坦白

沉默了好久，因为其实书写，是一种坦白，而难以坦白的时候，自然难以书写。

追梦的过程，一直有好多好朋友给予支持。不算是追梦吧，因为当导演，只因为兴趣所在，从未真正梦想当一个全职的电影导演。来念导演系的过程，是一个让你真正面对自己的过程(confrontation)。你喜欢它什么，不喜欢它什么，经过一年的磨练，会让你更清楚。

揭开的蒙纱，可能有一二。

作为朋友的，总是会支持。仿佛越‘梦想’的东西，我们越想要人家勇敢地去追求。不为什么，大概这是一种社会提倡的正面价值。教我们要不畏困难，教我们永不放弃。你想要的，只要坚持不懈，一定有收成的一天。一份耕耘，一份收获。这些，让一些比较感性的人，容易接受。

但是现实是，你可能选了一块地，但总是下错种子，用错道具，如果说错了再错，你学不会，说明什么？你可能一开始就选错了地。当然，你可以有两种选择。第一，坚持到底，就算再笨，一辈子苦苦学习，应该有所收获。关键就在于，你甘不甘心，花一辈子的时间。第二，选择另一块地，重新开始。一般来说，没有人会过问，你选择哪一块地，大多会支持，因为，朋友相信，你已经选择了你要的那块地。但是，我想，下次，我会更明白，其实选择哪块地，和必须下苦功，都有同等的重要性。天下无难事，只怕有心人。你必须思考和感觉的，不是你做不做得到，会不会成功，而是，你愿不愿意付出那种代价。当然，吊诡的是，不真正去做，你又不知道代价是什么。所以，人生也许就是这么跌跌撞撞吧，也许坚持中必带一点疯狂。

另外，我们接受的电影媒体资讯，大大来自于好来乌。而这个行业，不仅仅是创意的遐想空间，更是实实在在的商业空间。它靠的是华丽的包装，咋舌的宣传。这个过程中，不只演员们成了包装为‘明星’的对象，近年来导演也成了对象，使我们对导演有更深一层的认识，甚至于过份的崇拜。好赖乌电影业刚萌芽的时候，更受关注的是于创意领域极具影响力的制片人和电影制作公司。在那个时候，可能大家纷纷就想当制片人或创办公司。

于是，在当今导演光圈的笼罩下，大多年轻人都想当导演。哪一个电影学院都有一样的现象，导演系挤到不够位，其他技术部门尤其声音，却寥寥无几。这真是极度不健康的现象。个人认为，就因为其他的部门并不曾得到大力的关注或宣传，以至于普罗大众，甚至未来电影工作者，自然地对它们评价不高。

而事实上，一旦进入电影工作圈，每一个职员，就只是职员，各司其职。你有你烦，我有我烦。不是你当导演‘话事权’最大就不用烦。不是在好赖乌，各部门有专业技术人员负责，当导演就最幸福。这是其中一种现在低成本电影工作者的幻想，总是想，有钱还怕拍不出好电影？高成本的电影，不只要求导演功力强，还要求你能在众多的要求里妥协推拿，成为政治高手。吴宇森说，初到好赖乌时，惊讶的是有那么多的会议要开，那么多人要应付，让你精疲力尽。

在这里，很多事情变成一种活生生的事实，而不是一种憧憬，一种猜想。Film is not a game for everybody. 我很钦佩一个友人，能对自己坦白说，如果拍了三部电影，都没有好的收获，便是时候思考一下，自己到底长处在哪里。在他身上，我看到的不是悲剧，而是一种豁达。而同时，也有另一个友人，十年里换了不少学校，结果说，都是学校不够好。会不会是自己不够好，而无法去承认？可能这才是悲剧吧。

Identity?

我的硕士班是一个国际社会，班上12个人，只有一个是道地的英国人。然后我发现，和一些其他国家的人比，我能够感受到自己是一个比较不具有民族性或身份性的人。这么说，不是说我不爱马来西亚，也不是我不以自己身为华裔为荣，但我总是不明白，为什么自己所拥护的东西，必须也推广给别人。

一个土耳其朋友，总是赞赏东欧的食物多好吃，说Chinese Food真的很难吃，闻到那个味道就害怕。说橄榄油怎么煮怎么好吃，就是配面包也好吃，说有一天得带我们全班去吃土耳其的佳肴。回去土耳其的时候，还寄给我看，什么东西好吃，回来的时候也带了土耳其甜品给我们吃。然后也推广说哪个土耳其导演赢了什么国际大奖。

一个巴西朋友，说什么话，开口总是以“I'm Brazilian"为头，行事豪放不羁，皆因“巴西人”所至。在巴西文化，我们是就是，不是就不是，不会像英国人那样，事事讲求圆滑周到礼貌，"being nice"。光顾餐厅，鸡蛋里挑骨头，然后逼人家打折扣，也是因为“巴西人”。什么东西都complain complain, 也是因为“巴西人”。讲评他的影视作品的时候，他总是说，“不，不！不是这样的，因为我是巴西人，我们巴西人不是这样的，我不认同你们那一套。” 这么让他催眠了好久，直到来了另一个巴西人，才松了一口气，绝不是所有的巴西人都这样。

一个中国朋友，很关心中国人来英国的命运，也很关心自己的宗教。时不时就说，“圣经上不也说吗，......” “圣经里有个故事是这样的......” 那天他和一些同教的朋友遇上，大家就讨论什么佛教就是教你逃离这个世俗嘛，根本就不实用，说没有爱就没有恨，这个爱本来就是天生的嘛，基督教就很入世罗...”等等。我只是默不作声，因为我认为宗教信仰是很个人的事情，就像家庭排第一，还是事业排第一，这两种人永远很难说服对方。如果各自都要把自己优越化，贬低对方，驳斥对方，我们引发的就是宗教战争。为什么人类永远没有学会包容“异象”的能力，那么多宗教把他人label成异教徒，然后对他们进行各种不一样的行为。我知道，在他们眼里，我们是那些等待被救赎的迷途羔羊，传福音也是他们的“天责”，但有时候我真想说，放了我吧，你让我入地狱吧～！

还有一些人，因为他的国家有“共同的敌人”－周边邻国，而建立起自己的身份。像印度不喜欢巴基斯坦，沙特阿拉伯讨厌也门。

我面对这些冲击，也忍不住回望自己的背景，审视自己的“身份”。无可否认，当今这个时代，在外国对他人说“我来自马来西亚”，“咦？做末你会讲华语的？”“我是华人”这样的对白总是让他人充满疑惑和不解，但这绝对是他们的常识问题。来到我们这个辈分，我们对“中国”这个国家显然已没有任何牵挂，我们只是还有受民族的文化和语言的熏陶。而马来西亚这个国家，唯一爱比较的邻国，也只有新加坡。许多大马人到新加坡工作，但却不乐于当一个新加坡人。更重要的是，大马和新加坡不曾经历战争或种族屠杀的历史，两国绝不像上述所提的那般仇恨。没有仇恨表示我们没有绝对的“你”“我”关系，也正因为如此，也有一些大马人不排斥成为新加坡人。

就算是英国人对我说，以前马来西亚是英国的殖民地，我也不会难过。

不知道有多少关系，但我觉得多少有一点，因为在马来西亚的长大，我们对“异族、异教”的“存在”是不陌生的。在一般民众来说，偶尔会这里融入一点，那里融入一点。“你”和“我”，有时候也不会分得那么清楚。马来西亚没有什么骄傲可言，也没什么好跟人家比，所以“身份感”也就不怎么强烈。在外国和大马人，随便谈什么食物就能有connection，看看羽毛球比赛也很过瘾，外国人说要去马来西亚，就叫他记得去海边！

还是会想念马来西亚那一份纯朴，那一份自在。（这句话，只是自己的喃喃自语，没有叫你一定要喜欢。）

Revolutionary Road

It's good to watch a colour film again. I sometimes wonder why such a dreadful feeling when I watch black and white films, and I've seemed to figure out that it's because the setting of the period, the way the people talk, can't connect to me too much.

And watching a colour film like "Revolutionary Road" is more than just good. Both Kate Winslet and Leonardo di Carpio are at their best! Recently, I've just heard about a comment that says Leonardo is only good in Titanic, but this isn't the case. To see how they work and affect each other in this piece of film is simply amazing and of course for me, a wonderful experience to see how these actors act. They're focused, attentive to the partner, and it makes me believe that each time they do a take, it is not the same, and it must be the case. At times, the camera work just flow uninterruptedly when they're having a fight, and it works brilliantly without any cut (whether it is done purposefully or not during the shoot) because it delivers a more realistic and believable scene to the audience. What's more, both performances are too good to be watched. The scenes of them shouting at each other are so furious and frequent that any 2nd class actors would make it over-the-top and irritating to watch.

This film would probably look like an ordinary dull story on the screenwriter's papers, yet it makes you think almost every second on the screen, now this is what ya call film-making. Each characters have their own needs but they have to learn how to also accommodate the other person's needs since they are couple, and this is very true in all love relationships. As the saying goes, real people do not say explicitly what they think, because words uttered are rationalized. It is why we have to keep thinking and exploring what the characters really need or lack of. April loves her husband, she wants to make him happy, she takes care of him, but what is it that she's unhappy about? She wants a change - Paris, a fantasy that believed to be a paradise, but throughout the story, her conscious intent was to make her husband happy. Subconsciously, she's probably not. On the other hand, Frank seemed to buy the idea of relocating for a new life, but he is certainly unease with the change itself. The higher pay and promotion had challenged his decision, and as most of us will do, no matter how bored the job is, to accept this irresistible offer. Most of the people do not know what they want, but money is something that they absolutely know that they wouldn't not want. Despite Frank shows his sincere love and care to keep the baby, and I believe he didn't wittingly make his wife pregnant to cover his weakness of not going for a change, in a way he must have felt that the fact of the pregnancy is a more logical and solid reason to support his needs. The ironic thing about couple living together is that they want to please each other, and they make themselves in believing that making the partner happy means making they themselves happy. A long suppression of own need, probably unconsciously, makes something go wrong underneath each word and each action. Kate and Leonardo have brought out the essence of acting, where we observed that something is happening "in between" their words, and not "on" their words itself.

The movie is a tragedy. It seems there is no way out for both of them, which is pessimistic to think of. And the movie ends with the scene of the old couple talking in the living room, which gives an interesting hint.

The days go on

The study of "The Writer's Journey" is interesting, because it is also a study of one's life journey. They are your threshold guardians, so don't be angry, treat them nicely. If you know your end, you can work out the beginning.

It is heart warming to receive a message from a special friend (the wise old woman/ wise old man). Your magic words shall help me to stay true and stay firm.

This is the first time I am experiencing seasonal change, from winter to spring. For tropical habitant like us, our mind and mood stay still all the time, because the time doesn't seem to change. Now it is moving from cold towards warm, the change is somehow unbelievable. The simple fact that you are at the same location, but the weather is changing, is simply unbelievable. And I'm in the awkward position, uncertain as to whether I am missing the winter, or I am looking forward to the spring. The most important of all, is that I'm suddenly aware that time is passing swiftly, time is not enough, so I must learn to appreciate "now".

Life is a treasure, don't stop exploring. :)

Schindler's List vs The Pianist

I watched the Schindler's List sometime ago, and just watched The Pianist. Both films are made with the background of Germans exterminating the Jews during the World War II.

I remembered Schindler's List was good, but there was a moment I tried to recall what the story was. The Pianist was great too, in a way, you find it elegant, probably partly because of the music, but it doesn't give you the usual "sensational enjoyment" that you normally get from watching a film.

Schindler's List has a vivid hero, whose fate is to rescue as many people as he can, by recruiting them under his company. This hero is an unwilling hero, where he, not only once blamed his assistant for bringing in incompetent people to work. He is detached with the favour and the charity he is doing for his staff. However there is a scene where he is about to flee, and he suddenly breaks into tears, bragging about he hasn't done enough for the people. It is moving, yet the intention of the scene is too obvious. Schindler, breaking into tears and kneeling down, doesn't seem like the tough guy he used to be previously. Nevertheless, overall, the hero in the Schindler's List is someone we look up onto, and on the other hand, the protagonist in The Pianist is someone we identify with.

The Pianist has a protagonist, who is not set to go out and fight his enemies, but he has one simple objective - to live. He is a character, whom we, as the normal people, would identify with. He lost his career, his family, he lost everything. What would you do, if you were him, a powerless citizen? You'd probably do the same. On the day he is separated from his family, knowing that they would die, and he wanders back to the house, I felt a total lost, just like him. What is life? What is hope? How do you live on?

Schindler's List describes brutality in large scale - the mass showering of a group of naked women, citizens losing all their properties at the railway station, etc. The overall emotion evoked was sympathy. In The Pianist, we were brought into that realistic experience as if we were there. The Germans are so absurd, and the Jewish not fighting back, evoked an emotion of utter rage in me.

In The Pianist, the brutality portrayed is much more subjective, coming from the point of view of the protagonist, hence more raw and realistic. Perhaps the fact that the director himself, Roman Polanski has been through the experience, he tends to present these ruthless incidents as they were, without trying to give a reason. One German comes, picks some Jewish out, and starts shooting. That's it. At night, they rush into the house, throw somebody out of the window. That's it. We never understand why. Thus, many times, we feel shocked, like the protagonist, because they were unpredictable, unreasonable. Whereas in the Schindler's List, the German General guy often talks to Schindler, and sometimes his weakness is shown. It seemed to have some moral justification there, or the attempt to make him more humanised, or trying to ingest certain reasons behind all these insanity. It makes him a complicated character, but at the same time, it takes too much for us to try to understand him, or even pity him.

In The Pianist, time passes, he wakes up, he sleeps, he tries to find food. This routine is torturous, restless and hopeless (like in the "Cast Away"). We follow him all the way through, because we want to see the day he is reborn. The drama was heighten when he was almost dead - he was beaten until fainted, he was almost killed by the Russian because of the German coat he was wearing. These are the ordeals in the principles of mythology, and we find it utmost rejoicing to see him survive, and reborn again. At last, he is back at the radio station where he used to be.

All in all, the Schindler's List provides a more informative view. It motivates me to find out more about the racism and the war after watching the film. The Pianist initiates more psychological and philosophical thinking about human survival in individual and in groups. (Maybe there were no belief, or seemingly plausible way, or set of rules for each races to live harmoniously together, and so one must demonstrate his power or guarantee his survival by imposing fear onto another.)