Scribblings

One of the things I do and do quite often is watch and read about movies. So naturally I have my favorite columnists (Roger Ebert and Richard Roeper) and web sites (Rotten Tomatoes) I visit quite often. I always felt that movie reviewing is a tricky business but what’s more complicated is to figure out the movies would like; so I wanted to write about how you go about deciding which movies you would want to see and which to avoid.

Since all of us don’t share the same psyche, our liking and choices differ. That movie which worked for me might not for you. Example, I personally think Pulp fiction is the greatest movie ever made, you might certainly disagree and you might not be wrong. Even though RT or another site of sorts can give you the general opinion about a movie it’s up to you to dig out those gems. Basically, you would know what arouses your attention and what moves you, you would have genre and actors you fancy and the ones with “no-no” on any cost.

I’ll give you few examples to illustrate this better. Take “Knowing” for example, RT hated it but my fav reviewer Roger Ebert loved it (Four out of four stars). What do I do? Now ask yourself why these people liked it or hated it. Then you get an idea. For me, I’m not a big fan of Nicholas Cage, and just saw Bankbook Dangerous and hated it, and with no gorgeous heroine in tow, I knew this is not for me. But take movies like fast and furious or the recent Funny People, I absolutely don’t care what others think. I waited for them all year and nothing is going to stop me.

This neatly brings us to another category, the movies you really expect and hope to deliver, like “Year One”. I love Michael Cera. And Jack Black recent outings weren’t that bad either. Tropic Thunder was a blast but can hardly call it his movie. But I was really impressed with him in Holiday. Then the reviews for “Year One” were a disaster and knowing Black (when he is off track he can be ‘stinking’ bad). I stayed clear, though might catch it on DVD. Roger Ebert thought this might be a movie about Adam and Eve (Cera is drag, ha).

Then there are the critically acclaimed “Limited release” movies. By limited release, the movie was made by people possessed by an idea and they live by it. It’s obvious then that most of these movies are well received. But I’m generally skeptical about these, again the trick is to find a reviewer who mostly shares your taste and find what’s so good or bad about the movie. So its quite possible that you might hate a movie which was showered with praises and love the ones which are thrashed. Take “Cars” for example, it’s the worst reviewed movie by Pixar and WALL-E is one of the best reviewed, in fact it’s the best reviewed of 2008. But I love “Cars”, (forgive me, I’m stealing this line but its so apt) If sally was a little more real and I was a little nuttier, I would marry her. And I found WALL-E to be so-so, even occasionally boring

Now that you got an idea how to navigate through the endless sea of reviews and movies and pick the one for you, let’s move on to the actual “Writing” of the reviews themselves. You might wonder why I like Ebert. Is it that we share same taste? Nope, most of the time I disagree with his choices but I love the way he writes, he always says that writing a critical review about a bad movie is always fun. So it is to read. About Transformers he writes,

“A horrible experience of unbearable length, briefly punctuated by three or four amusing moments. One of these involves a dog-like robot humping the leg of the heroine. Such are the meagre joys. If you want to save yourself the ticket price, go into the kitchen, cue up a male choir singing the music of hell, and get a kid to start banging pots and pans together. Then close your eyes and use your imagination”

I’m linking another review of Ebert to which I share the same sentiment. Happy reading and hope you have a better time at the movies.

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090729/REVIEWS/907299997

As technology progresses, there are few and fewer things that surprise you. One that surprised me recently is Google Voice; it has its history for past couple of years. But it’s forced into the lime light with the recent debacle about Apple rejecting its iPhone app. So what is this Google Voice you talk about? It all started with Google accruing Grand Central, which was a phone management service. Now after nearly 2 years of rebuilding it ground up, Google has opened shop (though invite only). Ok now we got the history lesson. What does this mean to us? For most people, absolutely nothing.

This works only in the US, and I don’t see any big advantage for the folks with ATT. Brass tax. This is basically “One phone number to control all” kind of thing. You register with GV and then you select a number (which you keep for life). Now you can forward all the calls to this number to other phones you use. What big deal? Yes big deal. Say I carry two mobile phones (business and personal) and then I have a home phone. You need to give out these numbers to people and hope they catch you on the right one on the right time. But with GV, you can set it up to ring one of these at the time you want it. You can send business calls straight to voice mail during off hours and set your mobile phone to ring when not at home. The possibilities are endless

It also has your back if you change any of your numbers, because you haven’t given it in the first place. Just enable call forward to the new number. Neat isn’t it? But it doesn’t stop there. For carriers who offer favorite numbers (like T-Mobile) or give free incoming, GV could be completely free, as in F-R-E-E. If you have a smart phone, install the GV app and dial a local (within) US number. Google doesn’t charge anything for its service and since your GV number is in your Fav 5, T-Mobile doesn’t charge anything either.

It also promises stellar voice quality, SMS (so that you don’t have to give your mobile number for it), conferencing and a web interface (one even customized for mobile browser) to control everything. It also has apps for Android, WM, Blackberry and the iPhone (though you need to jailbreak it to use this).

So guys, happy talking.

There are a few things that is indisputable in hollywood, one such thing would be the tile “The king of comedy”. And he is Judd Apatow. In the past few years he has either directed or written or produced at least a dozen top notch comedies. He even made heroes of Seth Rogen, Jonah Hill and Jason Segel.

I was very much looking forward to this movie, he not only produced it but also wrote the screenplay and directed. I’m happy to say that I loved it, na I adored it. Accepted, I went in wanting to love it but I’m also the one to point out when I’m disappointed (Harry Potter, hello!). Funny people did not disappoint, though it’s light on ”Bromance” and a lot less raunchy, the way you have come to expect of a Apatow comedy.

But it’s brim full of “Funny”, the story revolves around a famous and lonely comedian George Simmons done so convincingly by Adam Sandler. George hears the bad news from his doctor that he is terminally ill and puts him on an experimental drugs. Here on what happens to him physically is immaterial but what been done differently is that he does not turn into a saint and undoes all wrongs in his life. Instead, he just goes on being his selfish self. I wont spoil the fun for you guys

But I got to say that, there is good chemistry between Seth Rogen and Adam Sandler, and the beautiful Leslie Mann is ever so funny. I would definitely go on record and say that this has been the best movie of this summer. Sure some would complain its long and dry but Apatow finds ingenious ways to show us a peek into stand up comedy world and this is a much more personal outing for the King.