Fahrenheit 911

Much has been made about this movie and the publicity it has gathered from Michael Moore's skillful handling of Disney's attempts to not have it shown during election year. This has ensured that people will watch this movie, although it is yet to be seen if the people it tries to persuade will actually give it a chance.

Although supporters will call Fahrenheit 911 a documentary and detractors, propaganda, the truth is that it is one side of a debate on something Moore feels strongly about: the suitability of George Bush as president and the nature of the war in Iraq. Michael Moore has been accused of twisting facts to serve his truth, but I don't think he has ever told an outright lie. His arguments have merits that should be addressed, not dismissed.

Michael Moore's assertion is this: George W. Bush, the 41st and current President of the United States, is not fit for his job and that the war in Iraq is an opportunity taken to enrich his and his friends' coffers rather than a genuine attempt to protect the American way and its public.

He implies Bush would not have become President if it wasn't for the help of supporters in high-up places that undermined the democratic process. And he has friends in high places, all the way from the Governor of Florida to the 'bin Laden' family (yes, that 'bin Laden') in Saudi Arabia.

When the events of 11 September 2001 took place, the Bush administration was quick to link these events with the regime in Iraq. The army moved in and quickly made ground in Afganistan and Iraq. "Mission: Accomplished" read the banner, and the contractors started moving in. The contractors who had links to those high up in the government, that is.

I've summarised a lot of what happens in the film . Moore show more than what I've said. But what is impressive is the way he has said it.

Those of you who have watched any of Moore's previous work on TV and film would have been impressed by the passion he has about his causes and the humour he infuses in his work. Sometimes the comedy comes across as levity, and it doesn't help that he favours hollywood-style editing to make a message bigger than its source.

However, Fahrenheit 911 is a serious film, much more serious than Bowling for Columbine or Roger and Me. It's as if Moore is saying, "Look, joking aside, this is a serious message I want to send". There are fewer obvious cheap shots and the documentary is at its best when the subjects do the talking: George Bush with his "Fool me once, shame on, err..." quote, soldiers when they enthuse about being able to hook their CD player into an Abrahm's intercomm and fire live ammo to rock music, other soldiers who gripe that contractors who drive trucks make four times as much as they do, and most emotionally, fathers and mothers who wail against their liberators while holding the bodies of their children killed by American bombs.

Movies are meant to be entertaining but this one has a very serious message indeed.

Cheryl Samad's Home Featured in The Star

OKAY, I don't really get this fascination for celebrity homes. Perhaps it's got something to do with the fact that my home looks more like an alien nest of paper, wire and books and the only way it would ever make the pages of The Star is if some devious crime took place there. But anyway, since Cheryl Samad is one of the stars of Table For Two (remember, 7pm on Saturdays on TV3) and there is a plug on the show in the article and there's a neat picture of her, I am linking to the relevant news article.

Table for Two: Episode 2 notes

Episode 2 aired last night and, well, I thought it was pretty good. 'Exceeded Expectations' would be the phrase to use. Anyway, here is the list of ten thoughts about the show:

1. Am I the only one that thinks that Pete (played by Soo Kui Jien)keeps looking like a deer? That's caught in the headlights? Of an oncoming truck?


2. "You don't know her handphone number? That's like forgetting her birthday, man." Melissa's birthday is 19 March 1980. Azizan's birthday is 17 May 1973. Just in case you wanted to know.


3. The girl who played the angry girlfriend in the coffee shop who threw water over her boyfriend was played by Haryati Hamzah. She is one of the winners of the audition competition organised by Ponds in conjunction with the series.


4. "Sue, I'm sure he still loves you. It's just that guys have an attention span of a goldfish." If that's true, it's frightening, since goldfish have an attention span of about three seconds.


5. Note that only trendy Sue has an iMac on her desk in the office. Everybody else has little beige PC boxes.


6. "Rita, could you get the number for ID designs for me. I'll be out for a while." The number given to Adam for Sue's office is a 7-digit number beginning with '272. '272' (now '2272') numbers are allocated to phones in Brickfields, which is very near Plaza Pantai, which is where the set for Sue's office is located.


7. "She wrote this down when I first asked her out."The movie ticket with Sue's number on it is dated 26/03 and is for a showing of Scooby Doo 2 at GSC Mid-Valley Megamall.


8. "So you want to show me what you've done so far? See if you're in the right direction?" The doodles that you see Sue doing are probably really Melissa's scribbles, so graphologists out there can have a field day analysing her.


9. "You know that Starbucks, just downstairs from your office?" You shouldn't be surprised to see a Starbucks in a Popiah Productions show. Producer and director Ping Ho has been known to write scripts and hold meetings at Starbucks.


10. Both Aroma's and the new wing of 1 Utama are featured again.

Well, episode 3 will air next week and it'll be all about parents and fish head curry restaurants.

Labels: tv

Table for Two: Episode 2 tonight

Just a heads-up that the second episode of Table for Two is due tonight. The synopsis is: A case of a lost handphone and number leads Sue to suspect that Adam is having an affair. I don't know much about the episode, really.

The ratings for last week are now up on the TV3 website. Unfortunately Table for Two is nowhere to be seen. Depending on which category it's in, it could mean that it got less than 453,000 viewers (still not necessarily bad) or less than 34,000 viewers (less good).

Incidentally, Malaysian Idol received 50,000 for the TV3 repeat on Sunday. Phua Chu Kang brought in 47,000.

Top rated show was 999 with 3.182 million viewers.

Labels: tv

Pollution figures will give a "grim picture of Malaysia"

Malaysia said air pollution figures would remain a state secret due to fears the economy would be hurt by revealing how much smog from neighbouring Indonesia had blanketed parts of the country.

"The only problem is that it gets distorted by the international media. It then gives a grim picture of Malaysia," deputy prime minister Najib Razak said Thursday.

"Malaysia fears providing pollution figures amid haze will hurt economy", Channel NewsAsia, 24 June 2004

And saying stuff like this doesn't?

Is TV entertainment or... what?

There are too many television and radio stations in the country now, said Information Minister Datuk Paduka Abdul Kadir Sheikh Fadzir.

He said the ministry was discussing with the Energy, Water and Communications Ministry on whether there was a need to stop issuing licences for private television and radio stations.

"If the competition is too stiff, they will tend be more concerned about making money and forget their responsibilities," he added.

Kadir also said that private television stations were not broadcasting enough programmes that promoted family values, peace and unity among Malaysians.

"The stations are more concerned about competing to screen imported films to attract viewers and increase revenue."

"Kadir: Too many TV and radio stations", The Star, 23 June 2004

It boggles my simple brain. I want to rant about this but I'm not sure where to begin. There is a danger that I will ramble.

How about, "Yes, a private company does try to make money"?

Or "Like you have guidelines as to what are 'family values, peace and unity'?"

Or "No s*** Sherlock - imported films are attracting viewers and increasing revenue"?

It isn't even necessarily true that Malaysians are obsessed with foreign programming. According to the ratings:


Maybe what annoys me is this: Television in Malaysia is already regulated. The Government decides to whom and when licenses will be issued. These presumably come with conditions, along with the right to revoke licenses if these conditions are not met or broken. We already have censorship boards. And all it takes to close down an entire production is a single letter of complaint in a newspaper.

I believe that "their responsibility" isn't specifically to safeguard the morality of Malaysians. I believe their primary responsibility is to make a profit. It is assumed that they will not make a profit if whatever they air isn't watched. I don't want TV companies determining what I should be able to watch. I decide what I want to watch.

There is no need for a single politician to supplant both legislative frameworks and market forces or, more importantly, my personal judgement.

Worse, there is a danger that a threat with non-specific triggers makes people less likely to take risks. What exactly are programmes that promote "family values, peace and unity"?

I like greater competition. Competition means that companies try harder to out-do one another and should result in higher quality shows and hopefully, more innovation. Of course, there is the problem of lowest common denominator (think "midget wrestlers") but it's clear that there will be no pressure to improve without competition. The reward for this is greater profits.

Yet, drawing boundaries as to what can or cannot be shown limits the amount of innovation possible.

Rant over, I guess.

Labels: tv

Penang Reading Celebration 2004: Update

Quick update on the Penang Reading Celebration 2004 and its events:

• Lat and Karim Raslan are confirmed to appear. Lat will host a dialogue on 7 July 2004 at the Penang State Library at Scotland Road after the launch of the Celebration.


• Karim Raslan will talk about his travels throughout South East Asia and Indonesia during the recent elections on 9 July 2004 at The Bookshop, Penang.


• There will be numerous events for children and teenagers: Storytelling sessions, drawing competitions, lightning maths competition, poetry workshops, and English Literature workshops. There will also be a talk conducted by Dr Irene Lee and Sherine Selvarajah on how children learn to read and what to do in case of reading difficulties.


• Also scheduled is a talk by Dr Henry Barlow titled "Lady Swettenham's Revenge". Dr Barlow is the author of Swettenham. No, I don't know what the talk is s about either, you'll have to drop by and listen!

More information can be found on The Bookshop's website.

New MSC stamps - But no Smart Schools!

Just saw the designs for the new series of Malaysian stamps titled Multimedia Super Corridor and, well... don't mean to sound fussy, but I see no sign of the Smart School project on it whatsoever.

Telehealth is represented, and so is the Multi-Purpose Card project, but nothing on the other two (Smart School and E-Government). I suppose you could attribute some of the pictures being Smart School-ish and E-Government-ish, but... I don't think so.

Ya-lah. When you're out of the limelight it's easy to be forgotten. *sniff*

Malaysian Idol: Whinging about whingers

There is a discussion titled "Complains everywhere!!!! NO PROFESIONAL JUDGEMENT" on the Bluehyppo/Malaysian Idol discussion board. Basically some people are upset (others are very upset) that there is a pre-audition round and not all the contestants meet Paul/Roslan/Jee. Words like "unfair" are being used. The crux of the complaint is that bad singers are getting through the pre-audtition and good singers are not.

How do I put this? Erm... STOP WHINGING. Yeah, that's right. I could add, "Life is unfair", "the world isn't Malaysian Idol" and "then do something about it already".

I think some people hold on to unreasonable expectations:

• All contestants should meet the three judges: It was announced that auditions would take place in four cities, for a total of twelve days altogether. At the last count, nearly 10,000 people auditioned for Malaysian Idol (6,000 in KL alone). If the three judges saw each of them for two minutes each, we'd be looking at about two months of auditions. You could have figured out before auditions even began that there would have been no way for the judges to meet everybody. And for those of you who say "But the judges meet everyone on American Idol", do the maths yourself: For AI3 70,000 people auditioned. Did they really meet everyone?


• They should only let good people through pre-auditions: The Idol series is entertainment. And the bad singers are funny. Entertaining, even. Given the success of this format overseas, it is unreasonable to expect people to stop doing this in Malaysia.


• If they select "bad" over "good", good singers will miss their chance to impress: The questions to ask are "How many good singers have lost out because they let bad ones through?" and "Of those singers who lost out, how many would have made it to the top 100?". My guess? The bottom 10% (of those short-listed) would have lost out to "bad" singers. And the top 20% (of those short-listed) would have been picked for the top 100. Fudging the maths a little, assuming that the bottom 10% would have been visibly worse than the top 20%, I would guess that out of everyone who auditioned (10,000), maybe 10 people or so lost out the chance to be in the top 100. 10 out of 10,000. Roughly your chances of getting 2nd prize on Magnum 4D.

Let's face it: If you're auditioining because you want to win MI, then yeah, it might seem harsh. But if you're auditioning because you want a recording contract - then this is one out of many options out there. If you're really good (good enough to win MI), then this is just a minor setback, and put into perspective of the sweat and tears involved, it's nothing.

Stop whinging.

Labels: tv

Malaysian Idol: Kuching Auditions

I watched AH-HA the other night and I watched Malaysian Idol today. And, honestly, I laugh much harder during Malaysian Idol. As I've always said, my favourite bits of the Idol programs are the auditions, when people who are so sure they can sing come and fail. Just fail.

Amongst the quotes from the Kuching show:

Paul: It was amazing. Not one single note was right... Please, don't sing. You're beautiful, but don't sing.

Roslan (after telling a guy he was no good): Tapi awak menyanyi tu lagi bagus dari Anuar Zain.

Paul (mouthed when that KK girl hit the high bit of Emotions): Oh Shit!

Paul: You're shouting, you're not singing.
...
Thalia: I can sing another song. Maybe this shouting song is not good for me.

Paul: You were in Penang, weren't you?
Julian: I was hoping you wouldn't recognise me.

Roslan: Laki-laki ke perempuan ni... Lelaki? Macam perempuan.
...
Roslan: I'm looking and hearing at a singer, who looks like a girl, but sounds like a boy... I think you are the most beautiful contestant we've had.
Paul: Take it as a compliment.

Contestant (when told he was bad): Lama sangat tunggu
...
Fauziah (finally showing a little fire): Then why are you still waiting... Kalau dah lama tunggu kenapa tunggu lagi?... Tak patut cakap macam tu...
...
Roslan: Walau bagaimanapun apa yang awak nyanyi tadi tidak bagus
Paul: So it's a 'no', is it?
Roslan: Yes. In English... the meaning is "no".

The show is actually shaping up well. Roslan Aziz is less annoying than in the first episode (perhaps I should say, "better edited"). There are some really talented people out there (both the girls who have sung Alicia Keys come to mind). And, darn it, it's entertaining.

Labels: tv

Table for Two - Pilot episode debuts on TV3

Just caught the debut of T42 on TV3. Well, it's OK-lah. I mean, I had a pretty good idea of how it'd turn out and I liked some of the more 'touching' moments, but I'd have preferred more 'funny' bits.

Anyway, ten things about the episode:

1. The lead-in to the show was a Chinese-language variety program. Don't know if there'll be much spill-over.


2. The 'Next on TV3' sign said "Pond Table For Two". OK, missing an aprotophe-s or a verb, not such a great thing.


3. The people featured in the photos in the title sequence are real-life couples. I think Ping said that one of them was his kuey teow vendor.


4. Both Sue's and Adam's are locations in a Bangsar condominium. Yes, they rented a pair of apartments for a few months, redecorated it and made it real (to the extent that people actually sometimes bunked the night there).


5. Despite the brandname-dropping in the choosing-a-restaurant scene (Bombay Palace, Burger King), I think neither of them were sponsored. And personally, I don't see how going to Burger King is that much less cheap than going to a food court.


6. Incidentally, the food court was Aroma's in 1 Utama. Or whatever that new wing is called.


7. The only way that Manchester Utd and Arsenal could play on a Thursday is if the FA made some sort of special dispensation or it actually was an early morning Champions League game (for us Malaysians). In short, impossible. Of course, I pointed this out, but does anyone listen to a writer? Nah.


8. When Sue was working out in the health club complaining about boys and football, the people in the background were film crew. I guess the best way to make it on TV is to apply to be a lowly-paid gofer with a production company.


9. Note that Sue puts as Sue is putting on Pond's makeup, she decides not to answer Adam's phone call. Current Pond's Placement Points for the series: 1.


10. If you want to take part in the SMS competition, but missed the details, send the word 'PONDS' to 39330. What you'll get back is a message saying "Purchase POND's products & retain receipt for unlimited entries" as well as a question. Which is extremely easy, so I won't even bother to print it here with the answer.

Labels: tv

Article in Utusan Malaysia about Table for Two

Utusan Malaysia published an article about Table for Two. Nothing very new in here, but there is an previously unpublished picture.

Labels: tv

NOUS SOMMES DESOLES QUE NOTRE PRESIDENT SOIT UN IDIOT. NOUS N'AVONS PAS VOTE POUR LUI

Some models of bags manufactured by a company named TOM BIHN carry the following on the 'washing instructions' label:

... DO NOT BLEACH
DO NOT MACHINE DRY
DO NOT IRON
---
LAVER A LA MAIN A L'EAU TIEDE
SAVON DOUX
ENTENDRE POUR SECHER
NE PAS JAVERLISSER
NE PAS SECHER A LA MACHINE
NE PAS REPASSER
NOUS SOMMES DESOLES QUE
NOTRE PRESIDENT SOIT UN IDIOT
NOUS N'AVONS PAS VOTE POUR LUI

It's the last three lines which are interesting. If your French isn't up to scratch, what it says is, "We are sorry that our president is an idiot. We didn't vote for him.".

More at snopes.com.

Table for Two Press Release Kit Thingamajiggy

Hah. A copy of the press release kit for T42 made it's way to my grubby little hands. I took the liberty of scanning some of them in:

• An introduction to the series (639 KB)


• More about the filmakers and actors (352 KB)


• The characters' bios in higher res (302 KB)

There was more stuff, but they were kinda boring so I didn't bother scanning them in.

Labels: tv

Penang Reading Celebration 2004!

In conjunction with National Reading Month, The Bookshop will be hosting a series of reading events in July.

As posted earlier, highlights include talks by Lat and Karim Raslan, as well as Dato' Henry Barlow, Lucille Das, Dr. Irene Lee, Dr. Wong Soak Khoon and an 'interactive play reading' with Cape Poetics.

Gmail is too creepy?

Is Google moving into that realm previously dominated by Microsoft? I'm talking about that area of they're-so-big-they're-creepy-and-I-don't-trust-them.

Well, the folks that run www.gmail-is-too-creepy.com certainly think so. They have a series of arguments which I admit are mostly correct, and yet I don't quite agree with their conclusions. Their stand is that you shouldn't send email to people with a GMail addres because you don't know what will happen to your email.

They say, I say:

• Gmail is nearly immortal: Because their large storage space discourages deleting messages, email will be on their servers kept almost for perpetuity. This is actually a selling point for Gmail. By saying that this is a Bad Thing, you are actually, in principle, against any form of owner-identified data kept on a public access network.


• Google's policies do not apply: The scope of Google's privacy policies are under debate - for example, do they adequately cover people who are sending email to Gmail? I believe that again, the problem exists for most Internet email providers. Why doesn't the same argument apply for Hotmail or Yahoo? Or perhaps he's saying it does.


• A massive potential for abuse: Because it's likely that a large (nay, ginormous) number of people will use GMail, data mining will be a temptation for the Powers That Be. I will admit that this is a risk. And we haven't pulled Orkut into the picture yet (which Google is associated with).
  
• Inappropriate ad matching: Because a computer, not a human, determines what ads are run, you run the risk of viewing inappopriate ads. All I can say is this: Yeah, mistakes will be made - live with it.

Different humans, different rights?

Public interest groups should take into account a country's historical, socio-economic and political situation when discussing human rights issues, Deputy Internal Security Minister Chia Kwang Chye said.

This was because different countries have different backgrounds and the implementation of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights differed from one country to another, he said.
The Star, "Chia speaks on human rights, ISA", 15 June 2004

Does that mean that the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights isn't so universal after all? If two different nations can implement an ammendment differently, what's there to stop a country from implementing it's own version of 'Human Rights'?

But hang on. Let's look at some examples. How about same-sex marriage? Should a person be allowed to marry anyone they choose, even if that someone is of the same sex? After all, article 16 says "Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family.", and article 2 says, "Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.". If so, does this mean that if a country has laws prohibiting same-sex marriage, then that country is violating some tenet of human rights?

Yet, there are countries that allow same-sex marriage and some that clearly don't and both sets would claim that they do adhere to the Declaration.

How about another example? Article 18 states that, "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.".

Does this mean that punishing apostasy with a death sentence is against freedom of religion, and thus human rights?

Some countries do, some countries don't. (For two views on the matter, see this and this.)

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights does not exist in isolation. I believe it isn't so much an article of compulsion as it is a set of guiding principles.

What is important is that people do not avoid debate by arguing "That one their culture and values. Ours different one.". The reasons for and against a certain interpretation of the articles needs to be open and transparent. This is why I disagree with another statement the good Deputy Minister made:

Asked about Gerakan’s stand on the Internal Security Act, Chia replied that the party supported the policy, which had been agreed upon by the Barisan Nasional. However, he added that it did not mean there was no need for reviews and improvements once a policy was adopted. "Discussions could still be carried out in closed-door sessions and private conversations."

TV3 listing for Table for Two

OK, not meaning to get too upset, but... THE TV3 WEBSITE DOESN'T LIST TABLE FOR TWO IN THE PROGRAM SCHEDULE FOR THIS SATURDAY!!!

Idiots.

UPDATE: I don't ******* believe it! Astro's TV3 listing doesn't have T42 either! A Robbie Williams Special?

Just for the record, AFAIK, T42 is on TV3, Saturdays, 7pm. It will compete directly (I assume) with Jejak on RTM, Crayon Shin Chan on NTV7, World's Scariest Explosion on AXN, Riverworld, Hysteria: The Def Leppard Story, My Big Fat Greek Wedding, on channels 40-42 and Xena: Warrior Princess on Star TV.

In other words, the only thing that people who watch Table For Two would watch in that time slot is Table For Two. Well, except for that big fat Greek thing. But that'll repeat, 'kay?

Labels: tv

Italy 0 - 0 Denmark

Forza Italia! They have the best defenders in the tournament, and you know that the best defence is going to win Euro 2004, don't you? Look at that back line: Cannavaro, Nesta, Panucci. Incredible players.

What's that? No point having the best defenders in the world if the midfield doesn't do it's job? Hah. Look at their opening game against Denmark. The back line, together with Buffon single-handedly held off wave after wave of attack without an ounce of help from any of their five midfielders.

More...

Sneaking around the Malaysian Idol audition waiting room

I was in Berjaya Times Square again on Saturday and took a quick peek into the Malaysian Idol waiting room. They were still doing auditions, but since they were recalls, there were no crowds and practically no security. E and I just walked in and sat amongst waiting auditionees, their friends and family.

If any of you ave the chance to walk in (perhps security is better outside Kuala Lumpur), these are some of the few free things you can pick up: A copy of the Malay Mail, sneak peeks as people practice for their turn, tins of coca-cola, TMNet hand fans, BlueHyppo temporary tattoos, copies of release forms and chairs to sit on.

The release forms were interesting because if you signed them, you effectively gave up your life to 8TV. Well, actually, it basically said that anything you did belonged to them (presumably, including any songs you might sing), you couldn't say or do anything bad and 8TV had final say on what was shown on TV, and if it made you look like a selfish evil b**tard, tough. Completely pro-8TV, completely expected, probably worth it for a shot at a recording contact.

I wonder what would happen if you put down the wrong name on the consent form.

While we were there, they called some of the contestents up to audition, including friends and family. I wanted to join in as an imaginary friend, but E didn't want to. Good choice too, since I think later they wanted to identify which friend went with which contestant.

We went upstairs nonetheless, and stood outside the security rope. Fortunately Jien happened to be there and thankfully he remembered me from the Table For Two shooting. We chatted for awhile - Jien said that the overall quality of performers from KL was higher than Penang, but that he could think of two from Penang that he felt had a good chance of going all the way. He also said that he thought the judges had dropped some good singers, probably because they could only shortlist 100-120 people for the next round. So, if you auditioned and didn't make it, it doesn't necessarily mean that you couldn't sing - it's as much luck as talent.

Finally, he confirmed that the format closely followed American Idol's, with the hundred cut down to thirty or so before public voting begins.

And If you look closely, Jien has begun to cultivate a little chin fuzz - he said the beard's a normal thing, but that he couldn't keep one when hosting shows for Disney. Pop Quiz: How many Disney animated heroes have beards?

Labels: tv

Sunday Mail article on Table for Two

Whoah. The Sunday Mail published an article on Azizan and Melissa, Harian Metro also had an article, and I received 30 hits on Sunday. A quick check on referrals showed lots of searches on "Melissa Maureen", "TV3" and "Table for Two".

OK, so thirty hits ain't so much, but it's loads more than what I usually get, and at least it means that somebody out there is interested, which means that the newspaper articles are doing their job. Excellent.

I saw the promo on TV3 and I have to admit that I was a little disappointed. Firstly, it's so short that if you blink, you miss it. Secondly, it potrays Table for Two as a romantic series, full of laughter, tears and love. Well, yes, it is that, but I would have preferred a misleading trailer full of exploding cars, scantily clad women and the Italian football team, 'cos that would have pushed the ratings waaay up there. At least for the first ten minutes of the pilot.

And I also include Harian Metro's picture just to satisfy some of the demand out there.

(N.B. The Sunday Mail article says that the Ponds ads have been out since 2001, but that's a mistake, surely?!!)

Labels: tv

Ray Charles passes away

I just heard on the news that Ray Charles has died aged 73 in Los Angeles.

Waaay back in 1994, while I was travelling across the US, I waited to board a flight in Atlanta. The way US airports arrange their waiting lounges (well, pre-September 11, anyway) is that there is one large waiting lounge with many boarding gates. Near one of the gates was a blind man reading, I swear it, a braille copy of Playboy. Or it could have just been an innocent treatise on world economics in Braille with the word 'Playboy' on the cover.

Anyway, the call for the flight was made, the blind man boarded just before me. I mentioned to the steward at the boarding gate, "You know, that guy looks like Ray Charles". He replied, "That's because he is Ray Charles".

Table for Two promos and Melissa Maureen in KLue

So I was going through my logs and I was curious why there were a large number of searches for "Melissa Maureen" and "Ponds" referring to this website. Well, it seems that KLue has a short article featuring Melissa. E thinks that it's ultra-wierd for people to search for other people on the Internet - I just say, "The Internet is a wonderful thing".

The next thing is that TV3 should be showing promos for Table for Two. I haven't seen it yet, but I've been assured by Ping that it's good (but he would say that, wouldn't he ;) ). Also, it seems that it says "Pond's Presents..." in big letters, which is a little bit at odds with the whole "subtle-in-the-background" idea of promotion.

It was pointed out to me, though, that the only time Sue (Melissa) uses Ponds products is when she's upset and she'd prefer to apply makeup instead of answering the phone. ("Unhappy? Use Pond's and ignore that idiot boyfriend of yours.")

Labels: tv

Malaysian Idol Fever!

Or at least the beginnings of it.

I dropped by Berjaya Mall yesterday hoping to see people auditioning for Malaysian Idol, but all I saw were lines, lines, lines. And a couple of strange people.

Incidentally, I'm not acutally a big Idol fan, but I do find the auditions amusing, especially people who really, really believe that they can sing well, but don't.

There are already a few websites out there with Malaysian Idol material: An MSN group, message boards and even a personal photo essay.

There are also photos from Penang and KL auditions on the official website.

And then there's the actual program on 8TV (Fridays at 8.45pm) and TV3 (Sundays at noon).

Labels: tv

More on GMail

I wrote an article awhile back about my impressions of GMail. Here's a follow-up (especially written for a sister of a friend), just to keep things up-to-date.

Here are a few more things about GMail:

• Keyboard shortcuts: Switch it on, get used to it, enjoy not having to touch your mouse ever again when using GMail. Very cool.


• In-demand invites (but a limited number): Normal members of public can't get GMail yet, but those that have accounts have a limited number of invites that they can send. Because people are keen to reserve their names, there has been a strong demand. Just look at GMail Swap, a website where you can offer gifts and services for GMail accounts. Amongst offers are: A basketball autographed by Kobe Bryant, your name on a race car, a samurai sword and 1 day of bodyguard service.


• Fairly effective spam filter: Yes, it's de rigeur now, and the one that GMail has isn't more than just a learn-as-you-label tool, but it works. In the last week, it has correctly identified ten pieces of email as spam and not let any through.

Everything else works as expected, including all the things I previously mentioned.

Lim Kok Wing University College of Creative Technology

Just read this posting complaing about the quality of services and facilities at the Lim Kok Wing University College of Creative Technology (or LKWUC) and it reminded me of this:

Is it

Lim Kok Wing University College of Creative Technology

or

Lim Kok Wing University College of Creative Technology

?

I mean, is it mean, or does this look intentionally confusing? When you apply, do you really think you're going to a University?

Of course, I know of places like University College London. And you apply to attend a college and not the university when you go to Oxford or Cambridge. But in both cases, at the end of the day, you are going to a university.

Why should it make a difference? For a start, there is a perception that a University degree is better than a college degree. And that's because the criteria of a university is usually higher. And there are laws that determine whether you can call yourself a university or not. So LKW's practice is, at best, disingenuous.

And one more thing. Lim Kok Wing is the one responsible for the recent Tak Nak anti-smoking campaign. I'm still trying to find the actual quote, but I recall a newspaper interview with the good Tan Sri that it was a 5-year campaign. At a cost of RM20 million. Per year.

Ah well. I guess the Ringgit doesn't buy what it used to.

Microsoft Kiasu

The new MS version, just for Singaporeans... ;)

Firefly on TV3!

Wow. I didn't realise that TV3 was carrying Firefly. If you're a fan of Sci-Fi shows with a brain, I would heartily recommend it. If you like smartish stories with sharp dialogue, I recommend it.

It's created and written by Joss Whedon, the man responsible for Buffy, The Vampire Slayer and shares a lot of the style. The big difference is that while Buffy is story of a girl who is a "chosen one" and has to come to terms with it, the lead character in Firefly has lost his purpose and tries to lead by his principles. Or something like that.

But I warn you - there's only a limited number of episodes. It was cancelled in the US mid-way through its first season.

And from what I'm seeing now, it looks like TV3 has split the pilot episode into two parts. Bad idea. It kind of kills the mood stopping it suddenly and then starting again. Not to mention confusing the heck out of people who only watch the second half.

Firefly, now on TV3, Tuesdays at 11pm.

Labels: tv