...writing about THE OFFICE...

Hello everyone!

Many of you may or may not know about the coolest opportunity I've recently fallen into. I applied for a position at examiner.com, a site that lets writers express their thoughts regarding arts, health, politics, etc. People can write for local pages or on a nationwide level.

After reviewing the available topics, I decided to propose an entirely new position at examiner.com: Writer for "The Office." Imagine my surprise when I was offered the job - I am now The Office National Examiner!

My very first article has been submitted and posted to the site -- you can read it here:

http://www.examiner.com/x-8550-The-Office-Examiner

There, you can also check out my bio, subscribe to my articles and add me as a "Favorite Examiner" :) I will be writing three to four articles every week...

As someone graduating with a degree in Marketing, journalism is something I hope to explore as a career option. Thus said, I'm still learning. Let me know how I'm doing in the comments section at the end of articles. If you love it, hate it, or remain indifferent... I'd love to hear from you!

Thanks!

MIN

...age is only a number...

A gaggle of giggling girls file into the theater, carrying lip gloss and bedazzled cell phones. Their chatter is littered with, “OMG! Zac Efron! He’s so hot!” Mothers and fathers trail behind with popcorn and Milk Duds. If the sugar overload won’t alleviate the headache, then perhaps the candy could double as earplugs. Zac Efron started breaking tweenage girls’ hearts with the instant hit “High School Musical.” Armed with an adorable smile and twinkle in his eye many predicted that Efron could become the next Mr. Lindsay Lohan, overtaking multiple spheres: singing, dancing and acting.

Manohla Dargis of "The New York Times" said, "He is pale, pliable and very pretty (picture-perfect for bedroom walls), with a curtain of hair that sweeps across his forehead and well-manicured dark brows as if gently stirred by the collective exhalation of a thousand virgins."

The film begins on a high note, literally, with a shirtless Mike O’Donnell (Efron) sinking free throws on the basketball court. Ear-splitting squeals erupted from the harem near the back of the theater, setting off car alarms within a 10-mile radius. Riding on the waves of the sing-and-dance franchise, an added delight included Efron performing a dance number before the game. The poor guy looked like a dancer masquerading as an athlete as he ripped off his outer sweats and shook his hips in front of teachers, parents, and a college recruiter.

Time jumps forward as we see a much different Mike O’Donnell (Matthew Perry). For the last twenty years, his family has sat on the bench and watched Mike live in self-pity. Now an unsuccessful businessman in his mid-thirties, Mike wallows in his unhappiness and is intent on spreading the wealth to his soon-to-be-ex-wife (Leslie Mann) and their two teenage children (Sterling Knight and Michelle Trachtenberg). When offered the chance to relive his golden days, Mike jumps at the chance and falls into a younger reality.

Roger Ebert said, "Instead of wishing to be 17 again, he should have wished to go back 20 years in time. Yes, he becomes himself trapped inside his own 17-year-old body. Same wife, same kids, same problems."

Efron has some big shoes to fill, no pun intended. Perry’s specific hand gestures and signature panicked cluelessness are key to the role’s believability. However, Efron convincingly played the part by capturing the key mannerisms and characteristics that Perry set forth. The young actor gives a voice to Mike’s inner struggle: he’s a man that still addresses others with the naivety of a teenager and has lived the past twenty years blinded by his youthfulness. Ironically, Mike finally grows up when he’s stuck in the body of a 17 year-old.

Although the film has its shameless moments (a spontaneous dance routine) and storyline gaps (no one questions where the older version of Mike O’Donnell disappeared to), “17 Again” had its entertaining moments. However, the film failed to provide any new elements, choosing to recycle slightly different versions of “Back to the Future,” “13 Going on 30” and “Click.” Secondary characters such as Principal Masterson (Melora Hardin) and Uncle Ned (Thomas Lennon) stole many of the film’s moments with their hilarious attempt at an elvish courtship, eclipsing Viggo Mortenson and Liv Tyler’s performance in “Lord of the Rings.”

Teenage audiences will love this film, but the parents that double as chauffeurs might want to purchase a different ticket, or they will be forced to make good use of those Milk Duds.

...it is written...

"Jamal Malik is one question away from winning 20 million rupees.

How did he do it?

A. He cheated

B. He's lucky

C. He's a genius

D. It is written"

Cigarette smoke and bright lights assault Jamal (Dev Patel) as he is interrogated for correctly answering questions on India's "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire." How could an uneducated boy from the slums have more knowledge than a computer genius or doctor? The questions range from "Who was the star of "Zanjeer"?" to "Cambridge Circus is in which U.K. city?" As the show's security try to beat the information out of Jamal, flashbacks are weaved through the film. For 20 years, Jamal has lived as an orphan, forced to steal in order to survive. He has not been told the answers to the questions, he has lived them.

Roger Ebert said, "A petty thief, impostor and survivor, mired in dire poverty, he improvises his way up through the world and remembers everything he has learned." Jamal's journey is intertwined with his morally wayward brother, Salim (Madhur Mittal), and a captivating beauty named Latika (Freida Pinto).

The film explores Mumbai's two worlds: the impoverished and the wealthy. Indian citizens have always been separated by economic status. After Bombay turned into Mumbai, the country changed in many ways. But the city's growing poverty levels were never given much attention. "Slumdog Millionaire" shows how the old India and new India overlap. Never has a film bridged the two with success.

Directed by Danny Boyal, "Slumdog Millionaire" was an immediate success with critics. Ebert said, "The film uses dazzling cinematography, breathless editing, driving music and headlong momentum to explode with narrative force, stirring in a romance at the same time." He predicted that the film could very well win the Academy Award for Best Picture.

On February 22, 2009, the cast, writers, and director walked the red carpet and rubbed elbows with the elite. Film greats like Meryl Streep, Kate Winslet, and Sean Penn expressed their congratulations to the cast and crew, who were nominated for 9 statuettes. History was made that night when "the little engine" steamed ahead of fellow nominees with 8 Oscar Awards.

• Achievement in Cinematography


• Achievement in Directing


• Achievement in Film Editing


• Achievement in Music Written for Motion Pictures (Original Score)


• Achievement in Music Written for Motion Pictures (Original Song)


• Achievement in Music Written for Motion Pictures (Original Song)


• Best Motion Picture of the Year


• Achievement in Sound Editing


• Achievement in Sound Mixing


• Adapted Screenplay

The success of "Slumdog Millionaire" will open doors for films set in India, but more importantly, will bridge the economic gap between Mumbai's wealth and poverty cultures. BBC News said, "The makers of Slumdog Millionaire have announced they are to donate £500,000 to a charity which will help children living in the slums of Mumbai." The charity will address the people that have invented alternative means of survival. The goal is to bring children like Jamal, Salim, and Latika a desperate attempt at hope.

Danny Boyle said, "Having benefited so much from the hospitality of the people of Mumbai it is only right that some of the success of the movie be ploughed back into the city in areas where it is needed most and where it can make a real difference to some lives."

...what goes bump in the night...

As a small child, the protective coverings of my blankets provided an impenetrable shield against creatures of the night. Growing up was tough with two older brothers who were Hell bent on scaring me with stories of furnace monsters and tales of Bigfoot. Films like "Little Monsters" caused me nightmares for months. Thankfully, my parents were never far from the scene and valiantly defended me from any potential attacks.

If "Monsters vs. Aliens" had been released in 1994, parents would have gotten more sleep. Guaranteed.

Susan (Reese Witherspoon) is ready to walk down the isle, intent on marrying her weatherman fiance named Derek (Paul Rudd). However, a close encounter with a crashing meteorite has some gigantic side effects. Susan grows to colossal proportions and transforms into a female version of Gulliver with the wedding party scrambling around like Lilliputians. Once snatched by the government, the newly acquired "Ginormica" is exiled to a prison with fellow monsters. All hope is lost until an alien robot, controlled by Gallaxhar (Rainn Wilson), invades the earth and threatens mankind. Roger Ebert says, "[The] robot, which has one big eyeball in the middle of its head, [is] like a giant Leggs pantyhose container bred with an iSight camera." This guy is the opitome of evil. Time to call in the monsters for help because, unfortunately, the Ghostbusters are busy.

"Monsters vs. Aliens" works tirelessly to establish a theme of identity. Susan relies on Derek and a dream that their relationship can survive, height difference and all. She voluntarily allows Dr. Cockroach (Hugh Laurie) to experiment (and electrocute) all in the name of love. When the government offers her freedom in exchange for battling against the alien robot, Susan, eager to reunite with her fiance, accepts the offer. About halfway through her eightieth passionate diatribe, I could feel my compassion for this character crumble under thin ice.

Jumping on the newest trend in animation that "Coraline" popularized, "Monsters vs. Aliens" is available in 3D format. However, unlike the critically acclaimed "Coraline," this Dreamworks production was not nearly as technologically impressive. Very few moments were specifically designed for the 3D film goers. The jokes were funny but not witty and held water like a colander. The storyline was campy at best and uninteresting. "Monsters vs. Aliens" relied heavily on the starpower: America's sweetheart Reese Witherspoon, "The Office's" funnyman Rainn Wilson, "Arrested Development's" underdog Will Arnett, "Superbad's" Seth Rogan, "House's" unflinching Hugh Laurie, and politically incorrect "The Colbert Report's" Stephen Colbert. Too bad that the actors wasted their voices on such poor scripting.

Ann Hornaday from "The Washington Post" believes that the film shows a promising beginning with its bright colors and interesting storyline. She says, "But within minutes, the movie gets mired in long, talky stretches, many of them about Susan's relationship problems with her tiresome fiance Derek." Much of the animated films Dreamworks produces lacks a certain energy that the leading competitor, Pixar, captures with such ease.

Rob Rector of "Blogcritics Magazine" has identified the major reason why competing studios can't replicate Pixar's success. He says, "DreamWorks Animation, always the bridesmaid at the box office, certainly has the technical chops to rival Pixar – there are moments in 3-D that are frighteningly realistic. Their problem repeatedly rests in the writing." The characters were more 2D than 3D in depth.

Hornaday says, "That's because, unlike the instant classics Pixar Animation Studios has become known for, "Monsters vs. Aliens" is about things, not characters."