Book review: The Papalagi by Tuiavii di tiavea

Book review: The Papalagi by Tuiavii di tiavea

Papalagi is the words of Tuiavii di tiavea collected and made into book by Erich Scheurmann who is the leader of southern islands of Samoa, Papalagi means the white man and in his word Tuiavii describes the european lifestyle of white men and how it’s one of the worst lifestyles compared to the simple lives of samoan people.


He previously travelled to Europe, he saw their life from a close point so he knows what he is telling his villagers.

He talks about how busy european life is , how european people are always out of time . How their machinary life made them into senseless robots more than humans.

I personally agree with most of his points but not all of them . He talks against concrete buildings and how they are only boxes white men built and call it house but it’s more like boundaries and lifeless jails.

He talks about cars , boats and airplanes, how their fast and quick travellings made humans feel like having less time . 

He hates over-organizations that papalagies or white men have in their life.

He hates newspapers because they cause humans run out of topics to discuss.

He hates books because they’re ideas bound in a box .

He is against the idea of over-clothing because he thinks every one has the right to see the opposite sex’s body before choosing their life partner, he doesn’t agree that showing skin and body is a sin , because he thinks breasts are no different than hands and legs and so on…

He is against the idea of time tracking, it simply makes people run out of time sooner ! He even is against knowing your own birthday!

So all these combined Tuiavii is a conservative person who thinks every human made development is evil and against the will of God or the holy spirit as he calls it in some occasions.

I agree human developments are not always helpful, they made life feel less like life but being such a conservative won’t help too ! Living a simple primate-like life is never possible because developing is a response for human needs , and whenever humans needed a better way of life they had to either invent or develop sometimes even to evolute their lifestyles.

Movie review: Fences

Movie review: Fences

Fences , a movie about a working father in the 1950s and his connections with his family , the movie is directed by Denzel Washington, starring Denzel Washington as Troy Maxson , Viola Davis as his wife Rose Maxson , Jovan Adepo and Russel Hornsby as Cory and Lyons who are Troy’s sons  and some other amazing actors.

The movie is set in the 1950s , so to give it some old time feeling mostly the main color seen in the movie is Brown ,it’s an adaptation of a play written by August Wilson so it’s filming locations are too few only a house and it’s backyards as the main location and some little seconds of Troy’s workplace and a bar .

Troy is a father of two sons who seems to be very happy with his family in the first place but later he shows how bossy and tough he is , he refuses to buy a TV as his son suggests , he rejects the offer his s n gets for joining a football team because on a hand he wants his son to get a job and on the other hand he is afraid of him being better in sports than how he was (he refuses to admit it but he is concerned about it) , and also makes a very big deal of lending his son 10$s even a bigger one when his son wants to pay it back.

the man is always in a deep thinking, he feels guilty because he used the money that the government gave to his brother who is having mental issues because of a war , to buy a house , also he feels guilty because he cheated on his wife and now there as a daughter coming from the other woman , who dies during the birthing process.


Troy wants stability even though he is the one creating the chaos, he wants a better life when he is the one destroying the life’s of his surroundings , he doesn’t have a cheerful character and he certainly won’t be loved by the viewer, I personally wanted to punch him in the middle of the movie.

He wants to build a fence as his wife asked him , but he never finishes it . Even when it becomes his own goal to build the fence , he dies before doing so. For me the fence resembles boundaries that keeps families together but how can a man who is the reason to break the family a parat build a fence which his wife wanted him to build to keep them together?

the way Denzel Washington acts in the movie and how he directed it is amazing .

But What really made me love the movie are two other characters , Viola Davis’s Rose and Mykelti Williamson’s Gabriel(Troy’s brother with mental issues) , Rose is the wife who loved her husband so much that she never suspected him to be cheating, and when she knows about it she refuses to talk to her husband again but she opens her arms to the baby who comes from another woman, from a woman who her husband had an affair with ,she raises the child as if she was hers , Viola Davis certainly did her best to show what her character really means , no wonder she won an Oscar for it.

And Mykelti’s Gabriel , a soldier ho got shot in the war and is having mental issues , Mykelti’s plays the role in a way to show all the innocence of a man not totally aware of his surroundings , he believes to be the Angel Gabriel , his acting is beautiful and amazing without him the movie would be really boring.

Book review: Disordered World by Amin Maalouf

Book review: Disordered World by Amin Maalouf

Some books are just read and passed by but some other ones need a moment of pause or a second thought, before reading Disordered World I had already read his other book Samarkand which is a novel speaking of a historic era in the times of The Assasins , it was a great novel and really deserved every single second i spent reading it , so when I saw Disordered World and saw the author I didn’t need to think , immediately I grabbed it and started reading it.


Disordered World is a book of three parts and an afterword , in the first part Maalouf talks mostly about wars and disorders created by the American government and how it caused all the chaos specially in Iraq, and later in the second part talks about arabic leaders and how they gain their legitimacy and how they ruined their legitimacy, then later in the third part he comes to generally talk about moral and human crisis , then in the afterwords he makes a summary about the whole book and his expectations for a brighter or a darker future.

In this review I want to stop by some points Maalouf makes during the book , so I will quote what he says in the book then talk about it here.

Firstly in the preface of the English edition there’s a line “A man prepared to die for a cause becomes a powerful weapon”, this is a very bold statement, and a very true one, this has a psychological view for humans , in which a person trying for a goal is not likely to be stopped , but that goal needs to be a cause or a reason powerful enough to die for , such as religious beliefs or nationality or any other cause.

In the first chapter of the first part he says “In one way or another, all the people on earth are in the same storm. Rich or poor, arrogant or downtrodden, occupiers or occupied, they are – we are – all aboard the same fragile raft and we are all going down together. Yet we go on insulting and quarrelling with each other, without heeding the rising tide.” Throughout the book Maalouf repeatedly mentions how humans are all in the same ship , specially in the last chapter in how morally we need to get together, but he knows too well that getting together is not that easy task “Teaching people to live together is a long struggle which is never completely won.” He knows too well that humans aren’t that simple animal which only knows survival, because only knowing survival and the way to achieve it is way simpler than surviving and also living all of it up to the highest levels , which mostly can be achieved by rivalries and antagonism.

In the first part even though he mentions the American-made disaster in Middle East, but he doesn’t hesitate to mention how arabs themselves contributed in this process, he says “when a Sunni militant gets behind the wheel of a truck packed with explosives and detonates it in a marketplace full of Shia families and this mass murder is called ‘resistance’, and its perpetrator a hero or martyr by certain fanatical clerics, there is no point in blaming others;” this is true, Iraqis lived in peace under the ruling of a dictator for over thirty years, yet when they have gotten their ‘freedom’ they realized that they can get hands on power , and they thought of only one way to achieve power, religion . Which later caused all the disasters happened in iraq , sunnies and shiites never had a better chance in becoming the powerful side till the fall of saddam and to gain that power they never hesitated to try getting rid of each other or at least weaken each other to become the successor of a powerful and steady government which fell only after American attacks.

Later , he talks about how the international community views Iraqis as a nation not worthy of democracy or they don’t want democracy,he says “Every time the Iraqis have had the chance to vote, they have flocked in their millions, even at the risk of their lives. Is there any other people on earth who would have queued outside polling stations in the certain knowledge that there would be suicide and car bombs? These are the people who we are told did not want democracy. This is repeated in the papers and in debates on the radio and on TV, and almost no one takes the time to examine it critically.” This is simple enough, the Iraqis opened their arms for democracy so widely they were ready to die for it, they believed in democracy specially they believed in leaders who used democracy but never applied it , it’s not their mistake that religious militias and terrorists are doing their best to oppose the western way of ruling, the Iraqis accepted democracy yet their leaders never give the hope of dictatorship up.

“A child can tell the difference between an adoptive mother and a stepmother. A people can tell the difference between liberators and occupiers.” This is Maaloufs view on the American excuse for invading Iraq , he like many of us thinks that America never meant actually liberating Iraq, their intentions might not be exactly clear but it’s obvious enough that both economic and territorial needs were the main reasons attacking Iraq.

There’s so many other points to stop by but the last one I’ll mention will be this question he asks “Does that mean that humanity progressed materially but not morally” this question comes after many points he talk about regarding human development in technology, medicine and many other aspects of life , but again we need to ask have we progressed morally? Did we get any moral development throughout all the years we lived in? Have we in any ways considered to look at another human being morally not materially? 

Summary: the book is amazing, one should never think twice to decide if one should read it or not , I absolutely recommend it (4/5)

The persecution and assassination of Jean Paul Marat (Marat/Sade) by Peter Weiss

The persecution and assassination of Jean Paul Marat (Marat/Sade) by Peter Weiss

The persecution and assassination of Jean Paul Marat is a play written by Peter Weiss , it shows a group of mental patients making a play about the last days of Jean Paul Marat and how he gets murdered, I first watched this play performed by “Ba theater group” in 2016 and I liked it so much that I Went to see it again !
The main aspect of the play is showing the philosophical arguments between Jean Paul Marat and Marquis De Sade about Revolution,death , nature , existence,sex and some other matters.

One other aspect is the romance between two characters that they already know it’s fate.
The play has a three level base , on one level Peter Weiss wrote a play which in second level has some patients acting as historic characters which is the third level

And we see reactions from all three levels at the same time , we see the revolutionary hearts (third level), the anti-revolutionary heads of post revolution(second level) and the anti-modernism of Peter Weiss (first level) 
There’s a question which cannot be avoided, why mental patients? Do they represent the fact that every different thinkingggg are considered mentally ill? Do they show the reality of mentally tired society of the Marat/Sade situation of the French society after revolution? Or they are to show how none of the French society was totally free and of responsibility to what they do and don’t? Or is it just another anti-modernism by Peter Weiss to show how mental patients and different thinking are tried to be of some sort of jailed? 


One of the characters (Corday) is the one to kill Marat , but Peter Weiss chose a patient who has sleeping problem, only wakes up when she has something to say or someone to kill , in my view she is she can be the people , those who believe in the last war or a war to end all wars , as she thinking if she killed Marat she on one hand took revenge and on the other hand ends the massacre which took place by Marat’s orders , she takes a knife and stabs a man , no feelings no second considerations , a young girl from Caen knows she will die if she killed Marat , yet she does kill Marat is she really the same as the people of the corrupt French society? Who would turn their beloved ones in just to keep themselves safe.
A really important point to focus on is Sade’s argument about death , he thinks death is simply overrated, and that death just like birth is a part of a cycle , he thinks if we wipe out the entire human race nature would give no importance to it , he believes that death is nothing but a man going into another phase of natural cycle .

Then later he talks about murder , he thinks murders before the revolution were better , he says that murders with torture had a more touching view, he hates the modern murders in which a person dies in a blink of an eye , this gives us the perspective that he only feels alive through feeling the human flesh , which he later admits “this is the world of bodies”. He wants Corday to hit him as hard as she can , he wants to feel the pain , he wants to see his own blood so he can feel alive , he wants to feel everything as a physical object only to feel alive about it.


Throughout the play there’s a general hatred towards humans , almost all the characters hate the animal side of humans and they never hesitate to show that hatred, Sade thinks humans are dishonest animals , Marat thinks humans are animals to be tamed and so on..this animal view of humans makes the play more realistic for it’s time-set , as in post-revolution times humans specially in France, were nothing but barbaric animals , killing, betraying, eating and having sex.

Even both main characters Marat and Sade, they both desire violence in different ways for different reasons.

Marat wants violence to end the previous ruling system and to tame the people also to keep the revolution safe from betrayal.

But Sade wants violence to feel alive , he wants pain , blood , torture and sex only to feel the humans flesh getting ripped off and sliced and burned.

These violent desiring characters always show only one common point of view , they all know that “these violent delights have violent endings” , Marat knows he will get killed , Corday knows she will get beheaded , Sade knows one day he will no longer feel the human flesh as an object to feel alive.


One thing not to forget is the musical parts of the play , the songs and the chorus are speaking really emotional, they defend Marat when he’s attacked , they ask for their rights when they feel oppressed, they say what the normal society feels when talking about the new leaders and how corrupt they are , the songs are true emotions of the lower classes of people , they are what every oppressed French person had felt after revolution.
There’s one part when they’re in the National Assembly, the people are randomly speaking “down with Marat” “down with Robspierre” “down with Danton” and so on.. They show how diverse the French society was at that time , also how people are driven by speeches and talks of the leaders as some of them change their opinions, how people are unstable and changed every time a leader speaks to them.
In the play there’s a certain mocking of “future” which means the present time for Peter Weiss but the future for the characters, Weiss talks about his time in a way to warn the characters of what’s waiting to humans later on , he wrote the play in the post World War II times and he saw the nuclear bombings , tanks and guns , so he made one of the characters say “there will be weapons which will kill thousands of you together ” this shows how Weiss hates the modern military actions , how he hates human activities in the modern era , but he also brings people like Voltaire into the play making fun of what science got to in the 20th century, which shows that no matter who the people are , they will always see future as a joke before actually getting to future.
Overall a really amazing play and beautifully set , one of the best plays I ever watched and read.

Movie Review: Doctor Strange 

Movie Review: Doctor Strange 


Doctor Strange is a very smart but arrogant neurosurgeon living a fancy life and always thinks he is the very best and nothing can beat him until a car accident causes him neurological problems in his hands and that is how his journey begins into becoming a man trying to save peace of the world.

The movie is directed by Scott Derricson and the main actors of this movie are Benedict Cumberbatch as Doctor Strange , Rachel McAdams as Dr. Palmer , Chiwetel Ejiofor as Mordo and Tilda Swinton as The Ancient One. And all of them were up to my expectations, they knew how to act for a comic movie and they knew how different they must be.

This movie is generally an introductory movie as we get to see the first Doctor Strange feature film , the movie has most of what it takes to be a comic movie as funny lines, plot twists, fighting scenes, teamwork against the bad dude and so on..

All the direction, cinematography, sound and other technical sides are bery good , even the storyline and events of the movie are good except that I may have some little problems with the movie as the medical side of it , for example when Strange is trying to write his name but fails , later Palmer enters the room and we see Strange throwing his hand all around with the slightest sign of abnormality .

The starting of the movie is so sudden, all you see is a group of people fighting!

And some other little detail problems.

The movie involves some different aspects of science from neurology to astrophysics , but strangely everyone knows about all of it ! Which for me was not that okay to deal with.

Summary:

A really good movie and an amazing acting by most of the actors but with few problems (8/10)

My prediction for the Razzie awards

My prediction for the Razzie awards

Razzie or Golden Raspberry awards is an annual ceremony where the worts of the movie industry for that year is chosen , and for this year there are some movies everyone expected them to be so good yet turned out to be a Razzie nomination. 

This year’s nominees are :
WORST PICTURE

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice 

Dirty Grandpa

Gods of Egypt

Hillary’s America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party

Independence Day: Resurgence 

Zoolander No. 2
WORST ACTOR

Ben Affleck / Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice  

Gerard Butler / Gods of Egypt & London Has Fallen

Henry Cavill / Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice  

Robert de Niro / Dirty Grandpa

Dinesh D’Souza [as Himself] / Hillary’s America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party

Ben Stiller / Zoolander No. 2
WORST ACTRESS

Megan Fox / Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows

Tyler Perry / BOO! A Medea Halloween

Julia Roberts / Mother’s Day 

Becky Turner [as Hillary Clinton] / Hillary’s America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party

Naomi Watts / Divergent Series: Allegiant & Shut-In

Shailene Woodley / Divergent Series: Allegiant 
WORST SUPPORTING ACTRESS 

Julianne Hough / Dirty Grandpa 

Kate Hudson / Mother’s Day 

Aubrey Plaza / Dirty Grandpa 

Jane Seymour / Fifty Shades of Black

Sela Ward / Independence Day: Resurgence 

Kristen Wiig / Zoolander No. 2
WORST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Nicolas Cage / Snowden

Johnny Depp / Alice Through the Looking Glass

Will Ferrell / Zoolander No. 2

Jesse Eisenberg / Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Jared Leto / Suicide Squad

Owen Wilson / Zoolander No. 2
WORST SCREEN COMBO

Ben Affleck & His BFF (Baddest Foe Forever) Henry Cavill / Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice 

Any 2 Egyptian Gods or Mortals / Gods of Egypt

Johnny Depp & His Vomitously Vibrant Costume / Alice Through the Looking Glass

The Entire Cast of Once Respected Actors / Collateral Beauty 

Tyler Perry & That Same Old Worn Out Wig / BOO! A Medea Halloween

Ben Stiller and His BFF (Barely Funny Friend) Owen Wilson / Zoolander No. 2 
WORST DIRECTOR

Dinesh D’Souza and Bruce Schooley / Hillary’s America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party

Roland Emmerich / Independence Day: Resurgence

Tyler Perry / BOO! A Medea Halloween 

Alex Proyas / Gods of Egypt 

Zack Snyder / Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice  

Ben Stiller / Zoolander No. 2
WORST PREQUEL, REMAKE, RIP-OFF or SEQUEL

Alice Through the Looking Glass

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice: Dawn of Justice  

Fifty Shades of Black

Independence Day: Resurgence

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows

Zoolander No. 2
WORST SCREENPLAY

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice   

Dirty Grandpa 

Gods of Egypt

Hillary’s America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party

Independence Day: Resurgence 

Suicide Squad 
And my predictions for this year are :

-Worst picture:

I’m a bit surprised that ghostbusters is not nominated, but in this list it’s quite simple to me , you can never find a worse movie than both zoolander 2 and Gods of Egypt ! They were one of the worst movies and I totally regretted watching both of them ! So if neither of them win the Razzie I’ll be disappointed!
-worst actor:

I totally hate to say this but Robert De Niro should have been the last one I predict for a Razzie ! Yet he is ! His acting in dirty granpa was really immature as if it was his first ever acting experience!
-Worst actress:

Just give it to Tyler Perry who despite actually being a male actor he was so bad he’s nominated for worst actress.

-worst supporting actress:

Aubrey Plaza’s boring awkward acting is bad enough to win it this year!
-worst supporting actor:

I really don’t think Jared Leto was that bad ! So I really hate seeing him nominated but I would go with Will Ferrel (Zoolander no.2) he had definitely one of the worst movies !
-worst screen combo:

Don’t have much to say , just either ‘BOO! A Medea Halloween’ or ‘Zoolander no.2’ come on really ! You can’t disagree!
-worst director:

Again Zoolander no.2(Ben Stiller) or Gods of Egypt(Alex Proyas) , did they even try?
-worst prequel , remake, rip-off or sequel

(Once again no Ghostbusters?) 

But now I go with Fifty shades of black ! The grey one was bad enough so what to expect from a darker version? 
-worst screenplay:

I really deeply hated Gods of Egypt’s everything! Clear enough?

Book Review: The Castle by Franz Kafka

Book Review: The Castle by Franz Kafka


The Castle is a novel by the Czech author Franz Kafka who also wrote The Metamorphosis, America and The Trial .

I haven’t read many Kafka works, but after reading The Metamorphosis some years ago I quite started liking Kafka, so when I could read The Castle , I didn’t hesitate.

Just like Metamorphosis, in The Castle there’s that gloomy winter weather that just by itself can make one sad and depressed, the story just pops out from nowhere and that wouldn’t bother you if you read Kafka before as it’s somehow always like that with him , a story starts from a point where you have no clue about. No detailed or decorated introduction only a starting , a man standing in snow and cold

No one tells you who this man is and why he’s there, the only thing you know is his name , which is K. Just like his character in the trial.

K. later claims to be a land surveyor which we can never somehow be sure as he never does his job as a surveyor , in fact no one does their jobs in that village.

K. After a while finds himself in a corrupt society, a place which is run bu a castle and that castle’s gentlemen which are the main corrupt characters in the novel , but throughout the story we understand that the gentlemen are not the only corrupt people in that place but also the people and workers .

The castle is not allowed for domestic people or just visitors, you have to be a gentleman or a castle employee to enter it which somehow is defining a corrupt and closed ruling system in which power remains to some certain people and thats it , who allowed this? Who made the gentlemen from the castle so powerful? Of course the people themselves made that kind of ruling, they are too coward to stand against it, and too lazy to a thing about it.

If i talk about the story following the storyline.

No one is sure if K. Is actually the land surveyor he says he is , he says his old assistants are coming, but such things never happen in fact he gets two new assistants who he doesn’t even know!

He wants to meet or talk to the officials up in the castle but it’s impossible, he wants to meet them in the village when they get down from the castle but everyone is trying their best to avoid that.

Later K. Falls in love with someone named Freida who works in an inn which mostly is a place for the gentlemen , but is he actually in love with her? Or is he using her to get to the gentleman he always wanted to get to? Whose name is Klamm and everyone is trying to avoid his meeting with K.

The only officials he get to see is the council chairman and two secretaries, in the first time with the council chairman, he gets a job ! Not as a land surveyor but as a school janitor! In that house what is weird is how his assistants are permitted to look into official papers but he is not ! 

In the story there a family who you get to know as Barnabas’s family consisting of two sisters , their brother Barnabas and their ill parents.

You get to read their story as a family who is in a poor condition only because their daughter refused to go after a gentleman’s request who asked for her from the inn.

Even though never the castle nor the gentleman himself complain directly about the matter , yet the people in the village start to punish this family for that refusal, their father gets fired , no one gives them jobs , no one visits them or even talks to them, such punishment comes from the people without orders from higher authorities, which shows how people are cruel to each other in names of higher powers. 

K. Faces hate, love, refusal, ignorance and all other type of feelings from the people in the story , everyone has a different telling and all of them seem convenient yet can’t they all be true so it’s important to know how K. Thought of all the stories told by the villagers who are lazy enough not to punish the village authorities and yet hateful enough to punish each other.

It’s a pity though that Kafka never finished the book, I personally don’t think it would have turned out to be his finest works but it would have been a good book , I don’t know whether Kafka lef it intentionally or something stopped him from writing, but from his request to his friend Max Brod , Kafka asked him to burn all his writings after he dies , so if Brod had done what Kafka asked for , we probably might have never heard of Kafka.
Summary 

The book is really good but in the end it remains unfinished and we may never know how Kafka wanted to finish it.

So for what we have of the book I can only say 3/5