Thursday, April 3, 2014

Imelda (2003)

              Imelda is a documentary film directed by Ramona S. Diaz about the life of former First Lady of the Philippines Imelda Marcos. It was first released in 2003 at the International Documentary Film Festival in Amsterdam. It was also shown during the 2004 Sundance Film Festival where it won the Excellence in Cinematography Award.

            The documentary is about the life of Mrs. Marcos, beginning from her childhood, her meeting and marriage to the former President of the Philippines Ferdinand Marcos, her life during the Martial Law, their exile to Hawaii, and her eventual return to the Philippines. The documentary includes actual interviews from Mrs. Marcos herself where she is allowed to tell her story herself. Hence, the documentary can be seen as a retelling of the history of the Philippines in the perspective of Imelda Marcos.

            Perhaps the most prominent part of the film is Mrs. Marcos’ constant emphasis on the importance of “beauty”. Here, she stated that all her outfits, shoes and jewelry were for the sake of providing the people a “role model”. Even after an attempted assassination on her where she got a number slashes from a knife she wondered “why such an ugly instrument” were used on her.

            It is easy for viewers of the film to see Mrs. Marcos as truly ignorant to the actual state and suffering of the people. With all the wealth and power she held, she became viewed as an arrogant elitist from the higher class. Amusingly, Mrs. Marcos herself might have realized this for she opposed the public showing this film in the Philippines. Perhaps she herself have seen what her true image had been.

            Overall, the documentary Imelda was an excellent take on the showing the life of Imelda Marcos. It was a balanced view of Mrs. Marcos, comparing to past media depictions of her during martial law. The documentary had truly shown what Imelda Marcos is as a person.


           Nightfall is a science fiction short story written by Isaac Asimov first published in the September 1941 issue of the Astounding Science Fiction magazine. The story is about how the people living in a fictional planet called “Lagash” which has always been illuminated at all sides by its six suns, face a time of darkness which they have never experienced before.

            The story tackles various ideas which center mainly on dealing with fear, religion, and the origins of a belief. The way the author depicts each idea in the story is quite interesting. The ideas are matched perfectly to the resulting beliefs due to the ignorance of the people of Lagash.

            The main concept is introduced by Emerson’s quote at the beginning of the story. Isaac Asimov’s take on this question is quite believable. If for instance nightfall does arrives in every 2049 year cycle, people who lived near the end of the cycle will have little to no idea of coming darkness, and hence, they will be unable to comprehend the “reality” before them. But due to man’s natural curiosity, they will still find ways, rather invent theories in order to somehow explain it.

            This is quite similar to the recent “2012 Phenomena” where people around the world conceived various theories about the end of the Mayan calendar. It is said that the “end of the world” was sure to come that day. Scholars and scientist however disputed this. However the event just passed similar to how our normal calendar ends.

            The story can therefore be also seen as a representation of the divergence between religion and science. It implies how the settlement of the difference in beliefs generally results in great conflicts. If the cultists and scientists just somehow tried to cooperate more, a lot more people could have been saved.

Friday, March 21, 2014

Musical and Scientific

                          How peculiar music is. How it can affect people’s emotions just by being combinations of different sound waves hitting our eardrums. Science can explain the movement of sound waves as we are studying in our Physics class. It can also move stuff and and break glass at certain volumes, frequencies and pitches. It is also scientifically proven that music can help us do specific tasks more efficiently like studying, working out, memorizing, or concentrating. But what cannot be explained scientifically about music is why it can affect us. Why can it enhance our skills and performances? Why do we react to it? Why do we relate it to certain memories? Why can they exemplify emotions? Why? I seriously don’t know. I just know that it does.
                          And as music can affect us, it can also be affected by everything else. Emotions, religions, situations, and almost everything related to science. Science can affect music. Science can BE music as it is in Gustav Holt’s “The Planets” where each movement of the music represents one of the planets of our solar system. Science is also dominant in the song “Right Here Right Now” by Fatboy Slim where it narrates the timeline of the universe. There’s even a song enumerating the periodic table of elements.

                          How peculiar music is. How it can be anything and how anything can be it whilst being only combinations of sound waves hitting our eardrums at measured intervals.

Yanna Palo

Imelda More-cost

I, honestly, am one of those people who were gullible enough to judge Imelda Marcos negatively right at the bat. What can I do, she’s so easy to judge! She is so narcissistic. While she talks about her life, her many suitors, her achievements, her lineage and her beauty, she speaks so highly of herself, it’s overwhelming.  Heck, she’s even proud of the English word, “imeldific”, that is so ego-centric in meaning and is based on her. “I am simple” she says but her extravagant hand-crafted clothes and her lavish collection of thousands of shoes say otherwise. She also came up with a bunch of symbols for life and such which all seemed to make so much sense to her but looked like doodles to me. And a number of people in the documentary about her seem to agree with my thoughts on her. Some of them despise her and her husband, former President Ferdinand Marcos with a passion.
But others didn’t. And that thoroughly surprised me. So it got me curious as to why they did like Imelda. So, first on the list of why these people admired Imelda was how she endured the grief of losing both her parents and her husband whilst enduring also the verbal abuse she is getting from the masses. I am amazed that she went through that situation so elegantly. Imelda says, "When you reach a certain level of leadership, people cannot be neutral with you. They either love, love, love you, or hate, hate, hate you". Then, the documentary got to the part where she got stabbed. Another positive thing about her was that she was an active First Lady. I think she was the first First Lady of the Philippines to “get her hands dirty” in the political world. And therefore, she has earned some of my respect. Gosh, I really did not know until watching this documentary that she was a victim of attempted assassination. And that softened my heart for her a bit. So did the time she was talking about Ferdinand while she was beside his corpse. You can feel her grief just by the aura she was giving off even though she was so composed. All of these supplement the fact that she was nicknamed the “Steel Butterfly”.

That scene reminded me that she is still a human being, having problems, feeling pain. It’s just that she’s living in a different world from ours and it might look ridiculous and narcissistic to the rest of us, but that is her life. And, now, I opt to let her be. I still dislike most of her actions, don’t get me wrong, but I dislike her a lot less than before. Actually, I shouldn’t dislike her but her actions in the first place, says my Philosophy I teacher. Her actions don’t reflect her entirely. She may still be exemplifying the “Steel Butterfly” image of hers by not showing anyone the pain she may be feeling deep inside. So I shall let her be and I should remember to not judge a book by its summary or the reviews or, in this case, people by the size of their collection of shoes.

Food for Thought

A Look into Instant Food: GFours Productions

No copyright infringement intended

We are always in a hurry, and because of this, our food tries to keep up with our pace. Nowadays, all types of "on the go" food are available to us. We cannot deny the extraordinary convenience and brilliant taste, at the same time, we cannot put aside the preservatives and processing that go with them.

This is an info-graphic video tackles the different kinds of "instant food" available in the market today. It helps you understand where these foods originated from, how they are prepared, and who eats them the most. More importantly, this video shows the effect of these food on our bodies and eventually, our society.

Opinions about the different instant foods from various people are also shared in this video.

BBC News. "Fast Food Factory." BBC News. BBC, n.d. Web. 19 Mar. 2014. <>.

Canned Food UK, (n.d.). Retrieved from

Geoghegan, T. (2013). The Story of How the Tin Can Nearly wasn’t. BBC News Magazine. Retrieved from

Levitt, A. (2013). A Brief History of Canned Food. River Front Times. Retrieved from

"News." The History Of The Fast Food Industry. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Mar. 2014. <>.

Reyes, Senen. "Fast Food Industry: Keeping up with the Changing Lifestyle1." Government of Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Market and Industry Services Branch, International Markets Bureau, Branding Management, Agri-Food Trade Service. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Mar. 2014. <>.

Wilson, Tracy. "How Fast Food Works." HowStuffWorks., 22 Aug. 2006. Web. 19 Mar. 2014. <>.

Yates, Jonathan. "3 Reasons the Fast-Food Nation Will Rule the World." 3 Reasons the Fast-Food Nation Will Rule the World. N.p., 17 Dec. 2012. Web. 19 Mar. 2014. <>.

The Bride of Frankenstein

       In the book Frankenstein and The Bride of Frankenstein film, Dr. Frankenstein is a scientist that has a scientific breakthrough wherein he as able to reanimate a corpse made of body parts coming from different corpses. Upon reanimation, the creature, who most people call Frankenstein, escapes the lab and roams the streets. Because of this, the townspeople come together in fear that the creature that is beyond their comprehension may kill their friends and family. Due to the circumstances unfolding, Dr. Frankenstein bore the guilt resulting from his work and vowed to never repeat his experiment.