-
DIRECT LINK ADDED
2007-04-15 05:07:19
Added a DIRECT link to '3', my new (and underdownloaded) Naruto 300 Trailer vid.
http://www.animemusicvideos.org/members/members_videoinfo.php?v=141969
Filesize is significantly smaller but quality is almost the same as the LOCAL link. Download speed may vary depending on where you are. If unable to download, it means bandwidth has been exceeded. It is after all FREE HOSTING.
With this, all preparations are complete. I can finally get on to some marking and serious work. Oh yeah, did i mention i'm a teacher.
-
Not another 300 Naruto video ?
2007-04-06 04:22:08
http://www.animemusicvideos.org/members/members_videoinfo.php?v=141969
1. My first video since 2003's Armed and Dangerous which i thought was the perfect swansong for me but old habits die hard i guess
2. I have always been inspired by the heroism displayed by the Konoha genins in the Sasuke chase arc and i'm glad i waited for 300's trailer to arrive before making a vid about them because i feel there is no better song or trailer out there that can justifically represent their battles and struggles
3. This is not about 300 spartans but only 3 konoha genins.
4. I have seen Rubix's video and i liked it a lot but this is something different
5. My first trailer amv, my first xvid export and my first time using DVD footage (thanks to a-m-v.org guides!!)
6 Story is roughly the same as the Sasuke arc. Sasuke has fallen to the dark side. Risking war with another nation, King Chouji (his wife is Tsunade!! haha) and 2 of the finest warriors from Konoha (Kiba and Neji) set out to retrieve him not knowing he went on his own accord. They never got to see Sasuke again (which means they all died in the end) which is why Sasuke did not appear again.
7. I think Chouji makes a great Leonaidas and this is my tribute to a criminally underrated character.
8. Good old fashioned fades and cross-fades rulezzzz!!!!!!!!!! Those who knew me around 2002-2003 know i don't make crap videos (not outstanding not not crap either).
Opinions or comments, good or bad are greatly appreciated. I welcome exchange of opinions. -
What is Marketing?
2004-01-01 05:19:30
You see a gorgeous girl at a party.
You go up to her and say, "I am very rich. Marry me!"
That's
Direct Marketing
You're at a party with a bunch of friends and see a gorgeous girl.
One of your friends goes up to her and pointing at you says,
"He's very rich. Marry him."
That's
Advertising.
You see a gorgeous girl at a party.
You go up to her and get her telephone number.
The next day you call and say, "Hi, I'm very rich. Marry me."
That's
Telemarketing.
You're at a party and see a gorgeous girl.
You get up and straighten your tie; you walk up to her and
pour her a drink.
You open the door for her, pick up her bag after she drops it,
offer her a ride, and then say, "By the way, I'm very rich
"Will you marry me?"
That's
Public Relations.
You're at a party and see a gorgeous girl.
She walks up to you and says, "You are very rich, I want to
marry you."
That's
Brand Recognition.
You see a gorgeous girl at a party.
You go up to her and say, "I'm rich. Marry me"
She gives you a nice hard slap on your face.
That's
Customer Feedback
-
Endorse the Against the Killing of Animals due to SARS Petition to Agri-food and Vetinary Authority of Singapore .
2003-05-23 07:16:35
http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?cwsasdhr
Please sign this...even if u r not from Singapore
-
Reactie Britse fanclub: 'making no apologies'
2003-03-09 23:20:22
It was billed as unprecedented access. It was certainly that. Michael Jackson let Martin Bashir into his life for eight months, apparently oblivious to the fact that Bashir is an investigative journalist with his own agenda. When push came to shove, it was irrelevant that Michael was disarmingly charming, open and friendly during their early conversations, because nothing was going to prevent Bashir from persevering with his crusade to expose the "disturbing" aspects of Michael's life.
So we were left with a Michael Jackson who was probably more genuine than anything we have seen before, and certainly by the end of the project, more angry and distressed than anything we have seen before. For fans of the artist, there will be mixed feelings. Perhaps some will be shocked that they did not know Michael Jackson as well as they thought. Perhaps – like me – it will be the opposite reaction: that Michael was behaving exactly as expected.
For me, it all boils down to a question of truth. Perhaps the most shocking thing for some fans to accept is the fact (and it is a fact) that Michael lied during the interview. But to concentrate blindly on this issue would mean missing one very vital point: even when he was lying, he was being utterly genuine. The things that he fibbed about (his face, the early explanations about Blanket's mother) were not great monumental questions of mankind. Those issues were his business, and he was very embarrassed and (for some reason) clearly did not expect to be probed like this.
Do I wish that Michael had been more open on those topics? Of course. Am I angry with him for not being open on those topics? Not in the slightest. I would question why it is that he has no-one around him that was able to explain to him that this was not going to be another Oprah Winfrey interview. This was going to be the Diane Sawyer interview on speed. This was going to be about feeding the public's taste for all things salacious. This was going to be about allowing Michael to open up to Bashir, climb trees with him, talk about his childhood – in order for Bashir to go in for the kill later. But to feel anger towards Michael for his naiveté and openness - openness which ironically led to him having to fib out of sheer embarrassment - is to demonstrate a fundamental lack of understanding about him. This is him being genuine. Evading questions that he sees as no-one else's business is what he does in real-life too! Over the years, I have spoken to countless friends and associates of Michael's, and none of them – even the closest – talks to him about his appearance. Apart from anything else, it quickly becomes ridiculous to remain focussed on that aspect of his life when he has clearly has so many other interesting things to say.
Crucially, contrast his reaction to those issues to the issue that the world's media, in their insatiable hunt for paedophilia, will focus on. Michael's relationship with children is something that he is happy to talk about. In the early scenes with Gavin, the brave 12-year old who beat cancer, Michael was awkwardly aware of people's image of him but didn't attempt to stop Gavin speaking about their close friendship. Indeed, Michael actually confirmed that Gavin does sometimes sleep in his room. Even in the segment filmed in Miami in early 2003, when Michael is obviously feeling very angry and betrayed by Bashir, he is unwilling to "clean up" his story to satisfy his critics. Unlike the shape of his nose or the complex nature of his relationship with his children's mother, this is an issue that Michael is perfectly honest about. Yes, he says, children (not just boys – again, a tabloid fantasy) sleep in his bed if they want to. No, he says, he doesn't have sexual contact with them. I thought that his speech about bedtime stories and warmed-up milk was painfully honest, and not in the least bit sinister. It is therefore terribly ironic that this segment of the programme, when Michael was – even through his anger – refusing to be beaten by the aggressive line of Bashir's questioning, is going to be the segment that parts of the media will use as an indication of how "disturbing" he is.
How many times can the word "disturbing" be used in one night? Does Martin Bashir really have such a poor grasp on the English language that he has to revert to these Louis Theroux-esque clichés?
Why was Bashir pussyfooting around the issue? We saw a boy who had suffered from cancer and had expected to die. We know he spent a lot of time with Michael. We know they slept in the same room, possibly even in the same bed (I was angry that Michael felt he was compelled to reveal the exact sleeping position they adopted as if he was on trial). Why do those things become "disturbing" unless Bashir believes that Michael Jackson likes to have sex with 12-year old cancer victims? The innuendo and smut can only lead to one conclusion, or else it's just there for the sake of it. My opinion is that it's the latter.
If Bashir feels that Michael Jackson has sex with 12-year old cancer victims, he should have the courage to come out and say it. If he doesn't believe that, then he should not employ such tacky journalistic practices to imply something he does not believe.
The argument against what I have just said comes from the righteous brigade. The point, these people say, with copies of the Daily Mail shoved up their backside, is not that Michael is actually having sex with 12-year old cancer victims. It is the fact that he lives in his own fantasy world that has no connection to our world (the world of war, deceit and corruption presumably) and that he should therefore be made to recognise the responsibility that he, as a 44 year old, has when it comes to the welfare of children. We're not saying there's anything sinister about him, say the righteous brigade, but it's just not right that he should be left alone with children.
My answer is: yes it is. Leave your children with this man and perhaps they will be exposed to a belief system refreshingly different to the ignorant fever that modern society suffers from with regard to child sexual abuse. We're all obsessed with having sex with children. The papers are full of it. People go out in the streets to protest against it. Front page after front page is full of details about men who prey on children. It is simply not right, says the perceived wisdom, for men to be alone in a room (never mind a bedroom!) with a child who is not their own. All men want to do is to have sex with children.
Michael is a victim of other people's fear and depravity. Study after study has revealed that most child abuse occurs in the child's own home – either by parents or other family and carers. There is simply no evidence whatsoever to back up the image of an enormous underworld of strangers desperate to get into a child's underwear. Of course these things happen, and they are horrific. But if just a fraction of the attention that is spent creating a climate of fear was thrown in the direction of where the abuse actually occurs, perhaps we would be living in happier times. When Michael's silly baby-dangling moment was plastered across newspapers the world over, how many other children were genuinely at harm in their own home? When Gavin was holding Michael's hand tight as he revealed how Michael had helped him gain mental courage as he suffered from cancer, how many 12-year olds were actually being abused in their own home as the media pundits tut-tutted?
Michael has nothing to hide when it comes to this non-nose-job area of his life, and it seems to me that it is this openness that really "disturbs" people. Despite all the suggestive headlines and the pop-psychology (even Freud would be turning in his grave), I am pleased that Michael is still so real that he can speak perfectly candidly about the need to show affection to children despite everything that happened in 1993. It's one of the reasons I admire him.
The other reason, my main reason, is his music. Of course, we should not be surprised that an investigative journalist did not want to concentrate on the music of this living legend. Similarly, we do not know how much footage was left on the cutting room floor. And yet, would the public really have been so bored if we had heard some more about Michael's creative process? If Bashir had refrained for just 10 seconds from asking Michael about how he dare change his own nose, would the audience have been so disappointed? Someone, somewhere, bought enough Michael Jackson records to fund that lifestyle that Bashir finds so "disturbing" (how dare someone spend their own decently-earned money on creating a fantasy world!). More people have bought products bearing Michael Jackson's name than have bought products bearing the name of any other artist, anywhere in the world, at any time. Would none of those people have been interested in knowing a little more than simply how Michael does the moonwalk and where he was when he composed Billie Jean? Were none of these questions worth pursuing, or – if they were pursued – were none worth including in the final edit? I find this a great, if predictable, shame.
I don't know how Michael Jackson has got to this stage in his life with no adequate system in place to protect his unusual personality from other people's agendas. However, I am pleased that he has remained true to his beliefs, and that when it came to the really important things, the things that are not purely to do with himself but can actually relate to us all, Michael consistently tried to be open and honest, even in the midst of what was clearly, by the end, an aggressive questioner.
In the article that Martin Bashir wrote for the Sunday Times on 2nd February 2003, he said that while he was pleased to have spent so much time with Michael, "it will be a relief to walk away from Neverland and return to the relative normality of a family life, three naturally conceived children and the weekly trip to Sainsbury’s." Well, I would have thought that it would have been quite a relief for Michael too. Let Bashir have his delightfully normal, inoffensive life. I don't see Michael, or anyone else, laying claim to know how best Bashir should live. There is no proof that Michael Jackson's way of life harms anyone; there is plenty of proof that it helps many disadvantaged people. My favourite scene from Living With Michael Jackson was the one of Michael walking over the bridge at Neverland with all the children around him. I dare anyone to find anything sinister in that; if you can, than I suggest the problem lies not with Michael but with you. If Bashir is so offended by this that he can't wait to get back to normality, then that's fine. Each to his own. In the mean time, I'm glad Michael's still there, doing what he does. And making no apologies.
JOURNAL: poolfan (Shane H)
Current server time: Dec 26, 2024 16:19:54