Letter to Esmeralda

(We had to write a love letter for Spanish this Valentine’s Day, I was chosen to be Quasimodo).

Querida Esmeralda;

¿Cómo puedo explicarte mi gozo, mi alegría divina? ¿Cómo podría mostrarte cuánto de mi te pertenece, con todas mis memorias, mis poemas, impulsos y temores?

Has sido como el viento desde el primer momento. Siempre tan impetuosa, intensa y agitadora. Nunca he conocido tal felicidad. Sin embargo, estoy lleno de dolorosa confusión.

Desde la impenetrable oscuridad de mi mazmorra de piedra me he preguntado cientos de veces si enamorarse sería mera intuición, hecho estallar por las acciones de otro. Inesperados movimientos, diminutas sonrisas, gestos inapreciables. Ahora, me aferro a cada gesto y cada postura, ansiando cazarme reflejado en los charcos de tus pasiones más profundas. He destapado al fin la verdadera cara del amor, y la intuición no existe en él. Me ahogo bajo las olas de mi propia beatitud, mas la intuición de nadar hacia la superficie para apresurarme a capturar una bocanada de aire no existe en mí.

El mundo ha sido durante interminables años un inescrutable misterio. Sin embargo, todo lo que necesito en él ahora eres tú. Tú y tu talento, tu belleza y tu voz, la cual hace eco en cada esquina que veo, y es que las observo todas lleno de asombro, buscándote tras ellas.

La paz me envuelve entre sus brazos desde que mis ojos se posaron sobre ti, mas he pensado en tu tacto y tu presencia tantas veces, incontables, que estoy entumecido por el anhelo. Oír tu suave voz de nuevo sería una explosión de euforia. Esa melodía de algodón y seda, que acaricia el alma y apacigua a la mente.

Si tu recuerdo no perdura en mí intacto, y gradualmente no se vuelve más que un punzante dolor que arrastre sobre mi apesumbrada alma hasta el fin de mis días, seguiré considerándome bendecido y único. Aunque nunca llegues a concebir cuánto te quise, tú y el mundo entero debe saber que hay un hombre, roto y apagado, que te amará eternamente. Es un honor sentir esto por ti. Sentir algo tan inmenso en semejante diminuta vida.

No puedo existir sin ti. Soy olvidadizo de todo cuanto me rodea excepto ver tu silueta de nuevo. Mi vida parece detenerse ahí, no alcanzo a ver más allá. Me has absorbido por completo. La sensación de que te disuelves me ahoga e inquieta. Siempre fue impactante la idea de que hubiese hombres dispuestos a morir mártires por su religión. Me he estremecido ante ello, sin embargo ya no. Yo podría ser un mártir por mi religión: el amor. Podría morir por ello, morir por ti. Mi credo es la afección y tú eres mi único dogma. Me has embelesado con un poder al que no puedo resistir, ni quiero.

Mi boca no ha cesado de hablar desde que posaste tus suaves labios sobre ella. La idea de que vuelvas a hacerlo ha intoxicado mi mente, la cual no recuerda nada anterior a la memoria de tu presencia. Te he amado toda mi vida sin saberlo, he añorado tu imagen tantos años, encarcelado en esta casa de Dios. ¿Por qué han de ser nuestros placeres tan efímeros e interrumpidos?

Mi cordura se desvanece con cada recuerdo tuyo que rememoro. No llego a reunir dos ideas sin que tú irrumpas en mi mente y te interpongas entre ellas. Soy incapaz de pensar en otra cosa que no seas tú. A pesar de mis esfuerzos, mi imaginación me conduce constantemente al pensamiento de tu imagen. Te rodeo, te beso, te acaricio y cada tacto se vuelve una pequeña chispa de pasión. Recuerdo las veces en que nos fundimos en un solo cuerpo: perfecto, completo y eterno.

¿Qué ha sido de mí? Me has privado de mi juicio. Esta monomanía hace que quiera romper mis cadenas y abandone esta mazmorra que va más allá de lo físico. Sin embargo, permanezco aquí, empujado por el sentido de la obligación. Un agitado conflicto se lleva a cabo en mi interior. Esta vida jamás habría sido mía sin ti. Me has devorado por completo. Me siento dichoso y necio tan pronto como me permito pensar en ti. Me arremolino alrededor de un delicioso sueño, en el que en un instante vivo mil años. Sobrepasado por amor, sintiendo amor en cada poro, viviendo solo por amor. Al mismo tiempo, consumido por la añoranza y atrapado en una inmensa telaraña llamada aflicción.

Debes saber, inigualable Esmeralda, que tu ausencia hace sentirme vulgar e impuro. Cada instante que paso sin ti es como inhalar una enfermedad que me subyuga a la languidez. Todo lo que es exaltado y boyante en mi naturaleza apaciguada me insta a volar hacia ti, me reprime por la fría demora, se ríe ante la aprensión y rechaza la prudencia. ¿Por qué no estoy contigo?

Advertisements

Film review: Elysium

This critic contains tons of spoilers, you’ve been warned.

Title – Elysium

Director – Neill Blomkamp (also screenwriter)

Cast – Matt Damon, Jodie Foster, William Fichtner, Alice Braga, Sharlto Copley, Diego Luna, Wagner Moura, Talisa Soto, Ona Grauer, Terry Chen, Adrian Holmes

Genre – Sci-fi, action, social drama

Why I watched – Sci-fi + Matt Damon + Distric 9’s director, nothing else to add, right?

Plot – Set in the year 2154, where the very wealthy live on a man-made space station while the rest of the population resides on a ruined Earth, a man takes on a mission that could bring equality to the polarized worlds.

“Elysium”, despite not being a revealing concept is basically a sci-fi film adaptation of many Mexicans’ struggle to jump the border and enter the USA, the same way District 9 was based on apartheid. Unfortunately and unlike District 9, which had its interesting turns, plot twists and unexpectance, Elysium is not subtle at all and delivers a cliche plot and cliche characters who make cliche actions.

First of all you have Max Da Costa (Matt Damon), your typical ex-convict with a good heart and intentions who is secretly in love with his childhood best friend/crush, Frey Santiago (Alice Braga), who just so happens to have a daughter suffering from acute leukemia, Matilda (Emma Tremblay). So far, nothing concept-revealing, right? Well, it gets worse.

“Spider” (Wagner Moura) is the head of a group of men who organize clandestine journeys to Elysium. Of course, they’re all fierce ex-convicts who wouldn’t think it twice before shooting anyone in the head, but hey, let’s not forget they’re good-hearted. To add to the stew, John Carlyle (William Fichtner) is the cruel CEO of Armadyne Corporation, whose comments’ purpose are written for the audience to deeply and instantly hate him.

In spite of all these platitudes, Jodie Foster (Secretary of Defense Jessica Delacourt in the film) thankfully brings in a positive aspect to the film with her fantastic acting. She reallly seems to have tried to bring in some of what we saw in Distric 9 into Elysium, thus making the audience forget for a little while that all they had seen so far had already been done in 45272481 films more.

The special effects were also remarkable, the producers seem to have invested a lot of money in making sure they were brilliant. Which they were, of course.

Let’s go back to the things I personally disliked, shall we? Let’s talk about goofs. Yep, I caught a few of those (which is something I don’t usually do but these were kind of obvious). For starters, in the beginning of the film we see lil’ Max (played by Maxwell Perry Cotton, good choice, IMO) getting in trouble, playing with lil’ Frey (Valentina Giros), talking to a nun, etc.. The narrator explains what has happened to Earth, explaining it is the end of the 21st century (let’s say 2096). Then, the story fast-forwards to an adult-looking Max Da Costa, in 2154. If this were true, Max would be at least 55, which he definitely isn’t.

The last one I caught was the fact that the healing machine must scan laser-etched tattoos in order to identify subjects as citizens of Elysium, right? Because even if you’re up there you need to be an Elysium citizen. Then Spider resets Elysium to make all humans declared citizen. The healing machine is able to identify Matilda despite her not having a tattoo, bit of a plot hole there.

I too have heard some people say Delacourt’s clothes suddenly change at some point as well as point out the fact that the first healing-machine we see (which cures a little girl bearing crutches) diagnoses “multiple compound fractures”, which actually means broken bones cut through the skin, which wasn’t in the film. However, no need to kill anyone over those goofs.

So, in conclusion, Elysium is a remix of District 9 except for a wider audience who have no idea everything in it has already been made about a hundred times. Too much melodrama regarding Frey’s daughter and too much fake heroism. Blomkamp, you did a brilliant job with District 9, are you going to start going downhill now? 😦

Rating just average (5/10 or even less), would not recommend. How about you let me know your opinion? *puppy eyes*

Protected: Oz the Great and Powerful – brief review

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey – Review

Aloha, my dear imaginative readers, I hope your new year is being nice. Soooooo, I went to see The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey today and was slightly proud of myself as I went on my own. Greatest achievement of the year so far. In all seriousness, I’m not actually that proud, as I’ve never seen going out alone as something weird, but what holds me back from this is mainly people. You may or may not know that not only do I hate most human beings (particularly stupid ones and of my age) but people also terrify me. They literally scare me, you’d be surprised to know that even babies and toddlers intimidate me.

Anyway, the only reason I’m writing this review is pretty much the fact that my router has been turned off – everyone must think I’m asleep – and I have nothing to do without the internet. I shall post this tomorrow. I apologize for my lack of creativity and awful vocabulary but y’know it’s 2 in the morning. Also, I’ve lately been missing writing; I should probably continue to write stories and fanfiction again. Wait, why am I telling you this? I bet you don’t give two fucks.

Title – The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

Director – Peter Jackson

Cast – Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggins

Sir Ian Mckeller as Gandalf

Benedict Cumberbatch as The Necromancer and Smaug

Richard Armitage as Thorin

Dean O’Gorman as Fili

Aidan Turner as Kili (Irish! #represent)

& others whose names I can’t remember

Type of film – Adventure, epic fantasy

Why I watched – First of all the Lord of the Rings trilogy plus The Hobbit (the novel) are on my to-read list of books. Secondly, the film was coming out and I thought it’d be a nice opportunity to read it and then watch it. Thirdly and most importantly, Martin Freeman is the protagonist and I bloody love him.

This film, as well as the novel, takes place in Middle Earth, sixty years before the Lord of the Rings. The film begins with 111-year-old Bilbo Baggins, a hobbit, writing and narrating the story of his journey to his nephew Frodo. He explains how Gandalf visited him one evening and the following day 13 dwarves knocked on his door. Gandalf also comes and tells Bilbo he has been chosen as a burglar to take part in a very dangerous journey to the Lonely Mountain, which was where long ago most dwarves lived and kept their thousands of diamonds, gold and other precious objects until a fierce dragon called Smaug killed most of them and from then on has been living in the mountain.

The novel was quite good, I really enjoyed it (although I won’t be reviewing it because I simply cannot be arsed to) and I think despite it being written for children absolutely everyone who likes fantasy will enjoy it. To be honest, I wasn’t sure if I would like it because I generally don’t enjoy novels which are too far from reality, having their own worlds and creatures. I was happy to be proven wrong.

The only “flaw” I could find in it was the fact that it’s a tiny bit confusing when it constantly says “at the East of mountain X” or “they walked to the South”, you would have to know the map of their world pretty well to keep track of what it talks about. It was still very entertaining and easy to read, with no complicated vocabulary.

My expectations on this film were extremely high as I think Peter Jackson (also known as the guy whom I keep thinking is called Percy Jackson and Samuel L. Jackson…) is a brilliant director, having directed the whole Lord of The Rings trilogy and Martin Freeman is an amazing actor (also, it’s pretty hard to make a shitty movie with a $200-315 million budget, let’s be honest).

I didn’t quite understand what was going on when Gandalf was talking with the King Elf (whose name I can’t remember) and that other elf played by Cate Blanchett about some sword or what Radagast the Brown was doing in the forest with his strange rabbits. The novel does mention Gandalf having other issues to take care of but the book focuses on Bilbo’s journey. I realized then that this was a way of conecting The Hobbit to the rest of the Lord of the Rings films.

Martin Freeman was brilliant portraying adventure-hater Bilbo Baggins (“from Bag End”). On the one hand I was a bit annoyed by the fact that in the book Bilbo is completely opposing to going on an adventure in contrast to the film but on the other hand I loved seeing him jumping that fence yelling “I’m going on an adventure!!”.

i'm going on an adventure

I could definitely see a bit of similarity between John Watson (the character which Martin plays in BBC ‘Sherlock’) and Bilbo. Watson is constantly saying no to Sherlock’s crazy propositions of plans, even though he always ends up accepting because let’s face it, he loves his boyfriend, and at the same time Bilbo is – at the start of the film mainly – saying that he loves his hobbit-hole and won’t take part in the adventure.

kili and fili

#AND #IN #THAT #MOMENT #I #KNEW #MY #LIFE #WAS #RUINED

Am I the only person who thinks Gollum is kind of cute? Yes? Okay, then. Seriously though, I know he’s almost bald, way too skinny and has only 9 teeth but his big blue eyes and innocent smile when he was talking to Bilbo was sort of cute-ish. Then he switched to his rage-filled personality and it became scary-ish and creepy.

There’s not much I can say about the ending of the film because it’s actually not the proper ending of the whole story. I was a bit concerned as of when the film was going to end and if it would actually feel like an ending. But in fact it was great.

Some might not like the fact that such a short book (less than 300 pages) is going to be made into a trilogy but I personally think it’s a positive thing. I mean, there is most definitely a money-seeking intention behind it, no matter how tiny it is. Still, it’s nice to see a film which can stay pretty close to how the novel is. In contrast, I was a bit confised because of the added scenes and background stories. (But that’s just me being a bad LOTR fan…)

The only few changes there were (apart from the added scenes) where the addition of some more fights and drama, however, we must not forget that films are way different from books. No matter how descriptive novels are you are always able to include your own piece of imagination into them, which is mainly why I love them. Films use props and special effects to recreate what books describe as closely as possible and they always sell better if they have that extra fight or dialogue.

I found that while the book wasn’t so “gory” and descriptive with the fights and deaths since it was written for a young audience the film is way more mature, making it less childish and more suitable for a teenager and adult audience. I think most people who generally enjoy fantasy books and films (The Chronicles of Narnia, Harry Potter, even Star Wars) will most likely enjoy The Hobbit, no matter how old they are.

The critics for this much acclaimed film have been extremely mixed, from what I have read in Wikipedia none are particularly negative (not being lower that a 6/10) with 7s and 6s and other are very positive giving it 9s and even 10s. To decide whether it is good, entertaining, exciting, disappointing or boring is up to everyone but this film is definitely one of the most highlighted ones of 2012 having gained in its box office more than 900 million dollars globally.

Cheers,

Victoria. xx

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year to all my lovely non-existent readers, I hope 2013 is full of happiness, fun and mainly health for everyone, I hope all your dreams come true.

That’s the crap people say in New Years, right?

Cheers. xx

The Perk of Being a Wallflower – Film review

Release Date – 3rd October 2012 (in Ireland)

Genres – Drama | Romance

Director – Stephen Chbosky

Starring – Logan Lerman (Charlie), Emma Watson (Sam), Erza Miller (Patrick).

Based on Stephen Chbosky’s novel ‘The Perks of Being a Wallflower’ (published 1999).

Review – This time I am not going to write a synopsis because the story is pretty much the same as the book, so if you don’t know what the book and film are about then I suggest you read my review on the book.

I watched the film a week later after it came out, and that was a while ago therefore I have forgotten a lot of stuff. Well done, shitty memory, I love you too. I really really cannot be bothered to re-watch it so this review will most likely suck. Deal with it.

Anyway, I must start off by saying that I hate a lot of things in this world. I’ll make a list for you guys one day. One of the things I most abhor is not when films omit parts of the book (as long as they’re not that relevant) but when they change stuff. Seriously no, there’s no need to do that. Thankfully, this film is pretty close to what the book is like – probably due to the fact that the author of the novel wrote the script.

There are two main things I can remember they changed. The first one was the whole story of the sister having a boyfriend who hit her once and then got pregnant. They included the slap he gave her but they didn’t say anything about the pregnancy and her having to abort. I feel like they didn’t give Charlie’s family enough attention.

The second thing is Charlie’s friendship with his English teacher whose name I can’t remember but I know was played by Paul Rudd (Mike in Friends). They did include how he gave him books to read and review but they totally ignored the part in which Charlie goes to his house for lunch and their general bond.

Also, I am sure many people will think this film is A+++ after watching it (my friend absolutely loved it) but to be honest I didn’t think it was that great. I mean, the actors, the soundtrack, everything was fine. I just don’t like those films which don’t have a “proper storyline”. For example, The Hunger Games is all about Katniss (and Peeta) surviving the Games; The Avengers is about defeating Loki and getting the Tesseract (or Cosmic Cube); Sherlock Holmes (the one with Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law) is about defeating Moriarty etc etc.. Of course these films have other “branches” of stories (e.g.: The relationship between Peeta and Katniss), otherwise they would be incredibly boring. Meanwhile, there are films and books which don’t have a defined storylines and, even though loads of people like them, I don’t.

I recommend this film and I can’t be bothered to write more about it. Comments and likes are appreciated. xx

Long time no see.

I am sorry for the title being so pathetic and lame.

I haven’t posted in a while – partly due to the fact that I am going through a major obsession over a tv series (Sherlock, in case you want to know) – but I have actually read a couple more books since my last post. Expect reviews for The Bell Jar, The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas and The Perks of Being a Wallflower (the film) soon.

Cheers. xx