I like Paul Newman. I am probably in the minority. I mean, who likes Paul Newman? Everybody liked the pretty-boy Robert Redfords. Who liked Paul Newman?
Do you want to know why I like Paul Newman? I'll tell you anyway.
I like Paul Newman because his face has character. He may or may not have any--I don't know--but his face does. For some reason, he seemed to pull off rather well parts that involved playing a little serious, a little lonely, a little dark and a little brooding character. It suited him. He remains one of my favorite actors.
Good movies to watch: The Sting, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, The Hustler, The Color of Money.
I was watching The Sting last night.
-
I sometimes go and idly look at the noisy, vast, labyrinthine spiderweb of the blogosphere. Some blogs are truly awe inspiring. A hundred li...
-
How fast are you moving right now? If you are reading this on your desktop computer, you might reply that you are not moving at all. If you ...
7 comments:
I also prefer Newman to Redford. From what I read about him, the chances are high that he has character (while Robert whispers to horses).
Where is your 'friend' Arthur? This would be the appropriate moment for him to chip in with comments on why Redford is far superior in every way.
J.A.P.
Yes, I read a brief biography of Paul Newman too. It appears that he is a decent man in real life.
Personally, it feels nice when things are actually as they seem. When I see something that behaves like the wrapper says it should, I try to make a note of it and keep it close. Because it is so rare.
And always so startling.
Apropos of nothing, there are not too many entries in that little-piece-of-shit notebook where I make the notes, and several entries have been erased in light of better data. That eraser has come in pretty handy over time. Strangely enough, I've been trying to get my own name included in that LPoS notebook, but without much success ... (Maybe I oughta try including it on a Saturday evening, after plenty of good, steady shots of 150-proof dark. That might do the trick.)
Where is my friend Arthur? Dunno. Trolling blogs that have big Trick-or-Treaters Welcome Here signs outside of them, would be an educated guess.
Hey, looks like Newman has more fans than we think... I like him too. Haven't watched The Sting though, is it in BlockBuster?
I recommend Layer Cake, a Brit gangster movie. Good humor but no gore. Okay, a little violence. but within the thresholds of watching in mixed company.. quite in the lines of Lock Stock and Snatch.. you'll get it in BB.
I want to see his "Road To Peridition". Any guess on what the hindi remakes of his movies are?. I recently saw "On the waterfront" and realised where our Aamir's Ghulam came from. dot to dot copy.
Btn Sougata, I read your thought provoking "thus-spake-pakistanis" post. obviously we have overlooked history, become coldhearted and brain dead over the years.
Kshitij
Babu:
Yup, you'll find The Sting in Blockbuster. Will watch Layer Cake as soon as I get a chance.
Speaking of Brit movies, I'm planning to see Trainspotting again.
North Country is a decent movie also.
Any good Hindi movies that anybody can recommend? Or is that asking for too much?
I'm not even going to bother asking for good Bengali movies. Those probably dried up a long time ago.
Anybody liked Aranyer Dinratri? Soumitra Chatterjee is the best. Young or old, doesn't matter. "Feluda" is immortal. He played an old schoolteacher in Atanka. I liked that movie.
Kshitij:
Road to Perdition is very, very good. I thought so at least. Tom Hanks obviously gets the lion's share though. And that's not a complaint. Great performance and an extremely good movie.
I would recommend watching
1. Rang De Basanti
2. Raincoat (director Rituparna Ghosh)
3. Black Friday (on Mumbai Blasts)
4. Hazaron Khwahishen Aisi (emergency years)
5. Ek Hasina Thi (slick thriller)
Few English movies I recently saw and liked (u have seen these already)
1. Requiem for a Dream
2. Being John Malkovich
3. Snatch
4. Memento
I posted some comments on the "Thus spake pakis". Let me know your comments, if possible.
Kshitij
Kshitij:
I've been meaning to see Rang De Basanti for some time now. Raincoat was nice -- loosely adapted from a short story called Gift of the Magi by O. Henry. Very nice movie.
I've yet to see Memento. Thanks for the suggestion. Will go and pick it up.
Re: Your first comment on "Thus Spake Pakistanis"
You are right of course. Indian schoolchildren are fed a sugarcoated version of Indian history. One standard explanation for this is that India has a sordid history and so it has to be taught this way. Well, in that case, why call it History? At best, it is a bastardized version of history; at worst, it is fiction. Why teach it at all, if we fear it is going to be so traumatic to the students? I personally have learnt more about my country's past from foreigners than from any Indian textbook. And that is something worth thinking about.
The saying goes that those who forget history are condemned to repeat it. The majority of Indians should be quite safe in that regard; you have to actually know your own damn history to forget it.
Re: Your second comment on "Thus Spake Pakistanis"
Even before we introduce "Go to War" as a viable move in the strategic game between India and Pakistan -- which by the way makes it a different game with its own set of moves -- let's consider the following.
The terrorism that Pakistan inflicts on India can be seen as a strategic game with a definite goal -- the goal being the weakening and eventual political collapse of India.
The Varanasi explosions, the Diwali blasts in Delhi, the Nadimarg killings, etc. are moves in this strategic game. Further, this game is a repeated game. Unlike players in a one-off game, players in a repeated game have to take feedback into account.
When Pakistan makes a "move", India has two immediate choices: do nothing (analogous to a prisoner keeping mum), OR inflict similar pain (analogous to one prisoner condemning the other).
What India does serves as feedback to Pakistan, who is the initiating player. Note that Pakistan also has the same choice of moves as India, i.e. do nothing OR inflict pain. What move Pakistan makes next is influenced by feedback from India.
In a non-simultaneous repeated game, the soundest strategy for the non-initiating player is to mimic the opponent's move. India, as far as I can tell, never does this. For example, an explosion in Varanasi is never followed by an explosion in Lahore. Pakistanis do not get to create a causal linkage between the terrorism that their government inflicts on India and the pain of being targets of terrorism themselves.
Why doesn't India play the game optimally? I have a theory.
Our government often reflects our own individual characters and motivations. This is not surprising since the people who make up our government are drawn from the underlying population. I have noticed that Indians, especially Hindus, have this strong need to be liked. To be considered nice and harmless and goody-goody. Similarly, our government, being a political projection of our desires and motivations, plays nice by Pakistan, even in the face of transgressions that other nations that we shall not name do not even dream of tolerating.
I personally have no desire to be liked. I don't give two fucks. And therefore, I personally do not want a government that tries to be nice; I want a government that tries to be effective. A nation state does not exist just so that it can send its bloody cricket team to the World Cup every four years. A nation state exists to fulfill one overarching goal: to guard the life, limb and interests of its citizens. If it cannot do this job with satisfaction, it might as well be dissolved.
India's foreign policy sucks. It has always sucked. The idea is simple: Foreign policy is a strategic game, not a cultural lovefest. I don't know how many Indians subscribe to this idea. Not many, would be a rough guess. Therefore neither does our government.
Post a Comment