What an unusual name, you might wonder. After all, how easy is it for a movie to get named something like ‘The usual suspects’ ? Well, if you have seen Casablanca, then you should stop wondering. In the end, when the policeman wants to save the resistance fighter (Humphrey Bogart), he instead tells his men to round up ‘the usual suspects’ (actually the name of the movie is based on a column in Spy magazine called ‘The Usual Suspects’). Besides the unusual name, the movie is also regarded as a neo-noir film. To add to the myth around this movie, it was shot on a $6 million budget and released in 1995 in a few theatres, but gained publicity through word of mouth and good reviews, and was then released in a much wider way. The movie also picked up 2 academy awards, further adding to the fame of the movie. As always while making of such iconic movies, the making of the movie went through many twists and turns in terms of getting the budget, getting the actors, and so on. But it did get made, and turned out to earn $24 million.

The movie was nominated for 2 Oscars, and won both. The awards were:
* Best Actor in a Supporting Role – Kevin Spacey
* Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen – Christopher McQuarrie
It was nominated and won other awards such as BAFTA. Get the list here.
The movie had a good line up, with the following line-up:
* Kevin Pollak (played Todd Hockney)
* Kevin Spacey (Roger ‘Verbal’ Kint) – An award winning role
* Benicio Del Toro (Fred Fenster)
* Gabriel Byrne (Dean Keaton)
* Stephen Baldwin (Michael McManus)
These were the 5 members of the gang, seemingly being manipulated behind the scenes by a mega-criminal, a ruthless man. But is the truth what it seems like ? The movie works at different levels, with story being told in flashes; with so many twists and turns. You start with a story, being told cleverly, but are never very sure about what is true or not. Miss parts of the movie, and you may not be able to identify what is going on in the movie when you get back ! The Usual Suspects is a gripping story, very cleverly told (although you will find critics who are dismissive of a movie that seems too clever). There is a good chance that you will start reading every gesture, every glance, and the dialogues to figure out where the story is going. And then the ending. What a story !
The central theme of the movie is one of detection: Who is the criminal mastermind Kyser Söze ? This is the character who is the mover behind the scenes, who manipulates a group of criminals like puppets on a chain, and about whom nobody really knows as to who he is.
Imagine a squad of policemen who reach a boat on a pier, and find a mini-battle has happened, with 27 people dead and a massive amount of heroin found. The only 2 wounded survivors are a Hungarian who fears a mass-killing master criminal known as “Keyser Söze”, who was in the boat killing people. And the other survivor is Verbal Kint (Kevin Spacey), who agrees to cooperate with the police in return for immunity. And this is the guts of the movie !
Kint and 4 others were earlier arrested and taken to a police line-up (with ‘the usual suspects’ being arrested); incensed over this arrest, they decide to strike back and plan a major robbery that will also implicate the corrupt police officers in the NYPD. The reluctant members are convinced, and the robbery happens without a hitch, and they travel to California to peddle the goods to a fence called Redfoot.
There, they are persuaded to commit another robbery that goes wrong, and they are forced to kill Saul Berg, a purported jewel smuggler and his bodyguards. And what do they end up with ? Not the reported cash and jewelery, instead heroin. When they confront Redfoot, they realize that the orders came from a lawyer called Kobayashi (Postlethwaite), who is in turn working for “Keyser Söze”, something that scares them because of his background and supposed ruthless nature.
The lawyer has proof of their activities, and blackmails them into doing another job for Keyser Söze, the destruction of cargo of a rival coming into the port. And then Kint starts to explain to the police who exactly Keyser Söze is (as explained to him by his fellow criminals); a superman of the criminal world, a man so ruthless that when his family is threatened, he first kills his family and then carries on a vicious vendetta against his rivals and all their known people; this done, he vanishes and now only works through henchmen. They try to fight back after one of their own is killed, but back down when facing the ruthless nature of the lawyer and his apparent boss.
The criminals attack the boat of Keyser’s rivals, and a major battle starts; Kint is held back to be able to escape and report in case the others do not survive; but things start to go haywire. There is no cocaine on the boat, people are killed who the criminals have not yet attacked, and then the remaining gang members are seemingly killed by Keyser Söze. The police seem to believe that Keaton was actually Keyser Söze, and Kint supports this theory. He gets bail, leaves; leaving behind policemen who slowly start to discover that the story that they have been told is actually bull. The police sketch of Keyser Söze is very close to Kint, but it is too late. He has disappeared in front of their eyes.

In this book, Bill Bryson attempts to recreate the travel itinerary of his youth some seventeen years earlier when he backpacked across Europe with one of his high school friend; He is alone this time with rucksack and notebook. This book a mixture of his lively anecdotes, sharp observations, and flashbacks to his earlier tour.

The book covers Norway (Hammerfest, Oslo), France (Paris), Belgium (Brussels, Bruges, Spa, Durbuy), Germany (Aachen, Cologne, Hamburg), Holland (Amsterdam), Denmark (Copenhagen), Sweden (Gothenburg, Stockholm), Italy (Rome, Naples, Sorrento, Capri, Florence, Milan, Como), Switzerland (Brig, Geneva, Bern), Liechtenstein, Austria (Innsbruck, Salzburg, Vienna), Yugoslavia (Split, Sarajevo, Belgrade), Bulgaria (Sofia), and Turkey (Istanbul).

The book is pure entertainment (provided you must not fail to catch the humor there). He is quite honest about what he liked or what he did not liked. And he was prompt is downgrading his rating for a “well-known” place once he reached there and did not found it up to the mark. He also diligently lavishes praises on lesser known places. He surely avoids the usual travel writer obligation to adore every place (read famous places) they visit.

I know that some of you may find this book rather strangely funny – or, even absurd at times. But only if you’re obsessed with political correctness, he may offend you, but he is democratic in his targets. He has some quite interesting observations to make. Although most of the observations are now out of the date (he wrote the book in 1990) but they are funny and a refreshing change from the breathless romanticism of so many guidebooks and travel brochures. He also shows that Europe and Britain aren’t as perfect as they look from the windows of a tour bus.

Most of us must have heard following opening lines of a poem by Samuel Taylor Coleridge:

In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
A stately pleasure-dome decree:
Where Alph, the sacred river, ran
Through caverns measureless to man
Down to a sunless sea.

The poem references Mongol and Chinese emperor Kublai Khan of the Yuan dynasty and his summer capital Xanadu or Shangdu (as popularly known). Xanadu has a significant place in western history as well because it was the destination of the most famous Marco Polo’s trip from Jerusalem to China (which he called Cathay) carrying oil from Holy Sepulcher & presents from Pope Gregory X for Kublai Khan between 1271 & 1274.

In his book by name of ‘In Xanadu – A Quest’, William Dalrymple retraces the epic journey of Marco Polo from Jerusalem to Xanadu, the ruins of the palace of Kubla Khan, north of Peking carrying oil from Holy Sepulcher, in the summer of 1986. He calls this book as a quest – not a vacation – just because it involves hardship and suffering not accompanied by a vacation. An intrepid traveler, and entertaining writer, Dalrymple offers an anecdotal history of the people and places he encounters en route through Israel, Cyprus, Turkey, Syria, Iran, Pakistan, and the breadth of China. An overland passage through these closed countries is an incredible travel feat in itself.

Although I did not found this book to be as engrossing or interesting as some of the other ones by William Dalrymple. But still, this is not a great book; it is an interesting book. Much of the book is the usual stuff of travel: difficulties in getting official clearance; locals speaking funny (read faulty) English; stomach upsets due to eating strange food at various roadside eateries; staying at inns which are sometimes as dirty as roads outside; and so on. However, in some sections he writes about more interesting things like how dull Polo’s own account really is, developments in Islamic architecture, the history of some of the places, recognizing Marco’s Polo description of a place and mapping it into current state of affairs. In totality, an interesting enough book by a 22 year old (remember this was his first book).

Read this book if:
1. You love reading travel books which are not like essays.
2. You are on a vacation which has turned wrong – in this book you will find that it could have been worse

What happens when a writer, known so far for travel books and about history, and who tickles the funny bones in your body, decides to write about science. Writing books about science and making them interesting have broken many authors, so when I first picked up this book, I was a bit worried. Well, when I finished the book, I let out a sigh of relief. While imparting a fair amount of education about science (although not about explaining the complicated algebra and geometry), the book does convey a great deal and did so in a very entertaining way.
Of course, if you are a scientist, you would take away almost nothing from this book, since it hardly claims to propound a new version of the string theory; one thing anyone can learn from such a book is how to write books like this that will explain a large number of concepts while keeping the overall subject light; and at the same time, making things more life-like by explaining details about the scientists that hardly ever makes it out.

Typically when you read about a scientist, you will learn about the great inventions that the scientist did, and how great it was and how beneficial it was. Typically such inventors are treated in a very god-like manner, and way above reality. Bill Bryson explains a lot more about such scientists, including their failing and weaknesses, and make them seem more life-like.
You will get to feel about what the situation and surrounding environment was like for such great scientists such as Charles Darwin, Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, and many others. And this is exactly the reason why this massive 500 page plus book was written. Like all of us, Bill Bryson learnt all the facts about science, but again like us, in a very dull manner. He wanted to understand the reasons as to why something was discovered, the motivation of the scientists, the environment around them, and so on; all these help in understanding the development of science in a much more understandable way. This works great – you learn as to how Newton was also an egoist and also responsible for sending many counterfeiters to the gallows in an official role; or how the great Cavendish was such a recluse that he would even communicate with his housekeeper through letters.
In addition to the part about scientists, you also learn about sizes in this universe, from the size of our planet to the size of galaxies, about the development of Homo Sapiens (us) and what separates us from our biological cousins (the chimpanzees) to whom we are more than 98% genetically similar. You learn a lot about such varied subjects such as fields of cosmology, astronomy, paleontology, geology, chemistry, physics and so on.
For writing this book, Bryson spent over 3 years, talking to various scientists and understanding things from them; as a result of his not being a scientist himself, there have been errors that have been pointed out in the book; but overall, I stick to my thought that this was a wonderful book that tried to explain how scientists and science learn about everything (and something that you never read about).