Joel's blog

Not so short review of "The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas" movie (2008)

Just watched the movie. I'm left literally speechless. Baffled.

"Young Bruno lives a wealthy lifestyle in Pre-war Germany along with his mother, elder sister, and army Commandant father. The family re-locate to the countryside where his father is assigned to commandeer a prison camp. A few days later, Bruno befriends another youth, strangely dressed in striped pyjamas, named Shmuel who lives behind an electrified fence. Bruno will soon find out that he is not permitted to befriend his new friend as he is a Jew, and that the neighboring yard is actually a prison camp for Jews awaiting extermination."

Written by rAjOo for IMDB

The ending scene was hard to watch. It was a scene where you feared for the worst, while disbelieving your fear because it is too devastating to be possible... only to discover that it is precisely what happens (sorry, minor spoiler here). And then the movie ends abruptly with no conclusion to console your troubled 'heart'. And so after you eventually recover from the 'shock', you are forced to come up with your own consolation as if in an useless attempt to make sense out of the insanity of it all.

I still have a lump in my throat that won't go away.

**WARNING**SPOILER**
...in WHITE, so you can only view it if you highlight the text. My advice, watch the movie first!

One thing really troubled me about the movie. In the last scene, seeing the two children 'meet their fate' really saddened me, because well, they were children - being innocent and all. But immediately then, I realized that I was not feeling any particular emotion for the rest of the innocent people who met the same fate. This isn't surprising, because they were 'strangers' to me (regrettably, it was as if they mattered less, at least in the movie), whereas I was quite acquainted with the children (they were the main characters of the movie). In reality, we do tend to (or perhaps even choose to) forget and ignore the fact that every stranger is not a stranger to everyone. Every stranger is surely connected to someone else.

Anyway it got me thinking, it's so easy to pass judgment on the Germans during the WWII - even those who were not directly involved - for being heartless and for choosing to be ignorant of the truth. But I question myself, had I been in their shoes at that time and in the same circumstances, would I have cared any more? And it scares me to think that I would perhaps have reacted in the same way. Indeed wars and its atrocities demand judgement, but perhaps more importantly, for us as individuals, it should serve as a reminder and warning of the frailty of so-called humanity. And that we should never think of ourselves as more than mere human - that we too are governed by the same weaknesses. It is therefore our responsibility to guard ourselves and those around us from succumbing to that very weakness.

There were many critiques (on IMDB) that said that the movie exploited the viewers emotions, taking them on a roller coaster ride, but stopped short on finding a purpose. I beg to differ. If this movie can cause me to question my own moralities, surely there is great substance in it. You just have stop dismantling the movie, and start digging in the right area - yourself, and how the movie has changed you.

... or maybe I'm just over analyzing, or it's that time of the night (morning) which messes around with your mind.

Eitherhow, if you've watched it, would love to hear what you thought of it. Goodnight.

Random useful information for Malaysian consumers

Found this randomly in some forum... Now, shall try and see if there's anything equivalent in Singapore:

Hi all,

Im among oldest members in Lelong, i see a lots of fraud happens in lelong here and i can see lelong have already take some action on the "Bxxxxxd" in lelong. As you all MUST know if we ever bought something that is not of good quality, we have the right to return it back and get back the money!

Legal Issue on Contract Law in Malaysia - Good for us to know

This is something I like to share with you from one of my seminar few years ago. If you find this informative, pls circulate. It was conducted by A/P Catherine Tay on Legal issues in E-commerce.

Notice that most of the time, the receipt / invoice you received from the
merchant carries this exclusion clause or similarly worded
statement: "Goods sold are not returnable" or "No refund once sold".

The thing that I have learnt from her is that : "As long as your good is
purchased for home use and not for business (i.e. to be resold), the above exclusion clause is VOID.

That means, as long as the good is defective, regardless of what is worded, you CAN get back all your money spent. You do not have to accept a repair on the good or an exchange. You CAN ask for a refund. AND you are LEGALLY right and entitled to! What a relevation!!

And most of the time the merchant will refuse to return you your money.

Her advice? From her own experience (and no less than 7 and all
successful!), she will threaten the merchant with four words: "SEE YOU IN COURT!" The court here refers to the Small Claims Tribunal Court.

However, you don't have to tell them what court! All you have to pay is
RM10 admin fee and the loser (the merchant) will have to refund you the money PLUS the admin fee! She shared this with us because she felt that even educated people are cowed by such unfair wordings.

Pls try not to let the merchant fleece you the next time you have a
defective good.

I know where to file this. On the 16th floor of Putra Place (The Mall
opposite Putra World Trade Centre). The form cost RM5.00. The
Tribunal will settle within 2 months period.

Tribunal Tuntutan Pengguna Malaysia,
Tingkat 16, Putra Place,
100, Jalan Putra,
50622 KUALA LUMPUR
Tel: 03 - 40492300 / 40424181 Fax: 03 - 40424259

Wow, so Biu-ti-pul! So X-pen-sif!

Sarawak. Chief Minister. Daughter. Relocate. Ottawa. Rich. Huge. Palace. Penan. Relocated. Shabby. Longhouse. Leader. Rich. People. Poor.

“The couple's (Taib's daughter and husband) house at 688 Manor Ave in Rockcliffe Park, completed late last year, is worth C$9,609,000 (RM28.3 million), assessors have decided,”

"MPAC's assessments are used to determine property taxes, meaning Mr. Murray and Ms. Taib will have a property tax bill of about $100,000."

Ottawa Citizen

Passed my Japanese proficiency test!

YEYEYEYEY!!! Thank God. Looking back, i still don't know how I did it. God definitely helped me. Who knows, maybe he wants me to apply for some job requiring Japanese? Thanks to T akeshi who probably prayed harder for me than I did myself, and all other ppl who prayed or supported me (although I don't think I told many ppl about me taking it).. Sounds like I got the Oscars.

How did I do?
Total: 255/400 (Passing mark is 240)
Vocab: 56%
Listening: 93%
Grammar: 53%

Was actually a bit lost during listening, surprised can still get 93%. Vocab - my command of Chinese characters is terrible which explains why i fared so badly here. Grammar - never actually studied/learned up to level 2 stuff, so most of my answers were based on what 'sounded' right. Guess I was right 53% of the time.
It was MCQ btw...

YEYEYEYEYEYEY!

Btw, to the occasional neighbour, I do update my blog rather regularly. If you're not seeing many new posts, please remember to sign in to your account since 99% of my posts are private. Cheerio

Cool video!

Different perspective of a conveyor belt sushi restaurant

Happy Chinese New Year!

DSCF4645e

Happy Chinese New Year to all me VOX readers, family and friends!

DAP made a blunder!

Lim Guan Eng was quick to point fingers at the previous Penang BN Govt for approving plans to build hotels in the Heritage Zone. But it seems like DAP isn't innocent afterall, and perhaps even the guilty one. According to Penang Gerakan Chief in this report, the previous govt had shelved a project within the inner zone because the developer did not want to reduce the height of his hotel according to new Heritage guidelines. 3 months after DAP came to power, the approved that very same project. Lim Guan Eng, Eng Eng liao... Ape macam? Let's see what excuse DAP can come up with. The way I see it, don't be too quick to point fingers (you're not the opposition anymore). Check properly first. If make blunder, then say sorry la, move on! But yea, politics never works this way. Sometimes sorry may equate to political suicide (but then again, sometimes it has a reversed effect).

What's the difference?

Background: Assume that you have a meeting in the afternoon and you're not sure what time it will end. Some friends are inviting you for dinner. You suspect that the meeting might extend till after dinner time but you're not sure. So you're rejecting their invitation. In rejecting their invitation, you can either (a) suggest that you don't want to go; or (b) suggest that you want to go but may not make it. So I'm wondering which of the following answers suit (a) and which suit (b), if you think there is a difference at all - that it really just depends on how you say it, that they each can be intepreted as suggesting (a) and/or (b).

1. I think I will not go to X.

2. I don't think I will go to X.

3. I think I will not be going to X.

4. I don't think I will be going to X.

My take:
For me, (1) implies that you are deciding not to go to X (because you don't want to). It sounds like "I think I will not go, whether or not my meeting ends early".

At first, I thought that (2) implied that you may not be able to go to X, but now that I think of it, it probably means almost the same as (1) - implying that you are making a decision not to go.

If that is the case, then perhaps (3) and (4) are similar, but differ from (1) and (2), in that (3) and (4) suggest that you want to go but because the likelihood of your meeting ending late is high, you will most probably not make it.

Apakah pendapat anda?

Winning over Sabah and Sarawak

Quite an interesting article that was published in the Sun? last year (I know... Maaflah, aku lagging sikit). Find it on the Malaysian Bar's Page here.

"Sarawak, on the other hand, seems to be fiercely autonomous even though it has given up some safeguards in the interest of unity and uniformity. But it is still the only state without a state religion.

Unlike Sabah, it was an independent state from 1842 and was recognised so by the US and Britain. It had is own flag and national anthem long before it became a British colony in 1946.

The same flag was unfurled and the same anthem sung when the state became independent again.

That perhaps explains why the proud state – the only one still without the benefit of Umno’s guidance – is trying very hard to remain autonomous."

I wonder how long more Sarawak can stay 'proud' though. Note to self: I have got to remember to work on the followup to my previous article.

Rubbish...

Mahathir's comments of his blog:

"The Government had wanted to build a modern incinerator like the ones in Japan. These Japanese incinerators are located in the residential area. They produce hardly any smoke from their very tall chimneys. The incinerator is so clean that the locals use them as their recreation area. I have never heard of the Japanese complaining against incinerators being located in their residential areas."

Malaysians don't disagree with having an incinerator - just that no one wants them in their own backyard. Malaysians are just selfish. But I guess we can't be blamed for being selfish, who isn't? But if the government really had a good reason to build the incinerator and could argue their case in the courts, then build it! But no, (if not mistaken), they backed down half way.

Malaysians also can't be blamed for not trusting the government, what with all the rampant corruption. So even if the government says the incinerator is good (and in my opinion, it really IS a much better alternative to landfills), the people may not necessarily buy it. I wonder also why can't the government build the incinerator on or near these garbage landfill locations? Surely there will be little/no protest if that were the case?

In the end, it's us Malaysians who will not benefit for the cancellation of this project (and perhaps many other initiatives that the government may have wanted to undertake). The banes of democracy - giving power to the people who do not know what is best for themselves.