The Ayn Rand movies

As promised yesterday, I'm here writing about the movies I was watching. Since both are movies based on Ayn Rand books, most of the post may not make sense unless you have read the books.

The first one: Atlas Shrugged- Part 2. It has a pathetic rating on IMDB and is said to be worse than Part 1, but I had to watch it still, didn't I? Surprisingly, I liked Part 2 much better than Part 1. As an independent movie, it's not even average (bad graphics is one reason). As a movie that explains Objectivism, just so-so. But as a movie that somehow showed characters close enough to what I had imagined them, it was pretty awesome.
For part 1, I had thought that the characters didn't have what you imagined them to from the book. And the whole idea of setting this movie in the future seemed stupid. But in part 2, there were some points where I thought it was a good idea. You relate more to the characters because they live similar lives and speak similar language (like using tablets and saying 'asap'). But I didn't like Dagny in Part 2- she was too emotional, didn't have the right amount of confidence AND showed too much cleavage. In fact, what's with all the women in the movie? An inordinate amount of cleavage, even for a Hollywood movie. Maybe somebody thought this abstract philosophy stuff puts people off, so lets make it up with some low necks. Honestly, it made the movie a little weird-looking.
Anyway, I liked most of the other characters- James Taggart (who I think makes a good Peter Keating), Ken Dannager, Lilian, Cheryl. I was not completely happy with Fransisco, but there was one moment in the movie when he said "Isn't money the root of all evil? I have decided to stop being evil" and it made me laugh. For that moment alone, I think he wasn't a bad choice at all. But I LOVED the guy who played Rearden. He was awesome! Just the right amount of sarcasm in his smile, just the right level of confidence and laughter in his voice and perfect expressions in his eyes. And for him alone, I'd say I love the movie.
There was one thing I noticed about the movie that was minor but irked me still. When Dagny waits outside Ken Dannager's office, she thinks that she COULD open the door, but she doesn't and she notes that all that's stopping her is 'civilization'. I love that moment in the book. In the movie she actually pushes the door open, and that bothered me a lot- not because they weren't true to the book, but because that one action betrays the rest of Dagny's character so much.

Anyway, I still love the movie for Rearden alone.

After that, I saw 'Fountainhead'. It's a black and white movie and the screenplay was by Rand herself, so I thought she would stick to the book. To my surprise, she didn't. While there are no character breaches in this one, the plot is changed a great deal. Some of it might have been for length, but it appears to me that when the movie was made, they couldn't show an engaged woman being someone else's lover or getting a divorce etc. Which messes up the plot badly. I could also see the difference in acting styles (compared to now). Maybe it was that but I wasn't too impressed by any of the actors- least by Roark.
And it led me to think about how interpretations and imagination change with time- what Rand saw in her own novel is not good enough for me today! I also realized how changes in movies (compared to the respective books) sometimes annoy me. It may be because I have imagined something and what they make is not as good as what's in my head. Or maybe I hate the parts where I feel the changes don't fit the essence of the plot or characters. (Like Dumbledore shouting out incantations and waving his wand too much. So so un-Dumbledoreof him!)

The other thing is that because I have read these books, my mind fills in the info for everything that's not in the movie. Which means I have no idea whether people who haven't read the book got it or not. And that makes me a poor judge of the movie. 

But well, I'd rather read the book and imagine the story first before I see it. So, its a minor loss I will have to take I guess..

1984

Can a book be simultaneously brilliant and nauseating? Can you ever reach a point in a book where reading the next word takes an excruciating amount of effort and yet, you cannot put it down? The last Thursday, I started reading a book like that and that's why I did not blog on Thursday and Friday. I know that's the kind of thing I was supposed to avoid when I took the one month challenge. But then, I simply couldn't put the book down. Not even to blog about it. The weekend I happened to go out and so couldn't find the time to blog either. I hope that doesn't happen in the future.

The book in question was '1984' by George Orwell. It's supposed to be a classic book (I was prompted to read it by a 'list of 10 books to read before you die'!). I remember reading 3-4 pages of a pdf copy sometime during my college days and like all other pdf books I have begun, I didn't get any further. So, the last time I visited India, I got a hardcopy.

(Warning: Spoilers ahead!) The book is about a dystopian communist society set in the future (the book was written in 1950) and a sort-of individualist who is unable to bear the communist regime and tries to break out. He also falls in love with a woman (in a world where marriage for love is banned) and eventually gets caught by the system. Whether he fights or loses forms the rest of the story.

If you have read 'The Anthem', you would realize it has the same outline as above. In fact, as I read on, I found so many elements to be the same- a society with no technological progress, one that glorifies obedience, one where all individuals follow the same routines and are forced by the government not to express their opinions, and so on. Even the fact that the party controls marriages. I tried to look up if 1984 had been influenced by The Anthem, but couldn't find anything. However, the more I read the book, the more I thought that both are simply extensions of reality in communist societies.

That being said, I definitely think 1984 is a lot more realistic. The Anthem is an inspiring novel but it assumes an almost stupid ruling class.1984, on the other hand, brings up the scary possibilities of smart people being evil and in power. It builds a world that is complete and makes sense within itself. A society where everyone is being spied on all the time, and any small breach from the expected conduct can lead you to 'vanish'. 

And the best part is this- a society where any piece of evidence about the past that contradicts with the government views about the present is destroyed and falsified. (Eg: If the government wants to prove  production has increased by 5% but had predicted it to increase by 10%- they just change all existing records of the previous announcement and replace it with ones that predict 5%). This brought up some very interesting questions about the past- does the past exist only in records? In fact, an even harder question- if a set of people refuse to acknowledge reality by consensus, is there any reality at all? (Eg: if everyone in the world see something falling down but refuse to admit that the thing has moved- has the thing moved at all?) While we are tempted to say 'obviously it has', in a  world where that reality is not accepted, for all practical purposes the thing might not have moved at all. (I find that idea mind-blowing!)

The last part of the book was haunting. The protagonist is tortured so much that he converts from the reality-acknowledging, sane-thinking, individualist to the typical party-supporting, communist with too much double standards. He doesn't just say what the society wants him to say- he actually believes in their ideas. It made me think- 'Until what point of adversity would I hold on to my ideals and values?' And if you do give up your values in the face of the worst torture imaginable to you, would you be considered moral? (Something about which I hope to write later)

As I said earlier- this was one book which was simultaneously brilliant and nauseating. There was a point I reached in the book where I did not want to read another word. And yet, I could not keep the book down. 

And 3 days later, the book still haunts me.

For anyone who reached this far without having read the book- I might have spoilt the best of the book's ideas for u, but I have not half-conveyed the details. So, highly highly recommend you to read it...

I hope to read 'Animal Farm'- the other popular title by Orwell- some other day..

Taken for granted

I am one of those women (or do I still call myself a girl? :P ) who would never consider a career of being a housewife. Even when I was in primary school, I could not imagine spending my life in the kitchen. It is not that I despise being a housewife- just that it always felt like I could do "more" with my time and it is not the thing for me. Notice the more. I'm one of those people who agrees with what Romney almost said (yes, finally one thing that I agree with Romney about)- that working women do "more" with their time.

Most of my friends' mothers are working women. Though not CEOs or anything, they are at least in some clerical position or the other. And I can remember at least 3-4 instances where said friends say- "unlike your mother, mine doesn't get time". I always use to consider that a legitimate argument. In fact, how many times have I thought that myself- that my mother has a lot of time? (Sometimes, I have tried to analyze this, but often I just get taken over by the idea that working women handle both home and work).


But, know what, that is just naive. No, really. Most housewives I know do a lot with their time too. It is just that what they do is not quantifiable, doesn't seem to have much impact, is in other words, taken for granted. My mother spends a lot more time at home but she is meticulous, she is very careful about the details. She thinks that reheating food is blasphemous, that every corner of the window sill should be dusted every week, that every meal must be freshly made (and if possible, the spices freshly ground!) and she is a perfectionist in her world. She may not be the greatest innovator or the "smart" hostess that many working women claim to be (smart because they can whip up an interesting looking dish out of MTR mix)- but she is indispensable. And our (aka mine, my dad's and my brother's) lives would never be the same if she hadn't decided to pour her time into fixing the details for us- details that are essential for us but which we always fail to notice.

Now I am not trying to say that working women are bad cooks or something- just that they have limited time to spend with their family, which they must apportion accordingly. Since housewives get more time to do household work, some of them do put in a lot of effort into it. Again, I am not saying all of them do, but the deep rooted stereotype in our minds that 'if somebody is a housewife, she is not doing anything' is simply untrue. To echo a line in the movie that brought me to this post "doing that would make us judgmental!"

As I said before, I find it unimaginable that I spend my life in the endless cycle of cooking and cleaning. ("One's life MUST matter, Dennis, beyond all the cooking and cleaning.."- Alexandra Roach as Margaret Thatcher in 'The Iron Lady'). I know I never will devote my life to supporting the lives of others in such a direct manner. But I respect the fact that there are people who are selfless enough to do this- not because they cannot do any better but because they see greater joy in it. THAT is the key thing I wish to say.

In a changing fast-paced cutthroat world, our generation (including myself) tends to think that just because somebody is not working, they are not capable enough. And as we rush through our lives with lack of time for each other, we forget the small ways in which we might be hurting someone who has been nice enough to spend their entire life for us. Capturing THIS was the essence of what made "English Vinglish" awesome! I am not reviewing it here, but I saw it today last week and I had heard it was good, but didn't expect to concur so much. I watched the Hindi version and all I could think of was my mother. And when I finished a few minutes ago that day, my amygdala was overworking (Yeah, yeah, I am doing the bioengineering showoff here.. Forgive me!)

The movie simply made me think of how my mother must be feeling amidst the three  of us who are always on our toes and not taking the time to appreciate her enough. Though her English may not be like Sridevi's there are many subtle ways in which we hurt her, and we don't even think about it. I also thought about how housewives get so caught in their little world that they don't get the time to update themselves about the world outside- so while the rest of the family becomes internet savvy and touchscreen friendly, they are still struggling to catch up. It doesn't mean they are slow learners, just that they never had the time or incentive to learn as much as we do. And then we laugh at them or get frustrated with them, when in fact helping us so much is the real reason they never caught up. So yes, the movie was awesome and I recommend everyone (housewives, children of housewives, children of working women who are friends of children of housewives and so on.. :P) to go watch it. In one word, it was "inspirational".

But the real thing I want to say is here- To all housewives I might have ever known and underestimated in any small way, however subtly or spontaneously, I am sorry. I know I shall never be in your shoes, but I will definitely try to respect your decision and you as a person. Above all, to my wonderful mother- Sorry for all the times we hurt you, however unknowingly. It is not fair to you and we try our best not to do so but  after all we are humans with our own foibles. You are a talented person and we are proud of you. And if we ever let you feel otherwise, don't take it to heart. We don't mean it. And what you have done with your life is a hard decision, one I would never take, one that involves more sacrifices than I care to even think about- we are lucky you did it. It is great. And we will try our best to never never do the worst form of ingratitude to you- taking you for granted! And yes, we love you!

A Flawed God

This is probably the last book I am reviewing this season. And it was just about ok.

The title is quite intriguing, I expected to find some novel about one man who fights against different odds and probably comes up with some sort of theory about a flawed God and a flawed universe. Well, I couldn’t have been farther from the plot. Of course it is a story about a man who fights against some kind of odds in his organization. But then, the flawed God refers to the stock market. The book talks about how organizations are controlled by the stock market which is in itself a dicey concept, and how they don’t care enough about the employees. A little communistic? Yes yes…

Plot. Plot is essentially the story of how the protagonist gets recruited a s part of a secret organization and how he later on tries to take control of the situations he faces, with the new confidence he has gained from joining the organization. Also, how he later on discovers that most of these have been fabricated by his co-worker (and love interest) in order to help him realize his true potential. The pace is not too fast, while the mystery of the secret organization drives your interest, there are points where the pace is too slow to sustain.

Theme is definitely different. Someone has finally tried to talk about how employees are treated and power play at work and all the untold secrets of workplaces. However, there is a risk in writing a novel about a theme that is by itself considered a little boring. And a theme which people try to forget while at home. When you take such a risk, it is incumbent on the author to try not to use language that is too official or boring. In this case, the author has not written that way, and at some points his style has a tad too much legalese. In fact, talking about style, maybe it is his choice of words or sentence length or I don’t know what else, but though the plot is quite simple the story telling seems a little laboriously done. There are points where the book is too heavy on the reader.  But then again, maybe that was intended, and maybe it adds to the theme :)

Charactewrs. Not much to say here, because there are very few characters being talked about. While the protagonist and lady love are the main ones, and it is obvious this guy is one of potential, but who needs a small push, while the lady is one who is clever enough to identify the right candidate and who can go great lengths to help him, there is not much else to understand about either. And the other characters are much worse- no one really stays in your mind for long. Maybe the author was too busy concentrating on the issues he wants to cover and the plot that he didn’t too much on this one.

So, overall- the book is ok. One-time read if you are interested in HR stuff and people and their interactions at the workplace. Else, it does have some interesting viewpoints to offer (the one that explains ‘flawed god’ is pretty good) and though a little red, it has some constructive suggestions as well. The booklet portion (games at the ‘playshop’) could have been included as part of the plot, as they seem to be quite interesting. And yes, great title! ;)

Well, that’s all folks! :)

This review is a part of the Book Reviews Program at BlogAdda.com.

Resident Dormitus

Can there be a person who doesn’t know what he wants? Yes. Can he be such that he revels in not knowing? Possibly. Can there be someone who not only revels in not knowing what he wants but also tries to trivialize every good opportunity he gets, who thinks that not defining any morals for himself is a way to be unique and who tries his best to be a nuisance to strangers while trying to do as little with his life as possible? Guess so. Can this person also try to understand his situation in a philosophical manner and eventually succeed in fighting his internal demons, though the answer dawns on him after committing a near-murder? Vikas Rathi answers this question with a “Yes”, as he sculpts the character of his protagonist in as inconspicuous a manner as possible.
 
Achet, a young man from Jaipur who starts off on his corporate career, after a  business education, is the kind of person who never takes independent decisions. He tries to do as little work as possible (mental, physical, official, whatever) though he continues to exercise his brain enough to make innumerable trivial jokes at the expense of other people. Not particularly heartless in introspect, but selfish and cruel in action, Achet is the man who is nearly evil by virtue of not having done anything. He pushes his luck as far as it can go, until a murder pushes him back to the reality he has evaded for long.
Plot-wise, this book is just ok. It is interesting though Achet’s inactivity stagnates the book in many parts and one might just lose interest. However, the plot hook right in the beginning ensures that you will eventually return to the book, at least to find out why was there a murder at all.
 
The real essence of the book is in the character of Achet and the experience of seeing the world through his eyes. There will definitely be many parts of the book where Indian youth would identify with him- if you have ever taken a decision purely because that’s what everybody does, (or) if you found that you have started drinking for no reason tha the boredom fo the corporate jungle soon after you started on your career, and you know it’s bad for you, but you also don’t feel like stopping, you would relate to Achet. Of course, if you are plain lazy, you would still relate to him.
 
If you, like me, are none of the above- if you have taken decisions on your own (Whether right or wrong), if you generally have the courage to face your true self and shun inaction, then this book might help you understand your anti-thesis. (Often, it is most difficult to understand the other side of the coin when it might seem totally senseless from your side- that's where this book helps!)
 
One good thing about the style of the book is that Vikas talks quite sensibly about a good many serious topics, in a way that you don’t even realize he talked about them! The other thing is the way he ends the book (which, of course, I will not talk about!) Of course, I wouldn’t like the constant drinking and smoking pot and what not, but by now I have learnt to expect these as Indian authors’ tickets to sounding authentic and mature! Also, like Vikas himself says, one often finds the greatest insights from sources that are otherwise not to your taste. This particular insight was itself an example to that theory (Ya, I am obsessed with recursion! ;) )

There is one problem though.. Most vices have a tendency to infect you if you look too closely into them (that maybe why they are termed vices!) - primary one among them being laziness and inactivity. To some extent this books slows you down and infects you with a boredom and vagueness in your mind (which you can only remove by readng a different book or watching a movie!). However, that only proves that the book is true to its own cause.
 
So, do I like this book? Not greatly. But, it did offer me an alternate perspective and contributed in at least a small way to improving my understanding of people. 
 
Will I recommend this book? Yes. If you think you are directionless, if you don’t know where you are and don’t even think that you might ever find your life’s calling this book might prove to be the “Resident Dormitus” for u. Or if, you are sure of yourself, at least to some extent, and, like me, you are interested in understanding people who are your opposites in life, you should. Whatever the side-effects, it at least leaves you with some insight. And for that alone, any piece of art would be commendable!

This review is a part of the " Book Reviews Program at BlogAdda.com.

Conversations

Conversations. The synopsis said a book with poems and short stories which reflect your own inner conversations. The problem with evaluating (or critiquing?) such a book is that most people have not read much of introspective stuff so if they have a taste for it they would find it good anyway. It is difficult to compare the book with an objective standard unless you have done enough introspection yourself. And as a corollary, if at all you are the kind that reads classic poetry and classic short stories (aka the minority) you run the risk of writing harsher reviews and having higher expectations. Since I have done all this and quite obviously over-intellectualized and over-philosophized every small detail of my life, I must admit at the start that if I rate the book 3, you can read it as 3.5..

Having said that, I must admit I started the book with very low expectations. After having been disappointed by too many Indian poets and writers, I couldn’t afford to start with a filled cup again. Luckily though, the book was good. It didn’t sweep me off my feet, it is not in my top 5, but it is good.
It is a collection of short stories, and not the red herring types. More introspective and down-to-earth- just as the cover promises. Writer Rajeev Nanda weaves tales that touch very important issues that each of us faces (more about them later) and the fabric does come out pretty well. Not too bright and fabulous but home-spun, comfortable and yet, wise.
(Note- It also has some poetry, but that's not too great. I will not comment further on the poetry and this review will focus only on the short stories..)

Rajeev starts with a minor Tagore-style story about dreams, then he moves on to a good discussion with/about God. A tale of a peaceful soldier and a predictable taxi ride later, there is the chance meeting between two travelers (Ya, it reminds me of “The Eyes have it” and “The woman on platform 8”  !), and then we are invited to listen to four eulogies for a man. If you pause at this point and observe, he has actually started with child-like dreams and the maturity level grows into touching adult issues like chance meetings that are part-attraction part-affection and part just that-- chance! Then we step into bolder territory- extramarital (and internet) relationships! After seeing two-three such, we walk into a group of friends who take the courage to face the truth about themselves and the book culminates with a peek into a euphemistic (and partly recursive) conversation about God and religion. But for 2 stories about God, the rest are mainly relationship-centric. Of course, there is a lot of liquor flowing through the book, as are physical intimacies and sex. Is it just me or is the world getting more openly carnal lately?!

The plots are not entirely novel, but then the story here is not in the plot, it is in the sub-text. There are some stories with a minor twist in the end, but I hope they were not intended to be twists, because I could see most of them coming all along. Again, it is not a big deal because plot is not the focus.
What about the characters? Some stand out (Like Melanie in Intersection- I just loved her!) Some were intended to stand out, but they fade away (Like Kundha in The Taxi Ride - this Roald Dahl style story somehow did not achieve the full surprise int he twist!). There are too many similarities between the characters in consecutive stories- men who try to push their limits, women who are both smart and good-looking, married men who are attracted to other women, mid-life crises, cynicism (the sheer number of times the word ‘cynical’ was repeated in the book was daunting!) -- with so many similarities, many of the characters fade to form one vague outline and few (almost none) stand out. But again, maybe they were intended to be inconspicuous so that one could identify them with themselves..

What I liked about the book are the many questions and many alternate viewpoints it offers. Some questions are fresh in the way Rajeev asks them, like “does commitment make sense in today’s world” (The Rabbit Hole) and “Would God care if mankind destroyed itself” (Tête-à-tête), some old yet haunting- like “Do we lose something by worrying more about the destination than the journey?” (The Truth Club) and “What is the most important thing in life?” (Splinters) and the mother of all questions- “Does God really exist?” (Conversation). If you read the stories and paused in between to think about the viewpoints, the book would truly reconnect you to your inner conversations. (As the cover promises, again!). Of course, personally some of these questions have occurred to me before, but then that was part of the book’s promise, right? :)
The bad part was that very few portions were striking and made lasting impressions. And yes, Rajeev needs to work on creating unique characters. 

Anyhow, my favorite stories were Tete-a-tete, The Rabbit Hole and Conversation. Overall, it is a good book if you want to think and introspect. Not great, but yes, commendable. Must try if you have not read this kind of stuff before.

This review is a part of the Book Reviews Program at BlogAdda.com

Chanakya's Chant

A book that has been on the bestseller list for about a year now. A book that is among the list of “Crossword Recommends” and “Landmark Top 10” and all the others. A book that has been called everything from “mesmerizing” to “very engaging” to “unputdownable”. And offered to me as part of “Sponsored Review” program. All the hype makes it very difficult for me to tell the world that 1) it is very much putdownable 2) it was just about average. But then, I believe in honest reviewing. So let me tell you at the start that this book is very much like a Bollywood movie- all plot and masala. And without even the ethics that Bollywood tries to have.

So if you are looking for a book that has a good plot but nothing else to offer (oh yeah, you get to flaunt to friends that you read a historical novel and sound intellectual), this is a very good Indian book. If you want to read a book that doesn’t tax the intellect or the conscience, and shows you the worst of India, this is again a good choice. If you have read enough history to know it well, or if you have some little morality left in you, this book will leave you with a bad aftertaste. 

Getting on to the plot.. As the cover says it is a parallel story of Chanakya and Gangasagar Mishra. The former wants to crown Chandragupta (Maurya) and the latter Chandini Gupta. (Yes, it really IS that obvious!) Both use unconventional (read most unethical) strategies to achieve their goals. Not only bribing prostitutes (which is still ok) and hiring eunuchs to castrate a man , but also falsifying documents, double-crossing friends, murder- just about every wrong thing you could dream of is there in the book. Of course, you know they will win in the end. And you know it in the first scene when Chandini is sworn in as Prime Minister. (And if you did any history at all in school, you know Chandragupta also became an emperor). So not much of a mystery (which is why I found it putdownable). But yes, the plot moves fast, and Ashwin untiringly thinks up newer and newer “strategies”. The plot could have been better if Chanakya or Ganga failed at some point, and the reader would want to know how they shot back. But Ashwin makes them invincible, which also means unreal.
 
Characters.. The beauty of the story is that nobody has any sort of character (not even a bad or evil character). Like their strategy for winning elections, the character is to have no character. The only character I remember is the honest ex-home minister who is the only one immune to Ganga and who appears in the story for about 2 lines.
 
Theme.. Politics and history. Unfortunately, the politics shown is so dirty that at no point of time do you sympathize with Ganga. If the other guys are bad, he is worse. Why would a reader want him to succeed? Because he is the protagonist? That is so typically Bollywood movie type logic, which I am quite incapable of. And history. I can write a separate book on the number of anachronisms and wrong language usage in the book. If it was supposed to be a historical comedy, they would have been appropriate, I guess.
 
What makes the book really bad is that it was a very promising plot. A good writer could have created a masterpiece with memorable characters and real mind-blowing strategies. And yes, he could have used original quotes. There is no fun in reading a book where almost all the witty lines are lifted from brainyquote and thinkexist*. Google can do that. The talent of a good writer lies in his originality. If the plot was historical, one could have given it a fresh perspective. And one could have sculpted characters who nobody would forget. All I can say to readers is- if you want to read a real strategy story on Chanakya, read MudraRakshasa. And if you want a real modern day political novel, read The Prodigal Daughter (it has really amazing and “original” quotes and a pretty good plot, which is why Archer is such a successful writer.)
 
Sorry Chanakya’s Chant, but no donuts for you this time!

* As one can verify from the appendix, many of them are not even from Chanakya himself. And the few Chanakya quotes available are not among the best of his.

This review is a part of the Book Reviews Program at BlogAdda.com. Participate now to get free books!

The 6pm Slot

Nothing important in life ever starts with appropriate background music prepping you for it. The same is true of my first sponsored review. It started with me expressing interest to review books as part of BlogAdda's free review program... and here I am reviewing “The 6pm slot”- a book by Naomi Datta, whose amazing first line I just paraphrased! :)

Intriguing first line. Even better is the line that says "Everything important starts with a PPT" (I loved the author for that one!)
And intriguing cover (shown aside), to be sure. That is, if you have some taste for adult content. But if it leads you to think that the book, like the anchor whose picture decorates the cover, might be all looks and no brains, let me warn you. Luckily, that isn’t true.

Mashed bananas, pyar and shopping....

It is the end of a particularly awesome weekend. And after a long time. Started off mildly with a visit to Landmark where I ended up reading HP7 instead of  looking at new books (I have been re-reading the series, ‘coz I had forgotten most of the finer details), but at least that helped my wallet a little. Anyway, watched a play yesterday evening after a long time, and 2 movies today- all of them were a real laugh! Ended it with Anand Bhavan coffee- so I really can’t ask for more.
Now for the stuff I watched. 
 
Butter and Mashed Banana: 
VERY GOOD play. It is really long since I saw one, the last I saw in B’lore was “Night of January 16th” and though I love the story, it was good-but-not-very-good. This time Rangashankara was full (never seen it like that before) and that only served to increase my expectations. Fortunately, I was not disappointed. The play is a satire about freedom of expression in India. The dialogues are amazing, and the actors did a great job. Each of them seemed carved for the role, and I liked many of their theatre techniques (Expressions, use of music, use of dance, almost everything). Thing is drama is something that not too many people watch, so you might think that this is only good for regular theatre enthusiasts. But no, not at all. Anyone who has watched a movie and heard a Beep where there should be some slang that anybody could have guessed, can watch this play and completely relate to it. Coming to think of it, even anyone who has ever used a dictionary can go watch this play :)
And that was the beauty of it. It was hilarious enough for the common man and creative enough for the serious art critic. I hate to tell out plots, so that is all I will mention, but I strongly strongly recommend you to watch it. There are 2 shows in Mumbai on Tuesday and Wednesday, and two more shows at Whitefield next weekend. If you have an hour, and haven’t seen a play in a while, it is a must-go. Actually, even if you have never seen a play at all, it is a must-go!
 
Pyaar ka Punch-nama: 
This was a lighter movie, and was mostly comedy revolving around relationships. I expected the feminist in me to come out saying “that is not how women are” and “this is so chauvinistic” etc. But actually I didn’t. There were so many dialogues in the movie and so many situations which I could relate to real-life behavior of women I know, so I had to admit the movie was right about portrayals. Women ARE demanding, and women ARE confused. Not all of them. Not at all times. Not to the same extent. But then, women are all that. And more. It might be because of the way society views them, or because of the way they are brought up; it might be because “Man's love is of man's life a thing apart, 'Tis a woman's whole existence”* or it might be because of natural selection but then women really are like that. (I know I must be the only jerk to think of evolution after watching Pyar ka Punch-nama, but I completely blame Dawkins for that- he has driven that angle too much into my head :( ). Anyway, I even came up with couple of theories about why women are the way they are and what men/women can do about this, but I am not gonna trouble you with all that.
Let me just say it was a good movie to watch, and hilarious. It is still on theaters, so if you want a good laugh, it is quite worth the money to go watch this one. (By the way, if you are taking your girlfriend, be sure to warn her that it is just for fun and surely she is special and ‘definitely’ not like the girls portrayed in it ;) :P)
 
Coas:
Confessions of a shopaholic- a movie I have seen at least twice already, second time only for Hugh, but he really suits the serious boss role. But I still liked watching it today. Shopaholism is quite an alien feeling to me, though I think B’lore is infecting me a little with it. But then, this movie always reminds me of why the “fish crisis” (fiscal crisis) happened in the first place, and why Indian parents are right about a lot of things, like teaching their children the value of money. Otherwise, nothing particularly great about the movie, but if you like shopping (and more so, if you are a girl) it is a must-watch.
 

So, that’s it. And to round up my list of recommendations- it will be very much worth the 15 bucks to finish this up with Anand Bhavan coffee, the way I did. :)

*That's by Byron in Don Juan. I hadn't read Don Juan until I wrote this article and was surprised to find it had so many wonderful lines (Including truth is stranger than fiction!) and also some great analysis of men and women. Find the original here.

Inception

I had to write a review on inception. I had to, because, it is among the BEST movies I have ever seen. Even though it does not fall in my usual definitions of best. I could say I had to do this, even though I am very much stuck for time, because, it is a movie that makes me take my "hat off and bow and kneel before and say 'that was great!'" But the real reason is what "lightning strikes everyday" says on his blog- "It is a movie that treats the audience with intellectual respect"

It is a movie that is not only intelligent, but demands an equal intelligence from the audience (not equal maybe, but at least approximately so) to appreciate it. (Of course that doesn't include people who read Wikipedia explanations or fake an understanding of the movie.) But each person individually would know how much he understood of the movie, and also that that indicates a lot about his intelligence, which was in itself a great feat!*

Another idiot review

3 idiots.

Much has been told about this movie already, if not too much. And yet, when I saw the movie, there was at least one minute when it touched my heart. And for the fact that most movies don't do that these days- the movie was awesome! :)

My own million dollar recipe!! -- inspired by Avatar :)

Here is my recipe for a dish that sells for millions of dollars (73 million dollar opening) and will make you an instant hit cook (Cost of the dish was also in millions, but assured returns!).

Serves four (all of them men, preferably)

2012 (the movie)

Yes, now it's time for me to write about the movie. Maybe it's late but in true thalaivar style, late ah vandalum naanga latest ah varuvom ;)

So, here is the movie that people eagerly waited for … And it's very much the Indian masala movie you wanted to see. Did you say it's not Indian- it's Hollywood? (Alas! I thought "Hollywood was made of sterner stuff"… "Et tu brute!") In any case, I don't wish to review as such. I will just mention a few things I noticed/thought while watching the movie. Whether they make the movie good or bad is a decision I leave to you.

So here goes- 24 things about '12 –

The Mysterious Stranger

(This post was formerly published on Christmas day, but later removed since I was not sure of some of the sources for the claims on theism.I have verified them, and hence, put it back again!!)

Beautiful!! That is the only word I have for it- for Mark Twain’s “The Mysterious Stranger”. I’d suggest u read the book because it’s not a long book, nor a boring one, so even if you are a poor reader, you can try it. I know it’s supposedly a classic, but effectively, it is only something like a fairy tale.

I’ve read classics before and they are usually quite boring. Even when they try to be interesting, they are such a pain to read. It is as if the author wanted to strain you to your maximum before you finished the book. And here is one, that is very very simple. Childish, in fact. And yet in its childish simplicity, it talks about some of the most serious issues in this world. Issues that shall probably remain unresolved till the end of the human race. Yes, it talks about the human race, about ‘our childish fantasies’, as Twain calls them, and about our frailties and about how stupid we can get (especially with respect to religion)!! (It is quite a weird coincidence that I happened to read this book on Christmas day!!)

Anyway, I was surprised at the intellect of Twain in comparison with the best of authors of his time. When people were still writing about society, love and marriage, here was a man who wrote about why we exist (or whether we exist at all!). And his great talent lies in the fact that he makes the book so delightfully interesting! Every minute that I was reading, I was eager to know the end, even though there was not much of a mystery! In fact, the element of magic made the book quite implausible, and I knew anything could happen anyway. And yet, I was wondering whether it shall have a good ending or not, whether the hero shall be happy in the end etc etc.

Oh, of course, as usual I forgot to tell you the story- it is a tale of three boys, (one of them, the narrator) and how they meet a mysterious stranger- who claims to be an angel, and even performs a great many actions that normal men cannot. They story goes on to tell you whether he is an angel or not and whether he could do any good to the boy or did he bring about further ill luck?!

But as part of this seemingly simple plot, Twain raises some beautiful questions that are very profoundly philosophical. It would probably take me days to discuss each of them, so we’ll keep that for the future, but I’ll just mention them here.

• How important are we in the universe? Is our lifespan too short for us to be of any real significance??
• Why do men always follow the majority, even when it’s against their own interest?
• What, in effect, have we achieved through civilization? Have we progressed at all?
• Who exactly is God?

Actually Twain talks about the insignificance of human life in comparison to that of angels’- a part that almost made me discredit him for his irrationality. Only in the end does he let you realize that he had only been sarcastic and he is as scornful of superstition as you and I!!

Then there is the beautiful statement “There is no other (life)!!” All rationality can tell us that we must be bothered only about our life on earth, which is such a struggle in itself! But how many people do we see, who talk of a life after death and how to pave way for a good one there??!! Isn’t there enough left for us to do to better this world for this life? Why would we want to waste our time thinking about another?? Or even worse, fearing it?
Anyway, the best part of the book, as I found it, was the angel’s speech against God. I can’t say I’ve read a more direct and beautiful argument against the more common portrayal of god!

“God who could make good children as easily as bad, yet preferred to make bad ones; who could have made every one of them happy, yet never made a single happy one; … who mouths justice and invented hell—mouths mercy and invented hell—mouths Golden Rules, and forgiveness multiplied by seventy times seven, and invented hell; … who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all;”

He prompts us to ask- Isn’t such a god another figment of our imagination?? How can such a God be “God” at all???

Maybe, our definition of God is wrong; maybe we are not even sure what kind of God we should have??!! The point is not that. It is not even whether God exists or not. Only that, as believers of God, shouldn’t we able to answer these questions? If we were right shouldn’t we be able to find some reason for God’s actions? And explain the sorrows of the world??

I am reminded of the dialogue from the movie ‘Dasavatharam’, “If God wanted to prevent catastrophes why should he invent clever remedies; why couldn’t he just stop us from thinking these horrible inventions for mass destruction??”

They are serious questions, and we may not find the answers for years to come. But it might be useful for us to remember them, and try to find answers as we continue to live!!

(P.S.:- Yes, I missed the most important thing he said in the book- that all life is a dream! I don’t think it is.. but that is an even more abstract topic to talk about, so maybe, some other time!!!)

(P.S. as added on 21.1.2009:- Most of the statements about God are made on the basis of 'Genesis' in the Bible. It makes a good read, honestly, and would probably enlighten you a great deal about Christianity! Of course, the Hindu religion's portrayal of God is quite different, and in fact, there are numerous opposing theories within the religion itself; so we cannot really analyse it from Twain's statements! But yes, there are overlaps, and maybe we can send some time pondering over them!)

Reviewer in the high

You know what, I was reading Salinger. And I feel sorta weird after the book. You see, it’s like this. Whenever I read some book (except Sheldons and the like), I mean any book that has any sorta feeling in it, I have to review it. Or at least say something about it. Books and movies leave me with a million words surging in my head. So here I am. Writing about Salinger. But I can’t review him, you know. The book was written some 50 yrs ago. (I think I’m wrong about that, but honestly, who cares?) And I am sure if you google, you’ll find a million reviews. And it wasn’t all that great a book for a review. Just a very very weird book that left u feeling weird too. And ruined your language (which I am sure you can see in this review).

How did I get to the book? Well, I had heard of Salinger of course, but I never caught hold of his books. And last week I was reading this beautiful short story where the gal says she is reading him. And since it was vacation, I thought I’d do a google on him. I couldn’t find the books initially, of course. I mean, not free editions. But finally I did. And then I just started reading this afternoon. Its only 115 pages, so u can finish it in less than half a day. And it’s quite a fast read- what with ungrammatical language and very simply understandable stuff. But the funny thing is you don’t understand what’s happening till the end. And honestly, I thought I only liked the last two-three pages. But once I was done, I could get the whole point. And then suddenly, I knew I liked the book.

God, that sound pretty much like a post-script to “Catcher in the Rye”- same tone, I admit. And I’m sure u wouldn’t understand this post at all unless u read it right after the book. Anyway, what I got outta the book was- the problem of a guy who really didn’t fit into this so-called suave and sophisticated world. That’s really a good issue to write a book about. And the really wonderful thing is, if u asked an Indian to write a book about a guy that didn’t fit, he would make the protagonist a real weirdo. And he would exaggerate situations beyond despair. And in the end he would kill the hero or something. As if weird people can’t live on. Honestly, till I finished the book, I was half expecting the guy to die or something. Or I thought that they would put him in an asylum soon. It’s the thing with us, you know- Indians are so crazy about the system. They just wanna run the mad rat race, however mad it gets. And the worst part is, even when they want to laugh at the system they do it in such a stereotypical way, u get sick of it. Maybe we should name our capital “cliché”. It would suit the country.

Anyway, this book is quite humourous, if u get to understand the humour at all. And it’s also quite insightful. (I know our college MOC guys call anything from the HOD’s welcome addresses to the chairmen’s vote of thanks “insightful”, but this time I mean it!) And it got u thinking about the world- about how crazy it really is. And about the people who live life the way they want and not the way they have to (I know that phrase is another of those clichés, but I really couldn’t think up anything else, u know.) And come on, why do we all have to earn and smile at everyone we hate and be called cultured? THAT is the question the book asks. And a very good question. I could, of course, go about answering it, but that would make our discussion too long. Anyway, the point is that society creates these crazy rules that are really not necessary for us as individuals. And it is true that the world would be a mad place without those rules. But then it is probably a mad place anyway.

(Incidentally, I picked this quote today afternoon, and till now, I didn’t realize how much it fit the book I read. It says- “Society needs rules that are quite meaningless as individuals. For example, it doesn’t matter if a car goes on the right side of the road or the left. But when there are many cars it makes all the difference!”)

Then there was this thing about innocence- how a guy cannot remain innocent for too long in this world. In Salinger style, I should say “it killed me”. It is one of the few things I often wonder about- the fact that innocence is so terribly lost in this world. And it’s such a pity. But I am not too sure if we’ll all be happy if everyone retained their innocence as adults. We’d probably get tired of that too. Anyway, that was a beautiful thing about the book.
There is more, actually. Like how the guy uses decent language though it’s all colloquial. Take any book today and you find it full of filthy language. And this book wasn’t at all classical. It was very much American schoolish. But no obscenity. (Unless u think ‘bastard’ is an obscene word!) Or maybe even if he talks obscene stuff, they don’t sound bad! At least they didn’t get me disgusted.

And there is also this part about brother-sister relationships. It’s not the way they show it in our novels and movies, u know. U must have a younger sibling to know what it feels like. But every minute the Caulfield guy was admiring his sis, I knew exactly what he felt. Younger siblings can drive you crazy at times. (both positive and negative) And he had captured that feeling pretty well. Not sentimental or any sobby stuff. Just the fact of liking your sister or brother and having a great time with them.

Anyway, the book wasn’t a whiff of fresh air into your mind or anything poetic of that sort that reviewers usually say. Nor did it stir a storm of revolution into your heart. It just made u think about the world. Actually, I dunno. I’ll only say, try reading the book sometime. It may be worth it.

P.S.:- I just read (about ten minutes after first publishing this post) in wikipedia that this was one of the most challenged book etc. and that it has too much profanity, quite contrary to what I thought. But maybe there is so much more profanity in the world today. Another thing is that the book is supposed to be abt a guy who is "growing up". I leave you to read all those interpretations. I ve written exactly wat I thought about the book. If it is not the right interpretation, well, there is wiki neway! :)

A Review

(It is probably too late to write this review, as the movie was released quite a while ago. But I couldn’t resist the temptation of reviewing it; and doing a little advertising for the movie, just in case, someone didn’t watch it yet!)

It’s rare that you feel a sense of completion after you see a movie. I have always believed that the easiest way to judge a movie is to see what you feel once it is over. You know, there was ‘Sivaji’- which made you feel empty, ‘Dasavatharam’- that made you marvel at Kamal’s talents, ‘Mozhi’- that made you feel happy about life, that filled you with hope and told you that the world is a happy place, whatever our problems, ‘TZP’- which woke you to the world of children, and made you want to do something for them.

And there is this amazing movie I saw yesterday- (quite surprisingly, Hindi)- that filled me with energy. For one thing, the movie itself was racy, and had your adrenaline pumps working on overload. But not just that, when the movie was over, you were so overflowing with energy- you wanted to face a hundred new problems, meet them square in the face, and yes, you knew you could make a difference in this world. It was not just a feeling of completeness, but as if u refueled ur mind! It did not just rejuvenate you, it made you feel empowered! N yet, it did not have beautiful cars racing (unless you call police vans and yellow buses beautiful), or hot women running, or romance or dupatta-udne-wali songs. (It did have a pretty(?) gal on the run, and the angry young man hero but not really the masala type!) In fact, what made it a beautiful movie was the simplicity, and the genius in story telling…. O, I am sorry, I didn’t mention the name of the movie, did I? It was “A Wednesday”.

(Note: Please don’t read the review before watching the movie. It is too beautiful to be spoiled by knowing the plot beforehand! And as usual, the review may not make much sense if you haven’t seen it yet…)

When the movie began, since I had already read the review, I knew the basic storyline- that it is an encounter between Anupam Kher and Naseeruddin Shah, that it is a bomb scare etc. However, thankfully, I didn’t know the ending. And reading the review usually keeps me from getting caught (I mean, over engrossed) in the story and helps me to stand apart and look at the movie as a pure critic. However, in this case, I must say I lost to Neeraj Pandey. Though, initially I was trying to analyse each shot, it didn’t take long for the director to get me trapped, and he had me biting my fingernails in eager.

The beginning is not spectacular, and THAT is the beauty of this story. It starts off with a simple man walking into a police station and then climbing the stairs up an unfinished building with a bag of sabzi (the way he pays attention to details and picks that one tamatar that fell, as though it were the most important element of the story- man, do we have a great storyteller here!) The simplicity of Shah holds you on for a little while, (and the gag at the news creators of our media, is good), but these things can’t sustain your interest for long. And at the precise moment before which you might begin to lose interest, Shah sits in front of a table of gadgets (the changing sim part is pretty outdated) and makes that much awaited strategic phone call and the momentum picks up, what with Jai and Arif running behind men, and the police headquarters getting busy and before you know it, the race has begun. (I was regretting I didn’t have popcorn in my room, to add to the mazaa!)

Then it’s all running, and waiting for the next phone call, and I really don’t know how time flew. The scene about the hacker and reiterating the fact that the best equipment of the police is still outdated, fit. Of course, the cartoonist gimmick to figure his face is too old, they should have used a computer instead!! The video about a man who might be the mastermind behind the blasts is cleverly done, though the author could surely have come up with better tools to divert the spectator's attention!

But there were many instances that made me marvel. One being the depiction of Kher. He is the man in complete control of the situation, and in his decisions lie the fate of a city. But he doesn’t shout, no melodrama; only a subtle play of emotions, and knitted eyebrows! The other, of course, is Shah! He is brilliant, to say the least, though I am still not sure whether it is his acting or the role itself. But it takes some mettle to underplay and still convey. Besides, in the scenes where the city stands in his background, you can smell raw power. You think- this single man, unpretentious, quite ordinary, but as he sips tea, holds the power to blast an entire city. And all the action behind, the running, the police, the guns, the blood, the Ethernet cables, and the network trackers , all revolving around and being defeated by his brain! Beautiful…

Of course, the twist in the end is clever, and the (Shah’s) dialogue, very intelligent. But what stands out, even in such moments is the simplicity. We have seen so many of Shankar’s movies- all of them trying to tell us that the common man can and should question atrocities. However, there is so much drama built by Shankar, and so much hype and glitz that really masks the theme; and reduces the movie to one among many others. That, is where, “A Wednesday” stands out. Even Naseeruddin’s dialogue is not sophisticated. And his reasons are amazing. He is not fighting because his son dies in a blast. It is for some unknown stranger. Again, he doesn’t say it is for the society, it is for his own self. And the statements about ‘aam aadmi’ –wah!!

If you thought that was the end, hold on. There is more to appreciate this movie for. Though the movie is about violence, there is very less bloodshed. It is an action movie alright, but no unnecessary gore! Again, no unnecessary romance. No hero running behind heroine, and all that crap. N more importantly, the hero (which is definitely Shah and not Arif) is an old man wearing specs and carrying, with effort, a bag of vegetables. Makes me wonder if Hindi movies are really improving! Also, no unnecessary bad dialogues- most action movies use such vocabulary that you really wanna watch them muted. Of course, these things make the movie very serious. Not much of humour except the poor attempt at it, initially. But what the movie lacks for in glamour, it more than makes up for, in speed and storytelling.

Of course, there are a few plot glitches too- why Ibrahim Khan had to be shot by the police and didn’t have to die in the blast. If it is only to add spice, well, that was poorly done. Or worse, still, if it was to tell us that terrorists are not all that brave when they face death, how very farfetched! And the whole idea that anybody can make a hoax call and get away with it- is our police force THAT bad?? Surely, logic was seriously lacking there…

But I guess we should forgive the director for these minor errors, and applaud anyway…

N yes, last but never the least, it is a movie you can go watch with children (if such a breed still exists!). It might be a little too serious for them, but it surely does not have any vulgar or violent content. That is itself very commendable, as most Indian movies have lost the habit of being watchable with family. Most of the times, we are forced to accept whatever is shown and loosen our own norms of censorship, out of very less choice. And if nothing else, in that sense alone, “A Wednesday” is an amazing movie. Or in the words of the director- “Sahi ya galat- pata nahi; lekhin jo bhi tha, achcha tha!”

Summary:-
Movie: A Wednesday
Genre: Action
Director: Neeraj Pandey
Actors: Naseeruddin Shah, Anupam Kher, Naseeruddin Shah, Naseeruddin Shah, …
Story: One man has the whole Mumbai police force running on a bomb scare
Bottomline: Don’t miss it!!

(P.S:- If it sounds like I am only praising movies, I would like to tell you about “Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na”. I heard raving reviews of it, and it had done very well at the box office, so I quite expectantly wasted more than two hours on it. It was an ordeal to watch, and had me desperately wishing it would get over soon. The story was obvious, and the treatment poor, but the worst part was there was nothing to grip you. Nothing that touched you either. A poor attempt at cinema, for, even with a simple storyline and popular stars, the director was unable to use the medium effectively. Incidentally, the only part I liked there too was Shah, and his Rathod dialogues! Luckily, a few movies like “A Wednesday” relieve us of the burden, and make us feel hopeful about Indian cinema.)