Saturday, November 28, 2015

A Second Chance: A Non-Review

.:A Second Chance: A Non-Review:.

"Pangako, mamaya, huling beses na nating maghihiwalay. Ito ang huling gabi na merong ikaw at ako. Simula bukas, ang meron nalang, tayo. Tayo, habangbuhay. Hindi ka na matutulog mag-isa. At hindi ka na gigising ng wala ako sa tabi mo. At itong mga kamay na ito? Kahit magaspang na,Hindi ka na bibitawan, ha? I will never let go. I will always love you, Basha Lopez Eugenio."

Some questions really did not need to be answered. But don't worry, there will be no spoilers here.

I watched "A Second Chance" because I had to. The first film, "One More Chance," is probably my favorite Filipino film of all time, as shallow as that might sound. The idea of a love lost that could be gained back was something that resonated deeply with me then, as it does now. But in between the first film and the second one, something changed, and that something turned me from someone who could completely feel every single pang of pain Basha and Popoy went through to me being a spectator, outside merely looking in.

Basha and Popoy got married.

If you didn't know this was gonna happen, then you don't need to watch the movie at all.

I can only relate so much to that, obviously, given that I myself am not. But in that one, big, momentous change for the two of them, their pathos has taken on a kind of gravitas that is no longer within my purview. I accept that. People do change, and certainly, fictional people would, even more so than real people. But the moment they exchanged "I do's," I lost Popoy and Basha to the ether, because I was no longer quite like them.

That isn't so much a fault of the filmmaker as it is a fault of having two characters that were so relatable and powerful as Basha and Popoy that living vicariously through them and their apparent rekindling of their romance towards the end of the first film simply seemed like something we could all aspire to. It felt like something that could indeed come our way. The moment they jump into a stage of life we aren't quite in yet, that sense of verisimilitude is utterly broken for me.

But no, this doesn't make for a bad movie. It just makes for a different one. One that recognizes the plateaus of a marriage far better than it has any business doing, but one that unintentionally alienates me because I'm not there at all. Maybe I will be someday. But given just the trailer, they don't exactly make the married life something aspirational now, do they?

Have you ever put off going to the doctor purely because you're afraid of what you might have, knowing that you're probably not well? That's rather how I felt about this whole thing, in all honesty.

When we left our lovers in "One More Chance," it was open-ended, but rather obvious where it was headed: a reconciliation. We wanted to have the ambiguity and our happy ever after despite all the realism in one lovely bittersweet cake and we wanted to eat it. "A Second Chance" jettisons that, and decides we needed to see more, and as much as we wanted to look away, to not force ourselves to ask those hard questions, we are enthralled to because we know we have to know the answer now that the answer clearly exists.

To say that I am not the target audience of "A Second Chance" would be an understatement, but it is also a massive boon to the makers of this film that I still enjoyed it, no matter how I felt like an outsider, trying to find the smallest of vicarious moments.

And irony of ironies, or should I say appropriately enough, I find those vicarious moments in the moments of pain that both Popoy and Basha go through. Because unfortunately, that is all that remains that I have in common with them: not the moments of wedded bliss, but the moments of indescribable pain. Of emasculation and emotional disembowelment. And if there is one thing this movie franchise has been good at, it has always been king at eliciting pain as a reminder that we still live and we still love.

I can ascribe every single profound philosophical idea I have learned and project them onto the film, but that would be merely self-serving and masturbatory and in no way helpful to even myself. I could look at the ennui of married life and take it as a warning beacon, or ask about the existential quandary one faces in the midst of feelings of inutility. In the end, what one could draw is that one feels, no matter how "shallow" the film may be, and let's face it, it is no more deep or shallow than, say, a Kalyeserye, that we are alive, and that there is something rather than nothing.

Especially with love.

It will always remain. It will always be there. And when you love someone who does not, cannot love you, then so will the pain be there. We may call love beautiful, but it is a force of nature, and like any force of nature, it overruns us even when we come unprepared for it.

Because love lost will always lead to pain until one becomes numb. Because that love goes forth and empties itself out, but simply refuses to extinguish itself.

"A Second Chance" is a beautiful masterpiece in mirroring reality. Unfortunately for me, it is not my reality I am looking at, but a reality I find myself denied of. And it is that jarring break from immersiveness, that moment where I simply cannot suspend my disbelief that I am Popoy or Basha up there in the silverscreen, where I actually find myself impotent and inutile and utterly helpless. And that is the moment where I realize that even at its grittiest moments, the silverscreen love story of Popoy and Basha still far outstrips my own: something I didn't feel in the first film, and something that points me to not like the second film as much, not out of a technical shortcoming.

But out of resentment.

Friday, October 16, 2015

Because I Refuse To Be The Goggles

.:Because They Do Nothing:.

Don't be the goggles.

I recently started hosting a television show, and surprisingly, I didn't really spend any time on the blog promoting it. Now, maybe it's because I've been remiss on blogging lately, and it seemed like going on social media and promoting it there in 140 characters or less was far easier than devoting an entire blog entry to it, but this also explains why I wanted to take the time to choose my words carefully before talking about the show.

And that's because I don't actually want to talk about the show. At least, not directly.

You see, when I auditioned for "Bara-Bara," I came into it with a lot of optimism and hope that we could finally have our very own response to "The Daily Show" or "Last Week Tonight with John Oliver." There's a lot of growing pains within the show at the moment, but I still see that happening in time.

On top of that, I'm even working on a "Colbert Report" kind of webshow this weekend in Burger Company, where I finally get to run with an over-the-top caricature for once, instead of the more serious non-character I am on "Bara-Bara." The show is going to be called "Better Late Than Never." It's gonna be a lot of fun.

Anyways, let's talk about what I really wanted to talk about. I think a visual aid is very necessary at this point.

Hello there, Elizabeth Bathory (or not)!

If you ever wanted living proof of how evil can triumph when good people do nothing, look no further than this. It's the equivalent of a German publication coming out with the headline "Hitler did nothing wrong," if you ask me. Or do you think I'm merely exaggerating?

When we were talking about Martial Law during the taping for Bara-Bara's first episode, I had to keep a lid on all my opinions about people who were glorifying Martial Law, because I didn't want to dominate the conversation. It was sobering, really: true, none of the cast were political analysts, but that's exactly why it becomes very unconvincing to any neo-loyalist that Martial Law was really that bad, if we didn't put a concerted effort towards correcting those notions.

When we removed the Marcoses from power in EDSA, we said "never again." We said "not on our watch."

And then we stopped watching.

This week, Bongbong Marcos files his candidacy to become a vice-president. The sins of the father should not by default pass unto his son, but not when it's pretty much an inheritance of millions, maybe billions - of our money, ill-gotten under the cloak and dagger of the Marcos regime.

Really? We didn't see this coming?

The sins of the father should not by default pass unto his son, unless the son willfully denies what his father has done, and chillingly promises to uphold his dad's legacy in the same breath.

The Marcoses are erudite, educated, eloquent, and most certainly empowered. How could they not, when they took all our money to make themselves all of these things? Our money. Taken along with thousands upon thousands of lives, as a matter of historical fact.

Nation,we forfeited the right to attack anyone who thinks the Marcoses aren't so bad the minute we let them creep back in to the point where another dictator himself, the late Lee Kwan Yew, could only shake his head in disbelief. According to him:

"The difference lies in the culture of the Filipino people. It is a soft, forgiving culture. Only in the Philippines could a leader like Ferdinand Marcos, who pillaged his country for over twenty years, still be considered for a national burial. Insignificant amounts of the loot have been recovered, yet his wife and children were allowed to return and engage in politics."

It is with that fact that we know: we have failed this nation.

When a certain article calls us "uneducated," he doesn't do it merely to posit a false dichotomy (which he's still totally doing, by the way) and paint us as emotional people who have a knee-jerk reaction to anything Marcos. He is calling us out for sleeping on the job. In all the hype of #NeverAgain, we still managed to look the other way for the Marcos cronies, much in the same way Voldemort's Dark Eaters slowly made their way back into the wizard community, all hiding under the guise of being under the control of the Imperius curse.

No shit, Sherlock.

Yes, nation: we have become every bit as complacent as Cornelius Fudge. We stood by and did nothing when Enrile and Ramos made their way back to power, because, hey, they helped us out when we needed them right? We stood by and did nothing when the Marcos family slowly revised the story and made it seem that the ends of the Marcos regime justified the means, and nobody actually paid attention to what the ends were.

We are every bit as competent as a school that specifically had a House whose member's defining characteristic is that they are 99% evil.

We have failed this country, and now, we are slowly but surely paying the price, as if we aren't already are. We took it too easy. We treated them with kid gloves. We thought they were harmless, but all they really needed was the Dark Mark to send them sprawling back into action, and all we could do is look on and wonder what we did wrong.

That's exactly the problem. For most of us, we did nothing. We were complacent in thinking that it would be impossible for anyone to ignore what the horrors of Martial Law truly were. We were self-assured that time wouldn't erase the wrongs done to us as a nation by the Marcoses as a family. We were wrong.

We were mistaken to think that the golden standard were our supposed liberators, the Aquino's, when they were little more than a transition that we should have built ourselves up from. They were the baseline, not the exemplar: yet we confused the former with the latter, and here we are now, disappointed with that realization.

It shouldn't have taken us as long as it has to realize: this was never Marcos vs. Aquino. Anyone who thinks these are the only valid choices to be had in this discussion is living in a very sad world.

In the meantime, we now have a man who insists we shouldn't condemn us for having his father's name, while also demanding we recognize him for the achievements of his own father. He wants to have it both ways, and we're pretty much letting him have it both ways. He wants us to forget the atrocities of martial law, but he wants us to remember the so-called glory years of his father's administration. He wants us to give him a chance to be his own man, yet he quickly proclaims that his dad's era was the kind of golden age he wants to bring back.

And now, his very own running mate, a woman who worked so hard to make us believe she was for justice and against corruption, decided to absolve him of his family's crimes, saying they don't owe us an apology for martial law, while crucifying her political rival over the very same topic. Slytherin, indeed. They slithered back in. After Martial Law. After Jose Velarde. After countless other breaches of trust. We are truly a forgiving people. And a forgetful one, at that.

This is why I refuse to be the goggles. I refuse to do nothing. I refuse to stand idly by and let him go there unchallenged, assuming what he likely believes to be his birthright. I am not Harry Potter, nor Neville Longbottom. Heck, I'd be lucky to even be Argus Filch. But what I will not be is quiet. For when the Death Eaters march in once again, I will at least get to scream out "Expelliarmus" once, before someone inevitably Avada Kedavra's me. I may have taken this analogy a little too far.

I agree with Miriam on one thing: indeed, the Marcoses don't owe us an apology. What they owe us is justice. Justice long overdue. Justice that still cries out to this very day. Justice they have tried to deny of countless victims for so long, knowing full well that the Marcos era was and has always been a family affair. Anyone who wants to pretend it wasn't need only take a look at the facts.

Would you ever elect Draco Malfoy as the Minister of Magic, if you were a wizard? How about Deputy Minister? How you answer to this seemingly whimsical question could very well explain how you feel about the Marcoses, in the end.

Tuesday, September 15, 2015

Back To The M:TG Grind

.:Or Not:.

Kind of difficult to say I'm going back to the grind when in reality, I have never extended this much effort in Magic: The Gathering before. Only now have I ever actually found myself seriously playing and actually making it far in tournaments like last weekend's Last Chance Qualifiers for the World Magic Cup Qualifiers, or a huge 37-man tournament for Legacy with a foil Liliana of the Veil on the line.

Pictured: hard, nerdy work.

In any case, I've been doing a lot of playing lately, and that's really been paying off for me. Won an LCQ and could have tried out for the National Team, won countless Modern tournaments, did mostly the same in Vintage and Legacy, and so on and so forth. Overall, I've been on quite a roll, and it's been showing in the fact that I've been consistently placing in every tournament I've shown up in, and I'm even beginning to make some headway with Lantern Control, which is really one of the decks to watch right now.

In any case, that's all I could really say for now. It's good to be gaming this much again, seriously.

Thursday, August 13, 2015

2 Hot 4 8List: 8 Questions I Always Get Asked About Marriage Equality

.:2 Hot 4 8List: 8 Questions I Always Get Asked About Marriage Equality:.

I try my best to be a moderate when it comes to my personal opinions. Most people know what they are, but I try my best not to be combative about them when I encounter someone who doesn't share the same opinion as I. This blog post will not be as charitable, because I've allowed a lot of people to get in their myopic jabs on the topic for long enough. This hopefully addresses most of those so-called issues they raise.

Here now are 8 questions I always get asked about marriage equality, especially in light of the recent SCOTUS ruling that recognizes LGBT marriage to be on the same legal footing as heterosexual marriage.

8. Why are the LGBT redefining marriage? 

First of all, marriage has been redefined so many times over the centuries that it's not even funny anymore. The idea that marriage is a union of love has been a fairly recent idea. There isn't really a "traditional" marriage, to begin with. Otherwise, all rape survivors will be required to marry their aggressor, just as the Bible stated.

In its current form, aside from the idea of one person loving another person for the rest of their life, marriage is understood to also come with concurrent rights. These rights are the crux of what marriage equality advocates are fighting for. It's something under the domain of the government, and in the case of the Philippines and America, the government is supposedly a secular one. What this means is simple: defining marriage as "biblical marriage," while not only problematic because of how the Bible itself defines marriage, also alienates the people who are not subscribers to the Bible.

TL;DR - marriage can stay the same for your church, but the government, in the interest of equal rights for all, needs to reassess marriage in order to live up to this secular ideal.

7. Why are the LGBT forcing people to bake them wedding cakes? How is this equality?

Oh. You mean that story in America of how a gay couple sued a bakery for refusing to bake them a cake for their wedding, then subsequently got awarded over $100,000 in damages afterwards?

First of all, you might not have read the entire story: this bakery didn't just "politely" decline this couple, they also doxxed (that is, they released the identity and private information) of these people when they complained about being refused service. People gloss over this fact, yet when you realize that the doxxing caused them anguish (they were given death threats) and extended that anguish to their adopted kids (they were also given death threats), suddenly, it doesn't seem like the bakery was fined nearly enough for what they did.

There's nothing "polite" about calling people an "abomination," okay? This is every bit as manipulative as saying that the old lady who sued McDonald's over their coffee was being frivolous (she received 3rd degree burns, not just some booboo someone can kiss to go away).

Also, remember how big a deal it was when people would refuse service to black people? Well, why would it suddenly be okay to refuse service to gay people just because? Are they not entitled to the same rights as black people in the first place?

Nobody was demanding this bakery to get gay married or to preside over the gay marriage of a couple that they already did business with before, prior to finding out about their orientation. That's plain discrimination, and it boggles the mind how people could think that discrimination is okay just because you claim that your God told you so. "God" has "told" people to do the Crusades. "Allah" has "told" extremists to fly a couple of planes into the World Trade Center. None of this was cool. A "lesser" offense hung on the same conceit isn't, either.

6. Why am I being called a bigot for not sharing the same opinion about LGBT marriage? My freedom of speech is being impinged!

First of all, when someone calls you a bigot, they are also exercising their free speech. We see a lot of people confused with that all the time, including certain bloggers who block people who call them out on their hypocrisy when they start cyber-lynching someone.

Still applicable, huh?

Secondly, let's get one thing straight here: your freedom to say whatever you want doesn't mean you are going to be free from consequences. If you lose your job because you went on a racist tirade, I'm sorry, but that's the consequence of you exercising your freedom of speech. Just ask Hulk Hogan, even if I feel bad for the guy.

To be fair, he's too orange to be a white supremacist.

If you can't take the heat, then get out of the kitchen. The only thing freedom of speech entails is that you won't be arrested by the government for saying whatever, although in the Philippines, we don't even have that level of freedom, since libel is a criminal offense here. Just ask Fashion Pulis.

Don't confuse our Philippine laws with American laws. This isn't an argument about tradition but legality.

Lastly, when you call someone an "abomination," do you even think being a "bigot" is remotely comparable to what you just called an LGBT person? Learn to check your privilege before you make these kinds of complaints, because you're working from the assumption that nothing is wrong with insulting the very being of an LGBT person by calling them an "abomination" all because your "God" "told" you so.

5. So does this mean I can't believe that God doesn't approve of LGBT marriage anymore?

Of course not! You're free to keep believing this, the same way some people still believe that slavery, or women's suffrage, or interracial marriage are all horrible things God would shun, too.

What you can't do, though, is to conflate your religious beliefs with the legal demand for equal rights for everyone, including LGBT people, to marry the one they love, who just so happen to have the same genitals as they do.


Your church can continue to never marry LGBT couples to each other, but if the government decides marriage equality is a thing, you can't pretend that the law has to conform to your religion, because it doesn't work that way.

4. Why does this matter so much to you if you're straight?

Well, wow. I didn't realize that empathy is a bad thing now! Do I even need to dignify this question with an answer?

3. Aren't you afraid of Sodom and Gomorrah happening to us if we let marriage equality happen?

No. No, I'm not afraid of Sodom and Gomorrah, because Canada has had marriage equality for a decade now, and they're doing pretty okay. And why does your God turn into the hellfire and brimstone version only when it comes to gay marriage, but He's all loving and kind and benevolent and forgiving when it's little crimes like murder or rape or plunder? That's mighty selective, don't you think?

You also might want to read up on why Sodom and Gomorrah was actually condemned in the first place. You might be surprised how little it had to do with homosexuality.

2. So what next? We can now do polygamy? Incest? Bestiality? Marry kids off to pedophiles?

Well, that escalated quickly. It's very clear that the premise of marriage equality is that two consenting adults decide to spend the rest of their lives with each other. All three of these words are integral to the definition of marriage equality. Animals can't legally give consent. Kids are obviously not adults and can't legally give consent, either. Consent is fuzzy when there are power dynamics in play with blood relatives, such as mother vs son, etc. In polygamous situations, the transfer of rights is ridiculously complicated, but if the law were able to dynamically adapt, then so long as all parties involved are consenting, why should it be legally disallowed?

Some Muslims already marry multiple women, as it stands. The reason that marriage equality advocates aren't particularly happy about this is that it's clear that the male is dominant in this setup, and as such, implies there's little "equality" to be expected in the first place.

Ultimately, when two gay people marry each other, how would this affect you? It doesn't. So let them mind their own business as you mind yours. Nobody is forcing you to get married to the same gender.

1.If the LGBT are asking for tolerance, why can't they tolerate people who don't want to tolerate them? Shouldn't they give it before they ask for it?

Tolerance of intolerance is self-defeating, and accomplishes nothing. It also reeks of privilege, because here, we demand the LGBT kowtow to our feelings while we refuse to give even a semblance of respect to theirs. The LGBT are fighting for equality. If we can legally marry the one we love, why can't they? If we can stay in the ICU with our spouse as they lay there in critical condition, why can't they? The law is the great equalizer that levels the playing field for when there is an inherent disadvantage for a marginalized class.

This is why it's so ludicrous to wonder why straight people don't have any "straight pride" parades,  because they don't need one. Nobody is oppressing them systematically for being straight. It's also why nobody is particularly impressed when Tim Tebow professes his Christianity. This is the norm. This is the default. How is this a shocker? When people tell him to "keep it to himself," does it ever stop him from professing his faith? Of course not. It doesn't even stop him from continuing to express his beliefs in public, because freedom of speech allows him to keep doing it, just as much as his critics are enabled by the very same freedom.

Not pictured: a fair comparison.

On the other hand, when you see someone like Caitlyn Jenner come out as a transgendered woman (who is still very much into women, by the way), you will see people praise her because it takes guts to do that, and let's not pretend she didn't get any negative backlash for it. She certainly did.

It's all about false equivalence, and privilege. When you have the luxury of living your life normally without people condemning you for the religion you happen to belong to and for the sexual orientation you happen to possess, it becomes difficult to see why it takes courage when someone who doesn't subscribe to the norm has to come forward and express themselves.

In short, Christians, you are not the persecuted class in this story. I understand how nice it is to pretend you're the underdog, but between a bunch of people who get called "abominations" with regularity, and a bunch of people who have to stretch the definition of "oppression" to claim it, I think it's easy to see who's really being persecuted. You're Floyd Mayweather. You're John Cena. You're the '96-'98 Chicago Bulls. Any backlash you get is because people know you're going to win in the end, and there's nothing wrong with that: you're just being who you are.

When the dust has settled, marriage equality doesn't affect you if you have zero plans of getting married to someone of the same gender. So why should it be any of your business if the government, the one that's supposed to protect everyone, and not just you, eventually decides that gay people are deserving of the equal rights they should have gotten in the first place?

You don't get to debate human rights, because they're just that: human rights.

And in the end, in all this hoopla about the "dignity" of marriage, there is yet another oppressed minority being pushed to the side...

What about us single people? Are we not deserving of "dignity," too? Alas, that is a discussion to be had some other day.

Saturday, August 08, 2015

Nothing But The Best Wishes For Nonong And Ryan Rems!

.:Shameless Not-Self-Promotion:.

Today is the Finals day for Showtime's "Funny One," and two of my friends and brothers in standup, Nonong and Ryan Rems, are in the finals!

Skelan is probably a sponsor or something.

All I can say is "thank you" to these two guys. Because you couldn't ask for nicer, more down-to-earth, and hardworking representatives for POV standup comedy than these two guys. Here's hoping that the laughs they have earned from the millions (and millions) of people watching them on television will not go unappreciated today.

We can talk about revolutions for standup comedy tomorrow. We can talk about the ramifications and the possibility of this kind of comedy invading the mainstream after over a decade of being branded as little more than "niche" some other time. Today, I would rather simply express my gratitude and support to two of my friends. It's *their* time to shine. Everything else merely follows.

Wednesday, July 22, 2015

The Manila Improv Fest That Was

.:A Belated Look Back:.

I hate the word "Sepanx," but what could be a more appropriate thing to say here?

Admittedly, looking back at the recently-concluded Manila Improv Festival well over a week after the fact seems rather too late the hero, but I don't really mind. When it comes to this blog, I've been writing for myself for a long while now instead of for an actual audience. And that's fine.

Anyways, I think what really stood out about this particular festival is that the sense of community has really brought the people together more than ever. Were there woes and cares within each group? Yes. Were there anxieties about the quality or lack thereof of certain performances? Absolutely. Did that ruin the festival? Not by a long shot.

At the end of the day, everyone came together. Everyone gave it their best shot. Everyone had memories to recount about the Festival, and most of all, everyone is absolutely looking forward to the next one.

I could give you a blow by blow account of my favorite moments from the entire thing, but given that I'm the 8List guy, I may as well boil it down to 8 things that really stood out for me, on a personal level...

8. The Music Workshop

I will never forget Dave of the Beijing Collective for as long as I live, and one of the main reasons is probably this particular workshop. There's nothing like taking a bunch of people with a ridiculously wide range of musical skills. I have to say it was pretty memorable to be creating great music on the fly, and I can't wait to put that to use.

7. The Non-Performers

Random pictures I still managed to find. Yayyyyy.

Made a few new friends within the Festival among people who went to watch or cover the whole thing, or at least to take part in the workshops, but wasn't actually part of any of the improv groups. In fact, when it came to getting to know them, Dave (he figures a lot in my Festival memories this year) actually spurred me on to do something I don't normally do. Jury's still out on the outcome of that one, but needless to say, I've gotten that monkey off my back, at least.

Also, Tomato Kick was an awesome venue for all our crazy after-parties. No doubt, no doubt!

Special mention to Miles, who kept me company for most of the Festival during the latter half!

6. Reconnecting!

Two years ago, the Manila Improv Festival allowed me to make a lot of new friends. Seeing them again in the Festival allowed us to pick up where we left off. Whether it was enjoying the comedy stylings of the Pirates of Tokyo Bay, or just catching up with Taichung Improv who really got me into improv wayyyy back in the day by giving me my first taste of performing it, to the fact that Dennis of Taichung is a dead ringer for Jeremy Renner, to PLI's insanity, to finally hitting it off with Dave and Liz and Jay of the Beijing Collective, to seeing a super-polished Zmack! to... man, I'm bound to forget people here, but whatever. It was awesome!

5. New friends!

The Improve Company from Singapore! Bacolod Improv Group! Dulaang Ateneo from CDO! These guys are just a few of the new people I had the pleasure of getting to know over the course of the Festival, and I can't help but think how great it would be to see them again soon. Who knows? Maybe I could swing by SG sometime this year...

4. SPIT continues to lead the way!

It's easy to say that without Silly People's Improv Theatre, this entire thing would not even have existed. With 13 years of experience under their belt, I can't help but be thankful for the kindness they have shown Switch Improv over the years. Thank you, SPIT! We couldn't be more grateful for everything you've done to bring improv to the people.

3. The PiP Show

Now kiiiiissssss!!!

I never heard of "slow comedy" before these guys came along. They pretty much defined it with their performance right off the bat! While most groups can get frenetic and that pace works wonders for them, these guys were just so chill. It was really just something for the ages, and every lady in the audience was practically screaming when the two of them actually kissed onstage. And yes, one of them certainly looks like Heath Ledger. Glad you noticed.

2. The Impromafia

Making me an offer I can't refuse!

Whether it's their two-man show or their three-person Disney-esque musical that they actually debuted at the Festival, Brisbane's pride and joy, the Impromafia, were simply phenomenal. It's hard to determine which I liked more: the fact that they brought something we've never seen before to the table, or the fact that Luke reminded me so much of G.R.R. Martin. Well, let me choose both, then!

1. My home team

Still making a scene wherever we go.

It's been three years, but let's face it: when the chips are down Switch Improv has always had each other's backs. There's pretty much nothing I could ask for more in this world of entertainment, where years of loyalty can be forgotten in an instant because of petty egocentricity and ridiculous entitlement. I get none of that from Switch Improv. All I get are a bunch of people who care. Who care too much than to stay complacent. Who care too much than to say nothing. And it's that caring I've come to associate with the world of improv, and why no matter what, I get sent to a happier place when I'm there. 

I don't need perfection or unbridled harmony. All I need are people who care. And that's why this team came together in the first place.

While I wish I could have been far more detailed in recounting my fond memories of the 2015 Manila Improv Festival, all I know is that it was definitely one for the ages, and it reminds me why I've always loved the improv community that Switch has been a part of for the past three years.

Tuesday, July 14, 2015

That Sinking Feeling...

.:That Sinking Feeling:.

There was so much I wanted to talk about. With how the Manila Improv Festival ended the other day, I was still feeling this kind of elation that was all over me, but I guess these things really weren't meant to last, were they?

Now that I've snapped back to reality, I realize I have to get away from it all for a while. I've been burnt out by the world of standup. I've worked too hard in the world of improv. I have very little left in me to keep going, and I know that I have to stop. Breathe. Think. And slow down.

There's so much I have to do next. There's so much I have to cover next. But ultimately, the great equalizer is the fact that I have hope, no matter what the circumstances are. Or I had it. I don't know. It feels like it really refuses to stick with me, so here I am, just dealing with another fallout I never counted on.

I've always been awkward. I've always been shy. Despite being a performer by trade, there's just something about trying to approach people and making myself known, that attempt at breaking the veil of anonymity, that terrifies me. Because while I like being applauded when I'm onstage, I also like my moments of quiet when I need them. Approaching people tends to jeopardize that.

So it came to pass that I saw a moment enter my life, and I didn't want it to pass me by. With a knowing nod from my friend Dave, I made a leap of faith. I said some things I don't normally say. I did some things I don't normally do. Not for any hope or agenda. Not for some misguided sense of entitlement that this would yield results. But only because I wanted to make sure I didn't let the moment pass me by. I didn't want to sit down there and ask myself if I could have. 

I had to, you see. I really had to.

It seemed right. It seemed like it was the best way to go about it. And as I've always been, I was wrong. In as quickly as it began, it may have fizzled out just like that, too. And I don't even know where to begin picking myself up. Not for anything, but because once again, I blew it. I ruined it for myself. If I ever wonder from time to time why I'm not happy at a particular point in my life, the reason usually just so happens to be myself. And it disgusts me.

So where do I go from here? Do I get a do-over? Or are we simply going to go with "no take backsies," and that's that? The worst part of this whole episode is I can't even blame anyone but myself for it. I blew it. I screwed it up. Because as always has been the case, my stupid mouth has got me in trouble. I said too much again.

So I'm sorry. I'm sorry I blew it. And if this chapter has to end as abruptly as it begun, I guess I just have to live with that.

Is it too soon to say these things? Is it too soon to feel this way? I can't help but have that sinking feeling that it isn't. This is merely just the latest in a successive string that affirms the pattern. It's not too soon: it's in fact too late.

But please... if you ever asked me why I did what I did, I just need you to know one thing: when something comes into your life and you feel something you've never felt before, when it inspires you to do something you've never done before, when it calls you to say something you've never said before, then there's something there.

I may no longer ever find out what that something was, but it was there.

Bakit ko iaasa sa hangin? Bakit ko ipapaubaya na lang sa tadhana? Sa bagay na hindi ko makita o mahawakan? Bakit hindi ko hahabulin, aamuhin, lulundagin, kung maaaring pagsisihan ko ang paglampas ng sandali?

Pasensya na. Sawa na akong kumiling sa kapalaran.