<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Math in the Movies: Revolutionary Road</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mathgoespop.com/2009/07/math-in-the-movies-revolutionary-road.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mathgoespop.com/2009/07/math-in-the-movies-revolutionary-road.html</link>
	<description>Ruminations on the Intersection Between Mathematics and Popular Culture</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 20:20:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.mathgoespop.com/2009/07/math-in-the-movies-revolutionary-road.html/comment-page-1#comment-65</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2009 06:09:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathgoespop.com/2009/07/math-in-the-movies-revolutionary-road.html#comment-65</guid>
		<description>I actually found Givings to be the least flawed character of the bunch - granted everyone&#039;s lives seemed cripplingly depressing, so this isn&#039;t saying much.  I&#039;m sure they could&#039;ve played with this notion of insanity without giving him a math background, but I don&#039;t think the film does much of a disservice to the stereotype, especially as compared to other films.  I found Givings to be the most likable character in the film, but maybe that&#039;s my own bias.  I guess they could&#039;ve made him a crazy physicist instead.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;as for your second question, outlandish awkward, no doubt!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I actually found Givings to be the least flawed character of the bunch &#8211; granted everyone&#39;s lives seemed cripplingly depressing, so this isn&#39;t saying much.  I&#39;m sure they could&#39;ve played with this notion of insanity without giving him a math background, but I don&#39;t think the film does much of a disservice to the stereotype, especially as compared to other films.  I found Givings to be the most likable character in the film, but maybe that&#39;s my own bias.  I guess they could&#39;ve made him a crazy physicist instead.</p>
<p>as for your second question, outlandish awkward, no doubt!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Smith</title>
		<link>http://www.mathgoespop.com/2009/07/math-in-the-movies-revolutionary-road.html/comment-page-1#comment-64</link>
		<dc:creator>Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 2009 23:47:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathgoespop.com/2009/07/math-in-the-movies-revolutionary-road.html#comment-64</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think you should give this a pass on the first stereotype of Givings being insane, because he&#039;s the most sane from our contemporary stand point.  The film plays this into being a major character flaw, and leads the viewer into believing this is at least associated with his mathematical and/or academic brilliance.  If anything, it will cause people to believe that those with a mathematics PhD will be one of two extremes of insane: Quiet awkward, Outlandish awkward.  Which are you?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#39;t think you should give this a pass on the first stereotype of Givings being insane, because he&#39;s the most sane from our contemporary stand point.  The film plays this into being a major character flaw, and leads the viewer into believing this is at least associated with his mathematical and/or academic brilliance.  If anything, it will cause people to believe that those with a mathematics PhD will be one of two extremes of insane: Quiet awkward, Outlandish awkward.  Which are you?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
