My first accident

It's been 12 years plus since I got my driving licence, and today (of all days, Good Friday), I got into my first car accident, which I hope to be my last, on my way to my cell group TGIF event, on CTE.

I thought my life would flash before me, but that, of course, didn't happen since it wasn't so serious, but the brakes did feel that they took a super long time to bring the car to a complete stop. And so I heard the 'bang'. It seemed pretty loud and I was like, oh no, was it serious? I admit I was driving a little fast, so I didn't stop in time. But it was a relief when I stepped out to check the damage. My car's licence plate was slightly dented. But if I didn't point it out, nobody would have noticed it (my parents both asked "where?" when they investigated).So no repairs for our car will be needed. As for the taxi, there was a slight dent in the back.

 

Honestly, I've heard so many horror stories about taxi drivers, that the first thing that came to my mind was "don't forget to take photo" and how to handle the situation. Am feeling a little guilty about that, but good thing the driver only suggested I let him know my workshop and I just pay the damages. Hopefully he really sticks to that. That should be settled tomorrow. As it was really minor, we didn't see the need to go through all the hassle of filing reports and claims. I think he doesn't want the trouble too. I also apologised to the passenger in the taxi for the delay. The whole saga ended in about 10-15 minutes I think.

Already a little frazzled, what irritated me were the cars behind that started sounding their horns. An accident just happened!

But thank God nobody was hurt. I pray that it will be a simple settlement. Hope my heart settles down soon. Probably only when everything is over. Thank God I got my cellgroup to pray for me, and my heart is a little warmer with friends asking if I was alright (posted update on FB & Twitter).

Passover

The theme of the Last Supper seems especially strong, at least for me, for this year's Good Friday. Why do I feel this way? Because it's being brought up rather heavily at least twice.

Firstly, the Christian arts group, CLV, that I recently joined decided to carry out the Passover Feast this year for the April session. Although this observance had reference to Moses' time in the release of the slaves in Egypt, but it does not forget how Jesus was our Passover Lamb as well (we have been "passed over" from death by the covering of His blood). It was an exciting session coz it was the first time I ever did something like this (we tried to follow instructions as closely as we could). So each of the action and item in the 'menu' had some form of symbolism. Here's a summary of what goes on during something like this PASSOVER III – Haggadah for the Seder. An interesting experience. Just a note that we followed the Messianic Jewish interpretation, which was more relevant to our Christian faith.

And this year, for our TGIF home event (hosted in cellgroup setting), we were instructed to carry out the Lord's Supper (Holy Communion) during the event. It's a bit different from previous years as we normally run through a programme of sharing without the Lord's Supper, mainly because guests might feel awkward during it. But this year, part of the programme was to include it. The idea was to bring us back to how church was like in the past, and at the same time, pay attention to the significance of this act, which was to remember Jesus' sacrifice, which is essentially why we have Good Friday.

"And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you." ~ Luke 22:19-20

The guests should also know what and why we do this.

So Good Friday is here. Thank God for Good Friday.

Photographing Hong Kong

Wow, it seems it has been a long time since I posted something about "me" here.
Guess I've been busy reviewing stuff (which I'm still doing and clearing) and work has been busy. Well, so here I am, back again, talking about myself...that's what a personal blog is about isn't it?

Anyway, ever since I came back from Hong Kong, I've been compelled to want to do some street photography (i.e. taking photos of the streets or city). More specifically, I have this compulsion to go back to Hong Kong on my own, to photograph the street scenes, billboards, etc. On those last days, I felt I didn't really see enough of Hong Kong and its sights. I didn't even visit the Arts Fest even though it was ongoing then. The whole trip was just eating and shopping, and well, maybe a little bit of nature on Lama Island. In fact, I didn't do that too on the other trip last Oct (which was pretty short). What have I actually seen of Hong Kong? Maybe I was too caught up in moving from place to place to actually just wander the streets leisurely. That's why, I thought of going on my own, or at the most, with 1 other friend.
Actually, I think I developed this feeling on the last few days of the trip. Maybe it was when I had the opportunity to take a "stroll" on my own from H&M to Peninsula Hotel. Short distance as it may be, but I was suddenly alone, at my own pace, and I took time to stop by the Hullett House area (some kind of heritage area). Maybe it was also the tram bus ride. In any case, I might just do that, going back to Hong Kong one of these days just to "experience" it in another way.

This kind of brings me back to when I actually walked around the city taking photos. Actually, only the City Hall area lah. It gave a different kind of feel to life really. At that point, I was in the mood for photography. I'm not a pro (only going around with an automatic) but there was some sort of satisfaction or just carefree feel, even if it was just for half a day, once in a while.

I must say I'm a girl of many interests, and they take priority at different times. Ah well, it's time I got down to finishing up my short play. Did the 1st draft and gotten some feedback, so will need to go revise it. I don't know what I'm going to do with the script eventually, but just see how things goes.

Madoff: The Musical (staged reading)

I didn't really have any high expectations especially after last week. However, this turned out not too bad for someone's first full-length musical, the someone being Kate Ingber, who wrote both the book and the music. That's commendable.

Having learnt some "tips" on structure and style of musicals from J, I tried to assess the musical as such. But firstly, I need to say that The Chamber, though a nice place didn't serve as well in this instance. It could well be the sound system, but I had a bit of difficulty catching what was said and sung as the mics or maybe the hard walls or high ceilings caused the speech to sound muffled (echo?). And maybe also I was affected by the singing, which was a bit diverse in mix and quality, but keeping in mind that this is just a staged reading, I think it's not a big problem.

Even though the musical was called "Madoff", the protagonist here isn't Madoff, but Henry, whose a corporate spy; the story of Madoff told from Henry's point of view.
Generally, there was a sound flow and structure of the story, that gave it a sense of completeness. Well, the story was predictable as it went along (even cliche at some points), but hey, nothing's new in theatre. The songs also followed a more or less consistent theme/style, which helped in keeping the audience focused. I believe the reprise of songs/tunes are quite crucial in making a musical more memorable and in reminding the audience of certain aspects of the show. Well, there was one, at least, which was the repeated chorus of "Waking Up in Wall Street" by the readers. I think I'm beginning to understand how the style of music in a musical affect the audience's engagement level. Used to take it for granted. Besides that, as J said, a change of settings/locations within the story is important in a musical, which there was (as contrary to a play which can work in a confined setting). To add on, I think that a musical should also transcend time, i.e. events should occur over a period of time. These were 2 things Casino didn't have. There was also an attempt to introduce each main character, which is important, but I think a little more character development would be nice. But then again, there seems to be quite a few characters involved, so it might be difficult as it will cause the musical to overrun.

As opposed to J, I preferred the 2nd half of the musical. I think it's because they managed to sustain a "high" since this was supposed to be the "action" part of the musical, and I kinda preferred the songs in the 2nd Act, like when the 2 couples Henry and Jane, Bernie and Ruth, sang their love song. The readers/singers also seemed to be more "warmed up". I felt there was more continuity in this act than Act 1, which I felt seemed a bit "choppy" in the sense that I kept feeling each sequence was a little short before I could get myself into it. Maybe I'm slow lah. But I remind myself that it's just a reading, so maybe that's why.

Well, I guess I can conclude this was better than Casino. Will this be suitable to be fully staged? I don't know, but who knows what this might lead to?

Casino: The Musical (staged reading)

If anyone has heard of Musical Theatre Limited (MTL), they might have heard of the incubation programme they have to aid new writers in creating their own musicals.Usually, there will be a performance of some sort of the musical that comes out of the programme. Well, Casino was one of those, written by Richard Lord, with music composed by Kenneth Lyen. In this case, it was a staged reading.

I admit that it couldn't engage me beyond a certain point. Why? I realised the reason that the musical felt "disorganised". The structure wasn't very clear and the main gist/goal/focus seem to get lost or shifted along the way. In the beginning, it seemed it was set out to be a bet between two people on whether luck or technique prevailed in gambling, by which they had to find a casino "virgin" to test out. However, this was not explored or developed beyond that first mention, of which was totally forgotten until it was decidedly brought up in Act 2, like an afterthought. It would have been more interesting if there were more signs of the competition between the 2. The novice casino-goer, which turned out to be the protagonist didn't come out strong enough. Or maybe due to the context, we couldn't empathise with him. There wasn't any particular highs or lows to bring us into the musical either, just a story that goes on, or any songs that stood out with the changing themes. Not that the songs weren't any good, but they felt a bit disjointed, with little (musical) links between them, if you get what I mean. I guess the absence of any distinct conflicts (which would contribute to the highs & lows) made it more a play with songs. Usually, in musicals, the situation would call for a song, where the character can only express him/herself through singing. Of course, we don't expect every song in a musical to be so, but it usually comes with some emotional circumstance or occasion, whether happy, sad, angry, etc.

Well, to give credit, the book and lyrics were rather creative and clever, for it isn't easy coming out with witty words in the context. Unfortunately, I felt the humour a little contrived, such that it fell short in bringing on laughs (in my case). Maybe Richard was trying too hard to be smart with the words. He's good at that, but somehow, it didn't come through in the musical. You could tell he gave a lot of effort in working the words but it didn't work out in the context, maybe. Moreover, I felt the earthquake reference was slightly in bad taste. Well, maybe it might have felt different in a play setting.

I felt it might have had a good premise (the bet) to start with, which in my own interpretation, would be good to play up. Whatever their intent, I felt more emphasis could have been made on showing the irony that as the 2 tried to manipulate the protagonist with their "luck" and "technique" presumptions, there are greater forces beyond them that is "playing" them. If that was the moral or intention of the musical, then it should have developed that way, at least in my own personal opinion. But to each his own. Maybe they were going another direction which I couldn't see.

Well, at least I learnt that there should be some sort of structure, focus and a consistent theme of songs in a musical.

Murder in San Jose 《圣荷西谋杀案》

A simply-titled murder story, but a more than mystery sequence of events. Just reading the word "murder" piqued my interest (a genre I like) even as I read that it has been performed to rave reviews in Hong Kong. Murder in San Jose was specially commissioned for the 2009-2011 Hong Kong Arts Festivals, and counting this run in Singapore, it has been staged more than 30 times. Furthermore, the script had won "Best Script Award" at the Hong Kong Drama Awards.

Initially, I was afraid I wouldn't be able to follow the show well since it was in Cantonese, even though it has English and Chinese surtitles (my Cantonese not very good lah). But it turned out manageable (like watching Cantonese drama), although I did feel tempted to read the surtitles from time to time.

This isn't a whodunnit mystery. Rather, it has been categorised as a psychological thriller, although it didn't feel that way till the end. As it is, it was a sequence of events from what seemed like a marriage-on-rocks drama that led to a more sinister truth. Someone was murdered in the ending...but it wasn't as simple as that.

In an interesting prelude, characters went about their daily routines before the official curtains up while the audience were still entering (well, the curtains were already up). It was apparent that the man was just doing everything on his own, even having dinner. So we were prepped for the scenes to follow even as that scene faded out with the start of Act 1 proper.

Set in an isolated suburb in San Jose, Ling (Alice Lau/刘雅丽) had been staying there with her husband, Tang (Tang Wai-kit/邓伟杰) for some years now and expecting their first child. Her childhood friend, Sammi (Kearen Pang/彭秀慧) comes for a visit. Things ain't so pretty as Sammi observes, with Ling being her controlling self full of rules and Tang, the frustrated husband who's dominated by Ling even as he tries to be an online entrepreneur. Sammi is unwittingly embroiled in the struggle between the couple which soon spirals into a showdown as a result of Ling's sabotage on a possible business deal for Tang. Then it comes out. The murder. Tang is not really Tang, but a bartender Ling met. They tricked the real Tang into moving to this secluded spot and conspired to kill him, and the bartender took the identity of Tang. The fake "Tang" had to however not try to leave the country or he might be discovered. However, "Tang" can't stand Ling anymore. He asks Sammi to kill Ling as it'll either be her or Ling. If Ling dies, Sammi can take her place. Sammi is petrified, should she choose between her own survival or live as someone else? The scene blacks out as the pregnant Ling sits on a chair, with Sammi raising a baseball bat. So who died?
At the end, Sammi is not seen again, and Ling and "Tang" seem to return to their couple life.

Hope I managed to describe the twist effectively. When the truth came to light, it made me realise how some of the things said earlier (even the funny bits) took on a double meaning now. The script was well-written and the actors played their parts well. Even though there was no intermission, the plot was fully engaging, and the 2 hours didn't feel long at all. It kept us moving along with the story perpetually, "driving" us through it all.

The only question I had was how come it was Ling and "Tang" (still don't know his real identity) who remained in the end? What happened to Sammi? If I assume she's dead, how did she die? She was the one holding the bat. Did "Tang" change his mind? Did Sammi back out? Was she really dead? Then how come the prelude had a figure that might be her (or not?).
Maybe as my friend said, it was better Sammi died. I think she would be too soft-hearted to live with killing the pregnant Ling.

Looks like I might need to review the script to see if I can shed any light on this, which fortunately, has been published (in Chinese & English) and was being sold at the venue. Maybe it'll serve as good reference in future. :)

H is for Hantu

H is for Hantu, to hunt you and to haunt you...and G is for Ghosts! (ok, that was pretty lame. Ha!)

Anyway, in case you didn't know, "hantu" is the malay word for "ghost". Not unfamiliar to the supernatural and comedy, Jonathan Lim marries these 2 in his latest (re-run) of H is for Hantu.

The story tells of how a kampung is set to be phased out by HDB to build more flats. However, unbeknownst to HDB, there are actually 2 kampungs (1 for the hantus, which was essentially a piece of forest behind the "living" kampung). Sazali, a boy who wants to preserve the kampung, tries to rally the kampung folks to support him, but to no avail so he turns to his hantu friends (yes, he sees dead people) who tries to convince the HDB officer (Angie) handling the relocation otherwise. However, they discover she's being haunted by a child ghost and he wants to help her (in the hope of her helping them). It turns out she used to live in the kampung and the child ghost was her best friend who's been using her to search for something they buried together. Angie had also been fighting for good packages for the kampung folks as the HDB project must still go own. However, eventually, they do get to preserve the forest part where the hantus lived with the help of environmentalists (through Angie's help). So all's well that ends well.

Besides the less than perfect recorded music (it sounded a bit noisy with static and some glitches) and the rather mixed genre of songs which was a bit distracting, I found it enjoyable, though a tad long. Maybe because I expected a 90-minute musical (from sistic's info) but it turned out to be 2 hours (excluding the delay and intermission). No particular song really stood out, but I probably took more notice of the pontianak's theme since it's totally based on what is known of it, like the parts with "hitting the nail on the head", "frangipani fragrance", etc. Think Jo Tan did well in that role as a less than scary pontianak, Cik Pon.

In the beginning, when Sazali started telling stories, I thought, hmm...is this going to be just storytelling? But it wasn't, although there were still narratives along the way. The references were funny in a "natural" way and most didn't turn out corny such that they didn't work (as opposed to another musical I watched recently...sorry, couldn't help but compare). I think the wayang kulit performance was rather well done for something like this and they managed to inject Singapore references into it with humour. It gave a contrast of what we used to value and the modern lifestyle. The warm, traditional "storytelling" that drew people, in the cold face of technology (multimedia presentation?). The puppets were pretty impressive too, especially with the massive Hantu Galah (tall ghost).

And what's a show about ghosts without a scary moment? Maybe the "hantus" portrayed from the beginning were on the comical side and the story was just getting "comfortable". But the turn of events (I felt this was the turning point or climax) happened shortly before the interval when Angie suddenly appeared like a zombie with a pale small puppet sitting on her shoulder (supposedly the ghost of a little girl). That was super CREEPY! The design of the puppet was such: white blank face, eyes with dark rings (making it look hollow) and dressed in a white dress. Creepy it really was, that it didn't send a chill down my spine, but chilled my heart instead, so much so that I nearly grabbed J's arm (yup, you might have noticed a slight cringe in your direction). It took some minutes for my heart to get back into the "light-heartedness" of the show again. I rarely feel this kind of chill you know (considering I do watch horror shows), so I must say it was pretty successful in producing the "tension" and made me wonder about what's going to happen in the later part of the show (but after the shock, I did consider a few scenarios that might have been expected). It kind of raised my rating of the show a little. Good thing I didn't have nightmares! Fortunately, the doll used later was less frightening. I think it was the suddenness of the appearance that spooked me. But as agreed with J, it did shift the initial focus of saving the kampung away, even though the ending brought it back again. But I guess it was intended, to create that "twist" to the story.

I would say it ended off in a happy mood, as a musical comedy would, with a medley of songs sung in the show.

Considering the factors, think I will give it a 3.5 out 5.