Quentin Tarantino's 'Hateful Eight'

What is a movie? It is a story told by using moving images and words. That is, in a movie the purpose of words is to tell the story. Words are the means to an end - not an end in itself. The end of a movie is the story.

This is how almost all movies are. Except Quentin Tarantino's. For QT (and his fans), it is the other way around. The story is the means, and the words are the end. The story is just an excuse to bombard the viewer with words – lots of words.

In one sense, this is justifiable. Real life is like this only. People simply talk (a lot) all the time. Their words (and actions) are completely random. They are not part of a straight-line story inside a scriptwriter's head. So in that sense, this style/approach is more realistic. But then again, one purpose of art is to impose some order on a chaotic reality – rather than merely reproducing it as it is.

So that is the USP of QT – words, a lot of words. His movies are filled with the characters having random conversations on everything from the meaning of life to the most mundane matters. QT fans love it. QT critics hate it.

The second feature of QT is violence – lots of violence. But this is not a unique feature. What is unique perhaps is the blood. Other directors have higher body counts. But QT has the highest litre count.

The third and final feature of QT is nihilism. There is no 'victory of good over evil' or 'triumph of the human spirit' in QT. Life is meaningless. And everybody dies in the end – both the bad guys and the good guys.

So this is the QT package. If you like this, you will like Hateful Eight. It is verbose, violent and nihilistic. Samuel L Jackson holds the movie together with his masterful presence. Walton Goggins supports him with a brilliant performance. And Ennio Morricone's music is a majestic contrast (or complement?) to the X-rated language, violence and nihilism.

'Star Wars: Force Awakens'

J J Abrams is a brilliant storyteller. He made the TV serial Lost and movies like Mission Impossible 3 and Star Trek. So when he was hired to continue the Star Wars saga, we had great expectations. Could he take Star Wars to the next level - like Christopher Nolan did with Batman?

If you thought like this, Force Awakens is a bloody nightmare. Because Episode 7 is just a remix of the old Star Wars story (especially New Hope). The characters have simply been recycled into new avatars:
Darth Vader --> Kylo Ren
Luke Skywalker --> Rey
Emperor Palpatine --> Supreme Leader Snoke
Galactic Empire --> First Order
Death Star --> Starkiller Base
R2D2 --> BB8

The 'scriptwriters' have simply done Ctrl-H (find & replace) on the old script. Above all, the core element of the hexology - the father/son story - has also been recycled! [Who is father? Who is son? You also pay your hard-earned money, like me, to find out!]

What went wrong? Disney didn't give Abrams any freedom (like Warner Bros gave to Nolan)? Or Abrams himself decided to play safe? The original was almost 40 years ago. So half the suckers today weren't even born then. The kindest verdict on Force Awakens is that it is just an introduction to the real story - which will be told in Episodes 8 and 9. We will see.

Anyway, what does it matter? Disney is laughing all the way to the bank. Force Awakens has already grossed $750 million, and will easily reach $2 billion. It is a triumph of the Hollywood marketing machinery. However, real Star Wars fans should be deeply disappointed. J J Abrams had the Force. But he chose to embrace the Dark Side.

PS: Almost all critics have given this xerox copy rave reviews (Rotten Tomatoes rating is 95%). How is this possible? The only answer is herd mentality. See Crucible (1996) for a brilliant analysis of herd mentality.

America In West Asia

America in West Asia:

9/11 happens.
US hawks: Saddam did it.
World: Nuts!
US hawks: OK, Al-Qaeda did it. But it has a base in Iraq.
World: Nuts!
US hawks: OK, Saddam has WMDs.
World: Nuts!
US hawks: Go to hell! We'll invade Iraq anyway.
America invades Iraq.
Number of WMDs in Iraq = 0.
World: WMDs?!
US hawks: Never mind. Saddam was a dictator. We'll make Iraq a democracy.
Civil war breaks out in Iraq between Sunnis & Shias.
World: Democracy?!
US hawks: (Silence)
'Arab Spring' begins.
US hawks: We triggered the Arab Spring by invading Iraq.
World: Nuts!
Revolt begins in Syria against Bashar Al-Assad.
US hawks: Assad must go.
World: Nuts!
'Arab Spring' turns into 'Arab Nightmare'.
World: Do you still take credit for this?
US hawks: (Silence)
Syrian rebels turn out to be Al-Qaeda.
World: You want Al-Qaeda to rule Syria?
US hawks: (Silence)
Al-Qaeda moves into Iraq.
World: You were right - Al-Qaeda is in Iraq... now.
US hawks: (Silence)

[5,00,000 Iraqi men, women & children have been killed due to the US invasion & its aftermath]

Sardar Patel: The Re-Unification of India

India was born 5000 years ago. Around 300 BC, Chanakya and Chandragupta unified this land from the Himalayas to the Indian Ocean. But the unity lasted only 100 years. After Ashoka, India broke up into many kingdoms. And starting around 700 AD, she was conquered and ruled by foreign invaders.

Finally in 1947, the last foreign invader - the British - left. But they handed over to us only the half of India that they directly ruled. The other half was made up of 565 kingdoms. They had to be merged with the rest of the country if we were to be both free and united. It was done by one man - Sardar Vallabhai Patel. (So the liberals' argument that the British made/ created/ united India is b***s***)

So more than 2000 years after the Maurya Empire, we were free and united again (of course, with the exception of Sindh, West Punjab & East Bengal). All because of one man - Sardar Patel. This was the re-unification of India. And that is what it should be called. Instead, Leftist historians called it 'Integration of Princely States'. They deliberately coined this silly phrase to downplay the magnitude of Sardar Patel's achievement.

Let us call a spade, a spade. Sardar Patel was not an 'integrator of princely states'. He was the re-unifier of India. Today on his 140th birthday, let us remember this great son of Mother India, and thank him for the priceless gift of freedom and unity he gave us. Bharat Mata ki jai!

A Short History Of The World

A short history of the world:

1. America fought USSR.
2. Jihadis fought USSR.
3. So America helped jihadis.
4. Jihadis formed Al-Qaeda.
5. Al-Qaeda attacked America.
6. America blamed Iraq.
7. America invaded Iraq.
8. Islamic State took over Iraq.
9. America is fighting Islamic State. (See #1)
10. Al-Qaeda is fighting Islamic State. (See #2)
11. So... (See #3)

Moral: The more things change, the more they remain the same.

'Post-Industrial Society'

In 1971, French sociologist Alain Touraine wrote a book called Post-Industrial Society. He said that Western society after 1950 had entered a new stage of development – the 'post-industrial' stage. His thesis was:

Society	Dominant Sector of Economy	Dominant Factor of Production
1. Agricultural	Agriculture	Land
2. Industrial	Industry	Capital
3. 'Post-Industrial'	Services	Knowledge

In 1973, American sociologist Daniel Bell wrote a book called Coming of Post-Industrial Society, and popularised this idea among English-speaking social scientists. And in 1980, American futurologist Alvin Toffler wrote a book called Third Wave, and popularised this idea among laymen across the world.

Is this thesis correct?

There are some differences between early industrial society (the West till 1950) and advanced industrial society (the West after 1950). But they are nothing compared to the differences between agricultural society and industrial society. Touraine, Bell, Toffler (and others) are 20th century Westerners who have never seen agricultural society. So they do not know the huge chasm that separates agricultural society and industrial society. They saw the minor differences between early industrial society and advanced industrial society, and jumped to the conclusion that the latter is a new stage of society. It is not. It is only the second sub-stage of industrial society.

So the term 'post-industrial' (and 'post-modern') is meaningless.

'Baahubali - 1': Review

Review of 'Baahubali-1':

A. Traditional Indian Story =
"Once upon a time, there was a king. He was good, brave & wise . . . "

B. Typical Indian Movie =
Handsome hero + beautiful heroine + wicked villain + romance + songs-dances + drama + action

C. South Indian Masala =
LTL + OTT (larger than life + over the top)

D. Hollywood Seasoning =
CGI special effects

A + B + C + D = 'BAAHUBALI'! :-)

* Paisa-vasool scene: When Kattappa places Baahubali's foot on his head.
* Best performance: Satyaraj (Kattappa)
* Doesn't Prabhas look like Manoj Bajpai?
* Why the hell can't we see this movie (& others) in Kannada?

India's Complexity/Diversity: Survey Categories

If you want to do a survey for India, what are the various categories you have to cover – so that your survey captures the whole country?

A. ZONE
1. North+Central
2. South
3. West
4. East
5. North-east

B. LOCATION
1. City
2. Town
3. Village

C. SEX
1. Male
2. Female

D. AGE
1. Young
2. Middle-age
3. Old

E. CLASS
1. Middle class
2. Lower class
3. Poor

F. CASTE
1. Upper-caste
2. OBC
3. SC/ST
4. Other

So total number of survey categories = 5 x 3 x 2 x 3 x 3 x 4 = 1080!!!

'Mad Max: Fury Road'

The 1973 & 1979 oil shocks increased oil from $20 to $100. The world suddenly faced a new question: What if oil runs out?

In 1980, Australian director George Miller made a movie called Mad Max to answer this question. In an imaginary future – oil becomes scarce, modern civilisation disappears, and humans go back to living as savages. The movie became a blockbuster and a cult classic.

35 years later, George Miller remakes Mad Max with Tom Hardy (Bane in Dark Knight Rises). Human society has been through 3 stages: tribal, agricultural & industrial/modern. But its fundamental forces have always been - and will always be - the same: resources/wealth, power & religion. Mad Max: Fury Road illustrates this truth brilliantly.

Even if you don't care about social-economic-philosophical analysis, watch it (if you haven't already). Because it's one hell of a kick-ass action movie! :-)

Trivia:
* The movie was shot in Namibia.
* Heath Ledger was the 1st choice for the new Mad Max.
* George Miller's other movies include Babe: Pig in the city and Happy Feet!

India's Complexity: Religion, Language, Caste

India's complexity (religion, language, caste):

Country	Religions	Languages	Castes
India	7	15	5,000
China	0	1	0
America	1	1	0

Total number of combinations possible in India = 7 X 15 X 5,000 = 5,25,000.

Kannada Movie Industry: Economic Analysis

Q: Why is the Kannada movie industry so weak – especially when compared to its neighbours?

Movie industry	Annual revenue
Kannada	Not available
Telugu	Rs 1150 crore
Tamil	Rs 1200 crore
Malayalam	Not available

Total revenue figures are not available for the Kannada and Malayalam movie industries. So we use another measure:

Movie industry	#1 Movie	Box office gross
Kannada	Mungaaru Male (2006)	Rs 65 crore
Telugu	Attarintiki Daredi (2013)	Rs 180 crore
Tamil	Enthiran (2010)	Rs 250 crore
Malayalam	Drishyam (2013)	Rs 60 crore

Immediately we see the strength of each film industry. How to explain this difference? We start with the most basic fact:

State	Population
Karnataka	6.1 crore
Andhra Pradesh	8.5 crore
Tamil Nadu	7.2 crore
Kerala	3.3 crore

1. Karnataka is straightaway at a disadvantage – being only the 3rd biggest state in south India. (only Kerala is smaller)

But how many people actually speak Kannada (as their 1st language)?

Language	Number of speakers (a)
Kannada	3.8 crore
Telugu	7.4 crore
Tamil	6.1 crore
Malayalam	3.3 crore

2. Now the situation becomes even worse. The Kannada-speaking population is much smaller than Karnataka's population. In every state, some people speak another language (as their 1st language). But the situation is worst in Karnataka.

[So Karnataka's size is misleading – only about 60% of its people speak Kannada as their 1st language]

Next, it's not enough to have people. The people need money to see movies. So:

State	Per capita income (b)
Karnataka	Rs 1,00,755
Andhra Pradesh	Rs 1,00,698
Tamil Nadu	Rs 1,18,100
Kerala	Rs 1,20,085

3. The situation gets even worse for Karnataka – with almost the lowest per capita income in south India.

[Tamil Nadu is the most developed state; but Kerala has the highest per capita income due to money sent by Keralite workers in West Asia]

Finally if we multiply the per capita income by the number of language-speakers, we get a measure of the total market size in that language:

Language	Total market size (a x b)
Kannada	Rs 3,82,870 crore
Telugu	Rs 7,45,166 crore
Tamil	Rs 7,20,409 crore
Malayalam	Rs 3,96,282 crore

4. The Kannada movie industry has the smallest market in south India. The markets for the Telugu and Tamil movie industries are almost 2 times bigger.

That is why the Kannada movie industry is so weak.

Bollywood/India's Movies: Logic and Realism

Logic and realism are industrial values. That is, they are the values of an industrial society (in-soc). They do not exist in an agricultural society (ag-soc). What does this mean for art – especially motion picture?

Movies in industrial societies (US & Europe) are logical and realistic. Movies in an agricultural society (like India) are not logical and realistic. How are they then? They are just the modern (technologically, not culturally) version of the village play. In fact, it can be argued that village plays are more logical and realistic than ag-soc movies – the former are stories from Ramayana and Mahabharata. For the real inspiration of the ag-soc movie, we must look elsewhere.

In the old days, a "picture man" travelled from village to village with his "picture box". If you looked into the window of the picture-box, you could see a picture. The picture-man would turn a lever, and you could see different pictures one after another. The pictures were sights from the big cities: Bangalore (Vidhan Soudha), Bombay (Gateway of India), Delhi (Red Fort), etc. You would pay the picture-man a coin for this pleasure. The ag-soc movie is nothing but the hi-tech version of the village picture-box.

The ag-soc movie is not what a movie should be: a logical and realistic story told using moving images. Instead it is just a visual spectacle: handsome hero, beautiful heroine, nice houses, nice clothes, songs and dances, some romance, ugly villain, some violence, uglier comedian, some humour, saintly mother, some melodrama, hero and heroine marry, then they live happily ever after. This is the typical ag-soc movie. (And Bangalore/Bombay/Delhi are out of the question; we are shown New York/London/Paris instead)

This is why Indian movies are illogical and unrealistic. As India becomes an industrial society, hopefully it will make logical and realistic movies.

This analysis applies to all Indian cinema: Kannada, Hindi (Bollywood), Telugu, Tamil, etc.

India's Greatest Prime Ministers (Ranking: Best/Worst)

Ranking of India's greatest Prime Ministers (best to worst):

1. P V Narasimha Rao
For starting India's real modernisation in 1991 by switching the economy from socialism to capitalism.

2. Jawaharlal Nehru
For helping India to survive as a free and united country by steering the Republic in its infancy.

3. Lal Bahadur Shastri
For making India self-reliant in food production by fathering the Green Revolution in 1966.

4. Atal Behari Vajpayee
For making India a nuclear-weapon power and continuing its modernisation.

5. Rajiv Gandhi
For not doing much good, but not doing much harm either.

6. Manmohan Singh
For heading post-Independence India's most corrupt government.

7. Jawaharlal Nehru
For condemning India to half-a-century of poverty by imposing a socialist economy.

8. Indira Gandhi
For making India a most poor and corrupt country by destroying its institutions.

Society/System: Sheep & Wolves

People go to work and make money.
They go to malls and spend money.
They live in nice houses.
They drive nice cars.
This is the system called 'society'.

Nothing runs on its own.
Especially a system.
It has to be run.
By some people.

99% of people simply live in the system.
They make money.
They spend money.
They are the sheep.

1% of people run the system.
They are the wolves.
They control the sheep.

Sheep are good.
Wolves are bad.

It is the existence of wolves that allows sheep to exist and to be good.

The Soldier

All the battles he fought
All the battles he lost
Do they mean something?
Do they mean anything?

He stands amidst the ruins
Ruins of his own making
Where does he go from here?
Is there anywhere?

Where did he go wrong?
At the beginning?
How did he go wrong?
By following You?

Why did You make him?
To fight a war?
Where is his army?
Where are his weapons?

You sent him here
Alone and unarmed
To fight a battle
A wolf among sheep.

A soldier he is
In the battlefield
Lost and lonely
Afraid and defeated.

Each day comes
As a dark cloud
And goes away
Followed by another.

Where is the light?
Where is the path?
Where is the answer?
Where is the joy?

How much longer?
How much more?
Till he gives way
And falls to the ground.

He has nothing left
Only pain and fear
Show him the way
Or end his fate.

What wrong did he do?
All he did was
Walk on Your path
The path of right.

Are You testing him?
Is this a test?
If yes, he is close
To failing it.

He is falling apart
Piece by piece
Just a matter of time
Till nothing is left.

He lies in the battlefield
Bruised and battered
Wounded and tired
Waiting for a sign.

Show him something
Show him a way
Or take him
And be done with it.

He will fight
To the bitter end
Till jackals and vultures
Feast on his bones.

He will go down
With a sword in his hand
A smile on his face
And a song on his lips.

Technocrats in India's Politics

Technocrats in India's politics:

Name	Education	Career
Manmohan Singh	PhD @ Oxford	UNCTAD
P Chidambaram	MBA @ Harvard	Lawyer
Yashwant Sinha	MA @ Patna University	IAS
Arun Shourie	PhD @ Syracuse	World Bank
Jairam Ramesh	MS @ Carnegie Mellon	World Bank
Montek S Ahluwalia	MPhil @ Oxford	World Bank

Politics: India, China, America

1. AMERICA [Scene: A school inspection]

Teacher: Good morning, sir.
Inspector: Good morning.
Teacher: Welcome to our school.
Inspector: Thank you.
Teacher: Our school is the best school in the city. Our boys are the best boys in the city.
Inspector: Really?
Teacher: Yes, sir.
Inspector: Can you show me some of your boys?
Teacher (points to 1st boy in 1st bench): This is John. He is our 1st rank student. He will study law, enter politics and become President of the country.
Inspector: Excellent!!!
Teacher (points to 2nd boy in 1st bench): This is James. He is our 2nd rank student. He will study law, enter politics and become Governor of the state.
Inspector: Excellent!!
Teacher (points to 3rd boy in 1st bench): This is Joseph. He is our 3rd rank student. He will study law, enter politics and become Mayor of the city.
Inspector: Excellent!
Inspector (points to the boy in last bench): What about him?
Teacher (embarrassed): He is Alex. He has flunked 3 years in a row.
Inspector: Don't worry. He will drop out and become a drug addict. Then he'll become a rock star.

2. CHINA [Scene: A school inspection]

Teacher: Good morning, sir.
Inspector: Good morning.
Teacher: Welcome to our school.
Inspector: Thank you.
Teacher: Our school is the best school in the city. Our boys are the best boys in the city.
Inspector: Really?
Teacher: Yes, sir.
Inspector: Can you show me some of your boys?
Teacher (points to 1st boy in 1st bench): This is Chang. He is our 1st rank student. He will study engineering, join the government and become President of the country.
Inspector: Excellent!!!
Teacher (points to 2nd boy in 1st bench): This is Ching. He is our 2nd rank student. He will study engineering, join the government and become Governor of the province.
Inspector: Excellent!!
Teacher (points to 3rd boy in 1st bench): This is Chung. He is our 3rd rank student. He will study engineering, join the government and become Mayor of the city.
Inspector: Excellent!
Inspector (points to the boy in last bench): What about him?
Teacher (embarrassed): He is Cho. He has flunked 3 years in a row.
Inspector: Don't worry. He will drop out and learn kung fu. Then he'll become a movie star.

3. INDIA [Scene: A school inspection]

Teacher: Good morning, sir.
Inspector: Good morning.
Teacher: Welcome to our school.
Inspector: Thank you.
Teacher: Our school is the best school in the city. Our boys are the best boys in the city.
Inspector: Really?
Teacher: Yes, sir.
Inspector: Can you show me some of your boys?
Teacher (points to 1st boy in 1st bench): This is Rama. He is our 1st rank student. He will study medicine and become a doctor.
Inspector: Excellent!!!
Teacher (points to 2nd boy in 1st bench): This is Shyama. He is our 2nd rank student. He will study engineering and become an engineer.
Inspector: Excellent!!
Teacher (points to 3rd boy in 1st bench): This is Bhima. He is our 3rd rank student. He will study management and become a manager.
Inspector: Excellent!
Inspector (points to the boy in last bench): What about him?
Teacher (embarrassed): He is Timma. He has flunked 3 years in a row.
Inspector: Don't worry. He will drop out and become a politician. He will become a corporator, MLA and MP. He may become Chief Minister or even Prime Minister.

India's Middle Class and Politics

Q: Why does India's middle class not participate in politics?

Middle class is a modern/industrial class. But Indian society is not yet an industrial society. It is still an agricultural society. Worse, it is a feudal society. So India's middle class is an industrial island in an agricultural/feudal ocean. An industrial society runs on merit, knowledge and education. A feudal society runs on money, muscle and caste.

A country's politics is a function of its society. That is, a country's politics is decided by what kind of society it has. An industrial society has industrial politics – ie, professional knowledge-based politics. A feudal society has feudal politics – ie, the politics of money, muscle and caste. Since India is a feudal society, it has money-muscle-caste politics.

Since the middle class is an industrial class, it has only merit, knowledge and education – but not money, muscle and caste. So it is unable to operate in India's money-muscle-caste politics.

Therefore the Indian middle class does not participate in politics.

Middle Class Indians' Marriage Obsession

Middle class Indians are obsessed with marriage. But there is a small exception to this rule:

Group	% obsessed with marriage
Brahmins	99%
Non-Brahmins	100%

Why is it so?

In ancient/traditional India, there were two types of people:
1. Grihasthas (householders)
2. Sanyasis (ascetics)

The vast majority of the people were Grihasthas. They married, had children and took care of their families. That is, they pursued Kama and Artha. Then there were a few Sanyasis. These stayed single and devoted themselves completely to working for society or to spirituality. That is, they pursued either Dharma or Moksha.

Both these options were open to all the Varnas. But since only Brahmanas had knowledge, only they (ie, a few of them) became Sanyasis. Since non-Brahmanas did not have knowledge, none of them became Sanyasis; they were all Grihasthas only. Thus society became like this:

Group	Grihasthas	Sanyasis
Brahmanas	99%	1%
Non-Brahmanas	100%	0%

This system has existed for 3000 years. So today's society is a result of 3000 years of social programming – which is very powerful. Therefore we have the situation described by the first table. Non-Brahmins (most of them) know only one thing: make money, marry and have children. But Brahmins (a few at least) are aware of an alternate path: devote oneself completely to society or to spirituality.

Thus the middle class Indian marriage obsession has a small Brahmin exception. But among non-Brahmins, it is total.

The Sanyasi system is and should be an exception. If everybody becomes a Sanyasi, then society will cease to exist.

Life, Love, Duty, Society, Country

COUNTRY

# There is Absolute Truth and there are relative truths. And the greatest relative truth is India.

# Love is the greatest force in the world. And love of one's country is the greatest love in the world.

# What can be more natural than the love of one's land, its people and their culture?

# If there is any cause in this world worth living for, fighting for and dying for – it is India.

# The 3 greatest blessings in the world:
1. To be born in India
2. To live in India
3. To work for India

LIFE

# Life is war. The world is a battlefield. And we are all soldiers.

# Life is a war. Every day is a battle. Give every day/battle your 100%.

# Life|War = 1/3 Preparing + 1/3 Fighting + 1/3 Waiting. The last is the toughest.

# A man's life must be judged by how much it increases the order of the System (ie, society).

DUTY

# Dharma is the highest Purushartha. And Rashtra Dharma is the highest Dharma.

# Great nations are not built by people who seek their own happiness. They are built by sacrifice.

# A patriot's life is dedicated 100% to his country. There is no 'balance' in his life. 'Balance' is for vegetable sellers, not patriots.

# The lofty ideals of country/nation/Motherland and duty/service/sacrifice can only be achieved through the mundane thing called SYSTEM – ie, getting into the right system and working in it.

LOVE

# What is love? It is surrender. It is submission. It is sacrifice. To an ideal greater than our petty individual selves.

# Romantic love, or male-female attraction, is a chemical reaction inside the brain. It is a program written by evolution to ensure the survival of the species.

# Most people don't know the meaning of love. They equate love with sexual attraction. True love is dedication to a great ideal.

# The concept of love has been hijacked by the entertainment industry, which has reduced it to sexual attraction. Patriots must take it back and make it their own.

# All love is good. But all love is not the same. There is the lower/ordinary love (family/friends) and the higher/great love (country/society).

SOCIETY

# Society/civilisation is the constant struggle of Order against Chaos.

# First law of thermodynamics says that energy cannot be created – it can only be converted from one form to another. Brahmacharya transforms sexual energy into social energy.

# Second law of thermodynamics says that a system's order can be increased only by supplying energy. For the system called society, where must this extra energy come from? It comes from Brahmacharya.