Monthly Archives: December 2005

King Kong

★ Posted on at 09:50 pm ★

Just watched Kong.

Peter Jackson can really make movies. Perhaps what was so stunning about the movie was that it seemed almost real most of the time (except for the parts where Naomi Watts still looks so sparkly even after being dragged halfway across an uninhabited island). King Kong was immaculately portrayed on the big screen and almost seemed real. He is every bit as believable as Gollum was, showing that WETA has just as much prowess in digital effects as ILM does. Which brings me to the stark differences in style between Star Wars and King Kong, where the former tries to put in as much detail as possible while the latter film has the effects and there is a lot of blurring in the motion. King Kong has a lot of aerial shots, and this works very well on the silver screen because of the wide angle format used.

Effects aside, Naomi Watts should be nominated for an Oscar. The point is she can act beside an imaginery ape, and she has 101 types of expressions, from happy to sad, you believe that she actually feels for King Kong (which is quite touching in a way). On the other hand, Jack Black is and has been the same in every other movie I’ve seen him in. A little toned down on the language and expressions, but you get the idea it’s him. There were some undeveloped characters, which can’t be helped when the movie is this ‘short’. Which brings me to another lament of the film. Although it’s no good to rush through a movie, some scenes were a little dragged out. Some highlighted the technical impressiveness of how the film was shot, some were there without any reason.

Overall a good film, maybe a little predictable towards the end, but you can roughly guess what happens to King Kong. Just feel that there isn’t the emotional impact that was there when I watched the ending for Return of the King. There are other things that I can add about the film, like how the whole musical score for the movie was made without Peter Jackson even meeting the composer (forgot his name). Everything was done via high speed connections, sending footage and musical recordings back and forth in real time so that both parties could collaborate on it. Heh, modern films are amazing, with all the logistics and coordination, it’s amazing they ever get started to begin with, let alone get finished and released to the world.

Dullness

★ Posted on at 08:25 pm ★

There is a dullness that is settling in. I feel a little on the numb end.

I did a good day’s work today. My colleagues appreciate the work I do, and I am efficient in that manner, always reliable and up to the task. I work on my attitude, my character, and try to build myself to be dependable. It makes me what other people want me to be. When I try to be myself, maybe I portray an egotistical person who thinks he’s better than everyone else. Maybe sometimes I like the efficiency about things, and there is little human emotion in efficacy.

It has always been a fine line to me, whether being altruistic really meant being self centred. It is a certain point of view, that to fuel one own’s desire to do good, that one unselfishly gives themselves away to seek the better good for everyone else. You could argue that by doing as such, you would deny those who would be close to you to be a part of you. Maybe not sharing yourself wholeheartedly to someone else, be it family or friends, would you be considered equally selfish?

Does it seem to always be about me? Of how I feel or what I want? You strive to give just to feel good about yourself. Is it really perceived as such? I don’t know, it’s one of those shades of gray you can’t even be sure if it’s black or just shadows deceiving you.

I try at times I really do. I still stumble at best with certain things. The only difference I do not want to suffer the vicious cycle of recurring themes. If it is a problem, you face and fix it. As much as I have a stubborness against change, I can wholeheartedly embrace it as a whole. It’s a complex paradox.

Basic Maths

★ Posted on at 03:36 pm ★

Heh, even a primary school kid can tell you it won’t fit (I’d digress from kindergarten kids who have learnt basic math, but they haven’t learnt how to solve word questions involving math until they turn 7).

Bought a 58mm tamp for my 57mm portafilter in the hopes that maybe their measurements are slightly off so it might fit. These are precision instruments, and I expected it to fit? 58mm – 57mm = 1mm, and I expected it to fit? Dumb boy, now you have to go back to the shop and exchange it.

Logic says one thing, so does experience and reasoning. Somehow, sometimes, we think we can win through with luck. Well, the 57mm portafilter fitting a 58mm tamp is not one of those things.