Welcome to the Beautiful Letdown

And I Want to Know Your Name...

2011-04-27T02:08:00.000-07:00

(Yeah, yeah, I know, I didn't keep up with the blogging in Lent...Oh well...)

I hope no one mistakes--I am excited to get married! For all I complain about it, I really am! But, as anyone who's ever planned a wedding well knows, there's a lot of bullshit that goes along with it. While this is perhaps a little more important than bullshit, I just wanted to point out that just because there's a lot of complaining going on doesn't mean that I'm not looking forward to getting married.

Anyway, what's currently on my mind is an issue that I'm ~~sure~~ know my fiancé decided, taken care of, and moved on from, but guess what? Not quite. You guessed it--I'm still hung up about my last name. After a few tearful arguments, I agreed to change it, but just keep my own last name as my professional name. He just really believes that couples should have a family name, and--whether he wants to admit it or not--it's honestly both a pride thing and the fact that he's pretty traditional. Fine. So I agreed to it because growing up it never even crossed my mind not to change my last name. So I thought that maybe that would eventually trump the fact that it's something I'm considering now, especially because clearly not changing my name would bother him a lot more than it would seem to bother me to change it.

But now I'm not so sure.

I think part of it is that I'm still not sure he completely understands why I would want to keep my last name. I know, I know that a rose by any other name is still as sweet; I know that my entire identity--racial, ethnic, or otherwise--is tied up in so much more than just my last name, and nothing can change who I am or what I define myself as unless I let it. I know all this--intellectually, anyway. But damnit, my entire life, whether I like it or not, whether I acknowledge it or not, whether he believes it or not, I have been defined by my race, and my race has been largely identified by my last name! It doesn't feel like I'm just leaving behind a last name--it feels like I'm losing my identity. It feels like I'm, I don't know, giving up, or giving in, or assimilating, or somehow saying that I'm 14 years old again and I resent being Asian, so I want to hide it away by a European last name, and I don't like this feeling.

I like even less that I can't seem to explain this adequately to my fiancé, or to any of my other close white friends, for that matter. It's not for a lack of trying. But it just doesn't seem to get through. I wonder if it's just the disconnect of people who are not in touch with their own racial or ethnic histories--that is, where those factors never mattered much in their lives--really being unable to understand the magnitude of how important it can be in other people's. It's like in Madeleine L'Engle's A Wrinkle in Time: It's impossible to explain sight to the blind. I mean, GOD, I know that the moment anyone sees me they'll realize I'm Asian...But why can't people seem to understand that IT FEELS WEIRD to think that people won't expect an Asian person, say, at the doctor's office or something under a new last name?

I know that in so many ways this shouldn't matter, but in so many other ways it really does matter! And it just makes me angry! The last time we talked about this, he asked, "Why does it have to be the last name?" Well, for fuck's sake, why don't you change your name to mine if all that matters is that we have the same last name?? I held back from asking him that at the time, but now I want to know what the answer would be. I can guarantee you the answer would be no, and while the initial answer might be because it goes against social custom, what it will ultimately boil down to is that it would be weird. Is it just a matter of pride? DAMN STRAIGHT, IT IS. Yes, I would be proud for the world to know that I am your wife, and I plan to scream it from the rooftops, but I am also proud of being a strong, successful Asian woman, and it's hard for me to let go of that when it took me so long to become proud.

I just wish there was a better way to explain.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Running Away and Running After

2011-03-26T14:32:00.000-07:00

This brother of yours was lost and has been found. -- Luke 15:32

Activity: Trace the shoeprint of each child on a cloth or poster board. Write the family name on the poster and individual child names in the outlines as a sign of belonging and welcome.

For real, pamphlet? Oh my. Anyway. It's a challenge to love unconditionally; it's easy to hold grudges, to kick people out, cut people off, and leave them out of your life forever. It takes a lot more to be like the father in that Gospel reading: To take a jerk of a son (you can substitute your own stronger words in there) and be grateful that he's come home to you. The movie Love Story has it all wrong when they say, "Love is never having to say you're sorry." False. Love is eternally saying you're sorry! Sorry for the little things like not replacing the toilet paper roll, or big things that I don't want to think about, let alone write it. And love is, even more, meaning it when you say it, and accepting it when it's said to you.

Prayer: Loving Father, we make a habit of running away from you, but time after time you seek us out and welcome us home.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Living in the Mystery

2011-03-25T12:25:00.000-07:00

Then Mary said, "Let it be with me according to your word." -- Luke 1:38

Activity: Write questions you wonder about and seal them in an envelope marked "why?" Pray for the faith to live with mystery.

Okay, honestly, even the reflection for this one was kind of lame. It almost seems to suggest that further inquiry and asking questions is a detriment to faith (which I'm sure wasn't the author's intent). I think a better message is this: Whether you're secular or religious, I think it's a common understanding that human beings will never know everything. Our brains are simply just not big enough! Because of this, the first step is to accept that there will be just some things that we can never know and understand, whether it's how quantum physics works or why evil exists in a universe created by a loving God. But that doesn't mean to stop questioning, or that questioning automatically means losing your faith! Intellectual inquiry has led to some of the most beautiful scholarly and creative works that the universe has ever known, and while not every question about the mystery of our faith will yield such works, at the very least it never hurts to make yourself more informed.

Prayer: God of wisdom, may we have the heart of Mary, full of trust and open to the mystery of your ways.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Where Do You Plant Your Tree

2011-03-24T21:19:00.000-07:00

They are like trees planted by streams of water, which yield their fruit in its season. -- Psalm 1:3

Activity: Gather around a bowl of water. Have family members place a finger in the water like a root and then bless themselves.

Seriously, version two of this pamphlet needs to do some work on the activities. I did like the reflection, though, which was about where you plant your roots and the importance of planting yourself in living water. I think this is a relatively easy metaphor for non-religious to understand, too: After all, how disgusting and unsanitary does stagnant water get? The basic moral of today's story is to participate in things that allow you to grow spiritually and as a person in order to glean the most out of life. Otherwise, you are just treading murky, disgusting, stagnant swamp water.

Prayer: Lord of life, let all who thirst, come to the water. May the river of your love refresh and renew us all our days.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Can't Take It Back

2011-03-23T09:05:00.000-07:00

Give heed to me, O Lord, and listen to what my adversaries say. -- Jeremiah 18:19

Activity: Have each person write down something they wish they hadn't said with a permanent ink pen. Then try to erase it.

This makes me think of a line from (I *think*) Amy Tan's The Joy Luck Club, where one of the daughters compares her relationship with her mother to a boiling pot that you see is about to spill over, and while you can stop it, you're also curious to see what happens--so you let it go. Particularly in my adolescence, I had a tendency to do this with my own parents. While I can't recall (read: have probably blocked out) specific instances where I've said something I regret, I know that they hurt because (regardless of what my dad will admit) he's said some pretty hurtful things to me as well that I will never forget and will always hurt to remember. This is another lesson I learned again recently. So I cannot reiterate enough how important it is to think before you speak; in spite of the phrase, words tend to hurt more than the sticks and stones.

"Let each thing that I say bear the likeness of perfection / Let my words tell the story of His everlasting love." -- John Angotti, "Everlasting Love"

Prayer: God, help us to say the things that people really need to hear, the things that will really help them.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Right Relationships

2011-03-22T10:03:00.000-07:00

Come now, let us set things right, says the Lord. -- Isaiah 1:18

Activity: Download and listen to the song, "If I Had a Hammer." Discuss the tools we need to fix problems and relationships.

Yeah, absolutely not. I'm surprised there was no plug for a particular download site or artist. A little while ago, a friend of mine on Facebook posted an article about several couples who had been married for 50+ years, and the advice they give for such lasting marriages. One person commented on my friend's page that s/he "doesn't appreciate" that one of these couples characterized marriage as "work" because "I have enough work to do...I don't need more at home," and that there was nothing wrong with treating marriage like you were still dating. I didn't comment on this because I didn't want to start a stink with a complete stranger on my friend's Facebook page, but I couldn't disagree more. That comment characterizes 100% why half of all marriages today end in divorce. Because the reality of the situation is that marriage is work, and if you want it to last and to avoid the emotional and financial heartache that typically accompanies a divorce, you have to work on it!

To paraphrase C.S. Lewis from Mere Christianity, love isn't an emotion. It may start out that way; you feel loving towards someone, etc.; but lasting love is not an emotion. Emotions fade away; medicine tells us that feelings of joy and elation are caused by endorphins (brought on through various circumstances) that do inevitably go away after a certain period of time. So so-called everlasting love that characterizes a lasting marriage can't possibly be an emotion! Love is a decision. And that's why it can be so hard to make a marriage (or even a trying friendship) last! Every day, every hour you have to make a conscious decision to love another person. This can involve changing yourself, accepting what you cannot change, or making the other person aware of what has to change in order to make your relationship work. In other words, it's the Serenity Prayer lived out loud (and I did not start out typing with that in mind)!

This is longer than my other reflections, but this is something I feel particularly strongly about, probably because I am going to be married myself in slightly less than 4 months. If you have a spare moment, send a prayer my way that I will always make the right decision to love...

Prayer: Almighty God, we are broken and you are whole. Give us faith and love to repair the damage we do to each other.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Beware the Perfectionist Judge

2011-03-21T22:41:00.000-07:00

Do not judge and you will not be judged. -- Luke 6:37

Activity: In simple verbal or written form, have your family members affirm each other today.

Mom: I can be very harsh and critical of you at times because I fail to recognize your perceived "nagging" as expressions of how deeply you care for and worry about me. Throughout my life, you have demonstrated the meaning of unfailing and unconditional love, in spite of every aggravating thing I do. I only hope to be able to emulate that love when my time comes (one day not close to now) to be a mom.

Dad: From you I have learned the value of discipline. People shy away from "discipline" today as confining and "stifling" to "freedom" and "free expression," but that ignores all the positives that can come from self-denial and dedication. I am accomplished; I follow through on my goals; I set realistic standards for myself; and I know when it's time to work and when it's time to play so I can have time for both. Without that knowledge, I wouldn't be where I am today.

Brother: You are always good for a laugh, and for once I mean that in the kindest way possible. While it sometimes aggravates me, your eternally goofy attitude and refusal to take anything seriously reminds me when I need to lighten up and just act like a dumb@$$. Thank you for reminding me to exercise my sense of humor.

Prayer: Merciful God, you alone can see the heart and judge our actions. Gently lead us to be more perfect as you are perfect.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Prisoners for the Lord

2011-03-20T23:26:00.000-07:00

Do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord or of me, a prisoner for his sake. -- 2 Timothy 1:8

Activity: Find a symbol of a prison bar--a piece of dowel rod or pipe. Pass it around and promise to serve the faith that frees us.

I'm sorry, as we go on, it seems like the writers of this pamphlet are getting lazier and lazier with the activities. *sigh* Prison is an interesting thing to ponder, though. Is its purpose to punish or rehabilitate? Revenge or justice? Which one should it be, and what can we do to make/keep it that one? "Revenge is mine, says the Lord, and I will repay." (Romans 12:19) Letting go of vengeance against criminals, especially those who do horrible, horrible crimes, is a difficult concept to digest, but if we are to live as Christians, this is what we have to believe. With that in mind, what should the role of prisons be: To force prisoners to "serve their time" for varying degrees of wrongdoing, or to rehabilitate prisoners so they can be better people and, thus, to go in peace and sin no more? This certainly requires much more deliberation regarding murderers, rapists, and others who commit more brutal crimes, but this certainly seems like a feasible goal for lower-level first-time offenders. And, if I may be a little overly-optimistic for a moment, it would certainly benefit society more than pouring millions of tax dollars every year to prisoners locked away in prisons for small amounts of time as punishment for "smaller" crimes. This won't be the last discussion of this I engage in through these reflections, so hopefully next time I will flesh this out a little bit more.

Prayer: Lord, we remember you as we pray for all who are justly or unjustly imprisoned: "I was in prison and you visited me."

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Faithful Carpenters All

2011-03-19T14:26:00.000-07:00

Thus says the Lord: "Are you the one to build me a house to live in?" -- 2 Samuel 7:5

Activity: Saw small shapes of wood out of spare lumber. Then carry them today in emulation of carpenters Joseph and Jesus.

Okay, I'm not going to lie, that's a stupid activity. But they can't all be winners, I suppose! What I got out of the reflection is that it's what we do that makes us who we are in the world. I always think of the hymn, "They'll know we are Christians by our love." That really is just such a beautiful statement when you stop to ponder it, and it's simultaneously profound and depressing when you think what would happen if everyone lived like that all the time. As Christians, everything we say and do should be an expression of Christ's love for us and others. Wouldn't the world be a wonderful place if we all lived our love for one another all the time? No wars; no fighting; no intolerance; no racism; no hate. That's the profound part. The depressing part is that we don't. We really, really don't. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try, that's it's not worthwhile to try. Begin small--try showing love all the time to your closest family, and expand ever outward. Maybe one day we can hit the whole world.

Prayer: Creator God, let us work in cooperation to build your world into a place of hope and joy, of justice and peace.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

God Will Not Be Bought

2011-03-18T14:19:00.000-07:00

First be reconciled to your brother or sister, and then come and offer your gift. -- Matthew 5:24

Activity: Make a peace offering or a kind gesture to a family member, friend, or neighbor.

Again, really difficult to reflect on this one online...I do really like the Friday reflections in the pamphlet for this one, though. There's a common misunderstanding about Catholicism that we think we can "bribe" our way into Heaven through good works or these Lenten sacrifices. But, seriously, if forgiveness or redemption could be bought, is it really that genuine or worth having? It's like love that way. And love it's what's necessary for true forgiveness and reconciliation.

Prayer: Prince of peace, help us to worry less about presents and more about presence. May we grow to be one body in Christ.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Proactive Prayer

2011-03-17T19:10:00.000-07:00

Ask and it will be given you; search and you will find; knock and the door will be opened for you. -- Matthew 7:7

Activity: Make a list of the top five things you pray or hope for. Then list five things you can do to help answer your prayers.

Five Things I Pray For

A happy and successful marriage
Less stress in my life
Better communication with my family
The safety of my loved ones
A good job when I'm out of school

Five Ways to Help Achieve My Prayers

Be an open and loving communicator with my future husband--and to forgive and accept that I will sometimes also need to be forgiven
Better time management skills and easing off on being a perfectionist
More patience--see previous post
Not really sure what I can do to accomplish this, but I suppose I can always make sure that I always make sure people know how beloved they are to me
Do the best work I can now to ensure that some university will want me afterward

Prayer: Lord, you stand at the door ready to answer. May we ask and knock, so that doors may be opened for all who seek you.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Detergent for a Clean Heart

2011-03-16T11:58:00.000-07:00

Create in me a clean heart, O God. -- Psalm 51:10

Activity: Have each family member privately write a personal fault on a piece of cloth with a washable marker. Then wash the cloths and promise together to work on the faults.

Finding a fault in myself is easy: I have too short a temper. I've always been this way; little, unreasonable things will set me off on people who really don't deserve it. It's something I've also been working on ever since I was little, to varying degrees of success--that is, sometimes I'm better about controlling my temper than others. But I have to start small and work my way up. For some time now, I've been working on keeping a level head when talking on the phone to my family. It takes a concerted effort! The "Think System" from The Music Man is all a sham--you need to make a conscious decision not just to be better, but to love and to change what you are doing. And I think I have improved; you'll have to ask them for sure. Maybe I'll add working on my temper to my Lenten sacrifice...

Prayer: Merciful God, wash away our guilt and cleanse us of our sins. Give us pure hearts and loving spirits.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Exploiting Our Debts

2011-03-15T22:57:00.000-07:00

Forgive us our debts as we also have forgiven our debtors. -- Matthew 6:12

Activity: Join hands and pray the "Our Father" as a sign of mutual commitment to clemency and forgiveness.

Forgiveness can be hard. Really. Especially when the hurt is really deep. It's easy to say you forgive someone, and you might really be trying to mean it, and even think you do for awhile, but then something will come up that will make you realize you still haven't let go. I admit that I'm still struggling with that at times. I still think about people who made high school hell for me; about those who made fun of me to my face or behind my back; about those who, probably out of jealousy, hoped I would amount to nothing. And I think about how wonderful and amazing it's going to be to see those people at a 10, 15, 20 year reunion, and rub their noses in what my life has turned out to be. Look! I'm getting my Ph.D.! I'm married (or will be soon) to a wonderful, amazing man who makes close to 6 figures a year! I have traveled the world! I'm GORGEOUS now! And I realize that this attitude--this desire to flaunt my success to the people who made me hurt--is vengeance. I haven't completely forgiven yet; I certainly haven't forgotten. It's something I'm still working on, and probably will be for some time. And this is because anger and vengeance are addicting; for awhile, they give you the strength to keep going on, the motivation to be better and stronger than before, but sustained use of these make you dependent while they poison you. But, as they say, admitting the problem is the first step; I am not yet a lost cause. Here's to a complete recovery...

Prayer: Lord, we are forever indebted for your mercy and forgiveness. May we share those precious gifts with others.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Human Law and the Ways of God

2011-03-14T16:37:00.000-07:00

The law of the Lord is perfect, reviving the soul. -- Psalm 19:7

Activity: Review the purpose and fairness of the rules in your household and make changes where necessary.

I'm noticing these are becoming slightly more difficult to reflect on by myself. Hmmm. Anyway, what I liked about the reflection written in the pamphlet was that it wrote about how both legal secular law and Catholic law change as humans grow and develop deeper understanding about the human condition and Christ's lessons for it--the latter in regards to Catholics. It demonstrates not only the fallibility of human beings who can declare things like slavery legal for a time, but also an innate drive to learn, to do good, and to strive for what is right and just; in other words, that by nature human beings really do aspire towards the ideal. In a lot of ways, it seems like society is telling us that it's unreasonable to expect ideals--most people won't do it anyway, so why even bother? You know what I mean; it's that fatalistic attitude that tells us we can't stop teens from drinking, smoking, or having sex, so we should just make sure they have a ride home, do it outside, or use a condom, respectively. There's no way to prevent it, so we shouldn't try and tell that abstaining from such behaviors is a valid option. But I say YES, we must aspire to the ideals! Even though we'll inevitably fall short, there is no shame in working your way towards perfection. It's just the way we are built.

Prayer: God, your law alone is perfect and unchanging. May our laws always strive to embody your justice and mercy.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Make a Meal Out of It

2011-03-13T13:23:00.000-07:00

One does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God. -- Matthew 4:4

Activity: Eat a simpler family dinner today. During or after the meal, read and discuss today's scriptures or a favorite passage.

Fasting is something difficult to explain to non-Catholics. Actually, that's not quite accurate. People seem to understand fasting in some capacity; it's the abstinence from meat that confuses most people. Someone very recently (i.e., on Ash Wednesday) was actually giving me a (joking) hard time about Catholics not eating meat but being allowed to eat fish on Fridays during Lent. Yes, we're all aware by now that technically fish is still meat. And, as I told him, "It's a symbol, jackass." (Pardon my French!) Because Christ was a fisher of men, we are allowed to eat fish in honor of that. For a nice further explanation, I found this article (http://catholicism.org/why-do-catholics-eat-fish-on-friday-2.html), and I might actually get the book she is describing. In essence, these simpler meals that excise a portion of what *most* of us consider a regular part of our diet are merely an exercise in self-denial. Finding meaning and beauty in these smaller sacrifices should hopefully cause us to magnify this behavior in our charitable efforts to others and the world.

Prayer: Living Word, fill our hungry hearts with the bread of truth, the nourishment of wisdom, and the sustenance of love.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

The Master's Voice

2011-03-12T13:19:00.000-08:00

Jesus saw a tax collector named Levi and said to him: "Follow me." -- Luke 5:27

Activity: Play a game of "Simon Says." Talk about role models in society and how to choose the right ones to follow.

This is something I discuss often with friends. How do you choose the right role models? How do you steer kids towards the right ones? How did I manage to seek out the right role models as a kid? After all, I think I turned out all right...I'm thinking specifically of our young women, who have so many contradictory images and expectations being thrown at them about how they should act, whom they should see, how they should dress, etc. And I know from experience that it's hard; high school memories still torment me now. So how do you choose the right role model? Look for someone who respects themselves and respects others, not necessarily just someone popular or attractive. Don't idolize someone just because they're pretty or outrageous or (this gets annoying) "saying something no one's saying now"--sometimes, things go unsaid either because it's stupid or because it's not true. Use common sense and good judgment; hopefully, you're parents have instilled that in you. If not, it's certainly something God did.

Prayers: Lord, you are the way, the truth, and the life. As we learn to follow you, we discover the true path to happiness.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

For Whom Do We Fast

2011-03-12T13:00:00.000-08:00

Alas, I've already fallen off the wagon. You will see 2 posts today.

Is not this the fast that I choose? Is it not to share your bread with the hungry? -- Isaiah 58:6-7

Activity: Together make a donation to a local food bank today.

You've probably heard by now of the horrible earthquake and tsunami in Japan. God knows how bad it's going to get over there. Donate now:

Catholic Relief Services: http://crs.org/japan
The American Red Cross: http://american.redcross.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ntld_main&s_src=RSG000000000&s_subsrc=RCO_NewsArticle
Save the Children Federation: https://secure.savethechildren.org/site/c.8rKLIXMGIpI4E/b.6617251/k.7E71/Donate_to_the_Japan_Earthquake_Tsunami_Children_in_Emergency_Fund/apps/ka/sd/donor.asp?msource=wexgpjef0311&gclid=CInO0uj62qcCFQcnbAodfnly8w

Prayer: Merciful God, empty us of our inclination to impress you and fill us instead with a hunger for peace and justice.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Life as a Precious Heirloom

2011-03-10T11:21:00.000-08:00

Choose life so that you and your descendants may live. -- Deuteronomy 30:19

Activity: Write the word "Life" on a piece of paper and pass it around the family. Let each person say what life means to them.

Life means joy and pain, though we as a society (perhaps as human beings) want to forget and forgo the latter because, well, it hurts. Life is difficult decisions and chores and things you don't want to do and things that you have to do. But life is also laughter and goofing off and eating comfort food and seeing something beautiful for the first time. Life is falling in and falling out of love. And life is precious, and I don't think I'll ever understand why society wants to grant the rights to death in so many forms when it's life we should be preserving! As hard as it is to believe and understand, even for myself at times, every single person at every stage of life--regardless of what they've done--is a beautiful creation made in the image and likeness of God. We have no right to determine when any human life should be terminated, whether it's the unborn, the elderly, or scum-of-the-Earth criminals. That's something hard to remember, but it's something you must believe if you believe that life is beautiful.

Prayer: Living God, help us to choose life so that we may live. May we pass your precious gift of life to generations to come.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

From Dust to Dawn

2011-03-09T08:02:00.000-08:00

It sounds weird to say "Welcome to Lent," but it is here, and I wish that it will be a blessed, prayerful time to all. I want to try something new for Lent that should help with both being prayerful this Lenten season and, perhaps, blogging a little bit more--and actually about something. On Sunday, I picked up a Lenten prayer booklet that is actually quite lovely. It's called "Lent: A Layaway Plan for Easter" by Jerry Welte (http://www.allsaintspress.com/Lent-A-Layaway-Plan-for-Easter-p51.html), and it consists of short reflections and activities to think about for each day of Lent. It's meant for family reflection time; however, I don't quite have my own family yet (just about 4 MONTHS now!), I'll share my reflections here. I won't write out Welte's reflection--aside from being time-consuming, it's probably copyrighted--but the Scripture verse, the activity, my own reflection on that activity, and the daily prayer.

Now is the acceptable time; now is the day of salvation. -- 2 Corinthians 6:2

Activity: Gather and write personal losses on slips of paper. Then burn the papers and pray for new life from the ashes.

It's funny how when you're in a bad mood you can only think of all the "horrible" things that have ever happened to you, but whenever I need to think on-the-spot of my losses, I always come up blank. It's human nature, I suppose, to want to focus on the blessings rather than the pain. I like to think I'm old, but I'm reminded nearly daily by my Ph.D. cohort of how young I really am, and for that reason I fortunately have not had to endure as many losses yet as many of my older friends. But I have experienced loss. When I was 10, I lost my beloved grandmother to cancer and diabetes, and missed saying goodbye in-person by only a few hours. As a kid, I remember all the times my dad was laid-off; some times were worse than others, but it always made us aware how tenuous our financial status was. People don't believe me now, but I was made fun of a lot in high school, and while I was fortunately never seriously bullied, that constitutes a loss in and of itself. I could go on, but what this leads up to is that all this was necessary for me to become the person I am today, and if anything in my past had gone differently who knows what would have happened. So I will try to thank God everyday for the burdens and the blessings, because it is only through darkness that we can tell what sunshine is.

Prayer: Loving God, you make all things new. May this Lenten season bring new life from the ashes of our losses and failures.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Strange Dreams

2011-01-20T15:18:00.000-08:00

I had a really bizarre dream last night. It was bizarre both regarding content, and in the fact that I actually remember it. I rarely remember my dreams; I don't know if that's because I don't dream, or because my mind just doesn't work that way. Anyway, without further ado...

I remember that my fiancé and I were at dinner. It was one of those places that can only exist in dreams, because when you go over the logic of it, there's no way to find a correlation in real life. We were going to dinner in a sandwich place, but the "sandwiches" simultaneously reminded me of regular sandwiches, crêpes, and pizza puffs--don't ask me what was in it because I can't tell you! Oh yeah, and apparently in this restaurant everyone shared everything. My fiancé had ordered some sandwich that was meaty and cheesy and your conventional sandwich. But the server was asking for clarification about something, and he either wasn't paying any attention or was giving her the brush-off. So I answered and changed it to something involving peanut butter and bananas and something else...Figuring that he really didn't care and would probably like it anyway. Well, when the order comes, he gets really quiet, and then really angry and defensive that I had changed his order.

And then we erupted into the fight of the century. When I originally woke up this morning, I remembered specifics about what we were fighting about, and I probably should've written them down then. I don't really remember now what we were fighting so epically about. I do remember waking up briefly, and then going back to sleep because I wanted to see how the fight turned out, which was weird.

It seems like it would be pretty obvious to figure out what this means, but I don't know if it's so simple. The personalities of our dream selves don't really match him and me at all. While we've argued, we've never devolved into a shouting match. I don't know. Just wanted to share.

To Enlightened Assholes Everywhere:

2011-01-18T15:41:00.000-08:00

Two instances occurred today practically simultaneously that really got my blood boiling. One was probably spurred by the other, and I fully acknowledge that neither was directed at me, just merely around me. Notwithstanding, people experience environmental stress all the time that is completely unintentional, and this was certainly that today.

Both of these occurred while I was sneaking in a quick lunch on campus today in the hour between my discussion sections and office hours. At the table to my right, I overheard an exchange between an Evangelical Christian and another student. I hadn't run into this girl before, but I had been proselytized in the same café by someone else from (I'm guessing) her same church group. And I'll be honest, even though I myself am a very strong Catholic-Christian, I found myself inwardly rolling my eyes at the presentation they give because it was simply them reading aloud to you from a cheesily-worded pamphlet. And as a Christian, I obviously to a general extent agree with what is in the pamphlet, but it's really not as compelling of an argument as they think it is, no matter how sincere they are. But I was polite, and let her do her thing when she asked me, and when it was done she just walked away and I finished eating. Well. The person I was overhearing today clearly only said yes to letting this girl do her presentation in order to argue with her! I'm not sure if Miss Evangelist (as I will call her, since I don't know anyone's names) was really that thick or if she just figured she'd plow ahead since she was already invested, but she just didn't seem to be getting the hint that this girl was mocking her the entire time!

Now, I may be weird, but if I don't care for something someone has to say--if I 100% disagree and couldn't care less--I don't agree to let people give me presentations on whatever it is. In fact, I'm the type of person who avoids topics that get me upset. At the very least, I don't seek out or allow people who espouse views I don't agree with to preach to me just so I can ridicule them to their faces. That seems, I don't know, a little hateful and unnecessary to me. And Miss Evangelized (again, I don't know names) definitely had the option of telling her to go away--like the Jehova's Witnesses, Miss Evangelist was very up front about what she was going to do, and Miss Evangelized chose to do her presentation. I allow that it would be a different thing if Miss Evangelized had said no and told her to leave, but Miss Evangelist just kept going at her, but that's not what happened. And she was just being so snotty about telling her she doesn't have a religion! If you feel that strongly about it, why did you let her sit down? That doesn't make sense to me!

The second incident was more insidious, and was probably brought on by overhearing the same exchange that I was. The people at the table sitting behind me suddenly started discussing religion once the evangelization session was over that actually made me lose my appetite. I had literally nothing to eat all day--I was up at 7 AM, and it was after 1 PM when this happened--and I had only eaten half of half a sandwich that I just bought, and I was so disgusted that I couldn't eat anymore. This table very loudly started slamming Catholicism, which of course would touch a nerve in me as a Catholic, but even more so because it sounded like they were those Enlightened people who firmly believed that the Da Vinci Code's version of Catholicism was completely accurate. I paraphrase here, but I definitely heard the most vocal one talking about how he'd love to see the Vatican just blow up one day, and all the Catholics would be so sure that God would strike everyone down, and then they'd be such fools because nothing would happen. No shit, sir--It's a building! A highly symbolic building filled with priceless art and relics of the saints, yes, but a building nonetheless! Would your faith in American democracy die if the White House suddenly blew up? NO! In fact, I think you would be hard-pressed to find a circumstance in which such an occurrence would actually not strengthen your patriotism and belief in democracy! I mean, seriously, where does this come from that Catholics believe in the power of a building? I have other non-Catholic friends (who at least were not as snotty about it) who thought the same thing! Come on!

But it gets worse. Because you see it wasn't enough that this table was insulting our beliefs; they had to get personal on all Catholics and all Christians in general whom they didn't even know. The conversation took a turn to complete incredulity that anyone could ever believe in religion at all, and at how devious really such belief was. I think I just found some disciples of Bill Maher is all, because they were repeating almost verbatim exactly what he said in his documentary Religulous...How religious belief is such a convenient comfort to people in hard times, but it really doesn't add up to much. I think I remember what they were saying almost exactly here: "Whoever came up with 'God works in mysterious ways' is really just ingenius. Because then they just have an answer for everything." But I've dealt with people who think like this before, and when you say that you think God has a plan, their automatic response is, "No, there is no plan, everything is random"--doesn't that also qualify as a convenient answer for everything? Or is it okay to have a so-called catch-all answer as long as it's not religiously tinged?

Then they were going on in their righteous anger about how annoying it is when they hear actors in awards' speeches thanking God. "Why the hell would you thank God for that? You have talent...What does God have to do with that?" Yet if you heard someone thanking a teacher for endowing them with knowledge, there's never a question why you are thanking the teacher; it's something that you have now, and someone else gave it to you. So how is that different from thanking what you believe is the source of your talent? If you believe your mother is the source of your talent, thank your mother, and if you believe God is, thank God. I understand this necessitates acknowledging that a belief in God in general is a valid thing, but I am merely answering the simple question of why an actor or actress would thank God in their awards speech.

But the part where I had to leave because I was so disgusted--and because I realized I was unnecessarily torturing myself since I didn't have to sit there (See? I extract myself from situations that I know will make me angry!)--was when Mr. Super Vocal said, "I guess it's fine to use the moral principle to guide your life, but how can you possibly believe any of the actual religion stuff? The moment someone says they believe in religion, they are automatically less intelligent." So I left. Why start a shouting match that would lead to nowhere? Why subject myself to irritation if I'm not forced to be in that place at that time?

Some might ask why I didn't bother to speak up and defend myself and Christendom. A valid question. However, if you're familiar with the phrase, "You can't teach taste to people who don't have it," you'll understand why. If you're trying to talk to someone about religion who is so antagonistic to even the concept of religion that they get personal and insulting on the first punch, you're not going to be able to explain your point of view to them no matter how well-thought out and prepared your argument is. Because he/she will just take the same track that Bill Maher does in Religulous and just say, "No, it doesn't" to everything you say in favor of religion--because obviously a simple statement of negation said authoritatively and disdainfully enough automatically disqualifies any argument ever.

And may I just say, Mr. Super Vocal--and I can because this is my blog, and you are free to contradict me as much as you like in yours--that what you said is incredibly hateful and closed-minded. Even Albert Einstein, who is widely acknowledged as one of the greatest scientific thinkers of all time, did not completely discount religious belief and a belief in God. He did not call himself religious, and in fact said many things about religion that I disagree with, but if even he feels like there is room for science and religious thought to coexist peacefully and--dare I say it--to have some value, that is awfully high-minded and egotistical of you to say he is "automatically less intelligent."

And also, I am so sorry that my inability to see existence and humanity as a meaningless and ultimately random occurrence is so offensive to you! And now I suppose is the point where, if we were face to face, we'd each start preparing our own philosophical arguments for an epic battle of -isms, but I'm not even going to bother because what is the use of one-sided debate? So all I can ask is this: Please don't be judgmental. That word tends to be applied by atheists towards religious believers, but atheists and agnostics can be just as judgmental and dismissive as your average religious nut. On the assumption that you are not currently being assaulted in some fashion by a religious fanatic at the time, can you please just keep your voice down? You never know whose lunch you are ruining, and chances are that person has not actively done anything to harm you. Thanks.

I Am No Longer Having Fun

2011-01-15T23:34:00.000-08:00

I haven't felt depressed like this in a long, long, long time. And it would seem there's no reason for it. I'm healthy; I'm getting married in six months; I'm pursuing a degree in a field I love; everything is just so fucking great on paper, and this week I've been more miserable than I have been in years.

Part of it is that I've come to the realization that I think I hate teaching. Actually, it's perhaps not so much that--I think I suck at teaching. I am one of those teachers I hate. I'm brilliant (not to toot my own horn, but it's true), and I have no idea how to convey it onto others. More than that, it's been only 2 weeks into this quarter, and I feel like it's already sucked away my whole life--we haven't even gotten to the brutal part yet! I feel like I'm drowning just knowing about all the grading in the very near future! And I think to myself, Oh my Lord, I signed up to do this for the rest of my life??

I keep telling myself it was just a bad day; I've just had a string of bad days. That may be all well and true, but that doesn't erase the fact that you can't do much with a Goddamn Ph.D. in film studies besides become a professor and teach, and I'm not sure that I ever actually wanted that. I've always wanted a job that I can leave at the office at the end of the day so you can get back to your real life, but work goes home with you when you teach! And I don't know how to stimulate discussion in a bunch of dumbass kids who have no fucking idea about taste and who tell me that Singin' in the Rain made them appreciate Glee more and that they don't understand what a fucking short essay test is. I have no patience for this! I have no desire to make kids like this learn! And I'm at the point where I don't even know if I have anything brilliant to contribute to the world of academics, let alone to the actual world, and I am so fucking sick of having to explain WHAT A PHD IN FILM STUDIES MEANS! Do you think Martin Scorsese has a doctorate degree? NO! So STOP ASKING ME IF I PLAN TO DIRECT OR BE A SCREENWRITER!

And it's not like I have a clue what to do if I stop. I have no life skills. I went to one of the best universities in the country, and I don't think I have any practical skills. I'm even past the point of saying that all I want to do is plan my wedding. I love my fiancé, don't misunderstand, but I am just sick of all the bullshit that goes along with putting on this big party that everyone claims is all about what I want, but in reality it doesn't seem like I'm getting much of anything that I want. For one thing, everyone thinks that you want their advice, and they only offer it to you when you don't actually want it, and then they tell you things like, "Oh, that's up to you" when you actually desire some input. Really helpful, I know. And I know everyone tells you that you can't try to please everyone (but I am so fucking sick of everyone), but in a supreme effort not to be a Bridezilla, I compromise. I acquiesce. I let things go. Just to keep the peace. Never mind that every time I call home the invite list seems to grow, or that just about every idea I have that I get excited about my fiancé finds some flaw with, or that my future MIL puts on all the airs of being super-duper-uber-conservative Catholic, but claims not to be able to understand the concept of godparents for the couple as a Filipino Catholic wedding tradition. IT'S NOT HARD! I keep telling everyone how my family is being so helpful, and they are helpful when it's convenient to them. If I ask them to do something, they'll do it if they remember. Or if they think it's right. Or until they change their mind. (That's a big one.) And left and right people keep reminding me to do things that I OBVIOUSLY know have to be taken care of or done or WHATEVER, and I just want to know why people can't trust that I am an adult, despite my looks, and I know what freaking goes into planning a wedding! God, I am just so sick of being told what to do...

I can't even look forward to sex anymore. Yeah, that's right. I've stayed a virgin for 25 years, and being Catholic is ruining the prospect of sex for me. My fiancé knows I'm a private person who gets squeamish about people knowing things about my body or what (potentially) goes on in the bedroom. So tell me why he preferred to take the Natural Family Planning class in person rather than online? Why he had to tell his parents about it, and then assure me that they'd never bring it up, only to have it (of course) brought up while we were at his place for Christmas? Why we had to sit in the front table during the first class? And this NFP shit is fucking disgusting! Holy shit, I know I'm paranoid about getting pregnant too soon, but I think I'd almost rather go for several more years of abstinence than have to keep track of mucus! Tacky, stringy, egg whites??? EW EW EW EW EW! I nearly vomited at the table this morning when the visual aids came up. I was this close to crying. And I refuse, refuse to touch myself to find out about the hardness of my cervix. No way. Isn't the Church supposed to be against all that activity? Why is it that women have to go through all this crap? What the hell does the man have to go through? I laughed out loud at the part of the lesson when they talked about how both parts of the couple get involved in the tracking process. For example, the husband will remind his wife to take her temperature. That. Is. Bullshit. That better not be their idea of how men share the responsibility of child-rearing, because I promise you I will cut a bitch.

For the first time in my life, I find myself unable to lose weight, too. But I won't get into that now. People have come home.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Diary of a Mad Yellow Woman

2010-03-05T20:51:00.000-08:00

Courtesy of author Darrell Y. Hamamoto¹:

Professor [Harry Kitano of UCLA] places great store in the notion that romantic "love" plays a preponderant role in interracial marriages. Contrary to this dubious explanation, it is conceivable that the high rate of outmarriage (particularly for females) is indicative of the favorable opportunity cost it represents for the Japanese American spouse who is marrying "up" (and therefore "out of") the racial/gender hierarchy, where white males occupy a superordinate position. Dianne Kawashima might indeed be marrying Tim Morris out of "love," but that very concept is historically constructed. What three decades ago was considered to be "forbidden love" is now viewed as acceptable because Asian women, with their favorable exposure in the media, have become more "in vogue" as partners for white males. In addition, the persistent desexualization of the Asian male might also help contribute to the flight of Asian females, who do not perceive their ethnic counterparts as desirable partners in romance or marriage. Viewed in this light, the high rate of outmarriage for Japanese Americans might well be interpreted as the material outcome of an interlocking system of sexism and racism rather than a matter of interracial couples "voting with their hearts," as Kitano argues.

In response, I only have this to say:

Fuck you. Fuck you, Darrell Y. Hamamoto and your cynicism. Fuck you and your supposed insights into Asian-American female psyche. Fuck you and your assumptions about my racial self-hatred. Fuck you for putting my love in quotation marks. Fuck you for implying that the love I feel for my boyfriend is "historically constructed" because I hate my Asian-ness so much and wish to marry above my status. Fuck you for assuming that he is only with me because of the admitted exoticization of Asian women in the media, when in reality he's so clueless about pop culture that he didn't even know it was the "popular" thing to do until I mentioned it to him. Fuck you and your close-minded, segregationist attitude that's contradictory at that. Earlier in this book, you were decrying the anti-miscegenation laws that prevented such interracial relationships from taking place, and now you are criticizing Asian women who choose to take advantage of it?

Fuck you. I am so glad I only borrowed this book from the library rather than buying it off Amazon!

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

1. Darrell Y. Hamamoto, Monitored Peril: Asian Americans and the Politics of TV Representation (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 1994), 171-172.

Oscar Predictions 2010

2010-03-03T10:38:00.000-08:00

Okay, well, here's my 2 cents on the topic. I'll share my (long-winded) opinions, then predict who I think will win, and who I want to win--they're the same sometimes, but not always. I welcome opinions, please!

Best Picture

Avatar
The Blind Side
District 9
An Education
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire
A Serious Man
Up
Up in the Air

At this point, I am going to be happy if anything except Avatar wins. I enjoyed it; it was fine; beautiful visuals; great special effects. But in no way, shape, or form does it deserve to be Best Picture. The story was crap and not nearly as clever as it thinks, the directing was mediocre at best, and once this 3D technology is implemented on films across the board, Avatar just won't be able to hold any water. If a sci-fi picture were to win, I would want it to be District 9 because it is every bit as smart as it thinks it is, in addition to being well-made and well-acted.

Of course, right now the tide of favor has turned to The Hurt Locker, which, I'll be honest, I wasn't too impressed by, either. It was fine--certainly a lot better than most Iraq war movies--but it didn't blow me away. And I just realized I lied--I would not be okay if either The Blind Side or A Serious Man wins. I hated A Serious Man so fiercely that I couldn't even bring myself to finish it; and there is nothing remarkable about The Blind Side except that Sandra Bullock proved she could act. Its inclusion in the Best Picture category affirmed all the fears anyone had about opening up the nominations to 10 again.

What I Think Will Win: The Hurt Locker or Avatar (I admit, I'm being a pessimist about that).
What I Want to Win: My heart is with Precious or, curiously enough, Inglourious Basterds. I did NOT think I would like that one, but here we go. I love that Up was nominated, but it won't win Best Picture, and both Up in the Air and An Education were really very solid films that I loved, but not enough to say that either was the Best Picture this year.

Best Actor

Jeff Bridges (Crazy Heart)
George Clooney (Up in the Air)
Colin Firth (A Single Man)
Morgan Freeman (Invictus)
Jeremy Renner (The Hurt Locker)

By all accounts, Jeff Bridges has this category locked up, but I have to say that this category is filled with a lot of good performances this year. But I think we can count Morgan Freeman and Colin Firth out because Invictus and A Single Man, respectively, just didn't get enough buzz as the rest. George Clooney gives a solid performance playing himself (which is harder than you think) in Up in the Air, and I have no complaints about Jeremy Renner, either, but those roles aren't very "showy," if you know what I mean. Jeff Bridges, on the other hand, had a role where he can say, "Look! I transformed myself and subsumed a character so different from my own!" And that sort of performance will outshine subtlety just about every time.

What I Think Will Win: Jeff Bridges
What I Want to Win: Jeff Bridges or Morgan Freeman--what can I say? My love for the man knows no bounds.

Best Supporting Actor

Matt Damon (Invictus)
Woody Harrelson (The Messenger)
Christopher Plummer (The Last Station)
Stanley Tucci (The Lovely Bones)
Christoph Waltz (Inglourious Basterds)

I unfortunately never got to see The Messenger, so I can't comment on Woody Harrelson, but it doesn't matter because, again, I think Christoph Waltz has this one sealed. I love Matt Damon, and I think he will get his acting award one day, and his South African accent was spot on, but Invictus just didn't get enough buzz. I love it when seasoned actors get their first nominations in old age, but Christopher Plummer's role was meant as Oscar-bait and nothing more. I'm also amused when good actors get nominated for bad movies, but I still love you, Stanley Tucci. That just leaves Christoph Waltz!

What I Think Will Win: Christoph Waltz
What I Want to Win: Christoph Waltz

Best Actress

Sandra Bullock (The Blind Side)
Hellen Mirren (The Last Station)
Carey Mulligan (An Education)
Gabourey Sidibe (Precious)
Meryl Streep (Julie & Julia)

Oh boy. I'll try to keep it short on this one, but I have a LOT of things to say! I know everyone's pretty much given this award to Sandra Bullock already, and that pisses me off. As I was discussing with Cassie the other day, I will agree that she put in a hell of a performance here. After an entire career of being cast into "light" acting roles of romantic comedies and action flicks, it's refreshing that she finally got a chance to show that she really can act. However, I think Cassie has it on the nose when she says this award is more an acknowledgment that Hollywood is validating her career, rather than her performance really being the best one this year. So, no, I don't think she should win.

As for the other nominees: See my comments about Christopher Plummer and apply them to Helen Mirren (who is nonetheless lovely as always). I will expect bigger and better things from Carey Mulligan--everyone needs to go see An Education! My heart, though, is with Meryl Streep and Gabourey Sidibe. Meryl is without a doubt the greatest living actress. I could make an entire website devoted to why she's amazing. And normally these biographies roles guarantee you the award, but for one the film was slightly too far away from awards season to be fresh in everyone's mind, and secondly this whole Sandra Bullock thing had to be this year. And poor Gabourey Sidibe is getting passed up all over the place--a stunning performance from a complete newcomer! Whatever film she's in next is sure to garner her a makeup award.

What I Think Will Win: Sandra Bullock *sigh*
What I Want to Win: Meryl Streep or Gabourey Sidibe

Best Supporting Actress

Penélope Cruz (Nine)
Vera Farmiga (Up in the Air)
Maggie Gyllenhaal (Crazy Heart)
Anna Kendrick (Up in the Air)
Mo'Nique (Precious)

I am really glad that Mo'Nique has basically been given this award already because I'm pretty sure that, without her, Precious will otherwise be shut out of this awards ceremony. And all of it is well-deserved--who would have ever figured that Mo'Nique, the comedienne, could put on a performance like that? Talk about embodying a completely other persona! Vera, Maggie, and Anna all put in very solid performances as well, but nothing showy, and hence not nearly as memorable as Mo'Nique's grotesquely abusive mother. And Penélope Cruz, well...I have my own issues with Nine, but my theory about how she's nominated is that the Academy figured Mo'Nique as good as won this award already, so they might as well throw in whomever they please. I love Penélope Cruz, and she was part of the tolerable portion of Nine, but what the heck, guys?

What I Think Will Win: Mo'Nique
What I Want to Win: Mo'Nique or Anna Kendrick, just because she's SO above Twilight, and yet Kristen Stewart gets all the attention...That would put Joan Jett in her place...

Best Director

James Cameron (Avatar)
Kathryn Bigelow (The Hurt Locker)
Quentin Tarantino (Inglourious Basterds)
Lee Daniels (Precious)
Jason Reitman (Up in the Air)

Dear Hollywood, Please don't give James Cameron this award. Besides the fact that he doesn't deserve it, he is already a stuck-up, egotistical prick, and this will only feed the flames. Love, Jenni

Really, I'd be okay with ANYONE else besides him winning.

What I Think Will Win: Kathryn Bigelow
What I Want to Win: Kathryn Bigelow or Lee Daniels. Kathryn Bigelow is only the 4th woman to be nominated in this category. Lee Daniels is only the 2nd African-American. Neither a woman nor an African-American has ever won. It's about time for one of those categories to change.

Best Documentary Feature -- I actually haven't seen any of these, so I won't even bother guessing.

Burma VJ
The Cove
Food, Inc.
The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers
Which Way Home

Best Documentary Short -- Ditto

China's Unnatural Disaster: The Tears of Sichuan Province
The Last Campaign of Governer Booth Gardner
The Last Truck: Closing of a GM Plant
Music by Prudence
Rabbit à la Berlin

Best Animated Feature

Coraline
Fantastic Mr. Fox
The Princess and the Frog
The Secret of Kells
Up

There's nothing but Up for me here. All the other ones were okay--yes, even my long awaited Princess and the Frog--but Up was just such a magical, wondrous, heartfelt, emotional experience for me that my heart belongs to it fully. Okay, I didn't see Kells, but no one has! And since Up won't get Best Picture, this will have to be its consolation prize.

What I Think Will Win: Up
What I Want to Win: Up or The Princess and the Frog

Best Foreign Language Film--Again, haven't seen any of these.

Ajami
The Milk of Sorrow
Un Prophète
El Secreto de Sus Ojos
The White Ribbon

Best Original Screenplay

Mark Boal (The Hurt Locker)
Quentin Tarantino (Inglourious Basterds)
Alessandro Camon and Oren Moverman (The Messenger)
Joel Coen and Ethan Coen (A Serious Man)
Bob Peterson, Pete Docter; story by Pete Docter, Bob Peterson, Tom McCarthy (Up)

I remember having a conversation with one of my colleagues about Best Picture vs. Best Screenplay (Adapted and Original), and we've come to the conclusion that, in order to see which films have actually contributed significantly to the American film canon, you need to look at the screenplay nominations, not the Best Picture ones. That being said, I will be SO pissed if A Serious Man wins! And, again, I didn't get a chance to see The Messenger, so...

What I Think Will Win: The Hurt Locker
What I Want to Win: Up or Inglourious Basterds

Best Adapted Screenplay

Neill Blomkamp and Terri Tatchell (District 9)
Nick Hornby (An Education)
Jesse Armstrong, Simon Blackwell, Armando Iannucci, Tony Roche (In the Loop)
Geoffrey Fletcher (Precious)
Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner (Up in the Air)

The only one I didn't see here is In the Loop, but I think the rest of the nominees are all incredible candidates--all what I honestly consider the best films of 2009. This will be a hard one.

What I Think Will Win: Up in the Air
What I Want to Win: Up in the Air or Precious

Best Cinematography

Avatar
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
The White Ribbon

These visual categories are the only ones I'd be willing to concede to Avatar because it actually deserved it. But I admit this somewhat begrudgingly.

What I Think Will Win: Avatar
What I Want to Win: Harry Potter or Inglourious Basterds

Best Art Direction

Avatar
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
Nine
Sherlock Holmes
The Young Victoria

I reiterate: I love it when crappy movies get Oscar nods! Sorry, Doctor Parnassus and Nine (and, to a certain extent, Sherlock Holmes). I haven't seen Young Victoria yet, but let's face it, this one is going to Avatar.

What I Think Will Win: Avatar
What I Want to Win: Avatar

Best Animated Short Film--Sorry, didn't see any of these

French Roast
Granny O'Grimm's Sleeping Beauty
The Lady and the Reaper (La Dama y la Muerte)
Logorama
A Matter of Loaf and Death

Best Live Action Short Film--Ditto.

The Door
Instead of Abracadabra
Kavi
Miracle Fish
The New Tenants

Best Visual Effects

Avatar
District 9
Star Trek

Yay for science-fiction!!! Sorry, other nominees, but Avatar has this in the bag.

What I Think Will Win: Avatar
What I Want to Win: Star Trek or District 9

Best Costume Design

Bright Star
Coco Before Chanel
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
Nine
The Young Victoria

I unfortunately didn't see all of these, but one thing I've learned in Oscar pools over the years: Never bet against the period piece!

What I Think Will Win: The Young Victoria
What I Want to Win: Coco Before Chanel

Best Film Editing

Avatar
District 9
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
Precious

Now, I'm not the best at discerning when the best editing is occurring, but I do know that shaky-camera editing is A) Very difficult and B) Tends to win awards. :-P

What I Think Will Win: The Hurt Locker
What I Want to Win: District 9

Best Sound Mixing

Avatar
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
Star Trek
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

I hate it when shitty, shitty directors like Michael Bay get their movies nominated for awards because it feeds their inflated egos and makes them think they're talented. For this one and Sound Editing (next), I never have a clue what the criteria are, so it's always a guess...

What I Think Will Win: The Hurt Locker
What I Want to Win: Anything besides Transformers, but I'll say Star Trek just to have something down.

Best Sound Editing

Avatar
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
Star Trek
Up

See above.

What I Think Will Win: The Hurt Locker
What I Want to Win: Up. For no reason. :-)

Best Original Score

Avatar
Fantastic Mr. Fox
The Hurt Locker
Sherlock Holmes
Up

As much as I love Up, I'm SO over Randy Newman. This, then, is also a guess.

What I Think Will Win: Avatar
What I Want to Win: Just to have something, I'll say Fantastic Mr. Fox

Best Original Song

"Almost There" by Randy Newman (The Princess and the Frog)
"Down in New Orleans," by Randy Newman (The Princess and the Frog)
"Loin de Paname" by Reinhardt Wagner and Frank Thomas (Paris 36)
"Take It All" by Maury Yeston (Nine)
"The Weary Kind" by Ryan Bingham and T Bone Burnett (Crazy Heart)

See what I just said above about Randy Newman. Plus, as I've told plenty of people, I was really disappointed by the music in Princess and the Frog; to put it simply, there just wasn't a song you were singing to yourself as you were leaving. Disappointing. No one saw Paris 36, and songs from panned movies usually don't win. Plus, Crazy Heart has this award already.

What I Think Will Win: "The Weary Kind"
What I Want to Win: "The Weary Kind"

Best Makeup

Il Divo
Star Trek
The Young Victoria

Unlike Costume Design, period pieces don't necessarily have this one locked. I'll go with Star Trek because it's the only one with showy makeup to make people notice.

What I Think Will Win: Star Trek
What I Want to Win: Star Trek

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Thoughts on House Season 6: Part 2

2009-12-20T22:55:00.000-08:00

Okay, so this is me managing to pick up where I left off before the New Year. (Hooray!) Hopefully, this won’t have to extend itself to 3 parts. We’ll see, because, as you know, I love to ramble.

I finished the last post with what I loved about season 5 and what I liked about season 6 so far. Now here are my (loving) criticisms. Remember, I only say these things because I love! Like last season, the House behind-the-scenes crew seems to be trying to mess with the format of the show. As I said before, last season did a great job of balancing DOTW (Disease-of-the-Week) and character drama. I was hoping they would stick to this path, but this season seems to be all about the character dramas with a little bit of medicine sprinkled on the top. This isn’t working for me—don’t they remember what happened to ER? I stayed on much longer than a lot of other fans, who jumped ship there the moment Dr. Green died, but what broke it for me was when it seemed like the county staff stopped treating patients and started acting in a soap opera. Come on, we have General Hospital for that! From the looks of this season, I fear that House might be headed for the same route if someone doesn’t stage an intervention.

I mean, for a show about medical mysteries, there’s been a shocking lack of both medicine and mystery this season. It’s been character drama all the way, and not even all of it has been about House—what were those weeks focused on Chase all about? And perhaps you can argue that I’ve been getting smarter, but I believe that the writers have just gotten less creative when it comes to the patients and their diseases after the D’bala stuff. For example, the episode with the porn star (which, to be honest, I just didn’t like at all, so you’ll hear me complain about it a lot) had probably the least amount of medicine in any House episode to date—even the season 6 premiere had more medicine, albeit not really being done by House—and I could see the twist coming a mile away. “My parents never let me play outside and freaked out whenever I had a cut or a scrape!” Didn’t they realize they were laying it on a little bit thick? Not to mention that I forgot they even had a case for the greater part of that episode. Part of the fun of the DOTW was seeing if you could catch the moment with the clue that holds the key to the entire diagnosis, but (for me) it only works if you don’t catch it before the team does, or at least not TOO far in advance.

And let me go on a tangent-rant here about the “moral” of that episode…Yes. The porn star is a nonconformist freedom fighter. Let’s all rebel against our parents and become porn stars just to show that we all can think for ourselves and not have to listen to what other people tell us! Because that’s what porn is about. Free thinking. Working outside society’s rules. Being the true original thinkers of the world. WHAT THE HELL, GUYS?!? The entire purpose of that episode basically justified the guy’s lifestyle of unprotected sex with multiple partners—what medical personnel across the board (let’s for a moment take morality out of the equation) qualify as destructive, unsafe behavior—as OKAY! The part that bugged me the most was when they thought he’d need a liver transplant, so Cameron told him that the transplant committee would (rightly) view his career as high-risk behavior, and he goes off on her. “She wants me to change and have a religious conversion! Why is everyone judging me? Why can’t anyone let me live my life the way I want to?” (Not the exact words, but that effect.) And his wife says, “Because it’s killing you.” Duh! Sure, Cameron was judging him throughout that episode, but saying that a transplant committee wouldn’t want to give an organ to someone who might get an STD through unprotected sex with a random partner, be it a porn star or bar floozy, IS NOT stifling your freedom! It’s COMMON SENSE! But then the episode completely backtracks on all of this by, in essence, making him seem right. His porn star lifestyle “saved his life.” Nice message, guys. That’s not edgy, that’s not profound, it’s not even entertaining. It’s just damn frustrating. I’ve disagreed with messages that House and other series have offered me before, but usually I at least find it somewhat provocative. This just sucked. Destructive living = thinking for yourself. Great life lesson.
I also just don’t understand how people supposedly work through “intimacy issues” by watching other people have sex, but that’s an altogether other post. Going back to House...

What happened to all the risks from last season? The ones that worked? The ones that involved unexpected points of view, unique aesthetic choices, somewhat intelligent philosophical debates? Aside from the “Wilson” episode that just seemed to come out of left field, House this season has become increasingly formulaic, this time in the soap opera sense rather than the Law & Order wave that it was riding for its first 4 seasons. For an uber-fan like myself, this has become increasingly frustrating.

Another major problem this season is that, after 2 or 3 episodes in the beginning, they seem to have forgotten that House had an addiction. The season premiere was completely dedicated to House in rehab. Then—I currently can’t remember if this was in one episode or spread across 2—House was trying to distract himself from the pain with cooking and the psychiatrist told him to go back to work. And…That was it. Oh, there’s since been passing references to why he didn’t have a medical license anymore, but apparently the temptation to go back to Vicodin just no longer exists. Wow! If rehab is that easy and effective, why do people complain so much? No problem! Let’s face it, that’s just not reasonable both realistically and narratively. From what I hear, addiction just doesn’t go away, even with very effective crash rehab, and certainly not with someone as far gone as House apparently was. And, from a storytelling perspective, this quick recovery is just not compelling. It wasn’t just the limp that made House conflicted, it was the drugs! Maybe they’ll visit relapse later; I hope they will. Hugh Laurie is a magnificent actor; he’s made me fall in love with this asshole addict that epitomizes everything I normally hate in human beings. He would certainly rise to the challenge of portraying an addict in relapse who is conflicted about his actions! Just look at his stunning performances at the end of last season! (For the record, I really thought last year would be his year, but the Emmy went to Jon Hamm. Frakking cable…) Perhaps the House writers thought relapse was just too conventional; they have a point. However, it’s also a topic ripe for stories, and, as I pointed out in my previous post, they do a magnificent job of telling these seemingly conventional stories in unconventional ways. I point again to House’s hallucinations as his addiction wake-up call. I will be sorely disappointed if the series continues to act as if the Vicodin thing is gone for good because, as House would say, that’s just not interesting.

In lieu of the potential drama to be had from a House relapse story, they’ve made the series into a soap opera about House and Cuddy. Now, don’t get me wrong; as you can tell from my previous post, I LOVE me some Huddy shipping action! I love their chemistry, I love their UST (Unresolved Sexual Tension), and I think they should eventually get together as a pay-off for the entire series. I just happen to think they’re going about it in the completely wrong way. Let me put it this way: House is an asshole. We know this. It’s part of his “charm.” But he’s been alarmingly quickly, in the course of this half-season, transformed into a pining adolescent boy who, to be perfectly frank, is a little bit pathetic, and in an rather un-endearing way. I guess he’s always more or less stalked Cuddy—popping up at her house at random hours, interrupting dates, etc.—but it just seems juvenile now. And it’s also the simple language that he and Wilson use to talk about her! I can’t think of a specific example right now and don’t feel like Googling transcripts, but the feel I get when they talk about Cuddy is of 2 junior high boys passing notes in homeroom about what girl they want to sit next to in the cafeteria. It just seems immature, and all this talk about House finally being able to retain an “adult” relationship with Cuddy is being undermined by this juvenile language. It’s also not nearly as interesting as House going about his usual bastard business. Because, let’s face it, if House has to act like a kid, I’d prefer rebellious teenager to infatuated prepubescent sad sack.

I also just don’t buy Cuddy and Lucas. I feel like I can’t be the only one who feels this way. For one thing, he looks like he’s 20, and while I know cougars are all the rage now, it just doesn’t work. Besides, part of the reason Cuddy claims to be with Lucas is that he’s someone she can see in a mature, committed relationship, and last time I checked, cougars weren’t looking for that sort of thing. Additionally, the whole Cuddy-Lucas thing is yet another element of this season that just came out of nowhere. I understand that they wanted an obstacle between House and Cuddy being together; in fact, I definitely prefer that to an oh-too-easy Huddy relationship once he left rehab. I also get that the most logical roadblock would be Cuddy in a relationship. But why Lucas? They sort of laid the groundwork for it in season 5; he definitely thought she was hot, they had that one encounter in the coffee shop for her to get “dirt” on House that she knew would be fake but attended anyway, implying that she may be interested in him as well…Then Lucas disappeared. I just re-watched season 5, and I still can’t recall how they managed to write him out! Was it just that Cuddy wouldn’t pay for a P.I. on the hospital’s dime? That might be it. Anyway, so this guy disappears in the middle of season 5, and when he reappears in that 3^rd or 4^th episode of season 6, we’re now supposed to believe that they have been dating and now have such a committed relationship that they’re moving in together? Sorry, I don’t believe it! I would believe that maybe House was the only one who didn’t know—after all, he was in rehab for awhile—but then to have Wilson, Cameron, Foreman, Thirteen, Chase, Taub, and apparently everyone else in the hospital clueless as well? I don’t buy that. Maybe if the writers had Wilson act like he’d been hiding it from House all this time, I could’ve bought it, but as it is it seems a stretch.

I would also have bought a Wilson-Cuddy hookup much more than randomly bringing Lucas back, if they insist on keeping it within the House canon, but that’s another story.

So I apparently have issues with the sixth season's overarching story. Just to be difficult, I also have issues with this season's standalone episodes. The reason why is rather convoluted, but I'll do my best to spell out what I mean. Previously (season 1-4), the standalone episodes were just that—stories all by themselves without really any effect on anything else. Season 5 managed to find ways to incorporate some of those standalones into the larger arc in creative ways (as discussed in the previous post), primarily by making those solo episodes involve characters and events within the House canon. I'm thinking now of the Kutner suicide episode, which really is a standalone episode when you think about it. However, the standalone episodes this season that are supposed to affect overarching stories/characterizations don't follow that formula.

What do I mean? Except for a BRIEF appearance by Wilson, House was the only person from the main cast to appear in the premiere. Now, I mentioned that there were nice moments in the premiere; however, overall, to me it felt more like a side note rather than a jumping point into the new season. This is because it was an episode revolving around people we’re never going to see again. Yes, of course, I just said House was there, but, as I complained about before, for being such a momentous thing, it seems to have had little impact on him for the season so far. Basically, to me, the season premiere just doesn't seem to connect with the rest of the series, let alone season 6. I realize this is partially because of the premiere's TV movie format, but it also has to do with the fact that House was dealing with deep-seated issues with people we didn't care about. Thus, the premiere had to waste precious time making us care about these people, at least minimally, and now they're gone forever. Meanwhile, the people with whom he's had issues for awhile—well, the issues are still there. This was also an issue I had with the Wilson episode, aptly titled "Wilson." The self-centered bastard in that episode, who was a patient of Wilson's whose cancer recurred, is oddly reflective of another self-centered bastard who has been known to take advantage of Wilson's generosity, friendship, and willingness to give until he has nothing left. They even said as much in the episode. So...Why did need this whole new guy??? We have one of those already! I want to see him have this argument with House, not some other guy we'll never see again! And if the writers thought we weren't ready for that, well, they were wrong.

As I mentioned in the previous post, side characters with their own drama have always been present on the series, but they were always in the periphery. They belonged there; the series is called House, after all. But this season, there's been an alarming amount of time spent on these side characters and it's just not as interesting. The only problem I really had with season 5 was that it dwelt so much on Foreman and Thirteen, and more of the same is going on here. Why should we care when Chase has a moral dilemma? Sure, it was a hell of a moral dilemma, and I actually thought the Diballa case was a great episode. However, they dwelt on it way too long afterward. So, while House was busy mooning over Cuddy, we had to deal with Chase feeling guilty over murdering a dictator and hiding it from his wife. I realize they wanted to do it that way to plant the seed for Cameron leaving, but it detracted to much from the guy the show’s named after. Plus, I know plenty of people who didn’t like Chase and Cameron, but I personally really liked them. I thought they were sweet, I thought the way they got together (Cameron showing up on Chase's doorstep to ask if it was Tuesday, not the sex buddies thing) was sweet, and I wanted them to stay together. Needless to say, I was sad to see them split up, and even sadder that Cameron had such a negligible send-off from the series. Hello, it's Cameron! She doesn't even get a complete goodbye episode? Just the last 5 minutes of one saying that she's leaving? INSANELY UNSATISFYING!

The producers have, however, said that they’ve left it open for her to come back, so here’s my prediction for how they’re going to do it: She’s going to be pregnant, and she’s going to say that she was artificially inseminated by her dead husband’s sperm that she had had frozen. (Remember at the end of season 5, when they almost called off the wedding?) If they choose to go the REALLY soap opera route, which they seem to be open to this season, it’ll turn out that she was lying and it’s actually Chase’s baby. TELL ME that that's not a fantastic idea! Don’t let me down, producers…

As a final thought, I feel that there may have been a missed opportunity by not showing House in rehab. I realize that it would really have been impossible. This is a show about House, so it would’ve been apt to see what he was up to in all that time; however, the show is predicated on showing medical mysteries, and they can’t bend the rules of reality so much that PPH would allow a doctor in rehab to treat patients. Fine. However, for stories rife with conflict pathos, where can you find a better source than rehab?

I realize that that was insanely long. If you made it this far, you must either love House or the way I write. In either case, congratulations, and I hope I made some valid points. Let me know what you think; I'm dying to hear...

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Thoughts on House Season 6: Part 1

2009-12-09T23:22:00.000-08:00

WARNING: If you haven’t been keeping up with House this season and just plan to watch it this summer when it’s out on DVD, don’t read any further! I will be giving spoilers! You have been warned.

You don’t have to say it; I know I’ve been slacking. And I was doing so well! Alas, the call of papers and applications sucked away the majority of my free time for the past time, and my boyfriend took up the other part of that time, so here we are. At long last, though, I have some time for myself, and as I’m currently trapped on an airplane with nothing else really to do, I figured why not prepare a new entry to post before the year ends? (Before anyone panics, I’m not online on the plane, I’m typing in a Word document and have published after the fact. Duh. Edit: This also ended up being torn into two parts because we started our descent into Chicago—woohoo!—when I started in on my criticisms of the current season. It seemed like a fitting breaking point, so stay tuned for Part 2…) So sit back, grab a drink, and get comfy. This is set to be a long one with a lot of ideas that have been percolating in my mind for awhile.

I was a late adopter of House. I started watching in the middle of season 3, watched the previous seasons on DVD, and am now (har har) fully addicted. Now, season 5 was excellent. I personally believe that it’s easily the best of the series so far. The show has come a long way from the first season’s strict Disease-of-the-Week format (Law & Order syndrome, if you will), and as such has become so much more engaging. Last season struck the perfect balance between DOTW and character-centered stories, and it took the series into a much darker, more conflicted place that it had been previously. It challenged the actors, and it challenged the audience by turning a show that asked you to be entertained in a “ha ha” way by a jackass doctor into a show that asked you to empathize with a guy you would probably hate. Part of the reason why last season worked was that the show at last attacked the biggest issue of the series—House’s Vicodin addiction. The timing of this was absolutely perfectly calculated; it’s such a big card to play that they couldn’t have used it too early in the series (i.e., in the first or second season) because the audience wouldn’t have cared enough about House yet. However, they really couldn’t go on too much longer without addressing the issue, particularly after season three’s Tritter storyline. The House team not only tackled this mammoth story, they did it in such a way that took a lot of risks aesthetically and narratively. Go back and watch those episodes featuring House’s hallucinations; maybe this time you’ll notice the creative things they do with the camera, with shot composition, with color. it was quite refreshing for a show that up to that point had been so standard artistically.

And even the idea of using hallucinations to prove to House he had a problem! Now, I have no medical background outside my love for medical dramas, so it’s entirely possible that this sort of things happen all the time; but I thought it was insanely original and proved useful in addressing House’s emotional flaws in addition to his overarching medical one (i.e., his guilt over Amber). These risks even held true with the DOTW episodes that didn’t relate directly to this overarching story: Kutner’s suicide and the locked-in episode spring immediately to mind. “Locked In” particularly took on a surreal style that was previously unknown to the series; how else do you tell the story from the point of view of a guy who can’t speak or interact with you?

I could go on and on about how much I loved season 5, but the point it is that season 5 worked so well because it stayed on target: Everything in this season needs to lead up to House confronting his addiction with Vicodin. The stories worked in the DOTW patients, who of course changed week by week, and fed in small subplots about the side characters, but focus never strayed from House. Crucially, season 5 used the established House characters to expose his demons—especially Cuddy. Using Cuddy in this capacity was very smart because it not only kept the story within the House world, but it also gave fans the Huddy action that we’d been longing for practically since the beginning of the series. Re-watch season 5’s finale, and tell me if your rage at being tricked about the Huddy Hookup has subsided at all. I know I was so insanely upset at the end of last season! I actually screamed at the TV, “How could you do this to me?” And yet, for all my torment, I came back this season. This is because they tricked you in a compelling way that totally made sense with both House’s and Cuddy’s characters; it confirmed what you’d been hoping for all along—that House was in love with Cuddy—while still leaving the option open for returning to the Unresolved Sexual Tension that made their relationship so dynamic in the first place. So it showed character drama AND the medicine, and it worked.

So, in case you couldn’t tell, I was excited for season 6. While I’ll be expressing some issues I had with the season premiere below, what I thought it did well was that it showed that House could continue to be a compelling character without his addiction. They have repeated throughout the series that the jerk and the brain preceded the Vicodin, and they finally proved it. He stubbornly set out to prove his doctor (whose name I can’t remember right now) wrong about the patient who thought he could fly much in the same way that House strikes out to prove, well, everyone wrong in Princeton-Plainsborough. But this time, it turns out he was wrong, and for the first time the consequences actually seemed to affect him. And the premiere just offered some great moments, like House rapping with Alfie (I think that was his name) during the talent show. I also thought the episode where House and Wilson attended that conference with Cuddy (again, I can’t remember the episode title) was excellent. For one thing, it gave us that fabulous and heart-wrenching moment where House finally confesses his feelings to Cuddy on the dance floor, and she just leaves him. I think I’m still sewing my heart back together! I’m personally glad that they didn’t go for Cuddy’s easy acceptance of his love; that just wouldn’t have led anywhere interesting (although I’m not so certain the path they’re on now with that is very interesting…More on that later).

It was also a great episode for what it did with the show’s actual leading relationship: The House-Wilson Bromance. (Can I just interject here that I was so happy they finally took the step to move in together this season? :-P) The series, particularly at the end of season 4/beginning of season 5, always explored the give-and-take of the bromance, wherein without exception Wilson gives and House takes. This episode showed that rehab had changed House, and that he actually would go through extraordinary lengths—in his unique jackass manner, of course—to protect his best friend. House, in other words, has the capacity to love and to act out of love. It was all the more poignant that House would demonstrate this to Wilson in the same episode where Cuddy pointedly refuses to believe House capable of this very thing.

As you can see, House still has some great moments, and it’s those moments that keep me coming back. However, I also have some (hopefully constructive) criticism about where this season has taken our favorite ornery doctor…

Which will be provided hopefully within the next week!

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Reaching Your Quarterlife Crisis with Dignity

2009-11-07T13:22:00.005-08:00

Earlier today, I was driving in my car and listening to the local oldies station. I was singing along pleasantly to the end of "Hang on Sloopy" by the McCoys; as it segued into the next song, I nearly slammed the brakes in horror. What was the next song? Madonna's 1984 hit "Borderline."

This wasn't the first time I heard 80s music on the so-called oldies station, but for whatever reasons I was much more aware of it this time. 1984? Since when was 1984 considered old enough for the oldies station? That was a year before I was born! That can't possibly be old, because if it were, then, well, that would mean I'm getting old. Right?

Things are more distressing than this clear oversight of my local oldies station. Spongebob Squarepants, that little critter in the pineapple under the sea, supposedly turned 10 this year. How is that even possible? I could've sworn it was maybe 3 years ago, 4 tops, that this show debuted. There's no way the world has experienced a decade of Spongebob. Kids are still watching Rugrats and Tiny Toon Adventures these days, right? Right?!?

I'm not getting hysterical...I always breathe like I'm hyperventillating...

But it's okay. Just because the relics of my childhood are being put out to pasture doesn't mean I have to panic. I just need to focus on the things I can tell this generation of young whippersnappers, like, "I remember a time before the Internet," or "When I was your age, Pluto was a planet." How about, "There was a time when MTV played music videos." I rather enjoy, "Our telephones were plugged into the wall, and the farthest you could walk around when talking was the 6-foot length of your cord." Oh, nostalgia!

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Why Halloween Is Awesome

2009-10-31T12:12:00.005-07:00

Perhaps this is a little late in the week (as in the last day of the week), but I still made it! I realized last week that I have a lot of anti-Twilight posts on this blog ever since I decided to try this posting regularly thing. Now, while I probably could maintain a blog for 52 weeks a year with various postings on why Twilight sucks, this is, in fact, not an explicitly anti-Twilight blog. Thus I figured I have to start posting some things not related to Twilight. (Not to mention that, by writing about why I hate it so often, I'm in a way supplying advertising for the franchise, and I'd really rather not do that.) Hence, today's very timely topic: Why Halloween is awesome!

This post is inspired more or less by my boyfriend and his sadly Halloween-less childhood. Yes, he came from one of those staunchly conservative Catholic families that spurned Halloween and Harry Potter. For the record, Steve has no problem with Halloween or Harry Potter, and it's not just Catholics that unjustly freak out over Halloween. (Nor is it true that all Catholics or Christians even freak out over Halloween--my family loves Halloween! More on this later.) On a certain level, I suppose I can understand the Halloween uneasiness. No one's denying (as far as I know) the pagan origins of Halloween, and it is a celebration of all things scary, undead, creepy, and, for some, occult.

However...

While Halloween began as a high holy day of the pagan religion, for all but the most extreme anything actually occult--Satan worship, magic, etc.--has been stripped from it. If I'm playing the devil's advocate, I'd make an argument about how Halloween is actually a precursor for what's currently happening with Christmas: a religious holiday that's become increasingly commercialized and stripped of its religious meaning. But that's not the title of this post; the title is why Halloween is awesome. So here are some reasons why:

Free candy. Childhood obesity naysayers probably freak out over Halloween. What I love about the whole childhood obesity thing is that everyone seems to pay attention to the eating, but not necessarily to the going outside and having physical activity. How much easier can it get: Get the kids on a sugar high, then send them out into the backyard to work it off! When I was a kid, my brother and I would bring garbage bags around and fill up from our neighborhood and 3 or 4 of the surrounding ones and bring back more candy than we could possibly hope to finish in a reasonable amount of time. Then we'd spend the next few days binging on sweets--the amount of candy taken in during those days probably equals the amount of candy eaten throughout the rest of the year--and afterward go back to a normal eating schedule. In the meantime, we'd totally spend our sugar rushes running around in the park or, if my Dad had a say, raking leaves and doing yard work. And although my brother is a little on the chunky side, you can see that we both managed to dodge the bullet of childhood obesity. So let the kids have their candy! Don't be that house that everyone hates that hands out apples or dental floss or pennies. (God, I frakking hated those houses that handed out pennies...) In fact, now I need some little kid to be my candy beard...
Costumes. According to Mean Girls, "Halloween is the one night a year when girls can dress like a total slut and no other girls can say anything about it." For some, I suppose that's reason enough to love Halloween. I never went for the slut thing. My mindset was always: A sanctioned day of dress up? AWESOME!! When I was a little kid, I was all about the girliest costumes: princesses, angels, fairies--though I guess one year I did wear my brother's Robin Hood costume. And then you got to wear them in public for everyone to see?? Where's the downside? Now that I'm older, it's certainly more about creativity: How can I put together, without going for an official, manufactured costume, this particular character? What kooky thing can I combine from what I already own? For minimal cost, I've put together: A pirate (all I bought was a striped shirt); Helena from the My Chemical Romance video; nondescript island girl; and, this year, Number Eight from BSG. Specifically, I went for Boomer in Season 1's "Kobol's Last Gleaming: Part 1," where, overcome with despair over her probable identity as a Cylon, Boomer shoots herself but fails actually to die and is left with a bandage on her face. For those who don't know and couldn't gather, she's the Asian one in the screenshot. Hehehe...Pictures to come later...
An excuse to watch crappy scary movies. Some people don't need excuses to watch horribly awful scary movies, typically in the form of sequels to decent scary movies. I do. Only on Halloween will I allow myself to view the Friday the 13th, Nightmare on Elm Street, and, of course, Halloween sequels. Constantine, Underworld, and other wannabe scary movies that take themselves way too seriously also make appearances. (And I know I'm letting people down because there are SO many shitty B-horror movies out there that I don't even know the names of, but what can I say? I only watch these movies once a year!) Naturally, actual scary movies can make appearances, too, but those can be celebrated all year round.
Another reason to get drunk. Enough said. Only if you're old enough, of course.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Edward vs. Prince Charming: The Bigger Detriment to Female Will?

2009-10-21T11:50:00.006-07:00

My failure to keep up my coherent thought a week past 3 weeks is only half-excusable. 2 weeks ago, I could blame being tied up with my dear Anya-berger's wedding. (I'm still trying to figure out how to combine her first name with her new last name...Anyetti? Lame.) Last week, however, was just a failure. I've already castigated myself over this, on onto this week's thought! It's very delayed, as it builds off my thought from 2 weeks ago. More accurately, this comes from an IM conversation with my former Deaners partner Brittany about my last post. (I know, who uses AIM anymore? Apparently, we old fogies do.)

Brittany brought up this interesting point in both her comment on the Facebook version of my post and in our conversation--her problem with the Bella-Edward dynamic was its particular flavor of codependence. An issue that I know I hadn't considered before is how Bella uses her trelationship with Edward basically to excuse herself from accountability and responsibility. Because she has Edward, why should she need to do anything for herself? She doesn't need ambitions, or dreams, or personal aspirations--she has Edward. The reasons for this are twofold: What in her life could she possibly need beyond Edward Cullen, and what could she possibly do that he won't do for her? Apparently (this was told to me, as I haven't read beyond the first book), even Edward disapproves of this, as he has to force her to apply to Dartmouth (I think?) for college; she didn't see a need to aim higher than a community college. Why bother? First of all, she has Edward. Second of all, going anywhere besides Forks (or Alaska, I guess) would take her away from Edward.

This then begs the question (or, at least, Brittany did): Who is the worst sight for a girl to aim for--Edward Cullen or Prince Charming?

I just explained the Edward side of this, and the Prince Charming case should be a familiar one by now, but I'll rehash it anyway. The entire Prince Charming concept has been plaguing feminist thought since I don't know when, but popular thought tends to trace it back to the Cinderella story, particularly the Walt Disney 1950 version (as the prince there is actually named Prince Charming--yeah, Cinderella, no Snow White, though that has plenty of issues on its own). Prince Charming, so it goes, tells girls that they don't need to bother having agency, will, or self-determination because at the big, strong, conveniently handsome man will come in to rescue them in the nick of time.

(Despite what it sounds like, I actually love Cinderella with all my heart, and spent a good portion of my senior thesis in undergrad defending its virtues and Cinderella herself as a feminine [thought not quite feminist] character. I'm just trying to present the Prince Charming argument in its most insidious form, as I've had no problem doing the same with Edward and the Twilight world.)

Which is worse for girls to aim for? Honestly, I'm not sure. My own biases against Twilight in general make me lean in favor of Prince Charming. Honestly, when you strip the saccharine off this relationship, all you are really left with is something rather bland and boring. Prince Charming, I don't think, would ever have the desire to hit Cinderella (let alone eat her), and I would argue if I had the time that Cinderella is much more spunky and willful than Bella ever demonstrates herself to be. I mean, Cinderella stands up for herself at the very least to her stepmother and stepsisters...

If I am being truly honest with myself, however, I would have to admit that a generation of disempowered damsels in distress worries me as much as the generation I believe we're getting of battered women. I have been told sadly not in jest by some women that "the feminist movement never asked me if I wanted out of the home," and that disturbs me about as much the willing victims in the Bella mode. [I may expand on this later, but I'm running out of time before I have to get to class, so I'll truncate this here...]

What it comes down to is that there is middle ground, ladies. There's no problem with a guy being willing to risk everything for you, or even with having a guy rescue you. The thing is that, if it comes down to it, you know that you can do it for yourself. And co-dependence of any form is not sexy, romantic, or healthy. Just saying.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Loving or Losing Literacy?

2009-09-30T22:48:00.006-07:00

Ha, you probably thought I already forgot about my "1 coherent thought a week" venture! I never said I'd do it on the same day every week, right?

This week's topic spawns from a conversation with a soon-to-be-former (again) coworker at your friendly neighborhood (if you live in Westwood) Borders. We were discussing overrated books and authors; it began with Dan Brown and spiraled outward from there. Naturally, in talking about something unworthy of attention in the literary realm, we had to get to Twilight. Both of us whole-heartedly agree: It's crap. Terrible writing, less-than-fluffy story, I'd rather read barcodes all day, etc. (And it's not just us; I think there's only 1 Twilight defender in the entire store, and she only restocks Paperchase.) There is, however, one point on which we diverge. She said:

"As long as it gets kids reading, I suppose. It's better than if they're not reading, right?"

I have given this a lot of thought, both before and after this comment. My response is a big, emphatic, NO.

Let me first of all say that while I certainly can be a snob about literature, I don't believe that everyone has to read only fine literature all the time. Trashy books generally aren't my thing, but I've been known to give into trashy (read: tabloid-y, not porn-y) magazines. Often, in fact. And I have my share of films and TV shows I enjoy that will never be considered high art except in the most ironic sense. So what, you are probably asking, is my problem?

My problem seems very specific to this book. My complete thoughts have been made quite explicit in a previous post, so to put it as succintly as I can: It's bad for you. And I don't mean any bullshit about vampires and demons and the occult, either. I'm talking about the disturbing cultural phenomenon of Bella and Edward. From reading these books (and only recently from watching the movie), young women have become infatuated with a twisted notion of so-called romantic love. As a result, I'm predicting that very, very soon we are going to find a generation of battered women on our hands. Bella is, putting it nicely, a pathetic image of frail femininity. She does what she's told unquestioningly. She relishes being stalked--don't even try to justify it, watching a girl sleep through her bedroom window without her knowledge IS stalking. Did everyone miss the fact that she clings to a guy who has openly acknowledged that he wants to kill her--because they're "in love"?? The lesson that you get from this book is that everything is okay--stalking, hitting (if I recall, he hits her in the second book?), abandonment, and rape (Having sex with someone who is unconscious? Yeah. That's rape)--as long as he says he loves you.

To get back to the original point: Would I rather have someone read Twilight or not at all? My answer is not at all, particulary if that reader is an impressionable young girl. The intrinsic value of literacy is lost if reading does nothing to enhance the reader.

My argument expands beyond Twilight, by the way. I mean, Mein Kampf would probably have kids reading. I'm just saying.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Thoughts on Tim Burton

2009-09-22T00:29:00.004-07:00

This is a new thing I'm trying; let's call it an experiment in discipline. I'm going to try to have one coherent, well-formed thought a week that I will post about. Particularly for the past year, I've been very sporadic in my posting--sometimes a billion posts a week, sometimes once every month or so--and I can hardly call that a blog now, can I?

(Plus, I found out people actually read this thing...Who knew?)

So here goes my first post in this grand experiment. Tonight's topic was inspired by a conversation I had regarding 9 not too long ago: Tim Burton.

I've always been a fan of Tim Burton's aesthetic. While one (meaning I) would've expected it to evolve somewhat by now, it has been rather innovative and very different. I don't simply mean the dark, pseudo-Gothic, German expressionism-esque visuals involving canted angles, asymmetrical lines, and lots and lots of black--he does more. In Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, for example, the colors inside the factory are something to behold: bold, eye-popping, incredibly vivid. There's also his practice of reversing the norms of the color palette. The one that pops immediately to mind is Edward Scissorhands, where the bright pastels of the surrounding neighborhood (traditionally coded as safe, good, and normal), symbolize bizarre and grotesque. In contrast, it's the dark blacks, blues, and shadows of the castle and Edward himself that come to symbolize normalcy (of a sort) and good values. This style, as any casual viewer knows, has pervaded Burton's animated and live-action films, and I don't expect anything less from 9 or Alice in Wonderland. While it's something I suppose I will always admire and enjoy, as I continue to view and ponder Tim Burton's films, I have become increasingly disenchanted not with the visuals, but with the characterization. Specifically, I'm referring what I will call Burton's vision of the idealized woman.

This is not a new concept, and certainly not one limited to this filmmaker. What I am referring to, exactly? Tim Burton appears to have a very precise conception of the perfect woman, and I don't mean Helena Bonham Carter--though she started representing them cinematically once she started popping out his babies. Burton's idealized woman is a passive female; she doesn't instigate action, it comes to her. Now, different characters possess different degrees of agency, but what it comes down to is that virtually none of his women act on anything, but are merely reactionary. Physically, she's very pale with long, flowing hair and big eyes. In the beginning, she always wore a white dress, though in more recent films she proves that black is the new white.

The plot of the film carries the characterization in one of two ways. The first is that the hero admires this idealized woman from afar--naturally, for he must then spend the rest of the film in his goal to attain her. Think of Winona Ryder's Kim in Edward Scissorhands: Throughout basically the entire film, Kim is the object of Edward's gaze, as he's constantly admiring her from near and afar. She herself doesn't really do much until towards the end--her mother is a much more active female in the film--when she puts on her white dress and lets her long hair flow as she dances under Edward's ice sculpture. But of course, she gets hurt, and then proves unable to stand up to her idiotic jock boyfriend, who literally rouses up the angry mob with pitchforks and torches. She does pursue the fight back into the mansion, but she doesn't really do much besides cower and scream until Edward ultimately kills Jim. The kicker is that in the film's frame story, she's an old woman who is so vain that she doesn't ever want to see the love of her life again--or rather, the other way around--because she is now old. Note that Edward is up in the mansion making more ice sculptures of his idealized memory of her.

Consider also Sandra Templeton from Big Fish. If I remember correctly, she wore a light blue dress during her long, flowing hair scene, but details. If any girl is idealized and admired from afar, it's Sandra. Edward (again with the Edwards!) declares himself in love with her long before he even knows her name. She always seems to be posed the same way--standing with a smile, her head tilted to the side and her hands clasped in front of her--no matter where she is: In a field of buttercups (I think), by the riverside, at the circus, etc. He doggedly pursues her, despite the fact that she, too, is engaged to a complete asshole. Her initial spurning of his affection was just about as ineffectual as her attempts to keep said jackass fiance from beating on Edward, once again proving the old trope that the only thing a woman can do to hurt a man is to refuse to marry him.

Other Burton women who fall into this category: Katrina Von Tassel from Sleepy Hollow, in a way Mrs. Barker from Sweeney Todd (if anything, you can agree that she's totally idealized in his memorires), and Johanna from Sweeney Todd. The last one REALLY pisses me off because in the original musical, she actually had lines, character, and, oh yeah, a SPINE...

The other track that the plot can take involves a heroine who is hopelessly and utterly devoted to the hero, no matter the cost to her or anyone else. Sally from The Nightmare Before Christmas immediately springs to mind. When it comes to Jack, Sally is nothing but a giggling school-girl, albeit an undead, stitched together school-girl. Her undead devotion to him is thankless; for example, she slips out at night, losing an arm in the process, to send Jack some food in a basket, but runs away before he can see who left it for him. What's notable is that she predicts the disastrous results of taking over Christmas, but doesn't exactly warn him. She tries, I suppose, though he just kind of talks over her and leaves her to shake her head after him and lament "Oh Jack" several times as she blinked her long eyelashes. I will give her credit for taking the initiative to take out Dr. Finkelstein, but she always willingly goes back with him, which I never understood because he doesn't seem like a very nice (or good) doctor.

Mrs. Lovett is on the completely other side of the devoted spectrum from Sally. While Sally is content with keeping her devotion on the sidelines, Mrs. Lovett lays it on thick right from the get-go. Now, Mrs. Lovett would seem to contradict everything I've said about Burton's women being super-passive; it was, after all, her idea to start killing people and baking them into pies. My complaint, however, comes from the change in Mrs. Lovett's characterization between the original musical and this film. Anyone who's seen either Angela Lansbury's or Patti Lupone's turn as Mrs. Lovett will know what I mean. These actresses' Mrs. Lovetts were so flippant and forceful--it feels like at every turn she's trying to force Sweeney to love her. Her only regret throughout the whole ordeal is that he found out the secret about his wife. Helena Bonham Carter's Mrs. Lovett, however, is a whiny sad sack, and I hate to say that because I love her as an actress. Lines that comes across as "LOVE ME!" with previous incarnations become "Love me? Please?" with her; she's pleading with him, and that's rather pathetic. Also, I never remembered Mrs. Lovett crying, let alone over Toby, before this version.

Other Burton women that fall into this category: both The Corpse Bride and Victoria Everglot (to different degrees) from The Corpse Bride.

What makes this all the more insidious is that he couches this completely outdated image of the idealized, virginal woman in white (and sometimes black) in this supposedly subversive visual style. It's such a disconnect when one aspect is so startlingly innovative and another is so overwhelmingly not! Am I really the only one who sees this?? Please let me know. I fully admit that I haven't seen all of Tim Burton's films, or even included all the ones I have seen**; feel free to disagree with me. (I will delete rude comments.) And if I'm totally off-base here, well, we can hope I'll come up with a better thought for next week.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

**One that I didn't include but have seen is Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. I believe it to be different because there are no romantic relationships foregrounded in the plot. It's about bratty kids and parent issues.

My Comic-Con 2009 Adventure :-)

2009-08-13T00:54:00.017-07:00

I know, I know--for everyone else in the world, this is old news already. And I really meant to get this posted much earlier, but my excuse is that Borders is slowly sucking away my soul and will to live. So, here goes...

Lindsay and Katherine picked me up around 6:30 AM for our drive down to San Diego. If you think we're nuts, our friend Ben left at 4 AM, while Arminder left at 5 AM. Oh yeah, and the doors didn't open until 9:30. Yeah. We got there pretty close to 10, and I was sus-ploding out of my skin.

Thaaaaaaaaaaaaat's me! I was disappointed that I had left all my X-Files related T-shirts back in Chicago. I wore the nerdiest shirt I had, and actually got a few compliments on my Narnia shirt. (On a side note, I swear I get as much if not more comments on my Narnia shirt as I do on my "Shakespeare hates your emo poems" shirt. Go figure.) Back to Comic-Con...

I had a quandary when I arrived: There was the Farscape 10th anniversary panel at 10:15, which featured the actors who played Crichton and Aeryn (and the creator and executive producer). However, what I was really drooling for was the BSG panel at 11:45. Now, those unfamiliar with the ways of Comic-Con are probably like, What's the problem? There's plenty of time. In theory, yes, but theory doesn't take into account hordes of uber-rabid fans staking out rooms, particularly for the really popular panels, for hours beforehand. I decided to go to the BSG room with Lindsay to gauge if I needed to wait in line with her; if I didn't, I would go to Farscape. But it was already crammed just for the Stargate panel, which was taking place in the room before BSG, and we were guessing over half were planning on staying for BSG, so I stayed. The Stargate panel actually wasn't bad. I wished I'd ever actually seen an eisode of Stargate ever--though they said it's been on about 15 years, I somehow missed SG-1 and Atlantis. Oh well. The panel was for the new spinoff, Stargate Universe, which will be costarring Ming-na. (Love her!) Although I wasn't in on any of the in-jokes, the panel was really entertaining, and at the very least piqued my curiosity about the series. (I probably still won't watch it.) 2 really memorable things from the audience Q&A:

Some fan addressed this question to Jamil Walker Smith, the only black actor on the panel: "I was a big fan of your father Michael and your grandfather Paul. How does it feel to be an actor in such a prestigious family?" There was a pause, and this look came over Jamil's face. At first, I thought it was because he was sick of being asked about his family. (Note: I had never heard of this actor before today...) Then he says, "It's tough being a young African-American actor in Hollywood. Since there are, relatively, not too many of us, a lot of things get passed around that aren't true. That being said, Michael Morris is not my father, and Paul Morris is not my grandfather." We were sitting too far back to see how the idiot fan who asked the question reacted to creating such an epically awkward moment, but you could feel everyone's jaw drop in the room. Seriously--it's generally assumed that those who ask questions are really big fans of whatever that panel's about; additionally, this guy was smugly dropping names like he was in the know or something. And to make such a mistake? Ouch! To his credit, Jamil let it drop and tried to play the rest off with a little humor: "They're great actors, though..."
Some other guy later asked this question: "In the past Stargate series, you've always cast these beautiful, intelligent, talented women. I was wondering what your motivation was for casting these women." Now. I'm certain this man was a veritable nerd through and through. He probably didn't mean for that to sound as insulting as it came across, but he also probably didn't have the social grace to realize that he sounded like an ass. Again, to the cast's credit, they played it off with humor. But it was definitely a face-palm moment.

After that let out, there was about 30 minutes of solemn anticipation on my part before the BSG panel. It. Was. AMAZING! Warning: I will get very nerdy here. If you don't give a frak about Battlestar Galactica, I suggest you skip ahead a little bit. The panel featured executive producers and writers Ronald Moore, David Eick, and Jane Espenson, Esai Morales, who is playing Joseph Adama in the upcoming BSG prequel series Caprica, and Edward James Olmos. Admiral Adama himself. As the panel host said, "arguably the savior of the human race." I'm totally serious when I say I would probably actually salute the man if I ever met him in person, and yes, I'm fully aware he's not actually in the military. He is, however, an all-around badass. When he came out onstage, he went to the mic and asked where his godson was! "I can't see you guys--get to the front or your in big trouble!" Now imagine that in his gravelly Adama voice.

(How convenient, you can even read their nametags!)

I cannot emphasize how fabulous this panel really was. I don't even know where to begin! They split the time pretty evenly among talking about Caprica, The Plan, and their experience on and the legacy of BSG. They showed previews for both Caprica and The Plan--The Plan looks amazing! So so so excited! Syfy (geez, that still looks stupid) announced the premiere for Caprica for the first time during that panel, but I of course can't remember the date right now. I know it's in January sometime...Highlights!

Ronald Moore's tirade about how underrated BSG was during awards season: "It's a frakking shame that this wonderful cast was never recognized for their contribution to this series!" And when he was talking about how Edward James Olmos and Mary McDonnell (President Laura Roslin) were the heart of the show, I was very touched.
Jane Espenson just being so ultra-cool--I mean, look at her! She IS a nerd, and as awkward as she looks, and she's a brilliant writer in Hollywood, which is still a male-dominated game, and very well-respected in the sci-fi world, traditionally a male-dominated genre. She's going to be the show-runner on Caprica, making her one of the few females out there in that job. Thank God there's one to look to now besides Grey's Anatomy...
This video: (I had tried to catch the moment right before, where Esai did his impression of Edward James Olmos as Admiral Adama, but I missed it. This was the aftermath.)
Edward James Olmos' promise that The Plan won't be the last BSG movie! And his description of the script he's supposedly written for a future movie: "It'll take place at some point in the future, and they'll go running to one of my future ancestors because they need someone to lead them in taking out the replicants." I had totally not realized that Edward James Olmos (why can't I stop writing his full name?) was in Blade Runner! He talked a little about that and drew some parallels between BSG and Blade Runner, which eventually led to that comment. Awesome.
Grace Park's surprise appearance in the middle of the panel! I had a feeling she would show up. And let me say that she is so hot in person! What? I can appreciate hot regardless of gender!

(My favorite part is how she's giving Jane Esenson this saucy look...)

At 12:45, there was the Disney animation panel which I would've LOVED to go to, as it featured John Musker, John Lasseter, and Hayao Miyazaki, the Japanese Walt Disney himself, in person. However, that was in Hall H (Read: the uber-hall of the convention center); if I had to wait an hour beforehand to get into BSG, there was no way I was getting into this one. Ben did end up going, and he said it was amazing. They showed previews for the Beauty and the Beast and Toy Story 1 & 2 re-releases in 3D, a reel for The Princess and the Frog, and advanced footage for Ponyo. I would've killed to be there, but alas. Instead, I went wandering around the exhibitors and getting autographs and taking pictures. The sad part is that my friends had separated from me to attend a different panel, so no one was actually with me to take my pictures with these awesome things. Alas...

Again, for those who have no clue about Comic-Con, people do and are encouraged to show up in costume. That's what some of these are; others are just random things I saw in the exhibitors hall:

(An Iron Man statue--sorry, just a statue--and is that Milena or Kitana there with Ryu?)

(Did I forget to mention that it was Star Wars Day? Storm Troopers and Slave Girl Leias EVERYWHERE!)

(Need I even explain this one? :-P)

(Some more Iron Man and one Terminator collectibles...)

(Why yes. That IS Stan Lee! A very select group who managed to get to Comic-Con early enough and beeline for a particular room got tickets to be able to get him to autograph things. I was not one of them. I did, however, manage to sneak this picture of him!)

(Let's see, we have Emma Frost, Professor X, Phoenix and Dark Phoenix, and inexplicably, Rorshach from Watchmen.)

(Bart Man and Emily the Strange!)

(TO BE CONTINUED, I PROMISE, I'M JUST REALLY TIRED RIGHT NOW...)

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

In Defense of Hating Michael Bay

2009-06-22T19:46:00.007-07:00

Disclaimer: As the author of this blog, I reserve the right to delete any comments that I deem offensive. In this case, I will be counting any comments defending Michael Bay or other so-called "filmmakers" of his caliber as offensive in addition to whatever is traditionally offensive.

I'm going to say this outright first: I love blockbusters. Like most people, for many years of my life I only went to the movies in theaters to see blockbusters. Even since I have become academically interested in film, I have never had a problem with film-as-entertainment. Naturally, the best films are art and entertainment, but there is nothing wrong with only being one or the other, and I will always defend the merit of film solely as entertainment. Again, there is nothing wrong with films as harmless fun. However, there are many different calibers of entertainment, and the mere fact that people are willing to watch a certain type of entertainment does not necessarily grant it merit. Let me put it this way. Some films are like court jesters--nothing very deep or life-changing attached to it, just light, fluffy entertainment for the masses. Then some films are like, oh, public lynchings--which were considered a viable form of entertainment for many years. And if you still find a public lynching a good way to spend your Friday nights, then you better put your hood back on and leave; you're going to be late for your cross-burning meeting.

Sure, it's a little extreme to compare Michael Bay films to public lynchings, but you're starting to get my point: Saying that a Michael Bay film is just mindless fun and entertainment is not necessarily a good defense. I'm not one of those people upset about his messing with the "lore" of Transformers as a franchise. I probably couldn't care less on that front. He doesn't offend me there. Where he does offend me is in the realm of good taste and good film making. I know my fellow film lovers don't need a treatise outlining why Michael Bay sucks, but I personally know many people who have no idea why this dude attracts so much ire from me and most of the intelligent world. So I will attempt to explain.

Michael Bay is a hack filmmaker who attempts to disguise poor scripts with the flash of explosions, beautiful actors, and lots of CGI. Sometimes it works; I admit that I actually have moments of enjoyment during The Island and The Rock, though I accredit any positive reactions to The Rock to the presence of Ultimate BAMF Sean Connery. I can even stomach Armageddon in an ironic sort of way. But--and take note, fellow hacks Brett Ratner and McG--special effects and all your other razzle-dazzle do not a good movie make.

Again, I love blockbusters! I love my mindless action movies without any deeper meaning or substance! I know not every film can be Citizen Kane, and I don't demand that they be. (In any case, I hated Citizen Kane, but that's another discussion.) Case in point: Die Hard. I. Frakking. Love. Die Hard. Who out there will disagree with me that Die Hard is little more than fight scenes and explosions every so often broken up by useless dialogue? And those groan-inducing sequel titles: Die Harder; Die Hard: With a Vengeance; and my personal favorite, Live Free or Die Hard--fabulous! Light, fluffy stories that don't require many neurons to follow; big-ass explosions; completely impossible stunts; special effects out the wazoo...This is the definition of a blockbuster! And I love it. So do not criticize that I don't know how to "turn off my brain and just enjoy a movie"--I can and have for movies that deserve it.

There is, in fact, no lack of good, clean blockbuster fun. Speed. (Ignore Speed 2.) Indiana Jones. The Harry Potter franchise. The first 2 Pirates of the Caribbean films. The first 2 X-Men and Spiderman films--Let's not turn this into a discussion about trilogies...That's another blog...--and in fact most of the films of the superhero bent. I throw Watchmen and The Dark Knight into another category--blockbusters with intellectual content--and even Iron Man sort of edges into there. Sure, in general most of the comic book movies contain some deeper contexts that typically come through more fully in print rather than onscreen, but for the most part audiences can count on comic book movies for quick catchphrases, lots of fight scenes, and spectacular CGI. In most recent history, Star Trek is a phenomenal franchise reboot action blockbuster! Is that even proper grammar? It doesn't matter! It's not perfect; my aesthetics-obsessed friends rightly complain about J. J. Abrams' penchant for handheld cameras and lens flares, but Star Trek remains nevertheless a rip-roaring good time.

As you can see, there's nothing but love here for the blockbuster. So what makes these and others that I don't have room to mention different from the films made by our good friend Michael Bay?

First of all, and I'm thinking of Die Hard in particular, good blockbusters don't pretend to be anything more than they are. They know the only categories they'll be considered for in the legit awards shows (sorry, MTV Movie Awards) are in visual effects and sound editing/mixing, and possibly soundtrack, though the occasional Johnny Depp will sneak into Best Actor. Michael Bay, on the other hand, thinks he is Orson Welles. I've been told that this is nowhere more evident than in the director's commentary track for Pearl Harbor, but I can also direct you to his bratty email rant about the apparent disrespect being given to Transformers 2. Ignoring the terrible grammar, he is apparently pissed that more millions weren't spent marketing poor little Transformers 2 to be the "event movie" of the summer. Perhaps Paramount has realized something that Michael Bay can't: That his movie is going to suck, so why waste money marketing something that is certain to be panned critically when they can market something like Star Trek that, a month later, still has a 95% positive critical rating on Rotten Tomatoes? (In case you were curious, Transformers 2 hasn't even been released yet and already has only a 39% positive rating on Rotten Tomatoes...)

More importantly, however, what I consider "good" blockbusters can be rip-roaring, action-filled, special effects-laden good times without relying on offensive stereotyping, toilet humor, or complete sabotage of historical tragedies to carry them. As I wrote in my current Facebook status,* Michael Bay is an insult to intelligence, and I mean it. As my case in point, I give you Pearl Harbor.

Now, here's the time for full disclosure: There was a period of time in my life when I actually liked and defended Pearl Harbor. I am ashamed of my sins, and, believe me, I think I'm still paying penance for them. But let me explain myself--this was during the years when my only criterion for liking a movie was that it starred hot actors, and Pearl Harbor was awash in them! The moment I started learning things about World War II and the actual events about Pearl Harbor, I realized what a horrible, horrible mistake that was. The historical inaccuracies in Pearl Harbor are insulting not only to any discerning moviegoer, but also to all those who served and lost their lives in WWII. Perhaps--perhaps--if Michael Bay had only decided to remove all references to the real WWII and made the film about some fictional war in an alternate universe, it could've passed as a relatively harmless, over-the-top action flick. After all, the actual bombing of Pearl Harbor in his movie could've been lifted from any bad disaster film. But he didn't.

As for the offensive stereotyping and toilet humor I was referring to, you don't have to look any further than Transformers 2. The bloggers over at Topless Robot and Movieline have already outlined this much better than I can, considering they've actually seen it, but for those who don't want to click the link I'll paraphrase: 2 new Transformers, Mudflap and Skids, are the Jar-Jar Binks of the Transformers franchise. Just what cinema needed, more characters portraying negative black stereotypes! In the words of Topless Robot, "there are illiterate robots who speak in ebonics in the movie and one of them has a gold fucking tooth in Transformers 2." And if you don't know about the toilet humor, you clearly haven't seen the picture of Devastator's testicles. Click that link. You may regret it, but at least you'll believe that we aren't making this up.

Are we that stupid? Have we, the American (and worldwide) movie going audience actually sunk so low that we're supposed to find anatomically-correct machines funny? It's not a cute joke, it's actually somewhat insulting to the concept of human intelligence! And did Michael Bay learn nothing from the backlash against George Lucas and Jar-Jar Binks? It's 200-frakking-9--minstrel shows portraying racial stereotypes are not cool! The same goes for you, Brett Ratner, Mr. Rush Hour. I admit, I have the DVD for Rush Hour, and it's a testament to how starved I am as an Asian-American for an Asian presence in cinema that I am able to turn my brain off forcibly for the 98 minutes of the film in order to ignore the blatantly offensive Asian and black stereotypes bombarding me from the screen. And yes, that's what it is. Oh, hahaha, it's a Chinese guy who does kung fu and speaks broken English! Bwahaha, it's a loud-mouthed black guy obsessed with Michael Jackson! Hilarious! Shame on me, I know. And shame on everyone else who defends and supports this type of film making. This is not, no matter how you try to spin it, harmless, mindless fun. I'm the first to voice my opinion about how political correctness often goes too far, but Transformers and Rush Hour aren't being politically incorrect ironically. They're exploiting racial stereotypes for a cheap laugh. And it's not funny.

Let me reiterate: Michael Bay isn't doing any of this in an ironic sense or to make some sort of commentary on anything. He honestly believes he is being funny, creative, and artistic, and he must be stopped. So I'm begging you: On June 24, do not go see Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. Withhold your hard-earned money from the likes of Michael Bay. Go see Star Trek or Up again. I'll even give you permission to see Terminator: Salvation or Wolverine: Origins. If you want to see the film, like I do, solely to justify your undying hatred for Michael Bay, this is the one time you will find me advocating illegal downloading. Do your part to make this film a financial disaster. Bay will surely blame it on "bad marketing," but we know the truth, and maybe, just maybe, we can put a stop to the madness that is supposed to be his remake of The Birds...

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

*Read this article. And then, everyone, PLEASE STOP asking me in excited voices if I'm going to see Transformers 2! I'm not excited, and I'm sad that YOU'RE excited! Transformers 1 was awful, it's all Michael Bay's fault, and you can just BLOW ME if you're actually going to defend him or the movies. Michael Bay is not just a hack, he is an insult to films and to intelligence. That is all.

Things I'm Guessing Movies Lie to Me About

2009-05-08T13:03:00.006-07:00

Do you ever watch a movie and wonder to yourself, "Do people ever actually do that in real life?" These are thoughts I often have in conjunction with my normal movie-going experience. I'm not referring to lightsaber battles or anything fantastically awesome like that, but things that appear in supposedly more realistic movies. You know what I mean--romantic comedies, family dramas, things like that. The habits of characters in those movies supposedly represent the workings of the Average Joe, but most of the time I know I've never done those things, and I'm pretty certain most of people I know never have, either. So I wonder: Has anyone?

Dancing around in groups singing into hairbrushes and collapsing onto your bed in a fit of giggles: It's become a staple of the chick flick. The circumstances regarding how this arises can vary: A teen's first sleepover, trying to cheer up a friend after she's been dumped, etc. A variation on the theme has the group of females merely dancing around and laughing while a non-diegetic song (that they somehow are all in time to) plays in the background. In any case, who does this? I would like to know! I've had plenty of sleepovers with friends, I've helped friends through breakups and good times, and we've never felt the need to karaoke ourselves into hysterical laughter in our bedrooms. I'm just saying.
The crying collapse into the fetal position: This is also pretty common in the chick flick. You know the scene: The leading lady loses whatever it is she's after (9.9 times out of 10 the man of her dreams), and she slumps against the wall to express her pain. It usually starts out with a single tear streaking down her face, but inevitably she will erupt into a fit of sobs and slide down the wall into a curled position clutching her knees. Granted, I've felt mopey mc-emo-pants like that before and have curled up in the fetal position on my bed (or in the backseat of a friend's car), but it's never been quite as dramatic as that. If only!
Wearing sexy lingerie under regular clothing on a daily basis. This is something James Bond films, among others, certainly lie to you about. I suppose if I knew I would be encountering James Bond at some point that day, I would prepare myself. After all, even lesbians aren't immune to Bond's wiles, so why fight the inevitable? But I don't suppose you really get warning for that, and it just seems silly to wear the fancy, lacy, sexy stuff every single day just in case. Not to mention that it's impractical, both from a cost standpoint and a comfort standpoint. Cost-effective underwear is, by its very nature, plain, nothing for show, and just does its job. But the really nice stuff? From my understanding, you only wear that for the express purpose of having it taken off, and, as a result, they aren't necessarily made with comfort in mind. Now that I think about it, if there IS someone who does wear sexy underwear on a day-to-day basis, I really don't need to know.
Have frank and detailed discussions about their sex lives in public. I fully acknowledge that I'm a prude and that most of my friends are the same way. Moreover, I really don't want or need to know the sordid details of what people I know do behind closed doors. I'm a visual person--it doesn't end well. In any case, movies and TV would lead you to believe that people talk about sex no matter how public the location and in as much detail as they please. Topics covered include: When, where, how often, what positions, special moves, etc. (I also admit that a lot of what I'm thinking about appears in comedies, so they do this specifically for the awkwardness, but still.) Again, if you have NO PROBLEM discussing your sex life in front of a crowd, I really, really don't need to know. But I question how many people actually do this.
Keep shoeboxes with pictures and other keepsakes under their beds. I can't even count how many movies feature this. You know the scene I'm talking about. The protagonist gets to reminiscing or feeling lonely or something and goes up to his/her room, shuts the door, and reaches under the bed for that shoebox. There are extra points if the pictures (and sometimes letters) are tied together with a ribbon. But I am convinced that this is 100% a screen thing. Excluding the fact that almost no one prints pictures anymore, people are more apt to keep printed pictures in albums or, if they are in a box, still in their envelopes, and those are in boxes.
Leave the windows open during sex. How many movies and TV episodes have there been where someone discovers that his/her significant other is cheating after looking through the window and seeing him/her having sex with someone else? That would be indisputable (but hopefully not video) evidence, for sure. But I'm predisposed to think that people in general would, oh, I don't know, draw a curtain or close the blind prior to naked time? I realize that we're slowly becoming a world of exhibitionists, but while there's still some modesty around I prefer to give us the benefit of the doubt.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Driscoll Is Closing...And Why I'm Not Sorry

2009-04-08T18:39:00.003-07:00

So PLEASE stop sending me invites to the frakking "Save Driscoll!" stuff.

To put it succinctly, I hated high school. That doesn't make me at all unique--everyone hated high school. The thing is, I didn't just hate high school because I was an awkward, hormonal, angsty teenager (though that was certainly true). And it's also not to say that my high school years were completely devoid of happiness--I thankfully had my friends to keep me sane and grounded. But you have to understand that I was made fun of a lot. Some of it was to my face, a lot of it was behind my back, and it still amazes me how people think I didn't know about it. A lot of people thought I was a snob, and I suppose being absolutely socially awkward and shy (yes, there was a time when I was shy) led to that. And I pretended not to care because I wanted to seem rebellious, no matter what anyone says, all they want is to fit in in high school. And how could I do that? I had my father tell me this; and I literally had other students tell me this: "Jenni, you have to dumb yourself down. You can't be like you are." So I did. At least, I tried.

Am I expected to miss a place that forced me to be someone I wasn't for four years? A place where I had to act a certain way just so I wouldn't have to hear people snickering behind my back in the hallway? And I'm not being melodramatic; I remember walking down the hallway freshman year by Mrs. Bates' old classroom and hearing that group of guys who shall remain nameless call out, "Hey, Fong!" and laugh when I said hi back. I remember the snickering whenever it would get announced that I got a high score at an Academic Bowl meet. I remember the jokes that were my high school proms. So no, I am not sorry.

I won't stop others, however, from trying to keep it open: Visit http://www.savedriscoll.org to donate and help.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Resistance Is Futile...

2009-03-09T01:38:00.004-07:00

But is assimilation the solution?

I suppose I go through a version of this every year, but I've been thinking a lot of my ethnic identity lately. This recent bout of Asian guilt has been brought on by a paper I'm writing for one of my grad classes. In brief, the title of the paper is "Asian-American: The Invisible Minority in Hollywood Film and Television." In it, I basically argue that the Asian-American doesn't exist in American media for 2 reasons: The one that I talk about longer (but actually comes second in the paper) is that Asian is equated with foreign, hence not-American; the other is the concept of the model minority and assimilation--the only way to be American is to be not-Asian (I suppose it follows from the first one). So my research for this paper has had me looking at portrayals of Asians in film and TV and reading a lot of articles about minorities and assimilation and ethnic identity, and, as you can probably guess, it's caused me to confront some of my own demons regarding my heritage.

As I mentioned, I've been reading a lot of articles for my research, and they span the spectrum on views regarding what it means to be Asian and American. I've read people who argue that we should work to uphold the "model minority" stereotype, and I've read others who believe even adding "American" to your description makes you lose your Asian identity. I'd like to think where I stand personally is a healthy place in the middle, where I do my best to embody both at the same time. But these articles make you paranoid...Or I might be predisposed to such paranoia due to my double-duty of guilt. (Asian and Catholic, geez...) I read about all these trends about children being subconsciously conditioned from an early age to believe that white is better, and arguments that Asian women who date white men are giving into the stereotypes in a desperate effort to assimilate completely, and differing definitions on the meaning of "cultural pride," and I just get confused.

I'm the first to admit that I'm perhaps not the most in touch with my roots. I'm a lot better than I used to be, but I still have a long way to go. I'll consider myself informed when I can stop looking up cultural customs on Wikipedia or Google. Sadly, I am not kidding. I can cook a lot more ethnic food now--I've been actively seeking a Filipino grocery and THANKFULLY just found one--learning a little more history when I can, asking more questions, and in general just showing more pride. The next step I'd like to take is to relearn the language I apparently spoke when I was a child before I went to school and decided to speak only English like all the other kids. But I digress. The point is I'm better than I was; I joke about being a self-hating Asian now, but for awhile I actually really was. I resented being different, that I wasn't ever going to wake up one day with blond-hair and blue eyes, that we ate weird foods, that my parents were from another country, that a language besides English was spoken in my house, and that no one I went to school with looked like me.

Like I said, I'm not like that anymore. But then comes the question, Am I too far gone?

I want to get married and have a family someday. (Okay, silly overreacting people, don't take this to mean anything, it's merely a statement of fact, do not read too far into it, I'm not getting married or having kids anytime soon.) And given my history, the odds are on the side of my future husband not being Chinese or Filipino. Will we do the knot thing at the ceremony? (I used to be ashamed that I found out about that on Wikipedia, but then I realized I've never actually been to a Filipino wedding, and I felt better.) How do I let my children know they have half of me? How do I show them where that half came from? Filipino names for adult relatives are easy enough to apply to my side of the relatives, but what about older siblings? Ethnic holidays? Is it hypocritical (Is that the word I'm looking for?) to insist on celebrating them when I A) am not entirely sure what they're about? or B) don't speak the language of the ceremony? What about the Chinese part I know next to nothing about besides food? Do I run the risk of being a stranger in my own house? And because of that stupid comment I read about culture being carried on through the husband, I've been wondering about my last name. I've never been opposed to the idea of a wife taking her husband's last name, and I always figured I'd do that. But I have visions of me going into a doctor's office or something, and the receptionist calling out, "Mrs. (White Name)," then taking one look at me and going, "Oh, I didn't expect you to be Asian!"

That's not offensive in and of itself; it's actually not offensive in the least bit. If the last name is all they have to go on, it's only natural to assume appearance matches the last name. So it doesn't offend me. But it makes me a little...Sad. I have two things that represent my culture to the world: My looks and my last name. My facial features and skin color aren't going to change anytime soon. I know that my last name doesn't change my blood, my family, my heritage. "What's in a name," right? But your name is everything! It's how you're represented to the world, it's your symbol, your mark. There has to be a reason why so many cultures have naming ceremonies of some sort. There's that short story by Ursula K. Le Guin--"The Rule of Names"--where knowing a person's true name gives you power over them. An extreme example, but the point is that your name matters. I don't know if it's too much cultural pride, not enough cultural pride, too much personal pride, too much listening to the ideas of other people whom I don't actually even know, or just a whole lot of worrying over something rather inconsequential in the grand scheme of things. On that issue, anyway, I'm going to take the wimp's way out and not decide anything until the situation actually arises.

As usual, I've raised a lot of questions, pointed out a lot of issues, and actually solved nothing. But I'm okay with that because these aren't exactly issues you should be able to resolve over the course of a blog post. We'll see how much of this will recur when I go through this next year.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

A Few Holes in the Wolverine Trailers...

2009-03-05T10:53:00.005-08:00

It may seem odd for me to be writing about the upcoming X-Men Origins: Wolverine for a few reasons. First of all, though I love the X-Men and know more about them than any other Marvel team, Wolverine has never been a favorite character of mine, though I don't hate him. Second, I've been WAY more excited about Watchmen than this film. So why do I care? Well, all my fellow comic book nerds are currently away from me, so this is my only way to vent my growing frustrations with this movie. I will still see it--probably opening week--and I think if you don't really know too much about comic books you won't see any of the problems I do. And, of course, Topless Robot (the nerd blog I read) has been doing a much better job tracking the movie and its possible errors than I have, so hit the link and read up with them as well. :-)

Oh, and as far as trailers: There's the one at Apple Movie Trailers and this one at USA Today that I can't seem to link properly. Enjoy!

First of all, and I may be mistaken, but I was always under the impression that Wolverine's original power was solely his healing ability; the adamantium claws came only after he joined the Weapon X program, after they grafted the metal onto his skeleton. So why are the showing a mini-Logan running around with bone claws as a child? Perhaps this is a detail from another Marvel Universe that I just don't follow? I wish someone would tell me so I won't be so angry whenever I see that.

Secondly, both the comic books and the first film imply that, when Scott and Ororo (Cyclops and Storm) find Wolverine in the woods that that is the first time they have ever met. The ensuing dialogue and the way they act--no idiot would think they had ever known each other before then. So why does it look like Wolverine stumbles across an adolescent Cyclops doing math and shooting beams from his eyes in this prequel? What, does Scott get brain damaged a second time and forget all about that, too? If the answer to this question is yes, I will give up all hope of enjoying this movie.

Topless Robot is much more enraged than I am about what the hell is going on with Deadpool. How can I possibly top them? So read this instead. And this one, too. I will note, however, that IMDB still has Deadpool listed as someone separate from Weapon XI, so I'm hoping against hope that, despite what the second article says, that scarred man with too many powers is NOT Deadpool.

Also, and perhaps the shots just never got close enough for me to be able to tell, but wasn't the love of Logan's life who was killed, uh, Japanese? Yuriko, who eventually became Lady Deathstrike (who was NOT the way she was shown in the second film)?? Perhaps I am once again mixing up universes/chronology/storylines, but I was always under the impression that Wolverine had a bad case of yellow fever before he met Jean Grey.

I am, however, still looking forward to seeing Gambit FINALLY, after being jerked around for 2 films promising he'd be there! I know the nerd world is not too optimistic about his screen counterpart, but as long as he's sexy and Cajun, I don't care.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Addendum to Why I Hate Twilight

2009-02-25T21:47:00.005-08:00

I honestly can't believe that I've actually received messages and comments (that I've subsequently deleted because of their sheer rudeness/bad grammar [Heaven knows the Grammar Nazi I am]) regarding my previous post! Sooooo here's a clarification/response to those...

Yes, it's true, I only read the first book. I was, however, up front with that and mentioned right away that all my opinions are drawn from what I encountered in the first book. For those who believe I have no right to pass judgment on the entire series because I haven't experienced the whole thing, I must ask: Have you ever decided you didn't like a TV series after watching 1 episode, maybe even 2? Or decided that a movie sucked after the first 15 minutes? If you honestly answered no to those two questions, then you are either the most patient or the least discerning person in the world. For those of you who said yes, which should be most of you, guess what--you did the same thing I did! It's a simple principle of a series having characteristics that are common to each part of the whole, and if you didn't like pretty much anything about 1 part, what are the odds you'll like the rest? And I currently have no intention of reading the rest of the books, even just to make all of you shut up, because I barely have time to read for fun as it is, and I want to spend the free time I do have reading books I actually have a chance of enjoying.

I also have no problem with fluff books. None at all! I've devoured many a fluffy read--I've even read a few of Nicholas Sparks' novels, for goodness' sake!--when I want to read without exerting my brain too much. They're fine. And as Nicholas Sparks proves, not every book I read has to have Nobel Prize-worthy writing, either. But I like fluffy reads with an actual plot, no matter how many times he uses it in his novels, and I'd prefer not to object morally to anything I read. Not the case for Twilight. I've already explained that part.

In case, however, you still don't quite understand why I think the books are sexist and Bella is a terrible role model for teenage girls, read this web comic--thanks to Nikki for pointing me to it! I thought I was got to the point, but this girl has me beat. (Read this one, too, while you're at it.)

I will try to make this the last text I waste on Twilight. I can't promise anything, though, if people won't stop trying to convince me to change my mind.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

How Well Do You Read?

2009-02-23T20:02:00.005-08:00

The BBC believes most people will have only read 6 of the 100 books here. How do your reading habits stack up?

Note: This is going to be interesting, since I have at least a dozen books that I'm about halfway through--I have a bad habit of doing that. I'll think I'll but a slash for those...

Instructions:
Look at the list and put an 'x' after those you have read.

1 Pride and Prejudice - Jane Austen (x)
2 The Lord of the Rings - JRR Tolkien (/)
3 Jane Eyre - Charlotte Bronte ( )
4 Harry Potter series - JK Rowling (/--I'm on #5!)
5 To Kill a Mockingbird - Harper Lee (x)
6 The Bible - (x)
7 Wuthering Heights - Emily Bronte ( )
8 1984 - George Orwell (x)
9 His Dark Materials - Philip Pullman ( )
10 Great Expectations - Charles Dickens (x)
11 Little Women - Louisa M Alcott (/)
12 Tess of the D’Urbervilles - Thomas Hardy ( )
13 Catch 22 - Joseph Heller ( )
14 Complete Works of Shakespeare (x--maybe I missed 2 or 3 plays, but that's close enough)
15 Rebecca - Daphne Du Maurier ( )
16 The Hobbit - JRR Tolkien ( )
17 Birdsong - Sebastian Faulk ( )
18 Catcher in the Rye - JD Salinger ( )
19 The Time Traveller’s Wife - Audrey Niffenegger ( )
20 Middlemarch - George Eliot ( )
21 Gone With The Wind - Margaret Mitchell ( )
22 The Great Gatsby - F Scott Fitzgerald (x)
23 Bleak House - Charles Dickens ( )
24 War and Peace - Leo Tolstoy ( )
25 The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams (x)
26 Brideshead Revisited - Evelyn Waugh ( )
27 Crime and Punishment - Fyodor Dostoyevsky ( )
28 Grapes of Wrath - John Steinbeck (x)
29 Alice in Wonderland - Lewis Carroll (x)
30 The Wind in the Willows - Kenneth Grahame ( )
31 Anna Karenina - Leo Tolstoy ( )
32 David Copperfield - Charles Dickens ( )
33 Chronicles of Narnia - CS Lewis (x)
34 Emma - Jane Austen (/)
35 Persuasion - Jane Austen (x)
36 The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe - CS Lewis (x--how is this not covered by #33?)
37 The Kite Runner - Khaled Hosseini - ( )
38 Captain Corelli’s Mandolin - Louis De Bernieres ( )
39 Memoirs of a Geisha - Arthur Golden (x)
40 Winnie the Pooh - AA Milne (x)
41 Animal Farm - George Orwell ( )
42 The Da Vinci Code - Dan Brown ( )
43 One Hundred Years of Solitude - Gabriel Garcia Marquez ( )
44 A Prayer for Owen Meany - John Irving ( )
45 The Woman in White - Wilkie Collins ( )
46 Anne of Green Gables - LM Montgomery ( )
47 Far From The Madding Crowd - Thomas Hardy ( )
48 The Handmaid’s Tale - Margaret Atwood ( )
49 Lord of the Flies - William Golding ( )
50 Atonement - Ian McEwan (/)
51 Life of Pi - Yann Martel ( )
52 Dune - Frank Herbert ( )
53 Cold Comfort Farm - Stella Gibbons ( )
54 Sense and Sensibility - Jane Austen (x)
55 A Suitable Boy - Vikram Seth ( )
56 The Shadow of the Wind - Carlos Ruiz Zafon ( )
57 A Tale Of Two Cities - Charles Dickens ( )
58 Brave New World - Aldous Huxley (x)
59 The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time - Mark Haddon ( )
60 Love In The Time Of Cholera - Gabriel Garcia Marquez ( )
61 Of Mice and Men - John Steinbeck (x)
62 Lolita - Vladimir Nabokov ( )
63 The Secret History - Donna Tartt ( )
64 The Lovely Bones - Alice Sebold ( )
65 Count of Monte Cristo - Alexandre Dumas (/)
66 On The Road - Jack Kerouac (/)
67 Jude the Obscure - Thomas Hardy ( )
68 Bridget Jones’s Diary - Helen Fielding ( )
69 Midnight’s Children - Salman Rushdie ( )
70 Moby Dick - Herman Melville (x)
71 Oliver Twist - Charles Dickens (...I can't remember...I'll give it a /)
72 Dracula - Bram Stoker (/)
73 The Secret Garden - Frances Hodgson Burnett (x)
74 Notes From A Small Island - Bill Bryson ( )
75 Ulysses - James Joyce ( )
76 The Inferno - Dante ( )
77 Swallows and Amazons - Arthur Ransome ( )
78 Germinal - Emile Zola ( )
79 Vanity Fair - William Makepeace Thackeray ( )
80 Possession - AS Byatt ( )
81 A Christmas Carol - Charles Dickens (x)
82 Cloud Atlas - David Mitchell ( )
83 The Color Purple - Alice Walker (/)
84 The Remains of the Day - Kazuo Ishiguro ( )
85 Madame Bovary - Gustave Flaubert ( )
86 A Fine Balance - Rohinton Mistry ()
87 Charlotte’s Web - EB White (x)
88 The Five People You Meet In Heaven - Mitch Albom ( )
89 Adventures of Sherlock Holmes - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (x)
90 The Faraway Tree Collection - Enid Blyton ( )
91 Heart of Darkness - Joseph Conrad ( ) (I own it...)
92 The Little Prince - Antoine De Saint-Exupery ( )
93 The Wasp Factory - Iain Banks ( )
94 Watership Down - Richard Adams ( )
95 A Confederacy of Dunces - John Kennedy Toole ( )
96 A Town Like Alice - Nevil Shute ( )
97 The Three Musketeers - Alexandre Dumas ( )
98 Hamlet - William Shakespeare (x--Again, how is this not covered by #14?)
99 Charlie and the Chocolate Factory - Roald Dahl ( )
100 Les Miserables - Victor Hugo (x)

Counting all the half-slashes, that would be 30.5. Someday, I SWEAR, I'll finish all those books!

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Why I Hate Twilight

2009-02-19T16:54:00.008-08:00

Anyone who knows me, even just a little bit, knows that when I dislike something, I dislike it passionately. The most recent object of my discontent is that unfortunately ubiquitous franchise Twilight. Some of you out there know the exact reasons why, others know a few, still others think it's a Harry Potter fan thing, and others think I just hate the trendiness. I feel that, since I inadvertently turned poor Kate Woodin's note into a Twilight discussion board, that I should explain myself.

First and foremost, I will always maintain that my dislike of the franchise stems from the books, and that is because these books are poorly, poorly written. I read somewhere (before I actually read the first book) about how Stephenie Meyer was just an average soccer mom with no writing experience. After I read the book, I realized that it shows, and as a writer I feel like I have a leg to stand on when I complain. (And I don't mean this blog--I've won awards, so there...) Granted, I have only read the first book, but I do not at all feel spurred to read the rest of them given the quality of the writing found in the first one!

Basically, everything that Stephenie Meyer does in the first book violates all the tenets of fiction writing 101. One of the big atrocities that she repeatedly commits is something that my prof told us the very first day of our creative writing course: "It's he said, she said, he asked, she asked. Everyone here is going to want to throw in adverbs everywhere: He said dejectedly, she asked curiously, whatever. And that's not wrong, if you use it sparingly. Otherwise, it should be obvious from the dialogue and from the story how your character is speaking."

What it pretty much comes down to is that you're only supposed to add an adjective in there when it will do something to enhance the story in a way that doesn't come through in the dialogue. For instance, if someone is saying something, and it needs to be conveyed that it's a lie, you can throw in, "He said slyly." To say, however, "'I love you,' she said amorously," is redundant...And stupid besides. In that first book, I kid you not, Stephenie Meyer does this about every freaking sentence. And some of them don't even make sense! The one that sticks out in my mind (and I do not own the book, I wanted to burn the one I borrowed, so I am NOT going to be providing page references, and I don't apologize) was when she said that Edward "sat sinuously." What. The hell. Does that mean?!? I just looked up "sinuously" now on Dictionary.com, and here are the definitions they provide:

having many curves, bends, or turns; winding.
indirect; devious.
characterized by a series of graceful curving motions.
Botany. sinuate, as a leaf.

Of those four definitions, I suppose the one that could possibly apply is #3, though how someone sits with "a series of graceful curving motions" is beyond me. The example Dictionary.com gave was a "sinuous dance," but the difference is that actually requires movement, where as the act of sitting is, well, sedentary. :-| In any case, it's insidious how many times she unnecessarily adverbs her dialogue to no particular effect.

Next in line: Nothing. Freaking. Happens. Don't even give me any crap that Stephenie Meyer may not have been trying to tell a story in a conventional way because the story that she does tell is about as conventional as you can get. Besides, there's unconventional storytelling (which this is not), and bad storytelling, which this resoundingly IS. There's something at the heart of conventional Western storytelling called "central conflict theory." It's quite simple: Every story revolves around one central conflict, typically in the form that Person A wants something, and Person B is trying to stop Person A from achieving this.

"But wait now!" Angry Twilighters everywhere are screaming at me. "You get that! Edward wants Bella alive, and the bad vampires (I can't even remember their names) want her dead!" Yes. It's true. That happens. 18 freaking chapters into the book!!! That may be off by a chapter or two, I honestly forget, but the point is that the majority of the book is spent in unnecessary exposition. I will describe pretty much the first 150 pages to you in 5 sentences or less: Bella moves to Forks. She meets Edward, who's Hotty McHot-pants, and they fall in love. But things are complicated since he's a vampire and she's a human. Oh look, we're at the point when conflict finally enters the freaking book!!!!!!!!! And that was in 4 sentences.

So what do you get for about 18 chapters before conflict enters the story? You get 18 chapters of Bella coming up with ridiculous ways to say how hot Edward is (Seriously, "gleaming adonis"? "Male model for raincoats"? It gets more ridiculous than that), of Bella whining about how she's not beautiful and how she's so plain and boring, of Stephenie Meyer f*cking with established vampire lore for no real reason. I will get to that in a minute. 18 chapters of narration regarding how Bella goes to class. How she gets distracted by Edward's beauty during biology. How Edward is so pained by her being nearby. The research Bella does on vampires worldwide (which was just Stephenie Meyer showing that she knows how to use Wikipedia.) How vampires play baseball. I. Wanted. To. DIE. So you can imagine how excited I was when the conflict finally came around! And it was pretty exciting for, what, a chapter and a half...Until Bella gets knocked out. Then the action occurs while she's unconscious. And it's all described to her later.

In fact, now that I think about it, about half the story was told secondhand--people recounting what was told to them that happened at SOME point in the past. Edward's entire freaking chapter on Carlisle's backstory is the biggest example of this. This is a cheap storytelling device! Creative writing 101: Show us things as they happen! Constant flashbacks are boring and a cop-out.

Since we're done with the formal elements, let's move onto content. I hate what Twilight has done to vampire lore. I don't mind a little bending of established vampire legend for a purpose, á la Let the Right One In or Underworld. But Stephenie Meyer not only completely distorts the vampire mythos, she makes crappy substitions and changes! WHY THE HELL DO VAMPIRES GLITTER IN SUNLIGHT?!?!? Were they all sired by Elton John? Since when can they fly? Or get other special powers just from being a vampire (like seeing the future or telepathy)? And killing a vampire--"You can't ever know. The only way to be sure is to burn the remains." BULL-CRAP. It's always been stakes, it SHOULD be stakes, and Buffy should slay Edward and let the whole thing be done and over with.

People love to say how original this story is. But how original is it, really? A vampire man falls in love with a human woman, and the world doesn't want them to be together. Yeah, never heard that one before. Except when Joss Whedon did it. Or when Anne Rice did it. Or when Bram F*cking Stoker did it! This story isn't original at all! It's the same as every freaking vampire love story ever written! And, no, it's not clever in any of the literature it not-so-subtly parallels either. I've made it clear in a previous post my opinions on how overdone Romeo and Juliet is, and it's far too obvious even to waste anymore text on it. What's more infuriating in Twilight is the oh-so-subtle comparison drawn between Edward and Bella and Heathcliff and Catherine from Wuthering Heights. In case you don't speak the language of sarcasm, that means it wasn't subtle at all. She narrated Bella reading the freaking passages from the book, for crying out loud! That was part of the problem I had with the film Little Children; the parallels between it and Madame Bovary were obvious enough--they didn't have to beat a dead horse into the ground by having her book club read it, too! I don't want it to be a fair assumption that readers of Twilight would of course not have read Wuthering Heights and would need it spelled out, but I guess that's what Stephenie Meyer believed. I look at something like A Thousand Acres (which I hated at the time but really appreciate now) for a great parallel to a previously established work (King Lear) that isn't forced...Or 10 Things I Hate About You and The Taming of the Shrew...Or even The Lion King and Hamlet!! You don't need Simba holding a skull in his paw and saying, "Alas, poor Yorick...I knew him well, Pumbaa..." for us to get it.

Finally, we have Bella and Edward. Again, I've made it clear on at least one other occasion my opinions on Edward as the object of many a teen girl's affections. But let me reiterate in brief: He's a creeper, a stalker, and an ass besides, and Bella's insanely shallow because it's apparently his body of a Greek god that's keeping her around. (On a side note, I read an interview with Robert Pattinson where he said Stephenie Meyer told him she based Twilight on a dream she had about some guy--not her husband--and how he feels dirty basically playing out her sexual fantasies. He cites, I believe rightly, the creepily over-detailed descriptions that she gives of Edward's physique as evidence for this. *shudder*) As for Bella, I would really have hoped by this day and age girls would be reading novels narrated by strong female characters. I really did. But Bella is one of the most passive, most victimized, most pathetic female characters I've seen in text in a very long time. She never stands up for herself! How many times does she let Edward walk all over her in the book, with only a feeble protest before she does exactly what he wants? All he has to do is say, "Please, trust me!" In the beginning of the book, when Edward is apparently glaring at her and avoiding her like the plague, she never confronts him or says anything about it. I would've given anything for a Mean Girls-esque reaction right then! She doesn't even try to fight back or run away when Evil Vampire Dude corners her in the ballet studio--even the narration right at the beginning says, she just sits back and accepts that she's going to die. And my GOD, can I return to how superficial she is? Another thing to count, aside from the hyperbolic descriptions of Edward's hotness, is how often she complains about being "plain" and "not pretty" and "boring." GET A GRIP, WOMAN! That's a great example to young girls there, I mean really.

I could probably go on and on and on, coming up with more reasons the more enraged I get. But this is long enough. There you have it--the main reasons why I hate Twilight. I expect I won't be influencing anyone who wasn't already on my side of this argument. But, please, read it with an open mind, and consider what I have to say. I tried Twilight, I really did. I read the entire first book, even honestly expecting something really good, what with the 50 bazillion copies sold, and these were my conclusions. However, if you have joined me on my anti-Twilight crusade, welcome, and prepare yourself. The battle won't be easy.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Oscar Predictions 2009

2009-02-18T18:09:00.008-08:00

This is probably the most well-informed I've been about the films nominated for Academy Awards than I have been in quite a long time. My categories are in the same order as the printable ballot I downloaded from www.oscar.com. The ones in bold are the ones I think will win, while the ones in italics are the ones I want to win--they're not always the same!

(Note: If you're reading this via Facebook notes, the html is all screwed up, and I'm too lazy to fix it, so you have to read it through my original blog.)

ACTOR, LEADING

Richard Jenkins in “The Visitor”
Frank Langella in “Frost/Nixon”
Sean Penn in “Milk”
Brad Pitt in “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
Mickey Rourke in “The Wrestler”

**I thought Sean Penn was amazing in Milk, really--he is a fabulous actor who reinvents himself in every role who acted the hell out of Harvey Milk. Plus, he was also in a film that's currently very significant politically (which makes me wonder if it would've been as successful if its release didn't happen to coincide with Prop 8), which is why I think it seals the deal for him to win. However, I really would love for Mickey Rourke to win because, seriously, who ever thought he'd be good again? And if you're raising your hand, you're lying. Honestly, I'd be good if anyone besides Brad Pitt.**

ACTOR, SUPPORTING

Josh Brolin in “Milk”
Robert Downey Jr. in “Tropic Thunder”
Philip Seymour Hoffman in “Doubt”
Heath Ledger in “The Dark Knight”
Michael Shannon in “Revolutionary Road”

**Honestly, if Heath Ledger doesn't win, I've lost all faith in the system. I'm still pissed about Dark Knight getting the shaft, but I'll get to that later. I know a lot of people are favoring Josh Brolin right now, but I honestly think his performance in Milk is slightly overrated--I like him, but he's NOT the second coming of acting! Philip Seymour Hoffman was fabulous as well, and I am just tickled the Robert Downey Jr. got nominated, both for his spectacular comeback last year AND for getting comedy some love! However, for me, it's Heath Ledger or nothing.**

ACTRESS, LEADING

Anne Hathaway in "Rachel Getting Married"
Angelina Jolie in "Changeling"
Melissa Leo in "Frozen River"
Meryl Streep in "Doubt"
Kate Winslet in "The Reader"

**The two actress categories are the tightest races this year, and are impossible for me to choose. By most accounts, it comes down to either Meryl or Kate, both of whom are acting powerhouses, and both of whom seriously deserve this award for their respective films. If you force me to choose, I would prefer that Kate won because she needs an Oscar by now, and I know that Meryl has lost more than Kate, but her career's also been longer, AND she still has 2 Oscars to go home to at the end of the night. But don't ignore the stunning performances of Anne Hathaway--coming out of nowhere to prove that she's an amazing actress!--and Melissa Leo--if you haven't even heard of Frozen River, go see it! I was so moved by the end, and I was only half-watching at the time, so you can imagine what happens when you pay full attention. I admit, Changeling is actually the ONLY film of the major nominees I haven't watched yet, but I have the DVD from Netflix here and WILL watch it before Sunday...**

ACTRESS, SUPPORTING

Amy Adams in "Doubt"
Penélope Cruz in "Vicky Cristina Barcelona"
Viola Davis in "Doubt"
Taraji P. Henson in "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button"
Marisa Tomei in "The Wrestler"

**This is the only race that really can go 5 ways. 5 fabulous performances by 5 amazing actresses. Admittedly, Taraji P. Henson was something of a stereotype in Benjamin Button, but she was still the highlight of the film for me. Everyone suddenly seems to be picking Penélope Cruz to win, but my money is still on Viola Davis in Doubt. She may have only been in the film, what, 12 minutes? But I'll put it to you this way: Not many people can be alone in a scene with Meryl Streep and live to tell the tale, let alone arguably outdo her. I would also personally love for Amy Adams to win. She also gave a stellar performance in Doubt, and she's my new favorite actress, so I'd be happy for that as well.**

ANIMATED FEATURE

“Bolt”
“Kung Fu Panda”
“WALL-E”

**This one is basically guaranteed. I don't even know why they bothered nominating other films. Of course, WALL-E SHOULD have been nominated for best picture, but again, I'll get to that later. I wish Kung Fu Panda had a fighting chance (har har, no bad pun intended), but it had the misfortune of being released in 2008 alongside WALL-E, so what can you do?**

ART DIRECTION

“Changeling”
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“The Dark Knight”
“The Duchess”
“Revolutionary Road”

**The Academy was in love with Benjamin Button this year. I didn't mind it until it got 13 Oscar nominations, about half of which it didn't deserve. I will give it credit, though, for its technical achievements--the high points of this film were the aesthetics. For that reason, and the fact that the Academy, Ben Lyons, and idiots worldwide are obsessed with this film, I think it'll win. I, however, would give it to Dark Knight or Changeling. Because I'm different.**

CINEMATOGRAPHY

“Changeling”
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“The Dark Knight”
“The Reader”
“Slumdog Millionaire”

**I won't get into the differences between art direction and cinematography here, but I'm choosing this for many of the same reasons as above. I realize that it's highly unlikely for 1 film to receive 2 awards in similar categories, but I've made my choice. However, I'd prefer for either Slumdog or Dark Knight to get it, and between those 2 I much preferred the camera work in Slumdog.**

COSTUME DESIGN

“Australia”
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“The Duchess”
“Milk”
“Revolutionary Road”

**Granted, I haven't seen The Duchess, and I wanted to kill myself during Australia, but I pegged Benjamin Button and Revolutionary Road for 2 reasons: #1 As I mentioned, everyone loves Benjamin Button; and #2 The Academy will feel like they have to throw Revolutionary Road a bone for something, since they didn't nominate it for any top awards except Supporting Actor. I chose Australia, however, even though I wanted to die in that (seemingly) 12-hour "epic" because I've always loved his aesthetic.**

DIRECTING

“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button"
“Frost/Nixon"
“Milk"
“The Reader"
“Slumdog Millionaire"

**I'm choosing Danny Boyle simply for the reason that I loved Slumdog, and I thought he did a marvelous job with it. Add to that the fact that he already won the BAFTA and Golden Globe for it (I could have sworn he won the DGA as well, but apparently I was mistaken), and it seems a pretty sure bet. I just don't want Ron Howard to win it. As I discussed with someone the other day, Ron Howard makes good movies. Good. Not bad. But not great. Just good. I think he peaked at A Beautiful Mind, and that was the end of that.**

DOCUMENTARY FEATURE-- I ACTUALLY HAVEN'T SEEN ANY OF THESE, SO I WON'T EVEN BOTHER. HERE ARE THE NOMINEES FOR YOUR READING PLEASURE. :-P

“The Betrayal (Nerakhoon)”
“Encounters at the End of the World”
“The Garden”
“Man on Wire”
“Trouble the Water”

DOCUMENTARY SHORT--SAME STORY HERE.

“The Conscience of Nhem En”
“The Final Inch”
“Smile Pinki”
“The Witness - From the Balcony of Room 306”

FILM EDITING

“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“The Dark Knight”
“Frost/Nixon”
“Milk”
“Slumdog Millionaire”

**I realize that I'm pretty much sending Frost/Nixon home with nothing, and while I liked the film, I honestly don't think it's that strong of a contender in anything it's nominated in, so there you have it. Great camera work necessitates a great editor to put it together, hence my choices.**

FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM--I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY OF THESE EITHER, THOUGH I'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THE CLASS AND WALTZ WITH BASHIR, SO I WON'T BE SURPRISED IF EITHER OF THOSE WIN.

“The Baader Meinhof Complex”
“The Class”
“Departures”
“Revanche”
“Waltz with Bashir”

MAKEUP

“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“The Dark Knight”
“Hellboy II: The Golden Army”
**I'll be perfectly honest--I don't want Benjamin Button to win the 4 awards I've projected for it because it's OVERRATED. Nonetheless, I begrudgingly have to admit that the makeup in it was freaking fabulous. Though I would bet that if Dark Knight didn't do that awful CGI job on Harvey Dent, they would have this one in the bag.**

ORIGINAL SCORE

“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“Defiance”
“Milk”
“Slumdog Millionaire”
“WALL-E”

**I loved all the music in Slumdog, both the songs with words and the score. I think it definitely deserves this award. I also loved the score to WALL-E (and WALL-E in general), but it's easy to miss when there's so much animated awesomeness on which to focus.**

ORIGINAL SONG

“Down to Earth” from “WALL-E”
“Jai Ho” from “Slumdog Millionaire”
“O Saya” from “Slumdog Millionaire”

**I still want to know, where is Bruce Springsteen's "The Wrestler"??? I honestly don't think I've ever heard a song better matched to its film...Putting that aside, I think all these songs are great. I picked "Down to Earth" for the same reason that (as much as I thought it deserved it) "Falling Slowly" from Once won over all those songs from Enchanted last year--Vote splitting. It happened with Dreamgirls, too, and you'd think the studios would've learned by now not to submit multiple songs. Not to diss WALL-E or anything, but that's the truth..."**

BEST PICTURE

“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“Frost/Nixon”
“Milk”
“The Reader”
“Slumdog Millionaire”

**I will murder someone if Benjamin Button wins, I swear I'll do it! Everyone is dissing Slumdog now that it's the favorite. But I'm with Roger Ebert on this one: Slumdog will win simply because it's a very enjoyable film, certainly the most enjoyable of this list. Which is, if I can get on my soap box for a second, composed of primarily the WRONG films. Here's what my list would look like:

"The Dark Knight"
"WALL-E"
"Slumdog Millionaire"
"Doubt"
"Rachel Getting Married"

I suppose I won't bore you now with the reasons why. But THAT would be a Best Picture race!**

SHORT FILM, ANIMATED

“La Maison en Petits Cubes”
“Lavatory - Lovestory”
“Oktapodi”
“Presto”
“This Way Up”

**I actually HAVE seen all of these, so I can make a guess! For me, Presto--the short shown before WALL-E--was my favorite Pixar short ever, and I think just about anything animated associated with WALL-E has it in the bag. I will, however, admit that the British short This Way Up was also absolutely HYSTERICAL, so if they manage to pull off the upset I could understand.**

SHORT FILM, LIVE ACTION

“Auf der Strecke (On the Line)”
“Manon on the Asphalt”
“New Boy”
“The Pig”
“Spielzeugland (Toyland)”

**Yep, I saw all of these, too! I think Manon on the Asphalt (a retrospective on a woman's life from her point of view as she lies dying on the street) from France will win not because it's more well-made than the rest (Make no mistake, it IS well-made, I just feel these were all pretty strong entries), but because there's a little bit of sex and nudity in it, and that of course means it's cutting edge and progressive and all that rubbish, so that's why I think it will win. If the Academy has a sense of humor, though, I think they'd pick The Pig (the fight of an elderly hospital patient to get back the painting of a pig in his hospital room) from Denmark. If Spielzeugland (Toyland) from Germany wins, well, it's a sentimental win because its subject is the Holocaust.**

SOUND EDITING

“The Dark Knight”
“Iron Man”
“Slumdog Millionaire”
“WALL-E”
“Wanted”

**I know I'm out of my mind for choosing 2 comic book films for this, but I honestly don't know whom to pick, so I just chose the 2 I liked the best. And I never saw Wanted.**

SOUND MIXING

“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“The Dark Knight”
“Slumdog Millionaire”
“WALL-E”
“Wanted”

**See above**

VISUAL EFFECTS

“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“The Dark Knight”
“Iron Man”

**I'm fairly certain I've made my opinion on Benjamin Button quite clear. Besides that, however, come on, you can't tell me you weren't just a little impressed by the special effects in last summer's comic movie blockbusters?? Not even a bit??? Liar.**

SCREENPLAY, ADAPTED

“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“Doubt”
“Frost/Nixon”
“The Reader”
“Slumdog Millionaire”

**I am 100% serious, I will lose ALL faith in the system if Benjamin Button wins this one because even the friends of mine who are also in love with Benjamin Button admit that the script is the weakest part of the film. I suggest you read Roger Ebert's review of the film to get the best articulated reasons why. I've heard that Slumdog is significantly different from the book, but I think it will win because of all the love being poured onto it. I really want Doubt to win, though, because I thought it perfectly captured the spirit of the play and made a beautiful transition to film. And maybe this will make up for it getting shafted for Best Picture.**

SCREENPLAY, ORIGINAL

“Frozen River”
“Happy-Go-Lucky”
“In Bruges”
“Milk”
“WALL-E”

**I'm going with Milk because of the statement that it (and undoubtedly the writers) will make if it wins. Not to say that it wasn't a very moving and well-written film! However, I'm really pulling for Frozen River and WALL-E, and between the 2 I would much prefer Frozen River because Courtney Hunt is one of the few women directors/screenwriters out there, and one of the few women outside of the actress categories to garner a nomination. YOU GO GIRL!**

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

What Is Love...

2009-02-05T00:49:00.004-08:00

And I was referring to the PAX217 song, not the song from Night at the Roxbury, though I know everyone is currently bobbing their heads to the side. (Baby, don't hurt me...No more...)

Perhaps I've finally read too many Facebook Bumper Stickers that swoon over Edward Cullen being the new ideal of romance. Maybe it's just that Valentine's Day is coming up. It could be a combination of both, but I really think it's just the first one. Because, seriously, it disturbs me that girls think a creepy, glittering in the sun, watching you while you sleep, treating you like crap because he can't "control" himself around you, following you home and down dark alleys weirdo like Edward Cullen is what a really romantic guy should be.

FALSE!

While we're at it, people should really stop idolizing Romeo and Juliet. They were stupid, hormonal teenagers who KILLED THEMSELVES at the end of the play! Death is NOT romantic, and you can't express your love when you're DEAD.

Just thought I'd mention.

Someone once said, "Everyone always says that you have to be willing to die for whom/what you love. I say, wouldn't it be better to live for them?" It's about time someone said it! (If only I could remember where I heard that; I could give him/her proper credit!) This whole culture of dying-for-love needs to stop. I suppose it is a noble gesture, but it certainly should NOT be the primary indicator of your devotion to someone. And this isn't just a Romeo and Juliet thing! I heard an interview with the girl who played Bella in Twilight (*vomit*) where she said, "The important thing is that Edward and Bella are willing to die for each other."** Well, that's all well and good, but what will you do for each other when one of you is dead? I'm with whoever that was--it's better to live for the one you love.

And then there's that stupid line from Love Story: "Love means never having to say you're sorry." I remember once at a Mass where the priest totally called the movie out on this: "I disagree! Love is always having to say you're sorry!" And he went on a funny little rant for awhile: Sorry that I never do the dishes, sorry that I leave the toilet seat up, sorry that I always change the channel when you're watching...But in a way it is, isn't it? Not because you always screw over the people you love, but because we're human and, in spite of all our best efforts, well, you'll inevitably have something to apologize for. Sorry I was late. Sorry I couldn't be there for you. Sorry I said those things. Sorry I messed up.

What they should've said was: "Love means having the courage to say you're sorry, and the strength not to do it again."

I love that 1 Corinthians 13:4...Everyone seems familiar with the first bit: "Love is patient, love is kind." It goes on: "Love is not jealous. Love does not brag and is not arrogant." Translated: Love is trust. Love is humility. The first one is rather obvious, but the second one can be puzzling. There's nothing wrong with shouting your emotions from the rooftops, provided you don't do it the Tom Cruise way via jumping on couches on Oprah. Because then everyone will think you're a nutter. That's not what it means by bragging. What I think it means, anyway, is that you should love without show, without bravado, and just love with the whole of your heart. You may not shower your significant other with gifts and dinners at fancy places all the time, but they know where you stand because you're there and you show them.

As far as my crusade against the Edward Cullen Ideal...Ladies...You're worth MORE than a stalker covered in body glitter! You want someone who's up front with you and talks with you and lets you know where he stands, not someone who avoids you and keeps secrets and hides himself, even if it's "for your own good," because he knows that you're the best judge of what's for your own good. You want someone who, uh, doesn't follow you home at night and watch you sleep through your bedroom window. That, I'd have to say, is pretty essential.

So I'm hoping that didn't get too cheesy. I promise I won't post one of these everyday until Valentine's Day.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

**I actually walked out of the Borders that was playing the behind-the-scenes footage where I heard this. The actress was saying, "Bella's sort of a damsel in distress, but it's not like she..." Then she paused, as if she knew what she was about to say was a complete lie, then said that stupid thing about dying for each other. I couldn't take it...

My Two Cents: This Year's Oscar Noms

2009-01-22T16:49:00.004-08:00

So the Oscar nominations were announced this morning, and, seeing as I'm pretty much all about the movies, here are my two cents...

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is over-rated. I said this right after I saw the film, and I still believe it now. Yes, it was a beautiful film that I enjoyed at the time, but it wasn't the kind of film that stuck with me, or even the kind of film that I'd ever want to see again. I applaud its technical achievements in aging Brad Pitt backwards and all that, but I do not feel that it was a compelling enough story with that resounding of a message (or even cultural impact) to warrant Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Adapted Screenplay, particularly over other much better films from 2008 like Doubt and, oh yeah, DARK KNIGHT, both of which failed to receive nods in that category. I'm also particularly sore that Brad Pitt got the Best Actor nomination, considering he was only physically in the film for approximately 20 minutes, when the Academy wouldn't award Andy Serkis a nomination for playing Gollum in the LOTR series for basically the same reason.
The Dark Knight got shafted. The Dark Knight was easily my favorite film of 2008. It's the best comic book movie ever made. It was smart, full of action, socially relevant, well-acted, and its message has this amazing resonance about humanity and its potential for good or evil. Not to mention that it was the biggest box office hit of 2008. And there was tangible hope that the Academy would see past its label as a "comic book film" and do the right thing and nominate it for the big awards: Best Screenplay, Best Director, or, at the very least, Best Picture. I don't mean to downplay the nominations that it did receive--the film certainly warrants all the technical nods it garnered, and Heath Ledger has a real chance of being the second posthumous actor to win an Oscar--but against the five films that did receive nominations for Best Picture (Benjamin Button, Frost/Nixon, Milk, The Reader, and Slumdog Millionaire), how many people in the general public wouldn't pick Dark Knight? I'm waaaaaaaaaay more upset about this not receiving a Best Picture nod than Doubt, though I also loved Doubt. This has been a growing problem with the Academy. There was once a time when the Best Picture nominations, the critical darlings, coincided with what people actually watched. This was even as recently as Titanic, Chicago, or LOTR: Return of the King! But, particularly last year, that hasn't been the case for awhile, and this year could've been the year to bridge that gap again between elitist critical attitudes and popular taste--if they had just given Dark Knight the nomination it deserved!
The acting races will be hard to decide. At least, for the viewer at home, like me! In the past few years, I've begun making 2 prediction brackets: 1 of the ones I think will win, and 1 of the ones I want to win--they don't always coincide. For me, the hardest ones to decide will definitely be Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress. I basically love every single nominee in both those categories (except I'm still puzzled about Penélope Cruz in Vicky Christina Barcelona--seriously, has ANYONE seen that film?!? And then there's Angelina Jolie for Changeling, out of nowhere...), so I'm caught in that I just want ALL of them to win! I think it's time for Kate Winslet to get her Oscar, but Meryl was so amazing in Doubt, but then you have Anne Hathaway out of nowhere revealing she can actually act, and in Supporting Actress-land I adore Amy Adams, but Viola Davis stole the scene away from Meryl, which practically no one can do, and as much as I complain about CCBB Taraji P. Henson was really the one bright spot in it for me, and...Seriously, I can't choose...
A few things confuse me. As Cassie pointed out, why are there only 3 Best Original Song nominations, and where is Bruce Springsteen's song from The Wrestler?!? For all I know, there is another one of those odd exceptions like Jonny Greenwood's score for There Will Be Blood, but it would be good if they clarified that. And why is Waltz with Bashir in the Best Foreign Language category instead of Best Animated Feature? The obvious answer might be, Duh, because it's in a foreign language, but last year's Persepolis was also foreign and was still up for Best Animated Feature. I mean, we all know Wall-E is a shoo-in, but I'm just curious.
Poor Kung Fu Panda! If only it wasn't released against Wall-E, it would actually have a shot at winning that Oscar...
Hooray for Robert Downey Jr.!!!!! For several reasons! First of all, this was the year of Robert Downey Jr. Iron Man was successful beyond belief, proving that people can in fact reform their lives and make it to the top again after falling to the bottom...And he is the first to tell you that he was in fact at rock bottom. Second, his nomination for Tropic Thunder is a triumph in that it's a nod for a comedy!!!! The Academy Awards are notorious for overlooking the comedy genre--Just ask Steve Martin--and for them to acknowledge that it takes a lot of skill and talent for an actor to be funny, well! It's a huge achievement.

My predictions blog will come closer to the actual awards. For a full list of nominees, click here: http://www.oscars.org/awards/81academyawards/nominees.html

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

A Treatise Against the Speakerphone

2009-01-21T00:48:00.003-08:00

It's a dreaded moment when I call my family. I'm not referring to the impending interaction with those who share my DNA. Complain as I sometimes do about having to call home so often, I usually look forward at least a little bit to speaking to my family. I typically call in the evenings, when I know they're done with dinner, ideally done with cleaning up. It always starts, and inevitably ends, the same way: Someone--usually my Dad--will pick up the phone, talk for a few minutes into the earpiece, then say, "Hold on, let me put you on speaker."

That, my friends, is the moment I dread. I've given up fighting it by this point; now, I just clench my teeth, mutter, "Okay," and wait for that *click* that tells me I'm being broadcast live--throughout the room, anyway. I understand why they do this. My mom and dad like to be able hear me at the same time, and it gets annoying to pass the cell phone back and forth, or to have one repeat what the other is saying all the time. Fine. The speakerphone seems designed for that; after all, speakers are meant to amplify sound, right? However, what they and most other abusers of speakerphones tend to forget is that sound goes back into the telephone through the speakerphone function as well.

Now, what do I mean by this? When speakerphone is on, ambient noise is a much bigger problem. Speaking straight into the phone doesn't completely muffle, say, a television playing in the background, but you certainly don't hear it very loudly because the mouthpiece is aimed directly at your mouth. That is not true with a speakerphone. I ought to know--my family never seems to turn that TV off. It's annoying enough trying to hold a conversation with my parents while they are yelling at some player in the Bulls game they're watching while talking to me, but it's made that much worse when you can actually hear the game as it's going on because they refuse to turn off the TV, or even turn off the volume. They also like to turn it on speakerphone while they're doing the dishes so it's hands-free. Not that dishes, pots, and pans ever make noise. I have to say, though, possibly the absolute worst is when another phone--either another cell phone or the house phone--rings, and one of them answers it...Without leaving the room. Naturally, the parent who is still on the phone with me does not take the phone off speaker. I have begged and pleaded and beseeched never to do this, but to no avail. Whether or not you can believe it, I can hear the conversation the other parent is having, typically much LOUDER than the one we are attempting to have on our line. If you can't get the other conversation to leave the room, please turn off the speakerphone, please!

Another issue that consistently pops up with speakerphone is the distance issue. While it's true that you don't have to have the speakerphone directly at your mouth to speak into it, there is in fact a limit to how far you can stand away from it. My brother loves to stand across the room from a speakerphone and talk, to which I can only reply over and over, "WHAT?!?" This may seem to contradict what I just said about ambient noise, but it doesn't. I maintain ambient noise is much louder on speakerphone, but I never said you can hear ambient noise clearly. Just louder. Though I guess if you could hear ambient noise clearly you would at least be hearing something.

STOP THE MADNESS, PEOPLE! The speakerphone has terrible audio quality, and is far too much of a hassle to be used, especially in every phone call. There are hands-free headsets, Bluetooths, even conference calls that are better alternatives to the speakerphone. Or, if you must insist on using this worthless piece of technology, do so in a quiet environment where ambient noise is kept to a minimum, and when you are within a decent speaking range to the phone. It'll keep everyone happier (and my blood pressure a little lower).

Other things that don't blend with speakerphone: Babies, blenders, aluminum foil, bodily gas (yes, I hate to say it...), crunchy foods, public places (ugh, speakerphone in public is a whole other blog altogether), and musical instruments being played within 20 feet, possibly closer depending on the instrument.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

In 2008, I...

2009-01-14T00:35:00.004-08:00

This is normally a post I try to put up before the new year actually begins. But, for various reasons (mostly, a strange combination of business and laziness), I'm only doing it now. The following list isn't in chronological order, or any specific order, really, besides the order of how they popped into my head. It might sound a little like bragging, and to a certain extent I guess I am, but whoever wants to remember all the sucky things that happened to them that year? So, without further ado...

In 2008, I...

Graduated college. 4 years, 2 majors, and thousands of dollars in debt later, I was able to climb up the steps of the Golden Dome with diploma in hand. It's something so surreal to think about. College (if you do it right) only lasts 4 years of your life, but it feels like an entire lifetime has passed. And I suppose the sociologists and the psychologists and whoever else will confirm that you do the most amount of growing and maturing in college, so it all makes sense. In any case, 4 years made me a different, hopefully better person than I was before college. I won't wax nostalgic about my entire college experience right now--After all, it wasn't even a year ago yet!--but I will say that I miss it and my ND friends a lot. Love thee, Notre Dame...
Moved to LA. This one is in direct correlation to the previous one. I went into ND as an English major, and I came out a film major (though, yes, my degree is in both). The next logical step, thus, was LA. I feel like everyone needs to live in a major city at least once in their lives; not necessarily LA, but any big city--Chicago, NYC, San Francisco, etc. Just to get the feel for how it is. But yes, I'm here now, doing the grad school thing, enjoying the sunshine, and cursing the traffic. Oh yeah, and STILL trying to figure out my future.
Made a film that will be exhibited in a festival. The actual festival will take place in 2009, but I made it in 2008. I'm referring, of course, to Deaners, the documentary on James Dean's fan community from his hometown in Fairmount, IN, that Brittany and I made for our Advanced Digital Production class Spring semester of 2008. We recently found out that it was selected for the 2009 ND Student Film Festival (January 23-25--GO SEE IT IF YOU'RE STILL IN SOUTH BEND!), which just totally rocks! No, it's not Sundance or anything, but it's probably the only film festival either of us will ever have an entry in, and we're proud of our work. And, no, not every film made in class at ND gets put into the festival; otherwise, I would've had 3 or 4 by now. Deaners was a project that Brittany and I worked so hard on, and we are both SO proud of the final product, and to get this kind of recognition for it is very, very gratifying. :-)
Had a story published, and won an award for it. I've always loved to write, but I've also always lacked the discipline to sit down and get my ideas on paper. Some of my best stories are still just floating around in my head, waiting for me to write them down before I forget. So taking that creative writing course Spring semester of 2008 was one of the best things I did, as it forced me to do some actual writing. Ironically, "Silence," my story that was published and won the award, came from a prompt I had to do for class rather than one of the stories percolating in my head for ages; to be fair, though, I wasn't done writing those before the deadline for the contest. And again, I know I wasn't published in The New Yorker, and I know I didn't win a Hugo Award or anything--I was published in one of the least known publications on-campus (I've even forgotten what it was called), and the Richard T. Sullivan Award is solely a ND thing as far as I know--but it's still something, and I feel good about it.
Presented at a conference as an "expert" in my field. Twice! I think I'm actually much prouder of my X-Files paper than my Disney thesis--I honestly look back at the Disney one and think how I could have done SO much better on it than I did. Not to mention the Midwest Undergraduate Film Conference was much more fun, with the panel Q&A that we had to do and all the other schools. It gave me a taste of grad school, I guess. :-P
Fell in love. Who saw that coming? I certainly didn't. By senior year, I had closed my mind and myself to the possibility of finding someone at ND, and I guess it's in those moments that God chooses to surprise you. Every logical reason says it shouldn't have lasted beyond graduation. Screw logic. It'll be 9 months this Friday. [1-14-4 9 11-14-15-23 25-15-21'18-5 18-5-1-4-9-14-7 20-8-9-19--9 12-15-22-5 25-15-21. :-)]
Started grad school. And I love it! I love that I get to think solely about film pretty much all the time! I love writing about topics I'm interested in writing about! I love doing research! By that last statement alone I know I belong in grad school. I'm still no closer to figuring out what I'm going to do with all this, but I'm having a hell of a time until then.
Swam with stingrays. That cruise with Nikki and her family after graduation was a trip of a lifetime! Not only was it time spent with one of my best friends in several tropical paradises, but I got to do things I've never done before and probably never will again; namely, swim with stingrays and drive ATVs around an island. It was amazing! And thinking about it makes me miss my roomie. :-(
Saw a panda in person. Anyone who knows me knows about my unhealthy obsession with those cute, fuzzy, black and white Zen balls of fur. And I finally got to see three at the San Diego Zoo over the summer! I have about 50 panda pictures to prove it.
Saw Tom Hanks perform live on-stage...For free. This was awesome! In November, I believe, Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson were hosting a fundraiser at UCLA, with tickets going $300 a pop. Given the economy, tickets weren't selling well, which is they only reason I believe they gave the CMS students comp tickets at all--to get butts in the seats for this event. What was the event? you ask. It was a celebrity reading of You Can't Take It with You (which I had performed in during high school!) featuring Tom Hanks, Rita Wilson, Mila Kunis, Jon Hamm, William Shatner, Annette Bening, Martin Short, Alicia Silverstone, and a whole slough of other actors whose names I can't think of off the top of my head. Go ahead, be jealous now. AND we got to go to the after-party for free!
Watched the sunset on the beach. Sunsets are beautiful everywhere, honestly, but I really am convinced it's best by the ocean.
Rode on a motorcycle. I know, right? You're allowed to laugh at the image of me on a motorcycle. Granted, I was by no means driving, but still, you're probably wondering how the hell I even got on one! (I had a boost. :-P) I guess this points out again how it was a year of taking risks and doing things I wouldn't have dared to before. Riding on a motorcycle. Swimming with stingrays. Moving across the country. Trusting my heart to someone. And risks suck, but, ultimately, I'm finding it's worth it.
Went to Disney Land. I went 22 years of my life with only going to Disney World once. But finally, FINALLY I've gone to Disney Land--twice now! Say what you will about the Disney Corporation, as most of it is probably true...Maybe it's manufactured happiness, but they can manufacture it well, and I'm glad they do it. :-)
Discovered who my real friends are. The ones who read and respond to my emails. The ones who put a regular effort into keeping in touch. The ones who bothered to try to see me when I was home for break. It's good to know that I actually am missed, because I miss you all so much, and you should come to LA and keep me company.
Had a dishwasher. For the first time in my life! I mean, I guess I still have it, but I don't use it as much anymore...
Got a job that paid over $10 an hour. Considering my jobs up to this point were either retail or work study at ND (which barely pays minimum wage), this is huge. Seriously, my job as a grad research assistant pays more than my Library job and my Info Desk job combined. Not to mention that I can make my own hours, and it's a subject I'm really into myself. Where can you go wrong? Now, if only I could find a job like this AFTER I graduate...I'd be gold!

Overall, I'd call 2008 a pretty good year. :-) 2009, the year of the Ox--bring it on!

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Oh, the Joy of Craigslist!

2009-01-12T23:11:00.005-08:00

Just thought I'd share some eyebrow-raising things I've found on Craigslist...

In a listing for a roomshare: "Room available for a single or Chinese couple." Bwah?!? I actually thought, Maybe this is some sort of slang I don't know about! So I looked it up on Urbandictionary.com--it's not. So, yes, apparently, this girl wants either a roommate or a Chinese couple.
In the "Free" section: "3 pairs of ratty jeans." Granted, it had a hyphen to "for art project?" But, honestly, who looks at their old ratty jeans and thinks, Hey, I'll post them on Craigslist! The Free section in general is very amusing to check out; I suggest you do it sometime. "Free Dirt" is also always a fun one to see.
Another listing for a roomshare: "Free room available for female. Also receive $100 a month. I would like someone to attend parties with me. I am willing to buy you outfits, if you're into that." This was posted several months ago...Enough said
Yet another listing for a roomshare: I didn't actually see this one, but my friend told me she saw one where a couple was advertising for someone to move in and share their master bedroom...And their bed...People are weird.
Listing in Classifieds for tv/film/video: "SEEKING NEWBORN TWINS FOR DISCOVERY CHANNEL TV SHOW." Bring me your newborns! Now, I'm sure it's 100% legit since it's with the Discovery Channel. I'm just saying...Advertising that you're seeking newborns just sounds bad all around.
Right below that listing: "Establshed Fetish Video Producer Looking For Models." Ummmmmmmmmmmm. Gross.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Random Poetry -- A New MP3 Player Game

2008-12-07T12:29:00.005-08:00

Stole this from Heather on (what else?) Facebook...And, wow, now that I just completed it, this actually sounds like an awesomely bad emo poem that would get published on someone's MySpace. How frightening that it comes from music I listen to...

1. Set your MP3 player on random
2. write down the first line of the first 20 songs
3. make spacing adjustments
4. copy down your poem

There's a hatchet, got a knife.
Every time I call you on the phone,
The wind hit my back, as cold as I remember.

In the howling wind comes a stinging rain,
And is this where we need to be.
This is the only lonely picture waiting on my floor.

What will people think when they hear that I'm a Jesus freak?

Do you have the time to listen to me whine?
She thinks I'm much too thin.
We made plans to be unbreakable.

Take my photo off the wall.
I hate feeling like this,
Over-zealous, to say the least.

Taking off, heading out of this town,
It feels right.
My breath smells of a thousand fags.

You think I'm crazy because I love you.

You listen in to what we have to say,
You're all just staring, angry faces, begging for a place to die.
Take this heart of darkness, I give it up.

*****

And, just because I'm a nerd, here are the songs they came from:

Anberlin, "Never Take Friendship Personal," Never Take Friendship Personal
Thousand Foot Krutch, "The Art of Breaking," The Art of Breaking
Mat Kearney, "Wait," Nothing Left to Lose
P.O.D., "Bullet the Blue Sky," The Fundamental Elements of Southtown
P.O.D., "This Time," Testify
Relient K, "I Just Want You to Know," The Birds and the Bee Sides
Something Corporate, "Ruthless," North
DC Talk, "Jesus Freak," Jesus Freak
Green Day, "Basket Case," Dookie
Jack's Mannequin, "Holiday from Real," Everything in Transit
Mae, "Mistakes We Knew We Were Making," The Everglow
Jet, "Look What You've Done,"Get Born
Skillet, "Comatose," Comatose
Five Iron Frenzy, "Most Likely to Succeed," Our Newest Album Ever
MxPx, "More Everything," Before Everything and After
Jack Johnson, "While We Wait," Sleep Through the Static
Robbie Williams, "Strong," I've Been Expecting You
MxPx, "Prozac," Let It Happen
The Fold, "With You, I Sink," This Too Shall Pass
Dead Poetic, "A Hoax to Live For," New Medicines
Further Seems Forever, "Light Up Ahead," Hide Nothing

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Movie Survey (Stolen from Andy...)

2008-12-02T09:58:00.003-08:00

Really, how can I resist? It's about movies!

What was the last movie you watched in a theater?
Wow...Um...Synecdoche, New York. And not even when it was in REAL theaters, but when my school had a free preview of it! I'm seeing Benjamin Button that way this Thursday!

Who is your favorite James Bond?
Recently, it changed to Daniel Craig. I LOVE this bad@$ Bond! Before then, it was Roger Moore, for no real reason I can state.

What was the last DVD that you bought for yourself?
Just got the Indiana Jones box set, sans the latest one because the 4-movie version cost $20 more, and I can DEFINITELY get the newest one for less than $20!

Do you remember the last time you watched a movie on VHS, if so, what was it?
Oy. I think Beauty and the Beast was screened on VHS in my Disney class because the DVD freaked out.

How many of the Matrix movies have you seen?
All three. The first one was magical. The last two...Do not exist to me.

Do you talk during movies?
Not in theaters. I can't stand it. If I'm watching at home, yeah.

Do you have Netflix?
Hellz yes!

In your opinion, do movie adaptations ever live up to the book it’s based on?
On the fantasy side, they can't, just because your imagination will always outdo what's physically possible. But more "realistic" books, sure.

Ever taken a date to a movie that turned out to be just God awful?
No, lol, unless you count the time we couldn't make it to the theater on time. :-P

Do you go to Blockbuster?
Don't have a membership.

Do you like Disney or Pixar more?
There's enough love in my heart for both.

Who’s a better director Woody Allen, Spike Lee or Quentin Tarantino?
I guess I'll go with Tarantino, though I wouldn't choose any of them as necessarily my favorite.

Have you ever seen a foreign language film?
Hells yes.

How do you feel about Jim Carrey?
When he tones down the overacting, he's pretty good--Eternal Sunshine, anyone? Otherwise, he can be such a jack@$.

Can you list three movies that Judd Apatow has produced?
The 40-Year-Old Virgin, Pineapple Express, and Knocked Up

What is the worst movie you’ve ever seen?
Date Movie. Everything that SUCKS about parody movies is embodied in that one. As much as it pains me to say so, The X-Files 2 comes pretty close...

What is your favorite movie?
It's become my standard answer to say Eternal Sunshine, but honestly, I have no answer to this question.

What was the last movie you “watched” with someone?
12 Angry Men. Which actually IS a good movie, but...

Have you ever seen a Spaghetti Western?
Not all of one yet, but I have some in my queue.

Roughly how Many DVDs do you own?
Oy. I never bothered to count. Do TV series count as one, or does each individual disc count?

Have you ever seen…

Almost Famous?
Most of the way through

American Beauty?
Yes

Big Fish?
Yes--I honestly expected more from it...

Chicago?
Love it!

Children of Men?
Opening night with Nicolio

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon?
Yes. I need to watch it a few more times. Maybe I'll start to understand it.

Fargo?
Probably my favorite Coen Brothers movie.

Forest Gump?
Yep--don't hate on it, it was good.

Juno?
Indeed!

Life is Beautiful?
Actually, no. I should get on that.

Little Miss Sunshine?
Oh yes. And my love for Steve Carrell just grew more and more...

Magnolia?
No

March of the Penguins?
Anything with Morgan Freeman. Seriously. Anything.

Moulin Rouge?
Way too many times!

Mystic River?
It's in my queue.

No Country For Old Men?
Yes. A little overrated, but the critics just go insane over everything the Coen brothers put out.

Once?
LOVE LOVE LOVE!

Pan’s Labyrinth?
Oh yes.

Pulp Fiction?
Yep

Saving Private Ryan?
This is one of those films that just gets better every time I see it. I canNOT believe Shakespeare in Love won Best Picture over this...I'm pretty sure most of the world can't believe it, either.

Schindler’s List?
Yes. I sniffle now thinking about it.

Shawshank Redemption?
Oh my GAWD. Such a good movie!

Silence of the Lambs?
Yes!

The Departed?
Yep. I liked it, but don't necessarily believe it was Scorsese's best work. But the Academy was like, Look, we can't hold off giving him an Oscar too much longer...

The Godfather?
Yes.

Sixth Sense?
Yes. Too bad M. Night Shamylan (did I get close to spelling that right?) is pretty much a one-trick horse.

Usual Suspects?
It's coming up!

There Will be Blood?
I did.

Titanic?
Yes. If you're able to get the hype and hysteria out of your mind when you watch it, it's actually kind of a beautiful film. But that's hard to do.

12 Angry Men?
Hahahahaha...Yes, I have.

2001: A Space Odyssey?
Not yet. I know, I fail...

Animal House?
No

Annie Hall?
Remember what I said about failure?

Apocalypse Now?
Yes. It was the Redux version. I wanted to shoot myself.

Casablanca?
Love!

Citizen Kane?
Yes.

Dr. Strangelove?
Not yet.

Driving Miss Daisy?
Most of it.

Duck Soup?
No

Gone with the Wind?
Yep

It’s a Wonderful Life?
Awwwww, yes, every Christmas!

Jaws?
I've seen the last half about 20 times whenever they play it on TV, lol.

Lawrence of the Arabia?
Yep

Monty Python and the Holy Grail?
Of course.

One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest?
Yes.

Philadelphia?
Actually, not yet.

Plan 9 From Outer Space?
No. I feel like I should, but no.

Psycho?
Yes!

Rain Man?
Yes.

Singin’ in the Rain?
Awwww, of course I have!

Some Like it Hot?
It's in my queue.

Sunset Blvd?
Love. This. Film!

The Good, the Bad, The Ugly?
I've seen clips...

Great Escape?
No.

The Sting?
No.

The Wizard of Oz?
Not until sophomore year of high school, but yes.

Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory?
Creeped me OUT as a kid!

Rocky?
Um, no.

40 Year Old Virgin?
Yes. Surprisingly sweet at times.

Austin Powers?
Yes. *sigh*

Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure?
Hahaha, yes.

Dogma?
No

Ferris Bueller's Day Off?
Love it!

Ghostbusters?
It's been a reaaaaaaaally long time...

Groundhog Day?
Yes!

Mean Girls?
Oh yes!

Office Space?
Yes.

Super Bad?
Blar. Yes.

Super Troopers?
No.

Team America?
No.

That Thing You Do?
Yes. Sorry to say--The Wonders were NOT a real band!

Blues Bros?
Of course.

Princess Bride?
One of my favorites!

Wedding Singer?
Yes.

This is Spinal Tap?
Yes.

Waiting for Guffman?
No

When Harry Met Sally?
Aww, one of my chick flick favorites!

Who Framed Roger Rabbit??
Oh man, that was a looooooooong time ago.

Young Frankenstein?
Yes.

Zoolander?
Ha, again, too many times.

Army of Darkness?
No.

Boondock Saints?
Yes. Aside from that one dude's AWFUL Irish accent, it wasn't bad.

Donnie Darko?
Yes. I think I'm still messed up.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind?
One of my all-time favorites. Oh man. The writing is flawless to me.

Fight Club?
Yes. My roommate watches it enough, lol.

Memento?
Yes.

Rocky Horror Picture Show?
Yes.

Saw?
Ugh, the first one was enough.

Shaun of the Dead?
Actually, no! I've been told I need to! I'm getting on it...

Snakes on a Plane?
Um, yeah, no.

The Big Lebowski?
Yes. I didn't like it.

Fifth Element?
Most of it.

Twelve Monkeys?
No.

Pi?
No.

Finding Nemo?
Yay!

Nightmare Before Christmas?
Yes

Shrek?
Yes.

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs?
Yes, and I can do a freaky imitation of Snow White, too.

The Incredibles?
LOVE!

Toy Story?
My favorite Pixar EVER. Nothing comes close to Toy Story for me.

Monsters Inc?
Yes!

Cinderella?
My favorite as a child. I thought I would eventually grow out of my dark hair into blonde so I could be pretty like Cinderella. Whoops!

The Lion King?
Oh man, I still SOB every time...

Aladdin?
:-D Yes

Jurassic Park?
Yes.

Kill Bill?
Both

King Kong (any version)?
Most of both of them.

Men in Black?
Yes.

Robin Hood: Prince of the Thieves?
Yes. Back to back with Men in Tights is the BEST way to watch it!

Sin City?
Yes.

Back to the Future?
Yes.

Harry Potter?
I think 4 out of 5...

Indiana Jones?
Yes, and I just bought the box set!

Die Hard?
I think I've seen all but the last one, but it's been awhile.

Lord of the Rings?
Oh yes.

Pirates of the Caribbean?
Yep...The first one was the best.

Star Wars?
Even the prequels.

Matrix?
Didn't they ask this already?

Spider-Man?
Yep. I choose to ignore the third one.

Iron man?
LOVE LOVE LOVE!!!!

Dark Knight?
Oh man, this movie was pretty much flawless. And, yes, I still whimper every time I hear Heath Ledger's name.

Wall E?
EEEEEEEEEE!

High School Musical 3?
*vomit* I'm sorry...

Twilight?
Twilight can go f*ck itself in the @$ and DIE DIE DIE DIE DIE!! Yes, I read the first book out of morbid curiosity, and the only way I made it through was to LAUGH at how horribly written it is, and even that almost couldn't keep my eyes from rolling out of my head! SOOOOO glad I don't work at Borders anymore and have to deal with MORE people going on and ON about Twilight. Gah!

Beverly Hills Chihuahua?
Ew, no...Who put this list of suck at the end?

Cloverfield?
Um, no.

Forgetting Sarah Marshall?
Actually, I wanted to.

Baby Mama?
I heard the previews don't do it justice.

Speed Racer?
No.

You Don't Mess with the Zohan?
Uh. No.

Kung Fu Panda?
Love!

Love Guru?
No.

Tropic Thunder?
Yes. Stupid, but funny.

Ice Age?
The first one and most of the second one.

Happy Feet?
So cute!

Night at the Museum?
No

Enchanted?
LOVE IT!

Rush Hour?
The first 2 can be amusing if you can turn off the filter in your mind that tells you, Hey, Brett Ratner is really, REALLY racist.

300?
Overrated. But visually rather lovely. And I mean the cinematography. Those beefy guys actually kinda gross me out.

Ratatouille?
I didn't expect to like it, but I did.

V for Vendetta?
Yeah. It was better the second time I saw it.

Halloween (either version)?
The original is fabulous.

Truman Show?
Yes.

Waiting…?
Huh? Somewhere along the line, I guess I missed this one...

A Few Good Men?
Yes.

Lost in Translation?
Another one I didn't expect to like.

Billy Madison?
Yes.

Gangs of New York?
This one would've been better without Cameron Diaz and with about 30 minutes shaved off.

Old School?
No.

Hudsucker Proxy?
No.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Things People Do When They Think They're Being (___)--But They're Just Being Awkward

2008-11-30T23:09:00.004-08:00

(Note: Not ALL of these come from personal experiences! Some of them, yes, but others happened to other people I know. And, no, I will not clarify if asked. :-P)

Funny: A poorly placed "That's what she said." It's really hard to misuse "That's what she said incorrectly"--seriously, I've made many seemingly innocuous things sound really dirty with that--but there really are a few situations where it just won't make sense. In these cases, then the speaker will be cracking up to him or herself, thinking they just told a really clever dirty joke, and you're there with this bewildered look on your face, and it's just awkward.
Considerate: This one's kind of specific, but it's really funny, just because it's me and Steve. So he was flown out here to LA this past week by a company for an interview (because he's one of those bastards who has a useful major that gets job interviews--yes, I swear I'm dating him :-P), and I of course went to meet him at the airport and helped him check into the hotel that the company also provided for him (jerk). Mind you, the hotel reservation is only for 1 person--and, even if you didn't know how I am and that I wouldn't stay there, the fact that it's clearly on a company's tab would probably tip you off that only 1 person is staying in the room. Anyway, the clerk, seeing me there with Steve, thought he was just helping a dude out and slips him 2 room keys. Yeah. That was awkward.
Macho: Acting like the über-alpha male to a non-receptive female. It also makes one look like a failed chauvinist, btw. This one is simultaneously awkward and hilarious, actually--not all these circumstances are. Seriously, if you've ever seen a dude try to be like, "Do this, come here, do that!" and the girl's just like, "Uh, no..."--it's rather hysterically awkward.
Intellectual: Misquoting some obscure information either while trying to show off how smart you are or while trying to correct someone. This is only awkward if they're talking to someone who knows that particular topic rather well; how awkward can it be if you insist that 2 plus 2 equals to someone who can't add? But I'm not merely talking about someone who just doesn't realize they were at some point misinformed; I'm talking about the people who, no matter what, will insist that whatever they were told is right when you (or that knowledgeable person) can clearly prove you are an imbecile. I think we've all been on one of the ends of this situation at some point--admit it! We don't judge here...
Smooth: Calling a girl by the wrong name. Enough said.
Pious: After delivering a stern lecture as to why you are heathens, declaring that he/she will pray for you so that Jesus won't damn you to Hell. No matter how much he/she thinks you deserve it, there's just no situation where that won't be awkward. Not to mention infuriating, because then he/she feels like he/she is up on the moral pedestal and is only condescending in a pious gesture to save your immortal soul. *Sigh*

That's all I've got for now. I'll come up with more later.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Yet More Signs of the Nerd I Have Become

2008-11-24T10:25:00.006-08:00

[Note: If you're reading this through Facebook, the links probably aren't going to show up, so you might want to read it on the original post.]

I have Bordwell and Thompson's blog bookmarked on my browser. (If you have no idea who they are, you're clearly not a film person...OR you never took a class with any of their University of Wisconsin disciples... :-P)
When I was telling someone I had given up on Fringe, he said (and I quote), "Whoa, that's serious...I mean it! From a sci-fi person like you, it's saying something!"
I comment on Topless Robot postings on a regular basis. (Btw, you might need to watch this video.)
I flag Twilight bumper stickers on the Facebook application as offensive...Oh wait, no, that's just a sign of how much I f*ing HATE Twilight. Ask me why another time. (And, no, I don't actually do that...Yet...)
I featured an extended clip of The X-Files during my microteaching session of my TA training course. And, yes, it was relevant, thank you very much!
I write up far too many surveys for this stupid blog.
The other day, I watched 4 episodes of The Addams Family (for my paper), Blade Runner (just for funsies), and an episode of Battlestar Galactica (again for funsies). All in one sitting.
I'm currently listening to the Harry Potter audiobooks. I suppose it comes as a shock that I haven't read them already (I know, I know!), but there's a very long-winded explanation for that. I'm actually getting through the first one relatively quickly, as I only listen to it when I'm stuck in traffic or on the bus. For once, I can honestly say, "Thank you, LA traffic!"
I've discovered IGN.com...And I don't even play video games!

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Yet Another Sign That I Live in LA

2008-11-20T23:26:00.003-08:00

And this time, it's literally a sign! :-P

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

My Favorite Bond Songs

2008-11-15T19:37:00.003-08:00

Okay, while I haven't seen Quantum of Solace yet, I definitely plan to sooner rather than later, as Casino Royale was so bad@$$ that, in spite of its stupid name, Quantum of Solace can't possibly disappoint! And while I haven't heard the theme for this movie yet (I know, I fail), I heard it's a surprisingly good duet with Alicia Keys and Jack White. So here's my personal favorite list of the best Bond themes...

(Note: I chose not to count the actual Bond theme. I mean, in a list of the most iconic and memorable bond songs, that would seem a little unfair now, wouldn't it? Also, keep in mind this is solely MY opinion, and personal taste certainly plays into this...)

"Live and Let Die" by Paul McCartney and the Wings, Live and Let Die. Hands down no question about it, the BEST Bond song ever made! Of course, it's for one of the worst (Note: Not THE worst, but still not good) Bond movies ever made, but I have a friend who has a theory that the better the movie, the worse the song, and vice versa. Of course, then he can't explain #2, but I move on. This song is simply amazing. It has that gentle intro to paino, then once the drums boom in and the tempo picks up with those strings, you can't stop the rock. Plus, you can't go wrong with an ex-Beatle on the song, right?
"You Know My Name" by Chris Cornell, Casino Royale. Let me start with saying that the opening credit sequence to Casino Royale is one of my favorite credit sequences of all time, let alone Bond films. (If you want me to analyze the title sequence for how it demonstrates the new goals of the reimagined Bond franchise, let me know, but I won't go on that tangent here.) And this song is absolutely perfect for that sequence! It lets you know right off the bat what makes this bond movie different: Unlike past Bonds (and Bond songs), this one is not smooth, luxurious, or sweet. It's harsh, full of conflict, full of action, and definitively the anti-cheese (No offense, Shirley Bassey). And I could use the Soundgarden excuse here, but I won't pretend that I was listening to them in the '90s. I know...Sorry...
"Goldeneye" by Tina Turner, Goldeneye. I was reading one review that called this song "unmemorable" and a "disappointment." What was a disappointment was how Pierce Brosnan's run as Bond started on such a high note--until Casino Royale, Goldeneye was my favorite "new Bond" movie--and end in such tragedy. (Die Another Day...*shudder*) Anyway, I personally love the groove of this song, and Tina's scratchy, husky voice gave it just the right touch, though I admit the song doesn't make much sense lyrically.
"Nobody Does It Better" by Carly Simon, The Spy Who Loved Me. Not too many Bond songs title themselves differently from their corresponding movie, and among those few manage to weave the title of the movie into the lyrics as seamlessly as this one does. I personally think Carly Simon was an odd choice to do a Bond song, since I only know of 1 song of hers that ever got any airplay (I could be completely wrong on that), but somehow it fit--made it smooth without the schmaltz.
"You Only Live Twice" by Nancy Sinatra, You Only Live Twice. Love Nancy Sinatra. Nothing really to say besides that. Plus, it scores extra points for me in that its opening string theme was sampled by Robbie Williams for his single "Millennium."
"A View to a Kill" by Duran Duran, A View to a Kill. Hahaha, 80s Bond! What's not to love? And, seriously, this was a MUCH better attempt at a Bond song by an 80s band that a-Ha's "The Living Daylights." Ugh.
"We Have All the Time in the World" by Louis Armstrong, On Her Majesty's Secret Service. This song makes me want to sip mimosas on the beach or something. It's so chill, so relaxed, so quintessentially Louis Armstrong (duh)...And I won't lie, I'm amused by the way he says "Woild." Ignore George Lazenby in the movie...
"The World Is Not Enough" by Garbage, The World Is Not Enough. This movie is wretched. Awful. Any other synonym you can think of for BAD. I mean, seriously, Denise Richards as a nuclear physicist is a suspension of belief that's too much to ask of anyone without a mental defect--much like Scientology. But the movie aside, I love this song because I love Shirley Manson and Garbage! If only the movie had gotten vibe of dark creepiness that this song had exuded; it might have saved it.
"Diamonds Are Forever" by Shirley Bassey, Diamonds Are Forever. Some people would SHOOT ME for not listing this Bassey's Goldfinger as my #1, but I'm being honest here: I don't think it's that great of a song. I will acknowledge that Goldfinger is the Bond film of the old regime, and in that sense Goldfinger is the song from that era, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. This song, however, I really like. I honestly can't remember the plot of this movie (there's that period of 5 or so movies starting with the end of Connery's reign that somehow blend together in my mind), but I like the bitchy attitude of this song: Men are unreliable, but diamonds are forever. :-P
"From Russia with Love" by Matt Munro, From Russia with Love. I'm pretty sure this actually wasn't played during the opening credits, which is strange, but I still like it. It's smooth, slick, and reminiscent of Frank Sinatra...Oh man, what if HE had sung it?

Bond songs I wish didn't exist: "The Man with the Golden Gun" by Lulu; "Die Another Day" by Madonna"; "Moonraker" by Shirley Bassey"; "The Living Daylights" by a-Ha

~Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

5 Things I Still Don't (And Don't Think I Ever Will) Understand About Living in LA...And 5 Things I Finally Do

2008-10-27T00:01:00.004-07:00

Legalized Marijuana. My own personal issues aside, it's seriously something I can't understand. Apparently, as one of my fellow grads has done this already, it's ridiculously easy to get a completely bogus prescription for the leaf, and everyone knows it's bogus, but they go along with it anyway. I have yet to run into the MJ vending machines, though I've been repeatedly assured of their existence. And, seriously, I'm sick of smelling it...
Snow Boots in California. Unless you are skiing in the mountains, there is NO reason for you to be living in Southern California and owning a pair of snow boots. NONE! And yet I constantly see girls around here wearing them; even more egregiously, many insist on pairing them with miniskirts!! Stop the insanity! Big, furry snow boots = cold, tiny miniskirts = warm, the two together does NOT = cute! You in fact look like a moron. And, seriously, your feet aren't sweating like crazy in those? I'd hate to be around you when you take your shoes off.
Scientology. Enough said.
Tanning Salons. Okay, when your state charter states that "sunshine is guaranteed for the masses," AND it's indeed sunny every single day whether you like it or not, what's the use of a tanning salon? You can just go outside! Or even just drive your car...And believe me, you will have a beautiful farmer's tan after just one day of driving because of the riDONKulous traffic. So, what, you need to pre-tan before you real tan? I don't understand.
The Willingness to Wait. Going along with the previous comment about traffic, I've discovered that a "long time" is a relative term around here. I was at a hot dog place with a friend the other day where the average wait to get your food is at least 45 minutes standing in line, and that's considered making "good time." Where I'm from, that's considered a LONG TIME! 40 minutes to go 5 miles is insane! I suppose I could just give in and invest in better speakers in my car and some audiobooks, but I haven't acclimated that much yet, and I still refuse to acknowledge that just maybe the weather is starting to get to me...

But, of course, I do understand a few things better now...

The Freeway Obsession. My 2 LA flatmates and our 3 Californian honorary flatmates would constantly sit around and chatter about the California freeway system while we were in London. And the rest of us didn't know why! I mean, really, why sitting around discussing the roads, especially when you're not there driving them? Well, I will fully admit that, 2 months in, I have been enlightened. Your life, like it or not, revolves around the freeways. They truly are the access points to all, and even when you can find a way to avoid them, you're still pretty much at their mercy from the traffic of everyone else who's trying to enter/exit them. Seriously. You just have to experience it.
In and Out. Another thing my West Coast counterparts would fawn over. Another thing I didn't understand until I experienced it for myself. Another thing I have been converted to.
Avocados. Okay, it's not like I never knew what an avocado was before I moved to California. BUT they really do taste so much better when #1 they're fresh, and #2 they're really cheap because they actually grow them right here. :-D I'm such a brat.
Veganism. Just kidding!
Trader Joe's. I know we have them in the Midwest, but they're few and far between. There's one on just about every street corner here, and I LOVE my poor man's Whole Foods! Kashi cereal for $2? Yes please! It's one of the few ways I actually eat healthy these days, lol...

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

You SERIOUSLY Know You're Cool When...

2008-10-02T12:59:00.005-07:00

You've added an "urbandictionary.com" search engine to your search bar in Firefox.
You realize that you've actually already read the dense theoretical article for class on Tuesday in a class you took last year.
You remember that you took really good notes on the aforementioned article, and you actually call home to see if your parents can find your old notebook (because you kept it, of course) and scan the pages in order to email them to you.
You for once write down in your planner what time something is supposed to start, then proceed to forget said start time, refuse to look at said planner because you figure you remember, and show up at the completely wrong time.
You find yourself quoting multiple episodes of Mythbusters in one conversation.
Your officially-licensed replica of the X-Files "I Want to Believe" poster is not the nerdiest thing currently hanging on your wall.
You actually own one of the books that your readings for class come from...And not because you had it from a previous class. No, you're that cool kid who bought it for fun.
You discover that the novel you're currently reading for fun is actually on the syllabus for a seminar class you decided not to take.
The thing that actually upset you most about getting rear-ended is that your ND license plate holder is destroyed.
You seriously considered not taking a class because it interfered with your TV schedule. Then, when you actually do drop the class, you have to justify to everyone else that you did it for legitimate reasons.
You can barely see over the wheel while driving because your rental car, unlike your real car, can't raise the seat any higher.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

On the Fringe

2008-09-29T10:36:00.007-07:00

This will be a post of me just being a huge FTT nerd and going on about the new Fox show, Fringe. Feel free just to skip this entirely.

I was actually quite excited for this series to come out because of its obviously parallels to The X-Files; creator J. J. Abrams himself called it a cross between The X-Files, The Twilight Zone, and something else that I forget. And it's hard to miss all that the two series have in common: a kick-@$$ female agent in the FBI, the focus on the paranormal, an overarching mythology involving a widespread conspiracy (though on The X-Files the government ran the conspiracy, while it seems that Fringe has modernized the idea by making the conspiracy a commercial entity), and a fair amount of UST (Unresolved Sexual Tension) between the series' two youngest, most attractive main characters. Not to mention that Fringe is getting rave reviews all over the place--critics seem to love it, and ratings are really good. However, I think I'm on the verge of giving up on Fringe, and very well may take it off my DVR if tomorrow's episode doesn't do something mind-blowing.

That seems strange coming from me, but I'm 100% serious. Maybe I was expecting too much, but this series is not the "new X-Files"; it has elements of it, and certainly owes something to the series, but in my mind it doesn't even compare. For one thing, it spoonfeeds the viewers too much! As one of my fellow first-year MA colleagues said, "It shouldn't be this easy to do something else while watching this show." Everything is constantly explained, over-explained, and re-explained! This was something TXF admittedly did during its first season, when Fox underestimated the audience's powers of deduction, but not nearly to this extent. Let me put it this way: There's Walter Bishop, the mad scientist genius who knows everything and thus uses the biggest scientific words for everything. Then there's his son, Peter Bishop, who's also a genius, but without the crazy, who repeats everything he says in a skeptical voice with more digestible words. But then Olivia Dunham, the FBI agent, needs to have everything explained a third time in even more layman's terms; plus, she has to express that she believes in Walter's work. And if that's not enough, there's still junior agent Astrid Farnsworth, Olivia's assistant, whose purpose on the series I just can't ascertain beyond that they felt they needed a black female on the series. Anyway, she usually gets explanation #4 in the shortest, simplest terms because, well, she's just a junior agent and clearly has NO clue what's going on!

So this over-explanation of everything leads to my next point that the stories are just not nearly as compelling as anything on TXF. (Can I add here that I have a half-written story that I can pretty much now throw out because J. J. Abrams used my idea of accelerated-growth super-soldiers in the second episode, "The Same Old Story"? I really need to stop doing that...) Besides the four rounds of explanation each episode, I just feel that things are far too convenient on Fringe, if that makes any sense. Coincidental may be a better word. Isn't it just so lucky that not only is Walter Bishop a genius, but so is his son? I'm serious, it seems like there's nothing Peter Bishop hasn't done; oh, I taught organic chemistry at Yale; oh, I'm a piano virtuoso; oh, I'm a master lockpick. Seriously?

I also feel that the comedic timing of a lot of the writing is totally off. Not that Fringe is by any means a comedy, but in every episode, to relieve the tension (or maybe just because they seriously thought it would be funny) there would be a few moments where something ironic or silly would happen, and I personally feel it usually falls flat. I'm thinking specifically of the last episode, where the team is about to start brain surgery on this guy, only to have a knock on the lab's door from 2 kids looking for poli-sci 101. To me, it felt like we were all waiting for the laugh-track to kick in as Olivia said, "Not here." :-|

So we'll see. I waited out Heroes' drought; maybe tomorrow night's episode will blow my mind. Or maybe I'll have more time to do research.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

All Shook Up (And NOT by an Earthquake)

2008-09-28T13:14:00.003-07:00

Well, it had to happen eventually, given that I am in fact an Asian female driver now in California...Emily and I were in a car accident yesterday, rear-ended by another guy while trying to get on the freeway. I was the one driving, but (without going into detail) it was 100% the other guy's fault, he even admits it, and both of us are a little sore but otherwise okay. My car is another story, but that's what insurance is for, right? I suppose the one absolutely fabulous thing about this whole ordeal is that I came to the hilarious realization that I actually do have State Farm Insurance, which made me laugh out loud that I never remembered that before. (I realize that's only funny if you were in Flat 42 in London, but sorry, no, I will not be explaining that.)

Don't worry, my next post will have more fun news than that. :-D

For those curious about the damage (and all my fallen stuffed animals really make the image that much more dramatic):

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Hallelujah, Heroes Has Returned!!

2008-09-23T19:17:00.006-07:00

And I mean back to the form of its extraordinary first season! Considering the goofs and missteps from season 2 (and I blogged about a good number of them here), this was an outstanding premiere. Here's what I have to say about the season 3 premiere, and I'll do my best to be spoiler-free for those of you who haven't seen it yet (I'll try to warn you with color changes if it's a spoiler)...

NOTE: If you're reading this via my Facebook feed and don't want spoilers, read it through my original blog, as HTML coding doesn't show up on imported blogs!
What They Did Right:

Unlike the start of season 2, everything was fast-paced, quick, and in your face. No more of the slow, lagging expositions to situations or introductions to characters. Tim Kring and the rest of the Heroes staff finally realized that that tactic only worked with season 1 because that's what we needed then--everything spelled out for us in digestible bites. However, season 2 started off so rotten because the characters we cared about and all that were already established, yet they still felt the need to explain everything so painstakingly slowly! But season 3 got off on the right foot. The biggest questions from the end of last season--who shot Nathan, and will he and Nikki/Jessica/whoever-the-hell-she-is be alive--were immediately answered, and the stakes of this new "volume" were established instantaneously. No more driving around the desert for 5 episodes--we have action!
Character introductions were short, sweet, and to the point. *spoiler* (highlight the text to read it) Is there a story as to why Daphne is a villain stealing the formula from Hiro? Probably. Did we need it? No! For the sake of the story, all we needed to know was that she runs really fast, and that she's a thief. Period. *end spoiler*
And how about some growth? In the premiere alone, we've seen some radical character changes in Mohinder (holy SWEET hot Mohinder!), Peter (*spoiler* Granted, it's Future Peter *end spoiler*), and Nathan. Hopefully, this is a trend that will continue throughout the season.
Mama Petrelli. Okay. Last season, they were trying to humanize her the way they did Noah Bennet in the season 1 epi "Company Man" (IMO, one of the best episodes of TV that season). And it didn't work. After everything in season 1, you didn't want Mrs. Petrelli to be even a potential good guy--you wanted her to be a bastard covered bastard with bastard filling! (Yes, Scrubs reference...) I think the behind-the-scenes people finally realized that we could only take the de-bastardizing of one parent at a time. And let's face it, they did a much better job with Noah Bennet than they were trying to do with Angela Petrelli. So season 3, she is back at full bitch! Rock on...
Thus far, there are no signs of useless characters. West was apparently gone even before the end of last season--and thank GOD, I hated him! Alejandro was long gone, and I'm still a little sad about that because I am admittedly one of 3 people who saw last season who didn't hate him and Maya. Caitlin is still apparently trapped in the future (which actually no longer exists, since Peter stopped the virus, so where does that leave her?), and will probably only be remembered in the realm of fan fiction. Parkman's dad will hopefully never appear this season, either. I will make one begrudging exception for Monica, Micah's cousin, but I'll get to that later. As for the added characters they did choose to keep from last season, they appear to be relegated to minor roles, which is where they belong.
Good choice bringing back familiar characters from season 1 rather than making up more new characters that we won't give a damn about! There seem to be only 2 really new characters--Daphne, and the as-of-yet unnamed African man who found Parkman who has abilities eerily similar to one Isaac Mendes. *spoiler* But Meredith is back! And...Linderman? I totally called him being only in Nathan's head, btw, but now I'm not so sure because the preview for next week shows him with Daphne...We shall see... *end spoiler*

What I'm Still a Little Shifty About:

What the hell are they doing with Ali Larter's character? I was shifty on what exactly her superpower was from the beginning...Okay, she has multiple personalities, and one of them happens to be the She-Hulk? Fine, I can deal with that. But I was willing to buy that for one personality...I've lost count as to how many we're up to now. *spoiler* And now this new personality--Tracy--has ice powers? What, does every personality have a separate ability? Because I seriously don't buy that. *end spoiler* I'm really curious to know, though, how they're going to transition her from being inside an exploding house in Louisiana to screwing and advising the governor in New York. Because, seriously, the timeline doesn't fly. The epi starts immediately where last season's finale ended, and Nathan was recovered by the next day. Tracy and the governor watch it live on the TV. But, from the context of their dialogue, she and he had been together for some time. So...??? So I want to see how that storyline plays out, and Micah's and Monica's parts to play there.
*spoiler* I'm also not sure what to make of Nathan finding religion/going nuts and seeing Linderman. This could get really complex or really stupid really fast. *end spoiler*

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Before I'm Oriented...

2008-09-22T23:33:00.004-07:00

Note: That's not "Before I'm Oriental"...

A few thoughts before I have orientation tomorrow.

I know that grad school is for the serious student. Obviously; if you're not serious about studying and all that, why would you subject yourself to more school? And while I'm a little worried about the work, I know that I'll be able to handle it. But that's not to say grad students aren't supposed to have lives, right? As I was telling my friend Cassie earlier tonight, school activities and clubs always seem more geared towards undergrads. For good reason, I suppose, but it's through extracurricular activities that I met a good number of my friends in undergrad!

Yes, that's what this post is about: My fear that my social life, after making huge strides in college, will regress severely this year.

And it's not just the activities thing, it's the commuter thing. 3 of my best friends from college were from my dorm; one of my main activities was from my dorm. I'm convinced that being on-campus was the only reason I really had a life in undergrad! I just don't know how the commuter experience will compare...

But I know I shouldn't worry. I'm in a new school that's in a new state, pursuing a new degree. I'm finding a new church, living in a new house, operating on a different TV schedule. I just have to handle it, you know?

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Pics of My New Place

2008-09-11T18:39:00.006-07:00

The title line says it all. :-)

So here's the front of the house, with my car in front. And, no, from what I gather no one takes care of the yard, and it shows. C'est la vie!

I guess this would be the living room? Whatever you want to call it, it's the first room you see when you enter the house. That would be a 40-inch plasma screen TV on the wall WITH On Demand and a DVR that I still need to figure out how to use! And all those movies are Alissa's (the girl who owns the house)--she's a film geek, too. *woot*

And the kitchen, which is adjacent to the main room...Not nearly as heavy-duty as my Dad's kitchen (those of you who've seen it), but it serves its purpose. And for the first time in my life, I have a dishwasher! I'm quite excited. :P The washer and dryer are also behind there, but the washer's currently broken...

Those are two shots of my half of the room I'm sharing with...Someone...Long story about that, but in short the girl currently "occupying" the other half of the room will be gone by the end of the month, so if you're moving to LA and you're looking for a room... ;-)

The bathroom is at the end of the hall. Yes, that would be me standing on the toilet in an attempt to get the best angle of the room. Isn't it modern?

And the backyard! We're planning to get rid of the playset, and there's a banana tree and a fig tree back there.

And this adorable creature is Poodie! She belongs to Alissa, and though she's quite puntable, she's the cutest little toy poodle I've ever seen! She currently has an issue with peeing on the floor, but Alissa's working on it.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

My Personal Personal

2008-09-08T23:27:00.004-07:00

Steve had mentioned that his most recent homework assignment in Spanish was to make a personal ad, and that reminded me of a journal entry I had written a little over a year ago. And, yes, at that time I was in kind of a bad place and not thinking too highly of myself and all that...Anyway, for comparison's sake, I thought I'd put it up here...

Single, 21-year-old Asian female, seeks single, similarly-aged male. Must be able to deal with a girl who is louder than humanly necessary, a bit weird, and very insecure. If not already a huge fan of The X-Files, must at least be open to the realm of extreme possibility. An affinity for hard rock a plus, though certainly not required.

Needs strong arms to be able to hold her when she cries, even if it's over nothing at all except her own insecurities about her life, her weight, her future, her looks, her family, herself. Understanding that she is still desperate for other people's approval because she's so scared of being alone a plus. Needs good ears to listen when she needs to talk about the little things that bother her and make her hate herself and the world. Late hours required when she finds she can't sleep because she's too stressed, too nervous, too caffeinated, too depressed to rest. Must enjoy Shakespeare, musicals, and Marvel Comics. A faith strong enough to hold up when hers can't is a must.

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

A Few Movie Questions

2008-08-16T18:18:00.003-07:00

Every so often, I watch a movie and just have some questions at the end. Sometimes, often after a poor life decision to watch a Michael Bay movie, that question is, "Why was this movie made?" :P Seriously, though, I do come up with a good question every so often, and here are a few of them. If you have the answers, please let me know...And consider this your SPOILER WARNING!

Regarding the scene in The Dark Knight where the Joker shows up to spoil Bruce Wayne's fundraiser for Harvey Dent: Does Batman realize he left the Joker alone in the penthouse with all the guests as well as Dent when he jumped out the window after Rachel? And then, what, are we just supposed to believe that the Joker had a few more cocktail shrimp and left quietly? After all, he still hadn't accomplished his goal of finding Dent, and with Batman no longer in the room, it would seem like the perfect opportunity for him to continue his search. Now, the thought occurred to me literally just now that there's perhaps a deleted scene that will appear on the DVD showing that the Joker at the time believed Batman was Dent; he did, after all, comment later in the film that he "almost believed [Batman] was Dent, the way he dove after Rachel." Or no such scene exists and Christopher Nolan just hoped that no one would think about it. You decide.
Also regarding that same scene in The Dark Knight: Did anyone else notice that Bruce uses his Batman voice while he's shoving Dent in that closet? I missed it the first time I saw it, but he definitely uses the gruff Batman voice when he says, "They're coming for you." And though I suppose Dent didn't actually see Bruce's face because of the weird way he grabbed him from behind, I'm fairly certain Rachel says Bruce's name when she asks what he's doing. Just putting that out there...
Regarding The Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl: If I understand it correctly, the titular "curse" is that anyone who took the Aztec gold becomes that living dead thing. So...Why weren't Will and Elizabeth afflicted with it? After all, they were in possession of that one piece for quite a long time, and Jack was cursed after he lifted that one piece. You could argue that maybe it only applies to people who took the gold from the source--that's what the Pearl's crew did, and that's what Jack did. But so did Elizabeth! Think back: After the crew failed to lift the curse with Elizabeth's blood, she gets hit and falls out of sight, basically into Will's waiting arms. They escape the cave, but only after she grabs the piece again. So it was still taken from the source...But she didn't get all ghost-y! Maybe I'm just thinking too hard about this; or maybe Gore Verbinski didn't think hard enough?
Regarding The Pirates of the Caribbean series in general (though I guess it starts in Pearl): Will's dad, Bill Turner, was definitely a part of the Pearl's crew when they stole the Aztec gold, so he shouldn't have been able to die, right? So when he was sent down "to Davy Jones' locker," he wouldn't have died. And then, following the mythology set forth by the following two films, Davy Jones shouldn't have had to come to him to ask if he feared death and did he want to join the crew, blah blah blah. Am I over-thinking these things? Please tell me if I am.
Regarding the Saw franchise: Besides the obvious question of WHY they continue to make new installments of it, how on Earth is it possible that Jigsaw has stayed alive long enough to torture people for 5 movies?? I admit, I only (regrettably) saw the first one, but I'd imagine that 5 movies covers a large expanse of time, and, if I remember correctly, Jigsaw supposedly had not long to live with terminal cancer. I'm not losing too much sleep over this, though, since I despise this franchise, so I don't mind not knowing the answer to this.

That's all I've got for now. I'll be remembering/formulating more questions later...

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Long-Distance Playlist

2008-07-29T22:12:00.006-07:00

Okay, this is me putting up a blog that basically describes my personal life. Deal with it.

In case you didn't know by now, I'm in a long-distance relationship right now, and during my last plane flight from seeing him I managed to kill a lot of time by going through my mP3 player and picking out all the songs that describe my situation. And I thought I'd share it with y'all.

"Bruised" by Jack's Mannequin, Everything in Transit. "I got my things, I'm good to go / You met me at the terminal / Just one more plane ride, and it's done..." This entire song is basically my situation right now. *sigh*
"Sleep Well Tonight" by Spoken, A Moment of Imperfect Clarity. "...I'm a million miles away from you / I can't get you off my mind..." So part of the chorus sounds a slight bit stalker-ish. At heart it still has a sweet sentiment.
"Snowbirds and Townies" by Further Seems Forever, The Moon Is Down. "...And I know that you're never leaving / Until your flight takes you up / And out of my arms / And into the air / So far from your charms / That I cannot bear another year..." Even in his pre-Dashboard Days, Chris Carabba knew how to write a really depressing song. This situation isn't totally applicable to me--about doomed winter vacation romances between "working class boys" and "girls from faraway points"--but I'll take it.
"A Summer Song" by Chad and Jeremy, A Summer Song. "...But don't you know that it hurts me so / To say goodbye to you?..." Oh yeah, I love my golden oldies. :-) The situation of this song is pretty much the seasonal opposite of the previous song, but I'll take it again.
"Second Star to the Left, Go Until Dawn" by Copeland, Dressed Up and in Line. "All this time away from you / With you would be better..." Copeland also gets points for the Peter Pan reference. And the line, "It was a big mistake to let me memorize your face."
"Everything Sucks (When You're Gone)" by MxPx, Before Everything and After. "...Everything sucks when you're gone..." The title says it all, really. This one's a little funnier than most of the other songs, but the sentiment is still there, I suppose.
"The Goodbye Blues" by Tyler Burkum, My Other Band, Vol. 1. "...I'm awful lonely, and I can't get much sleep / You know I miss you, and I know you miss me too..." Tyler wrote this one for his wife Allison and actually mentions her name in the song (awww).
"Leaving on a Jet Plane" by John Denver, This Is John Denver. "...I'm leaving on an a jet plane / Don't know when I'll be back again..." The one by Chantal Kreviazuk is also pretty famous, but I'm old school. Man, I'm depressing myself reading through all of these...
"Quit Your Life" by MxPx, Before Everything and After. "...New York to Los Angeles, and all it takes in between / After miles and hours on the road, you're the best I've seen..." This one's slightly different than all the other songs because it talks about wanting to give up the long-distance thing...And Mike Herrera wrote it for his wife. Awwwww again! :-P
"Shirts and Gloves" by Dashboard Confessional, The Swiss Army Romance. "...So I'll call your cellular phone to tell you / TV night was lonely without you / And so am I..." Everyone knew there had to be at least one Dashboard song on here! I think it's the line "And this phone tag game is endless" that's the most affective.
"Save Tonight" by Eagle-Eye Cherry, Desireless. "...Well, we know I'm going away / And how I wish, I wish it weren't so / So take this wine and drink with me / Let's delay our misery..." A little more optimistic than the other songs, this one is more about treasuring time spent together, rather than lamenting time spent apart. Rock on, dude with an insane name (yes, that's his real name).
"All My Loving" by The Beatles, With the Beatles. "Close your eyes, and I'll kiss you / Tomorrow I'll miss you / Remember I'll always be true / And then while I'm away / I'll write home everyday / And I'll send all my loving to you..." Leave it to the Beatles to make long distances seem romantic.
"Into the Airwaves" by Jack's Mannequin, Everything in Transit. "...It's all that I can do to stay / With all the things I didn't say to / Before you moved across the country..." Sometimes I'm inclined to believe that Andrew McMahon has a direct line into my brain.
"I Miss You" by Incubus, Make Yourself. "...I know I'll see you again / Whether far or soon / But I need you to know / That I care, and I miss you..." That about says it all.
"This Airplane Is a Ribbon" by Sherwood, The Summer EP. "...And I'll take that long drive down / To spend two months in your town / But I'm scared to death that I won't see you around..." Though it has a happy-sounding melody, this is one of the more depressing ones, as it's from the P.O.V. of someone who fears he's the only one putting any effort into the distance.
"Hey There Delilah" by Plain White T's, All That We Needed. "...Hey there Delilah / Don't you worry about the distance / I'm right there if you get lonely / Give this song another listen..." Easily one of the more over-played songs of the last couple years, but it's still pretty sweet if you can ignore that.
"Miles Apart" by Yellowcard, Ocean Avenue. "...We'll be miles apart / I'll keep you deep inside..." It expresses exactly what everyone in this situation is trying to do.
"Here Without You" by 3 Doors Down, Away from the Sun. "...But all the miles that separate / They disappear when I'm dreaming of your face..." This one borders on being almost too melodramatically sad to be on this playlist, but I still like it anyway.
"Goin' Crazy" by Natalie, Natalie. "...It's nice to smile when I get your phone call at night / But I'd rather have you here with me..." I have a hard time telling if this song is about a breakup or a long-distance thing, as every other line seems to change it's mind, but I'll take the latter for now.
"California" by Copeland, Beneath the Medicine Tree. "...You knew just the right things to say / When the distance ripped us farther and farther and farther away..." If they changed the line, "All of us here in Florida are starved for you attention" to say "Chicago," it would be perfect.
"The Distance" by Evan and Jaron, Evan and Jaron. "...I can't take the distance, / I can't take the miles / I can't take the time until the next time I see you smile..." I'm running out of things to say that I haven't said already, but it's a sweet song.

That's all I have for now. Hope I made a decent playlist for you...

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**

Bother, Bother, Bother...

2008-07-09T19:29:00.003-07:00

It's true, I probably worry too much, but I can't help it. My head feels like it's about to explode, and I think I may put myself into premature cardiac arrest, and I know it does no good to stress, but--again--I can't help it.

I just want to fast forward to the part where everything works out for the better.

"Something tells me that this is gonna make sense.
Something tells me it's gonna take patience.
Something tells me that this will all work out in the end..."

~The Original Fong~
**You wish you could pull off being me**