“Take my seat..” – AWKWARD MONDAYS #1

An actual conversation witnessed by my sister when she was in the Dubai Metro on her way to work. As is usual during the time, the metro was quite packed and a woman who was sitting in one of the seats looked at the woman standing next to her and offered her, her seat.

Lady 1: “You can have my seat, please sit”.

Lady 2: “No, it’s fine, but thank you.”

Lady 1: “No, I insist, please take my seat, I’m getting off soon anyway.”

Lady 2, quite charmed, thanks her and proceeds to sit down.

Lady 2: “Are you getting down at the next station?”

Lady 1 tells her she’s getting off at the 5th or the 6th station from there. 

Lady 2: “Oh, I thought you would be getting off soon. You needn’t have offered me your seat!”

Lady 1: “Come on now, how can I sit while you’re standing up. How far along are you?”

Lady 2: “Far along? I don’t understand.”

Lady 1: “…Your pregnancy of course. I gathered so from your belly.”

Long awkward pause.


Lady 2: “..No, I’m not..pregnant.”

Now if I were Lady 1, now is the moment I would have mumbled a sincere apology – “..sorry I thought your fat was your baby..?” and waited for the train floor to open up and the metro rails to swallow me up whole but no, Lady 1 keeps talking.

Lady 1: “Oh, but your tummy..it was looking quite big and pregnant-y, so I assumed you know, hehe, that umm.. you were carrying.”

Lady 2: “No no, it’s fine. I suppose it does look that way.”

Lady 1: “Yeah, how does it look so pregnant-like..”


Talk about a derailed conversation.

Almost like Lady 2 had some sort of (loco)motive.

OK, I’ll stop before I get way off track here. Trains of thought, anybody?

Happy (and not awkward, I hope) Monday!



                                                                      “I’m faking it? No you’re faking it!”

I hate taking photographs. Like legit, if someone put a gun to my head and asked me to smile for the camera and told me he would let me go if I smiled nicely, search for me with a gunshot wound in a dump somewhere.

I guess that’s not funny.

Oh well. Take two.

I wouldn’t say anti-photogenicism (yeah, that’s a word – look it up) runs in the family because my elder sister photographs like a dream. My brother on the other hand – you know those kids who smiled for the camera and then when you looked at the photos, they looked like they were in intense pain? – yeah, he was/(is?) one of those kids.

And don’t even get me started on my brace face years. Today when I look back at my final-year school pictures, I can feel the pain oozing out of the photos by the sheer effort it took me to smile trying to show as little metal as physically possible without ending up looking like someone punched me in the balls (I don’t have any.. not because someone punched it into oblivion.. but because I am a woman) right before taking the photograph.

I studied in a weird school where we didn’t have yearly class photographs taken. And for that, I’m forever grateful.

Now imagine this person (as in..me) being asked to have a good picture taken to be sent for suitable-match “hunting”? Like Tinder, but instead of an app, you have middle aged uncles/aunties sending around your photos and sending you photos of ‘nice boys’ back. And if you’re interested, more details follow. And instead of hooking up, the swiping right results in marriage. No big deal.


Excuse me while I go off screaming into the sunset. Alone.

Book Vs. Movie : The Shining

Author: Stephen King
Film Director : Stanley Kubrick
Cast: Jack Nicholson, Shelley Duvall, Danny Lloyd, Scatman Crothers, Barry Nelson

I read the book and watched the movie over the weekend (in that order) (and long overdue, I’m aware).

In isolation, the book & the movie are very good pieces of work, I mean the movie is a friggin cult classic. It, however, is a deliberately poor adaptation of the book and I guess I can understand why King hated it as much as he did. From the onset of the movie, it’s obvious that Kubrick, the director, wanted to take the movie in a very different direction from the novel when we are shown the meeting between The Overlook’s manager Stuart Ullman & our protagonist, Jack Torrence.

Characters: In the novel, Jack is a struggling alcoholic, flawed in ways more than one, but very loving of his wife and son. And he was likeable and we could understand his struggles. In the movie, Jack (one of the more memorable characters played by Jack ‘badass’ Nicholson) clearly has some loose screws right from the beginning and I couldn’t like him at all.

Frederick Clarke got it spot on when suggested in Cinefantastique magazine: “Instead of playing a normal man who becomes insane, Nicholson portrays a crazy man attempting to remain sane.”

“Whatchu just say about me?!” Sorry Jack.. [God, this GIF gives me a headache]

What about the other characters? In the novel, Danny is written as quite attached to his dad and loves him dearly, but in the movie, the kid seems scared & cautious of him in every scene. And Wendy, oh my god, Wendy – while reading the book, the picture I had of Wendy was a strong-willed yet sensitive woman who was not afraid to challenge Jack and the Wendy I got in the movie was a blubbering mess. Why would a director change a character so much?

My favorite parts: The scene where Jack ‘drinks’ at the bar after being falsely accused by Wendy of strangling Danny and he has this whole ‘conversation’ with the bartender, Lloyd, was fantastic and kept true to the novel.  You can see the craziness unraveling and you go ‘Uh-ookay’. And of course, the iconic scene of Jack breaking down the bathroom door with Wendy trapped inside -“Here’s Johnny!” – is forever etched in my mind and was filmed exactly how I pictured it when I was reading the novel (except of course Jack held a mallet rather than an axe and there was no “Here’s Johnny” but some improvs just make a sequence so much better). But you know what, when I was reading the book I couldn’t wait to reach the pivotal scene where Wendy plunges the knife into Jack’s back and you witness the final descent from human to monster – I was really disappointed that wasn’t in the movie. I would have rather watched that than have the director spend valuable movie minutes of father and son in a run & chase sequence in a hedge maze that wasn’t even in the book to begin with.

Don’t get me wrong, I did enjoy the movie, very much so, but we ARE talking Book Vs. Movie here.

The biggest thing that peeved me about the movie – Jack’s redemption, or lack thereof. In the novel, encouraged by Danny, the human in Jack resurfaces for the briefest moment giving Danny time to escape and Jack dies tragically, and we’re reminded that Jack loved his son and wife dearly. But in the movie, he dies a monster going after his son! My biggest issue is that Jack Torrence was so much more complex of a character than the movie made him out to be. And I can see why Kubrick would go in that direction – crazier the man, better the entertainment.

SM Special Mentions

I was honestly so confused as to who these kids were, until I don’t know, the 100th time I saw them.
I was also confused by why the director would change something so menial like a Room No.(in the novel, it’s Room 217 but in the movie it’s Room 237) but turns out that was at the request of the hotel they filmed in – the owners didn’t want guests being too spooked to stay in 217 – well, I DON’T BLAME THEM.
Dang it, Kubrick!

And finally, Dick Halloran – what a waste of a character. Now how is he going to hand young Danny the lockbox to lock up his future monsters in Doctor Sleep, with umm..Kubrick killing him off?

I woke up.

Today morning, I woke up.

I did not take a shower. But then again, when you’re unemployed, taking a shower in the morning is virtually unheard of. I made my bed. Because I figured I would have to lie down on it again exhausted after two hours of hard hitting procrastination – and I’m only unemployed – not an animal, I need a made-bed to lie in. I started this book by Jeffrey Archer called Paths of Glory. About a mountain climbing adrenaline junkie in the early 1900’s. Must feel nice, to know exactly what you’re set out to do in life. I’m talking about both Archer and George Mallory.

While I’m unemployed, I do have a job. And that is being the unpaid chauffeur of the family. My niece has to be picked up from school at 1.30, my mom has to go shopping and my younger sister has an interview she needs to be driven to. Rinse and repeat.

I’m also learning German. I dance as well. So although I’m unemployed, on paper it looks like I have quite busy days. Not really. The German learning happens every third day. The intense dancing happens once in a blue moon -usually after I’ve had Burn, this new energy drink that is my only motivator in life.

Dancing aside, I’m free styling right now though. I did not mean to publish a post today but my spontaneity and spunk in life got the better of me, I guess.