Just a couple things I'd like to say, and, rather than reply to each particular message, it was much easier for me to post 'em all in one spot (sorry)...
1) People have been debating if we know the exact value of pi, and contending the claims of the movie on this issue... I think the movie's point, is that pi is such a basic quantity, and we know exactly what it represents, that there sure as hell should be someway to express it simply... but there isn't, and that's what makes it interesting, and that's why looking for patterns in it might be a compelling pursuit.
2) People have been criticizing the acting in the film. As a theatre (well, and astrophysics) major, I've been taught that acting is highly subjective. Personally I thought the acting was well done in the movie, the individual styles appropriate to the surrealistic qualities of the film. And the fact that remains, is that the acting will seem different to each individual who views it, so the actor just does the best that he/she can, hoping to find a performance that the majority will find plausible, but, perhaps most importantly, will be satisfying to him/her-self.
3) In the end, I thought pi was a great, intense, film. And I think some people here are taking it a little too literally (harping on the math, etc.) and failing to see that the whole film is layered metaphors and, essentially, about the human psyche and fanatical pursuit of a goal. Just because something has deep underlying meaning, and is done in an unconventional style doesn't make it "artsy" or pretentious... IT just is finding different ways to speak more clearly to the human soul. So there.;-)
Slashdot Mirror
Just a couple things I'd like to say, and, rather than reply to each particular message, it was much easier for me to post 'em all in one spot (sorry)...
;-)
1) People have been debating if we know the exact value of pi, and contending the claims of the movie on this issue...
I think the movie's point, is that pi is such a basic quantity, and we know exactly what it represents, that there sure as hell should be someway to express it simply... but there isn't, and that's what makes it interesting, and that's why looking for patterns in it might be a compelling pursuit.
2) People have been criticizing the acting in the film. As a theatre (well, and astrophysics) major, I've been taught that acting is highly subjective. Personally I thought the acting was well done in the movie, the individual styles appropriate to the surrealistic qualities of the film. And the fact that remains, is that the acting will seem different to each individual who views it, so the actor just does the best that he/she can, hoping to find a performance that the majority will find plausible, but, perhaps most importantly, will be satisfying to him/her-self.
3) In the end, I thought pi was a great, intense, film. And I think some people here are taking it a little too literally (harping on the math, etc.) and failing to see that the whole film is layered metaphors and, essentially, about the human psyche and fanatical pursuit of a goal. Just because something has deep underlying meaning, and is done in an unconventional style doesn't make it "artsy" or pretentious... IT just is finding different ways to speak more clearly to the human soul.
So there.
Wombat