Top 10 Variations of Chess

Even if there are already several strategy video games (especially in PC) that have been developed to have more intellectual gameplays than chess, this timeless boardgame is still as popular and esteemed as ever.   But did you know that there are actually numerous variations of chess out there?  Here are my favorite modified versions of chess that employed a couple of twists to make the game more complex or crazier – hence, more interesting.      

10.) THREE-DIMENSIONAL CHESS

 

Three-Dimensional (3-D) Chess has its origins from the late 19^th century.  It features multiple boards at different levels, on which the pieces could move in three-dimensions.  This variant features different variants itself, but the most popular is the “Star Trek” version.  Star Trek’s 3-D Chess has been seen many times throughout the franchise’s TV series and movies.  Originally intended to be merely fictional, fans developed detailed mechanics to make it playable in real life. 

3-D Chess is probably the most complex chess variant I’ve encountered (yes, even more complex than Quantum Chess) that I didn’t even bother to thoroughly learn the rules.  But this is probably the most popular chess variant out there because of its connection with Star Trek, so I gave it the tenth spot.  And, besides, I have to admit that I also find it fascinating because of its intimidating set-up.     

9.) DRINKING CHESS

 

When I first encountered the image above back in 2011, I shared it in Facebook and jokingly captioned it...

   

So during my research while constructing this list, I was surprised to discover that I was spot on with my jesting deduction. 

8.) PLAY IT BY TRUST

 

This chess variant is developed by Yoko Ono (yes, that Yoko Ono) as an art project.   Both players’ pieces are white.  Therefore, after a few moves, the board gets confusing; the players will have the difficulty of determining which pieces are theirs.  Of course, those with genius-level eidetic memory would be able to play it with ease as if it’s a normal chess game.  But for most players, they must trust each other in determining whose pieces are whose. 

“Play It By Trust” is supposed to serve as a metaphor for the senselessness of war.  Through it, Yoko Ono intended to eliminate the “conflict” in a chess game, rendering the “battle” to eventual futility after a couple of moves.  So – if I get her intentions right – the set-up instead promotes “peace” and “unity” by forcing the players to rely on each other’s memories and honesty if there’s hope of finishing the game. 

It’s either stupid or profound.  Your call.  Either way, it’s truly unique.        

7.) MONSTER CHESS

In Monster Chess (also called Super King Chess), Black has the standard set of pieces while White only has a king and four – sometimes two, sometimes eight – pieces of pawns.  However, White can move two successive moves per turn. 

On paper, Black seems to have the advantage because he has a complete set of pieces.  But White’s “two moves against Black’s one move” function actually can make the game very winnable for him, especially if White plays with eight pawns.   

6.) EXTINCTION CHESS

To win, instead of checkmating the king, one has to capture all pieces of a particular kind of chess piece.  Therefore, he can win by doing one of the following: capturing the king, capturing the queen, capturing the two bishops, capturing the two knights, capturing the two rooks, or capturing all eight pawns.  Since the king is just a normal piece here, the restrictions in castling in check are suspended.  Moreover, a pawn can now also be promoted to a king.  Also, the queen should be taken good care of, since there is only one queen and its elimination would automatically mean losing (unless a pawn has been promoted to another queen prior to the initial queen’s elimination).      

5.) ATOMIC CHESS & STRATOMIC

I will be doing a “two item in one spot” entry here because both variations make an interesting use of a “nuke” option, but in different methods. 

In Atomic Chess, standard board and rules apply.  The twist is whenever a “capture” happens in a particular square, an “atomic bomb explosion” happens; all pieces – whether belonging to the player or his opponent – in the eight surrounding squares are removed from play.  Pawns, however, are immune to an “atomic bomb explosion”, hence, they can’t be removed from play by it. 

In Stratomic (illustration above), the game happens in a 10x10 board.  There are two extra pawns, and, instead of rooks, the two extreme bottom pieces are nuclear missiles (those that look like inverted kings in the illustration above).  A nuclear missile moves and captures one step at a time, like a king piece.  However, a nuclear missile can also be launched.  When launched, it “nukes” – removes from play – the piece on the square it is targeting as well as all the pieces on its eight surrounding squares.  The “nuclear missile” piece is also removed from play after its use.  The king is, understandably, immune to nukes.  There are two prerequisites before a “nuke” can be launched: 1.) a non-pawn piece must have been captured prior to using it; and 2.) the nuclear missile should not be on a “state of attack” – can be captured on the next turn – by an enemy piece at time of launch.  Lastly, pawns can be promoted to nuclear missiles.    

4.) ABSORPTION CHESS

Standard board and rules apply.  But whenever a “capture” happens, the capturer gains the movement ability of the capturee.  Example, if a rook captures a bishop, it can now also move diagonally (basically, making the rook capable of doing what a queen can do).  Or if a queen captures a knight, it is now also capable of executing an “L” movement.   

3.) FOUR-PLAYER CHESS & THREE-PLAYER CHESS

 

The number three spot is for Three-Player Chess and Four-Player Chess – another “two items in one spot” entry.  Sometimes, a few additional rules are applied but they are basically, at their core, three-way or four-way games of chess.  The “multi-player” aspect, simple of a twist it may be, actually enhances the difficulty and stakes.   There will always be “Unholy Alliance” and “Mexican stand-off” aspects hanging on the game.  It really makes the strategizing more complicated and exciting.

2.) BUGHOUSE CHESS

 

Bughouse Chess (which has also been called in other names like Exchange Chess, Siamese Chess, and Tandem chess) involves four players divided into two teams and playing against each other in two boards.  The set-up, as what the above picture illustrates, involves one of the players playing white on his board while his teammate is black on the other board, and the teammates should sit side by side.  Standard chess rules apply.  However, whenever a player captures an enemy piece, he can hand it to his partner and his partner has the option of putting it into play on his own board by placing it on any vacant square.  The team wins when either one of the two players checkmates his opponent or his opponent ran out of time.        

1.) CHESSBOXING

This mash-up of chess and boxing is actually a real sport, with federations and tournaments and all that.  It’s definitely one of the most extreme sports in the world as this taxing sport puts both mental and physical toughness into test.  A chessboxing match consists of 11 alternating three-minute rounds between chess and boxing  – 6 for chess and 5 for boxing (with sixty second breaks between rounds).  This means that after one or both players have exhausted the three minutes in the opening chess round (there is a total of 18 minutes worth of chess time; 9 minutes for each player), they would then proceed to a three-minute boxing round, then back to chess, and so on.  Anytime during the match, a player wins it if he wins in either a chess round (checkmating his opponent, opponent exceeds his time limit, opponent resigns) or a boxing round (a knockout, a TKO).  If neither of the players wins within the 11-round match, the chess game ends in a draw and the one leading in the boxing scorecards is the winner.  If it’s also a draw in the scorecard, the player with the black piece wins (I don’t know why such rule). 

Read More

Savoring the Glory of God By Means of Man-Made Pleasures

This essay is somewhat of a sequel to an essay I wrote about two years ago entitled “The Purpose of the World’s Pleasures” (I encourage you to read that one first before proceeding).  These are basically the important points of that particular essay: 

• There are, of course, sinful pleasures – things that God has explicitly commanded us to avoid.  And even innocent pleasures can tempt us to idolatry.  But the act of enjoying the world’s pleasures by itself is not automatically sinful.
• God has designed us to have desires.  And God is the Author of the world’s pleasures.  God intended for us to enjoy them.  God intended for us to be thankful for them.
• The world’s pleasures are not the ends.  The purpose of the world’s pleasures is the same as the purpose of the world’s pains: it should lead us to God.  The world’s pleasures should eventually bring us to the realization that God is the only source of Ultimate Pleasure; the world’s pleasures should help direct our innate desires to Him.  The delight found in Him is incomparable, unspeakable, and full of glory.  Pleasures given up for it and pains endured for it are all going to be infinitely worth it. 
• If we fail to seek the Pleasure beyond the world’s pleasures – settling with and prioritizing these lesser pleasures – then we dishonor God.  We pathetically give up the greatest glory for something preposterously lesser.  We are like, as the great C.S. Lewis puts it, “half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea.”       
• Not all aspects of the world’s pleasures are good or helpful.  Our faith, our understanding for the purpose of pleasure, and our desire to glorify God will serve as “filters” when we are in the act of enjoying the world’s pleasures – retaining the positive, and discarding the negative.   

Now in this new essay, I will be expanding a bit more about the topic, but I will be focusing more on – as the title has made obvious – man-made pleasures. 

“Man-made pleasures”, for a better term escapes me at the moment, are all the products of human arts and mass media that we derive enjoyment from.  This includes pop culture, music, literature, gadgetries, movies, TV shows, games, etc.  In this essay, I will be arguing that God can and will use these “lesser pleasures” in revealing His infinite glory to us.  (Of course, it’s always a possibility that I err with my understanding and, thus, also err with my arguments.  I welcome correction from those wiser than me.) 

HOW TO ENJOY THE WORLD’S PLEASURES WITHOUT BEING “WORLDLY”

I have already tackled this in the previous essay.  But let me elaborate.  Let us start with what 1 Timothy 4:4-5 says:

For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, provided it is received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by God’s word and by prayer.

The passage provided these important points:

1. God’s Creation – which includes the world’s pleasures – is good. 
2. These are God’s gifts.  And we should receive them with thankfulness.
3. These gifts – these pleasures that God allows us to enjoy – are sanctified.  

To be “sanctified” means setting something apart or transforming something into a means or state that can and will be used to glorify God.  This applies to everything (as stated by 1 Timothy 4:4) created by God – which includes, by extension, the creations of His creatures (I’ll get to this later).  Sanctification applies to people (John 17:17, 1 Cor. 1:2, etc.); sanctification applies on other things as well: food, money, property, practices (like what early Christians did with Christmas Day, December 25, which was formerly a date for a pagan festival), etc. 

So how are these things – particularly the world’s pleasures – sanctified?  In two ways, according to 1 Timothy 4:5: God’s Word and prayer. 

Firstly, God’s Word provides us with parameters on how to enjoy the world’s pleasures (no love for money, no sex outside of marriage, no drunkenness, no idolatry, etc.) as well as the revelation that God’s glory is manifested in the physical world and that the delight we derive from them must bring us to the glory of God (Psalm 19:1-4, Romans 1:20, Psalm 148:1-6, Colossians 1:16, Psalm 108:5, etc.).  So our adherence to God’s standards and willingness to learn about what He has to say about these pleasures brings sanctification to our enjoyment of the world’s pleasures. 

Secondly, through prayer, we are able to acknowledge that these pleasures that God allows us to enjoy are His gifts, and thank Him sincerely for we are able to freely enjoy His blessings because Christ already paid for them (Romans 8:32).  But aside from a means to say “thank you” to God, most importantly, prayer is the way we can ask His blessing and the Holy Spirit’s guidance in being able to really see the glory of God through the world’s pleasures.  By our own, we will easily fall to temptation and idolatry.  Only God can truly prepare our hearts to enjoy the world’s pleasures in the way He intended.  Only God can truly sanctify.   

DON’T JUST “LOOK AT THE BEAM”, BUT “LOOK ALONG THE BEAM”

The Bible has made it apparent that the majesty of the physical realm – Creation – serves as “appetizers” or “signposts” that should direct us to the glory of the Creator.  As what Psalm 19:1 says of the wonders of the heavens, they “declare” the glory of God.  C.S. Lewis shared this anecdote to wonderfully illustrate how the majesty and pleasures of this world are merely pointing us to the Source of supreme majesty and pleasure:

I was standing today in the dark toolshed. The sun was shining outside and through the crack at the top of the door there came a sunbeam. From where I stood that beam of light, with the specks of dust floating in it, was the most striking thing in the place.  Everything else was almost pitch-black. I was seeing the beam, not seeing things by it. Then I moved so that the beam fell on my eyes. Instantly the whole previous picture vanished. I saw no toolshed, and (above all) no beam. Instead I saw, framed in the irregular cranny at the top of the door, green leaves moving on the branches of a tree outside and beyond that, 90 odd million miles away, the sun. Looking along the beam, and looking at the beam are very different experiences.

“Looking at the beams” is settling with the world’s beauty and pleasures – hence, idolatry.  “Looking along the beams” is tracing back the “beams” of the world’s pleasures towards its Source, which is God, where supreme beauty and pleasure lie. 

BUT DOES THE FUNCTION OF THE WORLD IN POINTING TO THE GLORY OF GOD ALSO EXTEND TO MAN-MADE PLEASURES?

Absolutely. 

We are created by God in His image.  God designed us to have innate creativity, intellect, and capability of making beautiful creations in our own limited attempt to physically express or represent God’s glory, just as what the Creator did with His Creation.  Whenever we create – making the most of our God-given talents and abilities – we also “declare” the glory of God as much as what the heavens do in Psalm 19:1.  Therefore, man-made creations, are still, by extension, part of God’s Creation wherein he reveals His glory. 

Even the artistic outputs of non-believers – people who create without God consciously in mind – can still “declare” the glory of God.  Art is art, and beauty is beauty, regardless of who made it – a Christian or a non-believer.  Art and beauty are concepts invented by God, hence, ultimately, art and beauty comes from God.  Every human being – Christian or non-believer, consciously or unconsciously – deeply aches for God’s glory and is always compelled by the intuitive sense – whether he or she admits to it or not, realizes it or not – that there is Something beyond, Something bigger than what he or she can physically perceive.  Thus, human efforts and artistic outputs are still governed by a sovereign God that directs everything so that His intention of displaying His glory through physical representations – which includes man-made pleasures – comes through, regardless of the creators’ personal motivations.  A non-believing creator might have not honored God with his purpose, but, unbeknownst to him, he was nonetheless used by God to declare His glory when he exercised his creative impulses.    

The danger of a man-made pleasure is not necessarily because of the non-believer that created it.  Enjoying man-made pleasures created by non-believers is never an issue.  In this world, we always come into contact with services, products, and goods handled or built by unbelievers.  Your lunch might have been the cumulative contribution of an unbelieving farmer, an unbelieving fisherman, an unbelieving proprietor, and an unbelieving cook, and yet you still eat it.  The doctor that you have consulted about your health might be an unbeliever.  The mechanic that you went to to fix your car might be an unbeliever.  Your employer – the man providing your income – might be an unbeliever.  And so on.  It’s basically the same principle with enjoying a man-made pleasure created by an unbeliever.  God is sovereign over this world and everything we receive ultimately comes from God by using people – Christians or non-believers.           

Man-made pleasures, even those created by non-believers, are permissible to a Christian to enjoy (1 Cor. 6:12) because they are ultimately from God, and everything from God is good (1 Timothy 4:4), and God can sanctify them (1 Timothy 4:5) and make use of them to reveal His glory.  So for a Christian, someone who knows the truthful connection between the world’s pleasures and God’s glory, there is really no such thing as “secular.”  When he’s enjoying something secular by itself, like a Michael Jackson concert, it becomes sanctified when he is enjoying it with the holy purpose of seeking God’s glory – “looking along the beam” of MJ’s amazing talent. 

FICTION IS THE DEEPER REVELATION OF REALITY BY LIKENING IT TO WHAT IT IS NOT

The world’s pleasures, by stirring our sensations and emotions, arouse our deeper, inherent yearnings for greater awesome things than what we see in this world.  And, personally, outside of the complexity and loveliness of natural Creation, no other pleasure of this world is able to match fiction on blowing my mind away and awakening the desire in me for something bigger beyond my perceived reality.  That’s why I’m extremely fond of fiction. 

Some think that fiction is merely a “distraction” or an “escape” from reality.  Nothing can be more wrong.  Fiction “awakens” us to reality.  Kevin Vanhoozer wrote:

The sad truth is that many of us are, at best, only half awake. We think we’re engaged with the real world—you know, the world of stock markets, stock-car racing, and stockpiles of chemical weapons—but in fact we’re living in what [C.S.] Lewis calls the “shadowlands.” We think we’re awake, but we’re really only daydreaming. We’re sleepwalking our way through life—asleep at the wheel of existence—only semi-conscious of the eternal, those things that are truly solid that bear the weight of glory.

The world is full of wonders.  When we first come in contact with them, we probably had been awed.  But, over time, we got used to these wonders, taking them for granted, and our sense of awe is replaced with boredom and apathy – we “fall asleep.” And one of the best ways for us to “wake up” is through fiction.  For fiction articulates reality in a new light, providing for us an enhanced focus on the actual marvels found in things we had dismissed as ordinary.  As what G.K. Chesterton has perfectly analyzed:

When we are very young children we don’t need fairy tales: we only need tales.  Mere life is interesting enough.  A child of seven is excited by being told that Tommy opened a door and saw a dragon. But a child of three is excited by being told that Tommy opened a door.  Boys like romantic tales; but babies like realistic tales— because they find them romantic… This proves that even nursery tales only echo an almost pre-natal leap of interest and amazement. These tales say that apples are golden only to refresh the forgotten moment when we found that they were green. They make rivers run with wine only to make us remember, for one wild moment, that they run with water.

Once our sense of awe on the world’s wonders and miracles are rekindled, fiction could then further reveal to us what reality really is.  Often it is not enough to just describe reality for what it is.  When the Source of the deepest meaning of reality lies beyond it, then likening reality to what it is not actually reveals more deeply what it is (it’s another C.S. Lewis-ian concept).  Fiction does this. 

Besides, God himself opted to display His Reality through representation, making Creation – our reality – as means of revealing His glory to us.  In the same way, fiction serves as representation of our reality.  Of course, I’m not implying that we are merely God’s “computer simulations” in a The Thirteenth Floor sort of way (it’s a cool, underrated movie by the way) – that our existence lacked no real substance.  It’s just that God’s Reality is so grand, that our physical reality is much of a “figment” of God’s Reality as fiction a “figment” of our physical reality.                  

Simply, we are creatures that often require metaphors and analogies and illustrations and such to thoroughly grasp concepts and aspects of reality.  It’s simply the way we are designed by our Creator.  There’s a reason Jesus spoke in parables.  God has always intended fiction to serve as a means of intensifying our appreciation, understanding, and perspective of reality – and beyond! 

THE DANGER OF MAN-MADE PLEASURES

Of course, the fact that God reveals His glory through man-made pleasures is no excuse for us to consume every piece of it just because.  What do I mean by that?  We still have responsibility of choosing wisely the kind and amount of man-made pleasures that we choose to enjoy.  Seeking God’s glory is the chief reason for everything we Christians do in this world, including our choice of man-made pleasures.  Thus, if it’s already apparent that God’s glory is absent from a particular man-made pleasure, or it’s failing to bring us towards Christ, but, on the contrary, is actually leading us away, then there’s no reason to continue consuming it. 

We all have to constantly remember that the greatest danger of enjoying the world’s pleasures is how easily the Devil can use them to tempt us to idolatry.  If we are just immersing ourselves to banal entertainment – failing to “look along the beam” – we are vulnerable to the Devil’s attack.  Just like with idle hands, idle minds are also the Devil’s playground.  Man-made pleasures, whether enjoying them properly or not, will always arouse our desires.  When we fail to direct these aroused desires towards God, the Devil always jumps at the opportunity to exploit and redirect our desires towards idols.  Looked at how the Serpent tempted Adam and Even to eat the Forbidden Fruit when their imaginations and desires (“You will be like God!”) were aroused. 

Hence, we have to be honest with ourselves if a particular man-made pleasure is truly aiding us in our pursuit of God’s glory, or if it’s turning out to be a genuine unhelpful distraction.  Are we more engrossed during prayer than watching a movie?  Are we spending more time reading our Bibles than novels?  Are we more thrilled with God than Stephen Amell?

If we discover upon reflection that enjoying a particular man-made pleasure is not really helping us in our pursuit of God’s glory, or, worse, it’s actually leading us to sin, then we should completely abstain from it.  The Bible calls for radical cutting off of things that tempt us to sin.  Matthew 18:6-9 tells us:

“If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.  Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to stumble! Such things must come, but woe to the person through whom they come!  If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire.  And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.”

Jesus means business.  If you’re always being lured towards pornographic sites, then cut off your Internet service.   If you’re spending more time and delighting more in watching TV than praying and reading the Bible, then sell or give it away.  If you’re always succumbing into drunkenness whenever you taste alcohol, then completely abstain from alcoholic beverages.

Take in mind that God doesn’t exclusively reveal His glory through man-made pleasures.  He can use other kinds of innocent pleasures as well.  He can even use suffering.  Abstaining from a man-made pleasure when necessary is not a loss at all.  Don’t think of it that you’re missing out on something.  Ultimate Pleasure is found in God anyway, and God has continually guaranteed that giving up something for Him is infinitely worth it. 

USING CREATION AND MAN-MADE PLEASURES TO DELIGHT IN GOD

In conclusion: if God chooses to display his glory through something, whether through the natural facets and elements of Creation or through man-made pleasures, then we should proceed to enjoy them.  God designed us to have physical desires and sensations so that we can perceive God’s glory through physical manifestations.  And through them, we will realize that there is more to it than these, that there is a Delight that transcends the pleasures of the world.  The world’s pleasures are not the ends.  They are merely the means to sharpen our longings for something – Someone – greater than physical pleasures.  The ultimate objective has always been about finding our complete, supreme joy in God alone.  

Read More

The Wachowskis Has Another 'Speed Racer' With 'Jupiter Ascending'

When Jupiter Ascending was still in its promotion stage, I felt that it’s going to be another major sci-fi movie, regardless of being good or bad, that will suffer the same fate as John Carterand Edge of Tomorrow – a commercial failure, a critical failure, or both.  With the movie now at least a week in theaters, I am turning out to be right.  It is being panned by most critics, and profit projections aren’t looking good.  

But the thing is, Jupiter Ascending has also turned out to be like John Carter and Edge of Tomorrow in another way.  I liked those two movies.  And, despite its problems, I liked Jupiter Ascending, too.

And that’s what I mean by comparing Jupiter Ascending with another Wachowski movie, Speed Racer, in the title.  That movie didn’t fare well commercially and critically, but I adored it.  Now, I don’t adore Jupiter Ascending – I know of its flaws and understand where the critics’ negative reception of it is coming from – but I did enjoy it overall.       

Jupiter Ascending has a lot of terrific things going for it.  It was innovative in its theme and premise – a “Cinderella” story of galactic proportions involving disturbing, ultra-futuristic economics, technology, and practices.  The visuals are stunningly jaw-dropping.  It established an interestingly rich mythology.  It didn’t lack of exciting action sequences.  There were even two or three genuine humorous situations that honestly cracked me up.  And I love Channing Tatum’s anti-grav boots and every scene they’re in.     

However, while Speed Racer was almost perfect, at least in the sense of the delivery of the Wachowskis’ intended approach for it, Jupiter Ascending never really tapped on its optimum potential.   Now, I can think of two reasons why it is so:

a.) The seemingly failure of the Wachowskis to mine all those awesome things about this movie in executing an epic story.  Again, the potential is readily available.  There’s an apparent epic story that can be made from those awesome ingredients available.  The character development, dialogues, and transition of plot points could have definitely been done better.    

b.) The inability of Mila Kunis to play a strong, likable lead character.  Jupiter Jones is not at all the kind of character you would be invested on and cheer for.  She’s not only featureless, but also kind of infuriating.  This is not at all only due to the subpar character developments done in this movie.  But, in my opinion, Kunis is just not equipped or committed to portray Jupiter Jones.   A notable lead character would have done wonders to the story, regardless of quality. 

Nonetheless, again, I really enjoyed Jupiter Ascending overall.  For me, the positive things about the movie still outweigh the negative things, no matter how weighty they are.  Still a shame, though, that it could have been much, much better.    

Read More

Top 10 Movies of 2014 That I've Only Got to Watch in January

This is the first time I’m doing a top ten list on movies of a particular year which I’ve only had the opportunity of watching during the January of the subsequent year.  This won’t necessarily be a regular thing.  Probably only when I’ve got to see enough movies from the previous year of a January, and most of them are notable and compelling enough to make a list for.  Just like the case with this time, there are several good movies that weren’t able to make my best 2014 movie list because I wasn’t able to see them last year but I got to see them this past January.

      

10.) INTO THE WOODS

At first, I thought that the premise of Into the Woods – a musical mashup of some Grimms’ fairy tales – was an original Disney idea.  I found the whole concept creative and was impressed.  But I learned later on that this was actually an adaptation of a Broadway musical.  I don’t know why, but this discovery somewhat lessened my admiration for this movie (hence, it’s only number 10).  Nonetheless, this movie offers solid performances from a charming cast, a pessimistic but relatable take on “happily ever afters”, appealing musical numbers, and pretty production values – resulting to a fine piece of entertainment for the whole family.

9.) STAND BY ME DORAEMON

I’ve always been a Doraemon fan (I love the anime and the character), and I had been always meaning to watch this movie last year but I somehow forgot to check it out.  It was only in January that I remembered all about it.  

I first thought that this would serve as the finale of the Doraemon story, but it’s merely a loose adaptation of the whole thing, which is kind of a bummer.  The story isn’t that special, but the gorgeous visuals made watching this movie a truly delightful experience.

8.) FOXCATCHER

There are three reasons to watch this movie: First, Steve Carell; second, Channing Tatum; and, third, Mark Ruffalo.  One would expect a comedy film with these three names headlining a movie.  But what they did in Foxcatcheris quite the opposite of their goofy reputations as these three delivered stellar dramatic performances in this movie that tells the tragic story between the multimillionaire John E. du Pont and wrestling Olympic gold medalists, brothers Mark and Dave Schultz.  I was stunned that they – especially Carell and Tatum – are actually capable of such kind of acting depth. 

By the way, I also want to commend the flawless make-up job done on the characters (especially on Carell).    

7.) TIME LAPSE

This is far from Primer, but it has the same simple but smart “time-travel” charm (thought it’s not really a time-travel movie) as that cult sci-fi favorite.  The plot revolves on three friends (one of which is Caitlin from The Flash) who discovered a machine that takes a picture 24 hours into the future and used it to improve their fortunes.  The narrative is not exactly mindblowing, but it’s consistently intriguing all throughout.    

6.) THE TALE OF PRINCESS KAGUYA

It’s technically a 2013 Japanese film (produced by the wonderful Studio Ghibli), but it was in 2014 that it was widely screened in theaters and film festivals.  It also had its DVD and Blu-ray release in 2014.  Hence, it only become widespread, if not also accessible, in 2014, so I will consider this as a 2014 film.  

I’m already aware of the plot of the folk tale this animated movie is based from, so I didn’t have the benefit of having the narrative be new and surprising to me.  But I still completely enjoyed watching the story unfold due to the “watercolor book” appeal of its animation approach.

5.) THE WIND RISES

Same with the previous entry, The Wind Rises is a Studio Ghibli film that was released in 2013 in Japan, but became only widespread in 2014 (though this movie qualified to be nominated for last year’s Oscars, while The Tale of Princess Kaguya is nominated for this year’s) so I will consider this as a 2014 film.  The Wind Rises is a fictional biography of real-life person Jiro Horikoshi, the creator of the formidably deadly Japanese Zero fighter planes of WW2. 

Jiro, in the film, was portrayed as a passionate airplane enthusiast, whose dream of becoming a pilot was taken away from him because of his poor eyesight.   Still, he managed to get to work with his beloved planes by becoming an engineer.  His passion and pride for making planes led him to design powerful war planes, something he would greatly regret.  Aside from his heartbreak with airplanes, his love story turned out to be tragic as well.   So Jiro really ended up as an engrossing, well-layered character that made the ones watching the movie utterly invested to his sad, glorious story.   

4.) BIRDMAN

Birdman tells the story of Riggan Thomson (fantastically played by Michael Keaton), a washed-up Hollywood star – who had made his name decades ago by playing the superhero, Birdman, in a series of movies – struggling to accomplish artistic validation by producing, writing, directing, and starring in a Broadway play.  Throughout the movie, he is plagued by the voice of Birdman, mocking him of his career choices, as well as seemingly conducting acts of telekinesis and levitation – though greatly implied in the middle of the movie as the workings of his delusional, overwrought mind.  However, in the final scene, the supposition of his powers merely being imaginary is thrown out of the window (pardon the pun – you’ll get it if you’ve seen the movie), so we’re not really sure if his powers are real or not.  It’s an amazingly crazy and unique movie made more notable because of its inspired cinematography style (that gives the illusion that only one camera is used to follow the story, and that the narrative is captured in just one continuous shot). 

   

3.) THE IMITATION GAME

I admit that I’m particularly excited about watching The Imitation Gamebecause it stars Benedict Cumberbatch, who is probably my most favorite actor right now.  Cumberbatch’s demeanour as Alan Turing was wonderfully almost similar to his portrayal of Sherlock Holmes (the character that propelled him to this level of fame) in the brilliant Sherlock TV series.   This might not please everyone, but it totally worked for me.  Despite the similarities, Cumberbatch’s Alan Turing still turned out to be a distinctive character.    Hence, it effectively worked in making the movie an excellent character-driven historical thriller on Alan Turing, the cryptoanalyst and pioneering computer scientist, who significantly contributed in breaking Germany’s Enigma code back in WW2.       

2.) JOHN WICK

This is probably Keanu Reeves’ greatest movie since The Matrix.  Reeves plays the titular character, John Wick, a retired Russian mafia hitman who went on a vengeance spree after the son of his former  employer – the head of the Russian mob in New York – unwittingly assaulted him and killed the dog that his recently deceased wife (the reason he abandoned his former life) had left him.   The movie features a compelling action hero, a chic plot, a good amount of magnificent action sequences, and an interesting interpretation of the New York underworld.  Man, I hope John Wick is the start of a franchise.      

1.) AMERICAN SNIPER

This is definitely one of 2014’s most important films – a must-watch.  This film tells the adventures and struggles of the deadliest sniper (255 kills, 160 of which are confirmed by the U.S. Department of Defense) in US military history, Chris “The Legend” Kyle.  The collaboration of Bradley Cooper and Clint Eastwood – the former portraying the lead role, and the latter directing the movie – resulted into a beautiful, gripping, and thoughtful biographical war drama.  It both celebrates the heroism and skills of a soldier going to war, as well as laments the psycho-emotional scars that he has to unfortunately suffer.  It’s simultaneously testosterone-pumping and heart-wrenching.  It’s truly a powerful, complex, well-made movie that deserves every accolade it is now receiving.   

Read More

Top 10 Guitarists

The keyboard is my go-to instrument now, but the guitar will always have a very special place in my heart.  It’s the first instrument I learned how to play, and, as an amateur musician, I had spent years being primarily engrossed in the instrument, playing it, and – most importantly – listening to talented musicians who wield the guitar.  From the many guitarists I’ve listened to, I developed my own personal taste on guitar musicality – what styles or philosophies can produce the most pleasurable and rousing music from the guitar.  Of course, this “personal taste on guitar musicality” is not at all dependent on an actual definitive, objective standard, but merely on the preference that grew on me during my exposure to different guitarists. 

My “personal taste on guitar musicality” is reflected from my picks for this top 10 list of guitarists.  These guys aren’t picked by being the fastest, the most skilful, the most successful, the most technically savvy, or even the most awesome.  They are picked for being the ones that I am fond of listening, whose music has enthralled me, and had made an effect on my own thinking regarding how to play guitar.   

Honorable Mentions: Prince, Paul Gilbert (Mr. Big), Steve Vai, Carlos Santana, John Frusciante (Red Hot Chili Peppers), Brian May (Queen), Steve Lukather (Toto), Matthias Jabs (Scorpions)

9.) & 10.) DON FELDER & JOE WALSH (Eagles)

There are many better guitarists than these Eagles duo, but they have earned spots in my most favorite guitarists list for being the ones behind the greatest guitar duet ever in “Hotel California.”  Individually, both of them are capable of some slick guitar solos.  But they are truly special when their guitars respond to each other, like in the two versions (original and acoustic) of “Hotel California.”  They also did a swell job in “Life in a Fast Lane.”        

8.) NUNO BETTENCOURT (Extreme)

 

My first encounter with his guitar talent was with Extreme’s famous acoustic ballad, “More Than Words.”  I found Nuno’s guitar work throughout the song very unique, catchy, and complementary in expressing the meaning of the song.  I was already impressed.  Then it got to the last part, and the shredding blew me away.  As I got to listen to more of his solos – with the electric  guitar – I learned that there is more to his talent than “More Than Words.”  I’m not really an Extreme fan.  Aside from “More Than Words”, no Extreme song really stuck with my playlists.  But I’ve always enjoyed Nuno.  He is a phenomenal guitarist; his solos consistently retain musical definition while being done through extremely (pun intended) fast, rousing shredding.    

7.) SLASH (Guns & Roses)

It was with Slash where I got my first understanding of what a lead guitarist is.  I was auditorily mesmerized (if that’s a term) by “Sweet Child O’ Mine” back then. Guitar playing in hard rock is often associated with distortion-heavy noise.  But as the lead guitarist of a legendary hard rock band, Slash is different.  There is elegance in his riffs – there is a real sense of priority for making comprehendible scales (listen to “November Rain”) over cathartic hard rock expression.  Thus, Slash, for some time, was my definitive guitarist.

6.) JOHN MAYER

He’s not exactly the most liked musician out there with his reputation as a big jerk.  But with regards to his talent, after watching his “Where the Light Is?” live album, nobody can deny that John Mayer is an extremely versatile player of both acoustic and electric guitars.  I’m awed by how he can sing and execute complex guitar riffs at the same time without losing a step.       

5.) JIMI HENDRIX

Hendrix is considered by many guitar enthusiasts and critics as the greatest guitarist in history.  Personally, he’s not my most favorite guitarist, but I nonetheless acknowledge his musical genius.  His riffs are natural, versatile, and melodically flawless.  He revolutionized guitar playing, giving us an idea – if not completely showing us – what more can be done with the guitar.  Every guitarist should listen to him for he will definitely find something to learn.

4.) JIMMY PAGE (Led Zeppelin)

Jimmy is a legendary guitar player, but I don’t really consider him as the most, er, “efficient.”  Nonetheless, the most awesome thing about him is how he’s always totally in control in every musical situation.  There is always an innate awareness in him on what needs to be done with his guitar.  He wobbles a bit, but his guitar playing is just oozing with charisma and smart melodic choices.  And that’s probably why many consider the guitar solo in “Stairway to Heaven” as the greatest ever.                  

3.) ERIC CLAPTON

He doesn’t do fast, flashy shredding or complicated sequences.  His style is simple but unforgettable and delightful.  He effortlessly knows what notes to utilize, and executes them with beautiful musical clarity.  It’s with listening to Clapton that taught me that guitar playing doesn’t need to be fancy, fast, and complicated.  What’s most important is producing good, pleasurable music – and simplicity and good musical taste can accomplish that.    

2.) RICHIE SAMBORA (Bon Jovi)

Back in my early teens, I found myself getting to really, really like Bon Jovi.  And, understandably, I developed an affinity to Richie Sambora’s guitar playing.  Since then, I’ve always believed that Sambora is underrated and underappreciated as a guitarist.  He is extensively “fluent” in the different guitar styles and genres.  He also did the most stirring solos I’ve ever heard.  Just listen to “Livin’ on a Prayer”, “Keep the Faith”, “Always”, “Wanted Dead or Alive”, etc., and let them do the talking regarding Sambora’s awesomeness.      

1.) NIGEL HENDROFF (Hillsong)

Nigel Hendroff is my most favorite guitarist ever since I learned how to play guitar.  This is, of course, primarily because of my Christian preferences.  Music is a terrific avenue in giving glory to God, and I appreciate and admire musicians who choose to dedicate their talents for the Lord.  The ‘Droff is a lead guitar and musical director for Hillsong, the largest producer of Christian Contemporary Music today, and is probably completely unknown outside Christian music circles.  He is nonetheless a gifted musician – proven to be impressive in playing both the acoustic and electric guitar.  He has proficient technical know-how in using effects to produce distinctive, more sophisticated guitar sounds – just like U2’s The Edge.  But unlike The Edge, who primarily relies on effects to hide his lack of depth and mediocre skill, the ‘Droff possesses a legitimate well-rounded skill-set.  

Read More

Top 10 Disabled Fictional Characters

Oftentimes, in fiction, the disabilities of characters actually work in increasing their appeal, especially when they still roll and kick butt in spite of these handicaps.  Thus, such was the standard of how I assembled this list – picking my most favorite disabled fictional characters that haven’t been significantly limited by their disabilities, but in fact remained as competent and successful – or even more so – than non-disabled people. 

For this list, the category “disabled” is limited to the physical or sensory kind – blind, deaf, lame, and such.  Therefore, fictional characters with mental disabilities are reserved for a future list (if that ever happens).  Moreover, those characters whose disabilities are fixed by cybernetic enhancements are not considered (since they won’t really be “disabled” then).  However, characters that use superpowers to help them function while handicapped are still considered.             

Honorable Mentions: Dr. Strangelove, Madame Web, Kaname Tōsen

10.) LINCOLN RHYME

I understand that Lincoln Rhyme is originally a character from a novel series by Jeffrey Deaver.  I’ve never read the books, but I got to see The Bone Collector, the movie adaptation of the first book of the series.  In the movie, he was portrayed by the great Denzel Washington.

Rhyme was a brilliant forensics detective who became a bedridden quadriplegic after an accident involving a falling beam.  However, despite of being paralyzed from the neck down, his mind is still very much capable of solving crimes.  Lying on his bed in his apartment, he relies on a high-tech computer equipment and police officer Amelia Donaghy, who does the legwork for him and communicates with him through a headset.     

9.) YOMI

Yomi is a character from one of the best anime series ever, Yu Yu Hakushu.  Though not necessarily a straight-up antagonist (there was already a “good-evil ambiguity” element in the anime’s last arc, “The Three Kings Saga”), Yomi was the last opponent that main character Yusuke battled (during the “Demon World Tournament”) before the series ended. 

Yomi is one of the so-called “Three Kings”, the three powerful rulers of the Demon World that are in an impasse among themselves (if two engages in war, the third one would strike his weakened rivals, ensuing to his or her absolute rule).  Originally brash and reckless when he was young, he often got into trouble and had to rely on Kurama to bail him out.  Probably fed up with him, Kurama sent a demon assassin to attack Yomi, resulting to his loss of eyesight.  However, becoming blind actually made Yomi more powerful over time – Yomi’s sense of hearing exponentially became more potent (he even gained four more ears); he became a calmer and more calculating combatant; and his power levels became immense. 

When Yomi was already a king of the Demon World, he – ironically – still chose to make Kurama his second-in-command, despite of knowing the fact that he’s the reason why he became blind.  Being already more powerful than Kurama, he could have easily exacted his revenge.  However, Yomi acknowledged that what Kurama had done was for the best, which, in fact, it indeed was, for it made him more powerful.   

   

8.) ZATOICHI

Here’s another blind badass who made the list (come to think of it, half of the spots went to blind characters).  Zatoichi is a fictional Japanese swordsman (I encountered this character after I’ve already written my lists on fictional samurais and swordsmen) from the late Edo period of Japan (1830’s-40’s).  The character was originally portrayed by actor Shintaro Katsu in a film series and a TV series.  But my encounter with the character was with the 2003 revival, The Blind Swordsman: Zatoichi, in which the titular character was portrayed by Takeshi Tikano (who also wrote and directed the movie).      

Zatoichi spends his time and makes a living by roaming around, giving massages, providing acupuncture therapy, and by gambling with dice.  He lets himself have an initial appearance of a harmless, blind wanderer; but he unleashes his deadly swordsmanship skills whenever he encounters ruffians, bandits, or yakuza gangsters that oppresses or extorts the weak, innocent, and helpless.  In combat, his preference is extinguishing the candles that light the room and then using the darkness to his advantage in picking off his opponents.            

7.) ELI

The main protagonist of the film The Book of Eli is another Denzel Washington-portrayed character.  Living in a post-apocalyptic world, Eli gets by because of his all-around fighting and survival skills.  But what’s uncanny is that – which was heavily implied later in the movie – he’s actually blind!  Moreover – and more impressive still – is the fact that he had memorized the entire King James Version of the Bible.    

6.) SUSANNAH DEAN

A serial killer once attempted to kill her by pushing her in front of the train.  She survived, but she lost her legs – putting her in a wheelchair for life.  

Susannah Dean was originally known as Odetta Holmes, who had a split personality named Detta Walker.  Odetta and Detta are extreme, “yin-yang” polar opposites of each other, and it was in their merging that formed Susannah. 

Susannah is one of Ronald Deschain’s recruits for his ka-tet– companions drawn from different time periods of New York City in his quest for the Dark Tower.  Just like the others, she was trained by Roland in the ways of the gunslinger, which transformed her into a badass warrior.  Despite being dependent on a wheelchair, she is as sharp, capable, and dangerous as her comrades.  In the fifth Dark Tower book, Wolves of the Calla, she would even learn how to wield masterfully the deadly throwing iron plates (like a chakram) of the Calla women.      

5.) TOPH BEIFONG

Toph Beifong is a character from Avatar: The Last Airbender and its sequel, The Legend of Korra.  Even when still at a very young age, Toph was already a master earthbender.  In fact, she’s the one who taught Avatar Aang – who, at that time, could already bend wind, water, and fire, but not earth – to earthbend.  She is so immersed and in tune with her earthbending that she even got to invent metalbending – tracing and utilizing the earth components in metal to bend metal itself.  After the formation of Republic City, Toph served as its first Chief of Police, commanding an elite Metalbending Police Force.      

Blind from birth, Toph learned from badgermoles (these blind underground animals were the first creatures that mastered earthbending) how to use earthbending to sense the “vibration” in the ground allowing her to be extensively aware and sensitive of everything happening around her.   

     

4.) ECHO

Maya Lopez a.k.a. Echo is now currently deceased in the comics (killed by the Skrull impostor taking the appearance of Spider-Woman during “Secret Invasion”).  She is one of my most favorite female Avengers, and I really wish she’ll get resurrected already (maybe post-Secret Wars?). 

Echo is deaf, but she can read lips and easily catches visual cues and body languages.  Though she has no superpowers, she, however, has Olympic-level athleticism and “photographic reflexes”, which is the remarkable ability of perfectly and effortlessly mimicking other people’s movements by just watching them doing these movements (kind of like what the Taskmaster can do, as well as Eyeshield 21’s Agon Kongo).  Due to this ability, Echo was able to become a professional-level pianist (uncanny, considering the fact that she’s deaf), a proficient martial artist, an expert acrobat (from watching Daredevil), an able pilot, and an exceptional sharpshooter (from watching Bullseye).

3.) ORACLE

Barbara Gordon is back as Batgirl now (due to the New 52 reboot), but I liked her more as Oracle.  During the “Killing Joke”, the Joker shot Barbara Gordon and left her paralyzed.  This ceased Barbara Gordon’s career as Batgirl (though, as said earlier, she is Batgirl once more at the present).  However, this was not the end of her as a crimefighter and heroine.  Despite being confined in a wheelchair, Barbara still has her genius intellect.  Adopting the codename “Oracle”, Barbara became a hacker and information broker for the superhero community.  Her assistance is so invaluable that she was even asked to join the Justice League.  Moreover, even with her movement limited by her disability, Barbara is still a capable combatant and can still hold her own when needed.    

2.) PROFESSOR X

Charles Xavier eventually regained his ability to walk, but he is more identified as a cripple sitting on a wheelchair (so he’s qualified for this list).  Prof. X is so popular already that there’s no need to introduce him at length. 

He is an extremely powerful telepath; the range and application of his telepathy is probably unmatched in fiction.  The character is defined and driven by his dream – the so-called “Xavier’s dream” – of a world where mutants and humans are co-existing harmoniously together.  To bring this about, he knows that he needs to protect humanity from evil mutants as well as provide purpose and safety for the persecuted mutants (especially the young ones).  Hence, he created Xavier’s School for Gifted Youngsters and the X-Men to help him realize his dream.     

1.) DAREDEVIL

My most favorite disabled fictional character is Matt Murdock a.k.a. Daredevil a.k.a. “the Man Without Fear.”  He is, no doubt, the most iconic blind fictional character ever. 

He lost his eyesight when he saved the life of a blind man from being hit by a truck.  The truck was carrying toxic substances and some spilled on Matt, hitting his eyes, living him blind for life.  However, due to this same radioactive exposure, the potency of Matt’s other senses heightened toward superhuman levels.  Hence, he is extremely more sensitive and alert of his surroundings than other people.  After his father was killed by gangsters, Matt Murdock adopted the identity of Daredevil to avenge him and became a masked crimefighter.         

Though unable to see, Daredevil is compensated with a “radar sense” – which is kind of similar with bats’ echolocation – that allows him to sort of “see” his environment via sound vibrations.  Another interesting application of his abilities is using his superhearing as a lie detector while listening to the heartbeat of the one he’s interrogating.   

Aside from his superpowers, Daredevil also trained to become proficient in many martial arts disciplines and be a very athletic acrobat.  

Read More

Chain of Thoughts: I'm a Bit Upset That 'Secret Wars' is Looking to Be Another 'New 52'

To be fair with Marvel, details are still not definite at this point, and it might not turn out to be too “New 52.”  Still, I’m a bit upset, for a couple of reasons:

• There were some cool things about it, but in general, I really hated DC’s “New 52” reboot.  So with what seems to me Marvel’s attempt to “New 52” its own multiverse, it gives me unfavorable vibes. 
• In connection to the previous bullet, I hate the commercial aspect of it.  Is Marvel trying to replicate DC’s commercial success (though brief)?  In fact, it was also announced – in an apparent cash-grab tactic – that Marvel is partnering with Hasbro, Funko, Upperdeck, and others for merchandising tie-ins.  I have no problem with Marvel thinking of ways of making more money, but, to me, it feels like all of this is being done principally out of making money from the hype, with the creative and sensibility aspects not being thoroughly considered.  It’s infinitely worse than NOW!-ing everything.
• Speaking of NOW!, I find it a lack of forethought in conducting significant and innovative status quo changes with Avengers NOW! when everything is going to be reset and changed again anyway by a subsequent reality-altering mega event.               
• One of Marvel’s edges through the years over DC is being able to figure out a way to keep its main universe’s continuity existent and compressed.  Hence, in Marvel’s main universe (Earth-616), no matter what is the “today”, all the things that happened from issue number one to the present issue – regardless of how many years it took in real time – have occurred within a ten to fifteen year period.  Though not perfect, it satisfies every Marvel fan, and – compared to DC’s confusing pre-“New 52” continuity (try researching for Hawkman’s history) – it makes the history of the Marvel Universe comfortably neat.
• The Ultimate Universe used to be awesome.  Then Ultimatum happened.  From then on – with some rare worthwhile instances (like what was done in Ultimate Comics: The Ultimates; I really liked this series) – the Ultimate Universe became garbage.  Cancellation of the Ultimate Universe is long overdue; the opportunity to send off Earth-1610 with a bang has passed already.  Doing it now in “Secret Wars”, with an attempt to salvage some of its facets, makes it pretty anticlimactic and seemingly desperate.   
• From Marvel EIC Axel Alonso: “The Ultimate Universe, the Marvel Universe, they're going to slap together. Imagine two pizzas: They're going to combine toppings, some toppings are going to drop off. And that is the Marvel Universe moving forward. It's more than the Marvel Universe and the Ultimate Universe, it's all the universes you can imagine. That is the Marvel Universe going forward.”  Interesting analogy.  But it’s very likely that I will find some “toppings” dropped off from Earth-616 worth lamenting and griping about.  And, seriously, post-Ultimatum and post-Cataclysm, with the exception of Miles Morales, there are no “toppings” worth saving from Earth-1610.  However, I admit that I find it intriguing what “toppings” from the multiverse will become part of this new Marvel Universe.  By the way, will the “Earth-616” numbering of this new Marvel Universe be retained?    
• Spider-Verse is pretty awesome.  And it’s looking like Secret Wars– with different versions of Marvel characters from different universes instead of just Spider-Men – is merely a bigger version of it.  It’s not really a major nitpick.  But looking at it this way, some of the novelty of the premise of Secret Warsis lessened.
• The train of teasers back in 2014 on Secret Wars, which mostly alluded to notable Marvel events, are revealed to be new comic book series titles that will spin-off from Secret Wars.   More titles and details are to be announced in the next two weeks.  So far, the upcoming series (based on the teasers) then are going to be Civil War, Age of Ultron vs. Marvel Zombies, Years of Future Past, Planet Hulk, Armor Wars, House of M, The Infinity Gauntlet, Old Man Logan, Inhumans Attilan Rising, The End (which appear to be all about the Ultimate Universe’s end), Age of Apocalypse, Future Imperfect, The Amazing Spider-Man Renew Your Vows(which I hope would truly bring Pete and MJ back together), Avengers vs. X-Men, and X-Men ’92 (based on the beloved animated series classic).
• I’ll probably follow-up on this after two weeks.

Read More