Media imperialism, how I despise thee. 06/09/2009

Even before I knew it had a name, and even before I knew it was actually a phenomenon, I’ve had a huge problem with cultural imperialism.

A friend used to joke that I would complain about Americans because I had lived in Canada for a spell. This irritated me too, because in Canada, I don’t recall any rivalry between the two North American countries, but the media portrayed it as such.

I had just always assumed this natural disdain came from the internalisation of the “Americans are stupid and ignorant” rule. It wasn’t that, really. The fact that the US knows nothing about my country didn’t really bug me. What bugged me, is that if I saw a two-letter US state code, I could tell you what it stood for. I could probably name the capitals of several states, too. What bugged me is I knew exactly who George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and JFK were. I could show you where, on a map, California, Texas, Florida and New York are, and possibly others. I knew the stars on the flag represented the 50 states and given time, I could probably name each damn one. This was not the result of a class in American history. This was not even from an interest in the goddamn place. This was from the media. This felt so unbalanced to me.

How many Americans would be able to name the capital of South Africa? Or even point out where it is on a map? The only famous South African Americans know is Nelson Mandela. It felt to me like a very creepy unrequited love affair, and I wanted no part in it.

I was very disapointed with what television had done to us. I shuddered when my classmates pronounced words with an American affectation. I was disgusted when people would regurgitate culturally irrelevant cliches. I was horrified when SA music and movies and television were regarded as so far inferior to international media. I felt like screaming at people to wake the hell up when they knew more about the Obama vs Clinton election saga than who was actually going to run the very country they’re living in.

In university, I learned the term for this horrifying display of idiocy. Cultural imperialism. Knowing the monster’s name has not made it easier to deal with. But discovering feminism and, through that, the concept of white and male to be “neutral” states, I realised how terribly, terribly messed up everything is.

I’ve read pages and pages of blogs where people complain that men are “neutral” and women are “other”, where white is “neutral” and anything else is “other”, where heterosexual is “neutral” and all other orientations are “other”. But these bloggers? They’re American. So I guess that makes me… “other”.

Why is it that the US snatched up the .com domain extension? The rest of the world is .co.country code. Proving again that if you are not American, you are “other”. I remember my mom used to get annoyed in Canada, when a missing person or criminal at large was announced, they would sometimes describe the person as having “no accent”. NO accent? You might as well say a white person has no ethnicity.

I felt it was time for a blog on this subject because A) it has been bugging me for at least ten years now and B) I don’t consider the bloggers I would usually expect to blog about this stuff as qualified in anyway on this subject. Sorry guys, but I don’t. Not even you British or Australian folk.

It can be blamed, quite easily, on lack of exposure. We are not active in the media. We only have 4.5 million internet users, so we’re not well-represented online. No one gives a shit about SA news unless it’s to show that we’re either still racists, or we’re moving on despite the Injustices of the Past(tm). For those that do care about us, we’re like a plucky goddamn underdog. “Aw… look at that… South Africa has won a gold medal in the Olympics! I suport them because I didn’t even know they had decent swimming pools there.” Screw your gold medals. We produce that stuff. And diamonds. And hordes of platinum.

As a South African I’ve had to defend my country so, so many times against my fellow citizens. Things are bad enough with our own mess ups (yes, we know we have bad crime and corrupt a government) but now I have to handle being constantly and I mean CONSTANTLY compared to America. “Oh, what kind of a hellhole is SA anyway? We don’t have a Starbucks or internet as fast as in the States.” It is true, we don’t. But we still have decent coffee and we still manage to run businesses online.

But what exactly can we do about it, besides discussing and lamenting? The whole of the developing world is in a similar boat. We can’t refuse to consume Western media. And we really can’t expect those in developed countries to learn about the world around them.

I suppose I just wrote this article for the hope of awareness. Maybe, maybe an American will read this and think about cultutral imperialism and what it must be like to have an even number of patriots and haters. There. I tried to do my bit to dispel a teensy bit of ignorance.

My altar ego 24/04/2009

It seems I have an aspect to my personality that I never knew about, an alter ego, if you will.

By day, I’m a journalist, name alliterated in the tradition of comic book reporters and photographers everywhere. By night, I turn into… someone’s freaking wife.

This utterly wifely aspect is one of the reasons I chose to keep my name when marrying. We both kept our names. That sounds fair. That sounds… equal. It sounds like something women’s libbers were fighting for. I have a job, I drive a car, my name is on the property contract and yet… our wonderful home affairs department decided for me that I am done with my surname.

You know what? I like my surname. I’ve grown rather attached to it these past 22 years and I’m not ready to part with it now, nor will I ever be. I’m sick of generations of strong wonderful women being separated from their history and latched onto some male.

Okay, I understand that my name comes from a male, my father, but I’m sure no matter how far back I trace the women in my bloodline, the name will always be male. So I’ve decided the buck stops here. I’ve even considered having our as-yet-unconceived daughter taking my name and seeing how far we can run with this female line thing.

When I went to vote (thank goodness I still have that right) the name on the voter’s roll was not the same as the name on my ID, my driver’s licence or any documentation I use to prove I am who I am. Instead, I had my husband’s surname. I thought it was just a little glitch.

Getting to work on Thursday a colleague of mine (who also chose to keep her name) and I were discussing it, because the same thing had happened to her. Her phone call to home affairs confirmed it. We are not who we think we are. We are “and wife”.

Now, it is possible to go change it. But my problem is, why was it changed in the first place? I did not ASK for it to be changed. I didn’t phone up home affairs and request new documentation. I have never once on a form ticked the “Mrs” box or listed my surname as my married name.

So, I’ve been gleefully bounding along since October thinking I was still me. Relieved that I was saved all that trouble and admin of changing my name. Hmph! Now I have to schlep on down to home affairs and ask for my damn surname back! Those dadblasted good-for-nothing surname stealers!

For any woman getting married who wants to keep her surname, please remember to apply for surname retention. I’m not sure how one does it, but contact home affairs (and blog on it, for posterity), otherwise you too will find your identity has changed over night.

Found this on the home affairs website, maybe it will help:

Section 26: Change of surname of majors

In terms of section 26(1), a woman may assume her husband’s surname, or revert to her maiden surname or a prior surname she legally bore and since 1997 a woman may also join her surname with that of her husband’s as a double-barrelled surname. No application to the Department of Home Affairs is necessary in these instances, but to enable the Department to update the Population Register, women should notify the Department of such changes in writing.
http://www.home-affairs.gov.za/personal_amendments.asp

Notice how it’s “revert” instead of “retain”. Pah!

DVD review: Flashbacks of a Fool 11/03/2009

This film had been staring at me from the shelves of our local Blockbusters, and it looked like your typical empty-life-leads-to-journey-of-self-discovery movie. After watching it, I wouldn’t call it that.

Firstly, the movie title should drop the pluraliser. The movie is pretty much one long flashback, so much so that you forget it’s actually happening in modern times.

Essentially, it’s about Joe Scott (Daniel Craig) who leads a hedonistic, empty, materialistic existence as an actor (don’t they all?). The death of his childhood friend as well as his rejection from a film for being too old lead him to go to the beach, float poetically and fully clothed out to sea and remember his time growing up in a little British seaside town in the 70s.

This flashback of his teenagerhood is the bulk of the movie. It explores the story of why he eventually left the little seaside town.

At first, I thought it was based on a book because there is so much that isn’t said and so many unanswered questions (like, who exactly is Peggy Tickle anyway?). I thought it would all be clear if I read the source material, but alas. It was an original screenplay.

Perhaps it’s because the writer/director is a music video maker. I guess he’s too used to saying a lot in a short while by implying most of it. But we don’t really engage with the characters of music videos, now do we?

I won’t lie, this film got a tear or two out of me at the end. Perhaps I’m just weak to the effects of the sight of someone crying desperately to a moving soundtrack.

The final verdict? Give this one a skip. If you want a good movie about someone who goes back to their roots after being successful somewhere else, check out As It Is In Heaven.

My rating: 5

IMDb’s rating: 6.8

Directed by Baillie Walsh (Mirror, Mirror and music videos)

Starring Daniel Craig (Casino Royale, Layer Cake, The Golden Compass)

Eve (Barbershop, xXx, her TV show Eve)

Claire Forlani (Mallrats, Meet Joe Black, Basquiat)

* The actors mentioned are merely the biggest names in the film, they certainly don’t have the most screen time. That would go to their younger counterparts. Except for Eve, she’s the housekeeper. The only black person in the movie is a housekeeper. Progressive, eh?

Movie review: Slumdog Millionaire 09/03/2009

It may not be worth it for me to review this movie, since it’s been done and talked about to death. But read on and I’ll try to explain what my thoughts were and why I think the hype is a bit misguided.

I never read Q&A or any of the reviews for this film, so I didn’t know exactly what to expect. But I saw the trailers and heard the big hoo-ha, and the biggest shock to me was how heavy and hard-to-watch it was at times. All the noise around the movie said how feel-good it is. I was prepared for a warm fuzzy feeling.

I was wrong. It only gets happy at the end. Most of the movie is about the pain of living in poverty and how difficult it is for children to survive alone.

I had seen one of Danny Boyle’s other feel-good movies, Millions, and I thought Slumdog would be similar to that, but it seems to be the bastard child of Millions and Trainspotting: “Fine, we’ll give you joy, but to get there you need to experience pain!”. Granted, had it been so happy it would not have won so many Oscars. The academy seems to like pain, loss, longing etc.

I was on the verge of tears for most of the movie, because it actually starts with a torture scene. Now, this had been called “the feel-good movie of the year” or something like that. A torture scene? Really?!

As misled as I felt, the movie offered more depth than I had expected. And that’s always good. Everyone loves the rags-to-riches underdog stories, and this one is better than the rest of the bunch.

It’s an emotional ride, but a fun one with a happy ending.

My rating: 8

IMDb’s rating: 8.6 (number 42 on the top 250)

Directed by Danny Boyle (Trainspotting, Millions, Sunshine) and

Loveleen Tandan (her co-directorial debut)

Starring Dev Patel (his feature film debut) and Freida Pinto (her feature film debut)

Movie review: The Wrestler 24/02/2009

This film fits very well with the others by Darren Aronofsky – slow and heartbreaking. Also very gory. It was rather interesting to see a film about professional wrestling, and a meaningful one at that, since it’s such a silly and cartoonish industry, not really quality film fodder.

I’ve never been a fan of professional wrestling, not since the early 90s when my brother practiced wrestling moves on me in a ring constructed of pushing two couches together. But in the film, I found the relationships between the wrestlers fascinating. So I hope that was accurately portrayed. They are obviously hurting each other, although not as badly as we think. They are displaying animosity towards each other, and taking revenge by beating the hell out of each other except… before and after the match, they pat each other on the back and compliment each other. It seems like a very twisted industry.

The film was very slow-moving, especially at the beginning. Much of the movie is taken up by showing how he lives and where he works and most of the early beginning is a tracking shot showing the back of his head.

This movie portrayed the hopelessness and sadness so well. And Mickey Rourke did the washed-up has-been strikingly well. The badly bleached hair, the leathery tan… What I also liked about the film is that while you liked the protagonist, you had very little sympathy when he messed up because, well, he brought it on himself.

He was a very lonely character. His daughter hated him, the only woman in his life was an ageing stripper, his boss was a complete tool and besides his wrestling buddies, his only other friend was a kid in the neighbourhood that politely played an old Nintendo wrestling game to humour him.

It’s a very bleak movie, but I expected nothing less from Aronofsky. No one expected a happy ending, but you kind of hope for one.

It’s not schmaltzy in its emotion, having caused me to only shed two or three tears. And while I appreciated the honesty of the context, it was kind of painful to watch.

So if you feel like something with honest but painful emotions, and you’re willing to live without a happy ending, go watch it.

My rating… 8
IMDb’s rating… 8.5 (number 59 on the top 250)

Directed by Darren Aronofsky (The Fountain, Requiem for a Dream, Pi)
Starring Mickey Rourke (Sin City, Nine 1/2 Weeks, Buffalo ’66)
Maria Tomei (My Cousin Vinnie, Untamed Heart, Four Rooms)
Evan Rachel Wood (Thirteen, Across the Universe, Running With Scissors)

Bathroom review: Vodaworld 19/02/2009

This may seem strange, but I find public bathrooms very interesting. Not the gross dodgy ones in a pub somewhere, but rather the ones where people take great effort to make it convenient and nice for users. I tend to judge places by their bathrooms because you cna tell a lot from it.  So, you may see more reviews like this in future.

While the decor in the Vodaworld bathrooms (first floor) is terribly cutting edge, there is a little too much of the glass and mirrors effect for me. It’s a bright, clean totally non-dodgy bathroom, but still gives me the feeling of a carnival house of mirrors. At one stage, I got a fright because I saw myself out of the corner of my eye and thought it was someone I was about to bump into.

The decor consists of four main elements: glass, chrome/stainless steel, mirrors and white.  There is no colour there, and I kept worrying that I would walk into one of the walls.

It felt very stark and cold, like a very stylish hospital. There were many things I liked about Vodaworld, such as the parking, butI sometimes got the feeling that their designer was having a grand time until the budget wore thin and everyone sobered up.

The bathrooms stalls are also very narrow, with some (the stall I used certainly) having toilets dead centre, so they tried to squeeze a dustbin in the one side, barely smaller than the gap.

I’m not a petite girl, but I’m pretty normal and can fit in most places with ease. That’s why I got irritated when my thigh touched the side of the rubbish receptacle. I felt like Vodaworld was telling me to lose 10kgs.

Despite scoring high on cleanliness, I’m afraid Vodaworld suffers in the feel-good area.

Movie review: Seven Pounds 17/02/2009

While this is by no means the perfect movie, I went in wanting a good cry, and I got one. As anyone who has watched a movie with me knows, I cry very easily when the emotions are buzzing around. I’m a sucker for it, but I can often resist the cheap schmaltzy emotion.

So, I got a great cry in at the end. Curious looks of fellow movie-goers aside, I had a great time.

The good: it was a wonderfully emotional and pretty-to-look-at movie. There was a great deal of the intense emotion without the my-veins-have-been-ripped-out raw emotion. The music was great. There were funny, sweet, heartwarming moments. Another good point: sociologically, it’s great to see lead characters that aren’t white. Will Smith seems to be the leading man that is changing the typical predominantly white movie. There were main characters that were white, but the majority of characters weren’t. It was refreshing, and felt less cookie-cutter.

The bad: there are some unanswered questions. A lot of background and exploration of the different characters was sacrificed for scenes on the relationship between Ben Thomas (Will Smith) and Emily Posa (Rosario Dawson). Yes, their relationship was important, but she is a character new to Ben Thomas’s life, whereas his relationships with his brother and his best friend were not adequately explored. More in-depth background on these characters, and the rest of the seven that Ben was helping, would have made a larger impact at the end.

The verdict: Watch it if you’re in the mood for something emotional and not too light nor too heavy. Yes, there are cheesy bits, but it’s to be expected. It’s a romantic drama for goodness sake. But it’s not so sweet it leaves a bad taste in your mouth.

My rating: 7
IMDb’s rating: 7.6

Directed by Gabriele Muccino (The Pursuit of Happyness, L’Ultimo Baccio)
Starring Will Smith (The Pursuit of Happyness, Hancock, Independence Day) and
Rosario Dawson (Sin City, Rent, Josie and the Pussycats)

The great debate: book or movie? 14/02/2009

How many times have you heard the phrase “The book was better.”? If you’re a friend of readers, then I’m sure it’s been more than a couple of times. As someone who loves both books and movies, it’s frustrating that sometimes it feels like I have to choose. I can either enjoy the book or the movie (which ever is consumed first), but not both.

I recently read The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (via DailyLit) and I’m still looking forward to the movie and I doubt the movie will diminish my opinion. The reason being, the movie is WAY different to the story (and much longer). I can tell this from watching the trailer, and because I knew of the film first, and was excited about the film (you rock, David Fincher), I read the short story out of curiosity.

C claims he never finished The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy books because he watched the movie while still reading the book, and that ruined it for him. Things like Zaphod’s heads etc. Small inconcistencies.

I have another friend (we shall call him “Denmark”, because, well, that’s actually what we call him) who refuses to watch a movie unless he’s read the book. Or, if he watched the film first, he won’t read the book at all. So for him, it’s about priorities. If it’s not his kind of book (like Benjamin Button), he can take it or leave it, and enjoy the movie.

I prefer reading the book first, but with some, I just don’t care. I hear Slumdog Millionaire is based on a book. I may read the book one day, I may not. But wild horses couldn’t keep me from watching that movie.

Does it depend on what is more important to you? Do you have to pick a favourite in your love triangle with books and their adaptations?

I am slowly and sadly resigning myself to the conclusion that there just is no right or wrong (how many arguments end this way?). I give two examples:

Before watching A Clockwork Orange, I read the book, frequently paging to the glossary at the back. In the movie, there was no glossary. So reading the book first helped me understand the movie better. And, often, having read the book helps one understand the characters and their motivations so that you don’t feel lost. Which frequently happens if you are not familiar with the source material.

However, I watched One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest before reading the book. This allowed me to be surprised by the ending in the movie, which is not a surprise in the book.

Perhaps it’s also a prestige issue. If David Fincher takes some short story which is not nearly as famous as The Great Gatsby, but turns it into an Oscar nominated movie, is that somehow okay? But if some unknown director decides to take a much loved book and try to turn a profit on the book’s success, is that less okay? Surely it’s all done for profit and prestige.

Is this true for any movie based on something else? What about movies based on graphic novels? Epic poems? TV shows? Games? Other movies?

So my conclusion is, I suppose, that it depends on the situation. A cop out, I know. But I do lean toward reading the book first, if I have the opportunity to, because then I would catch all those references in the movie. So for a richer experience, I think the book is better. Just learn to not judge the movie by the standards of the book.

So, if you’re sitting in a darkened movie theatre one day and as the credits roll up you hear a whisper “The book was better, but this was good too.” That may just be me.

DVD review: Leatherheads 12/02/2009

Dear ol’ George Clooney. When did your directing become so… Coen-esque? This quirky movie set in the 1920s reminded me a little too much of The Hudsucker Proxy. Which, I’m afraid, is better. The premise is the same: sassy go-getter journalist (in this case, Renee Zellweger) is sent to investigate naïve young man (John Krasinski), and in the end, her feelings get in the way.

In this case, it’s sports rather than the invention of the hula hoop, and she doesn’t fall in love with the naïve young man but… it’s a bit similar for my taste.

Still a fun movie though, if you suspend the comparison with the Coen brothers. I know nothing about American football, but the movie wasn’t really heavily focused on that, and the old-timey backdrop is quaint.

So all in all, fun to watch, and quirky and quaint and light. But I’m afraid, George, you are no match for the Coens.

My rating…  6.5
IMDb’s rating… 6.2

Directed by George Clooney (Good Night, and Good Luck., Confessions of a Dangerous Mind)
Starring George Clooney (Ocean’s 11, Batman & Robin, ER) as Jimmy “Dodge” Connelly
Renee Zellweger (Jerry Maguire, Bridget Jones’s Diary, Miss Potter) as Lexie Littleton
and John Krasinski (Jarhead, The Office, License to Wed) as Carter Rutherford

Movie review: Frost/Nixon 10/02/2009

My, my, but Ron Howard enjoys his based-on-a-true-story movies. The director has an impressive filmography, but seems to win the most acclaim for movies like Apollo 13 and A Beautiful Mind, the second of which won some Oscars. Frost/Nixon, too, has been nominated for an Oscar, but we’ll see how that pans out on the 22nd.

Back to the review. The casting and acting was impeccable, the faux documentary style was engaging but… there was just something missing. The film didn’t absorb me. I just didn’t get lost in the film, which is my favourite part. Many will probably disagree with me, as more than 11 000 people have voted it into the IMDb top 250.

One of my biggest gripes is the trailer. As always, not only did it give everything away (like the climax) but it was also misleading. In the trailer, it seems like David Frost always has the upper hand and causes drama and blindsides Richard Nixon from the beginning. This is not so. Nixon has the upper hand for most of the film.

Watch it, but because the hype has over inflated it, don’t expect to be blown away. But expect a satisfying political movie, well acted and directed.

My rating… 7.2
IMDb’s rating…8.1

Directed by Ron Howard (A Beautiful Mind, Apollo 13, The Da Vinci Code)
Starring Michael Sheen (Blood Diamond, The Queen, Underworld) as David Frost
and Frank Langella (Superman Returns, Good Night and Good Luck, Masters of the Universe) as Richard Nixon