Happy 2009!

2009 is another year when Jupiter sojourns in the Sign of Aquarius. This means "Let's Party!" and expect some revolutionary changes in ourselves and in society.

Happy New Year!

How to be a Ladies’ Man or a Femme Fatale

Have you ever dreamed of becoming a Ladies’ Man or a Rudolph Valentino, gathering swarms of adoring girls wherever you go? Or if you are a woman, have you dreamed of being a femme fatale such that when you walk into a room, all the guys turn their heads to admire you? Fret no more, because you can be the macho guy or sexy girl whom everybody adores.

First you have to meditate; i.e., go to the alpha or theta level of consciousness. If you are adept at meditation, you know that alpha and theta levels are states of deep relaxation.

If you are not very good at meditation, you can listen to a CD that induces alpha or theta level state of consciousness. Or, if you have a computer program or an audio recording / editing software, you can generate tones with a frequency of 8 to 14 Hertz (alpha level) or 4 to 8 Hertz (theta level frequency).

In terms of magic, the alpha and theta levels are very powerful states to be in.

Sit down, close your eyes and relax. Meditate or listen to the CD or the computer-generated tones using stereo headphones.

It would take a minimum of five minutes for your brain to go down to the desired brainwave frequency level. You would know you are in alpha when you feel very relaxed and are quite oblivious to your surroundings. Theta is even a deeper state of relaxation. You cannot feel your body or your surrounding anymore. You feel like you are floating. When you reach this stage, visualize.

See yourself or imagine yourself walking in a roomful of people or in a beach. You are exuding charm and confidence. Ladies (or gentlemen) see you, and swarm over you. They are all attracted to you. Provide the details – the greater the details, the better. Take note of the admiring faces and adoring smiles.

Energize yourself. Feel your body hair standing on end. See the other peoples’ eyes filled with desire for you. Your emotion must be real and intense.

Feel that you are a Human Magnet who attracts the opposite sex like moths to a fire or bees to a flower. When you are at the height of the experience, touch your thumb with your middle finger and exclaim a word, any word such as "Charm" or "Magnet". This will be your Trigger Word.

Repeat this process at least 8 times more so your mind will match the trigger word with your visualization.

Next time you are in a party or a beach with many girls or guys, touch your thumb with your middle finger and say the Trigger Word.

When you say the trigger word, the energy you have created during visualization would burst forth and immediately affect people around you.

Constant use of this technique is beneficial to your health because every time you say the Trigger Word, your brain would produce “happy chemicals” such as endorphins.

And since like attracts like, you would soon be attracting sexually responsive people to your circle.

But remember, being a Valentino or a Femme Fatale can have its drawbacks. You wouldn’t want to attract somebody like the Glenn Close character in Fatal Attraction.

Goodbye, Mr. PAUL NEWMAN

Paul Newman is dead. He is 83 years old.

Really, how time flies. I still remember watching Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid when I was in the elementary school. I immediately related to the clever Butch Cassidy character rather than to the faster (at the draw) and younger Sundance Kid character.

This was the first Newman film that I saw although his films like Cat on a Hot Tin Roof were always shown on TV. The next time a Paul Newman film was shown on TV, I tried to watch out for them. Thus, I saw Hud, Cool Hand Luke, the Hustler and of course, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.

I am not sure when I saw Sometimes a Great Notion, but after seeing The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean and The Sting, Paul Newman became my idol. The Sting remains as one of my favorite films. This was in the early 70s and I was in high school.

When the Towering Inferno came, I was delighted to see so many great actors and actresses together, including William Holden, Fred Astaire and Jennifer Jones, whom I watched in movies on TV. I also liked Steve McQueen, whom I admired in Bullitt, Thomas Crown Affair, Le Mans, Papillon and The Getaway. But even though Steve’s name was billed before Paul’s (Paul’s name was a few centimeters higher), I thought that Newman had the better role. After all, he got the girl (Faye Dunaway), if I remember correctly.

Besides, at 15 years old, I certainly preferred to be an architect rather than a fireman. And Newman was much better looking than McQueen.

Then came The Drowning Pool. I did not see Harper so I did not even know that it was a sequel. I though it was a good detective film but nothing extraordinary. I liked the presence of Joanne Woodward and Tony Franciosa, who was Matt Helm on TV.

In college, I didn’t get to see many films, except during summer. I think I saw only one Newman film, Slapshot, a comedy with Michael Ontkean. But I was quite surprised that Paul found a new career as a race car driver.

I remember talking to a classmate and he mentioned that his dad was old. I asked him how old and he said he was 54 years old. I exclaimed, “That is not old. Paul Newman is 54 and he is racing cars!” My classmate said that I should not choose extraordinary people to compare his dad with.

After college, I thought Paul Newman was already a has-been. Many 1970s actors were no longer doing films by 1980. Paul was a star since the late 1950s. He was still part of the Studio system in Hollywood. Many of his contemporaries were already has-beens by the late 1970s as producers and directors refused to get the stars of the Studio era.

Despite Paul Newman’s back-to-back success with The Sting and Towering Inferno, producers and especially top-notch directors in the late 1970s did not want to have anything to do with whom they call “superstars.” They preferred younger actors like Pacino, DeNiro, Hoffman and Nicholson or even older men but not Hollywood studio superstars like Walter Matthau and Steve McQueen.

To my pleasant surprise, in 1981, Absence of Malice came out to great critical acclaim. And the 50s, 60s and 70s star Paul Newman was still very much in the game. I was also glad that the Flying Nun, Sally Field, was now a great dramatic actress.

Then came The Verdict. I was stunned. I had never seen Paul Newman act in such a great manner. I was sure that he would win the Oscars, and felt angry when he didn’t.

Four years later, Newman starred in The Color of Money with the young Tom Cruise. When I saw in the final scene the Fast Eddie character, after hitting the break, exclaiming “I’m back!”, I knew then that Paul Newman was back at the top and he would definitely win the Oscars.

Finally, after so many nominations, Paul brought home the OSCARS, which could now be displayed alongside his wife Joanne Woodward’s, who won hers about THRITY (30) years earlier.

It is quite usual for Academy Award winners to be swamped with offers after winning the OSCARS. But apparently, it is not the case with Newman. The great "avant garde" directors still did not seem to want Newman for an actor. Perhaps they were intimidated.

After the fall of the Hollywood studio system, younger producers and directors boycotted the stars created by the Hollywood studios. By the mid-70’s, so many of them fell by the wayside like one of the biggest stars of the 50s, 60s and early 70s and Newman’s contemporary, Charlton Heston. Only a handful of them survived. I credit that to the survivors’ innate talents, sense of self-respect and dignity, innovativeness and creativity. Paul Newman was one of those handful Hollywood studio stars who retained their star status in the post-studio Hollywood.

At the end of the 1980s, he did two films --Fat Man and Little Boy, a quite forgettable film, and Blaze, a comedy. I wondered why he even considered doing the Fat Man and Little Boy movie.

The start of the 1990s looked auspicious for the Newmans when Mr. and Mrs. Bridge came out. It was a critical success. Joanne got more critical acclaim than Paul. She was nominated for the Oscars and Golden Globe and won the NY Film Critics Award. For the first time, I saw Paul Newman as an old man. I thought he would never grow old. He was 65. I thought that the film was more a tribute to the enduring strength of Newman and Woodward as real-life husband and wife and as film stars.

I never saw Nobody’s Fool. I read that he was nominated for OSCARS and the Golden Globe. Maybe I’ll buy the DVD soon.

I saw Twilight. I thought it was a bad imitation of The Drowning Pool. And I felt that the cast - Newman, Hackman, Garner and Sarandon - were too old for their roles. It was a great cast for the wrong movie.

At the end of the 90s, he co-starred in Message in a Bottle. I liked the movie but I did not like the fact that Newman just played a secondary role. He still had charm to carry a whole film.

At the start of the 21^st century, I saw on TV that he had a new movie coming -- Where the Money Is. Unfortunately, it was not shown in local theaters and I did not see any DVDs around.

In 2002, I saw Road to Perdition. It was a very good film. And he was great. I felt then that his time on the big screen was going to end. He was already doing supporting roles.

Empire Falls was his last appearance. At 78, he still looked strong and charming. He was also a good actor. He won an Emmy for Best Actor in a Supporting Role. It was his swan song. Remarkably, Joanne Woodward was also in that 2-part TV series.

And now Paul Newman is gone. I have admired him in his movies and in his off-screen persona – as a race car driver, a salad dressing chef and a philanthropist. I admire his endurance and even though he and his wife were stars, they never went down the level of Hollywood couples. They maintained their dignity and elegance through the years. He seemed to me the epitome of a modern-day gentleman, a great role model.

They don't make stars like Paul Newman anymore.

====================

P.S.

I saw Nobody's Fool on DVD. It is a very good film -- perfect for Newman. The other actors did well, too. I now remember why I did not see the film when it was shown in the theaters. In the Philippines, it was billed as a Bruce Willis film, not a Newman film. While I have seen practically all Bruce Willis films, I did not think then that Newman was ready to play second fiddle to Willis. So I decided not to see the film back then. Oh well, better late than never.

What The Bleep Do We Know?

This is from my QUANTUM CINEMA column in Mr. & Ms. Magazine, May - June 2008 issue:
==============================================================



I have just finished watching for the nth time the documentary What The Bleep Do We Know? Enthusiasts of the documentary The Secret, which has since been made into a book, should watch this one as it would give the principles of The Secret more scientific grounding.

What The Bleep Do We Know? had its theatrical release in the United Kingdom in May 2005. But the DVD became a top seller even before that time. Like The Secret, it has now reached the status of a cult film with its followers forming clubs and publishing newsletters. And of course, it has its group of detractors, too.

In order to compete with feature films, documentarists or documentarians have resorted to using dramatizations. This is usually the case now for documentaries in the Discovery or National Geographic TV channels. What The Bleep Do We Know? is a documentary with a narrative segment that illustrates further what the interviewees and the narrator are talking about.

Academy Award- winner Marlee Matlin (Children of a Lesser God) stars in this segment as a photographer who feels like a victim in life. She is a mute who recently divorced her philandering husband and is bored with her job. But one fine day, she experienced a quantum leap.

QUANTUM PHYSICS

Although the film talks incessantly of quantum physics, it does not however explain precisely what quantum theory or quantum mechanics is. Rather, it explains the implications of quantum mechanics / physics. The interpreters of quantum mechanics are physicists, physicians, a theologian and America’s leading medium. Three people directed the film – Betsy Chasse, William Arntz and Mark Vicente.

The film’s intention is to provoke the viewer to think. It begins with a voice over: “In the beginning was the Void, teeming with infinite possibilities—of which you are one”. This is accompanied with images of what could be the Big Bang – the beginning of the Universe, according to scientists.
The narrative segment begins with Matlin at a train station. She boards the train, closes her eyes and as the camera closes up on her face, the narrator says, “Are all realities existing simultaneously?” The narrator bombards the viewers with so-many thought-provoking questions: Why do we keep re-creating the same reality? Isn’t it amazing that we have options and potentials that exist but we are unaware of them? Is it possible that we are conditioned to our daily lives, so conditioned to the way we create our lives that we buy the idea that we have no control at all?

WHAT THE PHYSICISTS SAY

The film’s panel of experts claims that quantum physics brings in a new paradigm of reality, knowledge and meaning.

Dr. Amit Goswami, a Physics professor at the University of Oregon says: “Quantum physics calculates only possibilities, but if we accept this, then the question immediately comes -- who, what chooses among those possibilities to bring the actual event of experience? So, we directly, immediately see that Consciousness must be involved. The observer cannot be ignored.”

Dr. Fred Alan Wolf, physicist and author of Taking the Quantum Leap, asks: “Are people affecting the world of reality that they see?” And he answers, “You bet they are! Every single one of us affects the reality that we see even if we try to hide from that and play victim. We all are doin’ it!” Dr. Wolf is also in The Secret.

Dr. William Tiller, Professor Emeritus of Material Science and Energy at Stanford University says. “Our purpose here is to develop our gifts of intentionality and learn how to be effective creators.”

For Dr. Goswami, an individual’s purpose is “To acknowledge the Quantum Self; to acknowledge the place where we really have choice; to acknowledge Mind.”

THE BRAIN AND PERCEPTION OF REALITY

The film emphasizes that we participate in creating reality. The brain, says the narrator, processes two billion (2,000,000,000) bits of information per second. But we are aware of only two thousand (2,000) bits of information per second. We are unaware of 1,999,998,000 bits of information per second. We perceive only a very tiny portion of what is going on around us.

An optimist will see only the positive side of things while a pessimist will see only the negative side of things. Each individual’s brain becomes very selective in choosing that precious 2,000 bits of information per second that would make up one’s reality.

Also, the arrangement of neural connections in the brain constantly changes. Over 70% of the connections between brain cells change every day. Changing our responses to stimuli changes these connections. We do not have to be victims of our own undoing. We can do something -- we can ensure that these changes in neural connections make us more creative, intelligent, and versatile.

THE NEW PHYSICS

Quantum mechanics is just one aspect of the New Physics which has now united the subatomic world of electrons, photons, neutrinos, positrons, quarks, and the astronomical world of stars, galaxies, superclusters, black holes, quasars, wormholes, dark matter, etc.

Quantum mechanics was formulated in the early part of the 20th century by scientists like Niels Bohr, Max Planck and Werner Heisenberg yet its philosophical implications have still to be grasped by most people. The film - What the Bleep Do We Know?- tries to impart such awareness to the public at large and ends with a challenge: “Don’t just take it at face value. Test it out and see whether it’s true!” (end)

MANNY PACQUIAO MEETS DESTINY

This Sunday morning (Manila Time) June 29, 2008, with the Moon in Aquarius, Manny Pacquiao of Mindanao, Philippines finally met his destiny – to be the first Asian to win championships in FOUR categories – flyweight, super bantamweight, junior lightweight (super featherweight) and lightweight. He thus joins the likes of Tommy Hearns, Roberto Duran, Sugar Ray Leonard and Oscar de la Hoya – all all-time greats.

Pacquiao is also now considered as the world’s greatest pound-for-pound boxer.

All he had to do to meet this destiny was to beat Mexiacan-American David Diaz, the WBC lightweight champ. And he did it in a spectacular way.

OLD FORM

Manny Pacquiao was back in his old form -- the aggressive, fast-punching killer machine.

Pacquiao’s last fight in March 2008 was against Juan Manuel Marquez for the super featherweight crown. It was a horrible fight for Pacquiao. He did all the wrong moves. He was slow and was counter-punching instead of attacking. It was a bittersweet victory for Pacquiao. It was his first legitimate boxing crown since giving up the super bantamweight title in 2003. But the fight was anybody’s call and some people thought that the fight should have gone to Marquez. (See Pacquiao takes boxing crown from Marquez)

The second Pacquiao-Marquez fight was quite karmic. In their first fight in March 2004, it was declared a DRAW even though Marquez was floored three times in the first round. One judge was later found to have miscalculated his scorecards (he gave a 10-7 score in the first round when it should have been a 10-6 score because of the three knockdowns. In other matches, three knockdowns equal a knockout.) Thus, Pacquiao was robbed of 2 boxing titles – WBA and IBF world featherweight titles – that night.

Four years later, Marquez was holding another title – WBC Super featherweight champ – and Pacquiao still had no world title to his name. But this time, karma went against Marquez. Though he was the defending champion and it was a VERY close fight, the judges went for Pacquiao.

But with the Diaz fight, there was no need for judges. Pacquiao was back in his old fighting style. It was all vintage Pacquiao – pummeling the WBC lightweight king David Diaz to a bloody pulp.

Pacquiao was super fast. And he was moving all the time. And like in the old times, he was throwing punches left and right. It was superb.

GLORY AT LAST

After fighting for almost five years without a world championship belt, Pacquiao now has two in two categories – junior lightweight and lightweight. And he has made history and joined the ranks of boxing’s all-time greats.

ERAGON and THE FOUNTAIN - Film Reviews

Below is an article Of Dragons, Magic, Immortality and Special Effects from my magazine column, QUANTUM CINEMA in M. & Ms. Magazine, March 2007



Two fantasy films are making the rounds of the world’s movie houses this year – Eragon and The Fountain. One is about mythical beasts in a mythical land which looks like medieval Europe. The other is a story of a man and a woman in three different periods – 500 years ago, today and 500 years later. The first is too juvenile in its simplicity; the other is pointless in its complexity.

ERAGON

It has always been my contention that no writer would ever go hungry in America. Anybody who can write a few coherent sentences can go places, especially to Hollywood. If your parents are publishers, you can even have your own book published even if you are just a high school kid. And with luck, your book could be made into a multimillion dollar movie.

Christopher Paolini was “home schooled” and finished high school at 15. When his parents said he should wait a couple more years before attending college, he wrote a story about dragons and dragon riders. When he was 19, his parents, who happen to be publishers, printed his book. A bigger publisher, Alfred A. Knopf, saw the book and re-published it with bigger promotional budget. It was just a matter of time before Hollywood made the kid’s story into a multimillion dollar movie spectacle.

ERAGON is now a big budget movie helmed by first-time director Stefen Fangmeier. The script is presumably like the novel. It is simply, well, juvenile.

If the authors of The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail sued Da Vinci Code’s Dan Brown for plagiarism, it is a wonder why the authors of Star Wars and Lord of the Rings did not sue Paolini. They would have a better case than the accusers of Dan Brown.

The story is about a boy named Eragon whose cousin had to leave the village. Eragon meets an old dragon rider. The old warrior Brom tells him of the time of heroic knights patrolling the world and teaches him magic and swordsmanship. Eragon goes on to rescue Princess Arya, a beautiful Elf, from the clutches of Durza the Shade, the henchman of the evil King Galbatorix. Brom, the old dragon rider, gave up his life for Eragon, the new dragon rider.

This sounds like the story of a boy named Luke Skywalker who meets an old Jedi warrior, Obi Wan Kenobi who tells him of the time of heroic knights patrolling the world and teaches him swordsmanship. Luke goes on to rescue Princess Leia from the clutches of the evil Darth Vader, henchman of the Emperor. Obi-Wan, the old Jedi knight, gave up his life for Luke, the new Jedi
On his way to Star Wars, Eragon made a detour through Lord of the Rings picking up Frodo’s cousin Bilbo Baggins, who had to leave the Shire; the beautiful Elven Princess Arwen; the arch evil magician Saruman and his demons, etc.

But both Star Wars and Lord of the Rings did not have Saphira, the last of the dragons.
This mighty female dragon comes with the very sexy voice of Rachel Weisz. She is the female version of Dragonheart’s Draco, the last of the dragons and who has the very macho voice of Sean Connery.

The dragons of Eragon’s Alagaësia are unique. The eggs hatch only when they have found their “rider”. The dragon and the rider have intertwined destinies. They not only communicate with each other telepathically, their very lives are connected. When the rider dies, the dragon dies with him but not vice versa. This dragon needs only a day or so to transform from a baby dragon to a giant one and a few more days to become a fire-breathing full fledged adult dragon.

ACTORS YOUNG AND OLD

Imitating Star Wars’ George Lucas, Fangmeier got an unknown, Ed Speleers, to act as Eragon. Like Mark Hamill (Luke) and Hayden Christensen (Anakin), he doesn’t seem to know the very basics of acting. If Star Wars had Alec Guiness, Peter Cushing et al to support the neophyte actors, Fangmeier got Jeremy Irons, Robert Carlyle and John Malkovitch to support the young actors of Eragon.

Irons and Carlyle, naturally, stole the show from the younger ones. But Malkovitch was a disappointment. He practically never left his throne the whole show.

SPECIAL EFFECTS

Fangmeier’s special effects expertise carried the day for Eragon. Fangmeier was the visual effects director of Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World. The dragon is quite endearing and the final battle between Eragon and the evil shade Durza was excellently done.
Eragon may not win awards like Lord of the Rings which won several OSCARS including Best Picture and Best Director, but with its special effects, it will win the hearts of many youngsters. There may not be any fire-breathing dragons, swashbuckling swordsmen and fighting princesses anymore, but they will forever live in the minds of young boys and girls.

THE FOUNTAIN

The Fountain is the story of a couple of souls in three incarnations. Tomas is a Spanish conquistador who is chosen by the Spanish queen, Isabela, to look for the biblical Tree of Life somewhere in Mayan territory in Central America. In his present incarnation, Tommy is a medical doctor (oncologist) in the US trying to find a cure for the tumor that is killing his wife, Izzi. In the future, Tom is an astronaut circa 25th century. He lives beside a magical tree in a space bubble and is constantly disturbed by visions of a woman, presumably his wife.

Or, this is a story of Tommy, an oncologist, in search for a cure for his wife Izzi’s illness. Izzi writes a book titled The Fountain about a conquistador chosen by the Spanish queen, Isabela, to look for the biblical Tree of Life somewhere in Mayan territory. Because of the stress of the fear of losing his beloved wife and his untiring efforts to find a cure, Tommy hallucinates and sees himself as an astronaut circa 25th century meditating beside a magical tree (like Gautama Buddha) in a space bubble and is constantly disturbed by visions of his wife.

GREAT ACTING

Hugh Jackman proves once again that he is one of today’s better actors. Whether as a Spanish conquistador or a medical doctor or a yogi spaceman, Hugh Jackman performs with great intensity.

Jackman’s counterpoint is Rachel Weisz, whose melodious voice made Eragon’s dragon quite endearing. While she was merely a voice in Eragon, in The Fountain, she has three characters – the regal Queen Isabela, the sweet and dying Izzi and the ephemeral visitor of the spaceman Tom.

SPECIAL EFFECTS

Computer generated special effects saved the day for Eragon. In The Fountain, it is also the Special Effects that are the film’s saving grace. But instead of ordinary computer graphics, The Fountain used special effects in its photography, creating mystical landscapes and emotion-filled images. Although The Fountain is marketed as a science fiction film, its images are more fantastic than scientific.


VISUAL MEDIUM

Eragon and The Fountain prove that films are more visual than verbal. The average person might throw out the book Eragon for being too simple or the script of The Fountain for being too complicated. But the average person can easily appreciate watching on the big screen a fire-breathing dragon battling a ghostly beast or a 25th century Buddha levitating and meditating beside the Tree of Life inside a space bubble.

======== ======== =========
Published in Mr. & Ms. Magazine Supermonthly of the Body, Mind and Spirit, Mar. 2007

==========================

Deconstructing Da Vinci Code during Lent

When I was a kid, all TV programs and movies in the Philippine were all related to the story of Jesus Christ or the Bible. Because of this, I saw The Ten Commandments, The Bible, Ben Hur, Samson and Delilah, David and Bathsheba, The Robe, and films like these more than ten times at least. There was no choice because there was nothing else to see. Besides, when I was a kid, I just wanted to go to the movies with my mother so I could gorge on chocolates and popcorn. We never watched a movie without anything to munch on.

The kids today are so lucky. TV and movie houses are showing regular fare.

For those who want to ponder upon religious thoughts, below is an excerpt from my post in my other blog. It is about the Da Vinci Code and the topicts surrounding it -- Jesus Christ, Mary Magdalene, Judas Iscariot, the Jews, The Passion of the Christ, Mel Gibson, Dan Brown, etc.:

Deconstructing the Da Vinci Code

by Jamal Ashley Abbas

(Published in the Mr. & Ms. Magazine: Body, Mind & Spirit, July 2006)

Film adaptation of literary works started with no less than the inventors of the film apparatus – the Lumière brothers. The book was the all-time best seller – The Bible. The film was La Vie et Passion de Jésus Christ. In Film Studies, the adaptation of classical literature is usually given more attention than those of contemporary books. Contemporary film adaptations are generally studied for their portrayal of current political culture.

Da Vinci Code, the movie, is an adaptation of a very contemporary novel but the structure of the story rests firmly on the New Testament and the early Christian Gnostic writings.

While the novel/film is ostensibly a thriller beginning with a murder and the consequential cops-and-suspects chase, what are foregrounded are the alleged marriage of Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene and the existence of their descendants.

The text of the film calls on so many other texts and subtexts. A proper critical analysis of the film would require so many pages.

**********************
For the full text go to: M-Reality: The Mind/Body/Spirit blog
**********************

PACQUIAO TAKES BOXING CROWN FROM MARQUEZ

Filipino fighter Manny Pacquiao has been dreaming of the super featherweight crown for more than four years. In 2004, even though he floored Juan Manuel Marquez three times in the first round, the fight was declared a draw.

For some reasons, he got to fight the world's best boxers, Marco Antonio Barreira and Erik Morales when these guys just happened to have lost their championship belts.

Last year, several Filipino boxers won world championships yet the Philippines' best boxer was crownless or beltless.

Finally, Marquez, the WBC super featherweight champion decided to finally give Pacquiao a rematch after 4 years.

Not many people gave Marquez a chance. But he came well-prepared. And he almost took the match.


TENTATIVE AND SLOW

Pacquiao was very tentative and quite slow. Perhaps it is the effect of going into the ring so many pounds higher than the weight limit.

The fantastic hand speed of Pacquiao was not seen often. And he seemed to be afraid of mixing it up. It was a very different Pacquiao out there. There didn't seem to be any fire in him. Is he near the end of the road?

Perhaps he was distracted by all the instructions his corner had been shouting the whole duration of the match. It was irritating for me. A fighter could not fight and listen to instructions at the same time.

KNOCKDOWN

A good combination of punches floored Marquez in the third round. Pacquiao followed it up with a flurry of punches. Marquez was in a daze but survived.

In the fourth round, the old Pacquiao would have gone straight and mixed it up with the opponent come what may. But this new Pacquiao was tentative. And so Marquez recovered.

Fortunately, Pacquiao got a second wind in the 10th round and staggered Marquez.


SPLIT DECISION

Pacquiao was lucky to have won a Split Decision. He fought a much better fight in their first match yet he just got a draw there.

I thought the judges would give the match to Marquez because he was the champion. Champions are usually given additional credits or benefit of the doubt. But then, Pacquiao was at least a 2-1 favorite. A lot more people in the gambling town of Las Vegas would be mad had Marquez won.

Pacquiao's handlers seemed to be training him to fight in a higher division by making him fight a lot heavier than he should. They should not have not made the Marquez fight a trial run for Pacquiao's future fights in the higher division. Pacquiao almost lost this fight.

And by the way Pacquiao fought, it seems that it would be better for him to remain in the super featherweight category.


WRONG ADVICE

I now realize that a boxer's coach and / or trainer can actually cause the boxer's defeat. In this case, the advice and training given to Pacaquiao almost cost him the fight.

Pacquiao, like George Foreman and Mike Tyson, is a power puncher. The power puncher's strategy is based on offense. The power puncher must punch his way through the best defense put up by the enemy. His best defense is offense.

If Foreman or Tyson would be told to think of defense first, they would not last long, especially if they would be fighting intelligent boxers.

Marquez is one of the most intelligent boxers today. He knows how to maintain a strategy and change tactics. He is a fast thinker. The way to fight him is to attack him like a bulldozer just like what Pacquiao did in their first match.


COUNTER-PUNCHER

Marquez is one of the best counter-punchers in the business. Incredibly, Pacquiao's handlers wanted him to counter-punch the best counter-puncher around!

From an attacking power-puncher, they wanted Pacquiao to counter-punch a counter-puncher. This is the silliest thing I have ever heard.

EXTRA WEIGHT

Add to this the fact that they made Pacquiao come into the ring ten pounds or so heavier than the weight limit, then it is truly remarkable that Pacquiao was still able to eke out a win.

The extra weight seemed to have made him slow-footed and heavy-handed, especially since he was ordered to counter-punch instead of simply attacking.

At any rate, congratulations to the Pac-Man. In spite of the wrong advice and training he was given, he still managed to win. He has now beaten three of the world's best boxers, pound-for-pound . He is the first Asian to have won 3 world boxing titles.

Whatever reasons his handlers had in giving Pacquiao the wrong training, I hope they now realize their folly. I hope they won't do it again.

Mary Magdalene, Judas and the Da Vinci Code Origins

March 8, 2008 is International Women's Day. On this day, women all over the world not only celebrate the role of women in today's society but also to fight for more women's rights.

Women have been maligned in literature and myth just as much, if not worse than in real life. One such woman was Mary Magdalene, who for some reasons, is thought of as a prostitute by most people today. That belief has absolutely no documentary basis. It is not even in the Bible. The book and the movie, Da Vinci Code, has tried to correct that impression.

Below is an article I wrote a couple of years ago for Mr. & Ms. magazine which concerned Mary Magdalene and the Da Vinci Code.





**************

Two documentaries are sure to get the ire of the Christian Church -- The National Geographic Channel’s The Gospel of Judas (2006) and Michael Bott’s Origins of the Da Vinci Code (2005).


DA VINCI CODE

The Origins of the Da Vinci Code documentary explains more fully the background of the secret Rosicrucian society Priory of Sion which plays an important role in Dan Brown’s novel, The Da Vinci Code. Brown’s book has so far sold some 40 million hardcover copies worldwide plus millions more in paperback. The film version is expected to be a top grosser.

Brown’s novel is quite mediocre. Its research is elementary, its artistry is shallow. As a thriller, it is nothing compared to say, Le Carré’s novels like Smiley’s People or Umberto Eco’s In the Name of the Rose.

But it had a sure-fire chance of being a best-seller. Brown merely created a fictional story based on the non-fiction 1982 best-seller The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail. Mixing religion with royalty has always been the obsession of many people in the world. Thus we had god-kings and the concept of the divine right of kings.

The Bible insists that Jesus came from the royal House of David even though he was merely a step-son of Joseph. The Muslim holy book, the Qur’an, traces Jesus’s bloodline through Mary, his mother. Can an adopted son inherit a bloodline?

And now, according to the Da Vinci Code documentary and novel, Mary Magdalene too was of the blood royal. Henry Lincoln, co-author of the Holy Blood and the Holy Grail and main on-camera resource person in the documentary, explains that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and so her womb was the Grail which contains Jesus’s blood and which creates the bloodline of their descent.

The documentary also alleged that Jesus and Mary’s bloodline somehow married into France’s Merovingian dynasty which means that their descendants now have Jewish and French royal lineage.

However, instead of delving deeper into the royalty-religion union, the documentary appears to be more like Henry Lincoln’s way of hitching his wagon to the Da Vinci Code novel’s popularity in order to promote his books – the Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, the Holy Places (1991) and The Templars’ Secret Island (2000).

Meanwhile, Holy Blood Holy Grail co-authors Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh unsuccessfully sued Dan Brown for plagiarism or more precisely for “appropriating the architecture” of their book.


MARY MAGDALENE

Like Sophie in Brown’s novel, most people will ask, “Mary Magdalene, the prostitute?”

Any critical thinker would agree with the character Sir Leigh Teabing whose answer to Sophie’s question was, “Magdalene was no such thing. That unfortunate misconception is the legacy of a smear campaign launched by the early Church.”

According to the Concordance of the New American Bible (1970) published by the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, Washington, D.C.: “Mary Magdalene is frequently identified BUT WITHOUT ANY REASON with the woman who was a sinner in the city and who came to weep at Jesus’ feet during the banquet offered by Simon (Luke 7:36-50).” (emphasis added).

Apparently, Biblical scholars and Church fathers know that Magdalene was not a prostitute but they let their followers believe otherwise.


JUDAS ISCARIOT

If Magdalene is looked down upon, Judas’s fate is even worse – he is vilified and demonized. Judas, considered the most educated of the Apostles, is condemned to eternal damnation by the Church for betraying Jesus. Yet, according to the gospels, Jesus knew of the betrayal. And according to Matthew, he was filled with remorse, gave back the silver and hanged himself (Matt. 27:3-5).

Peter, who denied Christ three times, is now said to be the guardian of the gates of Heaven.

The National Geographic Channel’s documentary The Gospel of Judas announced through world-wide cable television the discovery of the Gospel of Judas.

According to the documentary, the discovery of the gospel is indeed the stuff thriller novels are made of. Discovered by an Arab shepherd in a cave, it was sold in the black market, stolen, reappeared in the black market, brought to Geneva, then brought to the US where it lay disintegrating in a bank vault for more than a decade. It was sold later to an antiquities dealer and finally to the present owner, the Maecenas Foundation in Switzerland.

The documentary proved that the Judas gospel was authentic in the sense that the papyrus (the paper it was written on) was radiocarbon-dated to the 2nd century. This is older than any existing New Testament copy.

And most importantly, the documentary showed that Judas Iscariot as portrayed by the Church may not be the true Judas Iscariot after all.


EARLY CHRISTIANITY

One might well ask, “Where did these gospels come from?” “Why weren’t they in the Bible?” The answer of course lies in history.

According to the New Testament, after Christ’s death, Peter headed the Christian community in Jerusalem. Paul joined the Church in Antioch. Later, he and Barnabas were charged with spreading Jesus’s words in Asia Minor. It did not take long before Barnabas and Paul had a falling out and they went their separate ways.

The Apostles preached mostly to Jews, Paul preached mostly to the Gentiles / pagans.

One hundred or so years after the death of the apostles, there were hundreds of Christian sects. Two main streams of Christianity emerged – the Judaeo Christians and the Pauline Christians.

The Judaeo Christians were also called Unitarians since they believed in One God, with a host of angels and demons and Jesus as the Prophet or Messiah. The Paulinians believed in the Trinity and other teachings propagated by St, Paul, a Roman citizen named Saul who converted to Christianity and became its greatest evangelist and proselytizer.

As mentioned in The Da Vinci Code, Constantine the Great proclaimed Christianity the religion of the Empire. He convened the Council of Nicaea, which finally chose which doctrines, gospels, epistles, acts, etc. were to be considered canons of the Church. The Nicene creed, which became the cornerstone of Christianity, is Paulinian.

Out of the many Christian writings, only the following were considered canonical: the Gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke and John, the Acts of the Apostles (mainly Paul’s acts), the epistles and letters of Paul (including those thought to be Paul’s) and the Book of Revelation.

All other gospels, epistles, letters, etc. which were not Paulinian were declared heretical and destroyed. Some of the “heretical” documents included the Gospel of Truth, the Letter to Rheginus, Treatise on the Three Natures, Apocalypse of Adam, the Gospel of Matthias, Gospel of Philip, Acts of Peter, Acts of Thomas, the Gospel of Barnabas, the Gospel of Mary Magdalene and the Gospel of Judas. All these writings had been presumed lost. They are known to us only through the works of their rivals -- Paul and the Paulinian fathers. For example, people know of the existence of the Gospel of Judas because it was attacked by St. Irenaeus in one of his writings circa 180 AD.

Although Jesus lived well within historical time and in the midst of four civilizations – Egyptian, Jewish, Greek and Roman -- there is a dearth of knowledge on his life. Some people have constructed various conspiracy theories – Vatican, Jewish, etc. – to explain this anomaly.


NEW RENAISSANCE?

The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in Palestine in 1947-1956 proved the existence of a mystic community of Jews called the Essenes during the period of 2 century BC to 1 century AD. The discovery of the Nag Hammadi Library scrolls in Egypt in 1945 gave the world volumes of documents including the non-canonical Gospels of Philip, Thomas, and Mary Magdalene. And the discovery of the Gospel of Judas in the 1970s has now given us a new portrait of Judas Iscariot.

Discovery of the biblical documents did not mean its immediate announcement to the world. The contents of much of the documents are still unpublished and there is always a shroud of secrecy surrounding these ancient manuscripts. Mass media products like the Da Vinci Code and Gospel of Judas books and film/video documentaries can help insure that the public will know exactly what these biblical writings contain. After all, what happened in the Middle East during that historical era directly affects the beliefs of billions of people belonging to the Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition.

After a thousand years of Dark Ages in Europe, the Arabs, who had discovered Aristotle and other ancient Greek writings, re-introduced ancient Greek thought to Western Europeans. It must be noted that after the Fall of Rome, Western Europe was invaded and ruled by barbarians. The re-introduction of Aristotelian thought by the Arabs ushered in the Re-birth or Renaissance of Europe.

In the 20th century, in the 2nd millennium of Christianity, at the end of the Age of Pisces, the world is re-introduced to the ancient Judaeo-Christian writings through the discovery by the Arabs of the ancient scrolls. Will this usher in a Global Renaissance in the Age of Aquarius?

Maria Sharapova wins Aussie Open

The glamorous Maria Sharapova of Russia just won the 2008 Australian Open, beating another young and beautiful tennis player, Ana Ivanovic of Serbia in straight sets, 7-5, 6-3.

Maria played top-notch tennis, the way she was playing all throughout the tournament. In her victory speech, she mentioned that Billie Jean King sent her a message today that says "champions take chances and pressure is a privilege." Well, she played an aggressive game, taking chances and putting pressure on the opponent.

The experience of Maria showed quite clearly as she was more poised and focused than Ana. Both are 20-year olds.

Because she reached the Aussie Open final, Ivanovic is now ranked world's Number 2. But with Maria's showing in this tournament, she is clearly the "real" Number 2.

At any rate, Justine Henin needs to practice more as Maria is back!


**********************

Magic and Glamor in the Australian Open 2008

For some time now, tennis king Roger Federer and tennis queen Justine Henin have dominated world tennis so that only they get to win the Grand Slam championships. Of course there’s Nadal who made the French Open his own. And there’s the come-backing Williams sisters who won a Grand Slam each last year.

I like both Federer and Henin, but it can get boring watching them win again and again.

But this year’s Australian Open is different. Both Henin and Federer seemed to have either lost their magic or others found theirs.

Maria Sharapova is playing extremely well. She has fire in her eyes, which was lacking for the last year and a half.

I couldn’t believe how great she played against Henin, beating her 6-4, 6-0. I knew she could beat Jelena Jankovic, conqueror of Serena Williams. She indeed defeated Jankovic in straight sets although the victory is a bit clouded by apparent back pains suffered by Jankovic.

MARIA SHARAPOVA

VS. ANA IVANOVIC

Sharapova is going to meet another beautiful girl, Ana Ivanovic. Ivanovic defeated the other Williams, Venus, which makes her a formidable opponent. Ivanovic would like to avenge her Serb compatriot Jankovic’s defeat as well as attempt to make Serb history by making it a double whammy for Serbia with her winning the women’s crown and Novak Djokovic winning the men’s title.

But I think the Russian would see to it that that will not happen.

It has been quite a long time when two beautiful ladies battle for a Grand Slam championship. If Maria will play in the finals as well as she had all throughout this tournament, she should win hands down.

For the men’s, two youngsters are making their claim to the crown. The Serb Djokovic beat the almost invincible Federer in the semifinals. He will face the unseeded Jo-Wilfried Tsonga of France, who equally shocked everyone when he defeated the French Open champ and world’s No. 2 tennis player, Rafael Nadal of Spain.

I am rooting for Maria Sharapova. I like Djokovic to win but a Cinderella finish for Tsonga would be interesting.