Thứ Sáu, 26 tháng 7, 2013

RE: Superior Spider-Man Part 4 (Or "New-Look Superior Spider-Man Upped the Ante!")


I will always hate the “Superior” theme – awesome as it had turn out to be – since the essence of Spider-Man is NOT like that.  However, I’ve established in the past that Superior Spider-Man is an ironic, remarkable experience.  Because, at the same time of hating it, I’m also enjoying the awesomeness it has brought.  Hating and enjoying… they surprisingly mix well in this circumstance.  As a Spidey fan, I just can’t help it.

Take for example the debut of the new-look Superman Spider-Man in Superior Spider-Man #14 (technically, the new-look costume was first seen in Avengers #15).  
That is so far away from being Spider-Man but I have been overwhelmed by the sheer kickassery.  Spidey has an army of spiderbots, spider-mechas, and spider minions!  That is so wrong.  That’s not Spider-Man!  I hate it.  And yet… “Arachnaughts”?! “Spiderlings”?!  Whoa.  That was epic!

 
Spidey’s new mechanical spider-limbs also debuted in Superior Spider-Man #14. Fantastic piece of hardware.  

Furthermore, in Superior Spider-Man Team-Up, it is implied that Otto, who has been recently capturing and collecting Sinister Six members as if they were Pokemon, will create a team consisting of Spider-Man’s rogue gallery.
    
That’s interesting.  How will he make these villains work for him?  I have a theory:  He will put spider-bot brain implants on them that would allow him to control them.  He already did this before on the Avengers when he was still Dr. Octopus, by the use of octo-bots (during the “Ends of the Earth” storyline last year).
I am excitedly intrigued. Can’t wait to see how this new “Superior Team” will turn out.

Still, even with all these interesting stuff happening, I desire nothing less than Peter Parker’s return as Spider-Man.  I prefer that over any epicness that the Superior Spider-Man might be able to generate.  However, during the Spider-Man panel in San Diego Comic Con this year, Marvel editor Steve Wacker insisted, “There’s no more Peter Parker. How much clearer can we make it? There’s no twist.”

That sucks.

There’s no doubt that Peter Parker will come back in the future (death is never permanent in comics).  But what was implied by Wacker’s statement is that there’s no plan for it happening in the near future.  We’re going to be stuck with Otto Octavius as Spider-Man for a loooooooooong time.   

And so I will be stuck with having this confusing mix of feeling fury and fun for the Superior Spider-Man for a long time as well.

Chủ Nhật, 14 tháng 7, 2013

RE: Superior Spider-Man Part 3 (Or "Enjoying It, but I'm Madder Than Before!")

Dan Slott – the author of this abomination Superior Spider-Man – promised Spidey fans that Superior Spider-Man #9 would provoke more hating than the despicable Amazing Spider-Man #700.   And he was right.  I was shaking in rage after reading it.  Uh, I have calmed down now, enough to be able to write about it.  It’s just a comic book anyway.  Insignificant in the general scheme of fate and the cosmos.  But the disgust about it still lingers.   

I WAS AS PISSED AS THIS!

Doc Ock was able to learn that the memories that Peter Parker had uploaded into him prior his demise had created a personification of Peter Parker’s consciousness “alive” in Peter Parker’s body and mind (which Doc Ock had hijacked as his own).  Thus, he decided to eliminate Peter Parker once and for all.  And that’s what happened in Superior #9: the death of Peter Parker has been made definite at last (at least, as far as the Superior’s run is concerned).
     
I find it stupid for two reasons.  First, it negated the narrative impact of Amazing Spider-Man #700’s climax.  In my prior rant on the Superior Spider-Man (you are encouraged to read that first), I’ve mentioned why there can be some brilliance and beauty found on that development.  There was novelty on how this Superior Spider-Man came to be; Peter Parker still “won” even though he ultimately lost and perished.  Because despite of Doc Ock succeeding in stealing Peter Parker’s life, Peter Parker still ensured in his final moments that Doc Ock was obligated to stop being a villain and to carry the responsibility of being Spider-Man instead.  And Pete accomplished that by giving his memories to Doc Ock.  Now, I like to think that it was because of Pete’s memories that forced Doc Ock to choose becoming a hero; that makes that entire moment powerful and original.  So without those memories, what is keeping Doc Ock from returning into the life of a super villain?  Why would he choose to continue being a hero if he no longer empathizes with Pete’s “With great power comes great responsibility” mantra?  It doesn’t make sense.  That is, unless Doc Ock’s heel-to-face has never been dependently based on the integration of Peter Parker’s memories into him after all.  And that actually makes things worse!  It substantially cheapens Peter Parker’s awesome last moment sacrifice. 

Second, it negated the impact of the delightful twist at the end of Superior Spider-Man #1, in which it was revealed that Peter Parker’s consciousness still exists, though helpless, hidden inside the brain of Peter Parker, though already inhabited by Doc Ock’s own mind.  Pete’s last statement, “I don’t know how.  But I am still in the fight!  I am Peter Parker.  And I swear I will find a way back!”, has been powerful and optimistic.  It significantly lessened the blow of Amazing #700.  It gave us the feeling that though it might take some time but the return of Peter Parker – the Spider-Man we love – is just around the corner.  It has a calming effect. 

That’s why if they intended Peter Parker to “die” anyway, then they should have made it “permanent” (again, as far as the Superior’s run is concerned) on Amazing Spider-Man #700already!  Why bother extending Peter Parker into 9 issues when he was never going to be a fixture anyway?  Really annoying!

Okay, so the logical reason for doing this is for pissed Amazing Spider-Man readers, i.e. Peter Parker loyalists, to stick around long enough to be exposed to the Superior Spider-Man first.  And once it was done – 9 issues later – Peter Parker is finally removed permanently out of the story.  If that is the reason, then that’s one heck of a shrewd move.   But it was nonetheless exploitive of the fans’ loyalty.  Implying that Peter Parker would linger and would return soon gave false hopes to us fans.  And to give false hopes is pure evil because it breaks hearts.    


* * *


I really miss Peter Parker’s quips and wisecracks.  Being funny is part of Spider-Man.  But fooling around was never Otto Octavius’ thing; he doesn’t have Peter’s wittiness and humor.  Still, there are times when his demeanor would cause some unintentional funny moments. 

* * *

As I’ve mentioned before, I admit that the Superior Spider-Man has been actually pretty cool.  Not only because the “heel-face turn” done on him has been the first of its kind, or because he also possesses the “brilliant A-hole” charm that the character of Dr. Greggory House has, but, most importantly, it is because he is a superhero with a supervillain approach on superheroing.   And I am forced to admit that that is actually quite interesting.   

Oh, yes, Otto Octavious is quite sincere on wanting to be a hero.      

But his methods, however, are very much that of a sociopathic villain.     

In the conclusion of the latest story (as of writing), Otto blackmailed Mayor Jameson into giving him Riker’s Island, so that he can transform it into his HQ.  
Then, he started refurnishing his new lair and proceeded to recruit some henchmen. 
Minions?!  That is so like a villain.    

Also, after having a costume change just barely seven months ago, this proposed “new age” would bring another costume change to Spider-Man. 
Those spider-limbs – which I presume are going to be retractable and mechanical – look completely awesome.  Given Otto Octavius’ past as Dr. Octopus, which had him wielding mentally-controlled mechanical tentacles, I will also presume that the same technology used on Dr. Octopus’ tentacles is the same technology applied on these new spider-limbs.    

Also, it’s quite interesting that this new costume has debuted already in Avengers #15 when it hasn’t even been introduced on the Superior Spider-Man comics yet (which will happen in issue 14).  And it’s funny that in Avengers #14, he has still been wearing his old costume, and the narrative left no room for a costume change between #14 and #15. LOL. 

* * *

A couple of interesting things are lined-up for the Superior Spider-Man: 

a.) He is set to meet with the Scarlet Spider (who is the “Spider-Man” character I am currently fonder of because of obvious reasons) for the first time in a two-part story called “Sibling Rivalry”, happening in Superior Spider-Man Team-Up #2 and Scarlet Spider #20.  Kaine, the Scarlet Spider, is going to pay his “brother” Peter a visit.  Unbeknownst to him, Peter is now dead and it is Otto that possesses the body of his “brother”.  This is going to be an intriguing meeting considering that, back in the 90’s, Kaine (when he was still a villain) killed Otto Octavius. 

b.) He would then clash with another Spider-Man, this time the Spider-Man of year 2099.   Why is Miguel O’Hara time-travelling to the present?  Is it possible that he somehow knows that Otto Octavius has taken over Peter Parker’s body? 

c.) And if that is not enough Spider-Men for you, Ben Reilly (the original Scarlet Spider and had even replaced Peter Parker as Spider-Man, after both Ben and Pete erroneously thought that Ben was the real Peter Parker and  Peter was a mere clone) is returning!   Kaine is the one set to face this “Ben Reilly” – still not confirmed if this is going to be the real Ben – but if he is the real deal, then a meeting between him and the Superior Spider-Man is inevitable. 

d.) The Superior Spider-Man is going to be part of the roster of another Avengers’ team, this new Mighty Avengers.   

e.) The reunion of Black Cat and Spider-Man.  Black Cat has always had the hots for Spider-Man but can never stand his alter-ego, Peter Parker.  But now that it’s Otto occupying Peter’s body, would Felicia Hardy be finally attracted to “Peter Parker”?    

f.) The solicitation of Superior Spider-Man #21 implies that this is the issue where “Peter Parker” would gain his PhD (after Otto chose to go to school for it since it annoys him that he has no doctorate in the life that he is currently living, the life of Peter Parker).   There is a list of great things that Otto has accomplished or established for “Peter Parker” that the real Peter Parker can enjoy once he returns (it’s a guarantee to happen; the only question is the “when”).  And for me, the top of this list is going to be that PhD. 
On a side note: I don’t like that Otto began a romance with one of his classmates.
         
Now, I like that Otto has decided to leave MJ alone.  Because it would be creepy if he didn’t.  But I consider this new romance as one of the items in another list – the list of screw-ups done by Otto as “Peter Parker” that Peter has to bear with once he returns.  

 * * *

I find reading Superior Spider-Man an ironic and remarkable experience.  I enjoy reading it.  But along with the enjoyment comes the roaming feeling of fury, displeasure, and loathing.   But that’s just it!  I might find the stories and the titular character of Superior Spider-Man entertaining and interesting, but I can’t stop hating the whole concept.  I am a big Spider-Man fan, and Spider-Man is all about Peter Parker being Spider-Man

I won't ever acknowledge that Otto is indeed “superior” to Peter Parker as Spider-Man; because no matter how remarkable, interesting, and efficient his approach is, he never really personified the true essence of Spider-Man.  No matter how cool the Superior Spider-Man turns out to be, no matter how entertaining his adventures would be, the conclusion will remain the same: he is a mere bastardization of what being Spider-Man is about.   

#BringBackPeterParkerASAP!    

Thứ Sáu, 12 tháng 7, 2013

Tetsuya Kuroko: Template of a Worship Leader


“I am a supporting actor, a shadow. But a shadow will become darker if the light is stronger and it will make the white of the light stand out.” - Tetsuya Kuroko

In my lecture on worship, I analogized Tetsuya Kuroko (the titular character of the basketball anime Kuroko No Basuke) as how a worship leader should be. His quote (see above) powerfully and poetically nailed the proper attitude and outlook of a genuine and effective worship leader. It is parallel to what John the Baptist stated in John 3:30: “He must become greater and greater, and I must become less and less.” As what I’ve argued:
God is our Light, and we worship leaders are His shadow. Just as Tetsuya directs attention away from himself to make his teammates better, so we must make ourselves less and less that God would become greater and greater. As the shadow, let us be “darker” that “the white of the Light will stand out.” […] The best worship leaders are those that can effectively direct all available glory towards God.
I want to elaborate on it a bit. In this analogy, Tetsuya is the worship leader. The basketball is the “praise” or “glory”. And the recipient of the basket ball is God.

Thus, the best kind of worship leader is someone who can deflect or redirect that basketball of “glory” towards God in every single play.
“Passing” the glory to God comes naturally to him.
It’s an instinctive automatic response whenever an available opportunity to do so presented itself.
And he eagerly seeks such opportunities around him all of the time.
If the glory is being directed towards him, he will automatically redirect that glory to God.
And whenever someone attempts to grab the glory for himself, the worship leader would prevent that from happening by promptly pushing the glory towards God.

Tetsuya Kuroko is a perfect template of a true worship leader. He should be emulated, not only by worship leaders, but by all worshippers.

Thứ Bảy, 6 tháng 7, 2013

Top 10 Movies of 2013 That I’ve Seen So Far


Just like last year, I am now listing my picks for the ten best movies released in the first half of the year that I have been able to watch (while at year end, I will be listing those that I would have watched during the second half – regardless of being released in the first or second half). 

Yes, there could be several first-half movies that I might have liked if I had been able to watch them.  There’s the Great Gatsby, which I refused to see since I always want to read the book first before watching a movie adaptation of it, and I haven’t read that classic yet (that’s the reason I haven’t watch a single episode of Game of Thrones yet; I want to read the books first.  And this might also become the case with Ender’s Game, which is coming out later this year.  I am desperately trying to find a copy of it.  But it’s different with World War Z though, which was merely an “adaptation” in name only.  I can watch it since it has not much semblance with the book anyway, but I still haven’t got the chance as of writing).  I haven’t seen Joss Whedon’s Much Ado About Nothing  – a movie I have been looking forward to ever since last year – yet, since it hasn’t been shown in the theaters here and it’s not yet available in the Net.  There’s still a lack of Sundance movies of 2013 that are available for general viewing.  I’ve been meaning to watch Olympus Has Fallen, The Purge, This is the End, and Now You See Me, but haven’t been able to yet.  Will make room for these movies – along with the many fascinating movies set for release in the second half of the year – in my movie watching for this second half.          

But, for now, let us concentrate on the top 10 movies of 2013 that I got to watch from January to June 2013:

10.) OZ THE GREAT AND WONDERFUL

 
Though it had its charms, there was nothing exceptional about this movie’s concept – normal guy was magically sent to a magic land, became its champion, and saved the day.  This trope has been done too many times already – and in more superior ways.  Still, it was a solid and fun fantasy story.  Character developments on some characters, especially the lead character’s, are fascinating enough.  And the dazzling visuals alone – being the strongest point of the movie – should keep you entertained and in wonder.  The visuals were fantastic enough to keep you on your sit even when the narrative starts to lose your interest. 

9.) HANSEL AND GRETEL: WITCH HUNTERS

 
I’m a movie fan who doesn’t care about what the majority of critics and movie goers think of a particular movie.  If I sincerely liked a movie, even if others didn’t, I would state the fact that I liked it and won’t be embarrassed of it (heck, I liked Battleship, even if it was ridiculed and hated by many).  This applies with this movie.  Critics gave this movie a ton of bad reviews.  I, however, liked it.  I found it ridiculous but in a good way.  For me, the silliness of the premise, plot, and script totally worked.  I was greatly entertained by the badassery and wackiness of the action and violence featured in this movie.  Also, Gemma Arterton is kind of hot, isn’t she?

8.) EVIL DEAD

 
This movie simultaneously served as a remake and a loose sequel of the original Evil Dead trilogy.  It has several elements that were throwbacks or homage to the original movie series.  Just the same with the original Evil Dead movie, it was an effective combination of horror and dark comedy. 

Evil Dead was a gory and brutal thriller, but it wasn’t that nightmarishly terrifying.  You will probably be doing more laughing than screaming from the over-the-top violence in this movie.    

7.) WARM BODIES

 
You should get the idea of this being merely another godawful Twilightrip-off (capitalizing with zombies as Twilighthad capitalized with vampires) out of your head.  That perception is completely wrong.  Warm Bodies is infinitely superior to Twilight

The humor of Warm Bodies was not hilarious, but it was clever and funny.  I was surprised when I learned that this was actually based on a book, and according to those who have read it, the book was wittier than the movie.  This observation is not surprising at all, since a book has more room to explore the internal monologues in the mind of the lead male character/narrator – a zombie.    

The premise was quirky but justified, and the romance was vindicated, important, and not corny (again, it’s not Twilight).  The action, however, was not so much – just enough to push the story, which is actually a good thing.  And I can forgive the meh CGI.   

Initially, I had doubts and ridiculed this movie.  But after watching a trailer, I saw something promising about it.  I gave it a chance, enjoyed it, and become glad I did.        

6.) EPIC                                                                                                                                                 

 
To be honest, aside from Epic, I haven’t seen any other animated movies released in the first half of 2013.  I haven’t seen Monsters U or The Croods (which has the highest IMDb score among 2013 animated movies so far) yet.  I haven’t seen any direct-to-video animated movies released this 2013.  I haven’t seen the new Dragon Ball Z movie and Hunter X Hunter movie, which I am excitedly looking forward to see (as soon as they’re available in the Net. LOL).  So the lack of choices helped Epic a lot in securing a spot in my list.        

Overall, I’ve enjoyed Epic.  However, Epic hasn’t lived up to its name.  Seriously, if you name a movie “epic”, you are setting a very high standard for yourself.  And if you fail to meet that standard, that’s already, in a sense, a disappointment, right?  Anyway, I did my best to evaluate this movie as it is, and not based on the high expectations it had forced on itself.  

Most of the time, it was engaging, but it has never overwhelmingly won me over.  The animation was beautiful but it was not so stunning.   And while the story was fairly appealing, the narrative totally lacked originality and magnetism.  Nonetheless, Epic is a solid, entertaining animated movie.  But it’s far from becoming a classic.       

5.) G.I. JOE: RETALIATION

 
G.I. Joe: Retaliation was another movie that the critics generally panned while I, on the other hand, had adored.  Yes, it was a dumb action movie.  But it was a kickass and pleasurable dumb action movie. If you are a fan of the comics and the animated series, you would find that this movie totally captured the essence of G.I. Joe.  So who cares if Retaliation had a weak and dumb script?  G.I. Joe never pretended to be “smart” anyway.  It has always been a “stupid, over-the-top ridiculousness in characters, action, and plot” brand of cool, enjoyable entertainment.  What matters to me is it did deliver that.   

The movie oozed a lot of badass and entertaining moments: Every scene that featured Snake Eyes and/or Storm Shadow; the epic ninja battle on the snowy mountain; The Rock and Channing Tatum’s comedic chemistry; the badassery of The Rock’s character, Roadblock (especially when he clashed with Firefly); Cobra’s insanely ridiculous plot for world domination (which is actually something you would expect from them); etc.  The movie is far from brilliant, but it certainly succeeded in providing the elements for having a pretty good time.    

4.) ODD THOMAS

 
Odd Thomas, written by Dean Koontz, is one of the most beautiful books I’ve ever read.  And Odd Thomas, the character, is one of the most layered, most fascinating, and most empathic fictional characters I’ve ever encountered.  After reading the book, I easily became a great fan and fondly followed the series (so far, I have the first four books and a graphic novel in my collection).  That’s why I was really surprised and thrilled when I’ve learned that an Odd Thomas movie was made – something I’ve only become aware of sometime this year.  Major movie news sites haven’t hyped it (because it was not really meant to be a major blockbuster film this year).  I’ve only learned of it when I saw the trailer; I even actually thought the trailer was fake (great was my excitement when I saw it was legit). 

Here are my thoughts after watching it:  It sacrificed plenty of important details, especially Odd’s friendship with the novelist Ozzie and the ghost of Elvis.  Still, the movie was generally loyal to the main plot of the novel.  It also successfully captured the feel, the wit, and the emotion of the novel.  It almost moved me as much as the book.  Almost.    

I really liked the movie, but it could have been better.   

Lastly, as the ending implied, in which (spoiler) Odd walked across the desert and then looked over Las Vegas at the distance, the direction of this movie might be actually different with the book series’.  The sequel – if any – might not follow the events and plot of Forever Odd, the second book in the series.  If the next movie sets Odd’s next adventure in Las Vegas, maybe this is where he will encounter the ghost of Elvis for the first time.  Which is something to look forward to in the next Odd Thomas movie installment.       

3.) MAN OF STEEL

 
If you are going to evaluate Man of Steel as a Superman movie, then the verdict is it has utterly failed in understanding and interpreting what Superman is all about.  But if you choose to look at it with fresh perspective, in which you would merely treat the character as the protagonist of this particular movie, and watch the movie as you would watch any fantastical movie that isn’t an adaptation of any literary (or comicbook) material – ignoring the essence, premise, philosophy, mythos, and characterization established about Superman in the comics – you will have an enjoyably great time watching it.  However, if you watch this movie through the eyes of a serious comicbook fan, or worse, as a big Superman fan, you would find several aspects and developments in this movie that will drive you crazy.   Just treat Man of Steel as merely an Elseworld reinvention so you can enjoy it immensely.  That’s what I did.     
 
Man of Steel has been given the “Dark Knight” treatment. Meaning it was dark, gritty, and “realistic”.  Superman was Batman-esque in portrayal – angst-y, lost, tormented, and troubled.  Again, if you would evaluate it as a Superman movie, this portrayal doesn’t work.  It doesn’t work because Superman is no Batman.  Superman has always been the anti-thesis of Batman as a superhero.  Being gloomy, cynical, and gritty works for Batman because he represents the “dark” kind of superhero; while Superman represents the “light” kind of superhero – hopeful, optimistic, and idealistic.     

Even if a comicbook fan (like me) looks at this movie through the advised “Elseworld” lens, to refer to his Superman presuppositions can’t be helped.  Thus, there are several instances in this movie that made me cringe.  There was Pa Kent’s reply of “Maybe” when young Clark asked if he should have just let the other kids die when they were trapped underwater, for the sake of protecting his secret because it was not yet the “proper time” to reveal himself (the Jonathan Kent I know would never think like that).  There was Superman’s apathy for collateral damage while he was fighting the Krytonians (Superman always holds back).  But worst of all, there was the part Superman had to kill Zod.

Now, Superman doesn’t kill!  He never chooses “the lesser evil” option.  When given two impossible choices, he still manages to go around them to save the day.  He always finds a way to win without killing.  He can do this because he is Superman!  Batman might vow not to kill, but because he is human and, thus, limited by humanness, he can’t enforce this vow when facing an impossible dilemma.  Superman, however, can enforce his vow of not killing even in the face of an impossible dilemma because his godlike qualities should allow him to do so.  That is what’s being SUPERman is all about.  He is better than us.  He is better than Man. (Of course, there were rare times when Superman had found himself in situations where killing was unavoidable. But, again, these instances are rare.  These instances are merely exceptions to the rule.  And such exceptions are not what defines Superman, and thus should not be used on an origin movie that would define Superman.)

But once again, I forced myself on looking at it with the necessary point of view.  And that is, Superman’s decision to kill Zod is merely in line with the direction or mood DC is going with in establishing their shared movie universe, which is being grittier and more “realistic” compared to Marvel Studios’ take on their superhero movies (which is closer to the comic book feel).  I’m okay with that, if that’s what DC wants.  So with that put into consideration, I began to like the situation Superman was put in.  It was a “realistic” scenario.  Because in real life, moral choices are not always uncomplicated as picking between an objective, definite right and an objective, definite wrong; sometimes, one has to deal with a “trolley problem”or, worse, a “ticking time bomb scenario.”  So if this movie Superman – an Elseworldinterpretation – is going to be “realistic”, then even though he has godlike qualities, there will be times he would be forced into taking a “lesser evil” option – just like with real life moral dilemmas.  And with this, applying this context of being “realistic”, all other moments in the movie that made me cringe slowly made connections and sense.

Overall, the movie has been fun and exciting.  The action scenes were terrific.  The visuals were generally awesome, though too annoyingly CGI-heavy at times.  Henry Cavill did well as (a reinvented) Superman, and Russell Crowe and Kevin Costner had powerful performances as Jor-El and Jonathan Kent respectively.  Amy Adams, though, never impressed me as Lois Lane (because the greatest live portrayal of Lois Lane ever is still Erica Durance in Smallville).  But my most favorite performance in this movie is Antje Traue as Faora – Zod’s second-in-command – who was memorably kickass.    

2.) IRON MAN 3

 
Marvel’s “Phase 2” got a strong start because of this movie.  Oh, it’s not perfect.  But this is arguably, for me, the best movie of the Iron Man trilogy.  I love how Tony did some sleuthing.  I love how Pepper was given a bigger role.  I love how Tony was pushed to the limits.  But the best thing about this movie was the action.  The action scenes were intense and excellent, especially the kickass climax in which Tony Stark unleashed his Iron Man army (second most awesome action scene was the Air Force One sequence).

The thing about this movie that received a lot of backlash was the treatment of the character of Mandarin.  It infuriated a lot of fans.  As for me, I’m split about the matter.  Half of me was disappointed that the actual comicbook characterization of the Mandarin has not been executed in the movie when a very capable and very fitting actor like Ben Kingsley was available to perform the role (though Kingsley was still brilliant in the movie’s interpretation of the character).  But half of me enjoyed the unexpected twist of the movie: the “Mandarin” was actually not the true main villain but was merely an actor working as a dummy front for the real villain.       

My main disappointment on this movie was its absence of appetizing elements – like a cameo of a future superhero – to preview and connect to the next Phase 2 films.  Really hoping the post-credit scene was Tony Start in a deep-space Iron Man armor rocketing upwards toward outer space (as a prelude to Guardians of the Galaxy) or a glimpse of Hank Pym.

Overall, it was a very enjoyable movie.  Though, just like Man of Steel, if you looked at Iron Man 3 as an overzealous comicbook fan who expects it to conform to everything the comics had established about Iron Man and his mythos, you will get irked.  If you would just watch the movie as it is, and would continually remind yourself that this movie is merely an alternate version of the comics’ universe, you will have a wonderful time. 

1.) STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS

 
Star Trek Into Darkness had my full spellbound attention from start to finish.  It could be my most favorite Star Trek movie ever.  Primarily because this was the most visually amazing Star Trek film ever made.  This movie was so awesome that I can easily forgive the plot holes (seriously, why do they need to hide the Enterprise at the bottom of the sea at the beginning of the movie?  Why not just let it orbit the planet?  Saving Spock would have had no complications if they have done so).  The action in this movie – from the starship warp drive chase to the face off between Spock and Khan – has been quite exhilarating and the plot has been engagingly fast-paced.   

Every cast member did great with regards to portraying their respective characters and making them shine when given the exposure and opportunity.  However, it was Benedict Cumberbatch as Khan (a.k.a. John Harrison) who easily stood out from the rest.  He carried this movie from being great to epic awesomeness.  His performance has been very magnetic, layered, terrific, and interesting.  Some were annoyed of all the extreme secrecy and denials of who Benedict’s character was going to be; they said the extreme secrecy was unnecessary.  However, for me, this “unnecessary” secrecy still made it possible for a slight thrill to happen during the scene that finally confirmed “John Harrisson” as a mere alias (as expected).  A minor tingle still went up my spine once Benedict dramatically uttered, “I. AM. KHAN.”   For me, Benedict’s Khan has been more compelling and fascinating than the original depiction of the character.

The loudest criticism about the movie was its lack of originality; that this movie was merely a “greatest hits” gimmick instead of creating something new, as what the first movie (Star Trek) had promised.  But I want to argue that Star Trek Into Darkness was somewhat of an extension of the Star Trek reboot – which established this new timeline.  I want to point out that things were still being set up in Into Darkness; most notably, at the end of the movie, the starship USS Enterprise’s was only starting on with its 5-year mission “to boldly go where no man has gone before” – which is the entire premise of Star Trek.  Hence, Into Darkness was still part of the introduction or “origin” process.  So, now that the premise has just been established, the real room for originality can only really start on the next installment.  

I am excitedly looking forward for the next one.  And I hope it won’t take another four years.  

Thứ Năm, 4 tháng 7, 2013

RE: Assessment FOR Learning

This is the first ever reaction paper I've written for my CCT classes.  I also get to read this in front of the class.

In “Assessment Through the Student’s Eyes”, Rick Stiggins stresses the better philosophy of using “Assessment for Learning.”  He states the value of utilizing the assessment process in encouraging students to go for “winning streaks” instead of merely using it for categorizing them into “winners” or “losers.”  The old-fashioned assessment philosophy is satisfied already with just ranking and labeling students according to their achievements, thus, causing the unfortunate and unhealthy typecasting of students into “winners or losers” or “smart, average, and dumb.” But thanks to the evolution of the missions of schools, there has been a reform on the outlook of assessment.  Now, schools are more concerned with assisting all of the students (not only those that have been typecast as “smart” or “winners”) to succeed in learning; there is less emphasis on the sorting of students.  Therefore, assessment for learning aims to completely eliminate “losing” among students, to treat “losses” as mere setbacks that can be bounced out from, make “winners” out of all students, and set them on a track of “winning streaks.”
            The emotional dynamics of the “winners” and “losers” of assessments are extreme polar opposites.  The respective emotions and impressions arising from “winning” and “losing” in assessments are impactful enough to propel “winners” to continue “winning” and “losers” to continue “losing.”  That’s why there is a need for all students to feel the positive and constructive emotional dynamics provided by “winning.”  For that to happen, this is where assessment for learning comes in.
            There is enough evidence to conclude that assessment for learning is a legitimate success in generating optimum results in student learning (Black & William,1998).  The initial step of assessment of learning is for the teacher to set concrete standards for achievement that would be explicitly clear to students.  Hence, the students would know what to aim for.  Then, assessments would serve as constructive and friendly feedbacks which the students can use to evaluate themselves on what is their current statuses are as far as achieving the established standards is concerned; if there is a need for improvement, they would know what aspects they need to improve on.  Thus, there is a need for the teacher to make these feedbacks as clear and specific as possible, so that the students can properly analyze and adjust their performances.  Through this process, the students would undergo improvement, and they would sense this experience of improvement as authentic and somewhat tangible.  They would feel that success is realistically achievable if they continue to work for it.  Hence, they would feel motivated.  They will have a “winning” attitude.
            I’ve found myself continually nodding my head, agreeing to every point Mr. Stiggins raised, while reading his writing.  Mr. Stiggins has done a brilliant job in presenting a compelling thesis.  Now I am not sure if the ideas he presented in the article are originally his own, but regardless of that matter, he was able to deliver these ideas in a logical and organized manner that he succeeded in making the reading experience quite insightful and enlightening.
In a way, reading Mr. Stiggins’ article summarized for me the most important ideas that I have learned during the first meetings of our “Assessment of Learning” course; it served as an exclamation point for the dramatic shift of my presuppositions about learning assessment.  Throughout my whole academic life, I’ve always been given the idea that tests and grades are the end products.  That’s why it blew my mind when this whole “Assessment for Learning” concept was introduced to me.  I found it making a lot of sense.  Now, I’m totally sold on it.  I will advocate it and enforce it when I finally become a (licensed) teacher.