The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion
The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion |
| Gunners’ pride, on and off the pitch Posted: 28 Sep 2012 06:09 PM PDT SEPT 29 — It has been another successful year. That is what Arsenal can proudly claim … after the financial results were officially announced yesterday by Arsenal Holdings plc. According to the report, revenues from football increased to £235.3 million (RM1.17 billion) — up from £225.4 million in 2011; operating profit in the football business was £32.3 million — down from £45.8 million last year due to increased wage costs; profit from player trading was £26 million — the result of a number of significant player sales, including Cesc Fabregas and Samir Nasri; and finally, group profit before tax was £36.6 million, which is more than double last year's £14.8 million. Meanwhile, at Stamford Bridge and the Etihad, oil barons do what they do best, grease any problem by pumping in even more money to help managers rev up their professional fantasies on the pitch. That both clubs are running at massive operating losses despite significant earnings from their winning the Champions League and Premiership titles, respectively, in May, matters not. Can you hear that? It is the sound of moaning Arsenal supporters around the world wanting a little bit of that glory too, as the directors walk happily along the hallways of Ashburton Grove (the real name for the Emirates stadium) that have been barren of a trophy cabinet since the club moved from their previous home, Highbury. That the financial results should be released on the eve of a major London derby with Chelsea just enhances the disparity between both these clubs. But this Gooner is not complaining. I continue to believe in the principle of building a winning team, rather than buying one. With or without UEFA's Financial Fair Play guidelines (or rules), the Gunners are going to be the winners in the long run. Fans just have to be patient. I strongly believe, however, that they need not wait too long. This season has clearly seen one of the strongest starts by Arsene Wenger's men (and boys) in recent memory. Last weekend's display of grit and flair combined, gave the rest of the Premiership a taste of the Gunners' real strength — failing to take all three points against Man City only because of poor finishing. Then, in mid-week, the trouncing of League One side Coventry City in the League Cup, in which a few seniors (including Theo Walcott and Andrey Arshavin) combined well with younger talents, further enhanced the possibility that this season might be the start of Wenger's long-awaited victorious comeback trail and prove his critics wrong once and for all. Not that I ever doubted him, nor felt he needed a comeback of any sorts. He has delivered every season he has been with the club, and many a club would give up all their failed managers for even half a Wenger, let alone a complete one. For example, it is not often that one can get a better buy on the transfer market for half the price. That's exactly what happened after Wenger failed to get Eden Hazard from Lille due to the £32 million price tag, which Chelsea willingly paid. Instead, the professor, who celebrated his 16th year in charge of the Gunners yesterday, targeted a talented Spaniard by the name of Santi Cazorla for about £16 million. The official Premiership stats has shown that in the first five matches played this season, the individual performance of Cazorla has easily overshadowed that of Hazard. Yes, the season is long and form may change, but it has already set him apart as being possibly the best buy of the summer transfer market. Cazorla, who previously plied his trade at Primera Liga side Malaga, has made many stand up and take notice of the Gunners in a way they have not for many years. Some even rate him higher than Fabregas. This is why tonight's match (8.45pm) becomes even more crucial as a match-up between clubs on opposite poles in terms of sustainable financial policies and practices. Facing the two most obscenely rich clubs, in terms of player transfer value and wages, back-to-back, and getting a victory after last Sunday's courageous draw, would be the ultimate answer to all the pre-season concerns by Arsenal supporters. * The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist. |
| Posted: 28 Sep 2012 05:09 PM PDT SEPT 29 — Even though the Malaysian film industry is probably only 20 to 30 years younger than that of Hollywood (we missed out on making silent films, but our very first feature film "Laila Majnun" was still made in the late 1930s), we're further behind when it comes to industry trends and genres. In many cases, we not only missed the bandwagon but very often it felt like we never even knew the bandwagon existed. Films like "Menyerah" and "Pencuri" are the closest we've come to the film noir genre. We missed out on the pleasures of the Hollywood musical, which is significantly different from the Bollywood extravaganzas musicals we tend to copy. In Hollywood musicals, not only are the dances choreographed, but the camera movement and the editing rhythm are as well... not to mention the way the songs themselves are used to advance the plot and not just there as an excuse to have people dancing around trees. Only certain musical parts in films like Hussain Haniff's "Kalong Kenangan" bring to mind the elegant film-making of Busby Berkeley musicals. Only from the late 1970s onwards did we finally see attempts to bring the pleasures of the Hollywood musical (long dead by then since their golden age was from the 1930s to the 1950s) to Malaysian films, but with very patchy results. While we've always had a great literary tradition, it is quite a well-known fact that we Malaysians are not big readers. We have our fair share of great writers like A. Samad Said, Shahnon Ahmad and Abdullah Hussain, with great books like "Salina", "Ranjau Sepanjang Jalan" and "Imam" (to name just a few) already recognised as great literary works, but still we've been far left behind even by mainstream Hollywood when it comes to literary adaptations. Famous books by Charles Dickens like "Great Expectations" and "Oliver Twist" have seen at least two major movie adaptations, and the Bronte sisters are even more in vogue now with "Jane Eyre" and "Wuthering Heights" getting movie adaptations that can only be described as "modern" (as in modernist films, not films set in the modern day), especially the latest adaptations by Cary Fukunaga and Andrea Arnold respectively. Looking at the mainstream, just look at how successful the Harry Potter, "Lord of the Rings" and Twilight franchises have been, and how big a hit "The Hunger Games" already is, to see how big an appetite there is out there for movie adaptations of popular or classic books. And just look at the trailers for the upcoming "The Life of Pi" and "Cloud Atlas" to see how far and wide movie adaptations can go. Applying that theory to Malaysia will result in far scarier results though. With Malay as our national language and it more or less being the official language for local films (seeing as most of the cinema-going audience for local films are Malay speakers, and you English speakers reading this now know that this fact is undoubtedly true), the only logical books to adapt are the popular Malay ones. And this is where things get scary as the popular ones here are usually books that resemble those trashy Mills & Boon novels (but without the sex of course). While "Lagenda Budak Setan" did good but far from excellent box office, the runaway success of "Ombak Rindu" have now seen Tarantella Pictures, the production company responsible for both movies, take another gamble on a movie adaptation of a book in "Untuk Tiga Hari", adapted from a novel by popular writer Ahadiat Akashah. Directed by Afdlin Shauki, I don't have much to complain about in terms of technical competence, with Afdlin showing quite a bit of flair and understanding on the power of the tracking shot, the close-up and the use of swelling music as cinematic tools in the melodrama genre. But there's a disjointed feel to the film's tone as Afdlin tries to inject his trademark humour and I still have huge difficulties trying to swallow the movie's (and the book's) central conceit in which the lovers decided to marry other people, but only for three days, so as to satisfy their family's wishes and then go on and marry each other after divorcing their family's choices. For me, and I know for a lot of other people too, this is really hard to swallow, and I don't know how the book pulled this off and became a hit. In fact, I personally think this is even more outrageous than the controversial central conceit in "Ombak Rindu." But whatever the reasons may be, I think we are finally catching up on the idea that if you adapt a hit book, chances are that the movie adaptation will be a hit too. We should thank our lucky stars that there's a quiet boom happening in the alternative Malay book scene, with pulp novels by publishers like Buku FIXI and books by publishers like Lejen Press and Sang Freud Press selling quite well. Quite a few adaptations of FIXI's titles have been lined up, the most prominent of which is probably the upcoming "KL Zombie", an adaptation of the novel "Zombijaya", starring popular local comedian Zizan Razak and directed by the always interesting Woo Ming Jin (who last gave us the excellent "Seru" and who was in the Cannes Directors' Fortnight around two years back with his film "The Tiger Factory"). We're probably still a long way from having our own Harry Potter, but like that old Malay saying "sikit-sikit lama-lama jadi bukit"... better late than never, right? * The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan