The Natalie and Nadiya Anderson Fiasco

 

 

It was a firestorm of the shortest duration, but if you spend as much time as I do on the internet you pick up things pretty quickly. Recently, a YouTube clip from the show "Amazing Race" went (slightly) viral among Sri Lankans, as it featured a 3 minute interview with two Sri Lankans who were taking part in the latest season of the show. Natalie and Nadiya Anderson are twin sisters who, from what we have since gathered, were born and brought up in Sri Lanka but are American citizens who completed their secondary and tertiary education there.

The video clip has since been removed or made private, presumably from the barrage of negative comments it has since received, so I'll try to reconstruct it from memory.

The clip was basically a short on-location interview between the show's hosts and the two girls who had just won a challenge. They appear exhausted and tired, yet jubilant after completing whatever task had been set for them. The clip starts with the host asking them what they felt about the challenge and their reaction to winning it. They respond rather enthusiastically saying how they get to experience things from "the other side", and how because they are from a "privileged" family they are not exposed to this so-called 'other side' often, and what an eye-opener this was. The word "privileged" is tossed around a little bit more, as the girls painstakingly try to show they are embracing this new "street life" despite their obvious affluence.

Now, here's where things get awkward. Somehow, in their giddiness, they mention how proud their many "servants" would be of them if they could see them now. "Servants?", the host asks, not so innocently, and the girls gladly oblige, reiterating that their "servants" would be ecstatic that the girls are seeing into their world, so to speak. The host then asks (again not so innnocently) how many servants they have, and the girls answer "many", or something of the sort. If memory serves, they go on to mention that they have one for cleaning, and one for cooking, before noticing (for the first time) that the hosts are not so amused with these tales.

By this time, one of the twins seems to have caught on that they have made a colossal blunder, and she starts to try to explain that in Sri Lanka, it is quite common for people to have - yes, she says it again - servants, and then once again mentions that they are after all from a 'privileged' family, and it is the accepted norm. The girls, in an attempt to make light of the situation, then go on to tell a story of their beloved driver Premasiri, who has been in their employ since he was 14 years old. This draws an exclamation from the host, who says, "You've had a driver since he was 14 years old, before he was old enough to get a license??". The girls, again, still laughing and giggling but not as much as earlier, try to joke about it and one of them started with "Well in Sri Lanka you don't need.. " before the other sister cuts in, trying to show that they treat him like one of their own, since they've known him since he was so young.

The presenter allows for a slight pause, letting the awkward silence stretch out for a few seconds, before saying (only half-jokingly) "I don't think I should be giving you girls a millions dollars."

 

 

The girls finally catch on to where this interview has gone, and immediately get on the defensive, boldly claiming that "oh, we don't want the money, because half of it we plan on giving to our parents anyway and the other half we're donating to charity", and one sister then rather bluntly states that she works for a non-profit in Sri Lanka, alongside her mother, and that the money doesn't matter. Sadly, the damage has already been done, and when the presenter asks why they're taking part and they answer a) "to prove we can do it" and b) "to represent the 'brownie girls' of South Asia woohoo!", things couldn't have gotten worse.

The interview ends on a tame note asking if they had boyfriends waiting for them back home, to which one sister answered yes while thankfully avoiding mentioning anything about his social status or domestic help.

---

Most have ridiculed the two girls in the video, though their reasons have been varied. I personally could barely watch the video after the millionth mention of their vast array of servants, and Premasiri's child labour situation didn't help. What bothered me the most however was their complete ignorance of the politically correct way to talk about domestic help and maids. Yes, Sri Lankans do use hired help often in their households, but mentioning it in such a callous and offhand way in front of a camera crew is just unforgivable. These are not uneducated, socially awkward girls; they are self-professed "privileged" adults, exposed to both Western and local culture. Thanks to 3 minutes with them however, CBS happily captioned the video "Twins Natalie and Nadiya share with Phil how comfortable life is for them in Sri Lanka", making it sound like child labour is something every affluent Sri Lankan makes use of. The twins obvious back-tracking, with the "non-profit" employment thrown in, only made things worse for them, and no doubt made for good TV.

It seems that the YouTube video received a slew of insults, rude comments and verbal abuse before being taken down. I don't condone the insults, (and I definitely don't consider them a "national embarrassment", like this prominent news site does - ridiculous) but I do however understand the anger, or at least where it is coming from; Sri Lanka gets enough (but probably deserved) bad press internationally without having to have two giddy girls unknowingly making a mockery of the social situation at home.

 

One blogger has written a spirited defence of the twins (whom she knows personally), but while I commend her for standing up for her friends I feel she is letting that friendship cloud her judgement. I'm sure the girls are lovely, friendly, good-natured adults, but that doesn't excuse being really, really ignorant. If this were any other country, they would be releasing statements to the media clarifying their statements and apologising, but I sincerely doubt they'll do that here. Instead, they'll have to suffer in silence knowing that for a brief few hours, they were exactly who they said they were - privileged, spoilt children who hadn't seen anything outside of their little bubble, and now that they have, are still unable to comprehend it.

 

The fact that their online bio for the show states that they liken each other to Kim and Khloe Kardashian now appears rather poignant.

 

Welcome to the internet, Natalie and Nadiya. Actually, welcome to social etiquette 101. Take the punches, learn from it, and move on.

EDIT:

After reading this post with a more cool head, I realise that I may have been too harsh and not explained my thinking clearly. I get that these kind of bloopers can happen when you're in front of a camera, and no doubt the girls were only trying to express how they were enjoying themselves. They just did it in an appallingly inappropriate way. I hadn't read the comments on the clip before it was taken down, but I fear that it is highly likely they were as ridiculous and over-the-top as the Groundview status update I linked earlier in the post. I feel sorry for them having to go through that, but I hope they learned from it, and I wish them the best.

 

How Not To Be An All-Island Best Speaker

Warning: this is going to be a full on rant!

Last weekend I went for the final round of the All Island Best Speaker competition held at the Galadari. Someone I knew had taken part and had made it to the final 5, so a few of my friends went to show him our support.

The Toastmaster's club runs quite a tight ship, I must say, and I was pleasantly surprised to see that the programme started exactly on time. I literally can't remember a single time I've been to a function in Sri Lanka that ever started on time, so this was very refreshing. Our 'host' for the evening was clearly a member of the Toastmaster's club, and he spoke extremely well, throwing a few jokes in to his 'banter' before introducing us to the competition and the rules.

Basically the competition would consist of two rounds. The first round would be a prepared speech, which was meant to be 7 minutes in duration, while the second round would be an impromptu speech of at least 2 minutes, on a topic given to the contestants twenty minutes before they were to speak. As we waited for the first contestant to step to the stage, I glanced around at the crowd of 300 and couldn't help feeling like this was a much bigger deal than I initially thought it would be. Everyone was extremely well dressed, ladies in fancy dresses and the men in suits. I felt distinctly and hopelessly out of place in my neon-coloured Foo Fighters t-shirt and jeans.

First up was my friend, and he did a fantastic job of it, in my opinion. His chosen topic was about his life, and while it could have so easily turned into something boring or insincere, his speech was filled with colour and expression, yet somehow also conveyed the earnestness and honesty of someone who was speaking from a place of experience.

I can't say the same for the rest of the competition.

First of all, let me just say this: it turned out that my friend was the only competitor above the age of 25. He was also the only male, and thought technically that shouldn't have factored in to the competition, I somehow feel it did.

Contestant no.2 was a young teacher, who brought a 'prop' to the stage in the form of a single chair. As soon as she started speaking, I felt like I was transported back in time to the inter-school drama competitions. For this was not a speech, this was almost a soliloquy. Her entire speech was an exhibition in drama, as she pranced around the stage, making comical expressions at the audience when she made a joke, and basically acted out a one-woman play for us. She spoke about the 'cost of living', and tried to somehow connect her experience at the supermarket to how much we value life, while throwing in a story about an autistic child (the chair prop was for her to 'illustrate' how she sat on a bench to speak to this poor unfortunate soul). I couldn't wait for it to be over, but little did I know that the fun was just beginning.

Contestant no.3 spoke about "Man's best friend", and she too began in the shrill, theatrical voice used by her predecessor. However, with this one it was all about the hands; they went everywhere! From her face to show surprise to her waist to her sides, flapping about to show the urgency of her situation - it was just mesmerizing, and not in a good way. Her speech was terrible, somehow equating her fear of dogs, and how she ran away from one, to her fear of life, and how she avoided challenges. It was about as genuine as a Gucci bag bought in Pettah.

Contestant no.4 fared slightly better, but again her theatrical depiction of a rather mundane driving accident just did not work for me. Once again, her attempt at equating her fear of driving as some form of example regarding fear of challenges in life were just unconvincing. You hit a lamp post and it gave you an epiphany? Give me a break.

Contestant no.5 was a lot more lively, and her topic was something that easily tickled the slightly older audience - a "love affair" with her cell phone. Seven minutes of 'cute' jokes regarding her 'young and passionate affair' with her cell phone and how it disconnected her from the real world were the perfect topic to engage the somewhat elderly audience, who no doubt still think mobile phones are the devil.

By the end of the first round I was thoroughly disappointed. Here I was hoping for some really stellar oration, but instead we were sent to Dramatist's Anonymous. Perhaps my definition of a 'speech' is different from what the Toastmaster's organisation believes it to be, because in my definition, there has to be some tangible point to be given across, and that should be the focus of the speech. Instead, by the evenings end, it was clear to me that the panel and indeed the audience in general gave points for the most endearing, theatrical and dramatic performer. When the second round came around, the contestants had to give a 2 minute speech on "Love and War". My friend absolutely crashed and burned here, and I wasn't surprised; he is much more comfortable giving longer speeches where he can drive his point home. However, the remaining four did their best to make his speech look good, floundering around and doing their best to distract the judges once again with grand theatrics, stomping around the stage and trying to squeeze cheap laughter out of the audience with bizarre facial expressions.

There's a very strange misconception about what 'good English' should sound like, and it seems to have been instilled in us from our drama teachers and English teachers, who in turn have been influenced by the BBC. For some reason, we have this idea that to speak 'good' English, we have to speak with a British accent, and this was very evident during the programme; all four of the girls spoke in an identical accent! I have never been in the same room with four people that spoke that way, and it made me question why people had a problem with my Indian accent. Hey, I'm half-Indian and I lived and studied there; when were you working in the Queen's kitchen?

Bottom line: communication in this day and age is still key, despite the growth of digital media. Being able to stand in a room and deliver what you have to say is vital to success in any arena, and if we want to be successful individuals, we can't let ourselves believe that the theatrics exhibited at the All Island Best Speakers contest are necessary for that. Also, our accent and our pronunciation shouldn't need to be amputated for us to speak in a public forum. As long as we pronounce the words correctly, I don't see why we need to emulate our ancient conquerors.

Which Kind of Girlfriend Are You?

By now, Axe has made a name for itself by making a list of rather racy ads for their rather mediocre deodorants and other products. Yes, despite being just about ordinary, Axe continues to try to persuade you that you too can experience the 'Axe effect'.

So when I stumbled across this new set of advertisements for their shower gels, I was pretty surprised. No more are they trying to tell men that their products are essential for picking up random hot girls; nope, instead, their products are going to help you keep the girl.

So, ladies, which girlfriend are you?











And this one is my personal favourite - The Sporty Girl!




Enjoy!

Spare Me: 5 Annoying Things That Have Got To Stop

They say you can't have too much of a good thing. (Or do they say the opposite? I'm not exactly sure.) However, this is far from the truth, which I discovered through careful scientific experimentation. (Just the other day I almost died by chocolate overdose. It was awful, and my love for chocolate did nothing to alleviate this.) No, there is such a thing as overkill, and it is prevalent in almost everything you can find.

So as a public service, I would like to list the top 5 things that have lost their once grand appeal because of trying too hard, for too long.

1. Beyonce

Look, I get it - she's the diva of all diva's, she's the original independent woman, and the only real talent behind Destiny's Child apparently. Yes, she's a great artist, and she is married to Jay-Z, thus sealing her status in the hip-hop pantheon. She's curvy and proud of it, and is an inspiration for girls of all ages.

But enough already.

Honestly, when Beyonce went solo and started belting out these raspy old-school beat hits, it was a breath of fresh air and something so unique in the modern hip-hop scene. But it's become so repetitive, so fast. Drum beat, weird dancing, a few horns in here, something you can repeat while shouting along, ("Single ladies, single ladies...", "Lemme upgrade you, lemme upgrade you..", "Halo! Halo! Halo! Halo!", "Who run the world.. GIRLS! Who run the world.. GIRLS!", "Get me bodied, get me bodied, work your body, work your body..!"), and some awkward pictures to promote the single, usually with Beyonce contorted like a pretzel while wearing 21inch heels.

Contortionist Beyonce

Crocodile Hunter Beyonce

White Beyonce on Skates

The throwbacks have been done to death Beyonce, it's time for B to find a new beat.

2. DSLR's

Thanks to advancements in technology, professional cameras are no longer restricted to the wedding photographers and those old antique photo-studios where married couples and all the entourage vanish in to after a wedding. No, now you can own your very own DSLR, if you're willing to spend upwards of a small fortune. 24 megapixels? Yes! ISO 12800? Um, sure! DIGIC-4 image processor? I.. err.. I think so. F-3.8 to 5.6? Of course! Wait, does it come with flash?

But now we have itty-bitty teenagers, with their overly-generous parents, lugging around high-end DSLR cameras bigger than their heads so that they can take pictures of their house parties and upload all 600 of them onto Facebook. Just to justify the expense though, they take a picture of something not completely in focus and a bit off-centre and they call themselves photographers.

It has to stop. I vote the photography club of Sri Lanka issue licenses to people who are actually interested in the art of photography only, and no one else. Anyone without a license gets their DSLR confiscated and given to more deserving photographers who don't have pockets as deep as your daddy's. In exchange, you get one of these.

You're welcome!

3. 'How I Met Your Mother'

For those who haven't watched this show, the premise is simple. The narrator, in 2030, is telling his kids how he met their mother back in the 2000's. However, the narrator (Ted) never reveals to us, the audience, who the mother is, instead telling us a series of seemingly unrelated events, including all the escapades with his friends and potential love interests etc, leaving the audience wondering who this wonderful lady could be.

The first three seasons are excellent, filled with witty humour, enough intrigue to have people guessing and second-guessing the identity of the 'mother' while weighing potential scenarios where characters we liked could somehow fit the subtle clues left through each episode like breadcrumbs leading to the fabled 'mother'. Internet forums for the show were flooded with 'conspiracy' theories.

Then it started going south.

I love the whole concept of a love story in reverse, and it is true that the characters are well drawn up and are very interesting. However, HIMYM is now on it's 7th season! Yes, seven years of watching Ted get with several women, learning several things about himself and life along the way, and never quite meeting 'the one'. Seven seasons of average to above-average side stories involving the other characters who, in the grand scheme of things, the audience is not that interested in. I get how the networks wanted to stretch it out as long as they could, and it seems they have set season 8 as the final season, but for the love of all things, expecting viewers to stay engaged in this bizarre 'mystery' for seven whole years is pushing it into "Lost" territory. I predict a massive, massive let down next season.

End it. Now!


4. MBA's

"Sure, anyone can spend 3 to 4 years learning and studying under the guidance of a faculty of trained, experienced lecturers, while completing regular assignments and exams! But why have you not done a masters?"

Remember the time when getting a degree was a big deal, irrespective of what it was in? No, neither do I. That's because it was way before our time, before college degrees became as impressive as your birth certificate. Nowadays anyone can get a degree, and as a result, degrees are no longer held in as much esteem as they once were. Sure, they're enough to get you a job, in some cases. But what then? Limited or no chance of climbing the work ladder, because you've not got the magic letters after your name - MBA.

Doing an MBA used to mean you were interested in running a company, or staring your own business, or something along those lines. Now, however, every Tom, Dick and Harith is enrolled in a weekend class to get a 'speedy MBA', that is, an MBA from a 'reputed' foreign university in only a year instead of two. Without exaggeration, at the moment there are 8-10 people in my company enrolled in an MBA course. What makes it worse is that a majority of them are lost regarding their coursework, and regularly use unfair means to complete assignments, projects and even thesises.

So where does all this end? You suddenly have a load of executives, assistant and deputy managers with MBA's, all from the same place, all at the same time. So once again, prospective employers look at all these qualifications and ask you this:

"Sure, anyone can spend 20 hours every weekend for a year on classes, assignments and exams while working 5 days a week and fulfilling work obligations! But why have you not done a Ph.D?"

MBA students - if you're not genuinely interested in being a Master of business administration, then please just stop.

5. The Kolaveri Di songs

I'm not even going to bother writing a brief intro about this, because you can't possibly have not heard this song.

After taking off in India, the song went absolutely, madly viral in Asia, spawning multiple versions and takes on the song, including Punjabi versions, female 'response' versions, kid versions, rap versions, the Hitler version, even a Sinhala version which I've heard but couldn't find.

I just don't get it. Sure it's one of those songs that get stuck in your head, like every other rubbish song that you hate. But people are gushing over it, praising the musical genius behind the simplistic rhythm and lyrics. Just the other day someone in our department played it on loop for an entire day! I call people for work and the song is their caller tune! Even our telecom provider Dialog started offering it as a downloadable ringtone. Whyyyy??? Make it stop!!

Aptly, Kolaveri is supposed to roughly translate to 'murderous rage'. That is the only thing about that song I understand.

Conan The Librarian: A Movie Review

It had to happen eventually: after having "Conan The Barbarian (2011)" in my movie folder for almost a month and a half, I knew I would have to sit down and watch it sooner or later. Why did I get it in the first place? Because despite poor reviews, I always like to give movies a chance, especially if I feel the material could be used to make something surprising.

However, "Conan" was not such a movie. When the best scenes are in the first ten minutes of the movie and don't involve the main character, you have a problem on your hands. Jason Momoa plays adult Conan, a barbarian, born on the battlefield. However, despite a lot of blood being spilled and some intriguing ways of killing off people, I found his Conan to be slightly - tame.

Let's compare, shall we?

You see, when I heard that Momoa was playing Conan, I naturally assumed it would be somewhat along the lines of his depiction of Khal Drogo in the show "Game of Thrones". That's him, on the left, and as you can tell, he's a real bad-ass. For real.

Now, with a name like "Conan The Barbarian" it kinda goes without saying that you expect to see a little barbaric activity. The first ten minutes of the movie definitely lived up to those expectations. Without giving too much away, let me just say it shows a young Conan, displaying some very nasty skills. Honestly, that kid was crazy, and totally believable.

Fast forward to the adult Conan, and things just didn't hold up. Jason Momoa, while showing flashes of barbarianism (word?) did not live up to the hype generated in the trailer. While I understand how they wanted to portray Rachel Nichols character Tamara (the love interest/damsel in distress) as being tough as nails, they carried it a bit too far in my opinion. I'm okay with an 'ass-kicking babe', but talking back to one of the fiercest warriors of lore? Yeah, Conan, you got punk'd. Now go wash the dishes.

As for the rest of the movie, it was almost a joke. The movie moves through so many different cities and locations in an attempt (I assume) to portray the vastness of the landscape, but these little 5 second cut scenes with some building or temple in the background and "Mushemillah" or whatever written below were just pointless; all the places looked pretty much the same. In the end I was wondering why they even bothered.

Of course, when you have a Barbarian hero, you need an equally bad-ass villain. Enter Khalar-Zym, a dude who wants to resurrect some ancient evil so that he can a) be king over the whole world and b) bring his dead wife back to life. He is aided by his sorceress daughter, played by a very creepy/sexy (depending on your taste) goth Rose McGowan. Honestly, she was the most convincing of the cast; clearly all those years on "Charmed" paid off.

In the end of course, after establishing that Conan is a bad-ass with a good heart (and a sense of humour, unfortunately), and that Rachel Nichols is a tough but dainty princess, handy with a knife but quick to scream "CONAN!!" in terror, we have the unnecessary R-rated sex scene (yawn), the typical damsel-in-distress situation, followed by Conan to the rescue, then cue end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it scenario, people hanging off ledges about to die, walls collapsing all over the place, skulls falling down from the skies (I kid you not), and the eventual victory of our hero.

In a word, it was awful. Rachel Nichols must be wondering what she's got to do to get a good gig around here; G.I. Joe didn't do her any favours, and now this. Oh she was in "Dumb and Dumberer"? Never mind then.

Best line from the movie: Conan (to Tamara): "You look like a harlot."

Worst line from the movie: Conan: "I live, I love, I slay; I am content." - (pretty cool on paper, right? But just wait till Momoa actually says it in the movie. I've heard more emotion from Stephen Hawkins' voice box.

PS: Just a thought; why does everything have to blow up or collapse after the 'big evil' is defeated? It's always the case, the hero kills the bad guy, and as a result the big elaborate castle/structure/weapon of death just starts collapsing on itself and dying. Here, Conan rides off into the sunset and the skull shaped cave he was fighting in (again, I kid you not) just crumbles in the distance. Why, just.. why?

The Brutal Truth

The following is a small excerpt from the last episode of "House", a show I absolutely love, not so much for the quality of the episodes (which are good) but for the amazing intricacies that Hugh Laurie has managed to extract from the character over a period of 7 and a half years.

The scene begins with the entire team discussing the latest turn of events regarding a patient who needs a liver transplant. Strangely, he feels he cannot accept a liver transplant unless he tells the potential donors the truth about him, and that is he was cheating on his wife when he was struck by this 'mystery illness'. Unfortunately, when he goes to confess to his friends, he tells them that he has cheated and stolen from each one of them as well, resulting in almost all his friends who lined up to donate, leaving.

---

Chase: Telling the truth may have just cost this guy his life.

Adams: I told him to confess that he cheated, not confess every sin he's ever committed.

Park: If everyone did that, we wouldn't find a donor for anyone.

Adams: Everybody doesn't lie, cheat and steal from their friends.

Chase: Yeah they do. Maybe not as much as this guy, but if people told nothing but the truth the world would probably burn down overnight.

Adams [shrugs]: Some people think it's burning now. Maybe if everybody didn't lie...

House [joins the table]: Oh that is just cute.

Adams: [confused]

House: I'm talking about your breasts. They always get perky when you're being painfully earnest. Truth. It's uncomfortable isn't it? More truth: I only noticed because Chase was staring at them. He'll never admit it because he doesn't want to offend you, same reason he'll never tell you he's thought about having sex with you. But to be fair, every man you've ever met has thought about having sex with you. They'll lie; probably because if you knew, you wouldn't want to have sex with them. And that's just some of the lies from the last minute...

And here's a bigger one: you already know this. But you pretend you don't because it makes you feel civilized.

Most people find it easier to ignore the truth.

---

Points to ponder?



This segment of "TV Show Therapy" is brought to you by this glorious long weekend.

Captain America: The Worst Avenger

Last weekend was movie night, and the choice was between "Cowboys & Aliens From the Makers of Iron Man" (or something) and "Captain America: The First Avenger But The Last Avenger To Get A Movie". We had heard identical reviews regarding both movies, so we decided to let IMDB.com decide for us. Lo and behold, Cap' got a very respectable 7.2 while Cowboys & Aliens had a 6.5.

I had seen the trailers for the movie, and while I wasn't exactly fluent with the 'Captain America' storyline, I knew enough to get by. Basically this was going to be the last big blockbuster movie before they made the 'Avengers' movie which is scheduled for next year, and I was eager for what I was told would be a slightly 'different' superhero movie, since this would be set back in the late 1930's. Plus, Captain America is supposed to be the big daddy-O of the Avengers, the Superman of the Marvel Universe.

That being said, I haven't seen a good Superman movie since - well I've never seen a good Superman movie. I guess that in itself should have been warning enough.

Let's just say the first quarter of the movie was spent marveling at the technology we have at hand these days, technology that is able to make Chris Evans look like a scrawny 5'0" do-gooder that is thoroughly deserving of being beaten up by bullies. Set during WWII, the movie starts of with Agent Smith (Hugo Weaving) being a total badass in some Polish church, in order to retrieve some mythical and magical cube that seems completely out of place in the year 1930. Cut to Steve Rogers, a diminutive little dwarf that is frustrated that he can't seem to clear any medical exam that will allow him to enlist in the army. Such is his desire to get killed for his country that he attracts the attention of Stanly Tucci, who plays Dr. Abraham Erskine (quite easily the most memorable character in the movie). Stanley Tucci plays his part to perfection, as always, and I was sad that he didn't have a larger role in the movie.

It's every nerd's dream!

Moving swiftly along (and without giving too much away), Steve Rogers is miraculously turned into Captain America (i.e., Chris Evans in all his chiseled glory) and is promptly hit upon by Hayley Atwell, who plays Peggy Carter - a rather stern and serious looking agent for the secret army wing responsible for the Captain America project. Cue the awkward romance, the whole "I'm not used to being a Greek god so I don't know how to behave around women" charade, followed by the "Oh I'm not interested in your bulging biceps and pulsing pectorals, I'm drawn to the only remnants of your crippled former self, i.e. your heart, which just so happens to be invisible to the human eye and therefore tolerable". Needless to say, it was terribly awkward, and seemed more suited for some high school chick flick rather than (supposedly) the mother of all Marvel superhero movies.

"Why, Captain.. what a big - err - heart you have!"

I don't want to give too much away of the story, but I will say this - it was not very good. While there were some humorous moments, and some very nice action sequences, the rest of the movie seemed completely at odds with each other. The level of technology that the Germans secretly possessed was just totally out of sync with the setting, and even if this was the original story based in the comics, I feel that it's one thing to read about it in a comic book and something totally different to see it on the big screen.

To conclude, the latter part of the movie was spent predicting how the cliched story lines would end, down to the dialogues (T is my witness - I called it out flawlessly) and the ending. The final fight sequence was terrible, but the ending showed promise. However, the dialogue towards the grand finale was so pathetically stale that it robbed whatever plus points the ending would have given the movie.

As usual, there was a short scene at the end relating to the 'Avengers' movie, with Samuel L. Jackson making yet another 2 minute appearance in a movie (when is he going to get to act in an actual full length movie again?).

"I KNOW you didn't call me all the way here to wear this eye patch AGAIN for ANOTHER TWO MINUTE SHOOT..!"

 

I was so disappointed with this movie, even more than I was with Green Lantern (which I shall review later), and I'm baffled as to how it garnered a 7.2 rating on IMDB.com. Honestly, this should have been in the 5-5.9 range, and nothing more. Chris Evans does his best, but perhaps the Captain America mythology doesn't  give the writers or the actors much to work with in terms of making it 'cool' and relatable.

Let's just say I'll be rooting for Thor next year when 'Avengers' comes out. Him and Scarlett Johanssen of course.

The Internet Is Why We Can't Cure Cancer

I would just like to take this moment to reflect on the greatness of the human species.

Seriously, just sit up and give yourself a little pat on the back. Well done; and by the way, did you know you are only one of 9 species in the world that can do that^*1?

I mean, let's face it; we're pretty awesome, no matter what you're religious/non-religious leanings. Creationist? Yep, we were hand-made by God himself in His image! Darwinist? Yep, we fought our way right to the top of the food chain against ridiculous odds! Science-Fictionist? Yep, we're the descendants of a super evolved alien race whose world got destroyed by a meteor^*2! Scientologist? Yep, Tom Cruise = winning!^*3

However, we're not all cut from the same cookie cutter. While man has always been rewarded for hard work and dedication, there are some who are unaware of this simple premise. No, this new generation is the instant-coffee generation, who believe that cappuccino grows in little sachets, along with tea and Milo. They believe Macaroni comes from Kraft, that text messages can be labelled as 'documentation', and that the 'work' in 'homework' is the exercise ones fingers get form copying and pasting text off Google.

So I supposed it should come as no surprise that the latest 'innovative' way to solve our problems and save the world is Facebook.

I'm sure all of you have noticed this by now; women posting bizarre status messages that have mild sexual connotations. This phenomenon was rampant on Facebook for a while before people realised that it was actually some secret 'code' spread among the womenfolk to create awareness for breast cancer.

Seriously. This is how we're going to beat breast cancer.

Not only are these messages mildly annoying, they serve absolutely no purpose at all. And it's not like they stopped there; no, now it's moved onto child abuse as well. Apparently by changing my profile picture to a cartoon I enjoyed as a child, I'm helping spread the message. Yes, nothing says "stop abusing children!" like a picture of Voltron or Cheetara.

"Save the children!"

"Yeah, save the children!!"

Clearly, something has gone wrong somewhere. With the vast array of technology now at our disposal, how is it that we can't come up with a more interesting and engaging campaign for such a serious issue? Is it true that Google and the internet have made us dumber? So much so that our creativity and vision is now limited to what we can 'share' on a social network?

Perhaps I'm making a big deal about nothing, but it's the small issues like this that are indicative of our broader thinking. I see similar trends in technology as well - nowadays everybody wants a smartphone, and there are a multitude to choose from. While there are Apple fans, and Android nerds, and Windows Phone 7 fans, somehow I still feel that innovation has come to a standstill. Phones keep upping their specs, putting more horsepower under their hoods than really trying to improve the user experience. Today it's a 4.2 inch 1Ghz phone, tomorrow it's 4.3 inches and 1.4GHz, then it's 4.6 inches and a dual-core 1.2GHz, and next month it'll be a 5.3 inch monster that is so big you can't really consider it a phone anymore. The same goes for computing; we design software and code that is so elaborate and inefficient we need mad systems to even run them (I'm looking at you, Rockstar and you're ridiculous GTA IV engine!).

True, these are just isolated incidents and yet I can't help but feel this is a trend that is prevalent in a lot more areas if we stop and look. Yes, we've made it this far, but it looks like unless we get back to the root thinking that got us here in the first place, we may not go much further.

^*1 - Fake statistic. Sorry
^*2 - Yes, I basically stole the plot from "Mission To Mars". Sue me.
^*3 - This link is pretty much self-explanatory.

Driving Me Insane: Why Driving In Sri Lanka Is Crazy

I love driving. Always have, and I was surprised when I met some people who actually said they didn't enjoy it. I still remember when I turned 18, one of the first things I did was to ask Dad to teach me to drive. Fairy tale that this isn't, he said 'no'.

Needless to say, I was crushed. But soon he relented and sent me for driving lessons, which basically involved cramping myself into the drivers seat of those tiny mini-vans, and cruising around the lake at no greater than 40kmph. It was hopelessly monotonous; I was more likely to die from boredom than anything vehicle related, with the only 'excitement' so to speak coming from reversing into a lane that was wide enough to accommodate a small house.

(Oh did I mention my instructor was a one eyed, one legged man who had driven cabs in Germany? I kid you not; how he managed to convince anyone that he was able to teach people to drive with a wooden leg and a glass eye, God only knows.)

Long story short - I got my license, and soon I was driving. Within minutes, I discovered that nothing I learned during my so-called 'lessons' was of any use to me in the real world! Buses hurtling towards you, reckless overtaking, annoying three-wheelers, psychotic motor bikes - where were they during my tranquil rides around the Kandy lake?! And who is teaching these maniacs to drive??

So , in the interests of keeping our future generations alive just a little longer, I have listed out four things we need to teach all drivers from now on, regardless of vehicle type.

1. Bus drivers - you are not driving a Ferrari.

Somehow, bus drivers around the country are under the impression that their extremely large mode of transport is actually a small, sprightly two-seater sports car, complete with sharp cornering and precise steering. This is unfortunate, because you and I know that this is far from the truth. Yet, bus drivers around the country can be seen boldly throwing their vehicles around corners, wrestling them around other vehicles while barrelling down against the oncoming traffic, confident that their bus can somehow zip back in front before destroying the panic stricken driver headed its way.

Clearly, this needs to stop.We can't have these lumbering machines flying along our already too-narrow roads when they should be sanely chugging along in their lanes. The problem is, a bus driver, no matter how delusional and wrong, is still driving a bus! Which means it takes some guts to actually try to start something with a bus that's hurtling towards you like some metal meteor.

My solution consists of two parts. First, we train bus drivers in mini vans, around the Kandy lake, preferably with a one eyed instructor with a wooden leg. Mislead them into thinking that all buses need to be driven like this dinky 800cc Daihatsu. Brain wash them into thinking the speed limit is 39kmph. I guarantee those puppies will not only be more sane, they'll reduce the highway death toll ten fold. Part two, should part one fail? Counselling. Clearly, bus drivers are nothing more than frustrated children in adult bodies, acting out every males youthful fantasy of being able to speed in a high powered vehicle for a living. Heck, if I were a bus driver, I'd probably take refuge in that delusion too. So why not indulge them, and offer a weekly drive in a supercar around a local race track, free of cost, so they can get all their frustration out once and for all.

2. Three wheel drivers - you can't overtake on the left.

What is up with these three-wheelers? Who taught them that overtaking on the left is 'the right thing to do'? It's bad enough that driving in traffic is stressful and dangerous; now we have these multi-coloured fairies trying to mount the pavement and pass us on the left!

Dear Tuk-tuk - it can only end badly for you

It can't be just an evolved art though, because these guys have got it down to a science. First, they keep within striking distance of your vehicle, waiting for the next road block, traffic light, or any sort of blockage in the traffic. As soon as the vehicle in front starts slowing down, you can see them slowly creep towards the rear left of the vehicle. Now, given most people's impatience in these situations, the odds are that the vehicle in front will try to inch to the right, to have a peek down the road to see what's the hold up, and whether he/she can overtake. This is the three-wheel drivers moment to strike. They deftly squeeze their little death-trap on wheels into that tiny space you've so generously opened up, and as the traffic starts moving suddenly you find yourself stuck in no man's land. Your only options are to a) let him pass so you can slip behind me or b) be hung out to dry in oncoming traffic. [Option c) is to 'pull a GTA on him and ram the little maggot', but I'd never endorse that.]

Solution? Believe it or not, it's actually 'patience'. Whenever I notice one of these guys trying to pull this stunt I make sure I never give up my position behind the vehicle in front of me. If they do try to squeeze by you, never let them rejoin the line. Just stick bumper-to-bumper with the vehicle in front and watch them spaz out at you for driving legally. Totally worth it.

3. Those white lines on the road mean something.

I cannot count the number of times I have driven down a two- or three-lane road, watching the vehicle in front of me veer between lanes like it's part of some weird form of vehicular 'Pong'. Did they really think the lines painted on the road were for decorative purposes?! The two most annoying instances of this is when you're travelling quickly on the main roads, only to find that the vehicle in front of you on the right-most lane, (which is usually where the quicker vehicles travel,) is crawling. This means either you stick behind it, or switch to the next lane and get stuck behind another slow vehicle. This makes no sense to me; if you're travelling so slowly, why not just move over and let the quicker vehicles pass? But no, we're forced to pretend we're in some sort of moving maze, dodging from lane to lane to get ahead. Then of course there are those that blindly drive between both lanes, which leads drivers behind them to also break out of formation, and soon you have a disorganised mass of vehicles jostling for position on the highway.

Seriously people; the lines on the ground! Look at them!! How hard can it be to figure out what speed you want to travel at, and stick to the appropriate lane? Of course, this is something that isn't really taught in driving school here since instructors rarely, if ever, take their pupils on an actual highway to teach them these simple basics. "The highway?", they tell themselves; "Why would they ever drive on those?".

Idiots.

4. Dip your damn lights!

Driving during the day is dangerous in Sri Lanka. Driving at night is near suicidal.

Thanks to the poorly lit streets and 'highways' in the country, I can understand why people would want to use their head beams to illuminate as much of the road ahead as possible. However, doing so at the cost of the oncoming driver's eyesight is - to put it mildly - a tad insensitive.

It's bad enough that we have to contend with a) near invisible pot holes b) random pedestrians jumping on the road at the last minute and c) black dogs/cows/elephants that are invisible to the human eye at night (I swear, it's almost like they absorb light) while driving; how in the world are we supposed to drive at all when you have your lights in my eyes?? You see me flashing my headlights at you?? That isn't some friendly signal!! Take the hint and dip 'em!

I envy my dad's vehicle; he's installed super powerful fog lights on it expressly for these kind of drivers. Any time he sees an oncoming vehicle that fails to comply to these unwritten courtesies, he 'gives him a dose of his own medicine' and powers them up. Trust me, if you get caught in those you'd probably think it was the second coming and you were being raptured.

So there you have it; the top four that I could come up with. Feel free to add your own suggestions in the comments. Meanwhile, drive safely!

Challenge Accepted!

*Apparently I wrote a post in the dead of night last night in a semi-conscious state. It is somewhat lucid so I'll keep it up. Mental note - no internet after 1am.

Facebook, and the internet in general has been taken by this 30 Day Challenge fever, where everyone is posting music and movies (well fine, only me) and some have turned it into a poetry challenge and god knows what else. Then there's Cadence, who is on a 'Game Plan' to shed 14kg in a ludicrous time-frame, and then there are these GoodReads book challenges, and I AM SICK OF THESE CHALLENGES!!

Well not really, I'm just really bad at them.

My GoodReads challenge is as good as dead (I've read 2 books out of my allotted 15 book challenge. I may not reach 5) and I have decided to abandon my 30 Day Movie challenge out of sheer boredom (I watch too many movies; every question required hours of agonising and recollection). The only 'challenge' I seem to have conquered was my plan to return to regular gym work-outs, but I don't want to label that as a challenge in case I jinx the whole thing.

Despite all this, however, I have decided to take on.. another challenge.

The hardest habits to break are the ones that sort of sneak up on you when you're looking the other way. It starts off as something inconsequential, and then into something minor, then to something necessary, and before you know it you've incorporated it into daily life. Breaking these habits are hard because, really, you see no real need to do it and also because it's become so normal.

Yes, I am talking about - smileys!

I was rather alarmed when it dawned on me that I use those little faces way too often during chat conversations and text messages. It's not like I drop a punctuation mark 'face' after every sentence, but they do appear rather liberally in my conversations. Now, there are several reasons for this; one being, I use sarcasm. A lot. And in these situations, smiley faces are essential.

Sample chat statements:

Friend: Hey my girlfriend says hi!

G: She said more than that last night..

Friend: Dude.. WTF?? That's not funny!

Friend: Hey my girlfriend says hi!

G: She said more than that last night.. ;) :P :D

Friend: HAHAHA oh man, that's hilarious! You're the best friend ever..!

---

Friend2: .. and after that we're going to Galle Face. Do you know where Galle Face is?
G: No
Friend2: Really?? Oh you're from Kandy, you don't come to Colombo no??
G: No
Friend2: You really should machan, what is there in Kandy?? You spend all day in city centre no?
G: Yes
Friend2: I knew it!

Friend2: .. and after that we're going to Galle Face. Do you know where Galle Face is?
G: No :P :D
Friend2: haha just checking, okay anyway..

Also, those smileys are always useful in getting out of a sticky situation when you may have accidentally said something you weren't meant to.


Friend3: I might skip dessert, I don't want to put on any more weight u know?
G: How could you possibly put on any more weight?
Friend3: How dare you!! Are you implying that I'm.. (rant)

Friend3: I might skip dessert, I don't want to put on any more weight u know?
G: How could you possibly put on any more weight?
[realisation strikes]
G: :D :P :D
Friend3: hahahaha very funny! :P

---

As you can see, there is a distinct advantage to using them, but as I grow older I fear that I may end up being taken as seriously as a text-addicted high school kid by my peers, and that is not something that I want to happen. So, dear readers, it will be a challenge, but I am up for it! From now onwards, my use of smileys and other emoticons shall be reduce by (pause for effect) 99%!! The ground rules:

1. All emoticons with any form of punctuation mark are not allowed
2. One smile :) is allowed per chat conversation, and can be used either for a hello or goodbye, for courtesy sake
3. LOL's and haha's are allowed, as long as they are not too liberal
4. No implied smileys (such as "[smile]") or any other variant allowed.


There you go then. Lets see how long I can last in the cyberworld without my trusty icons, and feel free to join me in this quest.

If you dare...!

(Too much? Never mind..)


Cheers!

How Not To Swear In The Workplace

Stumbled onto this online, and just had to share it. I can think of a few people who could really use a list like this either pasted on their desk or permanently glued to their arm.

This may be the only time I will ever say: well done HR!


Cheers!

G

Is Today The Day The Music Died?

Music these days isn't working for me. Just the other day I spent three hours driving to Colombo while switching between Rick Dee's Weekly Top 40 and the American Top 40 radio shows, and I was really surprised at how plastic so many of the songs felt. Ke$ha almost personifies this trend; someone who can't really sing, has no real musical variety (all the songs involve getting drunk, partyin', partyin' harder, a bit of sex here, more partyin') but who knows how to make music that will play in clubs and will sell on iTunes. I'll admit, some of her stuff is catchy, but will I remember it ten years from now or request it on the 'golden oldies' show in twenty years? I don't think so.

Then there's the Black Eyed Peas, who have somehow become awful overnight. And the now-serious Linkin Park, who have recorded a song with reggae vibes. Then there's some new collaboration between Akon, Pitbull, T-Pain, Li'l Wayne, Keshia Cole, Kanye West, Keri Hilson, Timberland, Drake and Rihanna, every other week. Chris Brown singing "Yeah" not once, not twice, but "3X". Avril Lavigne telling us how all her life she's been good but now she's like, "what the hell?". I assume she had the same feelings towards actual song-writing too. Kim Kardashian singing auto-tuning something about - you guessed it - partyin'. Katy Perry with what is easily the most ridiculous set of lines strung together and labelled prose (outside of  the infamous Rebecca Black disaster), about someone's love being "extra-terrestial". (At this point I had to pull over for a minute to just scream in agony before I could resume my drive).

Normally I don't pay too much attention to lyrics, but lately with all the music that's on the charts I'm thinking that perhaps that's what is missing in music these days. Good music carries with it a message and a meaning, and you can't auto-tune or digitally add that onto a song.

Which is why I love what Jon Foreman, frontman of the band Switchfoot, did over the weekend. One of the many artists active on Twitter (I love his bio - "I play music in bands called switchfoot, and fiction family. I am grateful to be alive"), Jon asked his followers a simple question - "if you wrote a song tomorrow, what would the tune be called?"

Here is the seqence of tweets.

Click to see the full size image

Click to have a listen!

Click to check out all 125 song lyrics submitted

I thought it was a fantastic idea; so much so that if I had known about it (I was off twitter for the weekend) I may have even tried my hand at it myself.


Who knows, perhaps it's things like these that can inspire new artists to really give us some music that our generation can be proud of.

Whatever Women Can Do, Men Can Make Funner

As I write this post, I am running through all the different ways in which I can get flamed for it. No doubt you all know that today is International Women's Day, and I'm sure, unlike me, you did not realise this via the #bootyappreciationday hashtag that was trending on Twitter today. Twitter; you got issues.

Either way, the work place is a-buzz with all the activity here, since a majority of our employees and staff are women. There are posters, banners, and motivational talks during the lunch hour. I love it. I am in fact a closet semi-feminist-on-the-weekends. Many intense conversations with several lovely and opinionated women have opened my eyes to understand that yes, maybe I was wrong about some of my assumptions before. Maybe women should be allowed to drive. How else would they get the groceries?

Now, I was curious to find out why we don't celebrate the male version of this day. Turns out, much to my surprise, there actually is an International Men's Day. But after reading its purpose, I was not enthused. Surely, shouldn't Men's Day be more, well, fun? Enter my imaginary parallel universe..

I can imagine it now. As the work day starts, men enter their work places after 11am, in shorts and t-shirts, as the dress-code is repealed for a day. Sports radio is pumped on the PA system, and TV's are installed at every cooler playing old cricket/football replays. Toilet seats in all washrooms in the office are set to the upright position. Lunch comprises of every fattening unhealthy carbohydrate filled food on the planet, along with pitchers of beer. An overhead projector is set up in the conference room to play inspirational movies such as "The Godfather", "Good Fellas" and "Rambo". Charlie Sheen is invited to speak.

Of course, the ladies are not left out of the celebration. It will be customary for men to take their spouses and/or girlfriends to dinner and dancing, but not before they have taken him to his favourite electronics and sports stores, where he can spend hours deciding between Blu-ray and 3D support,  48" inch plasma or LCD, Man U or Barcelona, trainers or basketball kicks. Also, it is customary that all stores and restaurants refuse to accept credit cards from male patrons, and furthermore, men get into clubs free for the night while women have to pay cover.

What can I say, dear readers: I have a dream.

Now, please rise for the Anthem of Manhood.

note: To you readers who think this is written in seriousness - well, sucks to be you

Evolution And Eating

What is it about growing up that makes us increasingly more rebellious towards our parents? It's a tale as old as time; child grows up as the darling of the family before puberty triggers repressed rebellion he/she never even knew he/she had (this is however not applicable to kids without siblings; they're 9 times out of 10 forever ensconced in their parents collective womb bosom).


Why is this though? Is it some remnant of evolution, wherein we are genetically programmed to not function with our parents to ensure we leave the nest/hive/tree once we become adults?


As much as I love my quirky and semi-dysfunctional family, recently there are certain activities that I can only get through if I bite my tongue into submission or if I trick myself into thinking it's some form of survival test. Chief among these is the dreaded 'family meal out'. Please, join me, as we run through one together.


1. Where?

The first hurdle is always: where to eat. This is usually preceded by the "shall we have dinner/lunch out?" argument, where both parents argue about whether to do it or not, and whether there is food in the fridge that "needs to be finished first". Of course, since that argument usually ends in a stalemate, the two sons are involved, and as usual, we don't really care either way. Somehow, we make it all the way to the car, and then start deciding on a venue. The choices vary in number, depending on whether we're in Kandy or not (Kandy = 3-4 options. Elsewhere on the planet = infinitely more), but in actuality, the choices are limited to a) places we've already been to and b) random newspaper clipping/flyer discovered by Mom. Once we went to a place that Mom had found in a (very) old newspaper clipping, only to find that place had been closed down 6 months previously and been replaced with a dry cleaners. And then we went to KFC.

2. What to order?

Once we've made it to a venue that is agreeable to all, we sit down and begin the hardest part of the evening: ordering. Be it a fast food joint, Italian, Sri Lankan, Indian or Chinese, no one can agree on what to order. Bro wants something ridiculous. I convince him against it. Mom wants something small and healthy. No such item exists on the menu. Dad is usually the best; he sticks to something safe, with the odd experimentation (he once ordered a Birizza at Pizza Hut. That didn't go well). If rice or noodle portions are involved, the waiter gets involved with us to figure just how many portions the four of us really need, taking into account how we all eat differently. After that mathematical calculation is done ("bring one big plate and two small plates with a little extra on each...") we wait. Anxiously.

3. The eating.

The food always arrives a tad bit late, and more often than not, it doesn't look like the picture. No, not the picture in the menu (it never looks like that) but the picture in our heads. Comments are made. Noses are wrinkled. Prices from other restaurants are stated and compared. Sighs are uttered. Eyes are rolled. And then the waiter leaves the table, awkwardly. I always ask the parents, why do they make all these comments while we're still at the restaurant?? They simply don't realise it. And if the food is bad, heaven help the person that suggested we eat here in the first place instead of going to the other place that someone else wanted to go to all along...


4. The dessert.

This is really dependant on the meal. Sometimes, if the meal is bad, we don't get the luxury of picking dessert, just in case the dessert is of the same (low) standard. Which is sad, because Dad loves him some ice cream, but he'll only have one if either Bro or I are having too. I think this minimizes the power of the disapproving look from Mom. However, by this time, I'm already begging for the bill so we can bail.


And so, another eventful meal comes to an end. The thing is, I'm not really sure whether it is the family that has become more picky and annoying over the years, or whether it's just me not being able to put up with their usual idiosyncrasies. Perhaps I just got used to going out with my friends, during my college years and when I started working, who were a lot less likely to grumble and complain about eating in a restaurant, given that the alternatives were either to eat in the canteen or cook for ourselves. Whatever it may be, all I know is that as much as I love spending time at home and with the family, this is one of the small things that really make me want to flip the final switch of rebellion and demand my own place.

And don't even get me started on travelling with my family....!