See this story from yahoo.ca:
Bikini-clad Briton briefly detained in Dubai mall
By Michael Casey, The Associated Press
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates - A British woman was briefly detained after stripping down to a bikini and walking in her beach wear through a five-star mall in Dubai, a police official in the Gulf emirate said Thursday.
According to the official, the British woman was shopping in the mall Wednesday, when a conservatively dressed Emirati woman came up to her and criticized her for wearing a low-cut top.
The two woman started arguing, then the Briton stripped down to her bikini and walked away like that through the mall, popular for its many luxury shops.
The mall, one of the world's largest, has signs asking shoppers to dress modestly, although Westerners in short skirts and revealing blouses routinely ignore the advisories.
The mall security subsequently detained both women and took them to a police station for questioning.
They were released later in the day, after the Emirati woman lodged a complaint for public indecency against the Briton, said the police official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media.
The British woman's name was not released.
British Embassy spokesman Simon Goldsmith said embassy officials were aware of the
incident and had offered consular assistance to the woman.
The incident is the latest in a string of cases involving frisky Westerners in Dubai, a cosmopolitan city-emirate with the most lenient social codes in the Gulf but a tendency to crackdown on foreigners who ignore the rules.
In March, a British couple were sentenced to a month in jail for passionately kissing in public while an Indian couple was sentenced to three months' prison for exchanging steamy text messages.
In 2008, two Britons accused of having sex on the beach got three months behind bars, though their sentences were later suspended.
(end of article)
While it may seem contradictory to create a lush, luxurious desert playground for adults and then tell them that they can't be free like adults, people seem to be forgetting something very essential here. Yes, Dubai has been created as a sort of pleasure palace for the well-heeled to go and party, but it's still part of the conservative Gulf. It is not a separate state entity where everything goes. In short, it's not Vegas. What happens there doesn't necessarily stay there, and can sometimes cause incidents, that, while they may seem trivial on the surface, only contribute to the widening ignorant views held by both Westerners and Easterners.
What ever happened to that old saying "When in Rome, do as the Romans do?" It's more than just an expression. It's a belief that when you're a guest in someone's country, just as you might be a guest in someone's home, that you respect them. This means that you don't snoop around in their cupboards or make out in their pantry. And that you don't get tipsy and say obnoxious things while wearing a lamp shade on your head, thinking it's a fedora.
The basic tenet of respect is huge. It says something meaningful about the way that we perceive ourselves and the way that we perceive others. It shows that we value ourselves and other people and their rights and freedoms. Showing respect for another person's values and traditions is an indication that you're a self-aware, confident person with an open mind who recognizes that other people are just as valuable in their own way. It shows maturity and class.
That's why I find it unbelievable that Westerners, who are supposed to be the most open-minded, educated, worldly, and tolerant of nations, can't show basic respect to people in the Gulf. While you don't have to agree with the conservative practices of their people and their religion and you don't have to prescribe to their ideas, you should be respectful while on their territory. Cover yourself because it's the custom, not because you believe in it. Refrain from public displays of affection. Put aside your hedonistic ways for a couple of days and grow up.
Of course, it doesn't help that Dubai is marketed as a sort of pleasure island that's above all of these rules and attempts to sell the five star luxury vacation package to rich foreigners, excess and all. It's a funny sort of place, rife with contradictions and high end boutiques, sandy beaches and general anomalies like an indoor ski hill and rooftop tennis court. Despite all of this, though, people should remember that their pleasure islands are home to someone and that someone has their own values.
All of these little signs of disrespect are part of a festering wound that is just continuing to grow between East and West. Both sides are very critical and opinionated about the other and hold many ill-conceived notions of the other. There's a lot of stereotypes and newsreel images that continue to feed the ignorance and mistrust that already exists between Westerners and Easterners and travelers to and from are not doing a good job of undoing this.
That's because there's no willingness to learn or to respect one another and all of this will climax in more violent conflict later on. It's just like that bad relationship you have with that one person who undermines you all of the time with small jabs, joking and ridiculing your worth, until one day, the resentments grows too strong. And when it comes to the surface, the outcome is often disastrous.
But it doesn't have to come to that. Just as little incidents like these will cause the relationship to deteriorate, little actions of respect can help repair it. Travelers to this part of the world should be more considerate of the fact that even though they're on a personal trip, they do represent us. And we want them to represent the best of us. That's the only way we'll get closer to bridging an understanding and a peace.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
The American Empire: Gorging to Death
For those who are wishing for Death to America, they may be slowly getting their wish. Countries battered by abusive and instrusive American foreign policy in the past and in the present may be able to get some satisfaction out of the pounds of deep fried batter that is slowly, but surely, killing America, one new obese person at a time.
Recent studies have shown that in the past 16 years, the rate of obese people in the US has risen to almost 27% of the population and that this increase is causing a serious decline in the quality of life and life expectancy of these people. While this has been a boon for the diet supplement companies and reality tv producers, it's proven to be less than stellar for rates of diabetes and risk of cardiovascular diseases, not to mention kidney failure and other ailments which are a drain to the US's non-existent health care system.
The study also reveals, shockingly, that poor diet and physical inactivity may soon be the leading causes of death in the US. That hasn't happened since the Depression. And it's equally shocking given the accessibility to information about healthy living, the rise of healthy living new wave trends such as yoga and organic whole foods, and the prevalence of overpriced gym memberships. How did this happen?
Has fast food culture and the dependence on the car really reduced people to such inactive, drive-thru blobs? Or is it the failing economy that often forces poorer people to work multiple jobs and as a result, have no time for proper healthy meals and light exercise?
Or could it be a question of prioritization? It's a heck of a lot easier at the end of a long, pointless day at work to come home to a cheeseburger and your favourite show while sitting on the couch. Nobody really enjoys peeling, dicing and chopping when they get home. And a lot of people find walking around for no reason to be boring and unfulfilling. Not to mention how unflattering workout gear can be on more rounded individuals. Nobody wants to walk around with their stomach flab on display.
Maybe the anorexic models are too much for us to take? Maybe we're tired of trying to look like a Victoria Secret Angel and would rather have a tub of ice cream and look over magazines that have celebrities with cellulite in them. That actually sounds really nice.
As nice as all this sounds, and as much as we make excuses for ourselves, this all really breaks down to one thing: lack of discipline.
The real key to all this is discipline. Good old fashioned, no-nonsense tough love discipline. The kind that has your parents' nagging voices behind it, telling you to get some fresh air and exercise and that eating brussel sprouts won't kill you. None of this "I don't like vegetables" crap. None of this "exercise bores me" crap. None of this "work's too hard" crap.
It's all just crap that people use to justify laziness and procrastination. The American culture is one that is so grossly entitled and narcissistic that it seems to believe that regular rules don't apply to them and that there's no reason for them to work hard to get good results. Everything which is not pleasant or doesn't contribute to a person's pleasure of life is viewed as a hassle and waste of time, when they're really just life. Life is hard. And you have to work at it.
America, like the Roman Empire, may be another decadent, self-indulgent, self-important people too busy staring at themselves lovingly in the mirror to realize what is going on all around them. That's when empires fall. They die inside before outsiders even make it to the gates. Invasions occur when they're busy feasting and looking for sweets.
Those who are wishing for the death of America may have to wait awhile, but it seems like waiting is all that they will have to do. Americans themselves are slowly gorging themselves to death, dying out sooner than expected and living shorter, painful lives with diseases linked to their negligent lifestyles.
The most powerful nation in the world may be taken down by its own ravenous appetites. What a sad and appropriate fate.
Recent studies have shown that in the past 16 years, the rate of obese people in the US has risen to almost 27% of the population and that this increase is causing a serious decline in the quality of life and life expectancy of these people. While this has been a boon for the diet supplement companies and reality tv producers, it's proven to be less than stellar for rates of diabetes and risk of cardiovascular diseases, not to mention kidney failure and other ailments which are a drain to the US's non-existent health care system.
The study also reveals, shockingly, that poor diet and physical inactivity may soon be the leading causes of death in the US. That hasn't happened since the Depression. And it's equally shocking given the accessibility to information about healthy living, the rise of healthy living new wave trends such as yoga and organic whole foods, and the prevalence of overpriced gym memberships. How did this happen?
Has fast food culture and the dependence on the car really reduced people to such inactive, drive-thru blobs? Or is it the failing economy that often forces poorer people to work multiple jobs and as a result, have no time for proper healthy meals and light exercise?
Or could it be a question of prioritization? It's a heck of a lot easier at the end of a long, pointless day at work to come home to a cheeseburger and your favourite show while sitting on the couch. Nobody really enjoys peeling, dicing and chopping when they get home. And a lot of people find walking around for no reason to be boring and unfulfilling. Not to mention how unflattering workout gear can be on more rounded individuals. Nobody wants to walk around with their stomach flab on display.
Maybe the anorexic models are too much for us to take? Maybe we're tired of trying to look like a Victoria Secret Angel and would rather have a tub of ice cream and look over magazines that have celebrities with cellulite in them. That actually sounds really nice.
As nice as all this sounds, and as much as we make excuses for ourselves, this all really breaks down to one thing: lack of discipline.
The real key to all this is discipline. Good old fashioned, no-nonsense tough love discipline. The kind that has your parents' nagging voices behind it, telling you to get some fresh air and exercise and that eating brussel sprouts won't kill you. None of this "I don't like vegetables" crap. None of this "exercise bores me" crap. None of this "work's too hard" crap.
It's all just crap that people use to justify laziness and procrastination. The American culture is one that is so grossly entitled and narcissistic that it seems to believe that regular rules don't apply to them and that there's no reason for them to work hard to get good results. Everything which is not pleasant or doesn't contribute to a person's pleasure of life is viewed as a hassle and waste of time, when they're really just life. Life is hard. And you have to work at it.
America, like the Roman Empire, may be another decadent, self-indulgent, self-important people too busy staring at themselves lovingly in the mirror to realize what is going on all around them. That's when empires fall. They die inside before outsiders even make it to the gates. Invasions occur when they're busy feasting and looking for sweets.
Those who are wishing for the death of America may have to wait awhile, but it seems like waiting is all that they will have to do. Americans themselves are slowly gorging themselves to death, dying out sooner than expected and living shorter, painful lives with diseases linked to their negligent lifestyles.
The most powerful nation in the world may be taken down by its own ravenous appetites. What a sad and appropriate fate.
Rehab for Rehab
I think that Lindsay Lohan is addicted to rehab. Let's face it, she's overworked and way too young to look so dischevelled and disoriented all of the time. She keeps committing these silly DUIs, once taking out the curb in a Beverly Hills suburb, and has failed to show up for countless alcohol education classes. Her problem may not be the fact that she's addicted to partying, alcohol and drugs. Her problem may be that she's addicted to rehab treatments.
Hollywood rehab doesn't actually look anything like a hard treatment centre or a hospital. It looks more like club med, to be honest, with tennis, yoga and fish for dinner. The only thing missing is the jumping in the sack with an egg on a spoon race. Rather than looking like a sort of prison for junkies, it's more like an all-inclusive with the added benefit of privacy and no interruptions from the outside world.
And if you're a celebrity in Hollywood, you know all about interruptions, whether or not it's a papparazzi scrum while you shop in Wal-Mart, or a red carpet with legions of screaming fans, not all of them fans of your work. So of course rehab sounds like heaven compared to what must be the blaze and blur of daily life for a Hollywood star.
Oh, how I yearn for the days when the big studios ran the show and always carefully presented their starlets as untouchable goddesses on earth. They were always immaculate, glamourous and nobody ever aired their dirty laundry out in public or took pictures of them doing mundane things like shopping for yogourt or filling up the tank at the gas station. There was also no mention of surgery, past ailments or embarassing bodily functions, of which there are plenty nowadays.
People in North America love to see stars rise to the top because it makes us believe that maybe we can be part of the fortunate elite one day, with access to privileges, luxuries and jobs that we love. But we also love to see them come crashing to the ground of reality, suffering through bad breakups and bad hair days alike, because it reminds us that they're people just like us and just as vulnerable to life's strange ways.
So while it is satisfying to hear that Lindsay Lohan is going to jail for her flighty and reckless behavior, it's not as satisfying to know that she suffered this fate for a mere couple of weeks. But maybe rehab, regardless of what her addiction is, is exactly what Lohan needs. Some time off to get herself back together.
We all fall. We all need time to pick ourselves up and dust ourselves off. Not all of us get to do it in a resort in the sun, but so be it. This might be a chance for her to relax, reflect, drop the mask of the carefree party girl and rediscover herself. It might also be a chance for her to make a clear choice not to be that girl stumbling out of bars at 4am and physically fighting with her not-lesbian girlfriend.
She can afford to take the time out. She can straggle along on the few millions that she has right now. And maybe it's a good idea for her not to be in the public eye for awhile. Give them a chance to forget her and then rediscover her later on, when she's healthy and on the ball. Because when the recurring media image of you is in court and in shackles, it might be time to reform. Just a thought.
Hollywood rehab doesn't actually look anything like a hard treatment centre or a hospital. It looks more like club med, to be honest, with tennis, yoga and fish for dinner. The only thing missing is the jumping in the sack with an egg on a spoon race. Rather than looking like a sort of prison for junkies, it's more like an all-inclusive with the added benefit of privacy and no interruptions from the outside world.
And if you're a celebrity in Hollywood, you know all about interruptions, whether or not it's a papparazzi scrum while you shop in Wal-Mart, or a red carpet with legions of screaming fans, not all of them fans of your work. So of course rehab sounds like heaven compared to what must be the blaze and blur of daily life for a Hollywood star.
Oh, how I yearn for the days when the big studios ran the show and always carefully presented their starlets as untouchable goddesses on earth. They were always immaculate, glamourous and nobody ever aired their dirty laundry out in public or took pictures of them doing mundane things like shopping for yogourt or filling up the tank at the gas station. There was also no mention of surgery, past ailments or embarassing bodily functions, of which there are plenty nowadays.
People in North America love to see stars rise to the top because it makes us believe that maybe we can be part of the fortunate elite one day, with access to privileges, luxuries and jobs that we love. But we also love to see them come crashing to the ground of reality, suffering through bad breakups and bad hair days alike, because it reminds us that they're people just like us and just as vulnerable to life's strange ways.
So while it is satisfying to hear that Lindsay Lohan is going to jail for her flighty and reckless behavior, it's not as satisfying to know that she suffered this fate for a mere couple of weeks. But maybe rehab, regardless of what her addiction is, is exactly what Lohan needs. Some time off to get herself back together.
We all fall. We all need time to pick ourselves up and dust ourselves off. Not all of us get to do it in a resort in the sun, but so be it. This might be a chance for her to relax, reflect, drop the mask of the carefree party girl and rediscover herself. It might also be a chance for her to make a clear choice not to be that girl stumbling out of bars at 4am and physically fighting with her not-lesbian girlfriend.
She can afford to take the time out. She can straggle along on the few millions that she has right now. And maybe it's a good idea for her not to be in the public eye for awhile. Give them a chance to forget her and then rediscover her later on, when she's healthy and on the ball. Because when the recurring media image of you is in court and in shackles, it might be time to reform. Just a thought.
The Problem with Old Spice
There's a problem with Old Spice and it has to do with its incredibly successful advertising campaign. Yes, the campaign is witty, fun, and a great conversation piece. Lots of people seem to enjoy talking about it as much as they enjoy seeing it, and the main man in the ads is easy on the eyes. The problem? Despite all the buzz, sales are down for Old Spice, not up, as people would assume.
Initially, this may be surprising to some people, but really, it's not when you think about. Here are a few essential issues with this campaign:
1- It puts men down.
Most people don't respond well to ads that call them pansies and then tells them to buy their products. This sort of negative messaging doesn't sit well with the target audience. A lot of people are laughing at these ads, and they're mostly women. Men, on the other hand, are usually quietly seething when they see the ads or their eyes glaze over with indifference because the message does not reinforce their own idea of their individual awesomeness as males. Just as women don't respond well to makeup ads that tell them they're ugly, men don't respond well to the ads that call them pansies. Women ads are all about enhancement of their assets, whether it's long lash mascara or push-up bras. Men's ads are generally the same.
The simplest ad campaigns that pump up men are the best: smell great, get the hot girl. That's pretty much all they want.
2- It's got a reputation for being old.
It's called Old Spice. In a culture that is youth-obsessed and where all the major marketing demographics are squarely in the pubescent phases, something called Old will not do well. It doesn't take market analysts or psychologists to figure this one out. Old Spice could do with a name change that would make it more marketable. They could even come out with New Old Spice. This idea would probably go further than the "hey loser" campaign that's currently being used.
3- The image needs to be sexier.
The image of the product needs to be sexier, not the man in the ads. We already know he's hot. The problem with perfume and deodorant ads are that they are the only ads that cannot clearly demonstrate their direct benefits and instead promise you something less tangible, like maintaining a certain image or gaining a certain sex appeal. When you advertise laundry detergent, you can demonstrate its cleaning power through a simulated wash and compare it with other brands. You can't do the same with something that you need to smell because we can't smell through our TVs- yet.
Perfume companies get around this by creating artistic, avant garde, usually existentialist, ads that are reeking of sex appeal. They create an image of luxury, opulence and desire and that's their selling point. There is none of that with the Old Spice campaign and without a serious revamping of their image, there won't be.
Maybe Old Spice wants to keep the feel good PG factor of its products and that's just fine as well. They just have to do it in a more effective way so that the audience is engaged and buys into the concept, rather than insulted and bored. But like the guy at the party who prefers to be the class clown rather than the stud, Old Spice could be the one that nobody goes home with at the end of the night.
Initially, this may be surprising to some people, but really, it's not when you think about. Here are a few essential issues with this campaign:
1- It puts men down.
Most people don't respond well to ads that call them pansies and then tells them to buy their products. This sort of negative messaging doesn't sit well with the target audience. A lot of people are laughing at these ads, and they're mostly women. Men, on the other hand, are usually quietly seething when they see the ads or their eyes glaze over with indifference because the message does not reinforce their own idea of their individual awesomeness as males. Just as women don't respond well to makeup ads that tell them they're ugly, men don't respond well to the ads that call them pansies. Women ads are all about enhancement of their assets, whether it's long lash mascara or push-up bras. Men's ads are generally the same.
The simplest ad campaigns that pump up men are the best: smell great, get the hot girl. That's pretty much all they want.
2- It's got a reputation for being old.
It's called Old Spice. In a culture that is youth-obsessed and where all the major marketing demographics are squarely in the pubescent phases, something called Old will not do well. It doesn't take market analysts or psychologists to figure this one out. Old Spice could do with a name change that would make it more marketable. They could even come out with New Old Spice. This idea would probably go further than the "hey loser" campaign that's currently being used.
3- The image needs to be sexier.
The image of the product needs to be sexier, not the man in the ads. We already know he's hot. The problem with perfume and deodorant ads are that they are the only ads that cannot clearly demonstrate their direct benefits and instead promise you something less tangible, like maintaining a certain image or gaining a certain sex appeal. When you advertise laundry detergent, you can demonstrate its cleaning power through a simulated wash and compare it with other brands. You can't do the same with something that you need to smell because we can't smell through our TVs- yet.
Perfume companies get around this by creating artistic, avant garde, usually existentialist, ads that are reeking of sex appeal. They create an image of luxury, opulence and desire and that's their selling point. There is none of that with the Old Spice campaign and without a serious revamping of their image, there won't be.
Maybe Old Spice wants to keep the feel good PG factor of its products and that's just fine as well. They just have to do it in a more effective way so that the audience is engaged and buys into the concept, rather than insulted and bored. But like the guy at the party who prefers to be the class clown rather than the stud, Old Spice could be the one that nobody goes home with at the end of the night.
Monday, August 2, 2010
Angelina Jolie- The Female Action Hero
I love Angelina Jolie. Yes, I know that she's got tattoos that don't make sense, a strange incestuous relationship with her brother, a vial of blood from her ex Billy Bob Thornton and a constantly on-off drama with her estranged father who thinks that she needs mental help, but there is so much to love about Angelina Jolie.
Not only is she totally smoking hot, she's also the epitome of the independent, can-do, tough as nails woman. She can drive her own helicopter, raise 6 children, rake in millions at the box office, rock Armani on the red carpet, do all of her own stunts even with the risk of concussion, is a goodwill ambassador on behalf of refugees for the UN, and on top of it all, she has the world's original Hollywood studmuffin, Mr. Brad Pitt.
Whew.
It makes me tired just thinking about it.
For most of us, just doing one of those things would take an army of professionals and a few hours worth of dedicated, hands-on service. But the other thing that makes Angelina Jolie incredible, is the fact that she is quite possibly the only credible female action hero on the big screen.
A fair share of female action heroes have made their way to the small screen. This list includes the fantastic Jennifer Garner as Sidney Bristow in Alias, Sarah Michelle Gellar as Buffy, Jessica Alba as Dark Angel, Evangeline Lilly as Kate on Lost and Hayden Panetierre as the cheerleader in Heroes. All of these iconic women figures were a hit on tv, but very few could make the leap to the big screen, despite being big draws for women during prime time. So what's the problem?
There are a few factors at play. On the one hand, men represent a fair share of moviegoers, particularly for action films. Women audiences do not show up in droves for the premiere of the latest film based on a video game, even if the star happens to be a buffed up Gyllenhaal. And when those action films go to head to head with big draws like Sex and the City, most women make the obvious choice.
On the other hand, women don't identify with highly macho, one-dimensional male action heroes. The women of the small screen are successful not just for their high kicking ability, but also for their friendships, their relationships and family matters. The complexity of Sidney Bristow's relationship with her father, mixed in the fog of post-Soviet era paranoia and clouded by unresolved issues with her missing mother, are an integral part of what made Alias worth watching. Buffy's smouldering connection with sexy but highly dangerous Angel who still harbours deep remorse over his past added layers to the series that kept most women on edge as they watched week after week. And how could anyone resist the season-long mystery surrounding "Save the Cheerleader, Save the World?"
There's one common thread to this pattern of what made these women successful on the small screen- the time it takes to build these stories, tensions and connections. A 2 hour movie slot doesn't give you this time. In a typical action film, the audience is drawn in by a movie which is largely plot-driven, whereas the women in these series are largely character-driven.
In action films, the characters tend to be 'stock' characters, based on stereotypes and easily interchangeable for the guys that you see in just about every action film. We know this cast well: the tough as nails bureaucrat in a suit with piercing eyes who doesn't have time for red tape, the hard ass general who believes that the answer to everything is to shoot first and ask questions later, the nervous rookie on his first day who punches out one-liners or dies in the first sequence, and the hard-nosed detective who is determined to get his man, regardless of whether or not he's innocent.
It's no surprise, then, with no characters to identify with, that women don't flock to action films and that they don't star in them either. The only exception to this rule appears to be Angelina Jolie, who, arguably, is probably the only credible female action hero in Hollywood.
Let's face it, there are only so many women that we would believe in. Jolie already proved her action hero chops as Lara Croft in the two Tomb Raider films, and even that franchise represented the only female lead in a based on a video game movie at the time. Otherwise, women have been relegated to the side, either playing the victim or the assistant to the hero. And even when their role is to assist, most women end up just being eye candy, like Megan Fox in Transformers, who is virtually useless when she's not lying on a motorcycle with her butt in the air.
Michelle Rodriguez has also had a good run at being the tough as nails woman on the scene in films like Avatar and the Fast and the Furious, but even she's just an accessory and not a star. Although I believe in her to do a film one day, I don't know if she can carry an entire film on her own. And that may be a moot point, since there may not be many studios out there willing to bank on her being a success at the box office.
The studios know that their big draws are always going to be males in this franchise. A lot of men have made their entire careers as action heroes. That's why it was such a gamble to offer the role of Salt to Jolie when the role was originally written for a man and offered to Tom Cruise. The studio was banking on the idea that Angelina Jolie could give just as much as Tom Cruise into this role and draw major audiences, reeling in both men and women to this intense action film of the summer.
It was a good bet. It may be too soon to tell whether or not Salt is going to break the bank the way that the producers are hoping for, but the fact that Salt is a potential multi sequel franchise with good potential speaks volumes for the project and their faith in Jolie. Jolie is a sexy, intimidating killing machine in Salt, keeping the mystery up until the final few scenes and foregoing the untouchable vixen act for something far more gritty and compelling. Overall, it's a smart film as far as action movies go and Jolie does it make it worth the ride.
As Ms. Jolie herself once said, "I don't want to play a Bond girl. I want to be James Bond."
Mission accomplished.
Not only is she totally smoking hot, she's also the epitome of the independent, can-do, tough as nails woman. She can drive her own helicopter, raise 6 children, rake in millions at the box office, rock Armani on the red carpet, do all of her own stunts even with the risk of concussion, is a goodwill ambassador on behalf of refugees for the UN, and on top of it all, she has the world's original Hollywood studmuffin, Mr. Brad Pitt.
Whew.
It makes me tired just thinking about it.
For most of us, just doing one of those things would take an army of professionals and a few hours worth of dedicated, hands-on service. But the other thing that makes Angelina Jolie incredible, is the fact that she is quite possibly the only credible female action hero on the big screen.
A fair share of female action heroes have made their way to the small screen. This list includes the fantastic Jennifer Garner as Sidney Bristow in Alias, Sarah Michelle Gellar as Buffy, Jessica Alba as Dark Angel, Evangeline Lilly as Kate on Lost and Hayden Panetierre as the cheerleader in Heroes. All of these iconic women figures were a hit on tv, but very few could make the leap to the big screen, despite being big draws for women during prime time. So what's the problem?
There are a few factors at play. On the one hand, men represent a fair share of moviegoers, particularly for action films. Women audiences do not show up in droves for the premiere of the latest film based on a video game, even if the star happens to be a buffed up Gyllenhaal. And when those action films go to head to head with big draws like Sex and the City, most women make the obvious choice.
On the other hand, women don't identify with highly macho, one-dimensional male action heroes. The women of the small screen are successful not just for their high kicking ability, but also for their friendships, their relationships and family matters. The complexity of Sidney Bristow's relationship with her father, mixed in the fog of post-Soviet era paranoia and clouded by unresolved issues with her missing mother, are an integral part of what made Alias worth watching. Buffy's smouldering connection with sexy but highly dangerous Angel who still harbours deep remorse over his past added layers to the series that kept most women on edge as they watched week after week. And how could anyone resist the season-long mystery surrounding "Save the Cheerleader, Save the World?"
There's one common thread to this pattern of what made these women successful on the small screen- the time it takes to build these stories, tensions and connections. A 2 hour movie slot doesn't give you this time. In a typical action film, the audience is drawn in by a movie which is largely plot-driven, whereas the women in these series are largely character-driven.
In action films, the characters tend to be 'stock' characters, based on stereotypes and easily interchangeable for the guys that you see in just about every action film. We know this cast well: the tough as nails bureaucrat in a suit with piercing eyes who doesn't have time for red tape, the hard ass general who believes that the answer to everything is to shoot first and ask questions later, the nervous rookie on his first day who punches out one-liners or dies in the first sequence, and the hard-nosed detective who is determined to get his man, regardless of whether or not he's innocent.
It's no surprise, then, with no characters to identify with, that women don't flock to action films and that they don't star in them either. The only exception to this rule appears to be Angelina Jolie, who, arguably, is probably the only credible female action hero in Hollywood.
Let's face it, there are only so many women that we would believe in. Jolie already proved her action hero chops as Lara Croft in the two Tomb Raider films, and even that franchise represented the only female lead in a based on a video game movie at the time. Otherwise, women have been relegated to the side, either playing the victim or the assistant to the hero. And even when their role is to assist, most women end up just being eye candy, like Megan Fox in Transformers, who is virtually useless when she's not lying on a motorcycle with her butt in the air.
Michelle Rodriguez has also had a good run at being the tough as nails woman on the scene in films like Avatar and the Fast and the Furious, but even she's just an accessory and not a star. Although I believe in her to do a film one day, I don't know if she can carry an entire film on her own. And that may be a moot point, since there may not be many studios out there willing to bank on her being a success at the box office.
The studios know that their big draws are always going to be males in this franchise. A lot of men have made their entire careers as action heroes. That's why it was such a gamble to offer the role of Salt to Jolie when the role was originally written for a man and offered to Tom Cruise. The studio was banking on the idea that Angelina Jolie could give just as much as Tom Cruise into this role and draw major audiences, reeling in both men and women to this intense action film of the summer.
It was a good bet. It may be too soon to tell whether or not Salt is going to break the bank the way that the producers are hoping for, but the fact that Salt is a potential multi sequel franchise with good potential speaks volumes for the project and their faith in Jolie. Jolie is a sexy, intimidating killing machine in Salt, keeping the mystery up until the final few scenes and foregoing the untouchable vixen act for something far more gritty and compelling. Overall, it's a smart film as far as action movies go and Jolie does it make it worth the ride.
As Ms. Jolie herself once said, "I don't want to play a Bond girl. I want to be James Bond."
Mission accomplished.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Extreme Dating
See this story from yahoo.ca:
CHATHAM, Ont. - Police in Chatham, Ont., have charged a woman with assault after her boyfriend was punched twice — the first time in an alleged dispute over a sandwich.
Investigators say a man made his girlfriend a sandwich Monday evening and when she only ate half, she said he could have the other half.
A short time later, police say the woman became infuriated that the sandwich was missing and punched her boyfriend in the face.
Police say later in the night the two became involved in an unrelated argument and she punched him in the chest.
A 27-year-old Chatham woman has been charged with two counts of assault.
She has been held in custody pending a bail hearing.
(end of article)
My first diagnosis of this situation is that this woman's crazy. Now, it's quite possible that I don't understand the full context of the situation, that maybe there are extraneous factors involved in this situation and that a hostile relationship has been formed with her boyfriend with undercurrents of trust issues related to some deep-rooted psychosis associated with some sort of childhood trauma.
Taking that into account, my diagnosis is that this woman's crazy.
On the one hand, this is probably the most domestic of domestic disputes that you could have. It's a fairly simple, straightforward situation in which the solution seems pretty clear. The boyfriend made her a sandwich of which she ate half and then she offered the other half back to him. As of this moment, she has forfeited her rights to that half of the sandwich and therefore has no grounds on which to reclaim or claim theft of the aforementioned sandwich half. Yes, it's true that the entire sandwich was intended for her sole consumption, but seeing as she was unfit to consume the entire sandwich in one sitting, instead of putting it in a Ziploc bag and saving it for later, she willfully forfeited it back to the maker. Therefore, the resulting assault had no seeming justification given the context.
What makes matters worse, is that this woman then punched her boyfriend again, later, for a totally unrelated issue. It's possible that there were residual feelings of resentment from the missing sandwich half debacle, and that it boiled over into a subsequent dispute, quite possibly about laundry or something equally mundane and domestic-centered, and that this led to the situation of this woman's arrest.
Dating is hard in today's world. Everyone's so confused, and men and women have visions and expectations of each other which are so confusing and ever changing. Women have become more powerful in relationships and their demands have changed too. Men, for their part, have mostly been accommodating to these changes and have accepted to do more of the domestic stuff, like making sandwiches. Apparently, that wasn't enough for this particular woman and she might have had an issue with the sandwich itself or some related domestic issue which may have been on the ever-increasing to-do list on the fridge.
My question is: when did it become acceptable to punch people at home over stupid issues? Sure, in the old days, fathers used to rule with the iron fist and give you the beating of your life for doing things like failing math or taking the last Coke out of the fridge. So it would be feasible that something like a sandwich dispute could have led to some sort of assault...back in the 1950s.
Since then, there have been several laws put in place to protect people from domestic abuse. The issues are well-known, the laws are well-known, as are the adverse effects on the victims involved. What was once considered a fact of life and just something that people had to live with, like racism and sexism, has since been actively lobbied against and protections put in place to prevent it from happening again. Things like this aren't supposed to happen anymore, right?
It appears that I'm wrong on this one. It appears that abuse of this kind, which seems as outdated as wood siding on a family sized Buick, is still alive and well and that even women have gotten into the game. True, women are often latecomers to most things, what with them not getting rights for a really long time, but not EVERY frontier has to be conquered by a woman. Making the brave cross over step into domestic violence is really not a field that women had to enter.
How does this sort of thing happen? Who gets punched over a missing sandwich in their own home by the person that they call honey bunny?
Of all the things that we have to worry about in the dating world, I can't believe that getting punched out over silly domestic issues is still on the list. I thought that was out, just like inter-racial dating and the no kissing on the first date rule. What do we have to do to make this issue as obsolete?
The man charging the woman was a good first step. Overcoming the emotional pain and the potential embarrassment are a positive step to remind us that domestic abuse is unacceptable in all circumstances and that the abusers aren't justified because of their gender.
I hope that there aren't too many more maligned sandwich making boyfriends out there suffering in silence.
CHATHAM, Ont. - Police in Chatham, Ont., have charged a woman with assault after her boyfriend was punched twice — the first time in an alleged dispute over a sandwich.
Investigators say a man made his girlfriend a sandwich Monday evening and when she only ate half, she said he could have the other half.
A short time later, police say the woman became infuriated that the sandwich was missing and punched her boyfriend in the face.
Police say later in the night the two became involved in an unrelated argument and she punched him in the chest.
A 27-year-old Chatham woman has been charged with two counts of assault.
She has been held in custody pending a bail hearing.
(end of article)
My first diagnosis of this situation is that this woman's crazy. Now, it's quite possible that I don't understand the full context of the situation, that maybe there are extraneous factors involved in this situation and that a hostile relationship has been formed with her boyfriend with undercurrents of trust issues related to some deep-rooted psychosis associated with some sort of childhood trauma.
Taking that into account, my diagnosis is that this woman's crazy.
On the one hand, this is probably the most domestic of domestic disputes that you could have. It's a fairly simple, straightforward situation in which the solution seems pretty clear. The boyfriend made her a sandwich of which she ate half and then she offered the other half back to him. As of this moment, she has forfeited her rights to that half of the sandwich and therefore has no grounds on which to reclaim or claim theft of the aforementioned sandwich half. Yes, it's true that the entire sandwich was intended for her sole consumption, but seeing as she was unfit to consume the entire sandwich in one sitting, instead of putting it in a Ziploc bag and saving it for later, she willfully forfeited it back to the maker. Therefore, the resulting assault had no seeming justification given the context.
What makes matters worse, is that this woman then punched her boyfriend again, later, for a totally unrelated issue. It's possible that there were residual feelings of resentment from the missing sandwich half debacle, and that it boiled over into a subsequent dispute, quite possibly about laundry or something equally mundane and domestic-centered, and that this led to the situation of this woman's arrest.
Dating is hard in today's world. Everyone's so confused, and men and women have visions and expectations of each other which are so confusing and ever changing. Women have become more powerful in relationships and their demands have changed too. Men, for their part, have mostly been accommodating to these changes and have accepted to do more of the domestic stuff, like making sandwiches. Apparently, that wasn't enough for this particular woman and she might have had an issue with the sandwich itself or some related domestic issue which may have been on the ever-increasing to-do list on the fridge.
My question is: when did it become acceptable to punch people at home over stupid issues? Sure, in the old days, fathers used to rule with the iron fist and give you the beating of your life for doing things like failing math or taking the last Coke out of the fridge. So it would be feasible that something like a sandwich dispute could have led to some sort of assault...back in the 1950s.
Since then, there have been several laws put in place to protect people from domestic abuse. The issues are well-known, the laws are well-known, as are the adverse effects on the victims involved. What was once considered a fact of life and just something that people had to live with, like racism and sexism, has since been actively lobbied against and protections put in place to prevent it from happening again. Things like this aren't supposed to happen anymore, right?
It appears that I'm wrong on this one. It appears that abuse of this kind, which seems as outdated as wood siding on a family sized Buick, is still alive and well and that even women have gotten into the game. True, women are often latecomers to most things, what with them not getting rights for a really long time, but not EVERY frontier has to be conquered by a woman. Making the brave cross over step into domestic violence is really not a field that women had to enter.
How does this sort of thing happen? Who gets punched over a missing sandwich in their own home by the person that they call honey bunny?
Of all the things that we have to worry about in the dating world, I can't believe that getting punched out over silly domestic issues is still on the list. I thought that was out, just like inter-racial dating and the no kissing on the first date rule. What do we have to do to make this issue as obsolete?
The man charging the woman was a good first step. Overcoming the emotional pain and the potential embarrassment are a positive step to remind us that domestic abuse is unacceptable in all circumstances and that the abusers aren't justified because of their gender.
I hope that there aren't too many more maligned sandwich making boyfriends out there suffering in silence.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
The White Folk are Alright
The Canadian Conservative government wants to do a review of hiring practices within the public service with a statement that hiring based on ethnicity is unfair and that this practice should be removed. Immigration Minister Jason Kenney has made the argument that it's not fair to average white Canadians who pay taxes to tell them that they can't apply for certain jobs because they don't belong to a pre-determined ethnic group. What an argument.
Ignore the fact that affirmative action was put in place decades ago in order to ensure that women and minorities had a fair shake at jobs in the public service. Ignore also the fact that both women and minorities are far from taking over the top spots of government which are generally still reserved for white males (think of all those corner offices and six figure salaries and there's probably not a lot of people named Martha or Valkrim in those places). Even if you ignore all of that, this argument still doesn't hold.
Yeah, favouring ethnic groups for certain jobs in the government is unfair. You know what's also unfair? Favouring white people for those same jobs. You know what's also unfair? History, which dictates that for centuries, women and visible minorities have been the oppressed, the abused and the impoverished. You know what's also unfair? Life.
A quick look around the Cabinet will tell you that white people are doing ok. For all the talk about how affirmative action makes job competitions less about merit and more about race, it's hard to believe that the ethnic or the women will soon be taking over the seats of power. But I suppose it could happen, just one position at a time. It's true that once there were no women in offices. Now, there's lots of women in offices. People used to be afraid that pregnant women would cause trouble in offices and be a distraction. And now there are pregnant women in offices and accident rates have not soared through the roof.
It's funny that while women have done fairly well at balancing out the workforce, visible minorities in the public service have not fared as well. Visible minorities are still over-represented in other fields across the country and under-represented in comparison when it comes to the public service. I'll tell you one place where visible minorities appear to be taking over: Tim Horton's. They're all over those coffee shops. Hardly one white person over the age of 20 among them.
So the government is about to conduct a review to see if all the white people lining up at Tim Horton's in the morning while on their way to their public service jobs are about to be taken over by the visible minorities across the counter who are serving them their coffee?
Give me a break.
This is more over-reacting and pandering to the more conservative conservatives. This is another example of how this government looks to divide people on issues that were settled a long time ago: race, religion, rights.
This is also another example of plain meanness on behalf of the current regime, wanting to take away what grounds were gained by marginalized groups in the past and for which they fought a long hard battle and undo all the good in a day by calling them unnecessary and outdated.
It figures. Social justice is outdated and unneccessary, but meanness always thrives.
Ignore the fact that affirmative action was put in place decades ago in order to ensure that women and minorities had a fair shake at jobs in the public service. Ignore also the fact that both women and minorities are far from taking over the top spots of government which are generally still reserved for white males (think of all those corner offices and six figure salaries and there's probably not a lot of people named Martha or Valkrim in those places). Even if you ignore all of that, this argument still doesn't hold.
Yeah, favouring ethnic groups for certain jobs in the government is unfair. You know what's also unfair? Favouring white people for those same jobs. You know what's also unfair? History, which dictates that for centuries, women and visible minorities have been the oppressed, the abused and the impoverished. You know what's also unfair? Life.
A quick look around the Cabinet will tell you that white people are doing ok. For all the talk about how affirmative action makes job competitions less about merit and more about race, it's hard to believe that the ethnic or the women will soon be taking over the seats of power. But I suppose it could happen, just one position at a time. It's true that once there were no women in offices. Now, there's lots of women in offices. People used to be afraid that pregnant women would cause trouble in offices and be a distraction. And now there are pregnant women in offices and accident rates have not soared through the roof.
It's funny that while women have done fairly well at balancing out the workforce, visible minorities in the public service have not fared as well. Visible minorities are still over-represented in other fields across the country and under-represented in comparison when it comes to the public service. I'll tell you one place where visible minorities appear to be taking over: Tim Horton's. They're all over those coffee shops. Hardly one white person over the age of 20 among them.
So the government is about to conduct a review to see if all the white people lining up at Tim Horton's in the morning while on their way to their public service jobs are about to be taken over by the visible minorities across the counter who are serving them their coffee?
Give me a break.
This is more over-reacting and pandering to the more conservative conservatives. This is another example of how this government looks to divide people on issues that were settled a long time ago: race, religion, rights.
This is also another example of plain meanness on behalf of the current regime, wanting to take away what grounds were gained by marginalized groups in the past and for which they fought a long hard battle and undo all the good in a day by calling them unnecessary and outdated.
It figures. Social justice is outdated and unneccessary, but meanness always thrives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)