Internet and Privacy are Mortal Enemies

Once you put something out there, it's out there. No matter how hidden you think it is, someone somewhere finds it and shares it. Especially now that we have Tumblr, Memebase, 9gag, 4chan, etc., that picture you took "just for laughs" is more likely to circulate regularly.
Now, whenever someone brings up the issue of privacy on the internet, it is almost always a rule that Facebook makes its way into the discussion. Facebook, abbreviated to FB for lazy purposes, is known for its "loosey-goosey" privacy settings that may crash at any moment. Some people just don't care about such things, others are completely paranoid and make accounts under the names "Sarah Conner" and "John Doe" (or don't make accounts at all...), whereas some people like the idea of being public, of being known. It's probably the closest to famous they'll ever be.
To answer to this wide array of personalities and still address the problem of personal information sharing, I bring you, *drumroll*, Take This Lollipop.
If I were to describe Take This Lollipop, I'd say it is a shock site, although not like the disgusting ones that most likely came to your mind. It's a shock site in the sense that the little movie played is very disturbing and provocative. The site hosts a personalised movie that uses the information on your FB account to make a short (1-2min) that will have you watching over your back, literally and virtually. It is a one time thing, you see it and that particular version of it is deleted. Your information isn't kept. All you have to do is log in to facebook and "allow" the app to do its thing.
But before I send you off on your self-discovery adventure, let me just give you some recommendations. With headphones, in a dark room, is the best possible way to watch this. Please, please, please, avoid watching it with other people, as seeing the movie with someone else's info ruins the entire effect.

I can't give a synopsis, it goes against the whole point, but all I can say is, once you've watched it, you'll be going over your privacy settings one by one, and sorting through your friends list, that's for sure! Warning, though, it is creepy, so parental guidance for small children is highly recommended. Rather, forcing your pre-teen or teenager to watch this without giving them any incentive as to what it is will definitely make them remember not to give out personal information. It's a great parenting tool, really.
So, without further ado, I give you... www.takethislollipop.com.

Once you've sorted through your FB settings, please take the time to share this site, after all, educated people are safer people! Don't make it easier for the creeps to get you. Go ahead, take the lollipop.

Posted in Society | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

≠ Prostitute

Ever since I saw Tim Burton's Sweeney Todd with the scene between Judge Turpin and Anthony, where Turpin mentions his 'drawings', I've always wondered about the credibility of the script:

Oh yes... such practices. The Geishas of Japan, the concubines of Siam, the catamites of Greece, the harlots of India. I have them all here, drawings of them. Everything you've ever dreamed of doing with a woman. Would you like to see?

Although I love the movie and have the soundtrack on my phone, this scene greatly offended me, mostly because I already knew Geishas were NOT prostitutes, and so it got me thinking, were the others as incorrect? That's what we'll see.

Geishas performing a dance for guests.

Geishas: Popular misconception! Geishas were not and still are not prostitutes. Yes, Geishas still exist, and they are located in Kyoto, Japan. A Geisha can be compared to a monk in some ways. Although being a Geisha is actually a job, it is also a way of life with a small community, strict rules and attires, etc. Geishas were and are hired to entertain guests at meetings or social gatherings. They make traditional tea, dance, and generally chat with guests. Although guests can fantasise if they want, there is a strict no touching rule. Now, some of you may think; but, don't they sell their virginities to the highest buyers?! And here is my answer; you probably watched or read Memoirs of a Geisha, which was written by Arthur Golden, an American man who was sued by Mineko Iwasaki, his retired Geisha consultant, for defamation of character as soon as his 'biography' was published. The case was settled out of court for an undisclosed amount of money. However, Mineko Iwasaki later published a biography of her own which drastically differs from Arthur Golden's. Which do you believe? An actual Geisha or an American man who "researched it"?
The only real reason Geishas are thought of as high-class prostitutes for wealthy business men is due to Hollywood American soldiers stationed in Japan during World War II. The soldiers needed entertainment, and not having an equivalent in their own culture, they could not understand the role of a Geisha. So, to provide, faux-Geishas came into being. These women dressed similarly and sold themselves to soldiers, who, unused to Japanese culture, could not see the subtle differences in dress and attitude. All they knew was that women in kimonos who were selling themselves were referred to as 'Geishas'. Prostitution has become illegal in Japan since then, but the misconception stayed and some people still believe Geishas to be in some sort of human trafficking business. Think instead: a clown hired for a birthday party. A Geisha hired for a business meeting.

A prince with five concubines.

Concubines: These are a little more difficult to explain. In the simplest sense of the word, concubines weren't prostitutes, that is, they weren't paid for their services. Concubines were in relationships similar to a matrimonial relationship, but without being married. This was usually because of lower social statuses or other such reasons. Men of higher social statuses kept concubines as well as wives, and the only real difference between the two was a wife had a dowry while a concubine did not. Many men kept multiple wives and concubines just for the sake of it, while others took concubines to produce heirs when the wife/wives were not able to. Some concubines were slaves, but most of the time they were women who willingly entered into the relationship, or at least, the family was willing. Being a concubine brought monetary stability, and wasn't looked down on in the least. Some concubines could even get "promoted" to wife in certain instances, such as providing a son. Concubinage, as it's called, wasn't solely practiced in Siam, now known as Thailand. The practice goes as far back as Ancient Greece and Rome and concubines are often mentioned in the Bible. As the world evolved, so did concubinage, although it did so for the worst, until all that was left of it was white slave owners taking their black slaves. Of course, concubinage was unofficial abolished with slavery. Concubines are now simply identified as mistresses.

A lover and beloved kissing.

Catamites: I laughed when I researched this. I just downright snorted and choked on laughter. Catamites, indeed from Ancient Greece, were in pederastic relationships. Pederastic, from the Ancient Greek paiderastês, is commonly defined as "the love of boys". Yes, catamites were young men ranging from thirteen to twenty. I didn't know Judge Turpin bowled for both teams!
Although not strictly prostitutes, catamites were pretty close to it. In Ancient Greece, it was considered wrong to be gay, but to counter, actually engaging in homosexual acts wasn't frowned upon, or at least to some extent. Anal and oral acts were reserved for slaves and prostitutes, while a catamite was allowed to preserve his honour; being the receiving partner was considered demeaning. Art from Ancient Greece instead portrays intercrural (between the thighs) acts. However, being in a relationship with a catamite was only something the higher, sophisticated society could do. The role of a catamite changed depending on the situation; sometimes, being the young lover of an older and socially higher man was a sort of initiation for the military or for religion. As a rule, the catamite was always younger, and socially lower than his lover. Essentially, the relationship was one of power. Any other variations, such as switching the dominance, was strictly prohibited.  In other situations, pederasty was considered a part of a man's education or introduction into society, and a "beloved", or eromenos could later become the "lover", or erastes. Other times, catamites are portrayed as companions, or friends who would help their lover, be it sexually or simply dressing them or fetching water. Catamites are almost always mentioned affectionately, sometimes in a fatherly way. The relationship lasts only until the beloved reaches maturity or ceases to be an adolescent, and many writings highlight the fact that some lovers and beloveds stayed friends for a long time afterwards.

A stereotypical harlot costume, popular at Halloween.

Harlots: Although India very definitely had prostitutes, I can find nothing about harlots. Harlots does mean a prostitute in our contemporary times, and is often used to refer to prostitutes in the Renaissance or Enlightenment era, along with courtisans. However, the word has nothing to do with India or it's culture. It stems from the Old French herlot, or arlot, circa 1200, meaning a vagabond or idle rogue, usually male. It is only circa 1400 or 1500 that the word becomes associated with women of lewd occupations and only in the 20th century to a particular time in history.

So there you have it, although Sweeney Todd, I think, is a good movie, never trust what you see or hear! This applies to everything.

I would just like to stress out the point that us "westerners" often misunderstand other cultures, and through word of mouth, the damage done is almost unrepairable. Please, don't condone stereotypes and misconceptions such as these. Additionally, please never believe what Hollywood tells you. Especially when it's portraying an "exotic" or "foreign" culture. Educate yourselves!

Posted in Cinematography, History, Society | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

112 Gripes about the French

Do you find yourself hating or not understanding the French? Are you an American G.I. situated in France during 1945 after having just liberated it? Well then this is the pamphlet for you!

Written and published in 1945 by the Information & Education Division of the U.S. Occupation Forces, this little info book was meant to soothe the tense relations between the French and Americans during WWII. The Americans, perhaps a bit cocky, and proud of their victory to pull France from Germany's clutches, didn't understand why the French were becoming more and more ungrateful and resentful towards their American saviours. The pamphlet goes about answering questions or statements like: "Why bother about the French?" (N°21), or "The French drink too much" (N°59) with logical counter-statements. Some of the answers are well thought out and would stop any logical man right in his tracks. My favourite, however, is the only non-logical or backed-up one:

N°48. "I'd like the French a lot better if they were cleaner."

-That's perfectly understandable.

How brilliant is that?

In the own words of the original author/editor (listed only as the U.S. Occupation Forces):

 This booklet tries to help some of us understand an ally - the French. It is not meant either to "defend" the French or to chastise those Americans who do not like the French. It is intended simply to bring into reasonable focus those irritations, dissatisfactions and misunderstandings which arise because it is often hard for the people of one country to understand the people of another.

The full 112 gripes have been uploaded to the Internet, and can now be freely enjoyed from your screen. Somehow, the pamphlet is hosted on a pasta recipe site, so don't ask me who uploaded it, or why or when. All I know for sure is, it's here for your pleasure.

Alternatively, it has recently been republished (ISBN 978-1419165122) as it was originally, but also as a French translation: "Nos Amis les Français" (ISBN 978-2749101286) ("Our Friends the French").

Posted in History, Society | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Catch-22 Review

Catch-22 was written by Joseph Heller, and I have to say, I really enjoyed his book.

I found the timeline alluring, and I don't think it would have made as much sense if it was in chronological order. It was really funny, but I found the humour to be repetitive, like it was always the same type of humour, what I'm dubbing to be 'repetitive humour'. Examples:

-"'Will you get back into bed' she said, 'or must I take you by your ear and put you there?'
'Take me by my ear and put me there,' Yossarian dared her.
Nurse Duckett took him by his ear and put him back in bed." (p336)

-"'You really are up the creek, Popinjay. Is Popinjay really your name? Just what the hell kind of a name is Popinjay, anyway? I don't like it.'
'It's Popinjay's name, sir,' Lieutenant Scheisskopf explained." (p90)

-"'And how many missions have you flown?'
'Five.'
'Five?' asked Colonel Cathcart.
'Five, sir.'
'Five, eh?' Colonel Cathcart rubbed his cheek pensively.
'That isn't very good, is it?'" (p424)

Of course those are just three examples, but all the humour is like that. The joke gets old after a while.

Another thing that marked me in this book was the details. There were practically two adjectives minimum per sentence. And most verbs were accompanied by adverbs. There were lots of synonyms to avoid repetition of adjectives, and I can say I learned a lot of new words. Does anyone know what 'exophthalmic' means? I do now 😛 .

So all in all I really liked the book regardless of the fact that the humour was always the same kind. I was surprised when the plot took a sudden turn for sadness. I was deeply moved, partially because of the very quick transition. The ending was left a bit open, but it was a decent way to end this kind of novel.

Posted in Book Reviews | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Floreana by Margret Wittmer Review

While on my Galapagos Trip, particularly on Floreana, I stopped by the little gift shop run by Floreanita/Inge (the author's daughter) and picked up a t-shirt along with a English Translation of her mother's biography.

I recently took to reading the biography and am sorry to say that I couldn't finish it. For one, the book design (inside) was horrible, very painful to read, and full of mistakes. I suppose the mistakes weren't that bad (I'm not a grammar nazi), but the actual formatting of the book was truly painful to read, and it slowed me down to the point where I was annoyed. Things like line breaks in the middle of sentences, etc.

The story behind it should be the real appeal, being the first hand recounting of a Floreana inhabitant, who was there during the mysteries. But I found it boring. And it shouldn't be. It is an exciting story, and Margret Wittmer was an exceptional woman who had two kids with no medical help on the island, lived off of her own sweat, but she couldn't write for marbles.

Really, how can one enjoy a good story when it's being told in a bad way? I mean no offense to Margret Wittmer, really I admire her. I wouldn't last a week while she stayed on the island for years, but some people just can't write. I have only read two diaries so far, this one and Anne Frank, and I disliked both of them. Diaries aren't meant to be read by others in the first place, right?

Posted in Book Reviews | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Anaximandre de Milet

Anaximandre, né vers 610 av. J.-C. et mort vers 547 av. J.-C., passe pour le premier philosophe à avoir écrit ses idées. Il était un élève de Thalès et diriga l'école milésienne après ce dernier.

Comme Thalès, Anaximandre croyait en un seul principe originel. Par contre, pour Anaximandre, ce principe était ce qu'il appela l'apeiron.

L'apeiron, signifiant «infini» ou «illimité», était pour lui non seulement l'origine de tout, mais aussi éternel et indestructible. Il croyait également que tout ce qui mourait retournait dans l'apeiron.

Sa philosophie inclus aussi l'idée de l'existence de plusieurs mondes infinis.

Anaximandre n'était pas seulement philosophe, il était aussi astronome et géographe. Il est possible qu'il soit le premier à avoir publié une carte du monde (comme il l'imaginait), seulement cette carte n'a jamais été retrouvée.

Posted in Français, History, Society | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Thalès de Milet

Thalès de Milet, connu tout simplement sous le nom de Thalès, est né vers 625 av. J.-C. et mort vers 547 av. J.-C. Il faisait parti des Septs Sages: Solon d'Athènes, Chilon de Sparte, Pittacos de Mytilène, Bias de Priène, Cléobule de Lindos et Périandre de Corinthe. Les Septs Sages étaient des hommes politiques de la Grèce Ancienne, connus pour leur sagesse pratique et leurs proverbes.

Thalès est connu comme celui qui a commencé à questionner la mythologie en tant qu'explication pour les faits de la nature. Il est le tout premier philosophe connu, mais aucun texte ne nous reste de lui, dans l'hypotèse ou il en aurait écrits. Ses idées nous viennent des écrits d'Aristote.

Thalès croyait que l'origine de toute chose était le principe supérieur: l'eau. La terre n'était que de l'eau condensée et l'air de l'eau raréfiée. Le choix de l'eau parmi les quatre eléments classiques (eau, feu, air, terre) est peut-être dû à l'importance de celle-ci dans la nutrition.

Thalès commença aussi la rationalisation, c'est à dire l'utilisation de la raison pour faire des conjectures.

Thalès était autant intéressé par les mathématiques que par la philosophie. Il est le père du Théorème de Thalès. Il aurait utilisé ce théorème pour calculer la hauteur d'une pyramide alors qu'il voyageait en Égypte.

Posted in Français, History, Society | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Book 1: Män som hatar kvinnor – The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo Review

Contents for Millennium Trilogy

  1. Book 1: Män som hatar kvinnor – The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo Review

Book 1 in the Millennium series, written by Sieg Larsson, is decoratively known under its original title as Män som hatar kvinnor, or Men who hate Women. However, in English, possibly to reduce controversies, it was published under the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo title. It tells the at first separate stories of Lisbeth Salander, an introverted and asocial woman, a complete mystery to the reader until later in the novel, who is an extraordinary freelance researcher for the security firm Milton Security. Alternatively, Mikael Blomkvist is a financial journalist just convicted of libel against billionaire industrialist Hans-Erik Wennerström, and although still believing Wennerström to be dirty, he resigns to his fate of three months of jail. His ideas change however when is contacted by the patriarch of the wealthy Vanger family, who has a strange request; that Mikael find the murderer of a great-niece he held dear, who disappeared 36 years ago. The two tales eventually merge together, but saying anymore would be considered a spoiler.

First and foremost, I liked this book. Like most books I read, I read them because everyone around me praises them. I am most definitely not a hipster. This particular book has been internationally acclaimed, and critics around the world declared their love for the late author, and his complex characters. I have much to say in this review, so I'll try to organise it in some manner.

The writing was very well done, very smooth, although I always believe that authors' styles get lost in translations, so at any rate, the translator, Steve Murray (pen name Reg Keeland), did a great job. Sometimes, chapters ended almost like episodes on a drama series, I could almost hear the Da Da DAAA!! COME BACK NEXT WEEK TO FIND OUT MORE! The writing was also confusing at times, in the way with which we were sometimes given the characters' thoughts, although this was only with Mikael and Lisbeth, but other times they had ideas or theories, and we were only in on the secret when they told another character. This was probably to heighten the suspense, which it did for the main plot points, but it was also a contradiction of itself. We know more about Lisbeth as the reader than any of the characters, and yet when she has an idea, we are the last to know about it, usually a chapter later.

Lisbeth Salander as portrayed by Noomi Rapace in the Swedish movie adaptation.

Which brings us to my next point. The characters, starting with Lisbeth. Lisbeth is just Lisbeth Salander. There is no real way to describe her, only reading the book can allow you to come up with your own illusions of her. From her reactions and attitude, I can only claim that she must have suffered plenty of abuse as a child, in addition to what she suffers in the book. Other reviewers seem to believe her personality is so warped because of what we know she goes through during the book, but I believe she became the Lisbeth we know much earlier than that. What we see is how she deals with what she has more or less become used to, no matter how much she hates it. The original Swedish title says it all: Men who hate women. Needless to say, I didn't like Lisbeth. It didn't make her any less of a great protagonist for the story: she was the ultimate stand against misogyny, and yet I just found her warped life and personality to be too much. Stieg Larsson made an extreme of what happens in society. I know that abuse against women is everywhere, but she, to me, really felt like an extreme example meant to shock the reader. Of course, I only mention this in passing, but let's not forget the women who hate men, too. Although significantly smaller, such abuse does exist, and is often overlooked. But this is the subject for an intense debate, so let's instead return to the review.

The other protagonist, Mikael, I also didn't like. But for different reasons. If I met him in real life, I would just take an instant dislike to him. I admire his dedication to work however, and how he just pushes himself to do it. I found him to be rather typical, if slightly sarcastic, with a strange love life. He doesn't have much for me to talk about. I can say that I find his reactions annoying, and the only good thing I like about him is his ideas. Although not all of them.

Mikael Blomkvist as portrayed by Michael Nyqvist in the Swedish movie adaptation

This won't be much of a spoiler, considering that the two protagonists are male and female, but I must say I was actually disappointed when Mikael and Lisbeth hooked up and became lovers. The novel offered such a good plot, with twists of originality, and for once a heroine without double D size breasts, knocking conventional Hollywood badass heroines right out of the ball park. Lisbeth wasn't both the women's idol and the men's fantasy. She was just... herself. I wouldn't want to be Lisbeth, regardless of her gifts, and although I can't speak for men, I doubt she fits into the usual fantasies. That's why, when they got together, although far from romantic, I was just disappointed with Stieg Larsson. He tried to create a non-victim victim heroine (that'll only really make sense if you read the book...), but the universal Hollywood influence still showed itself in the ending.

The other characters were somewhat developed, and I liked most of them. But let's talk evasively about the bad guys. I can't name names you see, that would be a spoiler, and Wennerström isn't a bad guy in my book, because we never even meet the guy. He's just a face to a driving force. As with Lisbeth, I though the bad guy was an extreme example of what he/she (no hints!) would be. The climax of the book was so extreme it was almost unrealistic.

The violence itself is pretty graphic and it really sets the mood for a good, original plot, but as I said, the ending being an extreme, it completely eradicates the feeling and build up the 'every day' violence we saw earlier on gave.

So to wrap up, the characters can't be placed under a category, they are realistic, although the bad guy and Lisbeth are too stereotypical, if you will, for my taste, and I find it ruins the build up of the book with it's portrayal of violence against women seen everyday. The same goes for the ending, as that's when we know who the bad guy is, his story, etc. Additionally, the end would be somewhat lacking, but it could have finished as it did. I have a feeling the next book will feel more like another adventure entirely, like the Harry Potters or Alex Riders, instead of a saga which is continued on and stopping at a particular book would be like stopping at a particular chapter in the overall story.

Although I found many faults, I still liked the book, and prefer the Swedish title, I think it suits it more, but on the other hand, I like the "Girl with/who" pattern that emerged from the English translation. I recommend the book to everyone with the stomach to face societies extremes in relations to abuse against women. It's almost an eye opener in a way. I do recommend a basic knowledge of Swedish government and industry, because sometimes those parts can get a bit confusing. A lot of books and authors, among other things, are referenced as well, so Swedish general culture is advised. If you prefer not to take on general culture of a different country just to read a few books, then at least inform yourself of Astrid Lindgren. Her work often comes up in the novel, and is the explanation behind Mikael's nickname.

Those are my thoughts, so go read The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo to form your own. Enjoy!

Posted in Book Reviews | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Stieg Larsson Biography

Stieg Larsson is known as the author of the Millenium Saga: The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, The Girl who played with Fire, and The Girl who kicked the Hornet's Nest. He was born Karl Stig-Erland Larsson, nicknamed Stig, in Sweden, in 1954. He changed the autograph of his name to Stieg, so as to avoid confusion with his friend and fellow author, Stig Larsson. The pronunciation remained the same.

Larsson grew up the first nine years of his life with his grandparents in the northern countryside of Sweden for reasons that vary among biographies. He stayed there until the death of his grandfather, and returned to his parents who lived in Stockholm.

According to Kurdo Baski, a fellow journalist and friend of Larsson's, Stieg witnessed the gang rape of a girl he knew when he was fifteen at a summer camp. According to his recollection of Stieg recounting the memory: "On that day, 15-year-old Stieg watched three friends rape a girl, also called Lisbeth, who was the same age as him and someone he knew. Her screams were heartrending, but he didn't intervene. His loyalty to his friends was too strong. He was too young, too insecure. It was inevitable that he would realise afterwards that he could have acted and possibly prevented the rape." The victim nor the rapers were ever found, and the story was never proven. Regardless, it could explain Larsson's hatred for abuse against women, sexism and his active career as a feminist, just like his grandfather, who was locked in a camp during WW2 for anti-Nazi views, was most probably the origin of his affront to right-wing extremism, neo-nazism and racism.

Stieg Larsson and Eva Gabrielsson in 1980

Larsson had many trades, and never considered himself a novelist, only writing in the evenings to relax himself. He was, however, at one point or another, a journalist, researcher, activist, magazine editor, graphic designer, photographer, as well as minor roles such as dishwasher to scrap some cash while backpack travelling in Africa.

Larsson's foundation of an anti right-wing magazine led him to have many enemies, and he and his soulmate (for lack of a better word) often received death threats, both to themselves and to people close to them. Larsson met and subsequently fell in love with Eva Gabrielsson when they were both eighteen. They never married as Larsson feared a paper trail connecting her to him would place her in danger in regards to the threats they received, such as bullets in the mail, or even rocks through windows.

Larsson had begun writing a novel, laced with themes of abuse towards women, rape, sexism and other things Larsson stood against. The heroine of the book is presumably named Lisbeth Salander after the victim of the gang rape Larsson witnessed. Larsson waited until the saga and three novels were completely finished before thinking of publishing. Before any publishing deals could be made however, he died of a heart attack, at the age of 50, on the 9th of December 2004, in Stockholm.

SL & EG in 1990

Although Larsson had been adamant on keeping his original title for the first book as it was: Män som hatar kvinnor, literally Men who hate women. When the book was published posthumously, however, the English translation changed the title to a less provocative phrase. Changing the title did not change in any way the 'men who hate women' message in the books. Of the three, only the second, when translated into English, kept the same literal translation. The third, Luftslottet som sprängdes, literally, The air castle that blew up, was changed to The Girl who kicked the Hornet's Nest, presumably to keep 'The Girl...' pattern. The novels became international bestsellers, and spawned a Swedish movie saga, originally a mini-series, and an American remake (oh, Hollywood...).

As Larsson had no written will, his belongings passed to his family, notably his father (mother died of breast cancer in 1991), and Eva continues to fight to this day to at least have the rights to the novels, in order to be able to decide what should be done with the fragments of unfinished novels Larsson left behind. The family continues to refuse to give anything to Eva, who legally, as she was not married, has no right to anything, regardless of the fact that 30-something of their years were passed together.

Posted in Book Reviews | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Extr@ – Español

Me ha terminado la serie de Extr@, versíon español. Extr@ es una serie de televisión para aprender el español, pero también es una comedia de enredo. Sigue la historia de Sam Scott, un americano que visita su amiga por correspondencia, Lola. Lola vive en Barcelona en un piso con su amiga Ana. Lola y Ana tienen un vecino que se llama Pablo. Pablo siempre es en el piso de Lola y Ana. Al principio, el español de Sam no es bueno, pero de episodio a episodio hace bastante mejor.

Me gusta Extr@, y mi personaje favorito es Pablo. Es muy gracioso y simpático. Por otro lado, me odio a Lola. Es muy agarrado, molesto, y no me gusta su voz. Supuesto, hay treinta episodios, pero sólo vi trece episodios. No puedo encontrar los últimos gratis.

Extr@ existe también en francés, alemán y inglés, y el actor que es Pablo en Extr@-Español es Hector, el hombre que aprende el inglés en Extr@-Inglés. Sam Scott es interpretado por el mismo actor (Lawrence Ray) cada vez, no importa en qué idioma. Lawrence Ray sabe hablar el francés, español y alemán, ahora!

Posted in Cinematography, Español | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment