A case of Conflicting Emotions

Conflicting emotions.
Those are the worst kind aren’t they? Two words --- signifying the state of mind I detest the most. Conflicting, not cos, I'm burdened with more than a single point of view on a particular issue or subject, which I might add, based on past ambivalence and something I expect with dread, in the future, is rather torturous. As we grow wiser, it is not too uncommon to realize that not all things are as black and white as we were led to believe. In fact nothing ever quite seems to be as were led to believe. But I digress.

No, No I’m referring to a more complex set of conflicting emotions – where by expressly acknowledging, and/or tacitly supporting an emotional Issue A, would lead to a result or opinion which is detrimental to another Issue B, which is also close to one’s heart. Mutually exclusive issues, if you will. Made further complicated cos of the above mentioned moral and personal ambivalence on both Issue A and Issue B. Confused? Read on… but permit me to meander about with certain general observations before dealing with specifics of the case.

Emotions --- I’m not an emotional person. Or so I tell myself. While some conveniently, and with remarkable alacrity, spew their hatred and angst upon all, hurling their opinions, upon any given platform, I choose to observe and report and allow you to draw your own conclusions. My opinions are well-encapsulated and only few are privy to it. Now, does this imply that people are wrong to voice their opinions? Of course not. Far from it. To each his own. Or her own. But let me ask you this --- Are you giving an opinion based on what you feel or what you know?
Cos feelings are ephemeral as opposed to information. What we feel today, may or may not be what we feel tomorrow. That’s the curse of wisdom and maturity. A necessary by-product. Invariably it would only lead us to being tagged as hypocrites. Hypocrites to the world, cos we’re holding on to our statements, and it would shameful for us to now, at this point and time, reverse our opinions.
Oh sorry..I’ve been shouting from the rooftops about this, this and this but I take all that back now.

People do not look upon such retractions kindly. But more importantly, we’re being hypocrites to ourselves, cos we’re forced preach what we no longer feel or subscribe to, trying to convince ourselves that we’re not straying from the path we’d once rigidly followed. This, I feel, is a far greater sin than errors which can be attributed to youthful naiveté’. We can deceive the world, but can we deceive ourselves? And we’re compelled to continue committing this sin because the world has already slotted us into these neat categories based on our initial opinions and behavior amongst other factors such as race, gender, color of hair et cetera.

On the other hand, opinions based on information are relatively reliable, cos they appeal to the logic of our minds, but they can be equally deceiving. For as mere mortals, we are not given access to the whole truth, so to speak, only as much as we need to know to function rationally within our individual sub-systems. So then, would it be possible to supply meaningful arguments and opinions based on such partially true and known information? Would it be ethically correct if you were aware of such inadequacies in your arguments, yet continue to propagate them?

What about Books? Arts? Philosophy? Religion? Convention? Law? History? Are these not valid sources of truth and information? Yes, but are they free from bias? Or as individuals are we capable of interpreting this information without being influenced by the bias which has already been deeply ingrained into our collective sub-conscious?

Okay, so alright, why this need to discuss such abstract concepts? And in the process waste everybody’s time with such verbiage?
It would be seem that blogging is injurious to one’s health. It provides us with an accessible outlet to express feelings, emotions and arguments. Most of which under normal circumstances would be locked away behind a mask of compromises.
What triggered off this verbiage was a fairly, innocuous comment/remark made by a white, American woman, on her blog which under normal, usual circumstances I would’ve brushed away without as much as a second look. Why I reacted the way I did? Your guess is as good as mine. Maybe I woke up on the wrong side of the bed, or could be the mysterious alignment of the stars while reading her blog. Whatever it was, it made me sit up and take notice of the opinion passed and a wave of emotions and arguments swept over. I could see a successive array of words and sentences forming in my head and I opened the word editor and typed without pausing and continue to type as we speak.

So let’s fill in the blanks –

ISSUE A – Women’s rights, Strong but not vocal supporter for action against Eve-teasing, molestation and domestic violence against women. Support for movements such as Project Blank Noise. My reservations and ambivalence on these causes shall not be revealed at this point

ISSUE B – Striving for the positive and appreciative outlook of India and Indians amongst leading western nations. India is so much more than just – Land of the Kamasutra, Fakirs, Snake-charmers, Yoga, Spicy food, a land where jobs are Outsourced, IT, and people with strange accents and smell. I will not get into my love-hate relationship with India/Indians at this point.

Major Issue -- Why am I genetically pre-disposed to giving a flying rat’s ass to what people in white skins think about India and Indians?

So there you have it. Are Cause A and Cause B mutually exclusive? Well at first sight it appears they are not. Right?
Few weeks ago Project Blank Noise was initiated in India. If you’re un-aware of such a project, well then just google it or stop reading. It was a major effort, galvanized by the unequivocal support of the lobby of Indian bloggers through out the world. I found several blogs and articles written by prominent and anonymous women (and men) and their harrowing stories and tales. I felt this combined, coordinated effort would be an ideal way to ruffle a few feathers and lead to corrective measures.

Yesterday, I came across a blog where this woman (who shall remain nameless), based on what she’d read on some of the more vocal Blank noise supporter blogs, made the following remarks –

“I’ve never been to India…I don’t know much about India...but it seems that these poor women cannot step into the streets without being jeered, or teased or molested...”

Obviously I’m paraphrasing and poorly at that, cos the link to her blog has inexplicably disappeared. I can assure you I couldn’t make this up even if I wanted to.

So now this woman, in her mind, as if we Indians haven’t been stereotyped enough, has this image of India, and of Indian men as being nothing more than a pack of wolves, freaks, sex-starved individuals, waiting to pounce upon the next girl who happens to pass by. Or just waiting around the corner, in the shadows, to kidnap and rape an innocent victim or bombarding her with sexually explicit dialogue.
Is this ground reality? It would seem as if a girl walking down the street without being attacked is akin to a person walking around Gaza strip without getting shot.

“Yes! Yes!” a part of me cries. This is exactly what it must be for a girl in India. The constant fear of being molested or abused, physically or verbally.

The above was an example of an opinion based on what I feel. But is it true? Would it still stand if it weren’t true? The white girl cannot be faulted, for she made statement based on information which she believed to be true. Or an exaggeration of the truth. So now we have two sets of opinions, one based on feeling, the other based on information and both certainly misleading.

And what about the conflicting emotions? My enthusiastic support for Project Blank Noise and the subsequent comments panning Indians and Indian law enforcements is there for all to see? I am responsible in my own way of creating a negative opinion of India and Indians.
And so I’m now the hypocrite. To the world and to the person facing me in the mirror. I openly criticized Indians in my comments and now when a white person does the same, I get pissed? A case of double standards.

Conflicting Emotions. I wish I could go back to being un-emotional about matters which are beyond me.

::::::: Conclusion after a long stint at the badminton courts :::::::

We all have our imperfections. We Indians have learned to live with ours, for far too long. Would we have the same patience when dealing with a foreign culture’s imperfections? We’ve shown great strength by taking such strong steps, speaking openly, rather than hiding behind a facade pretending all’s well. When it is not. India cannot be viewed as a progressive, developing nation without first addressing its in-house issues. And in the process, if we fall from grace in the eyes of foreigners, well then that’s the price we pay for the negligence of our fore-fathers.

V for Vendetta

One can safely conclude that V for Vendetta pulls no punches. I didn't quite know what to expect from this movie. The promos looked ridiculous. Probably the most charitable comment that could be ascribed to it.

Please not another swashbuckling, man with a mask, brandishing his silvery sword. Weren't we subjected to enough torture with the Mask of Zorro series?
But then strangely and contrary to initial perceptions, it appeared there was more to this movie than what meets the eye. I'd read from several souces and write-up's as regards to how the controversial storylines was feared to not sit well with the American audiences as well as how the release of the movie had to be pushed back to a later date cos of the London bombings last year and the perceived affect of the movie on British sensitivities.

So all that being said, let's focus and examine what the movie aims to achieve. It's a scathing, full-pronged attack. on a certain superpower nation, and the ways and means of its government, its firm commitment to following a misleading, incendiary agenda, and accordingly using its economic strength and ties to bully other nations, and its own citizens in the process, all in some vain pursuit of justice, following a tragedy of immense proportions, which was, frankly, brought about by a collective, negligent, partisan and ultimately failed foreign policy.

The movie succeeds in pushing this message across with startling effect. In troubled times, it would seem, that the line between an ideal democratic government and a totalitarian government, is drawn too close for comfort, if its citizens are not careful. It would require an act of revolution to reverse and limit the damage caused by such totalitarism. However the movie chooses to remain silent by failing to address the thorny issue as to whether such an act of revolution, as mentioned above should be equated to an act of terrorism?

While such emotionally charged intellectual allegorical arguments would draw fair number of viewers , it could also, equally, be the cause for its disapproval. Afterall the audiences would require a certain mindset to tolerate and appreciate such entertainment(?), and it would be understandable if audiences decide to stay away from what can be easily perceived as liberal left rantings. Also known as the Michael Moore effect. Box-office numbers at the end of the week will provide answers.

There is not much of a plot besides what's already been described, in bits and pieces, above. But briefly, the movie is set in futuristic London, subject to totalitarian rule under Chancellor Adam Sutler (John Hurt) and his special group of enforcers. John Hurt barks and snarls as Chancellor Sutler, the Hitler-like leader of the British regime guilty of imprisoning and killing gays, lesbians, the sick and the weak, and intimidating its other citizens through surveillance, roaming secret police, curfews and manipulating the puppet media to divert attention and provide veracity to half-truths, all in the guise of protecting them from terrorists and bioterrorism.
Enter V (Hugo Weaving) the masked vigilante, who introduces himself to London on Guy Fawkes Day with fireworks and a symbolic bombing, and then hijacks a television broadcast to announce that he will return a year later to destroy the Houses of Parliament. Evey (Natalie Portman), plays a journalist who accidentally becomes a part of V's plans and later his protege'.

Certain portions of the story, understandably is devoted to the back-story of V and his origins and these parts drag the movie down with its predictability. What drives the movie forward is its politically-charged energy which feeds of contemporary relevance, although it's set in England in 2020. The screenplay written by Warchowski brothers (Matrix series) is punctuated by superb dialogue, with its circuitous usage of words, almost lyrical, effectively stringing terse, concise sentences to make way for multi- layered meanings. And all the actors deliver these lines with the right tone of seriousness, wit and foreboding.

Although the promos tried to market V for Vendetta as an action film, viewers expecting a thrill ride,something along the lines of Matrix, might be disappointed. Most of the action set-pieces are rather tame and bollywood-ish.

Natalie Portman, slips in and out of her English accent. Stephen Rea plays Chief Inspector Finch, who in his pursuit of Evey and V, comes to the realization that the government is keeping something horrible under wraps.

Worth a watch.

Nav

Growing pains

I opened my blog and was pleasantly shocked to discover I had no less than ELEVEN comments (!!!!) on my previous post. This couldn't be right, could it? Upon clicking the comments page-link, with, I might add, a great deal of excitement and trepidation, I stared at the long lists of porn-bot links posing as comments.

I'd been Spammed again.

It first appeared a few days ago. My first bit of spam. I promptly deleted it, figuring it was something every blogger had to deal with occasionally. However, being re-spammed and that too twice the number of sex links as compared to the last time is worrisome. Besides the fact that it's a mighty pain-in-the-arse to actually go about deleting them all individually. Obviously blogger.com have not given much thought to this aspect of blogging. Or maybe I'm just un-aware. If I remember correctly, there were certain links mentioning about comment verification or comment filtering, or something to that effect on the home page. I suppose now would be a good time to check those links out.

The only positive I could possibly draw from this episode would be that my Blog, has perhaps moved one step up the blogdom ladder. Hahaha. Afterall, I must be doing something right to attract the attention of porn bots. Wishful thinking indeed.

And while we're on the subject of growing pains, in response to one of the anonymous yet 'legitimate' comment - 'Are you planning on taking Karthik's offer?'

It does look very tempting doesnt it? The prospect of substantially increasing the blog's readership and popularity and so on and so forth. Reminds me of those investment companies or chit-funds which guaranteed increased returns on our investments. However pardon my skepticism on such short-term, high returns strategies.

I remember reading sometime ago on Lazygeek's blog, where he revealed that he was the only one to read his posts for the first six months! Imagine that. I've been a bit luckier in that aspect, having a few people comment on some of my posts every so often. Although I maintain that the joy of writing is reward in itself, a little feedback goes a long way.

Or if all else fails, I could always threaten my brother to leave me a few comments. Hahaha.

I would like my blog to be the proverbial 'Shop around the corner' serving a small, group of regular readers as opposed to a superblog with thousands of readers and the resulting inability of connecting with all readers.

-Nav

P.S : The first bit of spam appeared a few days ago as mentioned earlier. Coincidentally I put up the 'currently consuming' add-on's around the same time. Hmm...interesting. *eyes the add-on's suspiciously*

Post Oscar musings

Alright, people who had predicted Crash would win Best Motion Picture at this year's Oscars, please raise your hands.
LIARS! haha.

Jack Nicholson, who presented the big award, looked visibly stunned when he opened the envelope to announce the winners and the wild celebrations amongst the cast and crew of Crash accurately summed up their emotions. I'm sure they would've been quietly confident of their chances, but Brokeback Mountain had been sweeping much of the major awards and it looked like the Academy, as was the trend over the past two years, would follow suit. But not so last night. Which is why it's such a fascinating event to watch. I've watched Crash, not once, but twice in theaters. It's a compelling movie and deserves every award it won, if not more.

Coming to my predictions, well, I'd made 10 predictions. And I broke even with 5 right and 5 wrong. Obviously I got the Best picture pick wrong. Also the Best editing (Crash) and Best Cinematography (Memoirs of a Geisha). In hindsight, it was a good decision to stop the predictions with the top 10 categories, cos I would've definitely lost more than five, courtesy Memoirs of a Geisha (which picked up 3 awards).

And ofcourse the best supporting categories - I was rooting for George Clooney and Rachel Weisz, and they won. I am pleased. Although I didn't pick them. Oh well, will just have to wait till next year.

High-points of the Show :-

1) Jon Stewart was brilliantly funny. Sarcastic, subtle, relaxed, he hit the right notes most of the time and kept the audiences in high spirits. He had some zippy one-liners, astute observations and incredibly funny right through the whole evening. I wouldn't be surprised if he gets the job next year too. Good work.

2) Speech given by the Director of the South african movie "Tsotsi" which won the Best foreign language category. It was heartfelt, emotional with an almost unrestrained joy and pride of being South African - " God bless South Africa"

3) Meryl Streep and lily Tomlin, two fantastic actresses, brillantly illustrating the Robert Altman school of filmaking by improvising their act on stage.

4) Philip Seymour Hoffman, while giving his acceptance speech, thanked his mom -"She brought up four kids alone. She took me to my first play, she stayed up with me and watched the NCAA Final Four - we're at the party, ma!" That was touching.

5) Rachel Weisz and George Clooney winning the best supporting actress and actors awards. Both individuals are box-office stars but are also at the same time establishing themselves as serious, thinking actors. Rachel Weisz rightly credited John Lacarre' the superb british writer whose book 'The Constant Gardener' formed much of the base for the movie -"this unflinching, angry story." It's definitely a must read. As are all Lacarre's books. More on that in a seperate post.

6) Kathleen Bird York's powerful rendering of her song "In the deep" from the movie Crash which was nominated for Best song.

7) Keira Knightley. Damn she looks gorgeous. What was she doing sitting next to that old perv Jack Nicholson anyway?Grr.

8) Reese Witherspoon gracefully acknowledging, in her acceptance speech, her co-star Joaquin Phoenix's inspirational performance in the movie Walk the line - "He put his heart and soul into this performance".And the camera closes-up on Joaquin Phoenix and I almost immediately, and strangely, felt a certain sadness in him not winning the Best actor award.

9) Itzhak Perlman's violin medley of original scores.

10) Shorter acceptance speeches. Thankfully this year we were spared the usual laundry list of people to thank ( my lawyer, my driver, my dog..). As a result the show seemed to proceed quicker.

The not-so high points of the Show :-

1) Reese Witherspoon's acceptance speech, except for some parts, as mentioned above. She sounded fake. But it did get better towards the end though.

2) Tom Hanks mediocre attempt at being funny. He really looks wierd with that new hairstyle.

3) Charlize theron's dress...the thing growing out of her left shoulder...

4) What was with the annoying elevator music being played while people were making their acceptance speeches? Very distracting.


Did anybody watch the American Express commercial with Manoj Night Shyamalan? It was pretty cool.

I think that wraps up the Oscar based discussions for this year. I'll probably jazz up the post with pictures at some point. May also try to include some of Jon Stewarts funny lines and memorable parts of some of the acceptance speeches. May have to look around a bit on the internet.

-Nav

The Calm after the storm and Oscar excitement

By declaring after the end of play on Day 4, England had allowed themselves that much extra time on Day 5 to bowl India out. And one of the most thrilling and noticeable changes in Test cricket over the past 3-4 years, has been how teams look to and have successfully dismissed the batting team on the last day, with the last session after the tea-break packing more action than a Dan brown novel. Calcutta 2001 springs to mind. And England had pulled off a remarkable win last year on their South Africa to secure a test series victory.

Proceedings began on an inauspicious note when Hoggard shattered Sehwag's stumps early in the morning and Jaffer looked to be struggling against the new ball. Ominous signs. But with due credit to Jaffer and Dravid, they batted extremely well to place India in an impregnable position. Jaffer looked especially aggressive, with spanking and caressing strokes on either side of the square. With the fear of defeat safely negotiated, the hunter became the hunted, as India launched into a brilliant counter-attacking mode with Tendulkar and Irfan Pathan, aiming to get as close to the winning target as possible. At the end England may have well let out a sigh of relief and settled for a well-fought draw.

England lack an attacking fourth bowler, a role Simon Jones usually carries out with an almost menancing precision. His absence leaves the bowling rotation less potent. Hoggard picked up the Man of the match award.

Final Scorecard (From Cricinfo)


Only a few hours remain before the Oscars. Here's an interesting article about famous/infamous Oscar acceptance speeches (which I'll admit, I shamelessly borrowed from Rediff).

How to make a memorable Oscar speech

-Nav

India V England Test Series, 1st Test - An Unexpected Contest

With a day left to play in the 1st test at Nagpur, this India Vs England series appears to have all the makings of a hard fought, enthralling contest. Although for a while there in between it looked as if the series may not live up to it's initial billing cos both teams had to settle for less than favorable results in their respective tours of Paksitan. Worse news was to follow as the English squad where hit with some key injuries just before the 1st Test. A recurring knee problem ended captain Michael Vaughan's tour before he had even warmed up and his deputy Marcus Trescothick having to return to England for personal reasons. They have been reports circulating that he shall be back in time for the 2nd Test.
So I suppose it was perfectly understandable if most viewers expected this to turn out into a dull, dry series. The absence of senior, experienced batters in the England team (The two, Vaughan and Trescothick combine over 11,000 test runs). on top of the English team already missing the services of the wily veteran left-arm spinner, Ashley Giles and Ashes hero, fast bowler Simon Jones.And it's never easy losing your calm, creative skipper at the beginning of what could be a long, arduous tour. Was this team capable of taking on India on home soil? England would have to rely on their charismatic, top-class allrounder and stand-in-captain, Andrew 'Freddie' Flintoff to show them way.

And how brilliantly they have responded. Brilliance, in their attention to details, ensuring they did the little things right and playing sensibly when it mattered. At the end of Day 4, England were 297/3 with an overall sizeable lead of 367 runs. With another 7 wickets in hand and Freddie Flintoff yet to come, England would be looking to increase the lead to well over 450 and push India on to the backfoot with some sharp, aggressive bowling. At this stage I'd give them a 60-40 chance of winning this match, but somehow I feel they won't have enough time to bowl India out. If they do then it would definitely be a remarkable upset.
Fantastic contributions from all players is obviously been the difference between the two sides. Matthew Hoggard, provided a master class in sustained, accurate swing bowling, troubled all Indian batsmen, having them hopping around like they were standing bare feet on coal. Crucial centuries by Paul Collingwood in the 1st Innings and an yet to be dismissed century by debutant Alaistair cook. And not to forget, the irrepressable Kevin Pietersen.

For India obviously this has not been the ideal start to they were looking for, having their backs to wall but they can still certainly avoid defeat. The burgeoning pressure on Sehwag and Dravid to score the bulk of the runs for India is starting to get worrisome. Yuvraj Singh's absence both with the bat and on the field was distinctly felt and though, his replacement Mohd. Kaif settled down to play a pivotal innings, he does not inspire confidence. The Ganguly saga, as randramble accurately pointed out, just refuses to die down and everytime the Indian middle order appears shaky, questions are raised as to whether Ganguly should be brought back to strengthen the batting line-up. And why are Indian selectors hell-bent on treating Indian openers like dirt? What could possibly be the reason for bringing in Wasim Jaffer in place of Gautham Gambhir? It's disheartening enough that a precious, steady opener like Akash Chopra, who performed splendidly in Australia, has now been completely left out national reckoning. Unless Gambhir was left out for injuries, this replacement is a complete waste of everybody's time, cos even if Wasim jaffer scores a triple century tomorrow, he is by no stretch of the imagination, a LONG TERM OPENING PROSPECT.


So what made this series potentially exciting in the first place? Well for one, it's a clash between two equally matched teams. For my money England is without doubt, the second best cricket test team in the world and India would surely fancy themselves at Number 3 or number 4 spot. The difference between the number 2 team and subsequent two teams is often negligible.And yes, I'm sure that there are several out there who would be quick to disagree and lay out your case as to why England would be a much better squad. But let me hastily add that, India is a tough team to beat at home and England have, as history books would love to point out, always underperformed under sub-continental conditions. Several wise men have also famously agreed that 'history is bunk'. Both teams look at this series as an opportunity to raise the level of their games and try to compete with Australia for top spots.

This present English team has been making steady progress over the past few years. Under the dynamic captaincy of Michael Vaughan and coach Duncan Fletcher, they have matured quite wonderfully and built upon the strength's and successes initated during Nasser Hussein's tenure as captain. And who can ever forget last summer's heroics in the Ashes? Quite simply a remarkable sporting event which shall hold a place in the our cricketing consiousness and brought cricket back to the forefront in England and elsewhere. A lot is expected from this present English side which is not totally unreasonable, cos they have all the required arsenal and armory to take on the best teams.

They have already sent across a clear message to the Indians- that they are here to win and the Indians need to respond with equal purpose and aggression.

-Nav

(All images can be found on cricinfo.com)

Oscar Predictions

It's been a while since I've updated. Apologies to all my readers who no doubt eagerly await my every post - haha.

Moving along*ahem* to matters which deserve our fullest and immediate attention. The OSCARS!!! which is to be televised this Sunday the 5th. It promises to be an exciting event especially since it'll be hosted by Jon Stewart, one of my favorite comedians, intelligent, knowlegable and one heck of a funny guy. Anybody who has watched the Daily Show with Jon Stewart on Comedy central can vouch for that. If you haven't, then I'd strongly urge you to mark it down on your daily schedules. It's on air 11 PM everynight on comedy central. But if you miss it, don't fret cos they keep repeating each show every so often.

It'll be interesting to see if Jon Stewart can work his subtle magic on such a wide scale audience. It's a fine art, this hosting the Oscars business, and they've been many accomplished stand-up's and celebrities who have in the past, fallen short of expectations. I wonder if Dave Letterman or Chris Rock have any words of wisdom for Jon Stewart.

And while that shall be something to look forward to, what shall undoubtedly be on everyone's mind come this Sunday evening, will be trying to guess who'll walk away with the top honors. And as I do every year, I shall stick my neck out and like countless others, try to pick the winners. Initially I'd hoped to put it off till saturday, trying to get a feel of which way the wind blows. But might as well get it over with. I've always found it harder to choose 1 out 5, rather than say, 5 out of 20. And as usual, and i'm certain many would agree, the hardest part is being able to make a choice between whom you personally wish to win and whom you obviously expect to win.
And also there is more to it than meets the eye. For instance, in the Best director category, we have Steven Spielberg (director of munich) vs. Ang Lee (BB Mountain). Spielberg has won the top directing award twice before in the past and Ang Lee has not. How will that effect the voting process.Will the members confer the award upon Spielberg again (albeit he richly deserves it)?

Oscars, in the past have been known to take such factors into account while giving out the awards. Remember in 2001? Russel Crowe won best actor for his performance in Gladiator. Great performance but Denzel Washington's performance in the Hurricane definitely deserved the award. The next year, the same two actors, would compete again for best acting honors. This time Denzel Washington won for his performance in Training day. Did he deserve it though? Maybe. But for my money, Russel Crowe's performance in A beautiful mind was far better. So now we have two fine actors, each having won the academy award, but not for their best works. Life is not without a sense of irony. But this is my opinion. They are many who feel they deserved the awards for the respective works.

A word about the best Picture nominees. It's obviously Munich Vs. Brokeback Mountain. I feel Munich is a better movie. And that's not meant to take anything away from BBack Mountain. The others, all very absorbing productions, but well, it's a case of nomination being it's own reward. As is the case in the other categories

So that being said, here are my picks -

Performance by an actress in a leading role -

Judi Dench in “Mrs. Henderson Presents”

Felicity Huffman in “Transamerica”

Keira Knightley in “Pride & Prejudice” <-----Rooting for

Charlize Theron in “North Country”

Reese Witherspoon in “Walk the Line” <----- Expect to win

Performance by an actress in a supporting role-

Amy Adams in “Junebug”

Catherine Keener in “Capote”

Frances McDormand in “North Country”

Rachel Weisz in “The Constant Gardener” <-----Rooting for

Michelle Williams in “Brokeback Mountain” <----- Expect to win

Performance by an actor in a leading role-

Philip Seymour Hoffman in “Capote” <----- Expect to win

Terrence Howard in “Hustle & Flow”

Heath Ledger in “Brokeback Mountain”

Joaquin Phoenix in “Walk the Line”

David Strathairn in “Good Night, and Good Luck.”

Performance by an actor in a supporting role-

George Clooney in “Syriana” <----- Rooting for

Matt Dillon in “Crash” <---- Expect to win

Paul Giamatti in “Cinderella Man”

Jake Gyllenhaal in “Brokeback Mountain”

William Hurt in “A History of Violence”

Achievement in directing-

“Brokeback Mountain” (Focus Features)Ang Lee <---- Expect to win

“Capote” (UA/Sony Pictures Classics)Bennett Miller

“Crash” (Lions Gate) Paul Haggis

“Good Night, and Good Luck.” (Warner Independent Pictures) George Clooney

“Munich” (Universal and DreamWorks)Steven Spielberg <---- Rooting for


Best motion picture of the year-

“Brokeback Mountain” (Focus Features)A River Road Entertainment Production Diana Ossana and James Schamus, Producers <--- Expect to win

“Capote” (UA/Sony Pictures Classics)An A-Line Pictures/Cooper’s Town/ Infinity Media ProductionCaroline Baron, William Vince and Michael Ohoven, Producers

“Crash” (Lions Gate)A Bob Yari/DEJ/Blackfriar’s Bridge/ Harris Company/ApolloProscreen GmbH & Co./Bull’s Eye Entertainment ProductionPaul Haggis and Cathy Schulman, Producers

“Good Night, and Good Luck.” (Warner Independent Pictures)A Good Night Good Luck LLC Production Grant Heslov, Producer

“Munich” (Universal and DreamWorks)A Universal Pictures/DreamWorks Pictures ProductionKathleen Kennedy, Steven Spielberg and Barry Mendel, Producers <---- Rooting for


Adapted screenplay-

“Brokeback Mountain” (Focus Features)Screenplay by Larry McMurtry & Diana Ossana <--- Expect to win

“Capote” (UA/Sony Pictures Classics) Screenplay by Dan Futterman

“The Constant Gardener” (Focus Features) Screenplay by Jeffrey Caine <--- Rooting for

“A History of Violence” (New Line) Screenplay by Josh Olson

“Munich” (Universal and DreamWorks)Screenplay by Tony Kushner and Eric Roth


Original screenplay-

“Crash” (Lions Gate)Screenplay by Paul Haggis & Bobby MorescoStory by Paul Haggis <--- Expect to win

“Good Night, and Good Luck.” (Warner Independent Pictures) Screenplay by George Clooney & Grant Heslov

“Match Point” (DreamWorks) Written by Woody Allen

“The Squid and the Whale” (Samuel Goldwyn Films and Sony Pictures Releasing)Written by Noah Baumbach

“Syriana” (Warner Bros.)Written by Stephen Gaghan <----Rooting for


Achievement in film editing-

“Cinderella Man” (Universal and Miramax)Mike Hill and Dan Hanley

“The Constant Gardener” (Focus Features) Claire Simpson <---Rooting for

“Crash” (Lions Gate) Hughes Winborne

“Munich” (Universal and DreamWorks) Michael Kahn <--- Expect to win

“Walk the Line” (20th Century Fox)Michael McCusker

Achievement in cinematography-

“Batman Begins” (Warner Bros.) Wally Pfister

“Brokeback Mountain” (Focus Features)Rodrigo Prieto <--- Expect to win

“Good Night, and Good Luck.” (Warner Independent Pictures)Robert Elswit

“Memoirs of a Geisha” (Sony Pictures Releasing)Dion Beebe

“The New World” (New Line)Emmanuel Lubezki <--- Rooting for


As you may noticed in several categories (infact all xcept one) I've made two entries. Now the one's marked "Expected to win" are the nominations I pick to win. So the degree of accuracy of my picks should be measured upon these nominations and not the one's i'm rooting for. So that would lead to the next logical question which would be - Would I be happier if the nominations I rooted for actually won? (which means my pick was wrong). Well If they indeed did win I'll be pleased. On some occasions,I'd rather be pleased than be accurate.

And absolutely no Indian presence in the Oscars this year. Last year we had a documentary based on children of sex workers shot in the slums of Calcutta (which won, If I remember correctly). The year prior to that we had a nomination in the Short film category (Little Terrorist). Also last year there was an air of expectancy as Aishwarya Rai, the supposed toast of Hollywood, was slated to present an award. But was a no-show. Apparently was shooting on some foreign location and could'nt escape from her schedule. Or so her media managers would like us to believe. Haha. Will keep a close watch to check if she's kept herself free this Sunday.

-Nav