Monthly Archives: June 2022

Didn’t consider W Indies as big opponent in ’83 World Cup, says Mohinder Amarnath

The 1983 cricket World Cup-winning team had another reunion last evening in Mumbai at the launch of the coffee table book titled The 1983 World Cup Opus, facilitated by Paymentz.

The event saw the presence of Kapil Dev, Mohinder Amarnath, Kirti Azad, Roger Binny, Syed Kirmani, Madan Lal, Sandeep Patil, Balwinder Singh Sandhu, Krishnamachari Srikkanth, Dilip Vengsarkar, Sunil Valson and the then team Manager PR Man Singh. Ravi Shastri and Sunil Gavaskar, who were also a part of the team, joined the event virtually.

The event saw the 1983 team go down memory lane and recall interesting stories behind their triumph.

Much before the final of the world cup, India had beaten West Indies in their very first league match of the series. This was a huge hurdle to cross because before this match, the West Indies hadn’t lost a single match in the world cup from 1975 onwards when the series started.

Mohinder Amarnath and Kapil Dev after winning the 1983 World Cup

Speaking about the victory, Amarnath said, “If you trust yourself and have the guts, you can do anything. We didn’t consider West Indies as a very big opponent. To be very honest, this was my way of thinking. [But] I am sure all 11 players on the field were also thinking this way that we are better than them. This is what made us the world champions. We clicked at the right time.”

The event was also attended by Anupam Harshad Vassa, the Founder and Chairman of Paymentz, and Amoolya Vassa, the Founder and Managing Director of the firm, along with other dignitaries from the same firm.

During the course of the discussion, it was recalled how defeating England in the semi-final was also an important landmark since India was not given a chance by many. “It was a crucial, crucial game,” said Ravi Shastri. “England were firm favourites, at least in their media. When you open the newspapers in the morning, it was only England. India was as if we are the outsiders and we have absolutely no chance.”

The launch of the book at the hands of Kapil Dev

The final of the ’83 world cup changed with the wicket of the legendary Vivian Richards whose catch was taken spectacularly by Kapil Dev off the bowling of Madan Lal. The bowler revealed that this wasn’t the first time he got Richards out.

“I wanted to bowl that over. I would like to tell you that I had also got him out 2-3 times before in the Calcutta test match and in West Indies. Once the umpire gave him not out in my bowling in Sharjah when he was clean LBW,” said Lal.

Also read: He was selected in ’83 World Cup, but could play only in ’99

Not much is said about the 22 run last-wicket partnership which involved Sandhu, who scored 11 not out batting at number 11. Sandhu recalled that without that partnership, India’s score would have been much lower.

“Last wicket partnership is always very crucial,” said Binny. “If he (number 11 batsman) is not out, then how many runs are made (in the last-wicket partnership) are made by him because if he had gotten out, the runs wouldn’t have been made.”

1983 World Cup team — The 1983 team with their families

India looked favourite to win the World Cup final after West Indies were 6 or 7 down. But Kapil Dev didn’t think that way.

When Harsha Bhogle, the host, asked him when during the match he felt that the World Cup is theirs, Dev said, “(After getting the) last wicket,” said Dev. “How Jimmy bowled and he got the LBW, I think it was just a different feeling. Before that, you do think that it was possible. But it’s not possible till the last wicket. I think that’s the most important thing.”

Also read: 83 movie review

The ’83 team captain also said that it is only in recent years that the team is getting more recognition for the victory. “In last 10 years, I have felt it more. Now we are getting more respect and honour. It is something you can’t express in words. If you would have asked that day (after the final), I would have said that life is normal. We played the next series and we lost,” he said.

Filmmaker Kabir Khan, who made a film on India’s victory in that World Cup titled 83, was also present at the event.

Speaking about the event, Anupam Harshad Vassa said, “It was a no brainer and being cricket fans ourselves, we just grabbed the opportunity. The 1983 World Cup win put India on the world map. It was a proud moment for any Indian. Being a part of the ‘1983 World Cup Opus’ is an honor for Paymentz, and it is only the beginning of the company’s involvement in the sporting industry and recognition of cricket legends. Cricket is a religion in India and to be associated with the sporting giants, the first team who won the World Cup for India and gave us one of the most iconic sporting moments, is an honor for our company.”

Play review: Dhappa (Hindi)

Leave a reply

Writer, director, lyricist and producer Akshay Mishra’s Dhappa is a Hindi musical play based in the 1950s era of Hindi cinema. This description will make you expect the drama to play out in a certain way. However, it has a major surprise later on; something you don’t expect from a play of this genre.

Produced by Aum Theatre Mumbai, Dhappa takes place in 1950s Mumbai (then Bombay). Kumar (Pavitra Sarkar) is passionate about acting but he is unable to make it big in the industry. Worse, his crass and rude behavior has made him infamous in the media, especially the tabloids.

Kumar stays with his elder sister Iravati (Sharon Chandra) in a bungalow. She is a gifted Kathak dancer but has been unable to fulfill her wish of becoming a professional artiste. She is much more mature than Kumar and is his guiding force as well as critic.

Meanwhile, the successful foreign-returned novelist Shyam (Puneet Issar) is eager to make his first feature film. Despite being obsessed with the idea of his first film, he doesn’t like watching new Hindi films. He is introduced to Kumar in an unusual way.

Shyam’s idea to make a film gains Kumar’s interest as he feels he will cast him in the lead role. However, Kumar is actually interested in making a film based on Kathak with Iravati. But this doesn’t go well with Kumar. He plainly declines the offer on behalf of Iravati without even asking her. Is it due to jealously, patriarchy or something else?

Dhappa takes you back to the golden right at the onset with Pankhuri Gangwal’s introduction as an anchor.

The story is laced with a lot of drama and conflict and that is played out well on the stage on a majority of the times. Akshay Mishra’s fine presentation of various situations as a director is noteworthy. The elaborated scenes between Kumar and Shyam are a mixture of drama and humour. Kumar’s conversations with Iravati are more serious and deep.

Dhappa boasts of some rich set designing with minute detailing that brings back the bygone era. The use of lights is creative while the background score adapts to different emotions effortlessly. Ajit Kumar Srivastava, Amit Ranjan Srivastava and Radha Srivastava’s musical performances elevate the play.

Pavitra Sarkar succeeds in adding life to the character of Kumar. Along with arrogance, he also displays an undercurrent of vulnerability, which the people outside are unaware of. Sharon Chandra scores well both in her Kathak performances and while playing Iravati. Anuradha Athlekar provides decent support in a role that has more potential later.

The veteran Puneet Issar lives up to his name and gives a mature act, including a long monologue. His character’s comparison with Duryodhan in one scene is amusing and smart.

On the flipside, Dhappa needed to be lesser in duration, especially in the second half where the length is felt. The duration of the song performances could have been reduced in order to make it crisper.

This point, however, won’t hurt you much when the aforementioned twist takes place. The way in which it is presented has the potential of giving you a shock, even if you manage to predict it.

Writer, director, lyricist and producer: Akshay Mishra

Cast: Puneet Issar, Sharon Chandra, Pavitra Sarkar and Anuradha Athlekar

Singers and musicians: Ajit Kumar Srivastava, Amit Ranjan Srivastava and Radha Srivastava

Background score: Amit Sagar

Lights: Shyam Chavan

Also read: Play Review: Subodh Bhave-starrer Ashrunchi Zali Phule

What Aamir Khan said about Shivling & why is his film boycotted?

5 Replies

Over the last few years, every time an Aamir Khan film gets ready for release, one particular message or meme related to him starts circulating on social media and What’s App. As you must have guessed, it’s shared by the Right Wing fanatics with an appeal to boycott his upcoming film.

With the release of Laal Singh Chaddha not being far, the same message has started circulating again.

The message claims that Aamir once said in his television show Satyamev Jayate that instead of pouring milk on Shivling, it is better to use that money to feed a poor person. Hence, the message appeals to the audience to boycott his next release and use the money you would have spent on the ticket to help the needy.

How true is the message?

The message is fake. Aamir has never said that in Satyamev Jayate. In fact, a topic related to religion or religious beliefs was never addressed in that TV show. Some messages also claim that the actor made that comment in his blockbuster PK (2014). This claim is also false.

Still, if someone can find a video of him saying such a thing, please pass it on. Not that him saying such a thing would justify the boycott, more so after you read below.

Aamir Khan boycott — Aamir Khan in PK and Paresh Rawal in OMG Oh My God!

Who said it then?

Interestingly, the message against pouring milk on Shivling was given by Paresh Rawal’s character Kanjibhai in his film OMG Oh My God (2012). In fact, the character in the movie shares an in-depth and hard-hitting opinion on why it is futile to pour milk on the Shivling, as can be seen from the scene below.

But it doesn’t end here. During the promotion of the same movie, Akshay Kumar, who plays Lord Krishna in it, gave a bold personal opinion on why one shouldn’t pour milk on the Shivling. In fact, he didn’t stop at that. He also criticized the practice of pouring oil on Lord Hanuman’s deity on Saturdays. Watch the video below.

Those spreading communal hatred on the internet and social media have turned a blind eye at Rawal and Akshay’s comments. It is impossible that they are completely unaware about the comments made by these two actors, considering how much research their IT cell carries out.

But don’t expect any such boycott messages for these two actors since their surname isn’t Khan. As we all know, Rawal is also a member of the BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) and an MP (Member of Parliament). Akshay’s fondness for the party is known far and wide.

We are reminded of it every time we eat a mango.

Also read:

Rann keeps getting more relevant and that’s not a good sign

Samrat Prithviraj is a cinematic version of a What’s App forward

Leave a reply

Dr Chandraprakash Dwivedi’s Samrat Prithviraj is supposed to be based on the life of the 12^th century king and warrior Prithviraj III or Prithviraj Chauhan. The film focuses on his enmity with Muhammad Ghori of Ghazni in acquiring control over Delhi.

The film’s artistic camerawork and vibrant costumes make it an eye-pleasing affair. Some stunts during the battle scenes also stand out. From the performances, Sonu Sood is the best of the lot with a mature act as Chand Bardai.

But these positives are too few in number when it comes to the minuses. The film has a haphazard narrative throughout. For example, it starts on a tense note but soon loses grip and this is maintained throughout the duration. The forceful inclusion of songs adds to the misery.

A major negative point here is the casting of Akshay Kumar as Prithviraj. The actor never appears in character and it seems he wasn’t even interested in getting the body language right. Debutant and Miss World 2017 Manushi Chhillar has the looks but is pretty average when it comes to acting chops. And the less said about the awkward age gap between the two the better.

But these issues don’t appear as problematic as the film’s political propaganda. It is easy to forgive bad content, which is made aplenty in Hindi cinema, as it’s not intentional. But it’s difficult to overlook propaganda dished out to please the Right Wingers. This, surely, can’t be unintentional.

The film’s makers, during various promotional events, stated that the film is based on actual facts and that Dwivedi carried out research for as many as 18 years. However, such gigantic effort is never seen in Samrat Prihviraj.

(SPOILERS ahead)

Historical accounts state that Prithviraj was killed by Ghori. Astonishingly, the film goes onto show that it was Prithviraj who killed Ghori whereas the latter lived more than the former. It is one thing to take creative liberty. It’s altogether another thing to change an entire narrative of history just to suit your real target audience, which is ready to accept whatever is dished out to them if it suits their narrative.

If they are ready to believe textual ‘information’ in What’s App forwards, they will obviously believe the same forwarded message portrayed on the screen in a grand scale. That’s what this film is – a cinematic version of a What’s App forward.

Amidst such problematic content, the film, out of nowhere, makes you laugh unintentionally when Sanyogita heroically sings ‘Yoddha Ban Gayi Main’ and, while the song is ending, commits jauhar [self-immolation].

Strangely, the promotions of Prithviraj Chauhan also saw Dwivedi claiming that the film is based on the text Prithviraj Raso, a poem written by Chand Bardai. Now this particular text is past-historical and part-fictional. So why also claim that the film is a historical account?

But the film doesn’t do justice even with Prithviraj Raso. The text mentions that after marrying Sanyogita, Prithviraj spent too much time with her while ignoring the state affairs. Nothing of this is shown in the film.

Of course, this would have been too much to bear for their What’s App audience. So the writer-director omits this part. This is exactly how one prepares a What’s App forward.

But it’s surprising that their real audience is fine with the film claiming Prithviraj to be the ‘last Hindu king.’ They don’t remember various other Hindu kings born much later, including Shivaji Maharaj?

Irony just committed jauhar…

Also read:

Why are south films dominating? Is Bollywood on the decline?