Form a line!

Recently, I read an article in TIME magazine about how Chinese in China were taking Western etiquette classes so as not to offend the western world when dealing with them, now that the Chinese economy is booming and will be more involved in the global market. These are actual classes that people pay hundreds of dollars for to learn what is polite and what is not. For example, spitting on the street, how to properly use silver-ware at a fancy restaurant, how to line up and wait your turn instead of pushing and shoving, etc.

Chinese learning manners from the Western world? These are the same people who thought the Western world were barbarians a mere 400 years ago. I called up my brother and told him about this article, of which he was skeptical.

According to him, the Chinese may find that Americans are not that much different than they are when it comes to manners and etiquette. Granted that people in the Western world may not wash their soup spoons in a community soup bowl at dinner time. However, the notion of waiting in line is something that the Western world, Americans in particular, are unfamiliar with as well.

Perhaps things were different 25 years ago when I was growing up. We had to wait in line for our lunches at school, we had to line up in the yard before proceeding to class or anywhere else for that matter. "After you" was the mentality, something that I picked up and carried with me throughout the years, thus leading me to become known as "passive", "not aggressive enough", and "not a go-getter".

Things started changing, already in 1987. I remember attending a lecture on how to get in to good high schools. THE high school to go to in San Francisco at the time was Lowell High School, noted for its academic strengths and high turn-out of graduates as well as college applicants. Going to Lowell meant that you already had a better chance of getting in to a good college, or so we all thought. At the end of the lecture, they announced that they had applications for Lowell High School, and that they would be passing them out (apparently, applications for Lowell were hard to come by). Suddenly, a crowd of jr. high students thundered up to the stage and within seconds there was mass hysteria. People were shouting and pushing and grabbing, trying to get their hands on an application. What had once been a quiet auditorium filled with intent listeners just 5 minutes before had turned in to absolute chaos and cacophony. Seeing this, I thought I had better get up and at least make an attempt to get one, which is what I'm sure everyone else thought, as well. However, unlike the panicking masses, I stood up calmly and walked over to the crowd, which had become so thick it was impossible to navigate through. This is bloody ridiculous, I thought to myself.

A classmate of mine was in the thick of things, and saw me.

"Vince, did you get one? Vince, did you get one?" she called to me with a mixed look of fear, concern and uncertainty. Obviously, she wasn't able to get one, either. I shook my head in response and went home, leaving the countless masses to fight over the applications. What was ironic, almost amusing was that the majority of these people didn't have a snowball's chance of getting in to Lowell, anyway. But, whatever.

And then there was always the bus stop. As my brother had pointed out to me, if you ever watch a crowd waiting for the bus or cab, no one is standing in a line. It's always a disorganized crowd. As soon as the bus door opens, everyone tries to get on at the same time, regardless if people are trying to get off (one of my biggest pet-peeves). But lines? No way. And this is in San Francisco, New York, and Chicago. Same thing for the taxis in New Jersey.

The same thing happens with elevators.

And opening night for Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring? It was stampede! You had to run along with the crowd, unless you wanted to get trampled to death. Okay, maybe movies are an exceptioin.

This behaviour starts young and is taught to people, starting at a young age, or so Goh theorizes. But I believe this to be true. Kids in this country aren't taught to line up orderly; they're encouraged to be go-getters, meaning if anyone is in your way, bull them over. Don't let the other guy get ahead of you (my theory on why nobody ever lets you change lanes in front of them).
However, I do believe that lining up is taught in Europe. As evidence of this, during the British occupation of Hong Kong there were taxi lines that people lined up for in an orderly manner, or so the movies portrayed. Interestingly enough, if you watch the Harry Potter movies, which were filmed in England for all of you who live in a cave, the kids are always told to form a line and take turns when they're in school. Apparently, kids in Europe, or England at least are taught to line up.

Anyway, I'm not here to judge. I report; you decide.

Made In China

Recently, I was listening to the radio and of course they were talking about the economic growth of China. Finally, after years of poverty China is showing its econimic prowess. Influence from North America and Europe, World War II, the rise of communism, and the era of Chairman Mao were all econimic set-backs for China, lately; it's been a rough century. But now, the largest nation on Earth in terms of population is back on its feet and growing strong.

Not everyone is happy about this, of course. The U.S. is very afraid, not only because it fears competition in the world marketplace, but because China is a goliath that can easily overpower any other nation, if it can ever get its act together. But that's exactly what the U.S. is afraid of. Once China does get its act together the U.S. will be dominated, again, from the East. Not only will it have the British and German economies to compete with, but now it'll have to deal with China's.

Some American citizens have started boycotting products manufactured in China because of China's own political internal affairs and social policies. People in Europe and North American rant and rave about how inhumane it is to have sweatshops, having men, women, and children work 14 hours/day in a sewing factory or whatever factory it is. Given some thought, the mere notion of anyone working 14 hours/day is apalling (except if you're a doctor, for some strange reason - then it's okay). So people get all upset and start boycotting products. But notice how it's usually the economically privileged who do such things. Poor people don't boycott; they're just trying to stay alive. It's the wealthier and middle class people with more money and leisure time on their hands who pontificate their idealisms and perform such acts. But what these people fail to realize is that without these sweatshops and labor factories, people in 2nd or 3rd world countries have no other source of income, save farming or crime, which pay even less. So it's live in poverty and starve or work in a shop for 14 hours/day. It's not like it is in the U.S.; they have no other choice.

What would you choose?

Memoirs of a Geisha

Yes, it's a new movie coming out based on a best-selling novel. And that's fine. But if you know about the casting, anyone who is Asian would be left scratching their head wondering who in the world did the casting. Not to say that the actresses and actors casted are poor, but they don't quite fit the part. Which brings up another point: all Asians do not look alike.

Zhang Ziyi, Michelle Yeoh, Gong Li, and Ken Watanabe are some of the big-name actors/actresses in this flick. Okay, Ken is a great choice; his past performances have been excellent. Better yet, he's a Japanese guy who plays a Japanese guy. He looks Japanese, he sounds Japanese, he is Japanese.

Now let's take all the other actresses. Zhang Ziyi. She looks very Chinese and there's no mistaking it. It's not even close. When you listen to her speak, she has a Chinese accent. Again, not even close to sounding Japanese. Then there's Gong Li, another huge-name Chinese actress who's been in numerous movies. Again, she looks very Chinese; there's no mistaking. And then there's Michelle Yeoh, who is Malaysian. She looks....well, I'm not sure. But she sure doesn't look Japanese. And she has a British accent when she speaks. Hello? Mr. Casting-guy, what in the world were you thinking? Basically, that all Asians look alike, so that casting a Chinese-looking person for a Japanese role would be perfectly fine and that bringing in big names would help attract viewers at the box office.

Now, maybe box-office names were what drew the casting director to choose these people. After all, everyone knows Michelle Yeoh for her role in Jackie Chan's SuperCop, she was a Bond girl, and she was in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon (one of the worst kung fu movies ever made - but one of the best dramas). What I don't understand is that outside of the international movie-goer's realm, no one really knows Gong Li or Zhang Ziyi. So why was it so necessary to cast them in the role? Yes, Gong Li is an outstanding actress and she's proven that time and again (Raise the Red Lantern, Shanghai Triad, Qiu Ju, Madame Butterfly). But if you asked anyone walking down the street (NOT in Chinatown or San Jose) who Gong Li is, no one would know. So why choose her? "Becase she's an outstanding actress". Yes, but so is Sigourny Weaver. Why not just dye her hair black and cast her?
As for Zhang Ziyi, listening to her speak English, it just screams out "Mandarin is my native language". Again, there's nothing wrong with that. But she doesn't fit the bloody part.

One could argue, I suppose, that there were no good Japanese actresses who auditioned. Well, the movie guys could have tried to get Koyuki (who?). She was great in the Last Samurai. She looks Japanese, sounds Japanese, and most importantly, she IS Japanese. So you can't say there are no good Japanese actresses who fit the part; there definitely are.

That makes about much sense, I suppose, as casting Russel Crowe, an Aussi with an Aussi accent, as the Gladiator general, who was supposed to be a Spaniard.

The World Environmental Committee

I'm not sure what the exact name of this committee is, but their job is to discuss ways in which the nations of the world can preserve what little of the natural environment we have left. Which is fine and dandy. But at what cost? This committee consists of the U.S. (of course), Europe, and other various developing nations. The latest concern is China and India.

For those of you who live in a cave, China and India are two of the world's fastest growing economies. Both nations have taken after the United States and Japan, and have begun to industrialize their own nations. With industrialization comes energy consumption and economic power. It means millions of jobs for millions of people in China and India; this will give these nations the opportunity to get out of poverty and become an economic power. But aside from that, that will also mean huge amounts of extra industrial pollution to the world's environment. The Committee is meeting to discuss how this can be mitigated if not avoided.

Their short solution is to limit the amount of energy consumption from these developing countries. But wait! The established nations on the committee say nothing about reducing their own energy consumption and waste pollution. Instead, they're trying to impose these rules on the developing nations. In essence, it's the ol' "you do as I say, don't do as I do". Hipocrisy at its finest. Digusting, but true.

Batman vs. Batman Begins

Okay, enough about politics (for now). I've been on this government corruption/conspiracy kick for the past 2 weeks and it's driving Richel nuts. Although I find it fascinating. By the way, did you know that despite all of the current administration's antics and corruption, if they were to hold another presidential election tomorrow Bush would win, again? Amazing, eh? It's not Bush's fault for being president; it's the millions of morons who live somewhere under a rock and don't have a clue as to what's going on in the world. These are the proud Americans who vote for him.

Okay, I digress. Back to Batman. I just bought Batman Begins DVD. Unarguably, THE best Batman movie ever made to date. And a very good movie, period. Batman or not. If you haven't seen it, I won't ruin it for you. But just let me say it's a comic-movie that's based in a reality. All this stuff happening is highly unprobable, but not impossible. Good drama, excellent directing, pretty good story. The acting is so-so. And I must say, the character developement for all the characters (except for Rachel Dawes) is excellent. You can actually understand and almost feel the anger, rage and inner turmoil that drives Bruce Wayne to become the Dark Knight.

As the Dark Knight, we see him as pretty cool. But he's pretty scarey at the same time. Okay, I lied. I have to ruin part of it to make an example. There's one scene where Batman is dangling some poor shmuck upside down from 10 stories up and angrily shouting in the guy's face. You can hear it when he speaks; he has that "I'm going to kill you if you don't cooperate" tone in his voice. He sounds PISSED!

Now let's rewind to about 15 years ago, when Batman, starring Michael Keaton came out. When I first saw it, I wasn't sure what to think. The erie Batman scenes with him fighting crooks was somewhat entertaining. Just seeing the mask and the costume was exciting enough. But the Tim Burton feel of the entire film just ruined it for me. Jack Nicholson stole the show as the Joker in this film, or so all the critics raved. But even then, I wasn't impressed with his performance. The impression I got from Nicholson's performance was that the Joker was a nut-case who liked to dress in loud suits. He had a short fuse, yes, but didn't live up to the diabolical nature of the Joker (or George Bush....oh, sorry. Got carried away). There was no driving rage or anger behind Bruce Wayne, we knew he had a grudge about the death of his parents, but that was it. And the scariest thing he does to one of his opponents is dangle him off a rooftop and WHISPERS to him, "I'm Batman". There was nothing about Bruce Wayne's training, his skill and depth in martial arts, his potential for killing anyone, his philosophy, or anything. All we know is...."I'm Batman".

I remember exiting the theatre 15 years ago, thinking "Eh. At least seeing this movie in the theatre might score me some points with my date".

So what's this fixation with killing potential? For those of you who know Batman lore, we know he has great power, even though he's a regular guy with no super powers. If you've ever read some of the books, you'll remember he was blasting people away left and right with a machine gun at one point (I think that was in Frank Miller's Dark Knight series). He wasn't this goody-goody who just tied people up and left them on the doorstep of the police department with a note (that's more Spiderman-style). He'd beat the living crap out of the crook first until the crook was nothing but a bloody pulp, tie him up, then drag him behind his Batmobile for miles to the police station. Well, I don't think he ever did THAT, but that's what he was capable of doing.

The rest of the Batman movies, Batman Returns, Batman and Robin, and Batman Forever were garbage. It was a downward spiral for the Caped Crusader since the first movie, which wasn't that great itself.

But now, we have Christian Bale and a whole new cast who will hopefully turn around the movie franchise. They did a kick-butt job on the first movie. Let's hope they can keep it up.