jnalupta's Xanga

S'Long!

Fri, 13 Mar 2009 21:51:08 GMT

This blog is moving to jnalupta.blogspot.com. S'long, suckers! I mean, thank you, respectful reader, for your patronage over some 5 years. I hope you'll follow me to the other side. Nalupta OUT!

Oscars '09

Tue, 17 Feb 2009 17:02:40 GMT

There was a slew of great pictures this year. Here’s my verbose rundown:

Gran Torino – How do you adjust to a changing world?

I was reading Roger Ebert talking about Eastwood and how relatively few people can actually get better at their jobs as they get older. I would agree that that pertains to Eastwood. This movie reflects his age and, presumably, some of his thoughts on life as he ages, so well so that the sheer honesty of it really keeps you fixated. Race relations have always been an interest of mine and this movie is almost a study in that topic. No longer is racism so overt, but when it is, it’s almost shocking. And it shouldn’t be hidden--if it’s there, it should be displayed for what it is, so that it can be addressed correctly. That’s what I really liked about this flick. The counterparts to Eastwood are on an equal footing with him. They respond to his attitude with the same asshole-ishness that he gives out. I have a feeling that those people, who say there’s too much PC in the world today, probably wouldn’t be saying that if those same un-PC comments were thrown back at them. This is a great commentary on how our society has evolved and is continually evolving, and I hope Eastwood picks up best director or Schenk picks up best screenplay.

Benjamin Button – Should there be a certain progression in our lives?

I liked this movie. I like movies that play with the concept of time and our relationship with time. It reminds me of that saying, “The older I get, the less I know.” The world either gets so much more complicated or you just think about things more to the point of utter confusion. It kind of begs the question as to whether we should be living life a certain way, is there an order for us to do or accomplish certain things. I thought the acting was good. I think Taraji Henson has a shot at winning supporting actress and I think this one or the next flick might pick up best editing.

Slumdog Millionaire – Can you still have faith in your own abilities when everything is against you?

They say that this is Hollywood mixed with Bollywood, but I see this as a quintessentially Hollywood movie by the way it is written and acted. Great story, acting, directing, cinematography. While I was watching it, I could imagine it being the Philippines or any South/SE Asian or Latin country. It reminded me a lot of City of God but this movie actually had a love story at its center. There was one scene in this movie that I particularly liked which helped the movie to avoid falling into the trap that other “slum” pics fall into: When the brothers are talking they’re looking out at Mumbai and it is evidently thriving—roads, cars, skyscrapers. With the spotlight now on this movie, people who are exposed to seeing images of those slums for the first time believe the rest of the country is like that. But in one small scene, the movie counters those perceptions. People who are critics of the film and its negative portrayal of poor areas should really think about that. I can see this picking up directing, cinematography, or best picture awards.

Revolutionary Road – What if?

This was a really brutal flick, and there wasn’t even any violence in it. I wouldn’t recommend this to people who are considering getting married. You get a real feeling of heaviness after you watch it. The acting was incredible but there’s something that’s starting to bother me about Mendes’ (the director) subjects. He seems to have a real bias against 50s American suburbs, aAs if the entire era was just a façade and evil things were lurking. How about picking a different setting or time period?

Frost/Nixon – How does a country move on after it’s been wronged?

Another good acting duo in this movie in Sheen-Langella. In thinking about this movie I really believed it was more about the President and the interviewer and less about the country, but it’s really the other way around. The country couldn’t move on in its affairs after Watergate, or didn’t know how to. Ford pardoning Nixon was probably a good thing because it acted as a catharsis for the country. This kind of background tension really adds to the battle between Frost and Nixon. You get a sense of what is at stake for these two. I’d like Langella to win for his portrayal but I’d have to say that the winner for lead actor should be from either of the two next films.

Milk – How much should you fight for something you know is right?

I used to think Morgan Freeman was the greatest living actor, but I’m really reconsidering that with every Sean Penn movie that I see. He is pretty much astounding in this movie. I hadn’t seen footage of the real Harvey Milk before so I can’t do an adequate comparison, but Penn’s performance speaks of real acting, not impersonation. The movie documents the rise of councilman Harvey Milk and his repeated attempts at public office. The strength of this movie is in how it portrays the struggle for gay rights not only from a local perspective but nationally as well. It really elevates the magnitude of what Milk is doing because he had the potential for overturning, or having laws passed, in every state of the country. What might be overlooked is how amazing a politician Milk really was. Taking the gay rights issues out of the equation, Milk really knew how to ‘milk’ the political system. Incidentally, this movie really makes the city of SF shine. It shoots the city so well. I hope Penn picks up leading actor, but if not, it should go to the guy in:

The Wrestler – How do you survive in a world that’s forgotten you?

I have yet to see a couple of movies, but from what I’ve seen, I think this is the best movie of the year. Set aside the fact that it’s filmed entirely in Jersey and Springsteen is on the soundtrack, the story is just too moving. I can see a thread linking the movies this year and it seems to be on the theme of getting older. This movie shows the painful side of that. If a lifestyle that you enjoyed no longer cares for you, do you face the real world or keep trying to capture that excitement? This is Mickey Rourke’s dilemma and it’s sad to watch. This movie really felt like I was watching a documentary. Everything was just so real, even the technical aspects of wrestling. I really loved wrestling as a kid, but I never knew it was staged. What I did know was that guys get hurt, and you see a lot of that behind-the-scenes stuff in this movie which makes it even more fascinating. For Rourke’s character the pain that hurts him more is mental and emotional rather than physical, and he makes his ultimate choice based on that realization. I think Aranofsky should get the director award for this.

I’ve written too much already, but if I could, I’d talk about the Dark Knight and Vicky Cristina Barcelona, of which I hope both win awards. I'd give honorable mention to Defiance and Marley and Me. I have yet to see Doubt or the Reader so hopefully I’ll have the chance soon. I’ve also heard about a picture called Synecdoche but it's playing in about 2 theatres.

The first black US President

Wed, 05 Nov 2008 21:06:58 GMT

Well, what's new these days. Oh yeah, there's a new young, black US president... I guess that deserves a quick write-up. For a long time, it seemed as if the country had been watching these campaigns and had been getting weary, and almost sick of all of it. What struck me was how fast it all started to go about a day or two ago. It was like watching a slow movie and then when it starts to build up and climax, you fast forward through the rest of it.
I read a short blurb on what Tim Russert would have said about this election and what he would have wrote on that board of his and it probably would have been "Bush, Bush, Bush." You just have to look at an electoral map to see how many red states turned blue. People really wanted to fight Bush with their votes. It's a bit strange how much people hated Bush. He was actually a little bit more centrist than everyone thinks. I mean, a solid conservative President would not have signed a campaign finance reform bill into law like he did, which, incidentally, was sponsored by McCain. Either out of ignorance or shrewdness, he went against his own party on several initiatives but then again he did start a war that no one cares for now.
But, back to my main point about Obama. I don't believe there was much doubt that he would win. These types of political party realignments happen every so often--it happened after FDR and his New Deal and after Nixon's horrible performance. It basically happens after something really bad happens. In today's case it would be the economy, which leads to my main point about the man. My raging enthusiasm for Obama is tempered by my dislike for another thing--hype. Hype distorts reality, and hype is pretty much what surrounds Obama right now. He hasn't really proven himself professionally and he has yet to take control of the office of Presidency. Under normal circumstances, this wouldn't be much of a bother, but a new face that is facing the worst conditions could have negative effects. He is working quickly already, though, by picking Emanuel as his chief of staff, and mulling over others for his cabinet. He's also already planning to pitch that the Olympics be held in Chicago in 2016 (incidentally, he made an awesome statement on being a White Sox fan). Overall though, I think people are going to have to be patient with Obama because if he's going to change things it's going to start happening maybe a year or a year and a half from now--not in the first few months.
The thing that I'm most interested in is the aspect of race relations and how it could potentially be permanently changed. We know now that race is not a factor in the selection of President. I'm so fascinated by the interplay of race and politics and there were so many interesting things about how race was used and looked at in the media during the presidential campaigns. But, what's going to happen in the next 4 years with President Obama? Are people going to look at his some of his future actions as motivated by some kind of loyalty to some groups over others? Or will people be able to judge his actions based on their merits and only that? On the other side, will some citizens expect him to support their initiatives because they perceive him to have or that he should have certain allegiances to them? Or will people take those feelings out of the process and judge his decisions objectively? I can't wait to see what happens and how our country responds.
But, whatever side of the aisle you're on, this is still a day that has no equal. I'm sure our civil rights leaders could envision a black man at the helm one day, but I'm sure many of them thought it would take many more years (although Bobby Kennedy actually did predict a black president right about now). Hopefully, it won't take many more years before we see an Asian-American president :)

EDIT: Scratch everything I said. I just want to see how Iraq turns out.

Joe Namath II

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 15:13:51 GMT

So it looks like the AFC East is fun again, yay! It's hard not to get caught up in the excitement with the Faverererer trade to the Jets but, folks, you know who the real loser is in this entire deal? It's the man himself. Yes, that's right. To wind up with the Jets and to know that your market worth is a "conditional" 4th round draft pick? Yipes! I honestly don't know if he's going to be a good fit with the Jets lineup. They've got a terrible run game and now they're going to have to depend even more on the pass game with Favre. I dont even know who's on the team these days. Coles? Cotchery? Martin-or did he retire already? They're going to have to have a great backup QB also and I don't see it in that guy Clemens. As far as his surroundings go, I think he'll be able to handle the NY media and fans alright. And you can probably even compare the frozen tundra of Lambeau with the muddy swamp of Giants Stadium which can get pretty frozen during our crappy winters--so he should have no problem adjusting. I think this will give rise to another NY-Boston rivalry with the Patriots, and it'll probably last for a while if the Jets improve.

I've been watching the Olympics and there was a moment where they showed Amanda Beard and some kind of crazy swimsuit that swimmers are wearing this year. I wondered what other new tech gear is out there and I found this:

http://tech.msn.com/products/slideshow.aspx?cp-documentid=8251075

I think my favorites are the discus (disci?) and the bball jersey. It seems like R&D for olympic gear is just as crazy as the Pentagon's spending on military weapons. In a related story, I was reading about this:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/08/11/invisibility.cloak.ap/index.html
How awesome would it be if they combined the olympic swimsuits with an invisibility cloak? The possibilities...

Journey from the Philippines

Mon, 09 Jun 2008 19:14:20 GMT

This guy could be really great. Already seems a lot less bizarre than Perry.

Friday, May 30, 2008

Fri, 30 May 2008 16:48:54 GMT

Kobe's miserable treatment of women continues...

Multicultural Lesson of the Day

Mon, 12 May 2008 18:15:15 GMT

Today we go to Italy--more specifically, Naples--for my first and last Multicultural Lesson of the Day. The Nepalese, Neapolitans, take their pizza very seriously. They should, they invented it.

Pizza makers here in the US strive to meet exacting standards, and some go so far as to even have the same pH level in their water as the water used in Naples to make the dough. In order to be called an authentic Naples pizza, it must meet certain requirements. Enter the Associazione Verace Pizza Napoletana--an association that originated in order to ensure that any pizza that calls itself Neapolitan meets said standards.

So what are these rules? Here's a piece extrapolated from the VPN Charter (yes, there's a charter):

The certification mark of Verace Pizza Napoletana is reserved exclusively for those establishments whose pizzas fulfill the following standards:

"Verace Pizza Napoletana" must be made from the following raw ingredients:

· Flour
· Natural Yeast, Yeast of Beer
· Water

The pizza dough must be worked with the hands or with a mixer approved by the Association's committee. After rising, the dough must be shaped with the hands and without a rolling pin or any mechanical means.

The cooking of the pizza must take place on the surface of the oven and not in any pan or container. The oven must be a wood burning oven and structured in a bell shape and of special brick with the floor of the pizza oven constructed of volcanic stone. The oven must be fired with only wood and kindling.

The classic pizzas and their respective basic ingredients are the following:

· Marinara (Napoletana): Tomato, olive oil, oregano, and garlic.
· Margherita: Tomato, olive oil, grated Parmesan, and fior-di-latte or mozzarella.
· Ripieno (Calzone): Ricotta, fior-di-latte or mozzarella, olive oil, and salami.
· Formaggio e Pomodoro: Tomato, olive oil, and grated Parmesan

All types of pizza are agreeable to basil leaves.

Variations of pizzas are recognized if they are informed by the Neapolitan tradition of pizzas and are not in contrast with the rules of gastronomy, with judgment reserved to the Association's committee.

The pizza, when eaten, should present the following characteristics: soft, well cooked, fragrant and enclosed in a high, soft edge of crust.

Excerpt from the "Disciplinare" Manual:

Art. 5. Characteristics of the final product

a. Description of the product: «Pizza Napoletana» STG [Ed. an EU designation of an authentic regional product] is an oven made circularly shaped culinary product , of a variable diameter which should not exceed 35 cm, with a elevated border (crust) and with the central part covered with toppings. The central part should be 0.3 cm thick, and the crust 1-2 cm thick. The pizza as a whole should be soft, elastic, easily folded as would be a pamphlet.

b. Aspect: «Pizza Napoletana» STG is characterized by a raised crust of golden color, typical of oven-made products. It is soft to the touch and taste, especially in the center of the toppings, where the red of the tomato stands out, and to which the oil or for the pizza marinara, the green of the oregano and the white of the garlic has perfectly amalgamated; In the case of the pizza Margherita, the white of the mozzarella should be in patches more or less close together, with the green of the basil leaves, more or less dark from the cooking process. The consistency should be soft, elastic, easily foldable. The product should be soft to the touch, with a characteristic taste deriving from the crust, presenting the typical taste of risen and cooked bread, mixed with the acidity of tomato, combined with the aroma, respectively of the oregano, garlic or basil, and with the flavor of the cooked mozzarella. The pizza, at the end of the cooking process, will emanate a characteristic aroma, at once perfumed and fragrant.

There you have it. If you want to believe this author, go with the Neapolitan, it's my favorite type (if you're in NYC get it at Lombardi's, Grimaldi's, etc.). But if you want the best slice, go to NY Penn Station, to Don Pepe's near the Krispy Kreme. It's a secret, only 500,000 commuters know about it. It really is the best, though. And next time Tony's flipping your dough up in the air, ask him if his Neapolitan pie is certified by the VPN. You don't have to, but I just want you to get laughed at.

For Prospective Parents

Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:36:52 GMT

Most of you have probably seen these already, but I thought I would just pass on the wisdom anyway:

I have like 20 more of these, by the way. Someone just tell me they want to see more and I'll post the rest. I'm always seeking affirmation, thanks.

Monday, March 31, 2008

Mon, 31 Mar 2008 13:24:52 GMT

Hey you, check this out. It's fun.

Thanks, Wendell.

My first cricket...

Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:57:25 GMT

I was walking past Grand Central Terminal the other week and I saw some freebies being handed out on the street. I thought they were free samples of food, but after I got one I looked at it and they were dead, flavored crickets:

Funny enough this was a promotion for the show Bizarre Foods, which I had just started watching lately.

These things don't seem to have that much nutritional value. Only .5g protein and 9 calories? I think it's time for the cricket eaters to push for organic. Anyway, I decided to dive in and see what all the fuss was about, and these are pretty much the results. Please excuse the attire and, for clarification, I'm using tongs not chopsticks:
So how did it taste, you ask? It was kind of like an unpopped popcorn kernel...pretty much just shell. I think I was really disgusted by the sour cream and onion flavoring. God, I hate sour cream and onion.