iREVIEW: Talaash (Hindi, 2012)

Starring Aamir Khan, Rani Mukherjee and Kareena Kapoor.  Written by Zoya Akhtar and Reema Kagti. Directed by Reema Kagti.

After Lagaan, Taare Zameen Par, 3 Idiots and Satyameva Jayate, Aamir Khan has been associated with ventures nothing short of path breaking, both from artistic and commercial point of views.  Inevitably, expectations from Talaash are anything but low.  I saw the film after reading a plethora of praising reviews and they took their toll. I was sincerely biased in favor of the film.

And even though the film is much better than some of the recent debacles, I was sorely disappointed.  The film is basically a bi-layered deal, on the top it is a nail-biting investigation following an inexplicable car crash but somewhere the film coaxes us to believe that there's something more, much intense and mysterious than the accident, buried in the life of Aamir and Rani's shattered coupling.

The first half of the film succeeds in holding our attention because we really didn't have any clue what it was all about! It was, in its truest sense, a mystery.  But before we could even get bored and hope that the demystification shall begin soon, we are given some clues as to where the film might progress and we pray that it isn't what we think it is!  I mean, after all, Aamir is in it, right? How could it go wrong?

It does.  And it hurt my feelings.  The film goes horribly trite turning into a monstrosity of boredom.  Barring the few emotionally ripe sequences, the film has little to offer.  The only, one and only, salvaging aspect is the lead performances - of Aamir's, Rani's and Kareena's.

With a sharp first half, hiking our expectations, second half betrayed us like an ex-girlfriend does for dimes.

Essay: Abortion and Women Rights

Few good people have tried to take the problem of female feticide head on but even they don’t seem to be bothered by intentional killing of female fetuses and female-biased abortions so abound in developing nations like India and the subcontinent.  The question and the answer are simple, but they probably have recognized the solution to be very difficult.

People who condemn abortion and contraceptive means on the grounds that such acts help proliferate dangerously low female to male ratio are either ignorant or charlatans.   The fact is that the social stratosphere in such countries is immensely warped against women.  The classic and the traditional norm support women suppression in all walks of life including teen years, schooling, working and housekeeping.  They are the one who render women useless and they are the one who view women as stones of burden.  Life is full of paradoxes, this one happens to hit half of humanity. 

There is something direly wrong with a society in which a parent may find drowning their newborn girl easier than raising her up.  It is not only a psychological theory but a biological conclusion that death of a child is the most unnatural occurrence and hence deepest tragedy for a parent.  Raising a female child has to be worse than this atrocity for a parent to commit such heinous act. 

Naturally if we keep the anti-women sentimentality as a constant and relieve all anti-abortion laws, this will surely result in hike in female-biased abortions.  And once again the society will live with a warped view of reality.  Social revolution cannot take place one step at a time.  It is one of the very few phenomena that don’t work this way.  Simply legalizing abortions will not contribute to the problem of female-biased abortion.  In fact, it will aggravate it.

But if a girl has freedom to go to any school, attend any college, get any job, earn for her family, she is then not a burden but a dignified member of a family.  Revocation of all the traditions that inhibit a female’s freedom and plunge her under dependencies is the first step towards an equal and female-biased abortion-free society. 

Infringement of freedom has many faces, some even the strictest of moderates may not agree with.  For example, females in developed countries tend to marry at a much later age as compared to those in developing nations solely because they can afford a living.  They are not dependents.  A developed and civilized society encourages every human being to be independent in life and thought process.  A human being can only be independent in entirety when there are no legal commitments.  If we think about it, a commitment is a romanticized term for slavery.  It is then reasonable to say that marriages are a logical conclusion of dependencies when seen from a woman’s viewpoint. 

For earning, independent women, marriage is an onset of her lineage of family.  For uneducated, dependent women, marriage is a transfer of burden.  And for a society that discourages every norm which supports women liberation and independence, their women tend to pose burden for their parents, who in turn encourage early marriages.  Moreover, as a compensation for relieving burden off of their shoulder, parents indulge in dowry which usually takes place via abusive and humiliating chain of events.

Why then parents raise a girl child? Why shouldn't they hope for a boy who can earn for them?  When met with such questions, a parent does what it thinks is best for them and the other children, and also, logically, is best for the child they are about to kill.  A child who has a future of repressions has a better chance with no chance at all.

Freedom has to come from all directions.  Most difficult area to liberate is the area of sexuality.  Sexuality must not be repressed.  Many have called marriages as a mean to live with dignity and have sex at the same time.  For odd reasons, developing nations are strictly anti-sex.  But they are the most populous nations in the world with objectionable number of STD cases and deepest of prostitution nexus. Again, the point is repression creates perversion.  Sexual repression creates sexual perversions.  Clearly something is wrong with a society when a lifelong commitment is the only answer to sex.  

Such dark imagery needs to be banished.  It is incumbent on the government to pass radical laws encouraging complete freedom for women from all dependencies including sexuality.  This will shock many parts of the society but this is the time to electrocute them out of their miseries. 

Government must not provide any special subsidies for married couple.  Every couple, unmarried or married, with children must have equal benefits.  Married couples with no children deserve no special tax exemptions.  A parent’s responsibility should be towards their children and not towards one another.  Instead of giving special privileges to married couple, government should encourage live-in relationships.  It can do so by helping couples find accommodation in “broad-minded” localities, protecting threatened couples by providing police security or even relocating them to an undisclosed foreign location.   Media should actively take part in harassing bodies of people who advocate anti-women customs and traditions. 

Women rights issue has often been viewed as much smaller segment of social revolution than it actually is.  Fight against women repression is fight against majority of the social backwardness and oppression.  If fought with rigor, I firmly believe we will peel away social evils such as caste system and religion bias, one layer at a time.  But we can’t peel a middle layer and then ponder why the whole system collapsed on top of each other.  That’s why we can’t simply legalize abortion and hope that the newly warped freedom assigned to women will help solve the whole tree of problems. We have to start peeling out each and every layer of oppression in the society.  It will end with the end of religion and marriage.  

iREVIEW: Sinister

Starring Ethan Hawke, Juliet Rylance, Clare Foley and Michael Hall D'Addario. Written by C. Robert Cargill and Scott Derrickson. Directed by Scott Derrickson. 

Haunted house genre is so trite in its horror parent, I wonder if there is room for something fresh in this lane. A happy family is lured into a house with unreasonably low closing price and then finds themselves chased around by folks from beyond.  Think of all the haunted house movies and I am sure you'll be able to place them all in the aforementioned typecast.

In that sense, Sinister is no different.  Yes, the whole beginning and the reason to move into a new house is atypical and very specific to the lead character's motif but still it boils down to nothing unique.

However, before it is too late, I must add Sinister is a decent film.  It wins in the field of spookiness and for most of us, that's what counts in a horror film. If it can scare you, it's good. For these people, Sinister is a must watch!

Ellison Oswalt, a crime writer who gained unprecedented fame after his first book "Kentucky Blood", moves into a house with "dark" history in an effort to write the next big thing.  Of course, the wife and the kids have had their share of undesired locations but little do they know this time they are on top of a homicidal scene.  From this point on, Sinister trudges down a rather known path but thanks to its creative back story, the film weaves in some really spooky moments.   And that's where it wins.

There is a constant feeling of horrifying claustrophobia as we don't see much of the outside world other than in the grainy 8 mm film reels which Oswalt mysteriously found in the attic   If it was intentional, it is a cunning attempt at horror genre. On one hand, we have a haunted house revealing its macabre and on the other hand, we have these reels with sinister endings as our only gateway to the outside world.  As film progresses and Oswalt tries to cope with the supernatural, the world seems to be closing in on us, choking us with horror.

I believe because Sinister is so sinister at its core that we, the audience, can't absorb it at one point as we are left horrified, scared and sick. And to hide that, we shrug away the film as implausible.

iREVIEW: Up

Starring Edward Asner, Christopher Plummer, Jordan Nagai and Bob Peterson. Written by Bob Peterson and Pete Docter. Directed by Pete Docter. 

Some films defy norms. It's almost impossible to believe that an animated film with its trademarked "unreal" colors and shenanigans could evoke vivider emotions than a "real" film. Up is no less than a work of genius. 

We have heard time and again about macho men who held onto their conviction till the last breath but  seldom come across a man on mission who changes vision and goals as much as we do.  Up is as humane as a film could get. 

Up is about a young child Carl Fredricksen, enamored with explorations and global trekking but his timidness keeps the passion hidden.  But then he finds a girl who is as raw and adventurous as he always wanted to be.  They become best of friends and before we know it, they tie the knot and live happily forever... until Carl's wife dies and he realizes,  entangled in trials and tribulations of worldly life, they forgot to fulfill their mutual dream of living at the Paradise falls. 

And that's where the magic of Up comes in. Till this point animation seems quite pointless.  If this was a "real" film, Carl would be rubbing sole of his shoes at banks and real estate agencies trying to make the dream reality but in this case he simply flies away towards Paradise Island in his house, tied to hundreds of helium balloons. 

He can do this because the point of the story is taking us at a heartbeat distance of Carl's dream before revealing the human out of him.  To the paradise fall, Carl tags along the adventurous, tubby little kid, Ellie, who some would say is what Carl was on the inside when he was that young.

But just when we start to believe that the characters would lessen in layers and succumb to the cracking plot, we are taken aback by the story of it all. Without spoiling much, I can say the film makes us realize that big dreams and lifelong obsessions sugarcoated as ambitions and sacred goals all lose meaning when we fail to act with compassion towards everything, even as little as a bird. 

Up has exceptional animation, great plot, witty dialogues and vivid characters, but it has something more, something which takes us beyond entertainment and forces us to do that we have long given up on doing... introspect! 

Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA): From Submission to Approval

The following are the stages an applicant to receive a result for case type I-821D (consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals) with I-765 (work authorization) for approved cases with no request for evidence (RFE).

[In chronological order]

1. Applicant receives Form I797C - Notice of Action as a receipt for Form I821D - Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and for Form I765 - Application for Employment Authorization with INFO 1, INFO 2 and PAY 2, respectively. 
2. Applicant receives Form I797C - Notice of Action as an ASC* Appointment Notice for I821D and I765 with INFO 3.
3. Applicant appears at ASC and provides fingerprints. Applicant's Form I797C - Notice of Action as an ASC Appointment Notice is stamped with Biometrics Processing Stamp with INFO 4. 
4. Applicant receives Form I797C - Notice of Action as an approval notice for both case I-821D and I-765. 
5. Applicant receives Employment Authorization Document (EAD), a card. 

Glossary: 

INFO 1,2 - Information in addition to that provided by the applicant - Notice date, case type, USCIS Alien Number, receipt number, received date.

PAY 2 - Information about payment received including application/petition fee, biometrics fee, total amount received and total balance due.

INFO 3 - Information about ASC, date and time of appointment.

INFO 4 - Biometrics processing stamp consists of ASC site code, Biometrics QA review by and on:, tenprints QA review by and on:.

*ASC - Application Service Center

Important:

• Many people "walk-in" for fingerprints prior to their actual appointment date in hopes of expediting the process.  ASC is not obligated to accept any walk-ins but more often than not applicants have been successful. Whether walk-ins facilitate processing time is open for debate. 
• Online case status is not prompt and in perfect sync with actual events. Applicants are advised to check updates only for a general idea and not a specific stage of their file. 
• Once, USPS has received EAD card, applicants can call USCIS for a tracking number.  Generally, EAD cards are sent via USPS Priority Mail with most deliveries in 2-3 business days (including Saturdays). 

Next step:

For most applicants, deferral is not the end of the story.  Once you have EAD, you can apply for Social Security Card and then for a Driver's license in most states (in that order).  To travel abroad, an applicant MUST apply for Advanced Parole document only after their case has been deferred and pay separate fee expecting 40-70 days processing time in most cases. 

For any question, please feel free to comment. 

Other important links:
DACA: Find your approval date! 
DACA: Frequently Asked Questions

Dussehra: Let's kill the true evil

On the eve of Dussehra, I remember staring up at huge effigies of Ravana (the antagonist in Ramayana) with dewy-eyed awe.  In the black sky, the gaudy drape drenched in yellow paint of jewelry and the big round eyes with fiery intentions would spread an eerie glow in the darkness as if Ravana, lurking over us, had singled me out.  Ah! The adrenaline of the horror.  Ah! The excitement of imminent victory over it!

The next day, the Dussehra, just when my father slumped in relaxation on one of his rare holidays, I, with my sister, would begin pestering him for an annual round of Dussehra viewing.  It simply meant hopping into our new Maruti Zen and going on a morning trip to view all the effigies in the neighborhood, the big ones built in all glory and the amateur ones, a product of local donations, all ready to be obliterated at dusk.  I simply loved it. It was more entertaining than the best film of my favorite star.

The world, the neighborhood and the house, bustled with festive yelps. Even the air was saturated with subtle moisture of sweets and the inevitable celebrations of upcoming Diwali season  (when Rama returns after defeating Ravana).

More than a decade later, on October 24, Indians across the globe once again celebrated the defeat of evil (Ravana) by the paragon of good, Lord Rama.  But things have changed.  No longer do I get excited about Dussehra.   No longer do I feel connected with the celebrations of upcoming Diwali.  Yes, the color is there and so is the sweetness of festive warmth.  But somehow, we have ceased to grow up from our fairytales.

Have we ever pondered that Tulsidas meant to write the greatest epic of good and evil that resides within us and those qualities he bestowed in characters of Rama and Ravana? Maybe Ravana is within us. And so is Rama. But it seems as though our moral weakness has manifested itself in burning pieces of cardboard and gifting the planet with an annual dump of toxic gases. We celebrate as if Ravana is an alien, almost an underworld don being publicly executed.

But I say, let's at least try to kill a Ravana within us. Only then we attempt to rise above the childish acts, float with the good, let the children enjoy the hoopla when we celebrate the true Dussehra! 

iREVIEW: The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)

Starring Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans and Denis Leary. Written by James Vanderbilt et al. Directed by Marc Webb. 

I watched it for Emma Stone.  Here I said it. I saw the superhero flick for the chick in it. After Sam Raimi Spider Man trilogy's eventual slide to mediocrity, the world of spider man had convinced me that it's not for reasonably aged.  Rebooting any film requires at least a decade of fermentation from its last serving, but The Amazing Spider-Man caught all of us unaware by returning in half of that period.

Toby Maguire's cuddly looks and cry-baby melodrama was still fresh and salty when Andrew Garfield stepped into his shoes.  I thought the film wouldn't work, not at the conception level, not at the casting level and not at the release level. I was wrong... to some extent.

This film takes the zest factor a notch higher than before.  The love angle is definitely a sigh of relief.  Peter Parker, in this installment, really stepped up to his guts, understood his responsibilities as much as a high school chap would be expected to and of course had fun with the whole thing.  He realized that Gwen isn't going anywhere and it's not end of the world to focus on bigger things. After watching this film, I am confused with what makes a love angle interesting - it's constant bickering into every scene or a soothing scent in the backdrop.  You probably know what.

My beef with Raimi's series was that Parker really didn't party with his doppelganger.  I mean if we had all those powers at Parker's peppy age, crying in Mary Ann's longing and regurgitating the big time responsibilities that come with being "so cool" would be the last thing on our mind.  Webb's Parker is just like that and that's what made the first half so hip, funny and kinda cool.

But the second half was a letdown.  It was watchable of course but only in the capacity of special effects high dosage dripping all over the screen. I wish the film had given some more time to Peter Parker, his pet peeves and flaws.  We had so much fun exploring and abusing the powers to some extent without caring about hardcore moral philosophy.  That's what people do when they are entitled to such a privilege.  They take some time to evaluate but first they party!

Despite the two plus hour length, I didn't get enough of Parker's metamorphosis into his sassy alter ego - the egoistic, the arrogant and the more confident Peter Parker with powers. Having said that, I am not disappointed in any capacity. This film has definitely brought some much needed spice after the lackluster finale of Raimi's series.  Yes, the film didn't change much as far as the story goes but the characters have been brought to their senses!

Most Interesting Interview Guests

L-R: Javed Akhtar, Salman Rushdie and Bill Clinton

Some like it, others can't stand the apparent tedium of having to listen without any interjection. But I like to listen to the few I admire because of their sheer audacity to ride against the tide to represent humanity.  Here is a list of quadruplet of my favorite interviewees (in order)! I prescribe listening to them!

1. Neil deGrasse Tyson (American Astrophysicist, and Science Communicator) 
Neil is one of those personalities you have to listen to believe they exist. His sheer devotion to perpetuation of science and rejection of baseless faiths transmitted in public speeches through his splaying arms and powerful cadence in voice is like watching a progressive witchcraft.  His hawk eye vision in detecting even the minutest of betrayals to science, his first and only love, is one of the very few ways his love for the field manifests itself.  Only passion can explain Tyson's willingness to answer audience's questions with equal vehemence that he exuded in the actual lecture.

2. Javed Akhtar (Indian poet, lyricist, screenwriter and activist) 
If you want an interlocutor who is going to win the argument for you, Akhtar is your man. Co-writer of many blockbuster films of 70s and 80s and countless songs and poems, Akhtar has used his starlight to raise voice against many social evils in India, from class warfare to restriction on freedom of expression.  His memory, smart sense of humor and blunt attack on conservatism allows him to top the list of most interesting interviewees.  And  of course, he's an atheist!

3. Naseeruddin Shah (Indian film and theater actor) 
Shah is probably one of the finest actors to hit Indian screen ever.  Regarded as the superstar of parallel cinema, he has "crossed over" to western shores at several points.  But he is angry! Shah has never shied away from bludgeoning the indiscipline in Indian cinema, shoddy scripts of bollywood and communalists.  But things get really tasty when he takes names without any regards to sharp criticism and unnecessary controversies he ends up attracting.  His friends may be few but the man's respected!

4. Bill Clinton (42nd US President and activist) 
When he talks, you listen. Even if you don't understand a word of it. One of the most notable ex-politicians alive, Clinton never loses his cool demeanor and cadence even in the fieriest of political melodrama.  One of the few guys who seem to be experts in just about everything, Clinton's magic, in fact, is not entirely in the content but also in the style of it.  His interviewers can seldom gauge the width of his knowledge spectrum but even if they have some idea, it is never enough to refute this smooth ex-President.  All in all, if Clinton told you that you don't exist, you will probably not question it!

5. Salman Rushdie (British Indian novelist) 
Late Christopher Hitchens described Rushdie as "the wittiest user of the English language" and I think that sums it all.  Listening to Rushdie is like experiencing an interlocutory poet  playing with words just like a Jazz musician who makes riffs for the sheer joy of the sound it creates.  Unfortunately, unless there is an outburst in public rage concerning Islam or his book "The Satanic Verses" surfaces, Rushdie, an atheist, is seldom called to speak on other widespread issues.  It's a shame that one book that forced him into hiding for a decade has shadowed some of his less known but equal, if not greater, masterpieces.

People who just missed the list (or maybe they are all number 6!)... 
Richard Dawkins, Late Christopher Hitchens. 

iREVIEW: Oh My God (Movie Review)

Starring Paresh Rawal, Akshay Kumar, Mithun Chakraborty, Govind Namdeo, Poonam Jhawer and Mahesh Manjrekar. Written by Bhavesh Mandalia and Umesh Shukla.  Directed by Umesh Shukla. 

Sometimes a film is memorable because it smears the underlining message in your face with unabashed gumption and not because its some refined piece of art.  You like it or not, OMG tries its level best to convince you the inefficacy behind temples and other "paraphernalia" to reach God.

It is a simple story of a fundamental phenomena - human insecurity, greed and deception.  During times when human weaknesses have restricted the idea of God to the shenanigans of religion pettifogs and saints and priests to colorful buffoonery, OMG puts crosshairs right on its subjects, that is you and me, and shoots them with bullets of awakening.

Tersely, OMG places Kanji Bhai (Paresh Rawal), an atheist, right in the center of religious hooliganism when his shop is destroyed by an earthquake, an act of god, and the insurance company denies all claims of compensation.  The most rational breed of man, an atheist, then embarks on the most ludicrous journey of all - a lawsuit against God, since it's an act of God and God needs to recoup. Of course, as an atheist, his agenda is not to mingle with the idea of God but to recover his money and in process drag the colorful "gurus" into the court who have been maddeningly buzzing on his rationale shoulders for eons.

This film is a preachment sprinkled with entertainment and not the other way around.  The whole court session, the "God's" (Akshay Kumar) repeated conversations with Kanji and the entire flow of the film inclines towards decontaminating the idea of God from the political strata of religions.

Honestly, I want to bottle the filmmaker's gumption and sell it in black market for so bluntly refusing the idea of religion, temples and other "gateways" to God and that too in such an outlandishly direct manner. From Mithun's effeminate take on Swamis to Poonam as babe of a saint, we smirk to the images of real life "gurus" these characters remind us of (Swami Nithyananda and Guru Ma, perhaps!).

Such overt films require a personal connect with actors to look convincing.  For Paresh Rawal, I believe this film is as  personal as it could be.  He is awe inspiring.  Akshay is passable as an actor but he does look like a Greek God.  Mithun is fantastic, so is Govind Namdeo.  They are loud but lovable as mischievous gurus.

If films could change the world, this planet would be a much better place.  Oh My God will probably not even make a dent in our minds contaminated with insecurities and superstitions.  But at least they are trying.

Deferred Action (DACA) update: Approval Timeline and details

The following is the prediction for approval dates for DACA applications based on fingerprinting dates.  For example, people who got their fingerprints done on 10th October should expect a reply by 18th November. Note: These are not official numbers, but merely linear approximations. Actual results may vary significantly.

Biometics  Vermont

2-Oct	Past due
3-Oct	7-Nov
4-Oct	8-Nov
5-Oct	10-Nov
6-Oct	11-Nov
7-Oct	13-Nov
8-Oct	15-Nov
9-Oct	16-Nov
10-Oct	18-Nov
11-Oct	19-Nov
12-Oct	21-Nov
13-Oct	22-Nov
14-Oct	24-Nov
15-Oct	25-Nov
16-Oct	27-Nov
17-Oct	28-Nov
18-Oct	30-Nov
19-Oct	2-Dec
20-Oct	3-Dec
21-Oct	5-Dec
22-Oct	6-Dec
23-Oct	8-Dec
24-Oct	9-Dec
25-Oct	11-Dec
26-Oct	12-Dec
27-Oct	14-Dec
28-Oct	16-Dec
29-Oct	17-Dec
30-Oct	19-Dec
31-Oct	20-Dec
1-Nov	22-Dec
2-Nov	23-Dec
3-Nov	25-Dec
4-Nov	26-Dec
5-Nov	28-Dec
6-Nov	29-Dec
7-Nov	31-Dec
8-Nov	2-Jan

[Biometrics taken before the date in the first row should expect a result anytime now, hence, past due. Not enough data is available to predict approval dates for Texas Service Center applicants.] Updated: 11/07/2012 Other Important links:  DACA: From submission to approval  DACA: Frequently Asked Questions

Freedom of Speech: Responsibilities of Humanity

Salman Rushdie once said "true test for our love towards freedom of speech is when we advocate showcasing an idea that offends us personally."

I am not personally perturbed but simply lured into a write up by an anti-Jihad ad scheduled to be showcased across NYC subways next week.  Well, let me start by restating my respect for freedom of speech: I advocate putting this ad up and running.

But this doesn't mean I endorse the contents of the ad, it means I endorse the idea that an ad is showcased without any fear or threat.  And this is the greatness of a free society.

However, Pamela Geller, executive director of the organization paying for the ad, has come up with this poster as a retaliation to several anti-Israel ads displayed around the big apple.  Although I empathize with her, I must say that sometimes we have to understand the repercussions of our personal actions on lives beyond us. But she clearly doesn't. The sole purpose of this ad is... God knows what (or blunt hatred?).

I firmly believe in Gandhian philosophy. The most potent reply to hatred is silence. "They" darted hatred while endorsing anti-Israel ads, we don't have to reply with our canon balls of animosity.  We can simply wave the flags of peace. "They" will stop in shame when facing an opponent of such a high character.

But alas, peace reduces us to mere humans. Hatred creates organizations, gives us positions. 

Say hello to my little friend! Kitty!!

Look who I found outside on my porch, prying in my house, clawing at its reflection through the front door, desperately in need of affection, love and care - a kitty!

Looking for a new home, perhaps? Aww! Eyes that leave an indelible emotional mark! 

I try to shy away from everything that arouses a pang of emotion in me. It sounds a bit dark but do we really need an additional burden of a new friendship, and that too of an unconditional kind, in this already packed world of emotional voodoo? Well, against all odds, I guess we do. It reminds us of something so selfless. Something that simply needs love and nothing else. Well, maybe some food and water but that's a deal not to be missed comparing all that hassle people go through to bargain for much less in humans.  

The bowl was filled to the rim with milk first but milk isn't something kittens prefer, I found out pretty quickly (thanks google).  I replaced it and to my relief, kitty did lick some of that low fat yogurt.  It didn't go gaga over it. It's probably the low fat content (apologies for hideous Blackberry camera but more pics on its way)!

And the most trying part: the kitten didn't want me to go in. I've never been close to adorable felines,  thanks to the irrational Indian superstitions that stamps cats as bad omens,  so I was taken aback by the kind of affection the little guy exuded, something that we usually connect canines with.   And yes, that piece of dirty old curtain like thing towering next to the beauty are my pajamas! 

If I stood still, it weaved through my legs, if I walked, it stubbornly followed me. So, I simply stood on the porch till the kitty gained some confidence and a sense of security that I was there and wasn't going to leave. It started looking around as little bugs caught its fancy but if I moved a muscle, it bolted right back in between my legs. Aw! Well, I stood still for a little longer. Merely within minutes, it started doing its thing. Very lively and playful, it went after bugs. I lost its sight for a second and sneaked back in. I wish I could just stand there. Well, the yogurt is out there and so is water.  Maybe, the kitty will return. I want it to. 

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals: Help with Applications, Process and thought process behind it

The big day has arrived (and gone) on August 15, 2012, marking the commencement for accepting the request for "Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals". I will try to answer some basic questions which people may not have found the answers to on USCIS website due to storm of information buffeted at them at once.

Should we apply as soon as possible? 
Apply as soon as possible but do not rush feel left out if others have already applied.  Do not leave it to the USCIS to ask for more information as it can can add another fortnight to processing time.

Should I submit anything other than evidence document or anything redundant? 

Other than essential documents to prove that you meet the requirements, only attach your defining certificates and achievements. Think about what defines your career and what achievement is just a dabbling effort.

What does this process exactly mean in practical terms? 
Well, it is a consideration and not a guarantee.  Even if you meet all the requirements, the application can be denied and you can do nothing about it.

So, how will USCIS decide on who to approve and who not to approve within the section of people who meet the basic requirements? 
The application will be denied if you fail to meet ALL the requirements. USCIS will then select (leniently, of course) those who it believes will go on to become a productive part of the society.


What is the administration's motif behind all this? 
The overt motif is to bring young individuals into light and give them a fair chance to a better life and let them churn the economy.  But remember, even if you are granted deferred action, you are still an illegal immigrant stuck in a state of limbo at a price of behaving responsibly if in order to renew the deferral after two years.  USCIS can conveniently deport individuals who present threat to US since now they are "documented".

What are we exactly getting ourselves into when we apply for the deferred action? 
As young illegal immigrants, most of you are not on record of Homeland Security and Immigration department.  By applying for this initiative you are surrendering yourself to the mercy of the government. So, be careful and only apply if you think you've been a good and progressive member of the society because government is not mandated to answer anyone for their decisions.

What are the applications? 
Required applications: Form I821D (Main application), Form I765 (Work permit), Form I765W (Work permit worksheet).
Optional Applications: Form G-1145 (for electronic updates), Form G-28 (filled by a lawyer or accredited representative, if you hire one).

What about lawyers and how do I stay away from scams? 
Hire a lawyer or at least consult qualified individuals volunteering to help with the process (such as NYSYLC).  A careful submission will pay off big time in the coming months! Only if your evidence is absolutely unambiguous and you are crystal clear about the process, Do it yourself.

Hiring a lawyer doesn't mean you should be oblivious to the process. In fact, try to stay ahead.  Do a lot of research by reading everything laid out on USCIS website which is the official word in any case.  Ask your lawyer questions you think he/she should know. Select your lawyer on the basis of their insight.

Make sure your lawyer fills out the Form G-28 and puts down a state license number on top of Form I821D because that's the only way for you to know if your lawyer is currently allowed to practice. There are many non-attorneys who are volunteering to help with the process.

What should I pay the lawyers for and how much should I pay them? 
Only pay lawyers for this particular process and not to apply for SSN, driver's license and advanced parole document (permission to travel abroad). A decent lawyer fees, based on my investigation is $600-$800 plus $465 (application fee).  If the lawyer asks a lot more than that (like N.M. Gehi who asks for $3000!), look for other attorney.  All you need is a work permit to get SSN and these two documents will get you your driver's license. Both are simple processes and officials will help you with the application filing.

What is the processing time like? 
People are getting their work permits even within a month! USCIS is definitely chipping in extra hours.  Generally, I think 1-2 months is a good estimate.

What is next once my application is approved and I receive my work permit? 

Once you have a work permit, you can receive SSN.  Once you have SSN and work permit, you can get your license. Both are very simply processes and you don't need to pay anyone to help you with it.  You can also apply for advanced parole if you need to travel abroad, but let's not get into it at this point.

Is there a final word?
Of course, there is. This process is a favor to you by the US Government (precisely, President Obama), so appreciate it by making an honest living, being a decent and productive individual and reflecting your best self.  With such intentions in mind, you shall cross the bridge to a better life! God Bless.

For any questions, leave a comment!
OCTOBER 17, 2012 UPDATE

iREVIEW: District 9

Starring Sharlto Copley, Jason Cope and David James. Written by Neill Blomkamp and Terri Tatchell. Directed by Neill Blomkamp.  

I am absolutely gobsmacked by this film.  It is Humans vs. Aliens at its best, mostly because it is much more than that.  I understand that it is rather trite to say that a film is held together by theme and blunt action is merely an instrument of ornamentation.  But this film reinforces my belief to a new level.

For the regular masses who watch films for plain entertainment (as they should) and have no intentions or aspirations of making one, District 9 is a colossal war between Humans and "poor" aliens stuck on Earth quite literally due to a mechanical failure in their "mother ship."  Watching this film unfold, one laminate at a time, enthralls us like Independence Day, Transformers and Aliens, bottled into one breathtaking concoction, would.

Basically, an alien population (around 20 years ago) unfortunately landed on our planet and quick to leech upon the helpless, humans soon amass a treasure of high-tech ammunition they found the alien ship loaded with.  But here's the problem.  These weapons are biologically engineered to be handled by the aliens only.  Fallen to the mercy of the merciless, the "prawns", as the aliens are known to be, are forced into a few acres of containment with slum-like conditions.  Meanwhile, over a period of decades, as underground tests are being performed to decode the alien weaponry conundrum, riots are breaking down on the ground between the repressed aliens and the restless civilians. Hence, the government decides to relocate some million aliens to the outskirts of the city.  So far so good. But then something really awesome happens and rest I'll be kind enough to leave it for you to watch.

It is not that the movie is all hullabaloo, albeit it is frantic and loud at most points, but it is the emotional quotient you are taken aback by.  Much potent than what we saw in AVATAR,  District 9 truly slams a mirror in front of us and ferociously commands us to judge whether we adore or decry the atrocities on these aliens.  And let me tell you, you will be disgusted by the human thinking and find the race quite repulsive.  This success in showing us who we are at our deepest is what makes the film a gem.

There is a heart wrenching metamorphosis that takes place throughout the film and is the sole reason for aliens to fight back.  When one of us, with a conscience, enters their territory and becomes one of them, it is bad news for the profligate few (or many) of us.

Whether it be the acting, Sharlto Copley is the center of this film, or the semi-mockumentary style filmmaking,  District 9 follows the Avatar path but leaves a deeper scar on our vile hearts. Bravo!

Go get you DVD today!

iREVIEW: The Hunger Games

Starring Jennifer Lawrence, Wes Bentley, Stanley Tucci, Josh Hutcherson, Elizabeth Banks and Woody Harrelson. Written by Gary Ross et al. and Directed by Gary Ross. 

Sometimes even when the premise of a film is set in a future so unimaginable, an unmistakable connection with our lives resonates through the entirety of it. The Hunger Games revolves around the same Earth, the same humans and the same relations, except all of them blooming at their rawest.

We are taken to the world where humans are so hopped-up on decadency and pleasure, a murderous game is a blockbuster reality TV, probably monopolizing TV ratings.

This is a special film. I believe the message of the film should be like an aroma that is absorbed almost subconsciously but is enjoyed at the sensory level. An Indian story writer Salim Khan said it rightly that a film is a garland of flowers woven over a string, where flowers are the entertainment and string is the message.  We know the string exists, which is why the film is bearable, but we just don't see it (and we don't want to see it).  This is one of such films and that's why it's special.

The Hunger Games is a leftist film, an exaggerated take on the occasional communistic nature of our governments.  Instances such as the ludicrous trailer being presented to justify the barbarism behind the annual hunger games; the controllers of the game whimsically making up rules and interfering in the natural course of the game and so forth, are some of the loud moments in the film clearly instilling in us a fear for a totalitarian government.

The film is indeed a grim representation of our distant future with little hope for redemption, but not none.  "The hunger games" part of the film is simply a roller coaster ride for the audience. This magical connection we have with the game is partly because the making of the film and "the game" in it run hand in hand.  "When we want a relationship" as the controller thinks, we get a relationship between Katniss and Peeta.  When it's time for a finale, we get a finale in form of the vicious beast.  Katniss actually says during the climax "it's the finale"! You wish "the games" have started earlier in the film at the cost of the passive first half and those pesky (and nonsensical) brief flashbacks, but nonetheless, it's a wholesome thrill ride.

Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss takes the middle seat in the film and all you care is the preservation of her innocence and sanctity, which more or less represents our hope.  This film is one of those rare occasions, which is why it is so precious, when we truly feel the nausea associated with lust for decadency.

  

Precious Words (Juhi Chawla)

There are three types of people: those who watch things happen, those who make things happen and those who wonder what happened.

Juhi Chawla (Film Actress, producer, Miss India 1984)

Corruption and Anna Hazare: Honest Intentions, Bad Idea

Corruption is so deep in India that it has managed to penetrate the psyche of its citizens who, to reconcile with this horrid reality, condone it as a part of their daily lives.  It is a fact that bribing a peon at a government expedites your case file and of course a little more in the higher official's pocket can positively effect the outcome as well.  In this downward spiral the middle class usually finds itself in, the majority lower class (which is not able to afford bribing) is simply pulverized between the corrupt system and realities of their hideous living standards. Naturally, such a democratic nation becomes a breeding ground for emotive movements that may overlook the fundamentals of democracy which seemingly had lost its effectiveness.

Such is the movement by Anna Hazare, a social activist from Bhingar (Maharashtra, India), who rose to "Gandhian" pedestal for inspiring a head on collision with corruption.  I believe in Hazare's honest intentions but I am equally perturbed by the fact that his team has failed to understand the nature of the monster they are upholding.  The monster I am talking about is the center of Hazare's movement, the Jan Lok Pal Bill, seeking the creation of Jan Lok Pal, an independent investigation body above the President and the Prime Minister to eliminate corruption via a fast track courts.

At first glimpse, an independent anti-corruption body seems such a poetic solution to the corruption conundrum in India but ponder on the concept for an unbiased moment and the fundamental flaw is glaringly visible. Jan Lok Pal is a parallel government and has absolutely no balance and check mechanism attached to it.  In other words, where are these Lokpals (officials to run this anti-corruption body) going to come from? Jupiter? Mars? Nope, you guessed it right, they are going to come from the same bureaucratic lineage present in our government that we are trying to clean in the first place.  Justice Katju, former Supreme Court Judge, pinched part of the right nerve by saying:

 "[Jan Lok Pal Bill] will immediately double the corruption in the country, far from abolishing it because the Jan Lok Pal Bill brings all public servants purview of the Jan Lok Pal... to investigate and supervise the investigation of two crore [public servants] will require around one lakh Lakpals... you have to provide them [Lokpals] salaries, staff, etc., and most of them will become blackmailers considering the low level of morality prevailing in the country"

Even though I think Katju grossly simplified the corruption issue by solely linking it with "low level of morality prevailing in the country", I agree with his foresight in deducing that Lokpals will be future blackmailers and hence the next and brand new tier of corruption. 

I think we don't realize that corruption is not an entity but rather an idea and the counter to it is the wholly progress of the nation. Currently, India is improving in bits and pieces and the citizens who fortuitously find themselves in such minute "sections of improvement" refuse to deal with lagging downtrodden.  We cannot fight corruption, and any anti-social and backward idea, if the entire nation fails to collectively tread towards progress.  On one hand, benefits and salaries for lower rung government officials should be improved and simultaneously, other social issues like homosexuality and woman trafficking must be dealt with, broadening the psyche of common man to coax them into eliminating social evils on their own.  However, one must not forget that corruption-free democracy is an idealistic state which in theory only a communistic country can reach at the cost of their citizen's basic freedoms. So, we have to choose between a democracy with higher living standards at the cost of localized but inherent corruption or a communistic corruption free nation? I think the answer is obvious. 

Before I detour further from the central issue (of Lokpal), at this point, I would like to interject what Yogendra Singh Yadav, an Indian social scientist, said: 

"This is not a movement about Anna Hazare, the person... it is about every person, every village, every town, discovering their own little Anna. It is not about Lokpal... in no movement in the world people get into fine prints, movement was about people discovering they matter, that they can do something, that they are not helpless. And it is not only about corruption, this is about demanding a better life, a better polity... this is why they have the confidence, this is why the politicians feared them." 

I do empathize with the romanticized descriptions of Hazare's movement but I think Yogendra Yadav  talks about what the movement should have been and not what it has reduced to.  My point is that Hazare's movement might have started with an intent to end corruption via Jan Lok Pal bill but at this time, as the theatrics of the movement suggest,  Jan Lok Pal, the anti-corruption body, to be its crux and the promotional card.

I am, therefore, forced to analyze the greater picture encompassing the protagonist of this movement, Anna Hazare.  I wouldn't be surprised if Hazare, after the bedazzling stardom, has wet dreams about his name being mentioned in the same breath as Mahatma Gandhi. Is it really the corruption, as an idea, that he still wants to fight or is the titillating iconic status that he wants to perpetuate at the cost of the parallel government? 

Whatever be the case, one cannot deny the fact that Hazare's movement has brought much needed light on the horridly dark reality of corruption in the country.  But the fact that the movement did not carry itself forward from this one Jan Lok Pal parallel government,  I cannot endorse it.  I am sure Hazare did not start as a dishonest social activist who was hungry for authority but I am dubious that he didn't end up morphing into one.

Precious Words (OSHO)

Love is not dependent on the object but is a radiation of your subjectivity, is a radiation of your soul. And vaster the radiation, greater is your soul.

- OSHO

iREVIEW: The Dark Knight Rises

Starring Christian Bale, Anne Hathaway, Gary Oldman, Michael Caine, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Morgan Freeman, Marion Cotillard and Tom Hardy. Written by Jonathan Nolan, Christopher Nolan and David Goyer. Directed by Christopher Nolan. 

Now here's the thing about this finale of the highly acclaimed Batman series by Nolan.  Nolan, with his writing team, made sure the movie is bigger and scarier than its predecessors even if it meant shaving the character depth a little bit.  At one point, you do feel the supposedly trenchant dialogues spoken by Bane, Batman, Wayne, Gordon, the new kid John Blake and others is an attempt to simply add depth to their character when the film is all about taking the city to a brink of destruction and... well, watch for yourself.

Rises is Batman's ultimate test.  But it is also Bruce Wayne's finale as he tries to figure out how is he going to make a comeback against Bane, a criminal mastermind, after a recluse of eight years to fight for a city that has long perceived him as a murderer for their white knight, Harvey Dent.  And this inner struggle is what the film is all about. Or at least that's what Nolan wants us to think and move forward with.

I admire Nolan for his perception towards cinematic experience.  Films are to be enjoyed on a scene by scene basis and when an exceptional storyteller such as Nolan dons the director's hat, the film becomes a photo album with beautiful pictures (scenes, that is) we enjoy one at a time.  The overall story of the film is just an anchor to keep gigabytes of plot points from flying away.   After all, it's not the binding or the colorful packaging that makes a photo album beautiful, it's each and every picture in it.

From the very onset, with Bane's introduction, we are fully made aware of the scale of the film.  The entire city is soon under siege and Batman, the man with a frail body and soul, has to prevent the annihilation of twelve million Gotham inhabitants.  Of course, there's no way Wayne can pull this off on his own.  Thus, Nolan takes the help of Selina Kyle and John Blake to stand vis-à-vis Bane.


As to the performances, Anne Hathaway probably gets the most interesting character.  She is perky, audacious and snobby making her absolutely delicious.  Usually a super hero film is smothered with testosterone and any female interjection isn't always welcomed (I am not anti-feminist but this is how it is!), but I couldn't wait for her to return and sorely missed her absence at points.  Christian Bale is as usual. I really think this film wasn't about Batman at all but the return of a messiah to save Gotham.  Bane is huge and with his deliciously theatrical voice (yes, many reviewers found his voice annoying), quite irresistible.  However, he doesn't penetrate the psyche as well as Joker did maybe because the canvas of the film was so big.  Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine didn't get the kind of roles they got in the previous two ventures but still they added the most to the emotional quotient of the film. As far as Marion is concerned, her face is charming enough to keep the scenes bright.

I can get into all kinds of details of the film as done by pros but I don't think this film is about that in any sense.  Nolan really want us to enjoy the systematic fall of a hero, a city under siege and the final showdown, one frame at a time.  Don't worry about stuff, just enjoy the vastness of Nolan's vision and massiveness of his canvas. Simply go and enjoy. 

James Holmes: The Real Life "Joker" terrorist

As the plot behind the horrendous Colorado Movie Massacre begin to unfurl, we realize none of it is anything short of a horror film.  Authorities have now revealed that James Holmes, suspect responsible for 12 deaths and almost 50 plus injuries after opening random barrage of gunshots during a premiere screening of The Dark Knight Rises, thought of himself as the Joker with trenchant belief.

Tragic and horrific shootings are not something new to the United States.  This of course begs to question the validity and effectiveness of our gun laws that differ from state to state.  Can civilian bear arms? Yes, according to the constitution civilians have the right to bear arms.  This right is so pathetically abused, however, that we end up seeing a 24 year old college student with multiple semi-automatics and assault rifles with booby traps in his studio apartment.  This isn't what right to bear arms means.  It is for self-defense and self-defense ONLY.

Right to bear arms is a must for individual protection and self-defense in our greedy and somewhat flimsily structured society.  Today's massacre has forced me to construct my own laws to bear arms.  I believe the following should be the provisions in determining the eligibility to bear arms:

1. No one under the age of sixteen is allowed to bear arms. Cases for the candidates under the age of eighteen must be handed over to the police authority for thorough investigation. 
2. Only pistols with modest caliber (or the ones used to hunt birds) should be opened for civilians (no assault rifles, semi- or fully automatics).  
3. Medical history along with criminal history should be thoroughly verified by the authorities to grant guns to anyone. Any case of mental instability or criminal record (including frauds) should be handed over to police authorities for them to decide upon the decision to bear arms. 
4. Each decision should be case by case.  No set guidelines should ever be put forth except for the ones listed in these provisions. 
5. Every effort should be made by the police authorities to liberate the candidate of any threatening situations based on which he/she is demanding to bear arms. 
6. If the threat is not immediate and the candidate simply wants to acquire a gun, the police authorities should track the candidate's movements for at least six months before handing him/her the gun.  This is of course assuming the candidate has a clear medical and criminal history. 
7. At the end, these provisions should be used as fluid guidelines and if authorities are assured that breaking any of the above provisions would help with the security of an individual, the state police has the last call to provide a gun to the candidate. No provision must ever go through an amendment from this point on, unless a situation of national security occurs. 

I think the above provisions are pretty fool proof. If you any comments or would like to suggest a change in the above provisions or add a couple, please a comment below.

God Bless! 

The Dark Knight Rises: A Hypothesis

As special screenings are viewed all around the US before the worldwide release of the most anticipated film of this year on July 20, many reviewers barf out their thoughts about The Dark Knight Rises and alas, the news isn't perfect.

It isn't all that bad either.  Rottentomatoes has 86% approval rating as of 7:10 PM 7/18/2012, which is not the end of the world by any means, however, I am sure Nolan wanted this film to hit 100% mark after its predecessor (The Dark Knight) was crowned at almost 95% rating with baffling net box office of $540 million*.  I think even though majority of the reviews are still pending, the important ones and the generous ones are in, so reviving back to 95% mark is out of the question.

So, where did Nolan go wrong? Well, I believe the writers of Dark Knight were simply writing a great story with no intentions of making it larger than life. This unadulterated hard work put in only for the story worked out really in their favor. Also, since Batman Begins wasn't that big of a burden as many members of the audiences thought of it as too slow, ominous and dark for a superhero film, expectations from Nolan weren't humongous anyways.  However, with the death of Heath Ledger, the Dark Knight got the kind of reception that took everyone by surprise, undoubtedly Nolan was distracted by the burden of Dark Knight and hence, just wanted to make the movie huge in every sense.  I believe he simply didn't get one with the story. Still, since Nolan is exceptionally talented, Rises should turn out to be great film nonetheless.

Now, how is this going to effect the box office for the finale of this exceptional trilogy? The net box office would probably not hit the Dark Knight status but should land somewhere near that point and for the same reason that helped Dark Knight reach such a lucrative figure.  Both films acquired hype from not just content, crew and the cast, but something more.  For Dark Knight, it is unquestionable that the untimely death of Heath Ledger yanked the film into the center of the universe.  This time The Dark Knight Rises is the last of the three and the end of the almost decade long saga of the Batman, this aspect should help spike the numbers for the film.  My prediction is a bigger business than The Dark Knight!

So, is this movie all that good? Well, if you liked Batman Begins and went gaga over Dark Knight, you will definitely love this one too (I am saying it before watching it).  This is only because you can't comprehend all the layers of the movie just in one viewing anyways.  You will simply be flabbergasted by the sheer grandiosity and ominousness of it and end up liking the feeling being awestruck gives!

Am I going to watch it? Yes. How stupid of me to ask that question.

(* Courtesy www.rottentomatoes.com)