The Common Man Speaks

Selective outrage on Richa Chadha‘s tweet reeks hypocrisy

by Leave a Comment

First things first. I don’t support Richa Chadha’s ‘Galwan’ tweet. I feel if she had to criticize the government for its working, for which we all have a right, she could have done that without using a comment from a senior Indian Army personnel.

But it is blatant hypocrisy on the part of a few Hindi film celebrities to jump in and target Richa for her tweet and portray her as an anti-national or a big criminal of sorts. These are the same people who turn a blind eye when a fellow celeb who is a supporter of the current ruling party makes even worse comments.

The biggest example of this is Kangana Ranaut. Last year, she famously said, “The independence that India got in 1947 was bheek. We attained actual independence in 2014 (thereby indicating the rule of the current government).

Richa Chadha
Richa Chadha and Kangana Ranaut

I don’t need to spell out how problematic this comment is. In a single sentence, she has rubbished off our entire freedom struggle and thousands of freedom fighters who sacrificed their everything, including their lives, for the sunrise of freedom. And here is one public figure openly belittling the whole movement as some joke.

Some Hindi film stars openly lambasted Richa for her ‘Galwan’ tweet. But did they ever speak up against Kangana for the aforementioned comments? How can you be up in arms against one person for a three-word tweet but at the same time have no problems at all when someone else makes a comment of a much larger magnitude that rubbishes off the very movement that got India independence?  On top of that, Richa has deleted the tweet and also apologized for the same. Don’t even imagine Kangana doing the same.

The reason why Kangana’s comments faces no outrage from few of the same celebrities is because they all are the supporters of the same party. This also points out that for them it is always the party first, nation later. If it was otherwise, they would have slammed Kangana’s statements too. And she has made a big bunch of them. The one mentioned here is just one example.

The same goes for the general supporters of this party. They call themselves nationalists but they completely ignored Pragya Thakur’s comments when she hailed the death of Shaheed Vijay Salaskar at the hands of terrorists Ajmal Kasab and associates. Can you imagine what would have happened if someone from the opposition would have made the same statement?

Hence, only the party matters, nation doesn’t.

Disclaimer: The views expressed by the writer in this article are independent and are not endorsed by the publication he works for

Review: Uunchai overwhelms you despite its lambaai

by Leave a Comment

Filmmaker Sooraj Barjatya’s name has become synonymous with traditional family dramas mostly revolving around marriages among the wealthy class. He tried something different in terms of the content in Main Prem Ki Diwani Hoon (2003) but the result didn’t turn out to be favorable.

Barjatya has once again gone out of his comfort zone by presenting a bromance among a small group of friends in an advanced age in his latest offering Uunchai. The end result has turned out to be way different from his 2003 movie.

Uunchai is about a group of senior citizen friends staying in Delhi – Amit (Amitabh Bachchan), Om (Anupam Kher), Javed (Boman Irani) and Bhupen (Danny Denzongpa). The last one is a professional hiker who has successfully climbed few of the highest peaks in India. He is very keen for the four of them to go for a hike at the Everest Base Camp after preparing for two months. However, Amit, Om and Javed plainly refuse citing old age issues.

One day, out of the blue, Bhupen passes away due to a cardiac arrest, despite being fit and healthy. The rest of the three friends, who are obviously heartbroken, realize that Bhupen had already booked their tickets to visit the Everest Base Camp after two months.

Amit believes they should not only fulfil Bhupen’s wish of visiting the site but also immerse his ashes over there, since he was deeply fond of the place and the activity of hiking. Om and Javed strongly object but eventually give in for the sake of their late friend. But they, obviously, need to face various challenges to fulfil their mission.

The narrative of Uunchai is not just limited to three friends embarking on a hugely difficult mission. The script is deep and layered with special importance given to each character and his or her journey. This ensures that you start having sympathy for the main characters, their friendship and mission too.

Despite the emotional nature of the subject, the film is full of sensible situational humour, which comes as a pleasant surprise. Neena Gupta has a major share in the funny moments and she does a fine job of it.

Mainstream Hindi films about such missions always face the danger of suffering from the second-half syndrome. But this is not at all the case with Uunchai, mostly because the main mission is kept for the latter half. Plus, the screenplay has the right mix of funny, emotional and dramatic moments during this part, which is also handled effectively.

What takes the cakes though is the moment where the friends release Bhupen’s ashes. It was vital for this to be the most overwhelming scene from the film and this is understood well by Barjatya.

A good amount of the story based in the mountainous regions. Manoj Kumar Khatoi’s camerawork has provided eye-pleasing visuals. One can make out the tricks used through VFX during various situations but this doesn’t bother you much. While the film is fine in the technical parts, the songs only reach the average level.

(Review continues after the trailer)

The performances can also be easily included in the positives. Amitabh Bachchan continues to defy his age through an enthusiastic act. Boman Irani and Sarika, whose character later joins the trio in the mission, also provide praiseworthy performances. Anupam Kher is likeable but, at times, he tries a bit too hard in appearing angry and offended.

Parineeti Chopra, who is the hike organizer, gets more scope later as she delivers a decent act. Danny Denzongpa and Nafisa Ali Sodhi are memorable despite having guest appearances.

Also read – When SRK did a Panchayat 33 years ago

But Uunchai is not devoid of any negative points. Its lambaai (runtime) of 169 minutes should have been trimmed, especially during some events in the second half. The film also takes quite a lot of creative liberties. Without giving away any spoilers, the narrative does this the most with Bachchan’s character.

Overall: Uunchai reaches a convincing height despite its lambaai. It says a lot about friendship goals and human spirit without saying much. The film won’t get a big opening at the box office due to Rajshri Productions’ decision of opting to go with fewer shows. But it stands a chance of getting a wider release once the word-of-mouth spreads.

Rating: 4 out of 5

Director: Sooraj Barjatya

Producers: Rajshri Productions, Mahaveer Jain Films and Boundless Media

Writers: Sunil Gandhi and Abhishek Dixit

Cast: Amitabh Bachchan, Anupam Kher, Boman Irani, Danny Denzongpa, Sarika, Parineeti Chopra, Neena Gupta

Ram Setu review – Last 1 minute somewhat saves Akshay Kumar’s movie

by 1 Comment

Despite starring in different genre of films in the last two decades, Akshay Kumar is known the most for his action roles. This is the first image he acquired among his fans and he remains to be a specialist in this form of cinema. Although he plays an archeologist in Ram Setu, he gets more than a chance to showcase his action skills yet again.

But overall, the film falls more in the adventure and mystery zone. Akshay’s stunts are kept simple because of the profession of his character. Ram Setu is not one of his best acts. However, the actor has a knack of carrying a film on his shoulders even while giving decent performances. He has done the same in this film as well.

Ram Setu is a period film that takes place in 2007. Dr Aryan Kulshreshtha (Akshay) is a successful archeologist married to a professor (Nushrratt Bharucchha). He is an atheist who only believes in facts and science. He is sent on an expedition in Afghanistan to restore Buddhist statues that were destroyed by Taliban terrorists.  

It is also the period where India’s then government refuses to believe that the Ram Setu bridge between India and Sri Lanka wasn’t made by Ram’s vaanar sena [army of animals] and that it is formed naturally. A wily businessman (Nassar) also has his eyes set on the bridge in order to make a project over there that will benefit him immensely.

The Ram Setu matter goes onto the Supreme Court. Aryan’s next assignment involves studying the bridge and filing a report on the findings to conclude whether Ram Setu is the same as mentioned in the Ramayana.

It was obvious from the trailer itself that Ram Setu is intended to please people from a particular political inclination. The whole film makes it even clearer by taking subtle jibes at the Indian Government of 2007 without taking the name of the party running it.

Talking about the content and the craft, Ram Setu regularly takes creative liberties and shows disregard for logic. You might lose count on things happening so conveniently for the protagonist and his team. This includes Aryan’s escape from the clutches of Taliban, which is not even shown; we are only made to assume.  

Despite this, Ram Setu does have a positive point in the form of its engaging and entertaining narrative. The events are lined up in such a way that there is just no scope for boredom.

But what saves Ram Setu the most from falling more is the twist in the very last scene of the climax related to one of the prominent characters. It comes as a surprise and is sure to please the worshippers of the heroes of the Ramayana like lord Ram and Hanuman.

After Akshay, south actor Satyadev Kancharana, who plays Anjaneya Putra aka AP, rules the film with his confident performance. Nassar’s potential as a quality artiste isn’t seen simply because his character is quite one-dimensional. Pravesh Rana, another negative character, fares better.

Also read: Adipurush teaser has triggered opposite political reactions

Nushrratt Bharuccha lends good support but her role doesn’t offer much. Jeniffer Piccinato shows promise. Jacqueline Fernandez struggles but this is hardly surprising now.

Overall: Ram Setu is somewhat rescued by the twist in the climax and the fast-paced narrative. The film would have appeared little better if it had released before the Telugu movie Karthikeya 2, a similar spiritual adventure thriller and much better.

Rating: 2.5 out of 5

Director: Abhishek Sharma

Producers: Cape Of Good Films, Abundantia Entertainment, Lyca Productions and Prime Video

Writer: Abhishek Sharma

Cast: Akshay Kumar, Nushrratt Bharuccha, Satyadev Kancharana, Nassar, Jacqueline Fernandez, Pravesh Rana and Jeniffer Piccinato

Aye Zindagi review – An incredible real story narrated convincingly

by 1 Comment

Director Anirban Bose’s Aye Zindagi initially appears like just another story about a person struggling against a terminal illness.

The film begins in 2004 when the 26-year-old Vinayak (Satyajeet Dubey) is being diagnosed with severe liver cirrhosis. He works in Lucknow but visits a hospital in Hyderabad to check if he can undergo a liver transplant because he has only six to seven months to live. Over there, he meets Revathy (Revathy), a grief counselor. Her job also includes encouraging people to go for organ transplant.

Although Vinayak stands a chance for getting a liver transplant, the process has some major financial and emotional challenges in store, including his own deteriorating health. His elder brother Kartik (Sawan Tank), a medical student, keeps his studies aside to look after Vinayak. While undergoing treatment, he develops an unusual bond with his doctor and nurse, played by Hemant Kher and Mrinmayee Godbole respectively.

Despite the storyline, Aye Zindagi is much more than what we expected it to be at half point. It’s based on an incredible true story that took place in India some years back. This is a rare film where the makers haven’t tampered with the real tale and kept it as it is. However, there was no need for this since the real story itself is highly emotional and dramatic, which we get the know in detail once the film ends.

In a film relying on as much reality as possible, it was necessary for it to shine during its various emotional moments and that’s exactly what happens here. The narrative is filled with moments triggering different emotions and each one moves you. The best one happens when there is a major twist in the tale. This particular incident keeps haunting you long after the film is over.

It is vital for such films to be high on performances in order for the audience to feel for the characters. Aye Zindagi doesn’t disappoint on this front too. Satyajeet Dubey provides a dedicated act where we constantly feel for him as he goes through a whirlpool of emotions. The scene where he breaks down with his brother and the climax deserve special mention.

As one would expect from a seasoned artiste like Revathy, she is thoroughly impressive. Hemant Kher, Mrinmayee Godbole and the rest of the actors too contribute positively.

Also read: When SRK did a Panchayat 33 years ago

Aye Zindagi comes with its share of minuses as well. The film’s length, which is 105 minutes, could have been reduced further, especially during the ending moments. The character of Revathy’s son should have been given more importance, in order to increase the impact of the basic storyline.

But the positives easily override the negatives making Aye Zindagi a surprise package of the year where Hindi cinema has been criticized a lot for its content.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5

Director: Anirban Bose

Producer: Shiladitya Bora

Writers: Anirban Bose

Cast: Satyajeet Dubey, Revathy, Hemant Kher, Mrinmayee Godbole

Adipurush teaser has triggered opposite political reactions

by 1 Comment

Filmmaker Om Raut’s Adipurush has been one of the keenly-awaited films ever since it was announced more than a couple of years back. The filmmaker’s Hindi debut Tanhaji: The Unsung Warrior, his previous effort, had become a runaway hit at the box office, so there was anticipation on what he would offer next.

Apart from the cast of Prabhas, Saif Ali Khan and Kriti Sanon, the major reason why Adipurush made heads turn was because of its adaptation from the great Indian epic Ramayana.

But the reaction to the long-awaited teaser finally released more than a week back would have taken the team of Adipurush by a rude surprise. The initial footage has been panned on social media for more than one reason.

Firstly, the VFX has been criticized as the visuals didn’t impress the viewers. But more than that, the look of Saif Ali Khan’s character of Raavan has been literally lambasted for it doesn’t match with what people imagine the character to be.

Not just that, the looks of Prabhas and Devdatta Nage, who play Lord Ram and Hanuman, along with the depiction of the Vaanar Sena have also come under criticism.

It was gradually realized that the teaser has given rise to opposite political reactions.

Om Raut started off his career with the Marathi movie Lokmanya: Ek Yugpurush in 2015. Apart from narrating the life story of Bal Gangadhar Tilak aka Lokmanya Tilak, the film also gave special footage to the protagonist’s efforts in writing Gita Rahasya, his own interpretation of the Bhagavad Gita.

Adipurush starring Prabhas and Saif Ali Khan
Prabhas and Saif Ali Khan in Adipurush (Source: YouTube teaser screenshots)

His next Tanhaji, his debut in Hindi, was about the achievement of the Maratha warrior Tanaji Malusare.

In other words, both the films were appreciated by the Indian Right Wing. Of course, the movies weren’t aimed at them specifically but their subjects were such that they naturally found takers in people from that particular political side.

The announcement of Adipurush naturally excited the Right Wingers since the film is based on Lord Ram. Plus, Raut’s social media posts are also appreciated by them, especially the ones about the upcoming Ram Mandir in Ayodhya.

Another reason for the excitement for Adipurush for them was the casting of Prabhas as Ram. The actor has formed a fan base among the Right Wingers after the mammoth success of both the Baahubali movies. The films are considered pro-Hindu because of their content, although they were appreciated with people across political opinions.

Unfortunately for the makers, it is the Right Wingers who have been offended the most by the teaser of Adipurush. Although Prabhas is facing criticisms for his look as Ram, it is the portrayal of Saif that is receiving the maximum flak for him allegedly looking as a Mughal ruler or Alauddin Khilji. Despite being evil, Raavan was a learned scholar and, as per the reactions, Saif isn’t appearing like one in this get-up.

But that’s not all. Quite a few ‘pro-Hindu’ groups have started protesting and calling for a ban on the movie. The teaser has also triggered one such group to demand ‘Sanatani Censor Board’ to ensure that Hindu gods aren’t portrayed in a ‘derogatory’ manner in movies. A few BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) leaders too have slammed the teaser. Right Wingers on social media have also been trending boycott against the movie.

The film’s teaser was launched at a grand event in Ayodhya, where the much talked-about Ram Temple is being constructed currently. Ironically, the chief priest of the same temple has demanded a ban on the film.

On the other hand, the liberal crowd or those against the Right Wing have been providing full support to Adipurush since they believe there should be freedom of expression for the makers to portray any character the way they want. Their main argument is that nobody knows how the characters present in the Ramayana looked in real.

Before the teaser came out, not many would have expected a pro-Hindu movie made by pro-Hindu stars to be slammed by the Right Wing and supported by those having an opposite political view. The moral of the story is that trying to please people of any political ideology can backfire.

We can just wait and watch what happens when the full trailer of Adipurush is released.

Also read:

Why actual anti-national comments never face boycott?

Vikram Vedha review – Does the Hindi remake of the iconic Tamil film work?  

by Leave a Comment

Mainstream Hindi cinema has been obsessed with remaking successful and acclaimed south Indian films since years. However, a lot of these films haven’t yielded fruitful results. One should take note that most of those ineffective remakes have been made by different set of people.  

Vikram Vedha (2022) shows how much difference it can make when the same set of writers and directors, in this case Pushkar and Gayathri who wrote and directed the original Tamil film of 2017, take on the responsibility of remaking their film in another language.

The film is set in the north Indian town of Lucknow where senior cop Vikram (Saif Ali Khan) takes immense pride in being an encounter specialist, along with his team that helps him out with the same, since he believes they are only finishing off the bad guys. He has a conflict with his wife (Radhika Apte), a lawyer who doesn’t approve of fake encounters.

Vikram is loaded with the task of nabbing the dreaded criminal Vedha (Hrithik Roshan). He and his team has been struggling to match up to him. But one day, Vedha himself surrenders by walking into the police station. Vikram finds his act fishy and wonders about his motive. During the interrogation, Vedha narrates a story to Vikram that the latter can’t afford to ignore.

Despite the Hindi remake following the same storyline, it is given an identity of its own by the makers. The setting, milieu, characters, lingo and, most importantly, the more mainstream presentation makes the new Vikram Vedha worth enjoying even for those who have liked the original.

Vikram Vedha review
Saif Ali Khan and Hrithik Roshan in Vikram Vedha

Similarly, Saif Ali Khan and Hrithik Roshan bring out their own versions of the two characters played by R Madhavan and Vijay Sethupathi in the original. You are never reminded of the duo from the original and this is another major plus point for the movie.

Khan brings out his own toughness and style while enacting the ‘good’ cop. He scores high also when his character develops later on. Hrithik is remarkable as the ‘bad’ guy with different shades. His sarcasm is spot on and so is his sensibility in serious situations, although his accent does remind you of his act in Super 30 (2019) a few times.

Radhika Apte turns out to be the perfect choice for the role of an honest and upright lawyer. Sharib Hashmi has proved over the years that he can’t do anything wrong. He continues the same here in the role of Babloo Bhaiya. Rohit Saraf and Yogita Bihani score well in their supporting acts.

Like the original, the remake too is not just a stylish action saga but also thought-provoking in terms of whether all is either black or white in today’s world.

Vikram Vedha perfectly looks like it belongs to the small north Indian towns because of some impressive work by the production designer. The film scores high even in terms of other technical aspects like cinematography, editing and background score. The last sees the repetition of the signature tune from the original film. It is hard to imagine Vikram Vedha without that powerful and kick-worthy background score.

Also read: When SRK did a Panchayat 33 years ago

While the film is a worthy remake of the original, it has some minuses. For some time in the second half the narrative isn’t as smooth as one would expect, especially after watching the original. The all-important surrender scene doesn’t match up to the one in the original in terms of intensity and tension. It also appears more hurried.

But all in all, Vikram Vedha is one of the rare impressive Hindi films in a year that has largely been lackluster.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5

Directors: Pushkar and Gayathri

Writers: Pushkar, Gayathri and Benazir Ali Fida

Producers: Reliance Entertainment, T-Series, YNOT Studios, Friday Filmworks and Jio Studios

Cast: Hrithik Roshan, Saif Ali Khan, Radhika Apte, Sharib Hashmi, Satyadeep Mishra, Rohit Saraf, Yogita Bihani

Runtime: 159 minutes

When SRK did a Panchayat 33 years ago

by 6 Comments

Shah Rukh Khan is not only one of the biggest stars in India but also world over. But the actor has had to work his way up through hard-work from scratch. After doing theatre in Delhi, he migrated to Mumbai to continue the profession.

During his initial days, he was seen in quite a few Doordarshan shows like Dil Dariya (1988), Fauji (1988), Intezaar (1989), Adhuri Zindagi (1989), etc.

One notable work Shah Rukh Khan did during those days for the same channel was in the show Ummeed in 1989. The serial featured different stories that used to run for two episodes. In one such segment, Khan featured in the role of a young bank employee.

A noble soul with the channel name of ‘Super Tuber’ uploaded the two episodes of the show on YouTube three years ago.

As soon as I started watching the first episode, I was instantly reminded of TVF’s Amazon Prime Video show Panchayat. The web-series saw Jitendra Kumar play Abhishek Tripathi, an engineering graduate forced to take up the position of a secretary at the panchayat office in the small village Phulera, Uttar Pradesh.

Shah Rukh Khan in Ummeed
Shah Rukh Khan in Ummeed and Jitendra Kumar in Panchayat

The city-bred Abhishek gets a culture shock by the life in the village. But there were ruder surprises in store for him when he takes a look at the panchayat office. It turns out to be a basic office which, must to his dismay, also doubled up as his residence. Abhishek also finds it difficult to adjust to the workings of the village due to the politics and age-old attitudes.

Coming back to Ummeed, Shah Rukh Khan plays the character of Anand Gupta who is ‘promoted’ as the branch manager to the bank’s newly-opened branch at Bhingri. In reality, Anand’s superior was under tremendous pressure from his senior to send someone at the said branch since nobody was willing to relocate to the place.

Anand’s happiness turns sour as soon as he lands at the bank’s branch in Bhingri. The place is located in a no-man’s land and is completely empty; no staff and just one helper. In fact, the helper and Anand are the only members of the staff.

This is similar to Abhishek’s situation in Panchayat. And just like that web-series, Anand’s personal room is also inside the office, just a few steps away, and this one too has a set-up for making tea near the window.

That’s not all though. Just like in Panchayat, Shah Rukh Khan’s character in Ummeed too forms a bond with the people of the village after, initially, going through a nightmare.

This is in no way stating that Panchayat was lifted from Ummeed. A city-based officer facing challenges after being transferred to a rural area is a common theme around the world.

Ummeed featured a very innocent and raw version of Shah Rukh Khan. He perfectly fitted the role of a common man from a middle-class family required to work hard to rise in his career. In other words, he made a clear announcement of his acting talent very early in his career; something we got to know in the following years.

Also read: Exploring Gehraiyaan’s selfish character in James Hadley Chase manner

Ummeed was written by Mukesh Sharma. I couldn’t find any other work by him after doing a Google search. Vikas Desai, as per IMDB.com, before directing this show, had acted in quite a few parallel films like Arvind Desai Ki Ajeeb Dastaan (1978), Giddh: The Vulture (1984), Andhi Gali (1984) and Anantyatra (1985). There is no record of what he did after that, except that he acted in Ketan Mehta’s Aar Ya Paar (1997).

Rajat Kapoor is named as one of the assistant directors on the show. It is not known whether he is the same one of Bheja Fry (2007) fame.

Ummeed was produced by Joint Publicity Committee, Public Sector Banks. It is interesting to see a show produced by the banking sector showing the sorry state of banks in rural areas.

Watch both the episodes of Ummeed below:

Why actual ‘anti-national’ statements never face BOYCOTT?

by 1 Comment

India is all set to celebrate 75 years of its freedom from the British, which they got in 1947. However, it is ironical that just when the country is reaching the important milestone related to its freedom, a section of the population is busy promoting curtailment of the same.

The whole #BoycottLaalSinghChaddha ‘movement’ is not just unfair but plainly silly. One of the main reasons why the film is being boycotted is the supposed ‘anti-India’ statements made by the film’s lead actor and producer Aamir Khan way back in 2015.

Messages are being circulated claiming that the star said that he wants to leave India as he is feeling unsafe. This is nothing but a fabricated version of what Khan actually said.

As you can hear from the above video, Khan said that his then wife Kiran Rao asked if they should move out of India. Firstly, it wasn’t suggested by Khan. Secondly, the very next thing the actor said was, “Now that’s a disastrous and a very big statement for Kiran to make to me.” Khan himself said on record that what she said was “disastrous” but not many of us paid heed to that, either knowingly or unknowingly.

Funnily enough, the statement came out in 2015. Following this, Khan released three of his films in the following years, Dangal (2016), Secret Superstar (2017) and Thugs Of Hindostan (2018). Except Dangal to some extent, no other film faced boycott. But today, seven years after that statement, there is a massive campaign against the actor for his film Laal Singh Chaddha.

Source: YouTube screenshot from Koffee With Karan promo

This isn’t the only reason why the film is boycotted. Somehow few months before the release of the film, fake messages and memes are being circulated claiming that Aamir said in his show Satyamev Jayate that we shouldn’t pour milk on the Shivling and should instead use that money to help the needy. Some messages are also claiming that he said the same thing in his earlier film PK (2014).

As it is proved in one of my previous articles, Aamir has never made any such statement on the Shivling, either in his show or in the movie. Instead, it was Akshay Kumar and Paresh Rawal who have made exactly the same statements (read the article and see the videos HERE). The former made it in the movie OMG Oh My God (2012) and the latter while promoting the same film. In fact, Akshay also went onto criticize the practice of pouring oil on Hanuman’s deity on Saturdays.

Hear both of them out in the videos above. Did anyone of you ever come across any boycott calls for Akshay or Rawal?

Even if the boycotters argue that out of these, the statement made by Aamir in 2015 about Rao asking if they should leave India are problematic, it is still hypocritical. This is because they are completely ignoring Kangana Ranaut comment made last year, which is many times more controversial and offensive than what Khan said.

Speaking at a summit organized by a news channel, she described India’s independence from the British in 1947 saying, “Woh azadi nahin thi, woh bheek thi. Aur jo azadi mili hai woh 2014 mein mili hai.” Watch the video of the same below.

Now, I don’t need to spell out how problematic this statement is. In a single sentence, the actress has questioned the sacrifices of all those freedom fighters who fought for India’s freedom. It is also clear that the comments made by Aamir are nowhere near to what she said. Plus, she has had a history of making comments of this nature. Comparing Mumbai with PoK is just one other example.  

So, if you are deeply offended and incensed by Aamir’s comments but have no problems with what Ranaut’s said, you know what that makes you. More so if you are celebrating India’s 75years of freedom without having issues when someone said that that wasn’t actual freedom.  

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

by 4 Comments

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

by Leave a Comment

Dr Chandraprakash Dwivedi’s Samrat Prithviraj is supposed to be based on the life of the 12th 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.

Prithviraj movie

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?