'Playing Along' is supposed to be a comedy, rather, a satire on plays as such. It consists of two parts, one being a series of 'sketches' and the other being a complicated story of love, betrayal and murder.
The five sketches are almost completely borrowed from Rowan Atkinson. The director later admits, quite rightly, that they weren't even 10% as good as Atkinson. I hope he didn't think he was being modest.
The love story is really terrible. A married woman is having an affair, and gets caught when the husband comes home, with a detective he kept handy for the occasion. So the treacherous couple plan to bump off the husband, but some back-stabbing happens and we see various combinations of the four players claiming to be a couple (yes, there's a gay one even. As if to say using the G word makes something funny. Bloody kids). The acting was atrocious. Long silences, drawn out jokes, gut-wrenching expressions, pathetic dialogue delivery. 'I DHON'T think so!' 'Are YHOU Mmaaad?' '.... THE TRuT.' Egads.
Ironically somewhere in the middle the devil shows up, and claims to decide to make the play interesting (Ultimately, he lets me down) by forcing the 'actors' to screw up. Screw up they do, and how! I think he did this to cover up the lack of talent and professionalism the crew displayed. Come to think of it, maybe the bad script and action was a part of the intended satire. How very deep! I have misunderstood this play.
Still, the guy who played the devil was decent. Good acting and all. Yet no one was laughing at the jokes he kept belting out. Some wise souls left in the middle of the play. I would have too, except my friend had a friend who was a member of the cast. So I stuck around. Actually, at some points I was laughing uncontrollably at the play. So in the end I did land up doing what I went there for.
The play supposedly originated in NIT Trichy. Now, beside me was this couple from NITT, whom I know from the cul fest circuit, specifically word games. The girl was quite peeved at my reaction. Apparently even she was part of the drama club there, and was around when this play was written. I couldn't quite understand why of all the plays NITT decided to export it was this one, as it casts a very poor light on the drama there. This was an award-winning play too!
The best part is, I paid a 100 bucks for this shit! Some guys in my coll had put up a play, which I was part of, which was way more entertaining than this. The three main actors were terrific together (this obviously excludes me). So we could have put up the play and milked everyone for a couple of thousands together and had a gala weekend after. Sheesh.
These plays are beginning to be quite disappointing, and quite a rip-off. Hope something better pops up soon.
Sunday, May 27
Thursday, May 17
Adieu NITK
An entire chapter of my life has ended. Four years is an unbelievably long time, especially at my age.
Well, lots of people say it's been the best four years of their lives. Unfortunately I don't share that sentiment. I've had a lot of great times, met a lot of fine people, done a lot of interesting stuff. But on the whole, I didn't achieve what I went to NITK for. So I'll always look back upon it with a bit of disappointment.
Still, whats done is done, and with this short note, I move on from this moment, forever.
Well, lots of people say it's been the best four years of their lives. Unfortunately I don't share that sentiment. I've had a lot of great times, met a lot of fine people, done a lot of interesting stuff. But on the whole, I didn't achieve what I went to NITK for. So I'll always look back upon it with a bit of disappointment.
Still, whats done is done, and with this short note, I move on from this moment, forever.
Friday, April 13
I've been having a bad time with my project work. It's all about numerical methods and some dumb error keeps creeping in. Have no idea why.
In any case, Pigs (three different ones) is playing in the background, so my project isn't an issue right now. There's something very lovely about just listening to music. Not doing something and listening, just listening. Sadly, never have the time for that. Always something to do.
I haven't blogged in a while, and anyway whats been put up is more or less stuff no one is the least bit interested in. Oh well...
My friends have created a 'yo' scale. Apparently I score 0.04 Kanhe. 0 Kanhe is ultra-yo, and 1 Kanhe is non-yo. Kanhe is a the inventor of this scale. Or maybe they just named the unit after him. Whatever. Wonder how to increase my rating. I don't think working on my project is helping any. Sigh.
In any case, Pigs (three different ones) is playing in the background, so my project isn't an issue right now. There's something very lovely about just listening to music. Not doing something and listening, just listening. Sadly, never have the time for that. Always something to do.
I haven't blogged in a while, and anyway whats been put up is more or less stuff no one is the least bit interested in. Oh well...
My friends have created a 'yo' scale. Apparently I score 0.04 Kanhe. 0 Kanhe is ultra-yo, and 1 Kanhe is non-yo. Kanhe is a the inventor of this scale. Or maybe they just named the unit after him. Whatever. Wonder how to increase my rating. I don't think working on my project is helping any. Sigh.
Monday, April 2
Proud to be Down-to-Earth
Most people hate the so called 'yo' crowd. Yo people generally (try to) do everything with style. They are well dressed, wear only branded stuff, eat in expensive joints, and have their own transport.Which is all ok, really. They have an unnecessary accent and an attitude to boot. It is this attitude that ticks people off, since those who do not have the resources, or frame of mind, to be 'yo' get snubbed by the Yo.
There is, however, another type of crowd that I dislike. It is the (chauvinistic?) 'porikki' crowd. They revel in the fact that they are 'low level' and don't have any hang ups. They are proud that they are low level and willing to accept it. They think anyone who doesn't behave like them is being 'pseud' or 'yo'. Why I don't like them is because these so-called humble folks end up snubbing anyone who isn't like them. Does that behaviour ring a bell?
There is, however, another type of crowd that I dislike. It is the (chauvinistic?) 'porikki' crowd. They revel in the fact that they are 'low level' and don't have any hang ups. They are proud that they are low level and willing to accept it. They think anyone who doesn't behave like them is being 'pseud' or 'yo'. Why I don't like them is because these so-called humble folks end up snubbing anyone who isn't like them. Does that behaviour ring a bell?
Tuesday, March 27
State of Fear
I read the book a few days ago. I heard Crichton was speaking against the reality of Global Warming. I didn't like that, and read the book with a prejudiced mind. I'm surprised by a lot of what it has to say.
I am a pro-conservation kind of fellow. I reuse paper, minimize water usage etc. I can't call my life eco-friendly, but I do a bit here and there to be less wasteful. I used to believe strongly in Global Warming and even now I have a feeling that something's happening to the climate. The last few years have been hot, and the monsoons have behaved differently.
Now I'm not so sure about global warming. It may be happening, it may not be, I wouldn't know. The alarming thing, which Crichton has shown, is the manner in which Global Warming has been promoted/supported by sections of the scientific community and environmentalists. While State of Fear hasn't really dispelled my fears of climate change ahead, it has shaken my faith in environmentalists, who seem to have spread incomplete information.
Did you think that the polar ice caps are going to melt becasue of us? That the sea level is rising? That more CO2 means more temperature? That warmer climates will promote disease? That we need to and are competent enough to preserve forests? That the temperatures in a city are governed by many local factors and not solely dependant on the regional climate? Look for a report titled "Nine Lies about Global Warming" released by the Lavoisier Group.
The Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change released a report for policy makers around Feb 2007.
The things I noted about the report:
They state clearly (in a footnote, by the way) that according to the IPCC, climate change refers to the changes due to natural as well as human activities, not just direct or indirectly human activities, which was the old convention. I think this is because it has become hard to isolate climate change due to man, but they won't tell you that in a hurry.
The report gives pictures of the map of the world with regions coloured depending on the likely rise in temperature. At a minimum the arctic would be 4 degrees warmer by 2090, and at worst 7 degrees. The interesting thing to note is that the two maps are very similar, only that regions coloured 2 degrees previously are now coloured 4 and so on. When scientists predict that 2 degrees can trigger huge climate changes, how can I accept that the difference in the two projections is only the magnitude of temperature change? Completely new patterns should emerge, two different regions marked orange need not both become red. For God's sake, the atmosphere is not a linear model!! I know this much at least. My point is that the projection doesn't seem to be based on any realistic model of the Earth's climate, so how can it be presented as reliable data?
I still believe that we should cut down on greenhouse gas emissions. We are definitely modifying the composition of the air, and the atmosphere being chaotic, we cannot predict what the outcome will be. It may become hard to live in, it may not change much. It may bring drastic changes to Europe and S. America, but not really affect Indonesia. Who knows?
I also believe that people who use lies to pursue an agenda, should not be allowed to get away with it. Some environmentalists are not your average NatGeo scientist in khadis out in the middle of some desert. They are globe-trotters who ensure that they are paid well. Very little of the money that such NGOs receive is used in useful activities. A large chunk is spent maintaining the NGO, never mind its activities.
Many of us cannot do much to change the way the world works. However, some of us may lend support to various causes. I feel we should choose our causes from a position of knowledge, and not based on hype and propaganda.
I'd also recommend we take a relook at how we collect our information. The existing media have time and again proven to be sensationalist, trivial and inaccurate.
Who knows, the threat of global warming may be real and our climate is about to change for the worse. But find out for yourself.
I am a pro-conservation kind of fellow. I reuse paper, minimize water usage etc. I can't call my life eco-friendly, but I do a bit here and there to be less wasteful. I used to believe strongly in Global Warming and even now I have a feeling that something's happening to the climate. The last few years have been hot, and the monsoons have behaved differently.
Now I'm not so sure about global warming. It may be happening, it may not be, I wouldn't know. The alarming thing, which Crichton has shown, is the manner in which Global Warming has been promoted/supported by sections of the scientific community and environmentalists. While State of Fear hasn't really dispelled my fears of climate change ahead, it has shaken my faith in environmentalists, who seem to have spread incomplete information.
Did you think that the polar ice caps are going to melt becasue of us? That the sea level is rising? That more CO2 means more temperature? That warmer climates will promote disease? That we need to and are competent enough to preserve forests? That the temperatures in a city are governed by many local factors and not solely dependant on the regional climate? Look for a report titled "Nine Lies about Global Warming" released by the Lavoisier Group.
The Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change released a report for policy makers around Feb 2007.
The things I noted about the report:
They state clearly (in a footnote, by the way) that according to the IPCC, climate change refers to the changes due to natural as well as human activities, not just direct or indirectly human activities, which was the old convention. I think this is because it has become hard to isolate climate change due to man, but they won't tell you that in a hurry.
The report gives pictures of the map of the world with regions coloured depending on the likely rise in temperature. At a minimum the arctic would be 4 degrees warmer by 2090, and at worst 7 degrees. The interesting thing to note is that the two maps are very similar, only that regions coloured 2 degrees previously are now coloured 4 and so on. When scientists predict that 2 degrees can trigger huge climate changes, how can I accept that the difference in the two projections is only the magnitude of temperature change? Completely new patterns should emerge, two different regions marked orange need not both become red. For God's sake, the atmosphere is not a linear model!! I know this much at least. My point is that the projection doesn't seem to be based on any realistic model of the Earth's climate, so how can it be presented as reliable data?
I still believe that we should cut down on greenhouse gas emissions. We are definitely modifying the composition of the air, and the atmosphere being chaotic, we cannot predict what the outcome will be. It may become hard to live in, it may not change much. It may bring drastic changes to Europe and S. America, but not really affect Indonesia. Who knows?
I also believe that people who use lies to pursue an agenda, should not be allowed to get away with it. Some environmentalists are not your average NatGeo scientist in khadis out in the middle of some desert. They are globe-trotters who ensure that they are paid well. Very little of the money that such NGOs receive is used in useful activities. A large chunk is spent maintaining the NGO, never mind its activities.
Many of us cannot do much to change the way the world works. However, some of us may lend support to various causes. I feel we should choose our causes from a position of knowledge, and not based on hype and propaganda.
I'd also recommend we take a relook at how we collect our information. The existing media have time and again proven to be sensationalist, trivial and inaccurate.
Who knows, the threat of global warming may be real and our climate is about to change for the worse. But find out for yourself.
Sunday, February 11
Good Morning
It's been a good morning. Got up early, checked my mail. The internet is pretty quick early in the mornings. Then I go for a jog, stretch and do a bit of exercise. Caught the morning sun a bit, nice and red.
Get back, listen to music, have a bath. After feeling nice and clean, I go down to the mess for breakfast. Come back up, listen to some more music, try the crossword, Sudoku and in general read a few bits and pieces of the news.
It's been quite some time since I had a lazy Sunday morning like this. Feels great. Rooms clean, heads clear and moods up :).
Get back, listen to music, have a bath. After feeling nice and clean, I go down to the mess for breakfast. Come back up, listen to some more music, try the crossword, Sudoku and in general read a few bits and pieces of the news.
It's been quite some time since I had a lazy Sunday morning like this. Feels great. Rooms clean, heads clear and moods up :).
Meet Joe Black
Actually, don't. This is quite a bad movie. The director includes scenes whose outcomes are pretty obvious, yet draws it out in an attempt at suspense and 'keeping us on the edge of our seats'. However, the audience is probably getting up all together.
There's that scene where two people meet, are interested in each other, but somehow choose to go on their separate ways. Not without turning back to see if the other is looking. So most movies do it once. They do it FOUR agonizing times.
This takes a good thirty or so minutes. Then finally we learn that Death has taken over the guy's (Brad Pitt) body and is going to meet the girl's (Susan)(Claire Forlani) father Mr. Parish (Sir Anthony Hopkins), as its his time to go. However, Mr. Parish is supposed to be Death's tour guide, and the former will live as long as he manages to keep Death interested in the world.
Plot spoiler
Still, read on :)
So the rest of the plot is how Death meddle's in Parish's affairs, and falls in love with Susan. Death falling in love. What a concept! Finally Death wants to take her with him, and there are some aphorisms peppered throughout the movie, and Parish even says that Death has become a good man, and such stuff. Finally Death takes Parish.
A good thing might be Claire Forlani's presence, but her acting is the same as in all her other movies. This calm, sensitive woman, who seems a tad bit troubled.
This movie last three hours. And it should have lasted about one. Hmmmm. Of course, if you like slow,stretched romantic/meaning-of-life stuff then you probably shouldn't mind me. :)
There's that scene where two people meet, are interested in each other, but somehow choose to go on their separate ways. Not without turning back to see if the other is looking. So most movies do it once. They do it FOUR agonizing times.
This takes a good thirty or so minutes. Then finally we learn that Death has taken over the guy's (Brad Pitt) body and is going to meet the girl's (Susan)(Claire Forlani) father Mr. Parish (Sir Anthony Hopkins), as its his time to go. However, Mr. Parish is supposed to be Death's tour guide, and the former will live as long as he manages to keep Death interested in the world.
Plot spoiler
Still, read on :)
So the rest of the plot is how Death meddle's in Parish's affairs, and falls in love with Susan. Death falling in love. What a concept! Finally Death wants to take her with him, and there are some aphorisms peppered throughout the movie, and Parish even says that Death has become a good man, and such stuff. Finally Death takes Parish.
A good thing might be Claire Forlani's presence, but her acting is the same as in all her other movies. This calm, sensitive woman, who seems a tad bit troubled.
This movie last three hours. And it should have lasted about one. Hmmmm. Of course, if you like slow,stretched romantic/meaning-of-life stuff then you probably shouldn't mind me. :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
