Coins for an airplane fare

Reblogged from storiasenzastoria:

No wings and a dire need to fly, I need an airplane and the fare is high. Though I have been collecting for a while in  boxes made of mud and wood my money, is all in small coins unspent on other desires since childhood. For the flight I pay the fare in coins and after the rise I walk out of the plane, without wings and a dire need to fly. So again each day I collect coins weirdly shaped and sized. Some small like time, some heavy as my mind. Having flown often you say ‘its just once or twice maybe thrice …

The Aaron Sorkin Interview from ILM/LucasFilm Speaker Series

The Social Network, again. I continue to be fascinated by how they did it.

I swing between regarding Sorkin as a genius and someone with no respect for the medium of film. Film should be a healthy marriage of show and tell, visuals and talk – his writing is almost the exact opposite, the extreme end of too much talk. But, the words work so well together that  you can close your eyes and just listen to the dialog. So, either Sorkin just wrote the way he did, without any respect for the grammar of cinema (which is what most hacks do) or he understood it so well, saw it so clearly that he could play with it the way he wanted to (it almost always takes a genius to do that). Whichever way you look at it, it is very clear that directing material like Sorkin’s is a very very tough job. His material has led to invention of film-devices like the “walk & talk“! (BTW: would you call it a “trope”? It’s more like a narrative device, but, for film…ah! forget it) Here is a great sampler from 30 Rock where they do the walk & talk with Aaron Sorkin himself in the cameo – “We don’t need two metaphors, that’s bad writing, not that it matters…” – comedy gold!

I had seen Mike Nichols’ Charlie Wilson’s War and that made me think “How could Sorkin write something so big, so grand in scope and still be meticulous enough about the small moments?” However, all in all that film did not have as big an impact as The Social Network did. Maybe it was some nuance in the writing or maybe it was the director. I’ll go with the director there. (please don’t misunderstand me, I think Nichols is a great director in his own right, Closer is proof and so is The Graduate, Catch 22 etc.)

So, Sorkin material is tricky. Which is why I feel that Sorkin should only work with people like David Fincher, who can carve a fiercely visual experience out of his words. Somehow I think Fincher is a lot more fierce, emotional and personal about making his films. He tries harder, fights harder, goes nastier and so on. And I feel that it shows.

I keep going back to Zodiac for David Fincher with the same kind of awe that I felt for CWW and Sorkin. How did he do it? How could he be so grand in scope, yet so mindful of the smallest details? Also, I keep watching The West Wing, Studio 60, Sports Night for Aaron Sorkin’s writing, trying to make sense of it all.

Then I see The Social Network.

We can all get into arguments about the events around Facebook were not as big a deal as the events around Afghanistan and that that would in turn affect the film that got made, but, it would be a moot discussion. The point is that regardless of the subject, Fincher and Sorkin have always been able to treat it (the subject matter) well, break new ground and deliver gold. And to do that well you need to know you stuff really-really well.

And that, is genius.

So, when in this interview I heard Sorkin talk about the mechanics of doing it, how he came to write The Social Network, how Mike Nichols and David Fincher treat his work (and what they bring to the table) and how they worked with the actors on the material, I was, as I said before, fascinated.

At the time of this post, embedding is disabled on these videos, therefore I’ll directly link to the videos (that’ll open in a new tab/window). Here we go:

1. Part 1 of the interview,
2. Part 2 of the interview,
3. Part 3
4. and Part 4.

Fascinating!

S.

The Marvel Way!

How to Draw Comics the Marvel Way!

Stan Lee’s books, Richard Williams’ books, Andrew Loomis’ books and The Illusion of Life.

These were some of the books (in increasing order of preference) that fascinated me when I used to do 3D and computer graphics. What little I can draw, I learnt from these books. I remember buying The Illusion of Life for 2,500 rupees when my salary was exactly cannot-afford-it-at-all per month. These books, they were glorious, brilliant, great!

I was pleasantly surprised to see that Richard Williams (The animator’s survival kit) and Stan Lee had also done instructional video versions of their books! Where was I? Why had I not seen this before?

The Richard Williams set is a little expensive today (when has that ever been an excuse?…hehe)

Happily enough, the Stan Lee set is available as a set of videos on YouTube.

Stan Lee and John Buscema made this video in 1988! Makes for really interesting viewing.

Here’s the complete set of videos:

1. The Tools and The Terms of The Trade! 
2. The Secrets of Form! Making An Object Look Real!
3. The Power of Perspective!
   
4. Let’s Study The Figure!
5. Let’s Draw The Figure!
6. The Name of the Game is ACTION!
7. Foreshortening! Drawing the Figure in Perspective!
8. Drawing The Human Head!
9. Composition!
10. Draw Your Own Comic Book Page! 
11. The Comic Book Cover!
12. The Art of Inking!
13. Credits! 

I am not sure if I am within rights to put these videos up. No, but as long as they are available on YouTube I figured there’s no harm in linking to them right? 

Cheers to Stan Lee and all the ones with a charmed pencil

Shaurya.

The Winter Queen (Erast Fandorin Mysteries, #1)

I finally am done with this one! The going was slow, I blame it on the bad bump I had hit with the previous book. But, in the end it was very good! Read on…

I was reading ‘Not a Penny more, Not a Penny less’ earlier and I had a nasty hunch that the book would take away a lucky streak of good books that I was running before that – The Angel’s Game, The End of Mr.Y, The Invention of Hugo Cabret and Quite Ugly One Morning.

It did. The plot was a wafer thin, see through deux-ex-machina. Totally broke the rhythm. I started this book after ‘Not a Penny…’ in hopes of starting another good run.

I am happy to report that The Winter Queen did bounce me back. However, there were a couple of things that kept me from going as high as the last good run. Maybe it’ll get better with the next book I get my hands on.

Unlike ‘Not a Penny…’, the language and the plot construction here is very good! Boris Akunin sets the voice a little sarcastic of the extreme formalism and of the red-tape that symbolize any “for the people” communist government (also representative of the management echelons of any modern day corporate house). He brings out humour in the most unusual situations and makes you smile in new and interesting ways, all through maintaining a language that sounds faux-heavy and mockingly self-serious.

** spoiler alert **

Fandorin, the detective protagonist works for the government, a “public servant”. He is a black sheep in a system, where its a taboo being one! And despite all the bother of his situation, Erast Fandorin, through a series of humurous events, manages to make glorious progress (in his career). It really had me rooting for the protagonist in a very refreshing way.

The hook of the book, that involves solving small mysteries which lead to the main one works very well! It kept my interest alive till about half the book, by which time I was totally hooked! A very well executed plot indeed.

Now for the small bother I have with the book. It became a little run-of-the-mill mundane in a couple of places. In a book that is this new and innovative, these situations stand out like Fandorin’s mustache in London. Cultural idiosyncrasies carry a lot more weight than dramatic escapades when our Russian hero is out locking horns with evil in London, a place he’s never been to before.

The other trifle-stifle is the denouement of the mystery. It almost led me to the resumption of my disbelief. A dangerous situation. I attribute it to the translation though and to my lack of cultural understanding of the Russia the novel talks about. The end is meant to inspire awe and make one marvel at the enormity of the Goliath our David was facing. It falls a little flat and tests the reader’s suspension of disbelief a little too hard. I suspect it is the English translation of things that causes the book to loose it’s whip.

But, at the very end, the very end when Fandorin says goodbye to his youth. It turns to solid gold again. I have purchased three other Fandorin mysteries, in hopes of similar, if not better enjoyment. There are so many possibilities!

Also, on a related note, I feel confident that with a sharp eye and a happy heart, this novel can be transformed into a very engaging film.

Cheers!

Shaurya