About Me

My photo
I like Cardcaptor Sakura! and also, FullMetal Alchemist: Brotherhood!

Saturday, April 9, 2011

Abakada... Ina

Summary:

What does it take to be a mother, a wife and a daughter-in-law? Estella (Lorna Tolentino) is facing some serious problems in this regard. Relationship with her mother-in-law Miling, a teacher (Nida Blanca), is strained and living with her who also supports her family has not been easy. For years, husband Daniel (Albert Martinez), on the insistence of his mother, has been unsuccessfully looking for a job on board a ship. While Estella, who has not finished even grade one, ekes out a living as a market vendor. Miling has taken over Estella's family, insisting that Daniel try again to board a ship, even if she has to borrow money or pawn her valuables for him. She has taken over the care and supervision of her grandchildren and attributes this state of family affairs to her daughter-in-law, and has convinced her son to think so. She says that Stella is unreliable ("hindi maasahan"), useless ("walang silbi") and dumb ("tanga") or knows nothing. Miling sees her children's ambiguous attitude towards her, especially Beth, who has turned disrespectful. With dogged determination she sets out to regain her place in her family by trying to gather them around her.

Analysis:

Abakada…Ina presents three portraits of three mothers and what has taken each of them to become a mother to her children. Are there basic requirements to be learned to be a mother, as there are the ABCs to learn to be able to read, write and know things? Some answers are given. Although there is nothing objectionable regarding-sexual issues, or drugs and alcohol, there are frequent verbal harassment/abuse and some physical violence.

Abakada…Ina is recommended for classroom discussion on family and family relations. It is a rich source of subject matter to exchange ideas on and learn from. It is not only children who must honor their parents — parents must also honor their children.

Alice in Wonderland

Alice in Wonderland (2010 film)

Summary:

Alice, an unpretentious and individual 19-year-old, is betrothed to a dunce of an English nobleman. At her engagement party, she escapes the crowd to consider whether to go through with the marriage and falls down a hole in the garden after spotting an unusual rabbit. Arriving in a strange and surreal place called "Underland," she finds herself in a world that resembles the nightmares she had as a child, filled with talking animals, villainous queens and knights, and frumious bander snatches. Alice realizes that she is there for a reason--to conquer the horrific Jabberwocky and restore the rightful queen to her throne.

Analysis:

The movie is essentially a mash-up of Lewis Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass (which isn’t a huge issue since the two novels are quite often mixed up in most people’s minds anyway). Alice is 19, and about to be betrothed to a man for whom she does not have any feelings. As he asks for her hand in marriage, she takes a moment to step away and think, only to find herself chasing a familiar white rabbit down a rabbit hole. She re-enters Wonderland, a place that she had previously visited when she was much younger, but apparently forgotten about. Upon her arrival she learns that it has been foretold that a girl named Alice will slay the Jabberwocky, a dragon that is controlled by the evil Red Queen, and free the land from her tyranny. However, there’s just one problem: there appears to be some confusion over whether or not she is actually the right Alice for the job.

With all the focus on the 3-D aspect of this film, it’s important to note that Alice in Wonderland was not actually shot in 3-D the same way that Avatar was. All of the 3-D was added in post-production. There was also no motion capture used; although they did experiment with it initially, they ended up simply using the live action footage and inserting CG characters afterward. The end result is that the world does not feel quite as fully realized and as immersive as Avatar. Granted, it is a more stylized world, and the production time on Avatar was a lot longer as well, but Wonderland is somehow not quite as enthralling as Pandora (interestingly, Robert Stromberg was apparently production designer on both films). At times the environments feel a bit washed out and empty, which could be a result of the 3-D not meshing well with some of the darker colors. Either way, the character designs are still visually striking, and the CG animation work is one of the movie’s greatest strengths.

The movie starts off at an engaging and brisk pace, introducing a number of creepy and intriguing characters all of whom are voiced by inspired British actors including the White Rabbit (Michael Sheen), Tweedledee and Tweedledum (Matt Lucas), Cheshire Cat (Stephen Fry), and the Blue Caterpillar (Alan Rickman). By the time Alice reaches the Mad Tea Party, things are really starting to come unhinged and the zaniness is at an amusingly high level. Unfortunately, as the story transitions to the second half of the film, it falls in line with much more bland and formulaic fantasy fare in the vein of The Chronicles of Narnia. We are quickly whisked from plot point to plot point without much excitement or danger, and many of the wacky surprises and character interactions slowly fade away until we conclude with a tired clash of CG armies.

Make no mistake, even though Alice is a bit older in this version, this is a movie that is aimed squarely at kids, and doesn’t have the depth that some might demand from an adaptation of this classic tale. Screenwriter Linda Woolverton does not do much to elevate the material, although there is just enough self-discovery that goes on in the film to justify Alice’s character arc. The tone attempts to remain cute while also being purposely weird and trippy, which doesn’t always work. The sensibilities of Disney and Tim Burton at times appear to be struggling against each other, although the resulting middle ground still makes for some fun visual gags.

Johnny Depp succeeds in carrying much of the film as the Mad Hatter, even though his character feels a bit inconsistent. He alternates from a drunken lisp to a Scottish brogue and back again. Contrived at times, yes, and at other times it feels like we’ve seen it before, but it’s still a performance that not many other actors could pull off. (He does “nuke the fridge” towards the end with his break dancing scene, but I won’t get into that.)

Helena Bonham Carter is humorous but perhaps not quite menacing enough as the Red Queen, while Crispin Glover is a great Knave of Hearts, if only he had been given a little more to do. Anne Hathaway’s White Queen seems to be a mere footnote in the film, but most importantly, Mia Wasikowska is sincere enough to buy into as the main character of Alice herself.

Alice in Wonderland can definitely be categorized as Tim Burton lite, and is nowhere near as strong as his earlier works from the late ’80s and early ’90s… but then, you probably already knew that. I would say that it’s most comparable to his take on Charlie and the Chocolate Factory in terms of its energy and whimsical nature. This not the dark and edgy Lewis Carroll adaptation that some people may be hoping for, but it does have moments of twisted brilliance. I would still recommend it primarily on the strength of the visuals and some of the performances. As far as the 3-D experience goes, however, I honestly can’t say that it was really a necessary part of the equation.

Titanic

Titanic (1997 film)

Summary:

84 years later a 100-year-old woman named Rose DeWitt Bukator tells the story to her granddaughter Lizzy Calvert, Brock Lovett, Lewis Bodine, Bobby Buell, and Anatoly Mikailavich on the Keldysh about her life set in April 10th 1912, on a ship called Titanic when young Rose boards the departing ship with the upper-class passengers and her mother, Ruth DeWitt Bukater, and her fiancé, Caledon Cal Hockley. Meanwhile, a drifter and artist named Jack Dawson and his best friend Fabrizio De Rossi win third-class tickets to the ship in a game. And she explains the whole story from departure until the death of Titanic on its first and last voyage April 15th, 1912 at 2:20 in the morning.

Analysis:

Problematic Mix of Fixed Attitudes: In this story form, the objective story through line probes fixed mindsets as the arena of conflict. This is evidenced in everything from the Titanic's purported unsinkability, to the snobbery of the upper classes and White Star staff, to the belief that wealthy passengers, especially women and children, have more rights to seats in the lifeboats than lower class passengers. Rose and Cal's impending wedding is one of the story's ongoing examples of this clash in attitudes (women as people v. women as property), and the preconscious responses that arise from this difference in opinions. Ruth is determined to see the wedding through. When she believes Rose is deviating from this course of action, her immediate response is to remind her daughter of their dire financial straits--she resolutely laces up Rose's corset, constricting her literally and figuratively. Observing Cal's patronization of Rose, Molly Brown, not one to politely keep her own counsel, wastes no time speaking her mind. Cal's reflexive responses are violent, he lashes out at Rose for cavorting with the lower classes; when he discovers how far she has taken her relationship with Jack, and he strikes her face. Value versus worth is the thematic conflict illustrated by the luxurious ocean liner that ultimately proves to be unseaworthy. If the fact that the Titanic's seaworthiness was unproven had been taken into account prior to its first ocean voyage, lives may not have been lost.

Rose represents the physics domain--her attentions are on doing. A small but telling scene illustrates this concern as she observes a little girl, her mother admonishing the young lady in training's performance at the tea table. This reflection of her own existence causes Rose to focus on the hunch her life is terribly wrong, and provides the impetus to take the direction of devising a theory in which to cope or change. What has already been proven as her future way of life--the endless repetition of high society rituals--is problematic for Rose. Her solution lies in the untried, as in the spirit of flying machines.

The subjective story through line offers the most support for this story form. The domain is universe--the situation of a first class falling in love with steerage. The progress of their romance is heavily monitored by Ruth, Cal, and his menacing henchman. Rose and Jack play out the thematic conflict of the reality of their different class levels (fact), of which they remain unmindful, versus the fantasy life they fabricate for the future--the benchmark by which they measure how their relationship is developing. The focus of non-accurate and direction of accurate is critical throughout the subjective story, beginning with Jack coaxing Rose off the railing, then hoisting her up after she inadvertently slips overboard. Later, Jack is falsely arrested and shackled. Rose takes an ax to his handcuffs--and after two off the mark practice attempts--the whack is dead on. With love and life at stake, there is no margin for error.

The weakest area of this story form for Titanic is the obstacle character through line. Jack's domain is psychology--he represents a different way of thinking; a different way of life. Ruth exposes his concern of being, when she confronts him at the dinner table. Undaunted, he regales the party with his resume of odd and varied jobs, entertaining all in the company but Cal and Ruth. They do not tolerate the penniless young man without social standing, and they are accurate (the problem that serves as his personal drive) in their assessment of his influence on Rose--which ties into the subjective story catalyst of threat.

Legally Blonde

Legally Blonde (2001 film)

Summary:

Elle Woods (Reese Witherspoon) has it all. She's the president of her sorority, a Hawaiian Tropic girl, Miss June in her campus calendar, and, above all, a natural blonde. She dates the cutest fraternity boy on campus and wants nothing more than to be Mrs. Warner Huntington III. But, there's just one thing stopping Warner (Matthew Davis) from popping the question: Elle is too blonde. Growing up across the street from Aaron Spelling might mean something in LA, but nothing to Warner's East-Coast blue blood family. So, when Warner packs up for Harvard Law and reunites with an old sweetheart from prep school, Elle rallies all her resources and gets into Harvard, determined to win him back. But law school is a far cry from the comforts of her poolside and the mall. Elle must wage the battle of her life, for her guy, for herself and for all the blondes who suffer endless indignities everyday.

Analysis:

"Legally Blonde" is a featherweight comedy balanced between silliness and charm. It is impossible to dislike, although how much you like it may depend on your affection for Reese Witherspoon. She is so much the star of the movie that the other actors seem less like co-stars than like partners in an acting workshop, feeding her lines. They percolate, she bubbles.

Witherspoon plays Elle Woods, named perhaps for the magazine, perhaps because the word means "she" in French. Work on that pun a little more, and you could name the movie "The Vengeance of Elle," since Elle gets her revenge on the stuck-up snob who dumps her, and thus inspires a brilliant legal career.

We meet Elle as she basks in general approval as president of the Delta Nu house on a Los Angeles campus. She moves in a cloud of pink, dispensing advice on grooming, hair care and accessorizing; she has a perfect grade point average in her major, which is fashion. She thinks Warner Huntington III (Matthew Davis) plans to propose to her, but actually he wants to break up. He plans to be a senator by the time he's 30, he explains, and for that career path, "I need to marry a Jackie, not a Marilyn." Outraged, Elle determines to follow Warner to Harvard law school and shame him with her brilliance. And so she does, more or less, after being taken on as an intern by the famous Prof. Callahan (Victor Garber) and assigned to help him in the case of a famous weight-loss consultant (Ali Larter) accused of murdering her much older husband. The defense hinges on such matters as whether a Delta Nu would sleep with a man who wears a thong, and the chemistry of perms.

Witherspoon effortlessly animated this material with sunshine and quick wit. Despite the title and the implications in the ads, this is a movie about smart blonds, not dumb ones, and she is (I think) using her encyclopedic knowledge of fashion and grooming to disguise her penetrating intelligence. On the other hand, maybe not; maybe it's just second nature for her to win a client's confidence by visiting her in prison with Calvin Klein sheets, Clinique skin care products and the latest issue of Cosmo.

I smiled a lot during the movie, laughed a few times, and was amused by the logic of the court case. "Legally Blonde" is not a great movie (not comparable with "Clueless," which it obviously wants to remind us of, or Witherspoon's own wonderful "Election"). But Witherspoon is a star, and the movie doesn't overstay its welcome. It also contains at least one line I predict will enter the repertory: Elle Woods is asked, "A spa? Isn't that kind of like your mother ship?"

Avatar

Avatar (2009 film)

Summary:

When his brother is killed in a robbery, paraplegic Marine Jake Sully decides to take his place in a mission on the distant world of Pandora. There he learns of greedy corporate figurehead Parker Selfridge's intentions of driving off the native humanoid "Na'vi" in order to mine for the precious material scattered throughout their rich woodland. In exchange for the spinal surgery that will fix his legs, Jake gathers intel for the cooperating military unit spearheaded by gung-ho Colonel Quaritch, while simultaneously attempting to infiltrate the Na'vi people with the use of an "avatar" identity. While Jake begins to bond with the native tribe and quickly falls in love with the beautiful alien Neytiri, the restless Colonel moves forward with his ruthless extermination tactics, forcing the soldier to take a stand - and fight back in an epic battle for the fate of Pandora.

Analysis:

As you probably know, there are two “Avatars,” the awesome James Cameron movie and the cartoon series of more than fifty entertaining episodes. The two are not even remotely related but no one can explain why they share the evocative title.

However, I do not relish the thought of sitting through the three-hour “Avatar” movie again, just to find out which version sounds better. Frankly, the only thing I liked about the movie were the breath-taking scenes of the floating mountains, the incandescent floral of nocturnal forest, the fantastic dragon birds, the exotic Etruscan horses and the gigantic tree sitting on a precious mineral coveted by a global corporation. I thought the idea that the entire forest was alive because of a mysterious neurological network would make the movie unique.

However, the story line could not have been enhanced by even the latest software invented by a genius programmer. For some strange reason, “Avatar,” could not go beyond the worn-out formula combining “Apocalypse” and “Pocahontas” and the fight between good-hearted scientists and inhuman military leaders in collusion with heartless big business.

Yet at one point, it looked as if the movie would transcend the predictable.

I thought that in the final battle, those massive floating mountains would crush the weapons of mass destruction before these could rain incendiary bombs on the helpless indigenous population and that the jungle itself, with its neurons, would enlighten the soldiers to hurl their guns over the cliffs.

The movie could have shown the forces of Mother Nature defending itself and the natives who venerated and respected her. But that did not happen. The most violent and destructive war had to be waged by both the good and the bad guys just to achieve peace. That is the official message in real life, so why should it be different in the movies?

An Inconvenient Truth

An Inconvenient Truth

An Inconvenient Truth is a 2006 documentary film directed by Davis Guggenheim about former United States Vice President Al Gore's campaign to educate citizens about global warming via a comprehensive slide show that, by his own estimate, he has given more than a thousand times. The idea to document his efforts came from Laurie David who saw his presentation at a town-hall meeting on global warming which coincided with the opening of The Day After Tomorrow. David was so inspired by Gore's slide show that she, with Lawrence Bender, met with Guggenheim to adapt the presentation into a film. Since the film's release, An Inconvenient Truth has been credited for raising international public awareness of climate change and reenergizing the environmental movement. The documentary has also been included in science curricula in schools around the world, which has spurred some controversy, including a British High Court case.

Analysis:

Once in a while, as I'm taking out the recycling or staring through a hole in the ozone layer, I'll think, ``Al Gore should cut an album." It would alert the world that the planet is in serious danger, the way Marvin Gaye's ``What's Going On?" did 35 years ago.

In ``An Inconvenient Truth," Gore does the equivalent, committing his thoughts to film. He may not have Gaye's eloquence or the singer's lush production values, but in an eco-horror show that politely masquerades as a documentary, the former vice president effectively warns of man-made cataclysm.

Urgent but not alarmist, “An Inconvenient Truth" records the extremely depressing global warming slide presentation Gore has been delivering all over the world. As in his well-researched and highly readable 1992 book, ``Earth in the Balance," he takes his audiences on a journey through the nightmare of climate change. But where Gore the author could be long-winded and self-serving, Gore the screen presence is loose, brisk, and engaging. He stands in front of a smallish audience in an insulated auditorium, often pointing at the charts and pictures on the large screen behind him.

His performance begins with an ode to his newly discovered ability to wow the masses with mock humility and comic timing. ``I'm Al Gore," he says. ``I used to be the next president of the United States" -- laughter, applause -- ``I don't find that particularly funny." From here he offers a brief explanation of global warming, and then takes us on a breezy tour through the mess we've made of the earth.

Warming, for instance, has done a number on the Arctic and Antarctic. In a series of before-and-after photos, we see that the snows of Kilimanjaro are virtually no more, Glacier National Park is only nominally so, and the frozen caps of the Alps and the Peruvian and Chilean Andes are drying up.

One chart shows the levels of the atmosphere's carbon dioxide numbers across millions of years. The modern numbers are enough to give you vertigo. More CO2 leads to higher temperatures in the air and water, which of course, induce rapid melting and strengthen storms. Gore reports that 2004 produced the American record for tornadoes and the Japanese record for typhoons. And Hurricane Katrina's power was the result of warmer waters.

As he goes on, Gore cleverly uses scientific fact as ground for criticizing the Bush administration's disastrous environmental record. Aside from observing that recent climatic phenomena in Europe are like ``a nature hike through the Book of Revelations," he keeps religion out of his argument. But the worst-case scenarios are, in fact, biblical. A scarier Power Point show has never been made about rising sea levels. One set of images featuring maps of Shanghai, Calcutta, and Lower Manhattan enveloped by water is more heart-stopping than anything in “The Day After Tomorrow."

Gore has given this performance a thousand times, and it's a rare public moment, aside from his handful of image-changing appearances on ``Saturday Night Live," where he seems utterly comfortable being who he is. This folksy, confident, and engaging man seems a far cry from the stuffy cyborg who almost became president six years ago.

He's such a captivating figure that toward the end of ``An Inconvenient Truth" I desperately wanted his reassurance that some of the bad news is reversible. (Gore allows for hope, though not complacency.) That isn't a feeling I've had watching Harrison Ford or Michael Douglas. Yet for some reason, director Davis Guggenheim doesn't entirely trust the presentation to hold our attention. Instead he insists that we see Gore ``off stage" in biographical interludes that bust up the rhythm of the lecture. These attempts to humanize seem redundant when you consider that Gore's talk is already a scream of compassion.

Guggenheim wants to make it clear that the death of Gore's sister, his son's near-fatal bike accident, and that mythical 2000 election merely refocused and revitalized him: Saving the planet was his first love, and now he's returned to it. But any sentient soul could glean some of this merely from Gore's robust performance.

The personal interruptions are ponderous and cheesy. But they do lead one to wonder about the movie Guggenheim might have made had he spurred Gore to take his message out of the lecture hall and onto the streets.

“An Inconvenient Truth" is galvanizing in its own right, but it would have been something to see Gore try a Michael Moore-ish road trip, to evangelize for, say, better fuel efficiency standards and bark in front of the White House for the president to sign the Kyoto environmental accord.

The documentary brings with it charges that Gore might be using the film as a platform for a 2008 presidential run. This is crass, really. But from Anderson Cooper's CNN show to a recent wishful New York magazine cover story (Al Gore is ``The Un-Hillary!"), the media is happy to explore the political possibilities, while leaving the film's catastrophic ecological issues alone.

Gore, of course, is not out to blatantly self-promote. The planet's collapse is a real ethical and moral crisis, as important as the fight against terrorism, he says. His passion should be contagious; we're talking, after all, about a movie that leaves us with the sinking feeling that the world could end well before 2008.

Apolcalyto

Apocalypto (2006)

Synopsis:

This movie begins with a band of brothers hunting a tapir. They seemed to be very happy, enjoy each other's company and even engage in a frat boy style of communal fun. They are interrupted by a migration of other villagers whom have been attacked and run off their land. This visit sits in the mind of Jaguar Paw (Rudy Youngblood). At the village he wakes one morning to find a band of Mayan soldiers attacking his settlement. He rushes his pregnant wife and young son into a deep hole for insurance of safety. He is captured (as are all of the surviving adults). They are tied to bamboo poles and forced to walk through perilous terrain to the Mayan civilization. On this journey they encounter a young girl who delivers an omen to the Mayan soldiers that one of their captives will bring them all to their end. Upon arrival at the Mayan civilization the women are sold into slavery and the men are to be offered as a sacrifice to the Mayan Gods. Jaguar Paw was saved only by an eclipse and was eventually able to escape to freedom, but not until after he killed the Mayan general's son. The Mayan soldiers chase Jaguar Paw through corn field, the jungle, over waterfalls, etc. He is able to eliminate them slowly throughout this process. He arrives back to retrieve his wife (whom had given birth in the hole) and his son(s).

Analysis:

Apocalypto is a gorgeous film. The sets, CGI, cinematography, costumes, and make-up are first rate, vividly recapturing the heydays of the Mayans. The acting from Rudy Youngblood as the film’s hero on down to the shrieking mother-in-law men might well relate to is, without question, spot-on. Even Mel Gibson’s decision to go with the Yucatec language, which necessitated the use of subtitles, works perfectly within the confines of the film. However, a beautifully crafted production and tremendous performances can’t disguise the fact this is one of the most disgustingly violent, pointless pieces of ‘art’ in decades.

Gibson’s fascination with seeing almost naked men tortured continues with Apocalypto. But while Braveheart and Passion of The Christ had the benefit of an interesting story to go along with the bloodshed, Apocalypto appears to be all about showcasing violence for violence’s sake. Only by reading the film’s production notes did I get any sense of what Gibson and co-writer Farhad Safinia were trying to get across to audiences. However, moviegoers watching one brutally violent death after another aren’t going to have the benefit of referring to notes. Gibson’s goal may have been to relate the collapse of the ancient Mayan civilization with the corruption and chaos of our modern world, but that’s not how Apocalypto plays out. Gibson’s aim is way off target and what’s laid out on the screen becomes a bloody blur of maiming, torturing, and killing, seemingly without end and mostly without meaning.

The film opens with a small group of 16th century Mayans celebrating the kill of a tapir by distributing the innards to members of the hunting group. One of the film’s only light moments comes during this opening scene when a member of the happy hunting party is tricked into eating the testicles so that he might finally be able to impregnate his wife.

The tone dramatically shifts almost immediately following this scene as the peaceful tribe’s village is set upon by a group of marauding Mayans bent on destroying the village by slicing and dicing their way through its inhabitants (babies are not spared nor are women and young children). The men who are in good health are captured, chained to long poles, and forced to march to the Mayan temple.

The newly captured slaves have only a gruesome death to look forward to at the end of their trek. Once in the Mayan city, these men are set to be sacrificed to the gods in order to stop the drought and end the spread of disease throughout the land. Their hearts will be carved out (it is just as gory as it sounds) and displayed to cheers from the mob. Their heads will be chopped off and tossed down the temple stairs, followed shortly by their lifeless bodies (Gibson isn’t satisfied with displaying these images once but for some reason feels the need to do so multiple times from different angles).

Our hero Jaguar Paw (Youngblood) who, prior to being captured, was able to lower his pregnant wife and young son into a pit for safekeeping, is determined not to die. His struggle to stay alive against immeasurable odds sets the stage for the film’s final act, a lengthy chase sequence loaded with plenty of grisly deaths, including a scene in which a jaguar eats the face off of one of Jaguar Paw’s enemies.

Unlike Gibson’s Passion of The Christ, other than a handful of scholars there isn’t a built in audience for Apocalypto. Just because you’ve got the power and clout to create a $40+ million film set in the last days of the Mayan Empire doesn’t mean you should. Spending that much money to create a film in which the story isn’t there, a movie in which the audience is left numb from watching two and a half hours of women, men, children, babies, and animals being tortured and/or slaughtered, in my book at least, is not money well-spent.

I’m not a history scholar and I’m not going to claim to have any knowledge of the Mayan culture. Apparently Gibson and company did their homework and by most accounts represent well that time in history and the culture of the Mayans. Whether Apocalypto is a fair representation of the culture doesn’t matter in the least if the only thing accomplished by the movie is displaying as many ways as possible to mutilate and kill. Apocalypto is an exploitative, over-the-top, and nauseatingly pointless display of bloodshed devoid of any real story. Forget the richness of the culture, Gibson only wants to show the cruelty inflicted on the innocent by those deemed to be more powerful. Gibson succeeds in doing that, but fails in most other respects.

"Failing to prepare is preparing to fail"
--Benjamin Franklin--
Let's remember to thank God for everything!

Let's thank Him for all His "YES" that have truly warmed our hearts;
for all His "NO" that have taught us to trust His heart;
for all His "WAIT" that remind us He is in control and He means the best for us...
"No matter how big man's dreams are, God's blessings are infinitely more!
For always God's giving is greater than man is asking for.

English Trivias

The only 15-letter word that can be spelled without repeating a letter is
UNCOPYRIGHTABLE.

FACETIOUS,
ABSTEMIOUS
contains all vowels in correct order and

RHYTHYMS is the longest English word with no vowel.

Kapag nag-aaral ka, at nagugutom ka,
it means, natutuyo ka.

Pag nag-aaral ka tapos bigla kang inantok,
it doesn't mean na boring inaaral mo, mas nag-eager lang kasi yung utak mo na matuto, so naeexhaust ka.

--by: Brunner and Suddarth--
The point of PRAYER is not always to get answers from God, but to have perfect and complete unity with Him.

So endure the life with prayers...
Plato asked Socrates, "What is love?"

Socrates said: "Pumunta ka sa wheat field then kunin mo pinaka-special na leaf."

Bumalik si Plato na walang dalan leaf. Sabi hiya: "May nakita ako na special leaf, pero di ko pinitas dahil baka may makita pa ako na mas speacil, pero sa paghahanap ko, wala akong nakita. Kaya binalikan ko yung dati kong nakita. Pagbalik ko wala na dun yung leaf."

Socrates said: "People always look for the best and when we finally see it, we take it for granted expecting to find a better one, not knowing it was the best."
"The way someone treats you when your together, is something to be considered,

But the way they respect you when your not around is much more important."
Aanhin mo ang sapatos na maganda kung tanggalin mo naman sa paa mo amoy daga...
"You know that it's true love when one can be in your own magical world"

--Enchanted
"Why waste your life on too much sleep when you can have enough of it when you die?"

-a very inspiring thought to wake up...
What is DUE CARE?


DUE CARE is...


someone who makes you laugh.


Example:
"Napatawa mo na naman ako, DUE CARE ka talaga!"

(JOKER)
"We're all given the same number of hours each day, but the way we spend each minute of those hours with the person we love makes a great difference."

Ironic Poem

One bright morning
in the middle of the night
Two dead boys got up to fight back to back
They faced each other
drew their swords
then shot each other...

A deaf policeman heard the noise
then killed the two dead boys
And if you don't believe my lies are true
ask my blind brother he saw it too..