WOAH! THESE BAD TEACHERS STILL EXIST?

Within the last 20 years, whenever an old issue is brought up, two opinions you would hear among many are: "Oh it's the 90's, things shouldn't happen like that anymore" and  "Oh it's the 21 century I thought we were past that". However, whenever we hear those phrases it only involves old issues that are more talked about like race, sex or culture. Well, these two phrases will be brought to this less mentioned issue here - bad school teachers.

Teachers from the post modern golden era of child discipline, the 1950's and 60's, have a reputation of being villains. Treating pupils like animals and enforce that they should never speak unless spoken to. People who are mature or elderly of age would share one story two about certain teachers who were over strict and boarder line sadistic.

Now, that's all they are, stories of an era long gone. However even though the educational system has changed so that school children now have a voice, there are a type villainous teachers that are surprisingly still around. Not the sexual violating ones, not the boring ones, not the incompetent ones, but the annoying ones with the bad attitude. The ones who allow the class loud mouth to muck around, but singles you out for talking in class for only uttering a word. The ones who frown at you necessarily for asking to go to the toilet. The ones who blatantly ignores you as you try to ask for help.

These type of teachers may be in a minority in the broader picture of the educational system, but ask a young person, who had already finished school, about any teachers who had a bad attitude,  you might get a name or two as well as a few stories.

It's a wonder how, the method of school discipline has changed though the experience of those who were victimised in decades past, but the current bad attitude of teachers  hasn't.  It's a part of life to surpass the the poor standards of the past. To evolve. You would hear people who grew up in a single parent background, declaring their own children will not have the same upbringing.  You would watch the news to see governments delivering statements  about changing flawed laws that were made in history.

So what deep twisted dark side of the abyss did these teachers come from? Weren't they school children too when they saw a teacher with a bad attitude in their own class?  Every human being knows if someone is doing something immoral in their professional duties it's downright disgraceful. It doesn't matter if you are a tough or cynical minded human being. If its wrong, it's just wrong. Just when we think it's enough that these bad attitude teachers are being a pain in the backside, here's the kicker, they know that they being a pain in the backside. One can tell by looking at them, with that grin on their face, pretending what they are doing is normal.

In nowadays there should be no more of these type of teachers.  At least those teachers from the 1950's and 60's can say they were taught by the education system to be hard, even though its a weak excuse to butcher school pupils almost on a daily basis. Bad attitude teachers on the other hand, have no excuse whatsoever. Not a bad day. Not because they had a bad upbringing. Nothing. They willingly choose to use whatever reason to justify themselves to annoy students.

What makes that situation even worse is that teachers with a bad attitude has such a grey area in the school guidelines. If you complain to the headmaster, they mostly don't want to take your word for it. Reasons being they think you are 'too sensitive' or being a 'troublemaker'. This is really not a good way deal with complaints. That school student will remember that for years to come as mentioned earlier.

It would be nice if the national education boards in some western countries would put out bad attitude teachers but that would mean surveillance. Cameras everywhere. The last thing everyone needs is a repressed school.  It seems the best possible hope of bad attitude teachers being eradicated is to wait again for a new generation of teachers who will finally understand that teaching with a bad attitude is not cool.

TALENT OVER IGNORANCE.

WE HAVE TALENTS. DONT WASTE THEM. WE'LL BRING OURSELVES DOWN
AND OTHERS.

FOR 80's BABIES AND TEENS EVERYWHERE. ENJOY!

                              

This is for us who enjoyed growing up in the 1980's. I just thought this video will bring an nostalgia extravaganza to children and teens of the 80's. At times, it felt like that decade was made for us. Full of fun and excitement. Remember running home in time to see MYSTERIOUS CITIES OF GOLD and PEEWEE'S PLAYHOUSE. Well just ignore the cheesiness of the video (especially the 1st 20 seconds) and GO BACK IN TIME!



Added this video below as a bonus. Remember when we used to see this at the end of cartoons? Special times !

                Oh and in spirit of the Olympics, this is for those who grew up in Britain.



                           



SO WHAT?! SERIES FINAL PART: So what I like professional Wrestling?

He sat on a bench lacing up his boots. Soon as he finished, he took a moment to concentrate on what he was about to say in a few moments. He stood up, did a warm up and walked out of the locker room.

He walked in the hall in silent thought and saw the TV crew ready with the camera. He went up to them then the camera was focused on him and in a few seconds it began recording. He shouts.

"Tonight I want you! If you run and hide it's not doing to work, like it didnt work with Saddam Hussian!......."

Former WWF wrestler THE ULTIMATE WARRIOR.
Many would say he talked gobbledy gook, but if they are honest they do GET what he was saying.

Yes, wrestling, to the general public, has a kind of a bad wrap. It's 'cheesy', 'silly waste of time', 'terrible television' or 'just for children'. Many do not realise the skill and dedication it takes to be a good wrestler. The thought process and the ideas they must come up with to engage the public. The hours of hard training it takes to have good matches. Pro wrestling is not rocket science but it is not easy, it just looks easy.

Like most sports, there is thought and great team work between the wrestlers to have a match. There are a variety of moves in the ring that can be dangerous if done wrong. For example a bodyslam, an easy looking move enough, but land on the wrong angle on the receiving end of it, there can be an injury. That clearly would lead to a trip to the medic, missing a few match dates and maybe a heated argument with the wrestler who gave the bodyslam or all three.

To focus on another danger from a team work gone wrong, there is the bad match. A terrible situation which can be likened to a bad stand up comedy act or a flop concert. Just like other entertainment which is shown in front of an audience, there is nowhere to hide. Every move the wrestlers make is seen mostly at every angle.  If the wrestlers are awkward performing moves or miss time them, it's embarrassing. There are video clips on the internet to show just how. Wrestling fans call them 'wrestling bloppers' which can happen to the worst and best wrestler.

This is the same with the other part of being a pro wrestler, the promo. When a wrestler has to act he/she dislikes another wrestler while speaking to the camera, there is an immediate pressure to make sure it comes off perfectly. If the promo isn't even average standard the shame is on the wrestler after it's done. Again, it's embarrassing.

Just like most areas of professions, there is a high standard wrestlers are rated by. However this does not mean every wrestler on weekly TV are the elite class.  This is what some of these critics do not fully understand. There are wrestlers who are good or bad regardless if they are on TV or not.  The best workers, who can make a match look fantastic and there are sub standard wrestlers, who are better off wrestling in an audience of their pet dogs.  A person can easily watch a horrible wrestling match just out of curiosity then mistake it for an example of a good wrestling match before switching the channel in disappointment. After, they might feel that is the best pro wrestling is ever going to get, but they would be wrong. Given the chance to watch another match, they might see much better performers.That is why there are a handful of names that are praised in the pro wrestling industry.

If you are a bit cynical about pro wrestling or pro wrestlers, watch this

guy. WWE's future star, DEAN AMBROSE.

Besides the backstage politics that occasionally happens in pro wrestling, there is some intelligence involved in the profession to the point a wrestler is widely recognised and respected. In fact, any none fan can have great conversation with a wrestler and find them insightful and clever. That is what most people often miss out when bashing wrestlers. Wrestlers are just like everyone else who have  ambition and a good head on their shoulders. When listening to some of past lives of wrestlers it can be surprising they could be have been a success in a different profession. Be it sport; like UK or US football, swimming, athletics or white collar jobs like a judge, lawyer, business executive or a doctor.

It should be understood, that it is passion as to why these people would be bothered to get into the wrestling business in the first place. The thrill of performing, the chants of an audience and the social lifestyle are what attracted these men and women we now know as wrestlers. Ask some of these normal 9 to 5 workers what they would have liked as a career, they would say an actor or a huge pop star. Wrestling is just like that to some people. A job that is not the normal. A job that is made for ambitious performers. A job that drinks in the reaction of a crowd.

Having just mentioned the crowd, a group of people who arguably get more bashing from others are the wrestling fans. The most common phrase who dismiss pro wrestling on TV is "Who watches this stuff?". Through lack of understanding, these critics just see brutes wearing ridiculous costumes performing 'fake moves' and 'cheap soap opera.' Probably they think the main 'crime' of pro wresting is that, it's not a competitive sport because wrestling matches are choreographed and the winners are decided before the wrestlers even enter the ring.

 The fact of the matter is, there is a certain level of real competitiveness in pro wrestling. This competitiveness is not with the opponents, but with the wrestlers themselves. It's similar to trying to beat your personal best on a race track or in a power lifting training session. Wrestling fans know this and see that every time a wrestler performs they are actually performing (or should be!) at their personal best. How they do their moves, how they engage with the audience, how they tell the story during matches.

Wrestling fans appreciate the art of pro wrestling  as a whole, like eager spectators at an opera. As fans they are critical of all the wrestlers' performances. Some fan comments may be vague or some detailed, but one thing is for sure, they have a clear idea of what wrestling matches are good and what matches that are an equivalent to a dirty urinal. Those who look down on pro wrestling fans, dont know  these fans mostly think this way.

Yes, there are some wrestling fans that give the general fanbase a bad name. There are the 'neanderthal' types, who shout alot and act like fools and there are  'egotistical geeks', who do too much ranting about whats bad about pro wrestling. The term for them are 'smart marks'.  Unfortunately, it is these type of fans who unfairly get the spotlight when critics want to point out a typical wrestling fan. A typical wrestling fan would not be so obnoxious. Most fans discuss and behave like any other civil fan of entertainment.

So if pro wrestling is not one's cup of tea then that is fine, not everyone must be a wresting fan or like pro wrestling. However pro wrestling is profession that should be more respected.

Time for Justice. Comedy.

Just thought I'd do another one. Quick humor.

Wont see new Batman movie?

Just thought I would make this cartoon silliness for fun!

I know their voices need work.

SO WHAT?! SERIES PART 2: So what I like 'bad' movies

Everyone does through it from time to time: You choose a film you want to see, sit down and watch the film to start, get hooked at the beginning, get excited over a well made scene then praise the film at  the end. Then, all of a sudden you  feel that breeze of doubt and isolation  as you are surrounded by people blasting the film. That good sizzling film you recently watched has now swept from your 'favorites' list to the 'guilty pleasures' list.

The introduction of He-man in Masters of the Universe. One of the most iconic scenes
in the movie. 

This should not be. Its time for most people to fully admit they like a film even others pan it. This is not to say you should broadcast at high volume on a megaphone that you like a film every one else dislikes, but rather firmly admit it.

The type of bad movies pointed out here are not the awful wet- tissue-paper -balls -on- the -wall movies from the likes of mockbuster company Asylum ( Transmorphers? Almighty Thor?). The films that are the subject here are the ones which are not obviously as bad as the masses say they are. Those of us who have good common sense to know a film is quite good should not bow down to the bulling of others making us feel like outsiders. Take The Last Airbender for example. It got panned almost unanimously for being director  M. Night Shyamlan's shambles of a movie.  While is no Oscar winning movie, the film was executed well enough.

The original and superior version

The acting was made for TV movie standard rather then cinema quality, but the film has a certain charm about it which over rides the bland acting. The charm seems to have come from the care the director handled the film. The gentle touch to the general storyline, Katara's cute naturing role to Aang, the sharp timed action sequences  and the believability of the elemental powers used by the different nations.  These positives  made the film worth watching. So for someone to admit to a critic and say "I love The Last Airbender" it's possible to see why. There is no need to think anyone who likes Airbender belongs in an asylum (no pun intended).

Yes it missed the mark, but it wasn't that bad.

With that being mentioned, It is very understandable that the proper fans of the Airbender cartoon were enraged at the dull characterisations, especially the main hero of the film, Aang. The video clip below must have been frustrating to watch for fans as actor Noah Ringer was MORE like Aang off screen than he was on screen.  However, this goes to show the director wasn't bad as such, but more like missed the mark, because he could have made an excellent adaptation. However, as a standalone film it does have a decent touch.

Some films such as Airbender, are unfairly trashed by ignoring most of the standout work the films made.  Not every film has to be Man on Wire or Godfather 2. As people we are different. That is as obvious as calling our biggest star in the sky the sun. Not all of us want to see film that has been nominated for respected movie awards. There are films that can be a good watch without being a review success. This is not to say that most of the movies that got panned don't have big flaws, but there are parts of these movies that were done right. With the towering mountain of sparkle and glamour that is Hollywood, it is easy to forget film is an art which can be open to interpretation. What's total rubbish to one person can be good to another.

However, it must be clear that the movies that can be open to interpretation are the ones that had passion put into them during the making. That is why some movies became cult classics despite bad reviews: Masters of the Universe, Howard the Duck, House of the Evil Dead. There had been least some sweat and tears put into production and direction of these films. They were made with a vision, a meaning, an impression to leave the viewers with.

So there should be no shame in putting 'bad' movies on your favourites list. Once you GET the purpose of a film you like it should be defended. A great reason why people should admit liking a panned film is that not all classic movies are liked by everyone. Not everyone likes The Godfather series, Citizen Kane, Raging Bull or Titanic. True, some might not have any good taste in movies who might say these classics are rubbish. However, there are people with good taste who would not like some of these highly praised films also.

So the best thing to do if you like a film that most think is a pile of pigs truffle don't let them sway you; every film has it's fans and critics.

SO WHAT?! SERIES FINAL PART: 'SO WHAT I LIKE PRO WRESTLING'
COMING SOON

HAYE AND CHISORA TURNED INTO ROLE MODELS

 About time!

In case there are those around the world who do not know this. 5 months ago 2 men were named an embrassment to British boxing. The then retired boxer David Haye and defeated heavyweight Dereck Chisora.

They had a real fight at the Klitschko v Chisora post fight press conference in Germany that was similar to turf war between 2 male  bisons.  After the scuffle a vengeful Chisora was left yelling how he was going to find Haye and 'shoot' and 'burn' him. It created a bad buzz about the binary and digital world. As seen here:

They were branded outcasts of the boxing world and while Haye, who was already retired at the time, flew himself to Las Vegas in the US, Chisora had his British boxing licence taken away.

Fast forward to today, as fate would probably have it, they are due to clash again tomorrow night in a boxing ring in an OFFICIAL  boxing match. This created mostly scorn from the public and boxing officials calling it 'waste of time' or a 'disgrace to boxing'. 

While the fight at the press conference was terrible, there are those of us (many or few) who thinks that the events leading up to this fight is a good idea. This is why only in this fight they can be seen as role models. Forget the politics and the effort to please the British consensus, you have 2 people who have an issue with each other. From Chisora's point of view, something has not settled; The problem between them is not over. Haye who thinks he had settled the matter in Germany, agrees to end it once an for all with this match.

Many would not agree but that's what so good about it. How many movies have we watched and stories have we read where when 2 men have problem with one another, they argee to 'step outside'.  Most critise Haye and Chisora for 'stepping outside'in a way, but we all praise those John Wayne, Clint Eastwood types when they wallop a villian for being disrespectful or to settle an issue. Yes, it's fiction, but it cames from an old custom for men to settle their differences. Black,white or asian, it has been used throuhout the world.

Nowadays in Britain, it probably happens few and far between due to the courts of law. However, as boxers this is the right step forward for both men. It wasnt right what happened in Germany, even Haye said if he knew there would have been a possible fist fight in Munich, he wouldnt have went to the press conference.  This fight tomorrow is the only way to make amends for that night in Munich. Thats why for one night they are role models. Not the kind the Klitschkos apparently are, but the kind that takes an ugly situation and make it right.

WOULD U.K EMPLOYERS HIRE EX-RIOTERS?

When the dusts of ash and the rubble of glass had long cleared away, it's been almost a year since the U.K riots. Over 10,000 people who made that poor judgement last year are now sentenced. No doubt there will be more to come. Our Prime Minister, David Cameron made swift and hard punishments. So hard people were debating if it was fair a looter should go to jail for 6 months for taking bottled water.

Chelsea Ives, 19, courts said she attacked a police car and a mobile phone shop during the
riots. Would you hire her in 5yrs time?

 Now it's hardly spoken about. Innocent citizens want to move on as quickly away from the event as possible. However, employers are going to be reminded again when an influx of ex cons will apply for jobs in future. These people will have to put a tick on the criminally convicted box on an application form. If employers ask these ex cons what are they convicted of, would they hire those who said they had stolen 2 packets of crisps (chips in American)?

EX CONS FROM THE RIOTS CARRY A MORE TARNISHED IMAGE

Someone could say why should we, the innocent, care about if these 'scum' will be hired or not? The matter of fact is this, here in the U.K we are crawling back to have a stable economy where debates are being thrown around about how to raise employment levels. The government is now pouring money in our economy to beat the recession, so more people employed will definitely help the situation.

Many people might not agree with this , but  another reason why people should care about hiring rioter/looter is , a there is probably a good percentage of these convicts are not criminally minded. They probably had nothing to do with crime until they decided to join in the order of chaos. As the media stated last year, some of these 'scum' had jobs or enrolled in good education courses.
In a nutshell, some of these people would probably never have done any crime if the riots did not happen.

Yes, a suspicious looking lot, but if they came
to an employer wearing suit and tie....?

So in world where there is a 90% chance a person is not going to gain employment with a criminal record anyway, would it be suitable for employers to give more consideration for these ex cons? What has to be clear here is that the types of riot crimes highlighted for the title's question are the ones that did not cause serious harm to another person. Like taking drink cans, magazines, kicking in shop windows. The major crimes such as battery, GBH, arson, police interference, violent protesting and the sort are not included in this title's question. Those crimes need more careful thought by employers. 

So when an ex rioter comes into an interview, it puts the employer in a curious position. Unlike other convicts who did something somewhat unrelated to the employer, ex cons from the riots carry a more tarnished image. Since employers were the secondary target of the rioters, it doesn't matter if a person committed a misdemeanour during the riots on a whim. An employer interviewing an ex looter would be like interviewing a former enemy even though that person did not attack his/her business last year.

However, in a justice system like ours (and USA) it would be good to give these misdemeanour offenders a second chance for the sake of the economy, but this is not to say the employers' feelings should not be taken into account. If  employers do not want anything to do with ex rioters in future, an idea must be put into action so that the employers will feel more welcoming and the economy can grow.

JACKSON FICTION

GOLDEN PANTHER: PART 1

THIS WEEK

(CLICK JACKSON FICTION)

SO WHAT?! SERIES PART 1: So what I like comics?!

"I'm Batman", "You've got me! Whose got you!?"  and "With great power comes great responsibility". These examples of famous movie lines became dialogue, then quotes and finally phases which we use from time to time. We not only use them but also hold the films in which these pharses came from as classics.

Batman (1989), Superman(1979) and Spiderman (2001) are not only classics but were also fianacial successes when they were first released in cinemas. Those bums on seats, which made money for these films, were not comic fans or even movie fans, it was everyone. Fan and none fan alike. Last year, Marvel's Thor flew to the top of the movie charts in the USA and here in the UK.

For those of us who  like comics it's a joy to see a superhero come on the big screen and more than glad that such a film with a B list superhero gets big recognition. Espeacially by none comic fans. However when we go anywhere with a comic book there is a scorn in the air from critics who think comics are just for kids. There are times when we even mention we are into comics we get the same treatment. What an ironic twist that these critics most probably fell in love with 300 which most know was adapted from a comic book/graphic novel. These people who  think comics are just for geeks and kids do not understand how rich the stories and characters are. A comic book is just as involving as a novel with relatable characters and compelling stories.

'THERE IS A LOT OF INTELLIGENCE BEHIND A COMIC BOOK'

Yes, most comics are made for children but the themes,stories and characters can be relatable to ANY adult. Male or   female, 25 or 55.  This is of course  any adult who understand the format of the the story told. That understanding these critics must grasp is each panel, each cover, each sentence is a captured moment like a art painting or photography. This is not to dress comics up in the clothes of an Oxford professor, but to explain the realistic value of comics. There  is a lot of intelligence behind the scenes of a comic book. Think of the writers, the staff, the artists who everyday have to think of ideas to keep thier comic title successful. Some of these active thinkers as the public will know, produced some ground breakers in print. Even the critics had to admit it.

"They're still trash" they might say about the standard comics that never got such high praise, but it does not mean these standard comics have little or no value. Look behind the cartoonish colours and the cool or farfetched superpowers, they get impactful concise storylines and characters who have believible personalites. These qualities made the superheroes who they are to the fans. Icons, role models, inspirations and even friends. It may may sound silly that people see these outlandish superheroes this way, but when a common comic book can be so compelling, its no surprise. Just like the James Bond movies and the Harry Potter books, comic book heroes have appealing chartacters that the public can relate to. Captain America is one such character.  Eventhough the decision makers at Marvel killed him off few years ago, he was brought back because there was still a connection to the public. Captain America Steve Rogers had personality traits of patriotism which anyone can identify with. He may may be 'boy scout' but his character has solid development.

Captain America suspends Fabian

For instance, take this single panel from Captain America issue 372 of The Streets of Poison series in 1990. After ending an investigation for the day, Captain America returns to his HQ and a maintenance worker tells him Fabian, one of the mechanics, was acting strange. CA finds Fabian and sees Fabian is behaving more oddly then before. CA also finds it bizarre, Fabian had lost a lot of weight in a too short amont of time. He qusestions Fabian to see if he is o.k then Fabian overreacts as if he is being interregated. After CA calms him down Fabian opens up  and says he was on the new street drug to cope with his life demands. CA tells Fabian he has to taketime out in rehab.

 This may be a typical heroic act by Captain America, even a simplistic one, but it does not mean it doesnt have a good impact. Stories similer to this panel are in use throughout books, movies, cartoons etc. An example like this explains why people can become a comic fan in an instant. Generally people enjoy stories it's just in our culture most adults feel a bit a guilt when trying to explain why they are interested in books with pictures, colours and short sentences. It need not be from the reasons mentioned before; comics are just another medium of storytelling. No less meaningful  compared to a novel or even the artistery of TV and film. If Hollywood actor Nicholas Cage could take the 'Cage' name from Marvel superhero Luke Cage, an average citizen can definately enjoy a comic or two or even be a hardcore fan.

Comic Geeks to the extreme! Series hit Big Bang Theory



Comic Book Guy from the Simpsons

          

Now, the hardcore fan has the most misunderstood image which helped critics stand their ground against comic readers. For years, the image of the hardcore comic fan is a lonely, geeky, unassaming, childish and timid person. True to say, there are people like that who maybe tick one description or all of them. However, one does not have to be like any. You can be an Editor-in-chief, a successful lawyer, a police officer or a politian and still be a hardcore fan of comics. You do not need to be Comic book Guy from the Simpsons of the cast from the American sitcom Big Bang Theory to have a passion for comics. There are always those who take their passion to the extreme with costumes and piles of memorobila wither it be footballers, popstars or a TV soap. Yet a comic fan does the same thing it's a ton of ridicule. Hardcore comic fan should enjoy life doing what interests them(as long as it's not plain weird obviously).

So there is a lot more to be a comic fan then what it percieves to be. There is a value in it. There is no question comics as a medium can be powerful if desired. Comics like other forms of entertainment have different categories, so it should not matter if you are reading a comic. What matters is which one you're reading.

PART 2: So what I like 'bad' movies!

COMING SOON

THE CHOICE OF ACTION

IN LIFE THERE ARE TIMES WHEN TALK ISN'T ENOUGH.

ONLY ACTION.

JACKSON FICTION

GOLDEN PANTHER: PART 1 

COMING SOON