An NPR correspondent's revealing look at the use of electronic voting machines in India's last general election and how the US could (but won't) learn from them.
A Northwestern professor's attempt to get college students to use their votes wisely. College students in the US are allowed to vote in their home state or college state. The website encourages students to vote in a swing state for maximum impact. If you fall in this category, please remember to check your state's voter registration deadline.
Thursday, September 30, 2004
Thursday, September 23, 2004
The Force Is (Finally) With Me
So in true geek form I went and rented all five Star Wars movies the day the original three were released on DVD. And I couldn't watch a double trilogy that has quite possibly the largest cult following of any movie in the world without throwing my two cents in the ring along with all the others.
I should mention here that this is first time I've watched any of the movies. And to be honest, I didn't think I'd like the original three. In this day and age of near-perfect special effects, watching a twenty-five-year-old sci-fi movie is like being forced to write a letter when email is readily available - the shortcomings are all too apparent and the painful additional effort makes for an impatient watcher/writer.
Surprisingly, I thoroughly enjoyed them. Like hand-writing a letter is far more personal than typing an email, the original Star Wars movies have a personality that is sadly lacking in the more recent duo-soon-to-be-trio. And it is the personality that is largely responsible for the continuing popularity of the SW franchise.
Episode IV set the tone and laid a sound foundation for each character. Carrie Fisher as spunky Princess Leia and Harrison Ford as maverick Han Solo were instantly appealing and so was James Earl Jones' distinctive baritone for Darth Vader. The constant undercurrent of humour provided largely by C-3PO and R2-D2 was also a key attraction, something that seems to be a George Lucas speciality based on this and the Indiana Jones movies. And although Return Of The Jedi was far less appealing, there was a consistency and continuity in the personalities that tied the trilogy together, despite weak performances by some peripheral characters and a not-too-original storyline.
Unfortunately, in Episode I George Lucas goes so completely overboard with the special effects that the development of the characters suffers tremendously. Add to that some fairly obvious racial stereotyping, a disastrous comic relief character in Jar Jar Binks, depressingly wooden performances by Liam Neeson (Qui-Gon Jinn), Ewan McGregor (terrible as a young Obi-Wan Kenobi, given the serene yet intense gravity of Alec Guinness' earlier performances) and especially Keira Knightley as Sabé, and the disconnect becomes even greater. The only saving grace is Ray Park's menacing Sith apprentice Darth Maul, who gives the movie some much-needed flavour and punch. Which makes it kind of unfortunate that he dies in the end, but which also holds out hope for next year's final chapter, Revenge Of The Sith.
Episode II is far more watchable, as long as you don't expect a "Star Wars" movie. Attack Of The Clones is a run-of-the-mill potboiler, with the usual mix of action, romance and comedy that the genre demands. Some better-than-average emoting by Natalie Portman and Hayden Christiansen and impressive CG kept me entertained but the movie doesn't recapture the original mood.
For more views, check out the IMDB opinions. (The trivia is pretty cool too.) May the force be with you!
I should mention here that this is first time I've watched any of the movies. And to be honest, I didn't think I'd like the original three. In this day and age of near-perfect special effects, watching a twenty-five-year-old sci-fi movie is like being forced to write a letter when email is readily available - the shortcomings are all too apparent and the painful additional effort makes for an impatient watcher/writer.
Surprisingly, I thoroughly enjoyed them. Like hand-writing a letter is far more personal than typing an email, the original Star Wars movies have a personality that is sadly lacking in the more recent duo-soon-to-be-trio. And it is the personality that is largely responsible for the continuing popularity of the SW franchise.
Episode IV set the tone and laid a sound foundation for each character. Carrie Fisher as spunky Princess Leia and Harrison Ford as maverick Han Solo were instantly appealing and so was James Earl Jones' distinctive baritone for Darth Vader. The constant undercurrent of humour provided largely by C-3PO and R2-D2 was also a key attraction, something that seems to be a George Lucas speciality based on this and the Indiana Jones movies. And although Return Of The Jedi was far less appealing, there was a consistency and continuity in the personalities that tied the trilogy together, despite weak performances by some peripheral characters and a not-too-original storyline.
Unfortunately, in Episode I George Lucas goes so completely overboard with the special effects that the development of the characters suffers tremendously. Add to that some fairly obvious racial stereotyping, a disastrous comic relief character in Jar Jar Binks, depressingly wooden performances by Liam Neeson (Qui-Gon Jinn), Ewan McGregor (terrible as a young Obi-Wan Kenobi, given the serene yet intense gravity of Alec Guinness' earlier performances) and especially Keira Knightley as Sabé, and the disconnect becomes even greater. The only saving grace is Ray Park's menacing Sith apprentice Darth Maul, who gives the movie some much-needed flavour and punch. Which makes it kind of unfortunate that he dies in the end, but which also holds out hope for next year's final chapter, Revenge Of The Sith.
Episode II is far more watchable, as long as you don't expect a "Star Wars" movie. Attack Of The Clones is a run-of-the-mill potboiler, with the usual mix of action, romance and comedy that the genre demands. Some better-than-average emoting by Natalie Portman and Hayden Christiansen and impressive CG kept me entertained but the movie doesn't recapture the original mood.
For more views, check out the IMDB opinions. (The trivia is pretty cool too.) May the force be with you!
Sunday, September 12, 2004
Floats Like A Butterfly, Stings Like A Bee
With due respect to Muhammad Ali, that description fits one Roger Federer to a T. There are no words to describe just how good he is. So, I'll take recourse in the superlative. Roger Federer is simply the best.
He reminds me of so many different creatures, it's like walking through a zoo. With his un-photogenic face, flat-footed slouching stroll between points, skinny arms and flabby physique, he is like a penguin - ungainly and unattractive out of its element but gorgeous in it. If you've ever seen him hit a tennis stroke, you'll know what I mean. His langurous yet deadly groundstrokes are reminiscent of a cobra-strike, and his silent but lightning-quick court coverage can only compare with a panther on the prowl. Hewitt, Agassi and others get noticed more for their scramble ability, but I think that's only because they're much noisier and expend a lot more effort doing it.
And just when you think you've seen it all, he slips effortlessly into a higher gear, like some incomparable sports car pulling away from the competition. With about as much fuss as the radar blip of a B-2. He started off the second set by breaking Hewitt and going up 2-0 and I think he just relaxed a little too much, probably surprised at how easy it was. Result: he was down breakpoints in four service games in the second set - he saved all but one of six. Down 30-40 at 3-2 he served three straight aces to win the game. Down 30-40 again at 4-3 he hit a volley winner, a service winner and an ace. He had twenty unforced errors and a first serve percentage in the 30s in the second set and he still took it to a tie-break. Compare this with a measly two unforced errors in the first set and it puts things in perspective.
People say this (wrongly) about lots of athletes and teams in every sport and I don't agree with them usually, but I don't think anyone wins a match against Federer - he loses the match. I honestly believe that the only person who has seen Roger Federer play at his best is Roger Federer.
The only weak link in his armour used to be that he wasn't the best volleyer around - well, he's on his way to fixing that. He won 31 of 35 points at the net in Sunday's final. At one stage he was hitting so many lines that Mary Carillo said that unlike most players, Federer probably aims for the white lines instead of the green stuff in between.
At the presentation ceremony, Dick Ensberg said to him, "Well, you can serve, you can hit groundstrokes, you're volleying much better, you've got great court coverage. So what more can we expect from you in the future?"
Federer paused, smiled and said, "That's all I got."
And scarily, it's true. When you've mastered everything in a sport, what else can you do?
He reminds me of so many different creatures, it's like walking through a zoo. With his un-photogenic face, flat-footed slouching stroll between points, skinny arms and flabby physique, he is like a penguin - ungainly and unattractive out of its element but gorgeous in it. If you've ever seen him hit a tennis stroke, you'll know what I mean. His langurous yet deadly groundstrokes are reminiscent of a cobra-strike, and his silent but lightning-quick court coverage can only compare with a panther on the prowl. Hewitt, Agassi and others get noticed more for their scramble ability, but I think that's only because they're much noisier and expend a lot more effort doing it.
And just when you think you've seen it all, he slips effortlessly into a higher gear, like some incomparable sports car pulling away from the competition. With about as much fuss as the radar blip of a B-2. He started off the second set by breaking Hewitt and going up 2-0 and I think he just relaxed a little too much, probably surprised at how easy it was. Result: he was down breakpoints in four service games in the second set - he saved all but one of six. Down 30-40 at 3-2 he served three straight aces to win the game. Down 30-40 again at 4-3 he hit a volley winner, a service winner and an ace. He had twenty unforced errors and a first serve percentage in the 30s in the second set and he still took it to a tie-break. Compare this with a measly two unforced errors in the first set and it puts things in perspective.
People say this (wrongly) about lots of athletes and teams in every sport and I don't agree with them usually, but I don't think anyone wins a match against Federer - he loses the match. I honestly believe that the only person who has seen Roger Federer play at his best is Roger Federer.
The only weak link in his armour used to be that he wasn't the best volleyer around - well, he's on his way to fixing that. He won 31 of 35 points at the net in Sunday's final. At one stage he was hitting so many lines that Mary Carillo said that unlike most players, Federer probably aims for the white lines instead of the green stuff in between.
At the presentation ceremony, Dick Ensberg said to him, "Well, you can serve, you can hit groundstrokes, you're volleying much better, you've got great court coverage. So what more can we expect from you in the future?"
Federer paused, smiled and said, "That's all I got."
And scarily, it's true. When you've mastered everything in a sport, what else can you do?
Saturday, September 11, 2004
Open Forum
A Study In Contrasts
The men's semifinals are so different this time. There's Lleyton Hewitt with his grungy skater boy look and the tall stoic Swede Joachim Johansson. And then there's the classic matchup of Roger Federer and Tim Henman.
Without trying to take anything away from his obviously effective game, Lleyton Hewitt's counterpuncher style is not the most attractive to watch. And Joachim Johansson is one of the slowest and stiffest players I've seen. How he got this far is a mystery and I will be very (pleasantly) surprised if he doesn't have lower back problems in the future if he persists with his current serving style.
In stark contradistinction, Federer and Henman are two of the most silky smooth players on the tennis circuit today. Lithe, graceful and catlike, the second semifinal should be a joy to watch.
A Country Affair
This seems to be happening more and more of late:
US Open 2003, women's singles - Justine Henin-Hardenne vs. Kim Clijsters, both Dutch.
Australian Open 2004, women's singles - Justine Henin-Hardenne vs. Kim Clijsters, again.
French Open 2004, women's singles - Anastasia Myskina vs. Elena Dementieva, both Russian.
French Open 2004, men's singles - Gaston Gaudio vs. Guillermo Coria, both Argentine.
US Open 2004, women's singles - Svetlana Kuznetsova vs. Elena Dementieva, both Russian.
And this list does not even include the eight all-USA matchups between the Williams sisters or between Venus Williams and Lindsay Davenport in the last five years. Or the intense Agassi-Sampras US Open final of 2002.
Backhanded Compliment
The classic single-handed backhand seems to be making a comeback. Federer and Henman use it. As does Johansson. Henin-Hardenne and Amelie Mauresmo do it on the women's side. I hope it catches on. There is no sweeter sight in tennis than a well-struck one-hander and anyone who grew up watching Pete Sampras, Martina Navratilova and Stefan Edberg has got to be hoping that this current trend continues.
Ad-Vantage
I've seen some really cool ads at this year's telecast of the US Open. The Canon Rebel T2 ad with Andre Agassi and Steffi Graf is my favourite, but the American Express ones with Andy Roddick and Venus Williams are quite funny too. And then there are the various IBM, AIG and MassMutual commercials that aren't too bad.
The men's semifinals are so different this time. There's Lleyton Hewitt with his grungy skater boy look and the tall stoic Swede Joachim Johansson. And then there's the classic matchup of Roger Federer and Tim Henman.
Without trying to take anything away from his obviously effective game, Lleyton Hewitt's counterpuncher style is not the most attractive to watch. And Joachim Johansson is one of the slowest and stiffest players I've seen. How he got this far is a mystery and I will be very (pleasantly) surprised if he doesn't have lower back problems in the future if he persists with his current serving style.
In stark contradistinction, Federer and Henman are two of the most silky smooth players on the tennis circuit today. Lithe, graceful and catlike, the second semifinal should be a joy to watch.
A Country Affair
This seems to be happening more and more of late:
US Open 2003, women's singles - Justine Henin-Hardenne vs. Kim Clijsters, both Dutch.
Australian Open 2004, women's singles - Justine Henin-Hardenne vs. Kim Clijsters, again.
French Open 2004, women's singles - Anastasia Myskina vs. Elena Dementieva, both Russian.
French Open 2004, men's singles - Gaston Gaudio vs. Guillermo Coria, both Argentine.
US Open 2004, women's singles - Svetlana Kuznetsova vs. Elena Dementieva, both Russian.
And this list does not even include the eight all-USA matchups between the Williams sisters or between Venus Williams and Lindsay Davenport in the last five years. Or the intense Agassi-Sampras US Open final of 2002.
Backhanded Compliment
The classic single-handed backhand seems to be making a comeback. Federer and Henman use it. As does Johansson. Henin-Hardenne and Amelie Mauresmo do it on the women's side. I hope it catches on. There is no sweeter sight in tennis than a well-struck one-hander and anyone who grew up watching Pete Sampras, Martina Navratilova and Stefan Edberg has got to be hoping that this current trend continues.
Ad-Vantage
I've seen some really cool ads at this year's telecast of the US Open. The Canon Rebel T2 ad with Andre Agassi and Steffi Graf is my favourite, but the American Express ones with Andy Roddick and Venus Williams are quite funny too. And then there are the various IBM, AIG and MassMutual commercials that aren't too bad.
Old Friends And New
Labor Day weekend was action-packed, relaxing, fun and just what the doctor ordered. San Francisco, Part II involved navigating the twists and turns of Lombard Street in a Dodge Grand Caravan - something I wouldn't recommend doing on a regular basis, and a drive across the Golden Gate Bridge, neither of which I had gotten around to doing the last time I was in the Bay area. Throw in a trip to a really funky restaurant that shall remain unnamed, about thirty beers and other assorted drinks in the course of four days and an absolutely great bunch of people and the result is one long party - a party I think I'm still recovering from.
Coming back to a string of international student orientations does nothing to help one get over a tiring trip. What it does do, however, is far better. Already I've met a Greek guy who trips on bhajans (!) and Ravi Shankar, a heavily-tattooed gay British art history major, a Chinese-Canadian piano virtuoso and an Indian who is the daughter of one of the Bajajs! And those are just the new students. Re-establishing contact with some of my co-volunteer friends from previous years has also been loads of fun and I'm looking forward hanging out with them once we're done with all of these events.
Coming back to a string of international student orientations does nothing to help one get over a tiring trip. What it does do, however, is far better. Already I've met a Greek guy who trips on bhajans (!) and Ravi Shankar, a heavily-tattooed gay British art history major, a Chinese-Canadian piano virtuoso and an Indian who is the daughter of one of the Bajajs! And those are just the new students. Re-establishing contact with some of my co-volunteer friends from previous years has also been loads of fun and I'm looking forward hanging out with them once we're done with all of these events.
Thursday, September 02, 2004
Sound Suspension & Powerful Change
Fascinating looks at an engineering feat by an unlikely candidate and the resurrection of a hitherto-dormant scientific achievement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)