Search This Blog

Saturday, September 24, 2011


this photo has nothing to do with the entry. but i bet some will still try to connect it. well then, it is up to you.

1) last night i went to watch a play at stor teater dbp. tickets were rm 20.00 each. i thought the script was intelligently written by the writer, fasyali. fasyali in the past wrote few commentaries about stuff i've done in theater - some of which could be cheekily offensive, but after meeting him last night, i know for a fact that it was just a friendly jab.

2) this morning i was in taman tun dr. ismail. i met a boy who sells calendars for his rumah anak yatim, i bought a few in which each was given a receipt. right afterward, we shot a viral video for a friend's running event. everyone was happy running around and as usual everyone was doing it for free. we had lunch after that and sat down for a few hours talking about the world, nothing heavy, purely event-related stuff which was descriptive rather than idea driven where one's thinking is required. on the way back i thought "life is sometimes perfunctory."

3) when i was a kid growing up in the small town of ayer tawar, there were no cinemas, the first movie i watched was 'fenomena' when i was 9 and the next movie i watched was 7 years laters when i was circa 16 or 17 - a movie starring nic cage called "con air". i didn't know much about movies just perhaps some i enjoyed more than the other.

4) when i was a kid too - it was a daily routine for me to join the 'jemaah' in the surau for maghrib and isya' prayers. between maghrib and isya' there was a blip where i will be wandering outside the confines of the small town i was living in, with my mind, most of the time i would imagine myself as a super hero with a white cape and looking like rashid sidek - whom i thought was pretty good looking back then. of course i am only able to do this if i wasn't asked to get the other old pakciks and Hajis; biskut kepala lutut at the nearby grocery shop.

5) the paragraphs i have written above have nothing in common and absolutely were not written in sequence. the only reason is because, they didn't need to be, i feel like each paragraph tells a different story, i feel that whether or not they are linked does not matter. what matters is the significance of all those random events to me and how important it is for me to document them. and of course since it is my blog, i could write about whatever i want and however i want it.

6) speaking of responsibility, the next thing i want to talk about is on the subject of being anonymous. you see, it is fun being anonymous - as 'anonymous' you could claim yourself being anyone or in fact, anything you want, heck you can even be Barrack Obama - i wouldn't know. the 'fun' part of being anonymous is when one is void of responsibility, like a child. it is of course one's choice to take that responsibility. either that or get yourself a freaking identity.

7) people keep asking me what do i think about pisau cukur. to be honest, i have no thoughts about it except well i enjoyed doing it. it is not up to me to review it so whatever i say or however i feel about it carries no weight. some people called pisau cukur 'rubbish' some people called MY acting 'rubbish' - i could of course retaliate but still, it is NOT within my right to stop them from saying it.

8) in the previous entry someone questioned where i am in the industry. funny. whether or not i am 'someone' in the industry or whether or not i am a 'public figure' it does not matter. it is not something that bothers me anyway.

9) it is never my intention to hurt anyone. but if you were hurt, i am sorry. but saying sorry doesn't mean i take back what i said. why i said it, has been explained and if you wish to argue do so responsibly.

10) yes. rubbish is rubbish. i wish to move on and therefore anymore comments about the previous entries shall not be entertained.

love - RM.

Monday, September 19, 2011

Proper Review

about the previous entry, some said i wasn't being fair, some demanded a proper review and some saying i was seeking publicity through my blog. first of, since the day this blog was first written the tone has never changed, read through it and you'll find out. as such, 'seeking publicity' is an accusation which is uncalled for. but of course i wouldn't resort to calling names because i believe they are entitled to do so. but here is how i see it from a logic standpoint, 'publicity' would only be beneficial to me if i am doing this for a living. however that is not the case and as such doesn't make sense, pointless and irrelevant. perhaps why they love the movie so much.

however, i would like to address about the reasons behind the previous entry. and for the benefit of everyone i will 'try' and write some parts in bahasa melayu. be entertained.

1) on 'sampah'. untuk menjawab berkenaan sampah saya akan memberikan satu 'paralel'. pernah makan makanan ringan? makanan ringan jikalau diterjemahkan dalam bahasa inggeris berbunyi 'junk food'. apa yang dimaksudkan dengan 'junk'? rujukan cepat ke wiktionary memberi maksud sama iaitu sampah atau barang lapuk. ding dang, tora, sugus, super ring - kesemuanya terkelompok dalam jenis makanan ringan. makanan ringan hanya memberi kesedapan 'artificial' tidak berzat dan hanya membuang masa jikalau dilihat daripada aspek faedah pemakanan. jadi di sini secara paralel, filem tersebut boleh saya kategorikan sebagai makanan ringan atau dalam bahasa inggerisnya, junk food. sebagai contoh, babak dalam surau yang memaparkan 'keinsafan' yang dikarikaturkan, walaupun menghiburkan (for some) kerana bersifat slapstik selain meringankan isu berat (agama) adakah ianya sama dengan menikmati juadah lazat lagi berzat yang mak you masak? you tell me. so you get the drift, it is 'sampah'. dan jikalau dibandingkan dengan tora, ianya agak mahal.

2) formula. okay i'm tired of writing in malay, as you can see above, writing in malay is not time efficient and im writing this on my lunch break. anyway, on formula, well, its a movie that combines rempit and hantu, so why not. i don't see a reason why shouldn't they also include the word gangster in the title which would probably rake in another 8 million or 12? but here's the thing, in any industry there should be an ethic to making money, in fact even religion says so. the movie brings more harm in its message than positive, feel free to argue on this. you see on top of the many millions they've raked in, they get additional cash from astro first. so i think it is only fair that the movie makers are more responsible in making money.

3) now how does one become responsible? simple, quality. and this is where the movie is clearly lacking. the plot defied logic, was too weak while being caught in a web of unnecessary subplots which weren't even resolved. you may say, "it's a comedy!" well my reply to that is yes its a comedy which deserves a punch in the face.

4) terlalu banyak 'kebetulan'. contohnyalah, in one scene where zizan and his girlfriend were having conversation, secara kebetulan abang si girlfriend muncul untuk 'sound' si zizan dan secara kebetulan juga kawan si zizan (tai) cuba membunuh diri di tempat berdekatan, kesemuanya terjadi dalam 'perfect sequence' - i see this as either nak jimat duit tanak pakai banyak location or the scriptwriter is plain amateurish - which means he doesn't know how to break up the scenes - like i said earlier this is 'junk food' material. but hey, they got 8 million anyway.

5) let's go back to junk food. if you have a kid, and you know he loves junk food, and you never educate them why junk food isn't good and if consumed excessively would bring harm - would he know? the same as movie-maker, i am not saying they should play a parenting role but more of a guidance, to guide the movie industry in the right path - which means being responsible at making money. when you have a kid, you will not have him stuck in standard 1 forever, right? so think about it.

6) i know for a fact that i am a nobody in this 'industry' (if you could call it that). but hey, i don't even want to be somebody or anybody, i'm fine being a small fry as long as i could still enjoy the stuff im doing. i'll still do it regardless of what you think. and yes, i'll still write about it even if you were to treat me like garbage cause the only thing you can't do is take one's mind away.

7) the choice is really ours, just so you know 'jangan pandang belakang' which i enjoyed was first produced in 2007, about half a decade ago. what we see today is just an evolution of that with slight modification, that the ghosts are now on wheels.

like i said, if this is the case, what's stopping "Bohsia Hantu Gangster"?

yang benar - small fry, redza minhat.

Sunday, September 18, 2011

Sampah yang mahal

i have never reviewed a movie - proper. last night we decided to watch hantu bonceng in which at the end of the whole thing i felt compelled to write about it in full. by the end of this entry, i will ensure that the movie is being demolished entirely. so here, goes.


that's how my review started. but it took me a good 5 minutes to continue.


and then my mind went blank again like looking at a crumpled sketch paper. a minute later, my mind started wandering about baboons, monkeys and of various single cell organisms.

2 minutes later i threw out the rubbish.

so... yea.

i changed my mind, it is really hard to review something so pointless.


Thursday, September 15, 2011

final two minutes of 14 september

a) according to newton, an object will stay at rest or stay in motion unless acted on by a net external force - which means, an object travelling at a certain velocity in a straight line will travel straight if there isn't any external force stopping it. resistance of the force is known as inertia. if we simplify this, it pretty much means we are all naturally just a reactive element, and this ladies and gentlemen is very much relatable to the craft called acting, as some would say 'reacting' instead of 'acting'.

b) for example, if you see a guy jumping around like a kangaroo in a drama or a movie, to me, that particular action by the actor could be classifid as either 'retarded' or he was being disturbed or provoked into doing it. most of the dramas we see on tv these days, the characters are rarely provoked into doing such unreasonable actions such as screaming out of context, crying loudly out of context or literally moving around like monkeys. yes, literally. feel free to prove me wrong on this.

c) which leads to some commentaries about choices i made as an actor - especially on screen which is usually described as 'kaku' or stiff. you see whenever in a scene my motivation is only the necessary actions written in the script or merely a reaction to the other actors. in other words, i do not jump around like monkeys to prove i am embracing the craft called acting unnecessarily.

d) if i were to expand this further, my writing in general is also merely a reaction to the observation of the surrounding. for instance, whenever i made fun of atheists or activists (funny how they actually rhyme!) it is merely a reaction and most of the time a reaction to being imposed of things i do not agree to.

e) saying the above, i rarely see myself playing the role of a provocating agent. in fact if ever i did so, please accept my apology.

f) so remember, an object travelling in a straight line will remain the way it is unless disturbed - hence, disturb with care.

g) this post was written in two minutes, if you caught mistakes, nyeh, who cares.

till soon. love, love, hugs, hugs.