I try to say a lot while saying very little. Get used to it.
Posts tagged views
my problem with hindi movies today
Feb 16th
Posted by SEV in staying.reviews
There have been any number of reviews about the latest from the Bollywood stable (My Name is Khan) – ranging from vitriolic to sarcastic/mocking to adulatory.
I could write reams, spew abuse galore, and point out in how many different ways the movie gets it wrong… but I won’t. That’s too easy. Plus, people have already done a pretty good job of that. Quite simply, MNIK suffers from the problem that Hindi cinema has been suffering from for a long time. No, not the fact that SRK is in it, or that KJo is directing it… it simply takes itself too seriously.
You can make movies that are obviously escapist, sheer fantasy – and I’m willing to accept it. For example (just off the top of my head), Krrish and Om Shanti Om get this formula close to right. Then you have the movies that are more realistic (and ergo, more intelligent) – for e.g. Luck By Chance, Dev D. Then of course, the “off-beat” - Kaminey, Rocket Singh – they take advantage of it being “cinema”, but don’t push the envelope to the extent that you cannot accept what is going on. Penultimately, the completely unwatchable - Yuvvraaj, Love Story 2050. Finally, the awesome - Gunda. Obviously, you can choose to segregate movies differently, but this kind of classification can work for most movies in most languages.
Why all this background? Movies that belong to one class, but slowly devolve into a second class end up being neither here nor there. And lead to vitriol galore.
I went into 3 Idiots expecting an intelligent comedy. Within about 5 minutes, I settled back into “escapist comedy” mode. It’s not meant to be taken seriously. It’s sheer fun (note here that I think that people who thought 3 Idiots was “silly” were committing the other cardinal mistake: they were taking the movie too seriously). Ishqiya lived up to my expectations of intelligence. Chance Pe Dance lived up to my expectations to being nearly unwatchable. MNIK starts with merely wanting to be intelligent, then flip-flops between fantasy and unwatchable… resulting in something you eventually await the end of.
The premise starts out simply enough. A certain amount of realism is injected (not a lot, but a certain amount anyway). Soon enough though, things start to crash and burn as KJo starts to struggle to continue {acting/directing/writing} intelligently. He starts pandering to cliches galore. But powerful acting from that Tanay kid redeems some of it. Some silly explanations are given (which have been pointed out elsewhere) – to keep the story moving. The movie is sagging but expected chemistry between SRK and Kajol makes the cheesy romance work, but just barely. Sequences start appearing unwittingly funny as the movie traipses along (losing its plot) – quite simply the sequences are there for no reason at all. Back to getting things vaguely on track as pathos is injected for different reasons (9/11, death etc.). Until this point, I was willing to concede a vague amount of credit – and would have just talked about how KJo could have snipped a bit here and there and come up with a much better movie. Not hugely more watchable, but better.
However, MNIK then drags for another unforgivable 45 minutes which ensure that no sane person can really watch this movie and come out liking it. Or any of its very loudly advertised messages.
Back to my point. Making Hindi movies intelligent may not be the best thing – a large majority may end up never really watching it (case in point, Luck By Chance). But when you have a real box office draw in your movie, I thin KJo could have risked making it more intelligent: SRK’s draw would have overcome. Making a silly Hindi movie and then justifying it as “Hindi movies, ergo they can be stupid” is unforgivable.
Finally, the second biggest problem with this particular movie, and Hindi cinema today in general. SRK. The man gets on your nerves within 60 minutes of the movie. Why? He’s been on screen non-stop for 55 goddamn minutes. Continues to be so for the next 85 minutes (even Kamal Haasan has to wear different get-ups to justify such screen time). In the process, his performance goes from being barely interesting to highly irritating (never better illustrated than by the Mrs initially righteously justifying to me why his Aspergers’ must go undiagnosed for so long… and finally getting to the point where she gleefully applauded the fact that he might die near the end of the movie). He gets to pander to his Superman complex – he goes from being unable to verbalize anything properly to saving a goddamn town while being interviewed on national television (hey, if Aamir can deliver a baby in a storm.. SRK can..). In his big sentimental speech, he doesn’t even do a Hindi voice-over for a speech that should obviously have been given in English (SRK re-dub SRK? Are you crazy?) Hell, he even has Barack come back to meet him personally.
Hindi movie-makers really need to decide what they want to do with their movies – and stick to a single plan. You can’t really do everything in every single movie. SRK really needs to find himself some new directors. All the ones he works with (Chopra, Johar, Farah) currently seem to want him to do one ridiculous ham-heavy impersonation in the name of acting – and seem happy to call it “amazing”.
I really need to stop analyzing everything I watch so much. It’s not worth the effort. Oh well.
notes: what should be the real plan for the chrome os?
Nov 21st
Posted by SEV in staying.interested
The world has been talking about the Google Chrome OS. We have people saying ‘next big huge thing‘, and obviously, ‘next big huge steaming pile of crap‘.
Me, personally? I haven’t, and still don’t like the idea of Google having a browser on the market – it reeks too much of a company trying to ensure that they take over every part of the Internet (their proposing SPDY, which will best work in Chrome does not help matters). There have been a series of posts recently dealing with different facets of this particular takeover: the oncoming war, google’s war-winning strategy (+counter-point). The Chrome OS spells the onset of Google really taking the war to the big guys – M$, Apple, – and trying to ensure they have control at the level of OS.
Can it really succeed?
Dicey. Google has shown that even a relatively small move like releasing their own GPS (GPS software is just one step away from hardware, given phones today) really stuck it to the competition, as innumerable charts of stock prices have shown. On the flip side, that is a very specific market. Besides how much can an OS that is specific to one particular hardware set, has no storage except on the cloud, and no real UI really do? I do believe in cloud computing in a big way. As a backup. I doubt users really trust the cloud today. Even the generation that is growing up with Gmail and Google Docs being a reality from Day One (as opposed to us/me, the generation that saw the Internet take off 
), still does not live online. There is an offline component because the world is not online 24×7. Though the proliferation of smart-phones is changing that drastically, the world cannot do everything online just yet. I don’t think that can happen for a long long time to come. We still need our computers/laptops/notebooks – the thin client is a loooong way away - and in that sense, Google’s OS is doomed to failure in today’s world, even though it is visionary in heralding a pure cloud-based era.
), still does not live online. There is an offline component because the world is not online 24×7. Though the proliferation of smart-phones is changing that drastically, the world cannot do everything online just yet. I don’t think that can happen for a long long time to come. We still need our computers/laptops/notebooks – the thin client is a loooong way away - and in that sense, Google’s OS is doomed to failure in today’s world, even though it is visionary in heralding a pure cloud-based era.
What can the Chrome OS really achieve then? As Scoble pointed out, there is the “dumb device” market that need not do much more than access recipes (even if his estimate of $1000 is a bit off as a good price). Which can also be occupied by E-Readers like the Kindle, Nook and what have you. The Nook runs Android, meaning Chrome OS will then fight a losing battle against another Google product (anyone else smell monopoly?). Android is far far more extensible than Chrome can ever be, so that battle is lost before it begins.
There is one other market that struck me today as being perfect for the Chrome OS. The flash-based quickstart (or the pre-boot) OS. We have such things existing today in every single laptop, where at the press of a button you have a media center/web browser accessible within 7-10 seconds. As opposed to resume/start-up times of >30 seconds fore Windows 7 and Mac OS X [cat's name]. Its a tiny tiny margin that people don’t really care about – and so we don’t bother ever pressing that button. 2 reasons. OS media centers along with OS functionality is something people don’t mind waiting for – rather than have quick access to something crippled. Plus whatever browser/media player they offer is way way below par of anything usable. (Seriously. Have you tried any of them?).
What are the Chrome OS specs? Start-up time of 7-10 seconds. Browser available with Internet connectivity at the end of that. Easy access to Gmail, Docs, Lala, Hulu – essentially all the web apps. Basic media player functionality probably there in some manner (web-based or actual app unknown). No storage. Every single one of which fulfills all the requirements of a pre-boot OS. If we really are to hit that quickstart button on a laptop, most of us want to do one of 2 things properly: (1) quick access to personal e-mail, (2) media playback. Yes, in that order. Work cannot be something I do in a pre-boot. Chrome is a pretty decent browser, steadily gaining in features and speed (while ballooning in memory – just like Fx used to be). Infinitely better than the trash in pre-boots. And there are enough open-source media players out there to integrate into Chrome OS too. It all comes together perfectly.
Give up on the damn specific notebooks specifically pre-configured for Chrome OS and nothing else, Google. You have tie-ups with Dell, HP, Acer and so on to pre-install Chrome, Google Desktop etcetera. Tie-up for the pre-boot as well. Will users press that button? You have the hype already, work on that. There are definitely some curiosity presses of the quickstart button that will happen. It is near impossible to make an actual OS start up in the time-frame you are pushing for. Too many things to load up. There lies the killer move of this strategy: do NOT make Chrome able to do every single tiny thing. Read USB, Internet access, media. Thassit. That’s the basic stuff that you want people to use you for. Nothing more. You’re never going to be able to replace M$ or Apple. Ever. Plus you’re fighting with them on every other front anyway. But you can undercut them perfectly. And it’s a market they are not going to touch for a long time to come. Think of it this way: even if people use Chrome OS once or twice a week, that’s still a level of access that you don’t have today.
But is that enough?
Update: As Raghu pointed out below, there is a chance that the Chrome OS will merge with Android, in which case above strategy might still help them get a foothold in a market that they have no standing in. Additionally, a very in-depth look at the Chrome OS by Thurrott, a guy who is a big proponent of the cloud, and is actually already using it via Amazon.
notes: is the zune HD not awesome at all?
Sep 28th
Posted by SEV in staying.interested
[opinion due to : Betanews - Zune HD: The best portable media player you may never buy ]
Like many other reviews have done before him, the author demonstrates real love for the Zune HD. He also stresses limitations – both artificial and real – which apparently translate to it being the device that nobody will ever find utility for. This is a tack that a lot of people have taken when it comes to this device. I completely disagree.
The usual comparison is to the iPod Touch – which I think the HD was never a competitor for. The Touch focuses on gaming, apps, browsing – basically every single thing other than portable media playback. Speaking of which, most reviews are not terribly positive of the Touch’s media capabilities anyway. So if a player is launched with none of the above features, but with brilliant media capabilities – does it really become useless? So I can’t browse YT, I can’t perfectly sync my XBox with my HD, I can’t play a million-plus games. But wait, how far away are getting such features really? Mere firmware updates? Mere downloads? More importantly: are they really necessary for a PMP to be good at what it does? How often am I going to check email/sites on a PMP (which has only WiFi access – just like the Touch)? It is a misconception that if a player is sleek, big and touch-enabled it must be perfectly usable for browsing/internet. That is just wrong. That’s what smartphones/tablets/laptops are for. The Zune HD represents the true evolution of what media players are going to become – done well. Even considering Apple – why else would tech-blogs call for the retirement of the iPod classic, and an increase in storage for the iPod Touch?
I think when it comes to the Zune HD, M$ has just targeted a different market. To my knowledge the author is one of the few people who actually uses a Nokia N-series in the US – meaning he is actually conversant with the term: “true device integration”. For those who have simple phones and don’t know about integration (yes, lots of such people still exist, and especially so in the States) – the Zune HD offers a pretty awesome option. It is affordable, looks/feels beautiful, and has a very viable ecosystem which I am now convinced is a much better alternative to Apple’s. The large global market that M$ is not offering the Zune in currently – these are also places where the majority of the users have moved to device integration. I am not sure if a limited release is a bad thing necessarily; by the time it goes global it has a lot of chinks ironed out, lots of positive karma, more integration with M$ products etc. Even in device integrated markets, the Zune HD will then have an edge.
And remember M$ is in the process of opening stores. How long do you think people are going to go without knowing all about the HD? Before M$ makes it even easier for you to do everything in your home completely integrated with M$ products?
Not long at all.
Now if only some reviews would turn up that tell me more about the media capabilities of the player – audio quality, video fidelity etc. Funny how reviews of this PMP have not talked about that all.
notes: copyrights and comics
Sep 23rd
Posted by SEV in staying.interested
[Thoughts due to: io9: Who Created Spider-Man? ]
It is a deal-breaking case that has been filed against Marvel Comics, probably fueled by the recent success of Siegel vs DC for the Superman copyright (and the acquisition of Marvel by Disney too?). My own WTF was fueled by whether Spidey even belongs to this dispute (he probably doesn’t). The Superman case in itself is not completely without wtf-ness given the way the rights to Superman have been split up [link]:
…the Siegels have recaptured the rights to the first two weeks of the daily Superman newspaper strips, and portions of Action Comics and Superman comics. They apparently now control all depictions of Superman’s origin story, which means they now own Krypton, its fiery destruction, Jor-El and Lora, and Kal El. In 2008, the Siegels recaptured the rights to the Superman character (which includes his costume and his alter-ego of Clark Kent), Lois Lane, the Daily Planet, its gruff editor, and their love triangle. DC still owns Jimmy Olson, his ability to fly, Lex Luthor, kryptonite, and Superman’s expanded powers and origins.
Plus ALL rights revert to Siegel/Shuster (?) come 2013. Keep in mind this ruling is in spite of multiple previous rulings that the DC owned the rights to the character, and the fact that the creators had actually legally signed away the rights for $130 in 1938 “forever and all time”. Plus multiple previous not-so-small settlements by DC to the creators due to legal disputes. Admittedly I’m taking a simplified view of things, there are deep implications to the settlement.
The Kirby case, on the other hand, is a lot more wide-ranging for Marvel. Kirby worked on almost ALL Marvel’s characters (unlike the above case which is just about Superman). The dispute is over the copyrights and not trademarks, so the movies may remain unaffected (meaning the large majority won’t really care), but the comics may be significantly hit. One interesting point is that the original Kirby dispute was to do with his artwork – he never did get back all his original artwork from Marvel. Very little is said about who owns the character work he did (unlike Siegel who definitely signed his away).
Another thing that jumped out at me was that Kirby did not want to battle it out in court over copyrights. And now, suddenly, cases are being filed all over the place. I’m not really sure what the justification is when the original creator had no wish to do so. Would Kirby’s work be worth anything if Marvel did not publish/market it? Remember that Kirby has been paid for his work, has creator credit in most cases, and all this copyright business was nowhere even a year ago – when Marvel’s properties were just hitting the market. The timing for the case is impeccable given the Marvel movie roster and the acquisition.
Filing cases against the biggest players in the business is a routine matter now – maximum damage is guaranteed. For e.g. M$ has had issues with integrated browser and desktop search – even though Apple/Linux installs have the exact same strategy today! I agree that Marvel/DC may have shortchanged creators, but they must also be given credit for making their characters successful in multiple arenas. Worse of all, targeting their copyrights will first affect the fan-base that makes the movies possible – us comic book geeks. Why? We won’t get the characters we have supported any more. Is that really what their creators would like to see of their legacy?
My new series of posts via Reader. As promised. You’ve been warned.
what do i really believe in?
Aug 25th
Posted by SEV in staying.in.my.head
When it comes to religion, a lack of knowledge about the unknown has meant that I have come to classify myself as a sort of agnostic (as opposed to atheistic), but if you were to argue with me about God and rituals you’ll find I’m mostly just apathetic. I have been known to do rituals simply because they need to be done: it matters little to me that they are done at all; I can do them because they matter to others. My ‘religious beliefs’ are thus dynamic enough to be classified by more than one person as mere hypocrisy.
How and why I lost the absolute faith that characterized most of my childhood – I don’t know. Sometimes these things happen. A loss of faith (or a lack of understanding) in what rituals signify eventually means that religion itself starts to seem very arbitrary. Merely performing the rituals did not prove much to me, and not performing them made it that much harder to hold onto what faith I had left. Eventually, normal absolutes such as a religious basis for God became superficial.
Recently, however, events have happened to make me question my own agnosticism. There was this year’s avani avittam (related post still in progress), and the associated realization that the real depths of religion can only be understood by accepting everything about it completely. Hoping that faith is rejuvenated based on doing one set of rituals a year (no matter how sincerely) is not really doing much at all – indeed, it can seem hypocritical (as I’ve pointed out). Giving a way of life a real chance is the only way it can have a real effect. On the flip-side, my current apathy is based on the fact that blind faith does not hold up in my own scrutiny. Doing something just once a year for the sake of faith and assuming that the reason to do it will be found – and then finding none – has killed a lot of my faith. As cliched as it may sound, I need a reason better than ‘blind faith’ to accept religion completely again.
A second event, more recent, brought home to me the fact that all events are generally explained in one of a few ways: (1) a game of chance, (2) a series of pre-ordained events, (3) logical steps which led to a logical conclusion. However, the results of such events (whether fortunate or unfortunate) can defy any such explanation.
We can blame a mysterious ‘luck factor’ for the result – this effectively means we can only control so much of our own actions (for e.g. “Life is 99% effort, 1% luck” and so on). Alternatively we can explain it as the demonstration of a Higher Power, which also in a way curtails the limits of our own actions.
I tend to side with the former explanation. My logic runs thus: if my best efforts are put in,there is a high chance that luck favors me. Now, how is this different from believing in God? All too often, not getting what we want means we automatically deem ourselves undeserving. Or we conclude we didn’t ‘do enough for God’. And at this point I get pissed off, as I see this as escapism – you don’t want to take responsibility for your actions (or inactions). Conversely, getting what we want is attributed to God, and not enough credit is given to what we have personally done – a different kind of escapism. Not having an entity to blame it on seems to prevent this sort of escapism.
After this last event (yes, this so-called ‘event’ was not a good thing – and no, I don’t want to go into details right now), things have gotten murky. Luck favored me in one way, but not to the extent that the event did not happen at all. To my knowledge, I did everything I was supposed to do. It is not the first time that such an event has happened. In the earlier event, I could see a clear link between my own actions and the result. I can’t now. All I can see is that my so-called ‘luck factor’ has favored me in similar ways in both situations. Which somehow goes against the spirit of my rationalization.
It would be amazing to say that this last event has changed my life, more so when I take it in conjunction with what I realized during avani avittam this year. But I hate doing things the easy way. I really want start believing in God completely, forget all the ‘Higher-Power-is-only-possible’ crap, and somehow rediscover my latent faith. I can’t rationalize this course of action easily though. It seems as though I am trying to believe something just because I got lucky twice. Like I’m condoning every cliche in the book by letting one event change my life.
Starting from blind faith, I explored to the best of my ability what it really meant to me. It meant I rationally chose the path of agnosticism – I want to now rationally find a way to theism.
p.s. It is possible that all my arguments are not perfect, and I know they can seem hypocritical to a fault. It is possible I have not analyzed/presented this as best possible. Indulgence and understanding is appreciated, and debate is encouraged.
frustration, irritation and everything in between
Mar 3rd
Posted by SEV in staying.thoughts
Quoted from this article:
James Otis, the owner of the Mahatma’s items, told PTI he plans to donate most of the money collected from the auction to “worthy causes” and institutions and groups working to promote Mahatma’s ideals especially non violence.
Otis said he will “donate the items to the Indian government free if it decides to spend five per cent of GDP on the poor, who were very near to the heart of Gandhi, or announces some other scheme which would benefit them”.
See, we in India, we have no idea what to do with all the poor people we have. We don’t really need infrastructure, what we do need is handouts for all those people who have no money. If not for the awesome Mr. Otis, collector extraordinaire, we would not have known that we were supposed to help these guys. We would be busy getting rid of them.. somehow. Forget roads, schools, hospitals, and other such useless projects. Gandhi would have been ecstatic to know we were just giving them the money. Would’ve gladdened his heart to see his stuff has been hoarded by some American who got to show them off to his friends, and then decided to “give” them back to the country they should have been with in the first place.
What are these items of extreme value?
He is the owner of the five articles glasses, sandals, pocket-watch, plate and bowl which Antiquorum Inc will put under the hammer shortly. For all the efforts to track down the origin of belongings – from descendants of Junagadh Nawab, Abha Gandhi and a British army officer – it now appears that they had sold these articles to Otis several years ago. [Link]
Ah. How, I wonder? Therein lies murk. Allegations of a conspiracy by the Indian/US governments to stop the auction by any means necessary, as well as talk of asking NRIs to buy them for the country. In case you want to, please use the email address he has set up.
If he’s really that selfless, why not just give them back directly?
*********************
Supposedly, this attack was an Indian conspiracy. Stand-out statements include :
“We are not blaming anybody or holding anybody responsible like India did,” Taseer said.
and then,
“It’s all too obvious that it is the handiwork of the Indian intelligence,” retired general Hamid Gul said.
and to conclude,
A Pakistani minister also pointed directly at India. “The evidence we have shows these terrorists entered from across the border from India,” Sardar Nabil Ahmed Gabol, Minister of State for Shipping, told Geo TV. “This incident took place in reaction to 26/11,” he alleged. “It is a declaration of open war on Pakistan by India,” the minister, from the Pakistan Peoples Party, claimed.
They won’t blame anyone, and they are more than willing to conclude that it is India by default. I propose a theory that it was a training run for LeT/IM terrorists.
According to newsreports – these guys missed the bus more than once with rockets as well as grenades. Finally they went with the tried and tested formula of bullets. Finally, there is also the fact that they escaped. After a firefight with security personnel, the attackers retaliated while retreating into a shopping area. The police arrived, and mysteriously, everyone had disappeared.
Journalists were shown weapons found at the scene and at other locations, including 10 AK-47 rifles, two rocket grenade launchers, 32 hand-grenades and plastic explosives. [Link]
Whoa. That’s a lot of weaponry. But with novices you’d want backups for backups I guess.
Countries continually withdraw from Pakistan citing safety issues. How long is it going to be before it is labeled a terror state and treated as such? 20 years ago SA was boycotted for apartheid. I’m sincerely hoping similar treatment is meted out to a country that is ensuring something far far worse survives in this century.
