FIRST PRACTICE: Living in the countryside

   If I had to choose I would like to live in the countryside. Generally speaking, it is true that living in a big city may be more attractive, but residing in a rural area has always been more comfortable and healthy. In fact, there is less pollution in the countryside than in an urban area, because, for instance, driving is not necessary to go anywhere there. Furthermore, if you looked for a job in the countryside, it would be easier to find one, because there are more opportunities, due to the fact that it less crowded than a large town. In addition, the countryside, or a small village, provides you a more relaxing and contemplative way of life, and its gastronomy is organic and ecologic, unlike city´s gastronomy. Therefore, for these reasons, I prefer residing in a rural area instead of living in a big city, since this way of living is more gratifying than living in a big crowded city.

Disadvantages of watching dubbed films and original language versions.

If you are thinking of watching a film in the near future, both options -dubbed and O V- have disadvantages, unless the original  version is in your mother tongue.  Sometimes dialogs and subtitles are not well synchronized. In addition, subtitles are not always faithful to the original script; this is usually a matter of space, but as a result some expressions or nuances are lost. And if you have to be reading subtitles all the time you can miss images or visual details. On the other hand, watching a dubbed film implies missing the actors´ voices; this means that you cannot appreciate their whole performances. Besides, since a dubbed film doesn´t allow you to listen to the original voices, you do not have the chance to improve your listening skills. Furthermore, dubbed versions may manipulate the original dialogs, as happened with Franco´s censorship. For instance, that happened in Mogambo (as one of the main characters couple is presented as brother and sister instead of husband and wife in order to hide an adultery, but in the end it unintentionally seems an incest) and in several Hitchcock films, etc. 

Bringing up baby vs. What´s up doc?

In  the cinema world, classic movies are often used as the main source, model, reference... for a new film that is called the "remake" of the previous one.

 For instance, in 1972 Peter Bogdanovich directed What´s up doc, which  is a version of Bringing up baby, directed by Howard Hawks in 1938, tough there are more similiraties than differences between them. In general terms, both storylines share some similar basic points, because one film as well as the other are screwball comedies.  In fact, the main female characters are akin to each other; in the more recent film this character is performed by Barbara Streisand and in the earlier one that lead role is played by Catherine Hepburn. Both Catherin and Streisand play a "madcap girl". Furthermore, they fall in love with a charming absent-minded scientist, though in What´s up doc he is a geologist -Ryan O´Neal- and in Bringing up baby  a paleontologist - Cary Grant-. Thus, the big mess in the earlier one is caused by a little dog that hides a dinosaur´s bone, whereas in the remake it is originated by the confusion of several identical suitcases, one of them carrying the professor´s stones. 

      On the other hand, one of the main diferences between these films consists in the 30´s one being black and white in contrast to the 70´s one, which is a colour film. Another difference is the presence of animals; in the first one,  unlike the second one, there is not only a little dog, but also two leopards (which protagonize one of my favourite scenes). Therefore, despite the fact of being two films from different times, there is so much more that connects them. 

By the way, Baby is a leopard!

The conjuring

The conjuring is one of the worst terror films I have ever seen.  It is a film "based" on a true story:  Roger and Carolyn Perron move into a dilapidated farmhouse and paranomal fenomens begin to happen.  Among other things, this is due to the big melting pot created by the scriptwriter.  All the famous terror films are in there, not only films like The Exorcist, Chucky, Poltergeist, It, The sixth sense..., but also tipical terror settings, scenes and images, like "there is something in the basement; I´ll go and see", the rocking cheer or the swing moving alone, the  bed sheets hanging up on the backyard ... In fact, when you think it is imposible  for another trite scene to appear, there goes the solitary ball...Therefore, I can´t understand why it has been so successful, because for me is just another comercial terror film. 

You got: Well-Loved Book

"Your pages are loose and dog-eared, your spine broken many times over. You’re the book someone stays up late with, reading you under the covers over and over again." 

I agree, but the quizz is too anglo-saxon and I don´t know about all the options!!!

IS SCHOOL KILLING CREATIVITY? YES, IT IS.

       We need to change the education system.To begin with, the current  system comes from  the 18 century and was created in order to prepare people -even kids- to work more eficiently,  It sought to prevent  people from thinking then, as it keeps doing now. Since we have a type of sistem too old, where creativity is not contemplated enough, artistic matters are considered at the most an education complement in contrast to Maths or Languages. In fact, studying arts, music or dance is seen as a waste of time, and noboby expects that you find a job if you are keen on that kind of subjects.  For instance, one of my  friends´ gradma is always saying: "When will you start to work properly?", because his grandson works as a painter. Thus, this is a general feeling in the population and we must try to improve our education system as soon as posible.

Describing a dog (homework)

I have realized that I hate my neighbour´s dog. At first I thought it was funny, but then it began to annoy me. It is one of those long-haired, cinnamon-coloured dogs with drooping ears. It doesn´t look aggressive at all, but it is quite nervous and is always barking at everything and everybody. In addition, one day it bit my leg and that was the last straw. I cannot tolerate any more.  I think  this dog is the worst animal I have ever met. 

Is Spain different now?

People still say that Spain is different nowadays, but I do not agree, because the "Spain is different" slogan was coined in the 60´ and reffered to a way of life from the past. The food, the sun and the beaches have changed now. There are not unspoilt beaches any more, Mercadona sells us the food and we have spoiled the ozone layer. In fact, if you try to get a tan now, you will probably get a cancer soon.

My favourite place in the world

There is a place where I can go, when I feel low, when I feel blue….And it is the “Mirador de Carvajales” in Granada.  This charming viewpoint allows you to see the stunning Alhambra from a very short distance. At  sunset it offers you a breathtaking scenery due to the red walls of the ancient palace being highlighted by the rays of sunlight. In fact, “alhambra” means “red palace” in Arabic. The “Mirador de Carvajales”  is less touristic than the better known “Mirador de San Nicolás”, that is always overcrowded. 

It is in the middle of Albaicyn, an historic and lively area in Granada full of narrow and labyrinthine streets whit white houses on a hill in front of the Alhambra and beside the Sacromonte. Carvajales is a small square surrounded by trees that cast a pleasant shadow and there is an arabic fountain in the middle. But what I like about this place is its atmosphere. You can stay there for hours and don´t realize about it, while somebody is playing the guitar or another stops to talk with you… When I remember this peaceful square I feel pretty low and blue, so I must go to Carvajales now.

Fear of...

Fear of a tree falling down.
Fear of the lawyers.
Fear of the city sounds.
Fear of the storm.
Fear of speaking too loud.
Fear of keeping on being quiet.
Fear of driving alone.
Fear of the scenery.
Fear of the morning,
Fear of the sunset.

DALLAS BUYERS CLUB

Mathew McConaughey is becoming one of the best considered actors in Hollywood nowadays.  His renaissance comes from films like Killer Joe, Magic Mike, Mud and even the True detective series. In fact, a new word has emerged to refer to his recent career: “McConnaissance”.  

Yesterday I saw   Matthew Mc Conaughey´s last film, entitled Dallas buyers club, which made him earn an Oscar as best actor.

The film was directed by Jean-Marc Vallée in 2013. It´s based on the real story of Ron Woodroof.   A time reference at the beginning of the film is Rod Hudson´s death, so the action takes place in the 80s.  In order to perform this character he had to lose 40 pounds, because he plays the role of a homophobe man from Texas who was diagnosed with AIDS. 

 Ron tries to find an alternative therapy instead of the AZT medicine used at that time, what involves an explicit critic of the thriving pharmaceutical industry. Not only have the pharmaceutical people a mafia behavior, but also the governmental D.E.A – Drugs Enforcement Administration – members. 

All of this is shown in an aseptic way: there isn´t almost music soundtrack, the film´s rhythm is quite slow; it´s parallel to the character´s development. Mc Conaughey convinces by far as the prejudiced redneck who finally becomes aware of what AIDS implies.

HOMEWORK (24/9/2014)