Three Idiots and Five Point Someone

Twenty one years ago, when I watched QSQT, Aamir became an instant favorite. Jo Jeeta still remains one of my favorite movies. When he refused to accept the Filmfare award for Raja Hindustani, I “cheered” his decision. Then came Lagaan and “perfectionism” (I didn’t see it) and RDB and his blog… all of these convinced me that he is just as much flesh-and-blood, but with a holier-than-thou attitude that fooled me for almost eight years (Raja Hindustani to Lagaan).

Six months back, I considered Chetan Bhagat to be an idiot. I had read half his book. What I read did not impress me. Then I read some of his columns, and read a reply to his critics that he isn’t targeting the literary class, but folks who perhaps have read few English books. I read FPS and Two States. He had a story to tell and he told it in a fairly straightforward manner. And his prose was better than the drivel I manage to write. [A friend rightly commented that she disagreed with this stand for I am not the one writing novels]. I was hooked and bought rest of his novels. And then I read some more of his editorials. Well, suffice to say, I can’t remain a fan of a messiah for too long.

Two days back, I watched 3I. If one uses strict definitions of “adaptation” and “inspiration”, three idiots lies somewhere between the two. While FPS ends shortly after the three main characters graduate from IIT-D, 3I ends ten film-years and 45 minutes (approximate screen-time) later.

I think Chetan Bhagat made a big boo-boo when he signed-off all his rights for paltry eleven lakhs. Amit Varma is right on dot when he says that “It was silly on [film-maker’s] part not to [credit Bhagat at the start]—though the resultant publicity has done everyone involved a world of good.”

So, there was nothing legally wrong with what the film-maker’s did. Chetan Bhagat is also right in feeling let down. And I think the contrast that Vir Sanghvi draws between Slumdog and 3I is revealing:

It is no secret that Beaufoy’s script differed significantly from the book by Vikas Swarup on which Slumdog was based. But Beaufoy made it a point to thank Swarup on stage and to say that without his book there would be no screenplay, no movie, and no Oscars.

Later that same night Slumdog director Danny Boyle while accepting his own Oscar apologised to the choreographer Longinus, whose name had been left out of the end credits of Slumdog.

And here is a second image. [..]. When journos keep asking about the lack of recognition accorded to author Chetan Bhagat, on whose book the film is based, producer Vidhu Vinod Chopra stands up, points a finger at an inquisitive journalist and shouts ‘Shut up’.

[…]What is the difference between the two images?
I think one word sums it up: grace.

Question: What lessons are we teaching our youth through all this? Right-on Mr. Sanghvi, we definitely lack grace.

An IIT-M faculty bags the NASI-SCOPUS award

A colleague and a close friend of mine from our department, Prof. Tanmay Basak, has won the NASI-SCOPUS Young Scientist award.

Tanmay works in the areas of microwave processing, heat transfer and fluid dynamics. He is considered foremost authority on microwave driven flows and visualization of heat transfer through Bejan’s heat lines concept.

This is a great personal achievement for Tanmay and a proud moment for our institute. Also important is the context. Our department “loses out” to ICT-Mumbai, IIT-Kanpur, IISc and IIT-Bombay, in terms of faculty recruitment as well as graduate student hiring. In this respect, Tanmay’s achievement is especially commendable. Awards like this help both the recipient as well as the department.

“What an arsehole”

Via Pharyngula, a perfect punchline delivered at the last second:

Crossfire-like smackdown by BO

Barack Obama essentially smacked down the White-House Press Corps, much like Jon Stewart did in his Crossfire interview five years back:

Not one of them asked me about Asia. Not one of them asked me about the economy. I was asked several times about had I read Sarah Palin’s book. (Laughter.) True. But it’s an indication of how our political debate doesn’t match up with what we need to do and where we need to go.

Whether he was factually correct or not (he mostly was right), the incessant tabloid-like reporting in the media makes this comment resonate with people. This comment didn’t get as much press as the Crossfire smackdown by Stewart, but it sounds as true.

Of course, between American press and the Indian counterparts, I don’t know who is worse. No wonder my TV watching is limited to Pogo (and occasionally HBO).

Whats wrong with Indian left?

… so asks Rahul S.

My reply: Everything.

This is what you get when you let ideology get better of your judgments, rather than facts.

The Golden Gate from a downtown window

This week, Andrew Sullivan posted this beautiful view of the Golden Gate bridge from a home in San Francisco in his series “The View From Your Window.” I spent my last six months prior to returning to India in the Bay Area. One of the things we wanted to do was to rent a place in downtown SF, close to the bridge. But it was far too expensive and we settled on a drive-40-miles-each-weekend routine. The drive from the south Bay on I-280 itself was wonderful.

I sometimes miss that part of our stay in US.

Geeky jokes or not

We were just discussing what constitutes “geeky jokes.” Here is my opinion, based on the following examples:

Exhibit 1: “My fingers do not have cholesterol because I type too fast”.

Exhibit 2: “The meeting lasted for almost an hour. He just got caught in a limit cycle before reaching to the central point.”

The first example uses catchphrase or jargon such as “cholesterol” to sound, well, geeky. But the question is whether it is a geeky joke. Just because you throw in some jargon will not make it a geeky joke. It has to be a clever play on the words. The counter opinion presented in favor of it being a geeky joke is that it plays on the knowledge that regular exercise helps reduce cholesterol levels… and that my fingers get enough exercise. I think I will go with the latter.

The second example is definitely geeky. A point on a limit cycle would go around in a closed trajectory without leaving the trajectory. So, a seemingly never-ending discussion is kind of like a limit cycle.