Desicritics Author: Fleiger

Heard the Divine Music of Love Lately?

Fleiger — Sat, 7 Feb 2009 15:04:31 EST

Recently, I was waiting for a bus when a car stopped near me. A beauty looked at me, and smiled...

... and music blared around me. I smiled back at her...

... and got out my iPod to lower the volume so it would leave my eardrums intact.

It happens to all of us. We all go through the life waiting for The One. And we all know at his/her entry, the God will give us a clue in the universal language (not math, you idiot, the other universal language).

And one day it happens. A vision from heaven steps in front of you, heralded by an orchestra. You can't see anything except her, and she is rendered in soft focus (even though your glasses are smudge-free). But when a mistake can make a target for a #7 sandal with heels, you have to be completely sure that she is The One For You.

The quick and easy method to being "Completely Sure It's The Right Person" is presented as a simple-to-follow flowchart (click to enlarge). Follow these steps before you do anything :

Did you reach F14? Good, now look up. If the girl is still there, it is because:
a. She is really into you
b. She is following the above steps. Wait for her to finish.

In either case, congrats! You may just have found the love of your life.

What to do next? Try A Guide to The First Date, A Single Guy's Guide to 14th February.

Till next time...

The Lord of The Rings is a Bollywood Movie

Fleiger — Thu, 4 Dec 2008 11:51:06 EST

Just a few days back, I was talking to a friend who was ranting about the hindi movies, and the completely over the top masala ingredients added in them to spice them up. After defending the Bollywood for a long time (hey, we Indians may make fun of those movies but we stand together when some outsider does it), I went back to my most recent re-reading of Lord of The Rings.

And I got an epiphany. Here are:

10 Reasons why LoTR is just another Bollywood Masala film:

10. If you are a good guy and a father, you get to die at the hands of The Villain or his Henchmen. Which of course will inspire your kid(s) and others to vanquish the villain for revenge.

9. Things are going very badly for the good guys, when BAM! Help arrives in the form of the Hero.

8. The hero has a bumbling but faithful sidekick (or a group of them), who provides the comic sidetrack, but will lay down his life for the hero.

7. There's a costumed villain, sitting in his snazzy layer, surrounded by costumed henchmen and weird looking followers.

6. The "supporting actress" loves the hero, who cannot return her affections because he is in love with the heroine. But don't worry, she will find her life partner in the "supporting actor" before the climax.

5. The hero and heroine belong to different social groups, and hence her father is not exactly happy about their union, but there is a loving aunt who will help the lovers.

4. The heroine, the one belonging to higher social group in this case, will "sacrifice" her advantages in order to marry the hero.

3. The hero has greedy, conniving, thieving relatives who have their eye on his estate.

2. You can stab him, fire arrows at him, slash at him with swords, poison him. The Hero just goes on and on and on...

1. At moment's notice, there's at least one person who has got to sing up. Sometimes that quickly grows into a group song.

Anybody got any idea which characters I am talking about here?

P.S. The comparison is based solely on the basis of the books, and those who know LoTR as only the movie trilogy may be a bit confused.

Book Review: A Soul of Steel by Carole Nelson Douglas

Fleiger — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 12:49:12 EST

If asked which one person we would have liked to see again, true Holmesians would vote for Irene Norton née Adler with a huge majority, if not by an unanimous vote. "A Soul of Steel" by Carole Nelson Douglas is a novel from her Irene Adler series which tries to fulfill that fantasy.

Irene and her husband Godfrey Norton are spending their “posthumous” lives with their friend cum housekeeper Miss Penelope Huxleigh in Paris, when a man from Nell Huxleigh’s past is thrust in their lives.

Capt. Emerson Quentin Stanhope, presumed dead in Afghanistan has found that, a decade later, somebody is trying to silence him because of the secrets he holds about battle of Maiwand. And by association, the life of the doctor who saved him in battlefield is also in danger. When he is found, sick and dying, by Irene and her friends, they decide to help him find and warn the Dr. Watson. But, helping Quentin makes them a target for an extremely dangerous hunter, and they have to knock on the doors at 221B, Baker Street to bring the mystery to a safe conclusion.

Chronologically, the story does take a few liberties with Holmes canon. Taking place some time after “Scandal in Bohemia”, during and after “Naval Treaty” (possibly placing it back by some time), it introduces a major character before it appears in canon (If we go by timeline according to this novel, there are some serious questions about Watson’s memory re: people trying to kill him). Although, that’s just the Holmesian in me cribbing.

Characters-wise, Godfrey Norton is your Standard English Gentleman, a good friend and a honourable man. He and Irene are completely in love with each other (though their married life sounds a bit more 20th century American than 19th century English) and are equal partners in their adventures. And of course, he is understandably jealous of The Man his wife remains fascinated by.

Miss “Nell” Huxleigh is the typical vicar’s daughter, governess in a respectable family kind of girl. She is Watson to Irene’s Holmes (although she will not approve of that comparison). Loyal to the fault and having lived a sheltered life before sharing in Irene’s adventures, Nell is the voice of common sense in the household. And that explains her feelings towards Holmes.

Irene on the other hand is portrayed as the equal and opposite of Holmes. They both share liking for adventure, the ennui coming out of commonplace existence, the flair for drama, as well as the immovable sense of justice. But where Holmes is an analytical machine, Irene the Prima Donna is impulsive and emotional (in short, dare I say, a woman); jumping into whatever catches her fancy without a thought for dangers involved.

This is before Watson’s stories start getting published, and hence Holmes to Irene’s friends is a just paid agent trying to swindle Irene out of her only means of danger. Since this is a story from “the other side”, that was the only reason I could read the portrayal of Holmes for most part. Given that tone of the novel, I was worried about the eventual meeting between Holmes and Irene, but a careful reading dispelled my doubts.

In short, if you can’t get enough of the world of Holmes, or (like somebody said,) you can’t get enough of The Woman who got better of Holmes, this is for you. For me, continuing the series would depend on how they talk about The Man.

Book Review: The Time Paradox by Eoin Colfer

Fleiger — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 11:20:43 EDT

The greatest trials of the literary heroes come when they are faced with their intellectual equals. Like Sherlock had Dr. Moriarty, Feluda had his Maganlal Meghraj. In The Time Paradox by Eoin Colfer (book 6 of the Artemis Fowl series), Artemis Fowl II faces his most dangerous enemy yet, his ~~almost~~ equal.

After returning from limbo, Artemis is finally spending time with his family (teaching his two year old brothers restaurant etiquette), when disaster strikes: his mother is diagnosed with a deadly disease. The only cure is found in the brain fluid of silky sifika lemur. But there is a slight problem: when Artemis Sr. went missing in Arctic, Artemis sacrificed the life of last lemur to raise money for search and rescue mission.

So now, Artemis and his friend Capt. Holly Short must go back in time and save the little “not-monkey”. And while this puts them against new enemies like the Extinctionalists (mainly, their dangerous leader Damon Kronsky), the problem with the past is that the enemies they have already defeated, have yet to be defeated and still all powerful (here starteth the headache). Plus, Artemis has yet to face (and later befriend) the fairies, so he and Holly are on their own.

Not to mention, there in the past is the 10-year old Artemis Fowl II (and of course, Butler) who is hell-bent on selling the lemur to help his father. So it’s time for Genius Mastermind (the Elder) vs Evil Genius mastermind (the Younger).

The Time Paradox continues with the theme of change in Artemis. Artemis the elder is not yet the Champion of Downtrodden or Good Incarnate, but he is no longer the Criminal Mastermind he was. He will still cheat or manipulate his fairy friends to get his way, but his aims are more justifiable and “human”.

On the other hand, we also get to see how Artemis became the Artemis we know and love. Losing his father and with his mother starting to lose the touch with reality, 10-year old Artemis (the younger) has to take charge of his declining family fortunes and get his father back. And even if that means going against his mother's humanitarian efforts (and confirming to the family history), he will do what it takes. Butler is ~~still~~ now the father figure in his life, a person with some values.

There are a lot of similarities between the two. (Headache warning: ) Artemis the elder is working to save his mother from a deadly disease and get his family back together, while Artemis the younger is trying to get his father (and his mother’s mental health) back. Artemis the elder has a lot more experience and knows (or thinks he knows) his history, while Artemis the younger has the advantage of being a true Fowl (read, criminal), and has Butler at his side.

Holly Short is still an impetuous L.E.P. Recon officer, but now is one of the fairies who trust Artemis as a friend. She continues to be the Fairy main hero alongside Artemis. Although, the time tunnel turning her into her “teenage” self does not exactly help matters.

Though I would have liked to see a bit more of Minerva Paradizo, but then, the story does not really have a place for her. Otherwise, most of the older characters make an appearance (it is “past” after all). And apart from the trademark cynical wit of Artemis and other humour apparent in the series, the “paradoxes” are nicely wrapped up, leaving almost no loose threads while also giving some clues to the beginning of the Artemis’ story as we know it.

In short, a perfect continuation to a very good series. The only problem is, where will Artemis and Holly go from here?

Book Review: Churchill's Triumph by Michael Dobbs

Fleiger — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 00:20:28 EDT

While the war started by Hitler was knocking on his doors, the three most powerful men in the world met at Yalta from 4th February to 11th February 1945, to discuss the future of the post-war Europe, and the world. The third novel in the Churchill's War series by Michael Dobbs, Churchill's Triumph is the story of those 8 days which plotted the course of many years to come.

While American and British forces are being held in check at the banks of Rhine, the Russian forces are "liberating" the eastern European countries. The Yalta Conference (codenamed Argonaut Conference), considered by many to be the meeting of the Trinity, reminds Churchill more of the Second Triumvirate after the death of Julius Caesar. In reality, The Big Three are not so different from the famed monkeys of the fable.

Stalin has come to the conference knowing what he wants (and indeed has scored the first victory by getting the ailing American President and the British Premier to Yalta instead of Mediterranean), and refuses to hear anything which is not in his agenda. Roosevelt wants his dream of United Nations to become reality (along with Russia's support against the Japanese), and doesn't want to see anything which does not fit his idealistic world. And the third old man, Churchill cannot open his mouth without "offending" Stalin and revealing the big holes in the crumbling façade of the alliance.

But Churchill is facing the possible end of the glorious British Empire and British influence in Middle East as well as Asia. At the same time, his stubborn demands of free democratic governments in east European countries (particularly Poland) is getting nowhere. So he realises that the only his words might shield Poland from complete subjugation at the hands of Russians.

Meanwhile, he meets a young Polish plumber, who is actually an officer who ran away from Katyń, and is now living under false identity. The plumber wants Churchill to take him away from Russian influence before his adopted identity is revealed, and in return gives some important information regarding Stalin's plansand the meetings and deals between Stalin and Roosevelt behind Churchill's back. But history is waiting to place the blame of the inevitable failure of Yalta Conference, and Churchill is determined to show where the blame truly lies, even if it means that he has to go back on his personal word of honour.

Churchill, at this time, is a man tired and tempered by the war. Unlike the man he was at the start of the War, he is far more ready to be silent and listen to others before flying off the handle. Yet he is the same stubborn old man at the core, with his belief in his words (no matter how others twist them) and inability to start a sentence without turning it into an oratory. Again we see the man behind the invincible name, a man who is tormented by his decision to betray a gentleman, and by the knowledge that his two allies (including his friend Roosevelt) do not need him or the British help going forward. But even handicapped like this, he cajoles, tricks and bullies the conference into granting him the promise of free elections in Poland, the inclusion of which in the official communique is bound to show Stalin as the liar he is later on.

Right from the starting travel, when the road is filled with ruins, the story takes a personal turn. The novel is filled with interesting touches like Stalin (on the first day) "sweeping" his hand across the map of Russian territories, and continuing west towards Germany (while remarking on the markedly different successes by Russian and British armies) in Churchill's War Room. This picture shows far better Stalin's mentality, than when he brags later that Russian soldiers take what they can by force. At the same time, the story of Marian Nowak, the plumber and his "family" in Poland gives a far more realistic picture of the ground conditions than any description of statistics or any discussion in the conference would have done.

All in all, this story of three old men (both Churchill and Roosevelt travelled with their daughters, "just in case"), who didn't quite know how to finish what they started, is a worthy successor to "Never Surrender", in all respects.

Of course, being an Indian gives you one more perspective into the happenings. While Churchill is adamant about the democracy in European countries, and is ready to go to any lengths to gain that, he is equally adamant about the continuation of British Empire (it is mentioned by Stalin and Roosevelt many times). That is a bit hypocritical, as history remarks.

Because we all know, the track record of the "most civilising empire in the history of the world" is not exactly perfect. But in all fairness, will the young people in Poland, removed by two generations from the freedom struggle, talk about Russia in the same tones, as we do about present-day England? Or, for that matter, would the Tibetans about China, if they ever get freedom?

Book Review: Ruled Britannia by Harry Turtledove

Fleiger — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:13:08 EDT

The defeat of the Spanish Armada is one of the major turning points in the history of Europe, indeed the world. But what would have happened if the Armada would have reached the shores of Britain?

In "Ruled Britannia" by Harry Turtledove, King Phillip II has placed his daughter, Isabella, and her consort on the British throne, and they have been ruling the isles for 10 years with the conquistadors, the dreaded Inquisition and the help of the Irish. But now, Phillip is on the verge of death, and the old (surviving) advisers of the imprisoned Queen Elizabeth feel that the time is coming to get their freedom back.

Central to their plan is William Shakespeare, whose famous plays have made him the darling of the crowds. He is charged by Lord Burghley to write a play which will rouse the common Briton to take up arms against their conquerors. At the same time, the Spanish want a fitting tribute to their Great King, and there is none better than William Shakespeare who can write a play about the greatness of His Most Catholic Majesty.

So now, the fate of two queens and two kingdoms rests on the words penned by a man who can't decide which play he wants to perform. And the success of the plot, if it materializes, depends on the actors and men who are vain or simple, timid or courageous, oblivious to the danger, or relishing it; in short, the men as common as the audience who applaud and cheer them.

Although he is the central character in the novel, William Shakespeare is still a common man. Like most people he does not want to risk his life by going against the conquerors, and conforms to their customs and rites just to be safe from the Inquisition. And although he would not spy on his neighbors, the only difference between him and the man on street is his prodigious talent. So it is quite ironic that the same talent thrusts him in the center of conspiracy, spy games and possibly "treason."

If you are looking for a hero in traditional medieval mold, senior lieutenant Lope de Vega would be the one. A conquistador who came up on the Armada, he is a brave man, fond of plays and women. As an English speaker and a fan of Shakespeare, he has full "backstage" access. Not to mention, he is a playwright himself, writing in Spanish. He is looking forward to play a part in "King Phillip", and plays a reluctant spy looking for any conspiracy amongst the actors.

Imaginary characters like Cicely Sellis (a "cunning woman") stand shoulder to shoulder with characters like Kit Marlow, Lord Burghley, Robert Cecil, acting as the "supporting" cast. Indeed, many times they show more courage than the reluctant hero. The nobles, like Lord Burghley work in the shadows at the back, while Good Queen Bess does not appear until almost the end.

It is only in the last few days that I have heard the name of Harry Turtledove, and the place he holds amongst historical fiction writers. Given my current condition, I am a bit loathe to start any of his series, but I must say that "Ruled Britannia" lived up to all that hype, and then some more.

Movie Review: The Spiderwick Chronicles

Fleiger — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 13:06:32 EST

Based on the book series by Tony DiTerlizzi and Holly Black, “The Spiderwick Chronicles” is one more fantasy movie on the premise that the world around us is not exactly what it looks to be.

Storyline: Jared Grace, his twin brother Simon and elder sister Mallory have shifted with their mother to their great-aunt's house. Young Jared is unhappy about his parents' divorce and his anger gets him in trouble.

In the dilapidated house, Jared discovers a hidden library belonging to their great-grandfather Arthur Spiderwick. There are many strange things in the library, the strangest being a book with warning not to open the book. Of course, as any 9-year-old would do, Jared opens and starts reading "Arthur Spiderwick's Field Guide to The Fantastical World around You". But the warning on the book may just be literally correct, and somebody tying Mallory's hair to the headboard at night may be the least of their worries.

Now Jared and his reluctant siblings may have to get help from and fight the creatures in and around the house. They have to meet their (great-)aunt Lucinda (who is in an "institution") and uncover a secret. They have only until full moon before something terrible tries to kill them to get the book.

Although the three Grace children are the focus of the story in the books, the movie puts Jared right in the middle. Jared (Freddie Highmore) loves his father, and is unhappy about moving away from him. He thinks their father will be coming to get them (at least him). But it is his pranks and outbursts which get him mostly in trouble (the only reason he is not expelled from his old school is that they are going to move anyway). At the same time, he is resourceful, inquisitive and adventurous, and really cares about his family.

By contrast, his twin Simon (Freddie Highmore) is a pet-lover (don’t mind the size or ferocity of the animal). By his own admission, he doesn’t “do conflict”, but often gets in the middle of things because of Jared. Mallory (Sarah Bolger) is a typical teen aged girl, just one who is a very good fencer. She is often found with a foil in her hand, and bossing around her younger siblings if possible.

The Grace children are helped and hindered by their household helpful brownie Thimbletack, who turns into a malevolent boggart at the drop of a hat (or mention of the book). On the other hand is Hogsqueal the “hob”goblin (remember, he is not a goblin), whose perhaps only loyalty is to himself, and only wish is to get good birds for dinner.

Having a flying fantasy creature in movie is by now an established way to get some great aerial shots, not to mention some brilliant acrobatics in the movie. If Harry Potter franchise has Buckbeak the hippogriff (and a dragon in future, maybe), the Grace children find the ride on Byron the griffin. With these allies, they have to defeat the fierce and cunning ogre, Mulgarath, who will do anything and take any shape to get the book.

With 5 small-sized books, each around 100 pages in length, I had thought that there wouldn't be any major differences. I mean, I didn't really expect the Spiderwick estate to be as dilapidated as the books made it to be. But I wasn't ready for some changes, like in Byron's story. Even Thimbletack is too much prosaic than his rhyming self in the books, while some creatures are completely missing from the story, probably because the movie takes place in a day or two against the weeks it takes the storyline to unfold in the books. Many important changes seem to be made to make the movie more kid-friendly.

All in all, it is a good fantasy movie, with a feel-good ending and some good humour. If you are a fantasy fan, I would recommend it.

Reading Tintin - The Thin(?) Line

Fleiger — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:33:48 EST

I finally got my hands on the elusive Tintin comics, "Tintin in the Land of Soviets" and "Tintin in the Congo". Now, I agree that the comics were written in early 20th century by a 20-century author. So, on one hand, I am happy that these comics won't ruin the umpteen re-readings of other comics for me (and I am still looking forward to the movie). But on the other hand, one of my sensors will always be looking for racial tones in the comics which I earlier dismissed as racial quirks.

This has also raised an old question to the front of my mind: When do racial caricatures turn bad?

Those familiar with the writings of prominent Marathi author Pu. La. Deshpande will remember one of his most memorable characters, Pestonkaka. The story captures the tones, the language, the quirks of a typical Parsi gentleman in post-independence India (capturing such quirks is a typical characteristic of Pu. La.'s writing). And yes, the story uses these quirks and accents for humour. Yet, even the most "sensitive" individual will find himself chuckling along, and nobody will find anything derogatory in the caricature.

On the other hand is the desi version of "12 days of Christmas" doing rounds on the net. Personally, I found that particular video bad, if not in bad taste.

So, is this a subjective question to such an extent?

Every group, race, nation, people have their own characteristics, customs, accents, language (I am not talking about English, Hindi etc. here), which define them as a group. Personally, I think any true to life portrayal of a particular person will have these, giving the person an identity. There are so many differences, that you are bound to find one or more of such characteristics funny. Just to give an example, every Bollywood (and even Hollywood) film watcher will have a plethora of characters in mind, which portray a particular identity in good, cheesy, all the way up to bad and pandering to popular perception way. And personally, I don't think writers using such devices for humour is bad, till the time it is in "good taste".

But at what point does the funny turn into bad? Is overuse the line to cross here? Do we perceive the "intent" of writer to be offensive (or think we perceive it) based on our sensitivities (and sometimes, our mood at the moment)?

Or, is it just a case of us vs. them, and everything is funny till we are at the other end of the joke?

Short Fiction: The Relic Hunter

Fleiger — Sun, 6 Jan 2008 03:31:22 EST

He stood watching, surrounded by the ruins.

Behind him lay the path he had covered, tortuous and half covered by the jungle, almost invisible to the eye. In his mind, the path was indicative of the year of research, false leads and real and false hopes. An year spent in the dusty libraries and shops, ancient manors and the unknown corners of the world. Following a life after another, all connected by a single thread. Hoping against hope to find just one single clue, one more elusive piece of the puzzle. Frustrating as it was at times, the exhilarating path had finally taken him to the place he was standing in.

Walls and statues surrounded him, full of stone carvings and depictions. A tableau of history, depicting the scenes he recognized from the countless hours spent reading, pictured in numerous books, and told in many tongues across the ages. Dramatised and embellished by the believers and the devout, scorned by the cynics. Frozen moments in the history he had pieced together carefully. A life-changing moment here, a sad realisation there. Just the way his quest had been.

Before him lay the relic. The goal he had been chasing for such a long time. The single discovery which would mark the crowning achievement of his successful life. The object which would fulfill his life and make his dreams come true, as it had done to the select few throughout its almost-mythical life.

Anybody who was less determined than him would have given up the quest. Anybody less resourceful would have met too many dead ends to continue. But he stood there, staring victory in the eye. Yet again proving that he was the best of the lot.

He had to be careful now. One final piece of the puzzle was still missing from his notebook, despite his efforts. Even the most complete maps to the place stopped short of showing this place. He had to step carefully across the temple, watching each step. Every step could land him in a booby-trap, every support he took could bring the walls tumbling down on him.

After the excruciating journey across the short distance, he finally reached the pedestal. His goal lay in front of him, and he just had to stretch his hand to claim it. Yet his mind was troubled by the complete lack of anything designed to discourage people like him. This complete absence of any defensive measures was so disquieting, that he stopped a moment longer before claiming victory. Staring at the relic.

And that's when everything came together in his mind. The hours spent reading stories, woodcuts and the carvings. The sheer force of will which took him from one stop to another along the trail. The complex path his quest had taken through time and space. All had been pointing to a single fact. The quest which had taken over his life, had become something more. It had become his life, had shown him his life in a different light. The victory he was looking for wasn't over his rivals. The rival he was competing against wasn't anybody else, but his own self.

Touching the relic for the first and last time, he turned away. The last piece of the puzzle was finally in the place, and the completed picture was shining through in his mind.

He had realised why the relic never needed any booby-traps and trap doors for its safekeeping. Sometimes the journey itself is the goal...

Some More TV Detectives

Fleiger — Thu, 27 Dec 2007 00:10:13 EST

I want to finish up the "Desi Detectives" series with a few TV detectives I didn't cover last time, starting with a serial I didn't know existed.

The Name: Special Squad
The Men (and Women): Aryan Khanna, Shaina Kaur, Dipika Ghosh, Ajay, Neha, Boxer, Shotgun, Papaji

Background: Special Squad (not to be confused with their Australian mates) was set up by Commissioner of Police, Mumbai, as a "special" team. Supposed to be a crack team of homicide investigators and forensic experts, they are pitted against "perfect criminals". The team is led by Aryan Khanna (who is pushing himself because he could not solve the case of his wife and daughter's murder) and later by Dipika Ghosh (who is put in the team to control the unorthodox ways of Aryan).

The cases are a combination of ones where the team has to find the criminal and the ones where they have to catch the criminal. While the latter often tend to be more police-procedural drama, the former are interesting, if not brilliant. Perhaps the major point I can talk about is that the cases do not seem to be overtly "inspired".

Then again, the series was a 2005 original, and I am not really conversant with crime dramas of that period. Also, although the story of a cop troubled/fueled by personal trouble is common in books, it was rare in the serials I have seen in that time period (for a particularly good serial in this genre, refer "Life").

As far as the investigative cases go, they are fairly guessable. But when we see the unit reconstructing the crime scene while investigating, the "re-enactment" shows the real criminals. I want to find out who made this decision, as this definitely takes away a lot from the suspense. I agree that a group of people discussing how the crime happened is less interesting than actual visual (picture being thousand words and video being many pictures), but then seeing the face of the actual criminal about halfway through the episode is not good either.

I think if the serial had gone beyond one season, this would have been a good one. Of course, I don't think this would have given any serious competition to CID. This is much more emotional drama, not to mention that CID has got quite a few years behind them to establish the characters. But then again, this slight emphasis on emotion does make them less prone to the unintentionally-funny gaffes CID often makes.

That said, I did not know that the time of death could be pinpointed to the minute by forensic examiners. Neither did I know that bullet cases are recovered from victim's body, and not the bullet.

Coming next time: This detective lives with a doctor. They tell us that he is a master of disguises. Sounds familiar? Well, you will be surprised.