Have you encountered people who might have completely different and radical opinions while compared to yours? There might be a chance that I might be one of them. Welcome to this website where you can experience the thoughts of someone who isn't afraid to be controversial. Someone who feels that the world follows a messed up system and it is this system that is inhibiting the growth of humanity.
This website can be interpreted as anything you want. A blog, a diary, a journal or even a one-sided text to a friend. That is exactly why I want to make it as easy to read as possible and cover a wide spectrum of content. Of course, the end goal is not to publish a book or anything, so yes it might not be the most novel-like thing you have read.
So!! Let's get started!!
Auditory Journey with the song: New York, New York by Frank Sinatra
This is something I like doing and I haven't seen many people do it. Its called an auditory journey. Basically I provide situations which match the mood and theme of a song. Sort of like a walkthrough. I think its better with forming scenarios since you read the writeup and the song plays in your head. So you have your eyes, your mind and your ears giving you an experience you will remember forever.
The instructions are simple, you play the song from the start and then read the scenario along with it. Reduce the volume so as to have this song softly reverb in the back of your head. Picture the scenario in your head as much as possible for the complete experience. Again, this is purely experimental and you can comment if you think this can be fixed.
A cold, wet and damp evening in the Fall of 1964. The sky part cloudy with the gleamy sunrays from the setting sun disappearing behind the concrete jungle. Raindrops trickling down like pleasant tears from the eyes of Zephyrus herself. You are clothed to protect yourself from the cold water from the Atlantic hitting your skin and from the Gusty wind which streered ships into the Hudson Yards. The swift breeze, so quick that it blows away all the leafs from the nearby maple tree with a few leaves gently gliding on your wintercoat.
The footpath on West 51st Street, crowded as usual. A sound of some Jazz musicians playing is faintly heard in your ears as you walk further away from them. The hustle and bustle with someone occasionally walking swiftly into you, probably delivering such good news that they cannot perceive the surroundings. Attractive and colorful displays on dark, dingy buildings everywhere you look that make you forget whether its night or day. You walk, and you walk through this human maelstrom with a herd of cars by your side. Their honks and brakes like occasional trumpetting from elephants.
As you approach a Yellow Cab to exit the island that made lives of millions, you also leave behind all your inhibitions and make your way to transition into reality. As you leave the island, you see the Iron Rods on the Manhattan Bridge glimmering from the reflection of streetlights and through that, you see a silhouette of the island you are exiting. As you see the island, the cab driver slowly turns the music down as you reach your destination...
Does a bad review on Rotten Tomatoes signal an end of a movie?
C'mon I just don't write stuff crapping on religions and Nintendo. I write other stuff as well.
A grave realization also set in me, as I am typing this. I had not updated my website for over 10 months. And when you don't do something for more than 6 months, the internet basically regards you as dead xD.
Anyway, moving on to the topic of this writeup. Basically, I wanted to talk about what defines the success of a movie. Is it the fame? Is it the acting? Or, is it appeasing a bunch of pseudo-intellectuals who go by the name 'critics'? Let me be clear, I don't exactly "hate" movie critics. I just think that critics having the thought process that they are the best people to listen to when it comes to a movie is just pure horsecrap.
Today most of the world focuses on what reviewers say. Let's be honest, when we search up a movie on Google we see its Rotten Tomatoes rating and frame our assumptions about the movie. In this way, a lot of aspiring directors loose a large portion of their audience simply because of a misclick! Imagine the amount of effort that would've gone, even to produce and direct a trash movie and all that effort goes to waste when a reviewer says "don't watch".
I like the concept of IMDb ratings because its common people like you and me who provide ratings on it. That provides a much general perspective of how good the movie is. But when one person dominates the opinion of a creative work, it becomes monopolized to just that person and everyone else framing an opinion based on it.
I was having a talk with my friend the other day on how he personally likes the movie Batman v/s Superman a lot. It didn't matter to him what the reviews said because he had his own view of how the movie was. Similarly one of my other friends didn't like the movie Deadpool a lot in comparison to the highly positive critics ratings it received. These were people having a personal opinion rather than reading off of a review from a website.
There are a lot of genres in cinema. And everyone like or understand a particular type of genre better than the other. For example, I like or interpret crime movies better than I do, say for instance, science-fiction or drama. A few people perform an amazing rhetorical analysis on romance and drama movies in comparsion to understanding the intricacies of a crime thriller. My assumption is that even movie critics belong to such categories. So a critic is naturally biased towards one genre than the other. So shouldn't we take into consideration the bias of a critic when it comes to movie reviews?
Here is another domain of analysis, what about the god-figure like nature of actors that leads a movie to success? Cinema is a derivative of plays which is, in no doubt, written for common man. It is a natural perception of common man to view actors as mythical features since the props of a movie elevates the mere human of an actor to a god-like creature. In that way, a common man enjoys watching his favorite actor. So shouldn't the success of a movie also depend on how well the common man receives it? If I have to make a crude comparison, a Christopher Nolan movie should appease a common man as good as it appeases a science enthusiast. In my opinion, Parasite was a very simple, no-nonsense movie that encapsulated a poor family posing as qualified individuals.
As a conclusion I would just request everyone to view any movie once whether you read the review or not. No matter how terribly the review is written. You may like it, or you may not. But by viewing the movie, you are appreciating the effort put in by loads of people, the actors, directors, writers, make-up artists, light and sound engineers
How overrated is Nintendo today?
Do you know what's the best thing about being anonymous? You wouldn't have stuff thrown at your face. People just read your stuff and get offended. A few try to search for your existence and then finally give up. It is such a wierd world right! You want to target at some guy who is so distant and just exists virtually, but not target at people that really matter.
Anyway, the reason that philosophy came to my mind is because of how controversial the above question I raised is.
Think about this. You were so fascinated by the Japanese making some amazing gaming devices that you decide to bring this to the United States. Then you get a bunch of people hooked up to it, so much that they would wait in lines to get the new game or whatever. Fast forward, 20 years later, you still have the fame. All you have to do to sustain is to introduce the "kawaii" equation into everything. You sugar-coat the living hell out of it, make everything baby-like and ride along the "anime wave" which is without much doubt, prevalent in the Western Hemisphere.
Learn from these people, how to run a company.
A couple of days back, a friend told me something. He said and I quote, "Dude, you wanna sell anything just sugarcoat the f*ck out of it. Dumb people here just buy everything if they see cute stuff on it." It sounded a bit ridiculous, but after a lot of thought, I was convinced he was right. Look at Snapchat, Apple's animojis, Plushies and Kellogg's Frosties (featuring Tony the Tiger). They were all simple ideas but so heavily sugar-coated that the world now believes what they set is the standard for the commodity they sell (Disney too..). Nintendo did a great job learning this and exploiting this to the fullest.
Let me be clear, they are doing a good job of bringing the devices to the shelves.The Switch was a success because it revolutionized the way you perceive gaming. Their possible goal is to debunk the concept of handheld v/s non-portable gaming console. It is after long, that they brought out something that did create a dent in the gaming industry. But this comes from a dastardous side-effect of influencing people to follow baby-like games which undergo mild to no iterations. You are literally sh*tting at people who spend more than 15 hours a day maintaining and rolling out heavily rendered graphics. I do respect the company for being a success in the electronic segment of a consumer's catalog, but this success is celebrated too much by the customers. That is why I feel Nintendo is overrated today.(C.C)
Is the baha'I faith, a cowardly compromise?
Ooff!! Writing stuff like this makes me so powerful. People who are a little aware of religion probably think I am going to convert everyone into one of the Abrahamic religions. But that's anti to what I am going to do. If you don't know what baha'I is, I'll give you a brief introduction. baha'I is a contemporary faith from the Middle East (Iran) which is based on the respect to messengers. It basically combines the best out of all the Abrahamic religions into one flow of thought(And there is no way you don't know an Abrahamic religion)
I was introduced to this faith by a popular television celebrity named Rainn Wilson (Dwight, if you follow The Office). He starts off by saying that he wouldn't wanna influence anyone or force anyone to follow it. Moreover he says "Hey! We have the same ideologies! But ours makes much more sense"
The whole idea of starting or following a religion is to spread it and convince the rest of the world that what you say makes much more sense. Even Atheists and scientologists want to prove the rest of the world that god doesn't exist. I have personally always believed that the whole debate about realization of god/being/alternate form is way beyond human interpretation. Man is only limited to the 6 senses and makes conlusions based on what those six senses feed into his brain.
I get distracted into philosophy very easily.
There are many reasons why I believe baha'I is just another fabricated faith. Mainly the financial backing of the Lotus Temple in New Delhi. The Lotus Temple is a 5 million dollar project and the largest single prayer house in the world. If baha'I themselves just have 2 million official followers, where did the money come from? The website says that it was a generous donation from an Iranian businessman. But when this temple was being built in India, there was a cap on the amount of funding for religious establishments. How did they get over it? I have many questions whose answers are very unclear.
The core ideologies of this faith are something that us as humans have to keep in mind. Its basically embrace humanity, serve each soul, understand distinction between good and bad. Finally, if you come across a messanger, someone who spreads the good word around, learn from him and reinforce your learning into your daily lives. Apart from the core ideologies, the faith is ill orchastrated and very mismanaged. It basically asks its followers to come to a compromise on the idea of who god is and who a messenger is. It feels like a desperate attempt to bring together two or more religions who have been warring against each other at least for a millenium.
What I feel these sparse organizations need to do is to educate current followers of Christianity and Islam, original untainted interpretations.