Abey ye Warrirspirit or whatever
It is my forum ID, like yours is "Ruth-less" We choose our ID's because it reflects something about our personality. Mine is Warrior spirit because I have a warrior like spirit, in the sense that I am a fighter and I keep fighting for the truth, and I am not phased by others in expressing my truth. You don't know me in real life, but if you did you would know I have a common trait of going against the grain. If I think something is true I express it, even if it will upset my friends, family and well wishers. I do not go with the herd. It is because of this trait I alienate a lot of people and lot of people hate me, but at the same time the friend I do make are great people who are with me through thick and thin. I guess your ID "Ruth-less" reflects something of your personality, which is coming cross as rude, obnoxious and vulgar. A wise man(Socrates) said "Speak, so I can see you"
No, I do not work in the industry and nor am I aspiring to work in the industry or to be a film critic. I have a hobby in filmmaking and watching movies. I have some limited knowledge of filmmaking because I have studied it formally for a year, so I can recognize more of the technical aspects of a movie from a professional point of view. I am also an avid film watcher and I watch films from all around the world and all time periods since the advent of cinema. So I apply the same standards of criticism to every movie. What I am looking for when I watch a movie is technical accomplishment and storytelling. There are some movies which are extremely well-made, but have poor storytelling; some movies are extremely good in storytelling but technically not so well made. Great movies get both right.
Do you have any positive to say about talented movie maker or you just keep on pointing out sundry faults ??
Yep I do in fact:
I consider Bhansali to be one of the best directors in Bollywood, because he has his own unique signature atheistic that is felt in his movies. Every shot is immaculately designed, choreographed, lit and scored. Every sequence shows his craftsmanship. He even matches them to the mood, dialogue, sets and costumes. This is a hallmark of a great filmmaker, but when overdone, it is like seeing the mirrors during a magicians disappearing act. In this movie as a craftsman he exceeds himself -- oh what beautiful sumptuous imagery, gorgeous lighting, brilliant use of CGI. I had no idea Bhansali had such a deft handle on CGI. I found it even better than Rajamouli's 'Bahubali' the few war sequences looked much more realistic and polished. If you compare the volley of arrows sequences side by side from both movies, Bhansali's will come up
trumps. Technically, this movie is the best Indian production to date. Bahubali part 2 is going to have a high standard to beat.
How could you miss an entire paragraph?
Your all messages ( Even of Bahubali and Bajirao mastani ) are posted with prejudice mind. Never seen so much hatred for good art work. I am still thinking what made you like Bajrangi Bhaijan ?? Third grade movie which you liked lot.
What is wrong with you ?
Can you use brain if you have any please and write some good things as well.
I think you and I have different definitions of hate. If I hate something I do not give it a rating of 6. This is how my rating system works
10 - Masterpiece
9 - Excellent
8 - Very good
7 - Good
6 - Average
5 - Below average
4 - Bad
3 - Very bad
2 - Terrible
1 - Atrocious
Hence as per my rating system Baahubali and BM are average movies. I did not hate them.
I considered Bhajranji Bhaijan to be a very good movie, in fact many people have considered it a very good movie. It has good storytelling, it is well paced, entertaining and funny and it gets the emotional aesthetic correct. It is not because I am a Salman Khan fan, in fact this is what I said in my BB review:
It has been a long time since I have enjoyed a movie so much, and this too a Salman Khan movie. I am not really a Salman Khan fan. I did not enjoy the Dabang movies, I thought Kick was a time-pass and generally I find his acting to be a bit OTT.So
You said I did not write good things about them BM or Bahubali. Well I have already posted an entire paragraph of the good things I wrote about BM. Here is what I wrote about Bahubali:
First, I will begin with what is good, before I start deconstructing it. The cinematography and colour grading is stunning, I love the location shots, the waterfall and the sweeping epic vistas. The use of CG mattes mixed with live footage is the best I have seen in an Indian film, they are somewhat LOTR-esque. The hugely talked about battle scene in the end are amazing. The nods to 300 and LOTR are clear, but it does not copy them, and comes up with some creative shots, especially a sequence where huge stone boulder carry a massive silk cloth that falls over the enemies and then it is set on fire. I think here Bahubali has set the standard not just for India, but Asia in general. It compares favourably to Hollywood.
I really should be asking you what is wrong with you? You miss out entire paragraphs in my reviews where I say good things about movies you like, and then complain that I did not mention anything good? You complain I hate those movies, and do not look at the rating I gave for the movie which is far from 1.
Hufff Have you really seen movie or not. Screenplay have given her more scenes than Mastani. Her pain and anguish is shown in details. Her relation with her mother in law, Husband and with husband's second wife too are shown in proper manner. We don't see her character was sidelined at all.
I was agreeing with Nikhil's opinion, who you ignored also felt the same that Kashi's character was sidelined. It is not so much about screen time(although I am fairly sure that Mastani got more screen time, but I was not exactly counting how many minutes each character got) but it is the fact that Kashi's character played second fiddle to Bajirao and Mastani's relationship. The movie itself is called Bajirao Mastani, so it is all about them anyway. Bajirao is already a happily married man when he meets Mastani. If he was not happy then there would be some justification for his adulterous relationship with Mastani, such as in Kabhi Alvida Na Kehana. We are shown that the Peshwa family is a happy family and Bajirao is a highly respected and successful prime minister. Then, as soon as he meets Mastani, it is Mastani who thrusts herself onto him and his family despite knowing he is happily married. She goes to the extent of actually inviting herself into his palace and then she causes conflict and feuds in the family turning a previously happy family into an unhappy one; and a previously respected and successful PM, into a disrespected and unsuccessful one. Ultimately she is also the cause of him going insane and dying. Thus her effect is more of a villainous character than a heroine. I have seen countless Bollywood movies where this kind of character is always portrayed as a villain with the same story arc -- happily married family, other woman comes in, everybody becomes unhappy and start fighting with each other --- resolution in the end the other woman is ousted. In these movies the heroine is always the married woman and not the other woman and the audience feels sympathetic for the married woman and resents the other woman. Bhansali actually made the other woman his heroine, effectively making an unsympathetic character his lead.
The problem with making unsympathetic lovers your hero and heroine is you do not get the sympathy of the audience and the audience will not be able to connect to the love story. This is what has gone wrong with BM according to many critics and viewers, and hence why most people are sympathizing with Kashi's character. But as far Bhansali himself he sidelines her character to make it all about Mastani, and only because she is Muslim. He tried to make the audience feel sorry for Mastani just because she is Muslim and is being persecuted by Hindus. But Mastani's character is otherwise the villainous other woman in traditional stories. But now she becomes a heroine just because she is a persecuted Muslim? Typical sickularism.
I think there is a wider political commentary we can make here which has highlighted in BM, as, according to a great Indian politician Rahul Gandhi, "Politics is in everything, even in your pants" The problem with the Bollywood elite is that ideologically they have aligned themselves with leftist socialist ideology or Congress ideology. The recent protests by filmmakers and film students against the appointment of Gajinder Chauan, Award Wapsi and intolerance debate has put a spotlight on this. The "intolerance" is nothing more than the previous ideologues reacting to their ideology being challenged by a new political ideology of Hindu nationalism. This is why unfortunately even great Bollywood filmmakers like Bhansali and Gowariker portray historically unsympathetic characters like Akbar(he killed tens of thousands of Hindus in cold blood) and Mastani as heroes and heroines and Hinduism and Hindu history are Villainized, such as in the Rajkumar Hirani's "PK" or Ram Gopal Verma's "Sarkaar" or even in Slumdog millinaire. Bollywood film-makers have internalized anti-Hinduism. To the extent that even when mediocre movies are made such as PK but Hinduism is criticized, critics rave about it and the movie becomes a blockbuster hit.
It is time for a new wave of filmmakers driven by Hindu nationalist ideology which actually celebrate Hinduism, Hindu history and historical figures. This is now slowly starting to happen, certainly in the field of writers like Amish Triparti, but it is still not happening in the Bollywood elite, except for smaller animation movies. It is time for the domination of the Khans to end. We need a Hindu renaissance in Bollywood. Bring on the Shiva, Mahabharata, Ramayana movies. Bring on movies about Shiva ji, Marathas, Cholas, Guptas, Mauryans, Shankara, Bhakti movement, Tulsidas etc. India has a rich longer non-Muslim history, we don't have to put Muslims characters in every movie we make. And we should also not hesitate to portray unsympathetic Muslim characters in an unsympathetic light. There was a movie just a few years back called "Shahid" it is a sympathetic biopic about a Muslim terrorist who later become a social activist but is killed in an encounter by Hindu police. That movie had critics gushing with 4 and 5 star reviews and they all forgot that the hero of the movie is a terrorist. In fact the movie blames Hindus for why he became a terrorist. This is the warped sickular ideology we have had to put up with for decades.
reply
share