Endhiran Review

Finally got to see the much hyped, much awaited,  Rajini starrer "Endhiran" on October 1st, 2010 at a multiplex in East Windsor, NJ. Here is a my quick & very brief review of the movie.

First of all....Endhiran is a total entertainer.

Graphics & Spl Effects - Makes this movie levels apart from any of the Bollywood/Kollywood movies to date. It is on par with the Hollywood special effects. The last 1/2hr was....simply superb.

During the climax which lasts for about 30mins or so, you must watch Rajini's computer screen/display very closely to understand how our Hero Rajini wins over the Army of Robots, as it is a fast paced action packed 30mins. All the Graphics & Special effects reaches its peak in those last 30mins.

The story line is Good; Stunning Visuals; Even all the maamis in the "Happy Home" were good looking & commerical grade (I mean they appear in various commercials); Rahman's music is good but very fast except for one song.... I think, as I heard all songs for the first time though it has been few weeks since the Audio was launched.

The usual Rajini style & Punch dialogues are missing, which is a bit disappointing. But still a visual treat for all Rajini fans as they would get to see not just 1 or 2 Rajinis but an army of Rajinis as Robots.

I would say it is more apt to tag this movie as a Director Shankar's movie than Rajini's movie. He has roped in Rajini to take it to the masses (of interior remote Tamil Nadu), which otherwise would not have drawn only the city/elite crowds.

And last but not the least the all the marketing efforts of Sun Pictures which has put in Rupees 180-200 crore for this film (touted to be highest buget to date in Indian film Industry) is paying off.

On the whole, as I have mentioned at the beginning of this post, "Endhiran" is a total entertainer. I thoroughly enjoyed it. It is worth a watch atleast once. But I would not mind watching it again :-) 

Posted via email from Srini's Posts

Is Stephen Hawking wrong?

In "The Brief History Of Time" Stephen Hawking said: "If we discover a complete theory, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason – for then we should know the mind of God."

But as you might be aware yet till date the "complete theory" or "the Universal Theory" or "Theory of Everything" is elusive....that Stephen Hawking was talking about to in "The Brief History of Time".

And still... "Dark Energy" or "Dark Matter" are called so because the scientific community does not know what it is and how it can be explained.

But according to the excerpts released from his new book,  "The Grand Design", Stephen Hawking says, "....Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist.... It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."

These excerpts have triggered so much heated debate between the scientific & religious community now and among the people who are not sure whether they are one side or the other, that the chatter about this excerpt from his new book has become the trending topic in Twitter.

I have high regards for Stephen Hawking. And I think, everyone is jumping guns to conclude that "there is no GOD" or "Stephen Hawking is wrong". While, I don't want to jump to conclusions, I can guess what Stephen Hawking would have meant. He probably just says that we (humans) know a lot now than before that we can now explain the beginning & the evolution of the Universe with the laws of physics & the theories that we know as of today. I don't think he says "there is no GOD".

Let's see how far this debate goes. Or will this debate continue for generations to come?

BP Oil Spill

The BP (British Petroleum) Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico, is now considered the worst environmental disaster in the recent history. My heart goes out to everyone impacted by this disaster and I feel bad for all those oil soaked birds washing ashore. This is turning out to be a big threat to the marine species, birds, etc. But, you know what....I have a feeling that in due course of time all the species affected by this disaster will eventually evolve & thrive.

This oil spill is no doubt a big environmental disaster, but I don't think it is going to endager or result in extincton/near extinction of species. Environmental disasters like this would probably mutate the genes of the marine species in this region and thus would in few years/decades time we shoud see those species evolved to thrive in such conditions. If living organisms can thrive at the depths where even the sun light cannot reach, I guess some species could also live through this oil spill & evolve. After all Oil is just another natural resource. There are many places where it also naturally seeps to the ground without human drilling. I do not think such sites are devoid of any living organisms.

So, while the BP Oil Spill is a grave concern & a environmental disaster now, I hope mother nature will fix this in due course of time. I don't think there can be any second opinion that the leak must be capped, the Oil Spill needs to be cleaned up and we need to try & restore the same standard of living to all the flora & fauna in the impacted region. But even with all our humanly possible efforts, I don't think we can solve the problem we created. Were we able to fix the Ozone hole? So, we may need to wait for another generation or so to see how mother nature will fix this disaster. Probably, we might see new marine species evolve that is adapted to this kind of environment, capable of breaking down oil to thrive in such environment. We might even be able to handle future oil spills by introducing these new species in those waters, which might break up the oil.

PS: Just after posting this blog, I came across this news article - Scientists discover bacteria that can clean oil spill

Update (28-July-2010): Just within few days after the oil well has been capped, it appears that the oil slick is dissolving quickly than expected, atleast on the surface. Looks like as I wrote in this email, mother nature is fixing on its own.

Update (01-Aug-2010): Was the BP Oil Spill - disaster overblown?

Update (12-Aug-2010): In oiled Louisiana marshes, signs of regrowth seen

Update (09-Jan-2011): Methane from BP oil spill eaten by microbes

Donations By Text Message

In the wake of the devastating earthquake in Haiti, donations through Mobile Text Messages (see related news: Haiti Earthquake: Donations to Haiti Relief Efforts By Text Message - ABC News) has gone up significantly. They are indeed legitimate(though there might be some scams here & there) and the donations are reaching the right organization. It seems in the last few days millions of dollars has already been pledged for Haiti through Mobile Text Messages. Why are aid organizations like the RED CROSS going this route for donations now?

One of the primary reasons being stated is that donations through texting captures the "Impulsive Donors" segment, similar to the "Impulsive Buyers".

e.g., If you go grocery shopping while you are hungry you tend to buy more. The same logic applies here. When people are emotional, they tend to donate immediately. In the traditional way of Donation (through check), if one does not have the check book handy, then they put off donating for a few days. And by that time, such tragedies are not in the news headlines anymore. So, there is a chance that this person might not donate.

Infact according to a study done, it was observed that the donations to the charities are at the highest for the first 6 days after such tragedy/disaster occurs. So, donations through Mobile Text messages is an example of how technology is helping those in need.

Do you think Donations by Texting is here to stay or will it go away in few years?

BTW...did you know that Britain is planning to phase out the usage of check ("Cheque"---as spelled in some countries) books?

How old is our Universe?

Astronomers estimate the age of the Universe to be around 13.7 billion years or in other words the BIG BANG happened 13.7 billion years ago. Astronomers also believe that just a fraction of time after the BIG BANG, the debris (which form our Universe) expanded at a rate more than the speed of light and we know that the Universe is still expanding.

So, let us now imagine that after the BIG BANG, the universe is expanding.... in course of time Galaxies are formed and our Galaxy, the Milky Way is also formed. Some Galaxies would have formed before Milky Way and some after. And we do not know whether our Milky Way Galaxy is at the edge of the ever expanding Universe or closer to the Center of the Universe. Some Galaxies would have formed closer to the center of the Universe and Some very far off from the Center of the Universe (and also very further beyond our Milky Way).

If we could travel to another Galaxy at the edge of the Universe, far off from our Milky Way Galaxy, will the age of the Universe and the Time of BIG BANG be much more than 13.7 billion years?

So, the findings that BIG BANG happened 13.7 billion years ago (ie., Universe is 13.7 billions years old)...isn't that just relative to the earth?

Hope my question makes sense. I do not claim to be an expert on Astronomy or Astrophysics. I am just curious and someone interested in understanding the mysteries of our Universe.

I would appreciate if anyone can clarify me on this.

Also please feel free to share your thoughts or comments related to this topic or if you have any more questions that has been in your mind.

Updated on 28-Mar-2010: In the context of this topic and regarding the expansion of the Universe, I came across a news article titled "Universe expansion is speeding up". Here is the linnk to that article http://beta.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/article305275.ece