The greatest is gone, but interestingly, Dilip Kumar, the legend's beginning was anything but great, glamorous, starry or hi-profile. Born in Peshawar (now in Pakistan) in a Pashtun family with a name like Mohammed Yusuf Khan and a father who was a fruit merchant, you can be pardoned for wondering whether it's really the same man who is today revered by all who love Hindi films.

Relocating to India in the early forties (Pune) the young man did his school and a bit of college (where Football was the main subject) before getting a job as canteen Manager at the princely salary of Rs 36 a month. A chance meeting with the beautiful and popular heroine, Devika Rani and her husband - the owner of Bombay Talkies studio - Himanshu Rai, got him into acting.

However, before the film rolled a critical problem needed to be addressed and a solution arrived at - a screen name to substitute Yusuf Khan. A meeting was convened and dozens of names were suggested but it fell upon the eminent Hindi author Bhagwati Charan Verma to come up with, Dilip Kumar. It was instantly accepted for two reasons. One, because the biggest star of the day (Ashok) had a Kumar attached to his name. Also, because it was simple, easy to pronounce and remember.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/bollywood/news-devastated-saira-banu-after-dilip-kumars-death-says-god-snatched-away-my-reason-for-living-396542">Devastated Saira Banu after Dilip Kumar's death says 'God snatched away my reason for living'</a>

The 22 year old's debut film (1944) Jawar Bhaata was a super flop and had to be peeled off the ceiling, fetching him brickbats from every quarter, led by the acerbic editor Baburao Patel of the most influential film magazine of the day, Film World. Bewildered and upset in equal measure, the young man introspected hard and decided to take whatever corrective measures were required to improve.&nbsp;

He saw tons of Hollywood films and confessed his fondness for James Stewart's easy, languid style of acting. He was also very taken up with Ingrid Bergman. Returning with new resolve, determination and vigour after working hard on his acting method (this time with luck on his side) he scored two back-to-back winning hits, Jugnu and Milan. Suddenly the tide - even Baburao Patel - seemed to turn in his favour and he only went from strength to strength.

Shaheed, Nadiya Ke Paar, Mela, Shabnam, Andaz, Jogan, Babul, Arzoo, the hits came thick and fast. Later hits included Daag, Amar, Uran Khatola, Devdas, Insaniyat, Naya Daur, Madhumati, Paigham, Mughal-e-Azam, Ganga Jamuna, Ram aur Shyam, Gopi. The last phase saw Kranti, Vidhaata, Shakti, Karma, Mashaal and Saudagar.

Pics |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/as-dilip-kumar-bids-farewell-these-iconic-on-screen-pairings-will-resonate-with-fans-forever-396393#dilip-kumar-and-madhubala-396384">As Dilip Kumar bids farewell, these iconic on-screen pairings will resonate with fans forever</a>

Along the way, from Noor Jehan to Leena Chandravarkar (Bairag) across three decades he romanced them all. 
To students of screen-image in Bollywood, it could well have started with the advent of this trio. The lines were clearly demarcated in terms of profile and fans were divided regarding their preferred choice.&nbsp;

Raj Kapoor symbolized the Chaplinesque, Awara and Shree 420, the happy-go-lucky tramp, who with his lady love (Nargis) offered sunshine and smile to the bleak universe of have-nots. Dev Anand, India's Gregory Peck, was the dashing, debonair, fast-talking, stylish hero, all mannerism and ada, nodding away (while charming Suraiya, Nutan, Waheeda and a host of others) to dazzling fame and fortune.&nbsp;

In comparison, Dilip Kumar's image was that of a Tragedy King. The doomed, intense, sensitive lover who passionately believed that it is better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all.

In film after film - during his early days - he projected a brand of romantic suffering that got his female fans weeping and producers laughing all the way to the bank.&nbsp;

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/bollywood/news-dilip-kumar-and-madhubala-how-things-turned-sour-for-this-star-couple-396445">Dilip Kumar and Madhubala: How things turned sour for this star couple</a>

Soon, this intensity got to this method actor and he had to actually see a number of psychiatrists to rid him of the manic depression that he admitted had become part of his DNA. Their collective advice was simple; Learn to chill. Take on lighter, fun, happy roles and give the death-warmed-up specials a break.

That's when the Azads, Kohinoors and Aans came along. Doing a superb mix and match (by balancing these with more serious stuff like Devdas, Mughal-e-Azam and Ganga Jamuna), the newly composed, together and confident Dilip Kumar swept the Box office, his fans and the awards.

Dastaan, Ram aur Shyam (where he essayed a double role) and Bairag (where he did a triple role) also featured in his seventies list. However, the winds of change had by then begun to blow hard and first Rajesh Khanna and later Amitabh Bachchan, swept the centre-stage.&nbsp;

Romance gave way to multi-starrers and the violence-prone Angry Young Man gripped popular imagination as the new blazing hero. New content, treatment, subjects and styles entered the Industry catering to a new audience-base young, impatient, entertainment-friendly and uncaring for the finer aspects, shades or subtleties of great acting. Instant gratification was the name of the game and in this new scheme of things, clearly the thespian who loved and cared deeply for his craft, found himself out of sync with the times and slowly fading out.

That's when the great 'thinking actor' pulled back, surveyed the scene and took a 5-year sabbatical. He realized that it was a different era with demands and requirements of the leading man that he could never hope to match or provide.&nbsp;

Intelligent, perceptive and insightful that he was, he understood that if he still wanted to be around - with his reputation intact - he needed to re-invent himself.&nbsp;

Refreshed, confident and all charged, his second innings as a 'character' actor was equally mind-blowing, giving the new gen a taste of what great, powerful acting - not tinsel performance - was all about. I remember kids stunned by his power-house stuff in Shakti, Vidhata, Mashaal, Karma, Kranti and Saudagar. Such a difference from the usual, over-the-top hamming and glamorous posturing.

At this point it is both relevant and necessary to pause and ask, "What was so special, unique or extraordinary about Dilip Kumar that he mesmerized so many for so long?" The answers are many.

For one, he was the first star to introduce restraint, underplay and stillness - eloquent silence - into his screen performances in a space dominated by theatrics. Also, admittedly every hero played lover, but Dilip invested his screen persona with a brand of total sincerity and honesty that was truly infectious.&nbsp;

To his tragic hero role too, he suffused a kind of passion, torment, anguish and intensity that gave it a romantic aura transforming the lover-as-loser to an insanely desirable majnu.&nbsp;

Further, no other star-actor (before or since) has ever been such an intuitive master at going beyond the written line (dialogue) to ignite the unwritten sub-text, with a transformational, magical look, expression, gesture, inflection of voice. That is the true measure (and difference) between good and great.

In later years, be it Shakti or Saudagar, his complete understanding and subsequent command of every nuance and layer that defined the role, remains unmatched. It is sad that his desire to direct Kalinga remained unfulfilled and his last film Qila, went un-noticed but the legend of Dilip Kumar is something that will always live in our hearts.

The greatest is gone, but interestingly, Dilip Kumar, the legend's beginning was anything but great, glamorous, starry or hi-profile. Born in Peshawar (now in Pakistan) in a Pashtun family with a name like Mohammed Yusuf Khan and a father who was a fruit merchant, you can be pardoned for wondering whether it's really the same man who is today revered by all who love Hindi films.

The greatest is gone, but interestingly, Dilip Kumar, the legend's beginning was anything but great, glamorous, starry or hi-profile. Born in Peshawar (now in Pakistan) in a Pashtun family with a name like Mohammed Yusuf Khan and a father who was a fruit merchant, you can be pardoned for wondering whether it's really the same man who is today revered by all who love Hindi films. Relocating to India in the early forties (Pune) the young man did his school and a bit of college (where Football was the main subject) before getting a job as canteen Manager at the princely salary of Rs 36 a month. A chance meeting with the beautiful and popular heroine, Devika Rani and her husband - the owner of Bombay Talkies studio - Himanshu Rai, got him into acting. However, before the film rolled a critical problem needed to be addressed and a solution arrived at - a screen name to substitute Yusuf Khan. A meeting was convened and dozens of names were suggested but it fell upon the eminent Hindi author Bhagwati Charan Verma to come up with, Dilip Kumar. It was instantly accepted for two reasons. One, because the biggest star of the day (Ashok) had a Kumar attached to his name. Also, because it was simple, easy to pronounce and remember. Also Read | Devastated Saira Banu after Dilip Kumar's death says 'God snatched away my reason for living' The 22 year old's debut film (1944) Jawar Bhaata was a super flop and had to be peeled off the ceiling, fetching him brickbats from every quarter, led by the acerbic editor Baburao Patel of the most influential film magazine of the day, Film World. Bewildered and upset in equal measure, the young man introspected hard and decided to take whatever corrective measures were required to improve. He saw tons of Hollywood films and confessed his fondness for James Stewart's easy, languid style of acting. He was also very taken up with Ingrid Bergman. Returning with new resolve, determination and vigour after working hard on his acting method (this time with luck on his side) he scored two back-to-back winning hits, Jugnu and Milan. Suddenly the tide - even Baburao Patel - seemed to turn in his favour and he only went from strength to strength. Shaheed, Nadiya Ke Paar, Mela, Shabnam, Andaz, Jogan, Babul, Arzoo, the hits came thick and fast. Later hits included Daag, Amar, Uran Khatola, Devdas, Insaniyat, Naya Daur, Madhumati, Paigham, Mughal-e-Azam, Ganga Jamuna, Ram aur Shyam, Gopi. The last phase saw Kranti, Vidhaata, Shakti, Karma, Mashaal and Saudagar. Pics | As Dilip Kumar bids farewell, these iconic on-screen pairings will resonate with fans forever Along the way, from Noor Jehan to Leena Chandravarkar (Bairag) across three decades he romanced them all. To students of screen-image in Bollywood, it could well have started with the advent of this trio. The lines were clearly demarcated in terms of profile and fans were divided regarding their preferred choice. Raj Kapoor symbolized the Chaplinesque, Awara and Shree 420, the happy-go-lucky tramp, who with his lady love (Nargis) offered sunshine and smile to the bleak universe of have-nots. Dev Anand, India's Gregory Peck, was the dashing, debonair, fast-talking, stylish hero, all mannerism and ada, nodding away (while charming Suraiya, Nutan, Waheeda and a host of others) to dazzling fame and fortune. In comparison, Dilip Kumar's image was that of a Tragedy King. The doomed, intense, sensitive lover who passionately believed that it is better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all. In film after film - during his early days - he projected a brand of romantic suffering that got his female fans weeping and producers laughing all the way to the bank. Also Read | Dilip Kumar and Madhubala: How things turned sour for this star couple Soon, this intensity got to this method actor and he had to actually see a number of psychiatrists to rid him of the manic depression that he admitted had become part of his DNA. Their collective advice was simple; Learn to chill. Take on lighter, fun, happy roles and give the death-warmed-up specials a break. That's when the Azads, Kohinoors and Aans came along. Doing a superb mix and match (by balancing these with more serious stuff like Devdas, Mughal-e-Azam and Ganga Jamuna), the newly composed, together and confident Dilip Kumar swept the Box office, his fans and the awards. Dastaan, Ram aur Shyam (where he essayed a double role) and Bairag (where he did a triple role) also featured in his seventies list. However, the winds of change had by then begun to blow hard and first Rajesh Khanna and later Amitabh Bachchan, swept the centre-stage. Romance gave way to multi-starrers and the violence-prone Angry Young Man gripped popular imagination as the new blazing hero. New content, treatment, subjects and styles entered the Industry catering to a new audience-base young, impatient, entertainment-friendly and uncaring for the finer aspects, shades or subtleties of great acting. Instant gratification was the name of the game and in this new scheme of things, clearly the thespian who loved and cared deeply for his craft, found himself out of sync with the times and slowly fading out. That's when the great 'thinking actor' pulled back, surveyed the scene and took a 5-year sabbatical. He realized that it was a different era with demands and requirements of the leading man that he could never hope to match or provide. Intelligent, perceptive and insightful that he was, he understood that if he still wanted to be around - with his reputation intact - he needed to re-invent himself. Refreshed, confident and all charged, his second innings as a 'character' actor was equally mind-blowing, giving the new gen a taste of what great, powerful acting - not tinsel performance - was all about. I remember kids stunned by his power-house stuff in Shakti, Vidhata, Mashaal, Karma, Kranti and Saudagar. Such a difference from the usual, over-the-top hamming and glamorous posturing. At this point it is both relevant and necessary to pause and ask, "What was so special, unique or extraordinary about Dilip Kumar that he mesmerized so many for so long?" The answers are many. For one, he was the first star to introduce restraint, underplay and stillness - eloquent silence - into his screen performances in a space dominated by theatrics. Also, admittedly every hero played lover, but Dilip invested his screen persona with a brand of total sincerity and honesty that was truly infectious. To his tragic hero role too, he suffused a kind of passion, torment, anguish and intensity that gave it a romantic aura transforming the lover-as-loser to an insanely desirable majnu. Further, no other star-actor (before or since) has ever been such an intuitive master at going beyond the written line (dialogue) to ignite the unwritten sub-text, with a transformational, magical look, expression, gesture, inflection of voice. That is the true measure (and difference) between good and great. In later years, be it Shakti or Saudagar, his complete understanding and subsequent command of every nuance and layer that defined the role, remains unmatched. It is sad that his desire to direct Kalinga remained unfulfilled and his last film Qila, went un-noticed but the legend of Dilip Kumar is something that will always live in our hearts.

Opinion | Alvida Saheb-e-Alam Dilip Kumar

The year 2020 has triggered a paradigm shift in the way films are made, shown and received by the viewers. &nbsp;We all know about the lockdown effect on the Bollywood blockbusters &amp; superstars and the effect the STATUE game wreaked on Masala-land. &nbsp;

Salman Khan – Bollywood’s Most&nbsp;Wanted&nbsp;– with trademark swag and dare did something no production house or star dreamt of doing. He released his ambitious Radhe across several digital platforms &amp; theatres, at home &amp; abroad. While reports everywhere indicate that it probably was the DABANGG dasher's most disappointing release in years, to the critical eye and astute Bollywood observer, does this signal the beginning of the end for our star-system?

Is the unconditional love and support from their fans, across decades, suddenly on tricky ground? &nbsp;Has the combination of the lockdown [out-of-sight out-of-mind] and enriching OTT fare [vigorous, vibrant, varied] altered perceptions, taste &amp; choice of what is good and what-is-not? Will Radhe be an example for Bollywood to pull back and deeply introspect about their traditional, rock-solid affair with stars &amp; content? &nbsp;Has the rising chorus mirrored the fact that their moment of truth, litmus test and hour of reckoning has indeed arrived?&nbsp;

And finally, has the time come for mainstream Bollywood to unleash their [forever in the dark] brilliant galaxy of actors &amp; celebrate them through powerful, attention-worthy storm-centre roles that portray, with passion &amp; purpose, the linear truth, not glamorously inane armpit rhetoric &amp; hysterical posturing dramabaazi?

For some time now, powered by a magnificent mafia of young, new, daring, exciting directors &amp; story-tellers, this new lot has served notice that to ring out the old and ring in the new is their agenda. &nbsp;It was never about confronting, challenging or competing with the superstars or the movie moguls. &nbsp;It was about not being slung out as lonely sentries against the gated Bollywood border. About not being perceived as a one-off curiosity without garnering a decent audience base. This they did by clearly defining the difference between the mainstream and their content profile.

Bollywood manufactured movies. OTT made films. Bollywood sold fantasy and escapism, OTT was into realism with engagement. Bollywood avoided controversy, OTT embraced it. Bollywood strip-mined genres and made movies out of cookie-cutters OTT was passionate about expressing personal vision. &nbsp;

If Bollywood made movies by committees, their product was the result of individual sensibilities. While Bollywood hired directors to do a job, they worshipped at the altar of a process that popularised art in intelligent and relatable fashion. While Bollywood went for spectacle, action and special effects, OTT worked on an intimate scale focussing on misc-en-scene. If Bollywood pandered to popular taste, OTT worked without any set audience in mind, only inner calling. If Bollywood products were embedded in a system that cushioned risk, OTT films flew without a safety net. &nbsp;

So, basically, the OTT films exist in the huge and available space between the shots of Bollywood movies!

To the evolved lover of both Hollywood &amp; European cinema, the similarities are striking. While the world’s most glamorous movie industry Hollywood – like our Bollywood – was&nbsp;preoccupied with all that is grand and big, offering seductive star dazzle that paralysed the senses, European films – like OTT – worked with small budgets, outside hierarchies, producing content that was visually &amp; thematically innovative. Harking back to the older times like our present-day powerhouse actresses, [Neena Gupta, Rasika Duggal, Tisca Chopra, Divya Dutta, Tilottoma Shome, Sahana Goswami and of course the amazing Konkona Sen Sharma, among others] before Simone Signoret’s Room at the Top, could a head honcho imagine that a middle-aged, plump woman could also be desirable?

Before Jeanne Moreau, the idea of a sexy woman with small bosom and experience written on her face was unthinkable! Individuality was the key and names like Anouk Aimee, Monica Vitti &amp; gang were names to reckon with.&nbsp;

Not typically STAR types, they were womanly in their luminous and unique personalities. Wasn’t American society flexible in allowing women alternates to traditional role–playing and life-styles? How does one account for discrepancies in cultural association, myths and movie images? Did Americans polarise their women as Good or Evil? Or in their exuberant lack of introspection did Hollywood caricature and categorise, overplay &amp; overdress?&nbsp;

European films [like our OTT films] didn’t give such easy signals because they broke barriers and silos to reveal themselves as complex creatures containing &amp; combining every element of unpredictability. Audiences thus, saw a range of emotions – not histrionics or performance – and were a riveted party to her fears &amp; fantasies. Nothing stagnated and no one was readable at a glance &amp; yet movies like those compelled us by expanding &amp; sharing the female complex identities, rather than limiting them. &nbsp;

Sophia Loren was a dazzling example. Had it not been for Two Women, - and despite both American &amp; British Academy awards - she would still be wandering about in tattered blouses flashing a tempestuous surface [Boy on a Dolphin, El Cis, Lady L] ignored by the establishment despite the European made Boccacio 70, Yesterday, Today &amp; Tomorrow, Marriage Italian Style, Sunflower, The Priest’s Wife. &nbsp;

At the end of the day, OTT- like European heroines- present her like a woman, not a little girl and refused to surrender to clichés. Since its less sugar n’ spice and more fire n’ ice, viewing it could be – for the uninitiated – like undergoing surgery without anaesthesia! Its cathartic because it cuts you while it cures, enriches and empowers you, re-focusing on the human viscera, probing the dynamics of women’s relationship with each other [Ajeeb Dastans, Lipstick under my Burkha] giving it a vitality &amp; magic, unknown in mainstream fare. &nbsp;Their perception, conversation and gestures indicate an intelligence which star-driven projects can never dream of because introspection without snappy wit or glibness leans heavily on their concept of mass-entertainment &amp; femininity.&nbsp;

These actors&nbsp;represent anti-box office intellect. They care two hoots for designer clothes, exotic locales or big box-office leading men/directors. Bollywood, like Hollywood, therefore continues to &nbsp;be totally zapped about how to use these amazingly gifted stars just like the sublime Moreau and Liv Ullman were used as “imported products for exotica appeal” in Monte Walsh &amp; 40 Carats.

So what’s the future? Have these heroines fighting for liberation [equality, choice, opportunity] brought on their own quarantined isolation? They refuse to be fantasy friends and refuse to confuse fame with talent. For them, Cinema is the best way at getting back at life. Everyone creates their own signposts. For these OTT stars the invisible frontier has been lowered, no matter how little. Let’s hope and pray, the angels are on their side.&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.) 
&nbsp;

The year 2020 has triggered a paradigm shift in the way films are made, shown and received by the viewers. We all know about the lockdown effect on the Bollywood blockbusters & superstars and the effect the STATUE game wreaked on Masala-land.

The year 2020 has triggered a paradigm shift in the way films are made, shown and received by the viewers. We all know about the lockdown effect on the Bollywood blockbusters & superstars and the effect the STATUE game wreaked on Masala-land. Salman Khan – Bollywood’s Most Wanted – with trademark swag and dare did something no production house or star dreamt of doing. He released his ambitious Radhe across several digital platforms & theatres, at home & abroad. While reports everywhere indicate that it probably was the DABANGG dasher's most disappointing release in years, to the critical eye and astute Bollywood observer, does this signal the beginning of the end for our star-system? Is the unconditional love and support from their fans, across decades, suddenly on tricky ground? Has the combination of the lockdown [out-of-sight out-of-mind] and enriching OTT fare [vigorous, vibrant, varied] altered perceptions, taste & choice of what is good and what-is-not? Will Radhe be an example for Bollywood to pull back and deeply introspect about their traditional, rock-solid affair with stars & content? Has the rising chorus mirrored the fact that their moment of truth, litmus test and hour of reckoning has indeed arrived? And finally, has the time come for mainstream Bollywood to unleash their [forever in the dark] brilliant galaxy of actors & celebrate them through powerful, attention-worthy storm-centre roles that portray, with passion & purpose, the linear truth, not glamorously inane armpit rhetoric & hysterical posturing dramabaazi? For some time now, powered by a magnificent mafia of young, new, daring, exciting directors & story-tellers, this new lot has served notice that to ring out the old and ring in the new is their agenda. It was never about confronting, challenging or competing with the superstars or the movie moguls. It was about not being slung out as lonely sentries against the gated Bollywood border. About not being perceived as a one-off curiosity without garnering a decent audience base. This they did by clearly defining the difference between the mainstream and their content profile. Bollywood manufactured movies. OTT made films. Bollywood sold fantasy and escapism, OTT was into realism with engagement. Bollywood avoided controversy, OTT embraced it. Bollywood strip-mined genres and made movies out of cookie-cutters OTT was passionate about expressing personal vision. If Bollywood made movies by committees, their product was the result of individual sensibilities. While Bollywood hired directors to do a job, they worshipped at the altar of a process that popularised art in intelligent and relatable fashion. While Bollywood went for spectacle, action and special effects, OTT worked on an intimate scale focussing on misc-en-scene. If Bollywood pandered to popular taste, OTT worked without any set audience in mind, only inner calling. If Bollywood products were embedded in a system that cushioned risk, OTT films flew without a safety net. So, basically, the OTT films exist in the huge and available space between the shots of Bollywood movies! To the evolved lover of both Hollywood & European cinema, the similarities are striking. While the world’s most glamorous movie industry Hollywood – like our Bollywood – was preoccupied with all that is grand and big, offering seductive star dazzle that paralysed the senses, European films – like OTT – worked with small budgets, outside hierarchies, producing content that was visually & thematically innovative. Harking back to the older times like our present-day powerhouse actresses, [Neena Gupta, Rasika Duggal, Tisca Chopra, Divya Dutta, Tilottoma Shome, Sahana Goswami and of course the amazing Konkona Sen Sharma, among others] before Simone Signoret’s Room at the Top, could a head honcho imagine that a middle-aged, plump woman could also be desirable? Before Jeanne Moreau, the idea of a sexy woman with small bosom and experience written on her face was unthinkable! Individuality was the key and names like Anouk Aimee, Monica Vitti & gang were names to reckon with. Not typically STAR types, they were womanly in their luminous and unique personalities. Wasn’t American society flexible in allowing women alternates to traditional role–playing and life-styles? How does one account for discrepancies in cultural association, myths and movie images? Did Americans polarise their women as Good or Evil? Or in their exuberant lack of introspection did Hollywood caricature and categorise, overplay & overdress? European films [like our OTT films] didn’t give such easy signals because they broke barriers and silos to reveal themselves as complex creatures containing & combining every element of unpredictability. Audiences thus, saw a range of emotions – not histrionics or performance – and were a riveted party to her fears & fantasies. Nothing stagnated and no one was readable at a glance & yet movies like those compelled us by expanding & sharing the female complex identities, rather than limiting them. Sophia Loren was a dazzling example. Had it not been for Two Women, - and despite both American & British Academy awards - she would still be wandering about in tattered blouses flashing a tempestuous surface [Boy on a Dolphin, El Cis, Lady L] ignored by the establishment despite the European made Boccacio 70, Yesterday, Today & Tomorrow, Marriage Italian Style, Sunflower, The Priest’s Wife. At the end of the day, OTT- like European heroines- present her like a woman, not a little girl and refused to surrender to clichés. Since its less sugar n’ spice and more fire n’ ice, viewing it could be – for the uninitiated – like undergoing surgery without anaesthesia! Its cathartic because it cuts you while it cures, enriches and empowers you, re-focusing on the human viscera, probing the dynamics of women’s relationship with each other [Ajeeb Dastans, Lipstick under my Burkha] giving it a vitality & magic, unknown in mainstream fare. Their perception, conversation and gestures indicate an intelligence which star-driven projects can never dream of because introspection without snappy wit or glibness leans heavily on their concept of mass-entertainment & femininity. These actors represent anti-box office intellect. They care two hoots for designer clothes, exotic locales or big box-office leading men/directors. Bollywood, like Hollywood, therefore continues to be totally zapped about how to use these amazingly gifted stars just like the sublime Moreau and Liv Ullman were used as “imported products for exotica appeal” in Monte Walsh & 40 Carats. So what’s the future? Have these heroines fighting for liberation [equality, choice, opportunity] brought on their own quarantined isolation? They refuse to be fantasy friends and refuse to confuse fame with talent. For them, Cinema is the best way at getting back at life. Everyone creates their own signposts. For these OTT stars the invisible frontier has been lowered, no matter how little. Let’s hope and pray, the angels are on their side. (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Opinion: OTT stars are to Bollywood what European actresses were to Hollywood

To see Pather Panchali again today is still (as the great Lindsay Anderson once famously said) to go down on one’s knees in the dust, into the heart of the Indian reality and human condition. In the grinding poverty of the Indian village, Pather Panchali sees not the dismal ant heaps of Louis Malle but the individual human being, unique as much in his joy in love &amp; nature &amp; childhood as in the wrenching sorrow of death and in the endless struggle to live.

It is the human face of rural poverty and not its statistical horrors that makes us see Apu or Durga, Sarbajaya or Harihar as one of us. They become a part of our collective memory &amp; being and forever change a part of us &amp; our views on humanity.

Critics are of the opinion that unlike any other Indian filmmaker, Satyajit Ray is a classicist, an inheritor of a traditional Indian approach to art in which beauty is inseparable from truth and goodness. Despite his astonishing understanding of a wide range of western culture, it is his innate &amp; rooted Indianness which gives him his very special place in India...and world cinema.&nbsp;

Astute Ray-watchers have always commented on his unstinted affirmation of faith in human beings. There are no villains in Ray’s films. The oppressor and oppressed are both victims. Hence no matter what his role, he is in need of empathy and compassion – not anger or revenge.&nbsp;

At his best, Ray’s work has a sense of detachment, a distance from the event, an element of Indian fatalism. &nbsp;It is imbued with a sense that no man chooses the time or place of his birth or the circumstances that surround it. It is within the circle, pre-determined by these that he struggles to exist to make something of his opportunities. &nbsp;

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/remembering-satyajit-ray-how-the-filmmaker-taught-the-world-about-futility-of-war-through-a-childrens-film-215306">Remembering Satyajit Ray: How the filmmaker taught the world about futility of war through a children's film</a>

The nobility of man lies in the effort itself. The knowledge gives it a serenity denied to those who believe they are life-changers. This philosophical outlook is both Indian and traditional. It finds joy in the flotsam and jetsam of the human condition. It accepts everything with grace. The distance combined with compassion, makes it possible for Ray the artist to see a wider arc of reality and to combine the largeness of canvas with fineness of detail. &nbsp;

The truth is: while Ray’s material happens to be Indian, his statements are about humanity. It transcends national boundaries and become both chronicler &amp; document of life.

His ground-breaking Pather Panchali – the first of his magical Apu trilogy – has an interesting back story. De Sica’s Bicycle Thieves (which he saw in London) totally mesmerised him with its powerful neo-realism and he decided then &amp; there to translate Bibhuti Bhusan’s classic to the screen. This was 1950.

Upon his return to Kolkata, he worked on his first treatment and took it around to several producers, all of whom summarily vetoed it. His scenario, accompanied by over 500 sketches didn’t help. All of them found it too weird, unconventional (hero, heroine, villain, comedian, music, romance, melodrama, happy ending) and way out, including new theatres who had bank-rolled many quality films in the thirties. &nbsp;

After a point, when Ray realised that no producer would help him, he decided to make the film at any cost by financing it himself.&nbsp;

His books, records, mother’s and wife’s jewellery...all went into the making of the first cut, soundless, of around forty minutes. This would suffice for anyone open to see it objectively and understand that a film could be made without great locales, established actors and on a shoestring budget...but to locate that open-minded 'anyone’ was the biggest task/challenge! When hope – and resources – were running out at break-neck speed, serendipity entered the scene. &nbsp;

Ray’s mother arranged a meeting with the erstwhile CM of West Bengal, Dr BC Roy. He saw the film’s first cut, liked it and arranged a subsidy [through the Road &amp; Public Works department] to complete it. One of Ray’s employers too, after seeing a few sequences, liked Pather Panchali so much that he granted Ray long leave of absence and even put money into the production. &nbsp;

After seven months of struggle when the film was finally complete, the government, who were the producers, saw the film, found it too depressing &amp; pessimistic and suggested Ray insert some sequences showing the development of the countryside outside of Bengal. Ray flatly refused, saying it would go against the spirit of the story and distort the great author’s narrative. They reluctantly agreed to retain the original version and authorised the first showing in 1955.

Contrary to the thinking of many people that Pather Panchali made waves in Kolkata and India only AFTER it received international recognition, Cannes heading the list, let’s hear it from the maestro himself.&nbsp;

“We got a first run showing for 6 weeks in a large cinema theatre in Calcutta. At first the film hardly did any business but after the third week, the box office jumped sharply and people queued up for tickets. The manager of the hall was willing to continue the showings, but he had already signed a contract for a blockbuster spectacle from the South produced by the tycoon SS Vasan, who refused to delay his opening. &nbsp;

Vasan subsequently came to see me in my house to tell me how much he loved Pather Panchali and would have definitely postponed his release if he had any knowledge of my film. Pather Panchali was taken up by another theatre where it ran for 7 weeks. The film was successful in all of Bengal before journeying out to other Indian cities. The government found itself generously re-paid for its investment. &nbsp;

As for me, I understood at once that I could henceforth, devote myself to cinema full-time and so left my advertising agency job. This was in 1955. &nbsp;

Cannes award – Prix du Document Humain – happened in 1956. Incidentally, Pather Panchali was the first of many national &amp; international awards bestowed on the master, revered and celebrated by the best of the best – critics, directors, actors – across the globe. &nbsp;

These include prestigious film critic Pauline Kael, Elia Kazan, Time magazine, Keanu Reeves, Richard Attenborough, Akira Kurasawa, Marlon Brando, Christopher Nolan, Robert de Nero, Alexander Payne, Richard Gere&nbsp;

While much will be written about Satyajit Ray’s spectacular sweep, covering varied genres, themes, plot lines &amp; subjects across the three and a half decades that his work graced the screen including the tone &amp; tenor, scale, scope &amp; canvas, what better way to conclude this homage than explaining the essence of his material. &nbsp;

Fact is, everything considered, the realism of his films is determined by an ethical, liberal and philosophical overview powered by a naturalistic style. &nbsp;

This is marked by complexity &amp; ambiguity through concern for character over action and imagery over symbolism. &nbsp;Our perception is thus enlarged by his amazing insight and this is his unique &amp; magical touchstone, the ultimate measure of the universality &amp; enduring quality of his art; local roots with global embrace that neither age can chill nor rivals steal. &nbsp;

That was Ray. When comes such another?

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

To see Pather Panchali again today is still (as the great Lindsay Anderson once famously said) to go down on one’s knees in the dust, into the heart of the Indian reality and human condition.

To see Pather Panchali again today is still (as the great Lindsay Anderson once famously said) to go down on one’s knees in the dust, into the heart of the Indian reality and human condition. In the grinding poverty of the Indian village, Pather Panchali sees not the dismal ant heaps of Louis Malle but the individual human being, unique as much in his joy in love & nature & childhood as in the wrenching sorrow of death and in the endless struggle to live. It is the human face of rural poverty and not its statistical horrors that makes us see Apu or Durga, Sarbajaya or Harihar as one of us. They become a part of our collective memory & being and forever change a part of us & our views on humanity. Critics are of the opinion that unlike any other Indian filmmaker, Satyajit Ray is a classicist, an inheritor of a traditional Indian approach to art in which beauty is inseparable from truth and goodness. Despite his astonishing understanding of a wide range of western culture, it is his innate & rooted Indianness which gives him his very special place in India...and world cinema. Astute Ray-watchers have always commented on his unstinted affirmation of faith in human beings. There are no villains in Ray’s films. The oppressor and oppressed are both victims. Hence no matter what his role, he is in need of empathy and compassion – not anger or revenge. At his best, Ray’s work has a sense of detachment, a distance from the event, an element of Indian fatalism. It is imbued with a sense that no man chooses the time or place of his birth or the circumstances that surround it. It is within the circle, pre-determined by these that he struggles to exist to make something of his opportunities. Also Read | Remembering Satyajit Ray: How the filmmaker taught the world about futility of war through a children's film The nobility of man lies in the effort itself. The knowledge gives it a serenity denied to those who believe they are life-changers. This philosophical outlook is both Indian and traditional. It finds joy in the flotsam and jetsam of the human condition. It accepts everything with grace. The distance combined with compassion, makes it possible for Ray the artist to see a wider arc of reality and to combine the largeness of canvas with fineness of detail. The truth is: while Ray’s material happens to be Indian, his statements are about humanity. It transcends national boundaries and become both chronicler & document of life. His ground-breaking Pather Panchali – the first of his magical Apu trilogy – has an interesting back story. De Sica’s Bicycle Thieves (which he saw in London) totally mesmerised him with its powerful neo-realism and he decided then & there to translate Bibhuti Bhusan’s classic to the screen. This was 1950. Upon his return to Kolkata, he worked on his first treatment and took it around to several producers, all of whom summarily vetoed it. His scenario, accompanied by over 500 sketches didn’t help. All of them found it too weird, unconventional (hero, heroine, villain, comedian, music, romance, melodrama, happy ending) and way out, including new theatres who had bank-rolled many quality films in the thirties. After a point, when Ray realised that no producer would help him, he decided to make the film at any cost by financing it himself. His books, records, mother’s and wife’s jewellery...all went into the making of the first cut, soundless, of around forty minutes. This would suffice for anyone open to see it objectively and understand that a film could be made without great locales, established actors and on a shoestring budget...but to locate that open-minded 'anyone’ was the biggest task/challenge! When hope – and resources – were running out at break-neck speed, serendipity entered the scene. Ray’s mother arranged a meeting with the erstwhile CM of West Bengal, Dr BC Roy. He saw the film’s first cut, liked it and arranged a subsidy [through the Road & Public Works department] to complete it. One of Ray’s employers too, after seeing a few sequences, liked Pather Panchali so much that he granted Ray long leave of absence and even put money into the production. After seven months of struggle when the film was finally complete, the government, who were the producers, saw the film, found it too depressing & pessimistic and suggested Ray insert some sequences showing the development of the countryside outside of Bengal. Ray flatly refused, saying it would go against the spirit of the story and distort the great author’s narrative. They reluctantly agreed to retain the original version and authorised the first showing in 1955. Contrary to the thinking of many people that Pather Panchali made waves in Kolkata and India only AFTER it received international recognition, Cannes heading the list, let’s hear it from the maestro himself. “We got a first run showing for 6 weeks in a large cinema theatre in Calcutta. At first the film hardly did any business but after the third week, the box office jumped sharply and people queued up for tickets. The manager of the hall was willing to continue the showings, but he had already signed a contract for a blockbuster spectacle from the South produced by the tycoon SS Vasan, who refused to delay his opening. Vasan subsequently came to see me in my house to tell me how much he loved Pather Panchali and would have definitely postponed his release if he had any knowledge of my film. Pather Panchali was taken up by another theatre where it ran for 7 weeks. The film was successful in all of Bengal before journeying out to other Indian cities. The government found itself generously re-paid for its investment. As for me, I understood at once that I could henceforth, devote myself to cinema full-time and so left my advertising agency job. This was in 1955. Cannes award – Prix du Document Humain – happened in 1956. Incidentally, Pather Panchali was the first of many national & international awards bestowed on the master, revered and celebrated by the best of the best – critics, directors, actors – across the globe. These include prestigious film critic Pauline Kael, Elia Kazan, Time magazine, Keanu Reeves, Richard Attenborough, Akira Kurasawa, Marlon Brando, Christopher Nolan, Robert de Nero, Alexander Payne, Richard Gere While much will be written about Satyajit Ray’s spectacular sweep, covering varied genres, themes, plot lines & subjects across the three and a half decades that his work graced the screen including the tone & tenor, scale, scope & canvas, what better way to conclude this homage than explaining the essence of his material. Fact is, everything considered, the realism of his films is determined by an ethical, liberal and philosophical overview powered by a naturalistic style. This is marked by complexity & ambiguity through concern for character over action and imagery over symbolism. Our perception is thus enlarged by his amazing insight and this is his unique & magical touchstone, the ultimate measure of the universality & enduring quality of his art; local roots with global embrace that neither age can chill nor rivals steal. That was Ray. When comes such another? (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Opinion: 100 cheers for Satyajit Ray

Act 1. Scene 1. &nbsp;Enter Irony, through a simple but loaded question: Isn’t it truly intriguing that the most hymned, celebrated and revered emotion on planet Earth is – alas – allocated just one day in the year for remembrance [Valentine’s Day] when hard-sell, heart-sell goes on a maniacal overdrive? That done, on every other day, this emotion is slung back in the deep freeze with technological prowess, pricing coups, strategic alliance et al, grabbing the spotlight?

Fact is, never in recorded history has there been a more desperate desire and need for love. &nbsp;Quickly translated, it means the love-market has never been so huge and inviting!&nbsp;

Cynics &amp; pin-striped collar-down marketers may scoff at this line of thought, but obviously these sophisticated, myopic cavemen are a universe away from the new, exciting world of the Attraction Economy which explores the terrain created through narratives that are both engaging &amp; insightful and connect directly with the heart. Champions of this movement believe that the old, ghisa pita branding practices have become stultified and need to be put to sleep with love-affairs with the brand, the new name of the game. &nbsp;

Look around and see for yourself the scene exploding with people longing to invest in love, emotion, imagination &amp; feeling with one huge stumbling block. &nbsp;They are clueless about how to hit which button! Declares an amused Corporate Consultant “They are caught flat-footed in the challenge of translating love into a palpable &amp; tangible act that is warm and credible.” &nbsp;To real people, it is not rocket science. It’s about getting back to basics. Junking those bulky reports and research studies &amp; leveraging this emotion as a strategic device for consumer-connect. Then watch the bottom line soar!&nbsp;

Actually, there are three outstanding attributes define this template. Mystery, Sensuality and Intimacy.&nbsp;

Mystery is about stories, metaphors, dreams and symbols, a space where past, present and future becomes one. &nbsp;Also, what keeps long-term relationships alive.&nbsp;

Sensuality keeps the five senses on a red alert for new textures, intriguing scents and tastes, great music, spell-binding imagery. &nbsp;

Intimacy invokes empathy, commitment, passion – the small, perfect gesture. These are connections that win intense loyalty and are remembered long after features &amp; benefits have faded away. &nbsp;With intimacy comes the feeling of brand ownership. &nbsp;We all know the power of mystery, sensuality and intimacy from our personal journeys.&nbsp;

This could beg the question “why should relationships in business be any different?” The answer is simple. Business too needs the three traits that define transactions. &nbsp;Mystery draws together stories, metaphors and dreams that give a relationship, texture. Not surprisingly, after the metric mania of the 20th century, mystery is again taking centre stage. What we don’t know starts to be as critical as what we do know. &nbsp;Who wants to be squirted with perfume as they walk into a store? This formulaic spray-and-bray is just a symptom of a much bigger malaise – passion trimmed into efficiency. Inspiration pulled back to a positive attitude and love diluted to LIKE. &nbsp;By focusing on mystery, sensuality and intimacy, business-as-usual can be transformed as a powerfully, emotionally-driven selling idea.

Insightful and clued-in communicators have always understood, recognised and cashed in on this emotion intelligently to escape from the ‘commodity trap’ to place brands where they belong – centre stage! &nbsp;This is a hallowed space reserved totally for charismatic brands – Pepsi, Coke, Reebok, Nike, Apple, Fevicol, Tanishq, Vodafone, Airtel, Lux, HDFC, Archies – which inspires passion and loyalties that are non-negotiable. &nbsp;What better time than today’s cynical and complex times to get love back on track? &nbsp;Reaffirm what smart emo-driven marketers have always believed: In the war between reason and emotion, get your facts straight. &nbsp;Reason leads to conclusion. &nbsp;Emotion drives action!

Finally, if fun, sensuality, mystery &amp; intimacy enthrall, engage, entertain, enrich and empower life, why should they be blinkered off from the communication thrust related to trade &amp; commerce, business &amp; industry? &nbsp;Aren’t they driven to people? &nbsp;Why not substitute the dumb, impersonal, corporatised passion-trimmed-into-efficiency mode with a strong, personal &amp; emotional connect? Starbucks, Cafe Coffee Day, Barista and the new bank (ICICI) ads seem to be doing it, brilliantly, all the time.&nbsp;

They’ve understood that the rules of the game have changed. &nbsp;It’s no longer only about consumer contact programmes; it’s about hanging out and being involved. &nbsp;Not about taking notes – but taking the pulse. &nbsp;Also, they’ve recognised that the research guys, after researching the hell out of what they believe needs to be researched, have conveniently ignored the rest. &nbsp;The truth is, everything of value cannot be probed, dissected, analysed, scanned and researched for the right answer. Why? Because then we are in danger [as one perceptive pundit brilliantly put it] of being exactly wrong instead of being approximately right. Of placing consumers at the base of the pyramid rather than the centre, of mistaking the figures on our hands for the beat of our hearts.

So what’s the takeaway? Basically, we need to stop talking about love &amp; emotion and set it to work, blend it to the rampaging, new age emotion economy. The entertainment industry is a brilliant setting, it appeals to our creative, unconscious and intuitive side – zones that operate beyond rationality &amp; rules, celebrating story-telling mystery &amp; metaphor.

So at the end of the day: Is love a Mango? &nbsp;A four-letter word? &nbsp;A many splendoured thing? The April rose that only grows in early spring? &nbsp;Nature’s way of giving a reason to living, the golden crown that makes a man a king? &nbsp;You decide, but yes ... the jury is out and the popular consensus is that [everything considered], love is indeed the CEO that presides over all constituencies and target groups simply because it unfailingly conquers the most significant, critical, precious, sacrosanct and empowering territory of all – your heart!

Hey guys, give love a chance ...!

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Act 1. Scene 1. Enter Irony, through a simple but loaded question: Isn’t it truly intriguing that the most hymned, celebrated and revered emotion on planet Earth is – alas – allocated just one day in the year for remembrance [Valentine’s Day] when hard-sell, heart-sell goes on a maniacal overdrive?

Act 1. Scene 1. Enter Irony, through a simple but loaded question: Isn’t it truly intriguing that the most hymned, celebrated and revered emotion on planet Earth is – alas – allocated just one day in the year for remembrance [Valentine’s Day] when hard-sell, heart-sell goes on a maniacal overdrive? That done, on every other day, this emotion is slung back in the deep freeze with technological prowess, pricing coups, strategic alliance et al, grabbing the spotlight? Fact is, never in recorded history has there been a more desperate desire and need for love. Quickly translated, it means the love-market has never been so huge and inviting! Cynics & pin-striped collar-down marketers may scoff at this line of thought, but obviously these sophisticated, myopic cavemen are a universe away from the new, exciting world of the Attraction Economy which explores the terrain created through narratives that are both engaging & insightful and connect directly with the heart. Champions of this movement believe that the old, ghisa pita branding practices have become stultified and need to be put to sleep with love-affairs with the brand, the new name of the game. Look around and see for yourself the scene exploding with people longing to invest in love, emotion, imagination & feeling with one huge stumbling block. They are clueless about how to hit which button! Declares an amused Corporate Consultant “They are caught flat-footed in the challenge of translating love into a palpable & tangible act that is warm and credible.” To real people, it is not rocket science. It’s about getting back to basics. Junking those bulky reports and research studies & leveraging this emotion as a strategic device for consumer-connect. Then watch the bottom line soar! Actually, there are three outstanding attributes define this template. Mystery, Sensuality and Intimacy. Mystery is about stories, metaphors, dreams and symbols, a space where past, present and future becomes one. Also, what keeps long-term relationships alive. Sensuality keeps the five senses on a red alert for new textures, intriguing scents and tastes, great music, spell-binding imagery. Intimacy invokes empathy, commitment, passion – the small, perfect gesture. These are connections that win intense loyalty and are remembered long after features & benefits have faded away. With intimacy comes the feeling of brand ownership. We all know the power of mystery, sensuality and intimacy from our personal journeys. This could beg the question “why should relationships in business be any different?” The answer is simple. Business too needs the three traits that define transactions. Mystery draws together stories, metaphors and dreams that give a relationship, texture. Not surprisingly, after the metric mania of the 20th century, mystery is again taking centre stage. What we don’t know starts to be as critical as what we do know. Who wants to be squirted with perfume as they walk into a store? This formulaic spray-and-bray is just a symptom of a much bigger malaise – passion trimmed into efficiency. Inspiration pulled back to a positive attitude and love diluted to LIKE. By focusing on mystery, sensuality and intimacy, business-as-usual can be transformed as a powerfully, emotionally-driven selling idea. Insightful and clued-in communicators have always understood, recognised and cashed in on this emotion intelligently to escape from the ‘commodity trap’ to place brands where they belong – centre stage! This is a hallowed space reserved totally for charismatic brands – Pepsi, Coke, Reebok, Nike, Apple, Fevicol, Tanishq, Vodafone, Airtel, Lux, HDFC, Archies – which inspires passion and loyalties that are non-negotiable. What better time than today’s cynical and complex times to get love back on track? Reaffirm what smart emo-driven marketers have always believed: In the war between reason and emotion, get your facts straight. Reason leads to conclusion. Emotion drives action! Finally, if fun, sensuality, mystery & intimacy enthrall, engage, entertain, enrich and empower life, why should they be blinkered off from the communication thrust related to trade & commerce, business & industry? Aren’t they driven to people? Why not substitute the dumb, impersonal, corporatised passion-trimmed-into-efficiency mode with a strong, personal & emotional connect? Starbucks, Cafe Coffee Day, Barista and the new bank (ICICI) ads seem to be doing it, brilliantly, all the time. They’ve understood that the rules of the game have changed. It’s no longer only about consumer contact programmes; it’s about hanging out and being involved. Not about taking notes – but taking the pulse. Also, they’ve recognised that the research guys, after researching the hell out of what they believe needs to be researched, have conveniently ignored the rest. The truth is, everything of value cannot be probed, dissected, analysed, scanned and researched for the right answer. Why? Because then we are in danger [as one perceptive pundit brilliantly put it] of being exactly wrong instead of being approximately right. Of placing consumers at the base of the pyramid rather than the centre, of mistaking the figures on our hands for the beat of our hearts. So what’s the takeaway? Basically, we need to stop talking about love & emotion and set it to work, blend it to the rampaging, new age emotion economy. The entertainment industry is a brilliant setting, it appeals to our creative, unconscious and intuitive side – zones that operate beyond rationality & rules, celebrating story-telling mystery & metaphor. So at the end of the day: Is love a Mango? A four-letter word? A many splendoured thing? The April rose that only grows in early spring? Nature’s way of giving a reason to living, the golden crown that makes a man a king? You decide, but yes ... the jury is out and the popular consensus is that [everything considered], love is indeed the CEO that presides over all constituencies and target groups simply because it unfailingly conquers the most significant, critical, precious, sacrosanct and empowering territory of all – your heart! Hey guys, give love a chance ...! (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Opinion: Give love a chance?

Alia Bhatt has come a long way from being the cute, frivolous, pretty young thing. The new sing-dance-romance Student of the Year to accept – and shine – in complex roles like Highway, Udta Punjab, &nbsp;Raazi &amp; Gully Boy. Once a solid competitor and rival of the [more?] gifted Parineeti Chopra, her smarter choices of directors, films &amp; roles allowed her to zoom past the Chopra kudi who goofed big in that area. &nbsp;

While all sane people will agree that the final frontier in the success game is definitely luck, the run-up has to be intelligence, talent and hard work.&nbsp;

Parineeti’s situation continues to be unique: flawless performances in forgettable, mediocre films. &nbsp;

It’s like making a century for the losing side. Doesn’t count, dude! &nbsp;The Bhatt lass on the other hand has voluntarily chosen to enter a mined zone with no safety net &amp; challenge herself with projects &amp; roles that demand deep exploration of the linear truth, warts &amp; all and emerged triumphant!&nbsp;

This has filled her ever-widening constituency with new doses of surprise &amp; delight and even prompted the one person severely allergic to Bollywood, Naseeruddin Shah to admit that Alia Bhatt “is a natural”. &nbsp;

High praise from a powerhouse performer who looks at Tinsel Town as nautanki &amp; circus!

Presently, with her latest &amp; most ambitious starrer, Gangubai Kathiawadi’s promos out, has her biggest histrionic challenge arrived? &nbsp;

Way more demanding and complex than the other four, can she pull this off with the required intensity? Will GK be her make-or-break role towards anointing her as the finest of her generation and elevate her to the gallery of the biggies?

Unfortunately, since Sanjay Leela Bhansali, director of GK is controversies, darling [remember Ram Leela &amp; Padmavat?] the promos reportedly triggered mass chaos! &nbsp;The family of Gangubai threatened court action and the residents of Kamathipura took to the streets to protest strongly about Alia &amp; Bhansali’s misrepresentation of the character &amp; defamatory, shameless, uninformed &amp; insensitive depiction of the area.&nbsp;

This, they insist, is likely to damage the image of this place and spell ruin to the life &amp; times of the resident’s present &amp; future. Once again, before the film’s release, Bhansali will have to get pro-active as a defender of these allegations. He will have to assure the protesters that he neither attempted to portray faked realism nor masala-fied the environment and characters to spice up the creative license for commercial purposes.

Cut back to the main story. The first teasers elicited appreciation galore from Industry-wallahs and fans. Hailing her interpretation of the fiery, feisty &amp; fearless Queen of Kathiawadi, who could be brazen, authoritative and wily in one deadly sweep, it was felt that the young actress had indeed got into the bone &amp; marrow of the character. &nbsp; 
Others felt it was too early to comment but generally liked her take of GK. Still, others didn’t quite hit the same page. They found it superficial and openly admitted that it felt like a Flipkart TVC, where kids play grown-ups to grab eyeballs of viewers to ramp up the TRP!

The nay-sayers take first strike. Kolkata based Palash Sen, a gifted photographer, believes that while Alia’s credentials as a top-class actor is non-negotiable, this piece of casting may be the first miscasting of her life. For one, she looks way too young for the part. A hardcore, hardened brothel queen ruling her fiefdom with brazen bravura, demands a different presence. Remember Vidya Balan in Begum Jaan, Shabana Azmi in Godmother or Seema Goswami in Phoolan Devi? &nbsp;Despite her well-tutored and executed mannerisms, Alia appears to be acting – not living the role, like the other three. Sure, she’s played out of her oh-cho-chweet comfort zone earlier, but GK is another planet. She lacks the lived-in looks and her lines delivered appear to be like play-acting. &nbsp;The role needs a raw and rough edge, a gravitas to make it convincing &amp; credible”. &nbsp;

Bangalore based film buff Romsha Sharma dismisses this POV with the arrogance of a 20-year-old. &nbsp;

“Palash has spoken. We have heard, Luckily, opinions are not facts and the history of both these talented artistes – actor &amp; director – prove that they have always been tilting at windmills &amp; emerged with flying colours. &nbsp;Remember Rani and the Big B in Black? Ash, Salman and Ajay in Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam? &nbsp;Hrithik and Ash in Guzarish? &nbsp;SRK, Madhuri and Ash in Devdas? Ranveer and Dipu in Bajirao, Ram Leela &amp; Padmavat? &nbsp;In every instance, the stars have been challenged and inspired to offer outstanding performances, punching way above their weight. Every single actor mentioned has never failed to acknowledge the amazing execution of Bhansali’s vision, blending larger-than-life opulence, aesthetics &amp; mesmerising story-telling. Sure, Alia has never played a mafia queen but had Rani ever played a deaf-mute before Black? A gorgeous, sexy, glam star ripped off of any semblance to beauty, Rani still can’t thank Sanjay enough for a role that blew everybody’s mind. Bhansali’s eyes &amp; instinct are usually on target and I am sure that the Alia-Bhansali combine will do wonders.”

At the end of the day, it’s a tough call. &nbsp;Both Alia &amp; Bhansali have fantastic track records and despite the odd glitch [Sawariya &amp; Guzarish; Kalank &amp; Sadak 2] they are respected, admired &amp; eminently bankable with a captive fan base. &nbsp;

It appears that the film-maker’s penchant for historicals never fail to catch fire, both with the protesters &amp; box office! &nbsp;Why should this biopic be any different for a guy who loves living dangerously, hitting the scary &amp; adventurous road less travelled and of course, taking panga with the hypersensitive types. &nbsp;

Funnily, once they sit across the table for discussions, a [discreet?] compromise is invariably reached, aal is well!

In conclusion, Alia Bhatt’s journey has been a fascinating one with promise and performance, perfectly matched. &nbsp;Functioning in an industry where quality is equated with star power, winning awards, being a BO champ, signing inflammatory contracts and possessing immense marketable charm, star-struck fans should hesitate to fling the word GREAT her way. &nbsp;

Why? Because the word is the most telling monosyllable in criticism, an accolade that is jealously guarded by a special few. It fuses mastery of mystique &amp; magic, technique, hard labour, passion, determination, good luck, magnetism and an ability to lose oneself when the gods descend. The mystery lies in the harmony of actor and character, illusion &amp; reality, con-trick &amp; sacrament, being &amp; seeming.

The day the young actress embraces these sublime traits, she will move into the pantheons of gods chosen few. Till then, Gangubai Kathiawadi haazir ho!!

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Alia Bhatt has come a long way from being the cute, frivolous, pretty young thing. The new sing-dance-romance Student of the Year to accept – and shine – in complex roles like Highway, Udta Punjab, Raazi & Gully Boy.

Alia Bhatt has come a long way from being the cute, frivolous, pretty young thing. The new sing-dance-romance Student of the Year to accept – and shine – in complex roles like Highway, Udta Punjab, Raazi & Gully Boy. Once a solid competitor and rival of the [more?] gifted Parineeti Chopra, her smarter choices of directors, films & roles allowed her to zoom past the Chopra kudi who goofed big in that area. While all sane people will agree that the final frontier in the success game is definitely luck, the run-up has to be intelligence, talent and hard work. Parineeti’s situation continues to be unique: flawless performances in forgettable, mediocre films. It’s like making a century for the losing side. Doesn’t count, dude! The Bhatt lass on the other hand has voluntarily chosen to enter a mined zone with no safety net & challenge herself with projects & roles that demand deep exploration of the linear truth, warts & all and emerged triumphant! This has filled her ever-widening constituency with new doses of surprise & delight and even prompted the one person severely allergic to Bollywood, Naseeruddin Shah to admit that Alia Bhatt “is a natural”. High praise from a powerhouse performer who looks at Tinsel Town as nautanki & circus! Presently, with her latest & most ambitious starrer, Gangubai Kathiawadi’s promos out, has her biggest histrionic challenge arrived? Way more demanding and complex than the other four, can she pull this off with the required intensity? Will GK be her make-or-break role towards anointing her as the finest of her generation and elevate her to the gallery of the biggies? Unfortunately, since Sanjay Leela Bhansali, director of GK is controversies, darling [remember Ram Leela & Padmavat?] the promos reportedly triggered mass chaos! The family of Gangubai threatened court action and the residents of Kamathipura took to the streets to protest strongly about Alia & Bhansali’s misrepresentation of the character & defamatory, shameless, uninformed & insensitive depiction of the area. This, they insist, is likely to damage the image of this place and spell ruin to the life & times of the resident’s present & future. Once again, before the film’s release, Bhansali will have to get pro-active as a defender of these allegations. He will have to assure the protesters that he neither attempted to portray faked realism nor masala-fied the environment and characters to spice up the creative license for commercial purposes. Cut back to the main story. The first teasers elicited appreciation galore from Industry-wallahs and fans. Hailing her interpretation of the fiery, feisty & fearless Queen of Kathiawadi, who could be brazen, authoritative and wily in one deadly sweep, it was felt that the young actress had indeed got into the bone & marrow of the character. Others felt it was too early to comment but generally liked her take of GK. Still, others didn’t quite hit the same page. They found it superficial and openly admitted that it felt like a Flipkart TVC, where kids play grown-ups to grab eyeballs of viewers to ramp up the TRP! The nay-sayers take first strike. Kolkata based Palash Sen, a gifted photographer, believes that while Alia’s credentials as a top-class actor is non-negotiable, this piece of casting may be the first miscasting of her life. For one, she looks way too young for the part. A hardcore, hardened brothel queen ruling her fiefdom with brazen bravura, demands a different presence. Remember Vidya Balan in Begum Jaan, Shabana Azmi in Godmother or Seema Goswami in Phoolan Devi? Despite her well-tutored and executed mannerisms, Alia appears to be acting – not living the role, like the other three. Sure, she’s played out of her oh-cho-chweet comfort zone earlier, but GK is another planet. She lacks the lived-in looks and her lines delivered appear to be like play-acting. The role needs a raw and rough edge, a gravitas to make it convincing & credible”. Bangalore based film buff Romsha Sharma dismisses this POV with the arrogance of a 20-year-old. “Palash has spoken. We have heard, Luckily, opinions are not facts and the history of both these talented artistes – actor & director – prove that they have always been tilting at windmills & emerged with flying colours. Remember Rani and the Big B in Black? Ash, Salman and Ajay in Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam? Hrithik and Ash in Guzarish? SRK, Madhuri and Ash in Devdas? Ranveer and Dipu in Bajirao, Ram Leela & Padmavat? In every instance, the stars have been challenged and inspired to offer outstanding performances, punching way above their weight. Every single actor mentioned has never failed to acknowledge the amazing execution of Bhansali’s vision, blending larger-than-life opulence, aesthetics & mesmerising story-telling. Sure, Alia has never played a mafia queen but had Rani ever played a deaf-mute before Black? A gorgeous, sexy, glam star ripped off of any semblance to beauty, Rani still can’t thank Sanjay enough for a role that blew everybody’s mind. Bhansali’s eyes & instinct are usually on target and I am sure that the Alia-Bhansali combine will do wonders.” At the end of the day, it’s a tough call. Both Alia & Bhansali have fantastic track records and despite the odd glitch [Sawariya & Guzarish; Kalank & Sadak 2] they are respected, admired & eminently bankable with a captive fan base. It appears that the film-maker’s penchant for historicals never fail to catch fire, both with the protesters & box office! Why should this biopic be any different for a guy who loves living dangerously, hitting the scary & adventurous road less travelled and of course, taking panga with the hypersensitive types. Funnily, once they sit across the table for discussions, a [discreet?] compromise is invariably reached, aal is well! In conclusion, Alia Bhatt’s journey has been a fascinating one with promise and performance, perfectly matched. Functioning in an industry where quality is equated with star power, winning awards, being a BO champ, signing inflammatory contracts and possessing immense marketable charm, star-struck fans should hesitate to fling the word GREAT her way. Why? Because the word is the most telling monosyllable in criticism, an accolade that is jealously guarded by a special few. It fuses mastery of mystique & magic, technique, hard labour, passion, determination, good luck, magnetism and an ability to lose oneself when the gods descend. The mystery lies in the harmony of actor and character, illusion & reality, con-trick & sacrament, being & seeming. The day the young actress embraces these sublime traits, she will move into the pantheons of gods chosen few. Till then, Gangubai Kathiawadi haazir ho!! (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Opinion: Is Gangubai Kathiawdi make-or-break role for Alia Bhatt?

At a recent [unlock celebration?] party comprising close friends, my old and ever-opinionated buddy, renowned for calling out Bollywood’s antics, spotted &amp; buttonholed me &amp; took off. &nbsp;

“Boss, what is this fashionable crap – jhadoed from the West, no doubt – of putting the term Actress to sleep and replacing it with Actor? For Chrissake, can you imagine calling screen legends and dream girls like Garbo, Harlow, Taylor, Monroe &amp; Hepburn or even our very own Madhubala, Nutan, Suchitra Sen, Meena Kumari, Waheeda Rehman ... Actors?! &nbsp;Why this sudden anxiety and insecurity to emphasise &amp; insist on individual identity? Yahan bhi activitism ghus gaya? Their talent and beauty have always been recognised, acknowledged, applauded &amp; rewarded, so what’s the problem, yaar?”&nbsp;

Other supporting voices soon joined in and the general drift was that men &amp; women are not the same &amp; an actor in a female role sounded both weird and sexless! Why this 'dramabaazi' and self-conscious attempt to flag-wave female entity? Even the revered Oscars have a Best Actress award, so why this pagalpan to re-write the rules of the game that was never leaning towards anything remotely sexist or degrading.&nbsp;

Daughter of the legendary beauty Suchitra Sen, Moon Moon Sen joins the party&nbsp;

"Why are we constantly posturing and aping the West to appear with it, cool &amp; liberated? What is this great image-makeover or perception change that one hopes to achieve? What value-addition and in what way does the term actress – after all these years of total acceptance – suddenly appear to rankle, de-value, demean the dignity, prestige, aura &amp; stature and bring new power by replacing it with the term actor? &nbsp;Pray, do tell!”

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/opinion-why-film-critics-are-breath-of-life-but-a-kiss-of-death-for-the-masses-364981">Opinion: Why film critics are breath of life but a kiss of death for the masses</a>

34-year-old Bangalore-based housewife Ila Iyer takes it forward.&nbsp;

“For simple, middle-class Bollywood fans like us, we just don’t understand why this cardiac arrest over&nbsp;non-existent gender issues! Man-woman, hero-heroine, actor-actress - where does protest and woman-empowerment come into this or solid assertion of identity to celebrate the individual? Why and how does Best Actress become a Kalank to the female Performer &amp; Best Actor something liberating to be hymned &amp; celebrated since it appears to be in the same page? &nbsp;Why is everything so politicised, aggressive and hell-bent towards scoring brownie points? When beautiful, graceful and gifted Audrey Hepburn or Elizabeth Taylor, Meena Kumari or Rakhee received a Best Actress award, remember there is appreciation &amp; applause not paralysis through analysis!”&nbsp;

Respected veteran film critic Saibal Chatterjee rounds off this train of thought, part-bewildered, part-amused.&nbsp;

“To me, it’s nothing more than a war-cry of APNA TIME AAGAYA! A superficial celebration of aligning with the new-age woman-empowerment thrust blitzing certain sections of society. While I am all for anything that goes towards upliftment of women’s dignity, this Actress-Actor insistence foxes me. How can an alphabetic change suddenly bring more value, clout, prestige and status to gifted actresses already saluted? It will be interesting to check it out with some thinking &amp; articulate actresses, who have opinions and don’t get influenced by the forces that are desperate to look and appear politically correct. I would imagine, great scripts with solid roles and super directors would be their primary concern – not Actors instead of Actresses!”

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/opinion-ok-you-watch-arthouse-films-but-does-it-make-you-superior-361949">Opinion: Ok you watch arthouse films, but does it make you superior?</a>

Not all rock with these takes of the no-big-deal guys, who believe this issue is a waste-of-time which should be channelised to more important matters, like making better films with solid content and gifted actors.&nbsp;

Kolkata-based Indrani Sen however doesn’t agree and lauds Shabana Azmi who is said to have brought this [actor not actress] subject up.&nbsp;

“Shabana-ji, brilliant actor and dedicated activist, is spot-on. &nbsp;It is a timely and symbolic gesture towards perpetuating female-empowerment &amp; self-assertion which is the flavour of the day. The term actress has outlived its simplistic utility and today suggests a bimbette, a glam dumb doll, sexy eye-candy for the hunk hero. An actor does not suffer this image perception at all. Since both are performers, why not go gender-neutral?”&nbsp;

Mumbai-based Sharmila Khanna follows. The 20-year-old Marketing Executive, a serious film-buff agrees.&nbsp;

“Whether or not this new term impacts fees, clout or image is another matter but throwing the hat into the ring is about demonstrating intent and seriousness of purpose.“ &nbsp;

Gifted film-maker Aparna Sen [36 Chowringhee Lane, Mr. &amp; Mrs. Iyer, The Japanese Wife] offers her evolved take.&nbsp;

“I am in complete agreement with dear soul-mate Shabana! &nbsp;At a time when the new-age woman is multi-tasking &amp; multi-layering and meeting with such stupendous success, why should gender influence profession?”

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/opinion-is-2021-the-year-of-actor-vs-star-showdown-360345">Also Read | Opinion: Is 2021 the year of Actor vs Star showdown?</a>

Critics note that grammatically it is incorrect to refer to the female gender of actor as female actor. The female for actor is actress, like tiger-tigress, master-mistress, etc. However, the trend is such that actresses are referred to as female actors for two reasons. One, gender neutrality. In order to be on the same page and at par with male actors.

This takes the male-dominated sting off and makes it a level-playing field.&nbsp;

Two, the word tiger is a common noun but actor is derived from the verb Act. &nbsp;The same rule doesn’t apply for actor as tiger. Besides, it’s considered an outdated term. &nbsp;

Another view is that actresses come into the same category as authoress, comedienne, manageress, lady doctor, male nurse that date from a time when professions were largely the preserve of one sex, men.

As Whoopee Goldberg once said, “Actresses can only play women. I am an actor. I can play anything!”&nbsp;

Cut to a space beyond the battlefield. The word actor refers to a person who acts regardless of gender while actress refers specifically to a female. &nbsp;

The Dictionary states that originally the term Actor was used for both sexes.

“I was a professional actor for 40 years. Most of the women I worked with generally preferred to be referred to as actors, performers, artists, singers, dancers. The trend of identifying genders in job titles faded out in the late 20th century along with words like Stewardess [Flight Attendant] Waitress [Server]. Only Hollywood-type award shows sustain the gender-specific categories because of traditional slots which seem to have been writ on stone! At the end of the day, even in glam and glitzy Hollywood, remember all movie stars, male or female, belong to the same union – The Screen Actors Guild!” quips a veteran show personality from the West.

Your call esteemed readers!

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

At a recent [unlock celebration?] party comprising close friends, my old and ever-opinionated buddy, renowned for calling out Bollywood’s antics, spotted & buttonholed me & took off.

At a recent [unlock celebration?] party comprising close friends, my old and ever-opinionated buddy, renowned for calling out Bollywood’s antics, spotted & buttonholed me & took off. “Boss, what is this fashionable crap – jhadoed from the West, no doubt – of putting the term Actress to sleep and replacing it with Actor? For Chrissake, can you imagine calling screen legends and dream girls like Garbo, Harlow, Taylor, Monroe & Hepburn or even our very own Madhubala, Nutan, Suchitra Sen, Meena Kumari, Waheeda Rehman ... Actors?! Why this sudden anxiety and insecurity to emphasise & insist on individual identity? Yahan bhi activitism ghus gaya? Their talent and beauty have always been recognised, acknowledged, applauded & rewarded, so what’s the problem, yaar?” Other supporting voices soon joined in and the general drift was that men & women are not the same & an actor in a female role sounded both weird and sexless! Why this 'dramabaazi' and self-conscious attempt to flag-wave female entity? Even the revered Oscars have a Best Actress award, so why this pagalpan to re-write the rules of the game that was never leaning towards anything remotely sexist or degrading. Daughter of the legendary beauty Suchitra Sen, Moon Moon Sen joins the party "Why are we constantly posturing and aping the West to appear with it, cool & liberated? What is this great image-makeover or perception change that one hopes to achieve? What value-addition and in what way does the term actress – after all these years of total acceptance – suddenly appear to rankle, de-value, demean the dignity, prestige, aura & stature and bring new power by replacing it with the term actor? Pray, do tell!” Also Read | Opinion: Why film critics are breath of life but a kiss of death for the masses 34-year-old Bangalore-based housewife Ila Iyer takes it forward. “For simple, middle-class Bollywood fans like us, we just don’t understand why this cardiac arrest over non-existent gender issues! Man-woman, hero-heroine, actor-actress - where does protest and woman-empowerment come into this or solid assertion of identity to celebrate the individual? Why and how does Best Actress become a Kalank to the female Performer & Best Actor something liberating to be hymned & celebrated since it appears to be in the same page? Why is everything so politicised, aggressive and hell-bent towards scoring brownie points? When beautiful, graceful and gifted Audrey Hepburn or Elizabeth Taylor, Meena Kumari or Rakhee received a Best Actress award, remember there is appreciation & applause not paralysis through analysis!” Respected veteran film critic Saibal Chatterjee rounds off this train of thought, part-bewildered, part-amused. “To me, it’s nothing more than a war-cry of APNA TIME AAGAYA! A superficial celebration of aligning with the new-age woman-empowerment thrust blitzing certain sections of society. While I am all for anything that goes towards upliftment of women’s dignity, this Actress-Actor insistence foxes me. How can an alphabetic change suddenly bring more value, clout, prestige and status to gifted actresses already saluted? It will be interesting to check it out with some thinking & articulate actresses, who have opinions and don’t get influenced by the forces that are desperate to look and appear politically correct. I would imagine, great scripts with solid roles and super directors would be their primary concern – not Actors instead of Actresses!” Also Read | Opinion: Ok you watch arthouse films, but does it make you superior? Not all rock with these takes of the no-big-deal guys, who believe this issue is a waste-of-time which should be channelised to more important matters, like making better films with solid content and gifted actors. Kolkata-based Indrani Sen however doesn’t agree and lauds Shabana Azmi who is said to have brought this [actor not actress] subject up. “Shabana-ji, brilliant actor and dedicated activist, is spot-on. It is a timely and symbolic gesture towards perpetuating female-empowerment & self-assertion which is the flavour of the day. The term actress has outlived its simplistic utility and today suggests a bimbette, a glam dumb doll, sexy eye-candy for the hunk hero. An actor does not suffer this image perception at all. Since both are performers, why not go gender-neutral?” Mumbai-based Sharmila Khanna follows. The 20-year-old Marketing Executive, a serious film-buff agrees. “Whether or not this new term impacts fees, clout or image is another matter but throwing the hat into the ring is about demonstrating intent and seriousness of purpose.“ Gifted film-maker Aparna Sen [36 Chowringhee Lane, Mr. & Mrs. Iyer, The Japanese Wife] offers her evolved take. “I am in complete agreement with dear soul-mate Shabana! At a time when the new-age woman is multi-tasking & multi-layering and meeting with such stupendous success, why should gender influence profession?” Also Read | Opinion: Is 2021 the year of Actor vs Star showdown? Critics note that grammatically it is incorrect to refer to the female gender of actor as female actor. The female for actor is actress, like tiger-tigress, master-mistress, etc. However, the trend is such that actresses are referred to as female actors for two reasons. One, gender neutrality. In order to be on the same page and at par with male actors. This takes the male-dominated sting off and makes it a level-playing field. Two, the word tiger is a common noun but actor is derived from the verb Act. The same rule doesn’t apply for actor as tiger. Besides, it’s considered an outdated term. Another view is that actresses come into the same category as authoress, comedienne, manageress, lady doctor, male nurse that date from a time when professions were largely the preserve of one sex, men. As Whoopee Goldberg once said, “Actresses can only play women. I am an actor. I can play anything!” Cut to a space beyond the battlefield. The word actor refers to a person who acts regardless of gender while actress refers specifically to a female. The Dictionary states that originally the term Actor was used for both sexes. “I was a professional actor for 40 years. Most of the women I worked with generally preferred to be referred to as actors, performers, artists, singers, dancers. The trend of identifying genders in job titles faded out in the late 20th century along with words like Stewardess [Flight Attendant] Waitress [Server]. Only Hollywood-type award shows sustain the gender-specific categories because of traditional slots which seem to have been writ on stone! At the end of the day, even in glam and glitzy Hollywood, remember all movie stars, male or female, belong to the same union – The Screen Actors Guild!” quips a veteran show personality from the West. Your call esteemed readers! (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Opinion: "Please don't call me an actress but an actor"

Once in the mid-70’s, when both Bollywood’s mainstream movies and parallel cinema were booming, I happened to ask the late Manmohan Desai [Amar Akbar Anthony, Naseeb, Coolie, Mard] his views on the issue. &nbsp;The definitive super-hit masala film-maker’s response was as transparent, unapologetic and entertaining as his gems. &nbsp;

"Jab bhi critics aur pundits mera film ko tareef karta hai, ghabrahat hota hai. &nbsp;Mutlab, pucca flop! Jab bhi kass ke gaali deta high English mein, English akbaar aur magazine mein, main solid khush hota hoon ... mutlab, pucca super hit!!”&nbsp;

(Whenever critics and Pundits praise my film, I get scared because it's a sure sign of the film tanking at the box office. But when they pans my films in their write-ups in English newspapers and magazines, I feel overjoyed as it means that the film will do great in theatres)

Diametrically opposite was the view of Actor-Director Rahul Bose [English August, Mr. &amp; Mrs Iyer, 15 Park Avenue, The Japanese Wife, Jhankar Beats, Pyar Ka Side Effects].&nbsp;

“For me, critical appreciation is way more important than ra-ra from the masses and it reflects in the films I participate in. &nbsp;Appreciation certainly has its place, but hosannas from the evolved and thinking section makes my day. It allows me to explore newer frontiers of opportunity,” he said.

Cut to a reality check.&nbsp;In Bollywood-crazed India, not even the most [rare?] analytical and insightful reviews from film critics seem to make the slightest cut with the janata.&nbsp;

Why? Simply because conditioning is the key and unlike the critics gaze, these films do not represent their path to Xanadu; nor do they symbolise a space when massive changes have occurred and all bets are off &amp; definitely not the moment when everything has hit the ceiling &amp; all the old rules of the game have undergone a cataclysmic transformation furiously, fast &amp; forever.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/opinion-ok-you-watch-arthouse-films-but-does-it-make-you-superior-361949">Opinion: Ok you watch arthouse films, but does it make you superior?</a>

The masses have a clear idea of what they are looking for and what role a Bollywood film plays in their lives. Also, contrary to popular belief, big-ticket endorsement, testimonials or high praise from the most respected or celebrated names – be it Scorsese, Tarantino, Ray, Sen, Aparna, Benegal or Shabana &amp; Adoor – matters zilch. &nbsp;

Brand loyalty is big and movies that are slow, grim and celebrate Realism [art house?] are totally off their radar. &nbsp;They have little knowledge or interest in these products, secure and blissed-out as they are in their familiar world of glamorous, sexy heroines, macho, dashing heroes &amp; the accompanying hi-octane dramabaazi that goes with it.

In this scheme of things, does a critic have a hope in hell of breaking through and making a difference? &nbsp;Why not hit the basics and go back to an iconic film critic who defined their calling with rare honesty, passion &amp; purpose? &nbsp;Who better than the Big Mamma of film critics, hymned and celebrated as the finest voice of her generation, the late Pauline Kael

“The role of a critic is to help people see what is in the work, what is in it that shouldn’t be, what is not in it that could be. He is a good critic if he helps people understand more about the work than they could see for themselves. He is a great critic if by his understanding and feeling for the work, by his passion, he can excite people so that they want to experience more of the art that is there waiting to be seized. &nbsp;He is not necessarily a bad critic if he makes errors in judgement. &nbsp;He is a bad critic if he does not awaken the curiosity, enlarge the interest and understanding of his audience. &nbsp;The art of the critic, then, is to transmit his knowledge and enthusiasm for cinema to others.”

Admittedly, in a land like ours where entertainment is Bollywood and Bollywood means stars, it is a huge challenge BUT if we actually had a critic who was between being a snooty, high-brow type and a frivolous entertainer out to give you a good time, that would be perfect. &nbsp;

Someone like Kael who combined dazzling style that mesmerised readers, with deep knowledge, intelligence and genuine desire &amp; concern to connect with readers in a fashion that engages, entertains, enriches, enlightens, even empowers , it is a well known fact that Kael’s clout, reputation &amp; status was so huge and her reviews were so impactive that box office reports frequently swung with her opinions. &nbsp;

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/opinion-is-2021-the-year-of-actor-vs-star-showdown-360345">Opinion: Is 2021 the year of Actor vs Star showdown?</a>

Do we have a single reviewer of that class? &nbsp;The day that happens (and it will require a commitment along with a rare blend of marketing savvy &amp; scholarship) the fate of little gems like Masaan, Waiting, Aligarh, No Fathers in Kashmir, Manto, Omerta, Newton, City Lights ... will alter forever.&nbsp;

Like the recent OTT phenomenon, there will be a healthy co-existence and an equal opportunity/level playing field scene. After all Cinema, the youngest of the arts, lives on discussion, experiment, curiosity, variety, exchange of views and the comparison of standpoints.&nbsp;

If these critics discussed less art and more substance, more Sociology less aesthetics, all in an interesting reader-friendly manner, they would be making an immense contribution in smashing the gated community, advance the cause of cinema &amp; generally uplift content that needs exposure.

What better way to take this critical issue forward than re-visiting the memorable words of another iconic film critic, the late James Agee, when he took over as critic of The Nation, describing to readers his state as a “would-be-critic” with rare humility &amp; clarity he wrote, “I suspect that I am far more than not, in your own situation: deeply interested in moving pictures, considerably experienced from childhood in watching them, thinking and talking about them &amp; totally without experience or even much second hand knowledge of how they are made. &nbsp;

If I am broadly right in this assumption, we start on the same ground under the same handicaps and I qualify to be here – if at all – only by two means. It is my business to conduct one end of the conversation as an amateur critic among amateur critics and I will be of use &amp; interest only insofar as my amateur judgement is sound, stimulating &amp; illuminating.”

Contrary to popular belief, a real critic can and does de-code &amp; de-mystify both arthouse &amp; mainstream commercial in a way that hits the AIDA button – Attention, Interest, Desire, Action! &nbsp;The finest examples (Roger Ebert, Peter Travers, Kenneth Turan, Andrew Savis, John Simon, Chris Stuckman, Philip French, Scott Tobais) have demonstrated this with class. In the Indian film scene, alas, one mostly has the reviewers, the serious critics [of the zzzzzzz variety] or the exhibitionist who gives you less insight and more entertainment. &nbsp;

The day we have critics who are open, inclusive, pluralistic with a vision &amp; mission to break borders and build bridges by intelligently describing, analysing &amp; interpreting movies, without any baggage ... then both the breath of life &amp; kiss of death will fuse to present the ultimate surround-sound of tumultuous joy!

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Once in the mid-70’s, when both Bollywood’s mainstream movies and parallel cinema were booming, I happened to ask the late Manmohan Desai [Amar Akbar Anthony, Naseeb, Coolie, Mard] his views on the issue.

Once in the mid-70’s, when both Bollywood’s mainstream movies and parallel cinema were booming, I happened to ask the late Manmohan Desai [Amar Akbar Anthony, Naseeb, Coolie, Mard] his views on the issue. The definitive super-hit masala film-maker’s response was as transparent, unapologetic and entertaining as his gems. "Jab bhi critics aur pundits mera film ko tareef karta hai, ghabrahat hota hai. Mutlab, pucca flop! Jab bhi kass ke gaali deta high English mein, English akbaar aur magazine mein, main solid khush hota hoon ... mutlab, pucca super hit!!” (Whenever critics and Pundits praise my film, I get scared because it's a sure sign of the film tanking at the box office. But when they pans my films in their write-ups in English newspapers and magazines, I feel overjoyed as it means that the film will do great in theatres) Diametrically opposite was the view of Actor-Director Rahul Bose [English August, Mr. & Mrs Iyer, 15 Park Avenue, The Japanese Wife, Jhankar Beats, Pyar Ka Side Effects]. “For me, critical appreciation is way more important than ra-ra from the masses and it reflects in the films I participate in. Appreciation certainly has its place, but hosannas from the evolved and thinking section makes my day. It allows me to explore newer frontiers of opportunity,” he said. Cut to a reality check. In Bollywood-crazed India, not even the most [rare?] analytical and insightful reviews from film critics seem to make the slightest cut with the janata. Why? Simply because conditioning is the key and unlike the critics gaze, these films do not represent their path to Xanadu; nor do they symbolise a space when massive changes have occurred and all bets are off & definitely not the moment when everything has hit the ceiling & all the old rules of the game have undergone a cataclysmic transformation furiously, fast & forever. Also Read | Opinion: Ok you watch arthouse films, but does it make you superior? The masses have a clear idea of what they are looking for and what role a Bollywood film plays in their lives. Also, contrary to popular belief, big-ticket endorsement, testimonials or high praise from the most respected or celebrated names – be it Scorsese, Tarantino, Ray, Sen, Aparna, Benegal or Shabana & Adoor – matters zilch. Brand loyalty is big and movies that are slow, grim and celebrate Realism [art house?] are totally off their radar. They have little knowledge or interest in these products, secure and blissed-out as they are in their familiar world of glamorous, sexy heroines, macho, dashing heroes & the accompanying hi-octane dramabaazi that goes with it. In this scheme of things, does a critic have a hope in hell of breaking through and making a difference? Why not hit the basics and go back to an iconic film critic who defined their calling with rare honesty, passion & purpose? Who better than the Big Mamma of film critics, hymned and celebrated as the finest voice of her generation, the late Pauline Kael “The role of a critic is to help people see what is in the work, what is in it that shouldn’t be, what is not in it that could be. He is a good critic if he helps people understand more about the work than they could see for themselves. He is a great critic if by his understanding and feeling for the work, by his passion, he can excite people so that they want to experience more of the art that is there waiting to be seized. He is not necessarily a bad critic if he makes errors in judgement. He is a bad critic if he does not awaken the curiosity, enlarge the interest and understanding of his audience. The art of the critic, then, is to transmit his knowledge and enthusiasm for cinema to others.” Admittedly, in a land like ours where entertainment is Bollywood and Bollywood means stars, it is a huge challenge BUT if we actually had a critic who was between being a snooty, high-brow type and a frivolous entertainer out to give you a good time, that would be perfect. Someone like Kael who combined dazzling style that mesmerised readers, with deep knowledge, intelligence and genuine desire & concern to connect with readers in a fashion that engages, entertains, enriches, enlightens, even empowers , it is a well known fact that Kael’s clout, reputation & status was so huge and her reviews were so impactive that box office reports frequently swung with her opinions. Also Read | Opinion: Is 2021 the year of Actor vs Star showdown? Do we have a single reviewer of that class? The day that happens (and it will require a commitment along with a rare blend of marketing savvy & scholarship) the fate of little gems like Masaan, Waiting, Aligarh, No Fathers in Kashmir, Manto, Omerta, Newton, City Lights ... will alter forever. Like the recent OTT phenomenon, there will be a healthy co-existence and an equal opportunity/level playing field scene. After all Cinema, the youngest of the arts, lives on discussion, experiment, curiosity, variety, exchange of views and the comparison of standpoints. If these critics discussed less art and more substance, more Sociology less aesthetics, all in an interesting reader-friendly manner, they would be making an immense contribution in smashing the gated community, advance the cause of cinema & generally uplift content that needs exposure. What better way to take this critical issue forward than re-visiting the memorable words of another iconic film critic, the late James Agee, when he took over as critic of The Nation, describing to readers his state as a “would-be-critic” with rare humility & clarity he wrote, “I suspect that I am far more than not, in your own situation: deeply interested in moving pictures, considerably experienced from childhood in watching them, thinking and talking about them & totally without experience or even much second hand knowledge of how they are made. If I am broadly right in this assumption, we start on the same ground under the same handicaps and I qualify to be here – if at all – only by two means. It is my business to conduct one end of the conversation as an amateur critic among amateur critics and I will be of use & interest only insofar as my amateur judgement is sound, stimulating & illuminating.” Contrary to popular belief, a real critic can and does de-code & de-mystify both arthouse & mainstream commercial in a way that hits the AIDA button – Attention, Interest, Desire, Action! The finest examples (Roger Ebert, Peter Travers, Kenneth Turan, Andrew Savis, John Simon, Chris Stuckman, Philip French, Scott Tobais) have demonstrated this with class. In the Indian film scene, alas, one mostly has the reviewers, the serious critics [of the zzzzzzz variety] or the exhibitionist who gives you less insight and more entertainment. The day we have critics who are open, inclusive, pluralistic with a vision & mission to break borders and build bridges by intelligently describing, analysing & interpreting movies, without any baggage ... then both the breath of life & kiss of death will fuse to present the ultimate surround-sound of tumultuous joy! (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Opinion: Why film critics are breath of life but a kiss of death for the masses

Feb 14 is this big world mush day when lovers of love in all sizes, shapes, colour, language, religion &amp; region, floating on a delirious lavender cloud, play out their very own expression of love. Different degrees of anticipation – from the hysteric, hi-decibel to the coy &amp; understated – come centre-stage because of the sanction to openly display their dil ki baat to their significant other. &nbsp;

With setting, day, time &amp; occasion in place, this is the day to Show the oldest emotion on Earth...through action and not words. Let it all hang out. Undoubtedly, gifts top the list of this big, fat V-Day bazaar for the moony gang to shower their mehbooba with one-from-the-heart!

In 2021, however, is the pandemic all set to rain on this parade? Despite unlock happening with baby steps, is the conscious and (sub) conscious apprehension, fear, nervousness &amp; negativity that coloured the recent nightmare times going to play spoil-sport &amp; ruin the Love Utsav? Or will the lovers of love proclaim, Pyar kiya to darna kya and discover new &amp; ingenious ways to insist Sangam, hoga!hoga!hoga!!

20-year-old, Delhi-based psychology student of Amity University, Esha Chauhan fires the first salvo. Like most of her gen, she is fully into the hi-pitched, over-the-top, baring-of-the-heart theatrics that explode on this day “But since I am single, I choose to do my own thing ... Meet with friends, party, bond afresh with them and generally have fun. Now with the Pandemic, life has gone on-line, so from studies to socialising and chatting with friends, video calls &amp; zooms have defined my life." &nbsp;

"Result? My friends are in my room every day!"

However, for young couples in relationships, it can be trying and frustrating but on-line range of romance-driven fare [thanks to the huge demand &amp; supply quotient] are on call. &nbsp;Singer Prateek Kuhad is this sensational mush singer, a pied-piper for Gen Y, who adore his stuff. &nbsp;Then there are music events, concerts, etc but I know there will be a big segment of kids who will defy this edgy time and physically meet with who cares? &amp; damn-the-pandemic writ large on their heart! &nbsp;

"After all, for young people in relationships, this is undoubtedly the biggest day of the year!” Senior citizen, communication person Delhi-based Esha Guha, for a second, goes coy and misty-eyed.&nbsp; 
“Let’s face it. &nbsp;Virtual life is virtual life and real life is real life. &nbsp;Zoom calls are fine for business meetings, education and catching up with friends, a platform that facilitates collective events, but love is the most intimate relationship of all, something age cannot wither nor custom stale her infinite variety ...”&nbsp;

A trifle embarrassed at her emotional outpouring, Guha agreed that kids will take a hit and resort to on-line romancing, but the ones that wear their heart on their sleeves will follow the love is a many splendoured thing melody &amp; fly to their soul mate.&nbsp;

Kolkata-based Chitrani Ghosh agrees. &nbsp;

“Here clubs &amp; pubs are great popular settings for fun &amp; entertainment and they are forever designing themes for special events. After the miserable nine-month-plus push on the pause button, things have started opening out and action – with checks &amp; balances in place – is happening. &nbsp;However, like it’s been mentioned before, it does cast a cloud, barrier and a purdah between couples that feel compromised on the thrill of feel &amp; touch. Without the real ambience of person-to-person, no matter how fabulous the roses &amp; chocolates and on-line gifts are, somewhere, the magic is lost.”

Kolkata-based [Dr.] Angana Moitra, 29 year old, visiting faculty (Dept. of English, Sister Nivedita University) offers her evolved take on this theme.&nbsp;

“Kolkata, the City of Joy, is a city that is truly irrepressible in its zest for life! V-Day, obviously, for young couples is a very special day, when their world will revolve around everything that is heart-shaped! With the pandemic slowly appearing to calm down &amp; cool-off and the vaccine a reality, psychologically it is an easier time. &nbsp;Responsible young people will certainly celebrate but with caution, avoid crowded events and parties. However, I am sure there will be tons who will explode and freak out, throwing to the winds the SMS [Sanitiser, Mask, Social Distancing] way of life that held them in vice grip all these miserable months. Youth can be an intoxicating time and given an inch could trigger an Usain Bolt flyer into their favourite zone!” Adman Tito Khanna is the only dissenter who comes on strong and zooms in with his take&nbsp;

“This annual hoo-haa about V-day, I am certain, is a brilliantly orchestrated marketing and merchandising exercise seductively flaunting a product called love – aiming at the exact spots where logic is hit out of the park &amp; love, emotion &amp; cupid play huge starring roles! Before getting the knives out, answer this: If love was such a big deal, why is it given just one lousy day in the year for celebration? &nbsp;To me, it is a blatant commodification of a sentiment that supposedly makes the world go round; a calculated smooth and savvy commercialisation of the four letter word that zonks the softies, transporting them to a never-never-land-of-happy-ever-after! &nbsp;In a savagely consumerist society which knows the price of everything and value of nothing, isn’t V-day an event totally in sync with the tone, tenor &amp; testosterone of the times we live in, a vulnerable acceptance of a global phenomenon that champions hollow, emotional posturing? I rest my case.”

Before the howling mobs are at the gate of this gentleman, yelling things like KILL-JOY, CYNIC, DOOMSAYER, WET BLANKET, DAMPENER, let’s get back on track and address the main issue. &nbsp;It was a year of the forced re-discovery &amp; re-evaluation and in some ways echoed the life of pre-liberalised India. Sure technology helped, but could it go the distance? &nbsp;It made us reflective and hope that the future has a better script for [hopefully] the new &amp; improved version of ourselves with Love at its centre.

Mohabbat Zindabad!

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Feb 14 is this big world mush day when lovers of love in all sizes, shapes, colour, language, religion & region, floating on a delirious lavender cloud, play out their very own expression of love.

Feb 14 is this big world mush day when lovers of love in all sizes, shapes, colour, language, religion & region, floating on a delirious lavender cloud, play out their very own expression of love. Different degrees of anticipation – from the hysteric, hi-decibel to the coy & understated – come centre-stage because of the sanction to openly display their dil ki baat to their significant other. With setting, day, time & occasion in place, this is the day to Show the oldest emotion on Earth...through action and not words. Let it all hang out. Undoubtedly, gifts top the list of this big, fat V-Day bazaar for the moony gang to shower their mehbooba with one-from-the-heart! In 2021, however, is the pandemic all set to rain on this parade? Despite unlock happening with baby steps, is the conscious and (sub) conscious apprehension, fear, nervousness & negativity that coloured the recent nightmare times going to play spoil-sport & ruin the Love Utsav? Or will the lovers of love proclaim, Pyar kiya to darna kya and discover new & ingenious ways to insist Sangam, hoga!hoga!hoga!! 20-year-old, Delhi-based psychology student of Amity University, Esha Chauhan fires the first salvo. Like most of her gen, she is fully into the hi-pitched, over-the-top, baring-of-the-heart theatrics that explode on this day “But since I am single, I choose to do my own thing ... Meet with friends, party, bond afresh with them and generally have fun. Now with the Pandemic, life has gone on-line, so from studies to socialising and chatting with friends, video calls & zooms have defined my life." "Result? My friends are in my room every day!" However, for young couples in relationships, it can be trying and frustrating but on-line range of romance-driven fare [thanks to the huge demand & supply quotient] are on call. Singer Prateek Kuhad is this sensational mush singer, a pied-piper for Gen Y, who adore his stuff. Then there are music events, concerts, etc but I know there will be a big segment of kids who will defy this edgy time and physically meet with who cares? & damn-the-pandemic writ large on their heart! "After all, for young people in relationships, this is undoubtedly the biggest day of the year!” Senior citizen, communication person Delhi-based Esha Guha, for a second, goes coy and misty-eyed. “Let’s face it. Virtual life is virtual life and real life is real life. Zoom calls are fine for business meetings, education and catching up with friends, a platform that facilitates collective events, but love is the most intimate relationship of all, something age cannot wither nor custom stale her infinite variety ...” A trifle embarrassed at her emotional outpouring, Guha agreed that kids will take a hit and resort to on-line romancing, but the ones that wear their heart on their sleeves will follow the love is a many splendoured thing melody & fly to their soul mate. Kolkata-based Chitrani Ghosh agrees. “Here clubs & pubs are great popular settings for fun & entertainment and they are forever designing themes for special events. After the miserable nine-month-plus push on the pause button, things have started opening out and action – with checks & balances in place – is happening. However, like it’s been mentioned before, it does cast a cloud, barrier and a purdah between couples that feel compromised on the thrill of feel & touch. Without the real ambience of person-to-person, no matter how fabulous the roses & chocolates and on-line gifts are, somewhere, the magic is lost.” Kolkata-based [Dr.] Angana Moitra, 29 year old, visiting faculty (Dept. of English, Sister Nivedita University) offers her evolved take on this theme. “Kolkata, the City of Joy, is a city that is truly irrepressible in its zest for life! V-Day, obviously, for young couples is a very special day, when their world will revolve around everything that is heart-shaped! With the pandemic slowly appearing to calm down & cool-off and the vaccine a reality, psychologically it is an easier time. Responsible young people will certainly celebrate but with caution, avoid crowded events and parties. However, I am sure there will be tons who will explode and freak out, throwing to the winds the SMS [Sanitiser, Mask, Social Distancing] way of life that held them in vice grip all these miserable months. Youth can be an intoxicating time and given an inch could trigger an Usain Bolt flyer into their favourite zone!” Adman Tito Khanna is the only dissenter who comes on strong and zooms in with his take “This annual hoo-haa about V-day, I am certain, is a brilliantly orchestrated marketing and merchandising exercise seductively flaunting a product called love – aiming at the exact spots where logic is hit out of the park & love, emotion & cupid play huge starring roles! Before getting the knives out, answer this: If love was such a big deal, why is it given just one lousy day in the year for celebration? To me, it is a blatant commodification of a sentiment that supposedly makes the world go round; a calculated smooth and savvy commercialisation of the four letter word that zonks the softies, transporting them to a never-never-land-of-happy-ever-after! In a savagely consumerist society which knows the price of everything and value of nothing, isn’t V-day an event totally in sync with the tone, tenor & testosterone of the times we live in, a vulnerable acceptance of a global phenomenon that champions hollow, emotional posturing? I rest my case.” Before the howling mobs are at the gate of this gentleman, yelling things like KILL-JOY, CYNIC, DOOMSAYER, WET BLANKET, DAMPENER, let’s get back on track and address the main issue. It was a year of the forced re-discovery & re-evaluation and in some ways echoed the life of pre-liberalised India. Sure technology helped, but could it go the distance? It made us reflective and hope that the future has a better script for [hopefully] the new & improved version of ourselves with Love at its centre. Mohabbat Zindabad! (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Opinion: Pandemic moved Valentine's Day online

It was a good, grounded and witty friend who, one fine day, brought up this topic.&nbsp;

“You are a Bong living in the so-called Culture-capital, so tell me – why is there always a funny smile, a tragic sigh, a soulful nodding of the head, raising of the eyebrows and sentences starting with a fatigued ... How can you bear to enjoy those films? &nbsp;I can’t sit through them for more than 5 minutes! This is mostly followed by speeches on the masters, ending invariably, in hushed tones, about Cahier Du Cinema? Do enlighten a lesser mortal, residing in Versova, the heart of Masalaville!”&nbsp;

After I laughed loud, hard and long, I consoled him by admitting that I fully agreed with his observation. There indeed exists one hugely hyper section of people who can effortlessly provide you with discomfort &amp; complex if you aren’t in love with Fellini, Kieslowski, Kurosawa, Antonioni &amp; Bergman and make you feel like a moron lacking in the proper cultural pedigree; a 7-star dumbo in the speak-converse-debate-enlighten department. &nbsp;

After I gave him a little brief on Cahier Du Cinema, its importance and significance, he re-entered the conversation with all guns blazing. &nbsp;

“Thanks for your Cahier yak, but what’s the big deal about a 50s museum piece, French new-wave mag making such a hoo-haa with a bunch of about-to-pop-it antiquated bozos? This is 2021 for chrissake! Even the Pandemic appears to be on the way out. We are not historians, academics or critics, yaar. Dump the paralysis through analysis crap and get a vaccine for these kill-joys! As the super song in 3 Idiots went ... Give me some sunshine ...”

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/opinion-is-2021-the-year-of-actor-vs-star-showdown-360345">Opinion: Is 2021 the year of Actor vs Star showdown?</a>

While I disagreed with his sweeping and flamboyant dismissal of anything beyond the Bollywood entertainer, I totally rocked with his pulling the trigger on the species who have a cardiac if you haven’t heard or seen Battleship Potemkin! Or [snored through?] many of the revered gems showcased in the film festivals, raved about by people, most of whom are totally clueless about why exactly they are feeling so viagrised on seeing unfamiliar, grim, esoteric and metaphysical content exploring the human condition. Its hysterically funny checking out their response when asked about their opinion, post the screening ... A confusing, bewildered, ashened smile!

The answer to this million-buck question lies in the fact there are three kinds of audiences that hit this territory. &nbsp;

One, a minority who genuinely wants to see, enjoy or be initiated into this alternate space and believes that with time, patience &amp; discussions will get the true meaning of these gems &amp; begin to connect with them.&nbsp;

Two, people who are curious &amp; open about this genre and want to check out these soul-uplifting masterpieces raved about by their arty friends.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/michael-b-jordan-celebrates-late-chadwick-bosemans-historic-sag-nomination-361946">Michael B Jordan celebrates late Chadwick Boseman's historic SAG nomination</a>&nbsp;

Three – and this is the section in question – the cultural wanna-bees desperate to hit the “respectability &amp; fitting in” button. Ordinary people who can’t be accused of sensibilities or interests beyond the entertaining blockbusters, but suddenly crazily anxious not to be perceived as someone who is frivolous or views movies as time-pass BUT as sensitive connoisseurs who look at Cinema as an agent of change, truth 24 times a second, artistic exploration of linear truths that reside in the human soul. &nbsp;

This – they believe – will give them a special aura, status and will allow them to enter the charmed circle where their book-jacket-inspired comments &amp; coffee-table wit will be applauded by the like-minded frat!

To each his own, but the problem with this attitude is the hi-decibel inflicting and imposing of opinion on the unguarded &amp; un-interested guy’s throat with aggressive force! &nbsp;The 'My way or the highway' thing, frequently followed by the [yawn!] gyaan of how masala films have ruined the taste buds of the nation, how compulsory film education must be kicked in ASAP blah, blah, blah.&nbsp;

While the intent may be admirable, it is this fierce, non-negotiable thrust that demands enquiry. The lack of tolerance, the condescending look and tone of the wild-eyed art-wallah at anyone who stoops to sample anything beyond the gems could get a weak-kneed bloke to start writing his will, or seriously considering which exact spot is ideal to leap from his 16th floor balcony.&nbsp;

Fact is, taste for the more refined and the desire to want to be challenged [not spoon-fed or catered to] depends mostly on the environment in which one has grown up and influences that have shaped &amp; formed one’s sensibilities.&nbsp;

Sometimes, it is also acquired through the company one keeps and at other times [very rare, though] – it is instinctive. These are factors to be considered before flaunting cultural superiority because the recipients are creatures of a lesser god. &nbsp;

They are therefore unable to connect with complex or thought-provoking content that demands solid participation while viewing a film. &nbsp;To the everyday audience, movies still spell entertainment, a blessed out escapist trip to the never-never-land-of-happy-ever-after!&nbsp;

Their instant retort is: Why should I pay and think? It’s your job to think how best you can entertain me and you better get it right, or else ...! Fly me to the moon and let me play among the stars ...

Ultimately, it really boils down to live and let live. Forget the obsession of playing Masterji &amp; evangelist and trying to convert every non-art house soul to a disciple. Most will either ponder how you’ve been actually certified sane, vanish from sight every time you enter their frame or wonder what terrible things one did in one’s last life to suffer these OMG moments.&nbsp;

It also reflects poorly on these self-styled brand ambassadors of this genre because it shows them off as uncivilized people, pompous and self-righteous, the definitive, argumentative Indian who must prove his point, come what may. It doesn’t strike them that beyond bad manners, the lesser mortals are not obliged to listen, do cartwheels or go down on bended knees with gratitude for these pearls of wisdom. Labelled Mr. Bak-Bak and boring, they are likely to head their drop-dead list of creatures the world should quickly forget!

At a personal level, the two amazing exponents of the inclusive, pluralistic, accommodating and reach-out school have been my late dad-in-law, Mr. Chidananda Das Gupta &amp; filmmaker Shyam Benegal. Both were curious, interested, attentive and listened intently to your raves about Bollywood films, eager to pick up any new insights they may have missed. &nbsp;

Das Gupta, while not really into the mainstream commercial, was always enthusiastic and eager to remain updated about trends in masala land &amp; I remember how excited he was, years ago, when I explained to him the Angry Young Man phenomenon gripping Bollywood &amp; the masses. Benegal was of course completely in tune with the times and so, whether it was Kieslowski or the Khans, his takes were always engaging &amp; fascinatingly insightful. &nbsp;

Neither of these eminent personalities ever offered gyaan or flung hard-to-pronounce names of world cinema with affected flourish. &nbsp;Nor were they humouring or indulging you. They simply and interestingly decoded the best of the alternate cinema &amp; suggested – along with the masala stuff – checking out some of their material. &nbsp;It was always done in a warm, friendly and seductively un-threatening manner &amp; always with a good word for the commercial cinema because they genuinely saw lots of good things in many Bollywood films.

In a world filled with Guru-giri or posturing, it is hugely gratifying to follow the itinerary of sane, imaginative and cultured minds, showcasing civilised discourse, drawing readers &amp; people into a space where even the most complex film-makers &amp; films become intimate companions. &nbsp;Theirs is the art of de-mystifying cinema without making confusion, more confounded! &nbsp;Clearly there is a lesson somewhere for both, the learned Gurus of Cinema or the one’s posturing as devotees of Cahier Du Cinema ... will they pay heed?

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

It was a good, grounded and witty friend who, one fine day, brought up this topic. “You are a Bong living in the so-called Culture-capital, so tell me – why is there always a funny smile, a tragic sigh, a soulful nodding of the head, raising of the eyebrows and sentences starting with a fatigued .

It was a good, grounded and witty friend who, one fine day, brought up this topic. “You are a Bong living in the so-called Culture-capital, so tell me – why is there always a funny smile, a tragic sigh, a soulful nodding of the head, raising of the eyebrows and sentences starting with a fatigued ... How can you bear to enjoy those films? I can’t sit through them for more than 5 minutes! This is mostly followed by speeches on the masters, ending invariably, in hushed tones, about Cahier Du Cinema? Do enlighten a lesser mortal, residing in Versova, the heart of Masalaville!” After I laughed loud, hard and long, I consoled him by admitting that I fully agreed with his observation. There indeed exists one hugely hyper section of people who can effortlessly provide you with discomfort & complex if you aren’t in love with Fellini, Kieslowski, Kurosawa, Antonioni & Bergman and make you feel like a moron lacking in the proper cultural pedigree; a 7-star dumbo in the speak-converse-debate-enlighten department. After I gave him a little brief on Cahier Du Cinema, its importance and significance, he re-entered the conversation with all guns blazing. “Thanks for your Cahier yak, but what’s the big deal about a 50s museum piece, French new-wave mag making such a hoo-haa with a bunch of about-to-pop-it antiquated bozos? This is 2021 for chrissake! Even the Pandemic appears to be on the way out. We are not historians, academics or critics, yaar. Dump the paralysis through analysis crap and get a vaccine for these kill-joys! As the super song in 3 Idiots went ... Give me some sunshine ...” Also Read | Opinion: Is 2021 the year of Actor vs Star showdown? While I disagreed with his sweeping and flamboyant dismissal of anything beyond the Bollywood entertainer, I totally rocked with his pulling the trigger on the species who have a cardiac if you haven’t heard or seen Battleship Potemkin! Or [snored through?] many of the revered gems showcased in the film festivals, raved about by people, most of whom are totally clueless about why exactly they are feeling so viagrised on seeing unfamiliar, grim, esoteric and metaphysical content exploring the human condition. Its hysterically funny checking out their response when asked about their opinion, post the screening ... A confusing, bewildered, ashened smile! The answer to this million-buck question lies in the fact there are three kinds of audiences that hit this territory. One, a minority who genuinely wants to see, enjoy or be initiated into this alternate space and believes that with time, patience & discussions will get the true meaning of these gems & begin to connect with them. Two, people who are curious & open about this genre and want to check out these soul-uplifting masterpieces raved about by their arty friends. Also Read | Michael B Jordan celebrates late Chadwick Boseman's historic SAG nomination Three – and this is the section in question – the cultural wanna-bees desperate to hit the “respectability & fitting in” button. Ordinary people who can’t be accused of sensibilities or interests beyond the entertaining blockbusters, but suddenly crazily anxious not to be perceived as someone who is frivolous or views movies as time-pass BUT as sensitive connoisseurs who look at Cinema as an agent of change, truth 24 times a second, artistic exploration of linear truths that reside in the human soul. This – they believe – will give them a special aura, status and will allow them to enter the charmed circle where their book-jacket-inspired comments & coffee-table wit will be applauded by the like-minded frat! To each his own, but the problem with this attitude is the hi-decibel inflicting and imposing of opinion on the unguarded & un-interested guy’s throat with aggressive force! The 'My way or the highway' thing, frequently followed by the [yawn!] gyaan of how masala films have ruined the taste buds of the nation, how compulsory film education must be kicked in ASAP blah, blah, blah. While the intent may be admirable, it is this fierce, non-negotiable thrust that demands enquiry. The lack of tolerance, the condescending look and tone of the wild-eyed art-wallah at anyone who stoops to sample anything beyond the gems could get a weak-kneed bloke to start writing his will, or seriously considering which exact spot is ideal to leap from his 16th floor balcony. Fact is, taste for the more refined and the desire to want to be challenged [not spoon-fed or catered to] depends mostly on the environment in which one has grown up and influences that have shaped & formed one’s sensibilities. Sometimes, it is also acquired through the company one keeps and at other times [very rare, though] – it is instinctive. These are factors to be considered before flaunting cultural superiority because the recipients are creatures of a lesser god. They are therefore unable to connect with complex or thought-provoking content that demands solid participation while viewing a film. To the everyday audience, movies still spell entertainment, a blessed out escapist trip to the never-never-land-of-happy-ever-after! Their instant retort is: Why should I pay and think? It’s your job to think how best you can entertain me and you better get it right, or else ...! Fly me to the moon and let me play among the stars ... Ultimately, it really boils down to live and let live. Forget the obsession of playing Masterji & evangelist and trying to convert every non-art house soul to a disciple. Most will either ponder how you’ve been actually certified sane, vanish from sight every time you enter their frame or wonder what terrible things one did in one’s last life to suffer these OMG moments. It also reflects poorly on these self-styled brand ambassadors of this genre because it shows them off as uncivilized people, pompous and self-righteous, the definitive, argumentative Indian who must prove his point, come what may. It doesn’t strike them that beyond bad manners, the lesser mortals are not obliged to listen, do cartwheels or go down on bended knees with gratitude for these pearls of wisdom. Labelled Mr. Bak-Bak and boring, they are likely to head their drop-dead list of creatures the world should quickly forget! At a personal level, the two amazing exponents of the inclusive, pluralistic, accommodating and reach-out school have been my late dad-in-law, Mr. Chidananda Das Gupta & filmmaker Shyam Benegal. Both were curious, interested, attentive and listened intently to your raves about Bollywood films, eager to pick up any new insights they may have missed. Das Gupta, while not really into the mainstream commercial, was always enthusiastic and eager to remain updated about trends in masala land & I remember how excited he was, years ago, when I explained to him the Angry Young Man phenomenon gripping Bollywood & the masses. Benegal was of course completely in tune with the times and so, whether it was Kieslowski or the Khans, his takes were always engaging & fascinatingly insightful. Neither of these eminent personalities ever offered gyaan or flung hard-to-pronounce names of world cinema with affected flourish. Nor were they humouring or indulging you. They simply and interestingly decoded the best of the alternate cinema & suggested – along with the masala stuff – checking out some of their material. It was always done in a warm, friendly and seductively un-threatening manner & always with a good word for the commercial cinema because they genuinely saw lots of good things in many Bollywood films. In a world filled with Guru-giri or posturing, it is hugely gratifying to follow the itinerary of sane, imaginative and cultured minds, showcasing civilised discourse, drawing readers & people into a space where even the most complex film-makers & films become intimate companions. Theirs is the art of de-mystifying cinema without making confusion, more confounded! Clearly there is a lesson somewhere for both, the learned Gurus of Cinema or the one’s posturing as devotees of Cahier Du Cinema ... will they pay heed? (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Opinion: Ok you watch arthouse films, but does it make you superior?

Out of sight, out of mind is a term we only know too well. Human memory is dangerously short &amp; in today’s nano-second times, when the here n’ now rules and impatience, impulsiveness &amp; promiscuity is the name of the game, this adage takes on ominous dimensions. &nbsp;

The nine-month closure of theatres &amp; releases, now slowly limping back but with pandemic still around and vaccine entering the frame with hope &amp; relief, presents a whole new Hitchcock-ian screenplay. &nbsp;In this sanitised world, fear, confusion and uncertainty reigns. Also, second and even third thoughts about entering movie theatres plague movie-junkies. &nbsp;

The nine-month interval however had one dramatic fallout; It allowed OTT, the streaming platform to usurp this space, offering sensationally varied, quality content that can be comfortably and securely enjoyed in the comforts of their home! &nbsp;For the traditional fans of the Bollywood-manufactured masala, this template started out by appearing to be weirdly different.&nbsp;

No high-pitched razzle-dazzle, dance, romance, glamour, tension, dialogue-baazi ignited by sexy, larger-than-life stars ... but soon [due to a lack of option, curiosity &amp; conditioning] and after a longish session of hide n’ seek, the OTT menu grew addictive. &nbsp;Over time, the Bollywood product seemed to move into soft focus, with fresh and absorbing OTT content slowly romancing their mind. [When was the last time you heard anyone excitedly recount or discuss mainstream films or stars?] Sure the media is warming up to usher their comeback – SRK’s Pathan heading the list – but isn’t the old hysteria missing?

Has OTT and their fantastically gifted actors converted a substantial section of the viewers in terms of sensibilities, taste &amp; quality control? Has this period unlocked a new side for audiences bred and buttered on cheap thrills, cardboard cut-out stars &amp; armpit rhetoric designed for instant gratification? &nbsp;Do all of this translate to the end of the blissed-out honeymoon of the superstars affair with their bhakts? Is this new and exciting version of David versus Goliath the latest show in town?

Tempting as it is to be carried away with the OTT-wave, perspective is the need of the day. &nbsp;Can stars really be so easily forgotten or relegated to the background after forever inhabiting the hearts and minds of the masses?&nbsp;

Remember, wherever films are made, stars are made too. &nbsp;Stardom is the characteristic of film industries, the world over. &nbsp;Unlike European and our regional films, which have a long tradition of expressing the viewpoints of their individual makers, Bollywood – like Hollywood – is totally star-driven. &nbsp;

They are the direct/indirect reflection of the needs, drives, dreams of the masses. &nbsp;In the darkened hall of a movie theatre, where wilful suspension of disbelief rules, stars seduce fans to participate in a collective experience that has more in common with tribal worship, myth and primitive magic.&nbsp;

No wonder, hardened film critic Anupama Chopra was once inspired to confess that “despite my long stint as a journo &amp; critic, I haven’t been able to be immune to their magical charms, their amazing ability to imbue inane scripts with heft, their innate talent for fuelling the fantasies of billions of people and their magical power to always provide hope. &nbsp;

Life may be nasty, brutish and short, but we can forever find comfort in the soothing image of SRK’s sexy wide-spread arms, Salman’s flamboyant bhai-giri, Aamir’s charming humour &amp; affection to find our own moral centre. Stars are a source of beauty, pleasure &amp; joy ... and totally irresistible. &nbsp;We in India enjoy a uniquely reverential, unthreatening but obsessive and overblown relationship with stars that remain totally unapologetic!”

So, as the clash between stars and actors is all set to zoom centre-stage very soon, the battle-lines will be drawn between the loyalists &amp; the converts. Will the amazing Pankaj Tripathi and his gifted co-actors or Criminal Justice, Sir, Patal Lok, Kagaz, Panchayat, Family Man or Bandish Bandits be able to match the fire power of the mighty Khans, Ajay, Akshay, Ranveer, Ranbir or the to-die-for wet dreams like Kat Kaif, Priyanka Chopra, Deepika Padukone?&nbsp;

As emotional responses go, stardom unleashes a different kind of fervour from the ones that greet actors. Actors invite respect and admiration. &nbsp;Stars attract craze and madness!

Furthermore, the star opens up doors to advantages galore. Stars have tangible features which can be advertised and marketed – face, body, voice, a certain kind of presence – and can be easily typed: Hero, Heroine, Comedian, Villain, Sexy Siren, Sweetie Pie, Neurotic, etc. The system provides a formula easy to understand and the use of this formula serves to protect Production House biggies from having to pay attention to such intangibles as the quality of the story or acting.&nbsp;

Here is a standardised product which the Bankers &amp; the Trade can easily connect with and regard as insurance for profits. &nbsp;

The Big Banners can then promise the junta of a SRK, Salman, Aamir, Akshay, Ajay, Hrithik, Ranveer, Ranbir, Deepika, Priyanka, Katrina starrer which traditionally spell profit. Star Power in action! Dramatically opposed to this perspective is a view presented by the legendary Marlon Brando.&nbsp;

“The idea is to be real, not to try and act out an emotion that you don’t feel or experience during the performance. Mostly, one has the popular and successful Personality Actors, totally predictable with manners well-loved. Acting is supposed to be a calling redolent with magic and mystique, a leap into the unknown, a voyage of discovery. It’s not about easy-to-digest junk food that guarantees inane feel-good smiles”.&nbsp;

Famous French Director Roger Vadim is up next. “Actors need gardeners more than professors. &nbsp;They are flowers that need to be watered, not cut. Actors, at the end of the day, don’t fantasise about the yellow brick road in the Wizard of Oz. &nbsp;Actors, like fire, are not meant to be hoarded, but spent!” 
&nbsp;&nbsp; 
So the question is: In this more mature environment, will cinema race past movies? &nbsp;Will content defeat glamour? &nbsp;Will realism confront escapism? Will actors challenge stars?

The heat is on and your time starts now!

Out of sight, out of mind is a term we only know too well. Human memory is dangerously short & in today’s nano-second times, when the here n’ now rules and impatience, impulsiveness & promiscuity is the name of the game, this adage takes on ominous dimensions.

Out of sight, out of mind is a term we only know too well. Human memory is dangerously short & in today’s nano-second times, when the here n’ now rules and impatience, impulsiveness & promiscuity is the name of the game, this adage takes on ominous dimensions. The nine-month closure of theatres & releases, now slowly limping back but with pandemic still around and vaccine entering the frame with hope & relief, presents a whole new Hitchcock-ian screenplay. In this sanitised world, fear, confusion and uncertainty reigns. Also, second and even third thoughts about entering movie theatres plague movie-junkies. The nine-month interval however had one dramatic fallout; It allowed OTT, the streaming platform to usurp this space, offering sensationally varied, quality content that can be comfortably and securely enjoyed in the comforts of their home! For the traditional fans of the Bollywood-manufactured masala, this template started out by appearing to be weirdly different. No high-pitched razzle-dazzle, dance, romance, glamour, tension, dialogue-baazi ignited by sexy, larger-than-life stars ... but soon [due to a lack of option, curiosity & conditioning] and after a longish session of hide n’ seek, the OTT menu grew addictive. Over time, the Bollywood product seemed to move into soft focus, with fresh and absorbing OTT content slowly romancing their mind. [When was the last time you heard anyone excitedly recount or discuss mainstream films or stars?] Sure the media is warming up to usher their comeback – SRK’s Pathan heading the list – but isn’t the old hysteria missing? Has OTT and their fantastically gifted actors converted a substantial section of the viewers in terms of sensibilities, taste & quality control? Has this period unlocked a new side for audiences bred and buttered on cheap thrills, cardboard cut-out stars & armpit rhetoric designed for instant gratification? Do all of this translate to the end of the blissed-out honeymoon of the superstars affair with their bhakts? Is this new and exciting version of David versus Goliath the latest show in town? Tempting as it is to be carried away with the OTT-wave, perspective is the need of the day. Can stars really be so easily forgotten or relegated to the background after forever inhabiting the hearts and minds of the masses? Remember, wherever films are made, stars are made too. Stardom is the characteristic of film industries, the world over. Unlike European and our regional films, which have a long tradition of expressing the viewpoints of their individual makers, Bollywood – like Hollywood – is totally star-driven. They are the direct/indirect reflection of the needs, drives, dreams of the masses. In the darkened hall of a movie theatre, where wilful suspension of disbelief rules, stars seduce fans to participate in a collective experience that has more in common with tribal worship, myth and primitive magic. No wonder, hardened film critic Anupama Chopra was once inspired to confess that “despite my long stint as a journo & critic, I haven’t been able to be immune to their magical charms, their amazing ability to imbue inane scripts with heft, their innate talent for fuelling the fantasies of billions of people and their magical power to always provide hope. Life may be nasty, brutish and short, but we can forever find comfort in the soothing image of SRK’s sexy wide-spread arms, Salman’s flamboyant bhai-giri, Aamir’s charming humour & affection to find our own moral centre. Stars are a source of beauty, pleasure & joy ... and totally irresistible. We in India enjoy a uniquely reverential, unthreatening but obsessive and overblown relationship with stars that remain totally unapologetic!” So, as the clash between stars and actors is all set to zoom centre-stage very soon, the battle-lines will be drawn between the loyalists & the converts. Will the amazing Pankaj Tripathi and his gifted co-actors or Criminal Justice, Sir, Patal Lok, Kagaz, Panchayat, Family Man or Bandish Bandits be able to match the fire power of the mighty Khans, Ajay, Akshay, Ranveer, Ranbir or the to-die-for wet dreams like Kat Kaif, Priyanka Chopra, Deepika Padukone? As emotional responses go, stardom unleashes a different kind of fervour from the ones that greet actors. Actors invite respect and admiration. Stars attract craze and madness! Furthermore, the star opens up doors to advantages galore. Stars have tangible features which can be advertised and marketed – face, body, voice, a certain kind of presence – and can be easily typed: Hero, Heroine, Comedian, Villain, Sexy Siren, Sweetie Pie, Neurotic, etc. The system provides a formula easy to understand and the use of this formula serves to protect Production House biggies from having to pay attention to such intangibles as the quality of the story or acting. Here is a standardised product which the Bankers & the Trade can easily connect with and regard as insurance for profits. The Big Banners can then promise the junta of a SRK, Salman, Aamir, Akshay, Ajay, Hrithik, Ranveer, Ranbir, Deepika, Priyanka, Katrina starrer which traditionally spell profit. Star Power in action! Dramatically opposed to this perspective is a view presented by the legendary Marlon Brando. “The idea is to be real, not to try and act out an emotion that you don’t feel or experience during the performance. Mostly, one has the popular and successful Personality Actors, totally predictable with manners well-loved. Acting is supposed to be a calling redolent with magic and mystique, a leap into the unknown, a voyage of discovery. It’s not about easy-to-digest junk food that guarantees inane feel-good smiles”. Famous French Director Roger Vadim is up next. “Actors need gardeners more than professors. They are flowers that need to be watered, not cut. Actors, at the end of the day, don’t fantasise about the yellow brick road in the Wizard of Oz. Actors, like fire, are not meant to be hoarded, but spent!” So the question is: In this more mature environment, will cinema race past movies? Will content defeat glamour? Will realism confront escapism? Will actors challenge stars? The heat is on and your time starts now!

Opinion: Is 2021 the year of Actor vs Star showdown?

It may be a little over 9 months but it appears a lifetime, a game-changer and life-transformer. The lockout-pandemic combine converted us suddenly into a nation of cynics, pessimists, philosophers &amp; thinkers re-connecting with long-forgotten, ignored, neglected primal truths that once graced our lives. Since entertainment in India means Bollywood &amp; Bollywood represents stars, this lockout unleashed a dramatic knockout by offering the movie-crazed Janta a startling new alternative, home-delivered: OTT platform! &nbsp;

This streaming space – Netflix, Hotstar, Amazon among tons of others – provided content that was planets away from the Bollywood model to present a cinema that defined truth, twenty-four frames per second. At first confused, reluctant and hesitant, large sections of traditional movie viewers soon embraced this platform with passion &amp; purpose to propel a boom in this space.

Today with the vaccine entering our lives and promising to deliver us from the twin nightmares, will the grandstanding of OTT vanish in the face of the old, much-loved, familiar Bollywood model? &nbsp;While the OTT menu, comprising gifted actors and superbly varied content are indeed great eye-openers, can they ever hope to compete with the mega-power &amp; star-draw of the Khans, Ajay, Akshay, Hrithik, Ranveer &amp; Ranbir or glam, sexy divas, Katrina, Deepika, Priyanka &amp; gang? Will the post-pandemic phase thus be the real litmus test in terms of transformation &amp; conversion and ask the vital question: Was OTT tolerated due to a lack of choice or did it genuinely represent &amp; introduce a new, exciting template and kick off a fascinating voyage of discovery?

Veteran producer of classy films [Rajnigandha, Shatranj Ke Khiladi, Gandhi, Katha] Suresh Jindal takes the first strike. &nbsp;He believes that the Pandemic, in serendipity fashion, has given us the most amazing content-viewing bouquet of our lives.&nbsp;

“With the vaccine entering the frame, the focus could well return to the big screen. The Theatre-going experience can never be replicated. After all, it’s an event! The OTT space however need not feel threatened because it offers its very own USP. Their twin advantage of convenience &amp; comfort is hard to match and the fantastic content spread they lay out, each day, is an impossible act to follow. &nbsp;Finally, you can’t possibly go to movie halls every day. OTT offers that cutting edge benefit. So it has to be, khayal apna apna, pasand apni apni!”

Hi-profile, gifted Adman, Theatre &amp; Screen Artiste, Bharat Dabolkar is next with his POV.&nbsp;

“I think both will exist, after some initial glitches, in peaceful co-existence. &nbsp;Remember the initial anxieties of Bollywood when TV serials – Humlog, Buniyad, Khandan, Ados Pados – were rocking and sometimes even sent movie timings for a toss? It all evened out because ultimately STARS are STARS and actors [TV/OTT] despite their talent &amp; popularity are children of a lesser god! They can never hope to match the larger-than-life aura, glamour or charisma of the demi-gods &amp; goddesses!” he said.

Dabolkar however has a note of warning to both. He cautions the OTT platforms to not freak out on vile language [Tribhanga being the latest] and sex scenes, mostly designed for effect. &nbsp;Bollywood too, after the OTT invasion, needs to review their content-base, forget trash-with-flash and offer meaningful content. OTT has made one thing clear: Substance NOT star is the new name of the game.&nbsp;

Who better than the brilliant, respected, veteran film critic Saibal Chatterjee to wrap up the debate?

“Actually it’s a loaded question and there can be no easy answers simply because this situation is unprecedented in our lifetime.” he says.

Chatterjee believes that while the thrill of the big screen experience and the impact of the mega-stars are undeniable, OTT too has left indelible footprints in the minds of large sections of the traditional audience that one can’t wish away. &nbsp;Undoubtedly, OTT is here to stay and co-exist with the mainstream masala.&nbsp;

“However, my fear is different. OTT’s huge invasion into the homes, hearts and minds of millions hasn’t gone unnoticed by the hawk-eyed sharks of B-town &amp; Karan Johar – along with some other big production house biggies – are already eyeing the platform as the new, juicy target. KJO, it is rumoured, is already busy producing content for Netflix. Others will surely follow, desperate to grab their share of the pie. Will their brand of entertainment muddy the waters and Bollywood-ise the content profile [like Tandav] of this wonderfully creative, democratic space? By doing this, will they devalue, trivialise and corrupt this platform &amp; attract the wrong audience-base to view this space? Agreed, finally it’s the viewer’s choice, but won’t the likes of a Criminal Justice, Sir, Kagaz, Bnadish Bandits, Family Man, Undisclosed etc rubbing shoulders with Bollywood’s self-conscious and pretentiously arty, non-commercial products, look hopelessly out of sync? &nbsp;Mercifully, the digital divide in India is still humongous, so lots of areas will not be affected. However, it’s something to ponder over." he says.

Everything considered, 2021 could be a watershed year as the plot thickens!&nbsp;

Let’s wait and watch.

It may be a little over 9 months but it appears a lifetime, a game-changer and life-transformer. The lockout-pandemic combine converted us suddenly into a nation of cynics, pessimists, philosophers & thinkers re-connecting with long-forgotten, ignored, neglected primal truths that once graced our lives.

It may be a little over 9 months but it appears a lifetime, a game-changer and life-transformer. The lockout-pandemic combine converted us suddenly into a nation of cynics, pessimists, philosophers & thinkers re-connecting with long-forgotten, ignored, neglected primal truths that once graced our lives. Since entertainment in India means Bollywood & Bollywood represents stars, this lockout unleashed a dramatic knockout by offering the movie-crazed Janta a startling new alternative, home-delivered: OTT platform! This streaming space – Netflix, Hotstar, Amazon among tons of others – provided content that was planets away from the Bollywood model to present a cinema that defined truth, twenty-four frames per second. At first confused, reluctant and hesitant, large sections of traditional movie viewers soon embraced this platform with passion & purpose to propel a boom in this space. Today with the vaccine entering our lives and promising to deliver us from the twin nightmares, will the grandstanding of OTT vanish in the face of the old, much-loved, familiar Bollywood model? While the OTT menu, comprising gifted actors and superbly varied content are indeed great eye-openers, can they ever hope to compete with the mega-power & star-draw of the Khans, Ajay, Akshay, Hrithik, Ranveer & Ranbir or glam, sexy divas, Katrina, Deepika, Priyanka & gang? Will the post-pandemic phase thus be the real litmus test in terms of transformation & conversion and ask the vital question: Was OTT tolerated due to a lack of choice or did it genuinely represent & introduce a new, exciting template and kick off a fascinating voyage of discovery? Veteran producer of classy films [Rajnigandha, Shatranj Ke Khiladi, Gandhi, Katha] Suresh Jindal takes the first strike. He believes that the Pandemic, in serendipity fashion, has given us the most amazing content-viewing bouquet of our lives. “With the vaccine entering the frame, the focus could well return to the big screen. The Theatre-going experience can never be replicated. After all, it’s an event! The OTT space however need not feel threatened because it offers its very own USP. Their twin advantage of convenience & comfort is hard to match and the fantastic content spread they lay out, each day, is an impossible act to follow. Finally, you can’t possibly go to movie halls every day. OTT offers that cutting edge benefit. So it has to be, khayal apna apna, pasand apni apni!” Hi-profile, gifted Adman, Theatre & Screen Artiste, Bharat Dabolkar is next with his POV. “I think both will exist, after some initial glitches, in peaceful co-existence. Remember the initial anxieties of Bollywood when TV serials – Humlog, Buniyad, Khandan, Ados Pados – were rocking and sometimes even sent movie timings for a toss? It all evened out because ultimately STARS are STARS and actors [TV/OTT] despite their talent & popularity are children of a lesser god! They can never hope to match the larger-than-life aura, glamour or charisma of the demi-gods & goddesses!” he said. Dabolkar however has a note of warning to both. He cautions the OTT platforms to not freak out on vile language [Tribhanga being the latest] and sex scenes, mostly designed for effect. Bollywood too, after the OTT invasion, needs to review their content-base, forget trash-with-flash and offer meaningful content. OTT has made one thing clear: Substance NOT star is the new name of the game. Who better than the brilliant, respected, veteran film critic Saibal Chatterjee to wrap up the debate? “Actually it’s a loaded question and there can be no easy answers simply because this situation is unprecedented in our lifetime.” he says. Chatterjee believes that while the thrill of the big screen experience and the impact of the mega-stars are undeniable, OTT too has left indelible footprints in the minds of large sections of the traditional audience that one can’t wish away. Undoubtedly, OTT is here to stay and co-exist with the mainstream masala. “However, my fear is different. OTT’s huge invasion into the homes, hearts and minds of millions hasn’t gone unnoticed by the hawk-eyed sharks of B-town & Karan Johar – along with some other big production house biggies – are already eyeing the platform as the new, juicy target. KJO, it is rumoured, is already busy producing content for Netflix. Others will surely follow, desperate to grab their share of the pie. Will their brand of entertainment muddy the waters and Bollywood-ise the content profile [like Tandav] of this wonderfully creative, democratic space? By doing this, will they devalue, trivialise and corrupt this platform & attract the wrong audience-base to view this space? Agreed, finally it’s the viewer’s choice, but won’t the likes of a Criminal Justice, Sir, Kagaz, Bnadish Bandits, Family Man, Undisclosed etc rubbing shoulders with Bollywood’s self-conscious and pretentiously arty, non-commercial products, look hopelessly out of sync? Mercifully, the digital divide in India is still humongous, so lots of areas will not be affected. However, it’s something to ponder over." he says. Everything considered, 2021 could be a watershed year as the plot thickens! Let’s wait and watch.

Opinion: With post-COVID times on horizon, will OTT-fix go for a toss?

Since Valentine&rsquo;s Day has come and gone, accompanied by its predictable hysteria and histrionics, it would be interesting to examine why the new gen seems to find love and marriage so totally incompatible. Why, after those sacred vows and wow honeymoon, love seems to take on a guest appearance role in most urban marriages.

Love is a many splendoured thing.&nbsp; It is the April rose that only grows in early spring.&nbsp; It is nature&rsquo;s way of giving a reason to living, the golden crown that makes a man a king.&nbsp; Once, on a high and windy hill, in the morning mist, two lovers kissed and time stood still, so rhapsodised the magical crooner Nat King Cole, rocketing cupid into zillions of thrilled romantic hearts! There was also, ugh, a flip side too.&nbsp; This lot declared love is a mango and, worse, Love is just a 4 letter word, re-enforcing the point of kill-joys who believe that love really is just a drug, biologically and emotionally programmed for transience and against all delusions of foreverness.

Women continue to be angry, upset and confused about this scenario.&nbsp; How can all that passion and poetry &ndash; they ask &ndash; during those enchanting halcyon days of courtship suddenly hotfoot into nowhere-land, replaced by a pragmatic, practical &amp; horribly (un) romantic entity?&nbsp; Is it then true that men are more seduced by the thrill of the pursuit than the conquest?&nbsp;

Embarrassing, inconvenient and uncomfortable as it may seem, some men perhaps agree.&nbsp; &ldquo;Maybe we are made that way! I have to confess that it was a huge challenge for me to win Laila, given her classy background, dazzling looks and hoity-toity airs.&nbsp; I managed to do it with an audacious strategy that &ndash; luckily &ndash; worked: Be insulting, dismissive, rude and mock her celebrated good looks, background and lifestyle, all the time telling her how hollow and superficial her life is, how her friends really are her chamchas [not real friends] and how those arrogant airs that she puts on are nothing but a defence mechanism against her total lack of self-confidence. It took time, boss, but it finally worked! Today, she is my wife &ndash; despite the near-cardiac arrest of her parents &ndash; and all is cool.&nbsp; She is grounded, real and even agrees that she lived a fake life.&rdquo; &nbsp;

Laila goes along but makes a slight detour.&nbsp; &ldquo;Sushil is right when he says that he tore my mask to introduce me to myself and the real world.&nbsp; His approach &ndash; rough, direct, aggressive, totally devoid of polish, class or politeness &ndash; was certainly a culture shock but I guess the searing truth got me.&nbsp; Also, the complete lack of the visual playing moony-eyed devotee/chamcha, was attractive. Inverted snobbery, I have to confess, worked.&rdquo;&nbsp; However, after marriage, that very directness that appealed to her so much simmered down.&nbsp; &ldquo;He was a sweet and caring husband but the attractive rough edges, the straight no-bullshit talk had almost vanished. He was busy and distracted.&nbsp; I so miss the turbo-charged volcano he was.&nbsp; He was so so different!&rdquo;

Men complain &ndash; that like lyric, poetry and epic &ndash; passion of the courtship kind will shift from a raging fire to a warm, cosy glow.&nbsp; &ldquo;Boss, like sexual hi-jinks, it has an expiry date too and if you don&rsquo;t agree, drop into your friendly, neighbourhood nursing home for a close-up of over-ambitious guys who insisted on wanting to do &hellip; Yesterday once more!&rdquo;&nbsp; The men add that women totally believe that the earlier junoon and paagalpan is a part of the overall romance package they bought into and if one per cent is missing ever &ndash; in word, thought or deed &ndash; its chaos!&nbsp; Yaar, ab to biwi hain, not gasp-pant object of desire, so calm down, chill and taste the coffee.&nbsp; Kaun samjhaye?!

Women are not amused at this typically chauvinistic, patronising, dumb, insensitive, corny and obtuse observation.&nbsp; Does the chase only rock till the conquest happens and, once achieved, like animals, is devouring the only thing on their mind, instead of fostering, nurturing, caring or bonding, taking the relationship to the next level?&nbsp; Confesses a distraught 28-year-old Ayesha Sehgal, home-maker with two small kids, aged 5 &amp; 3, &ldquo;I was so bewildered and disappointed at Akhil, when soon after our blissed-out courtship phase, honeymoon and early days, he started changing.&nbsp; It started when I became pregnant.&nbsp; I expected special attention and caring which just didn&rsquo;t happen.&nbsp; Forget flowers and gifts, even the earlier tons of calls and texting took a huge hit and became minimal.&nbsp; He was there for me and I&nbsp; really can&rsquo;t put a finger on where he went wrong, but somewhere, the magic had evaporated.&nbsp; I&rsquo;ve often tried to figure out the reason but failed.&nbsp; Many of my friends have similar stories to tell, so all is clearly not well in the state of shaadi-nagar!&rdquo;

Marriage counsellors, behavorial scientists and social commentators believe it has to do with men being chronically lazy and totally secure once the &lsquo;campaign&rsquo; is won.&nbsp; Since it&rsquo;s a done-deal, baat khatam! It also has to do, some believe, and women please don&rsquo;t scream, about women too pulling back on their looks and figure post-marriage and certainly post-kids. &nbsp;

A friend swore he heard his once-very-attractive 26-year-old colleague coolly say &ldquo;yaar, shaadi ho gayi, bachche ho gaye, not competing with Kat or Dips for my hubby&rsquo;s attention, so what&rsquo;s this big obsession of retaining looks and hot figure?&nbsp; That&rsquo;s for the insecure types, compulsive attention-seekers or females who are seen as furniture at home by the hubby.&nbsp; I am in a comfortably secure and happy state. Period.&rdquo; &nbsp;

Truth to tell, there are no easy answers.&nbsp; However, in the year 2015 when both women and men &ndash; in their respective ways &ndash; have taken such giant leaps towards achieving their future, it might be wise to pause and reflect on the basics that define the human condition, factors that colour, grace and caress the most significant space of all &ndash; the space between the heart. &nbsp;

Agreed it&rsquo;s a fiercely consumerist world, success at any cost is the new aphrodisiac and battle of the sexes continues to get more over-heated each day with egos going through the roof, but point is &ndash; why continue to play the silly, stone-age hunter-hunted game?&nbsp; Why believe in your own market-driven mythology and chase shadows leading to doom?&nbsp; Why not just be yourself &ndash; warts and all &ndash; bereft of posturing and masks, celebrating simple, uncomplicated joys like togetherness, loyalty, trust, integrity, caring?&nbsp; Try it, and love could well make a glorious return journey, even post-marriage!

&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

In a fiercely consumerist world, success at any cost is the new aphrodisiac and battle of the sexes continues to get more over-heated each day with egos going through the roof

Since Valentine’s Day has come and gone, accompanied by its predictable hysteria and histrionics, it would be interesting to examine why the new gen seems to find love and marriage so totally incompatible. Why, after those sacred vows and wow honeymoon, love seems to take on a guest appearance role in most urban marriages. Love is a many splendoured thing. It is the April rose that only grows in early spring. It is nature’s way of giving a reason to living, the golden crown that makes a man a king. Once, on a high and windy hill, in the morning mist, two lovers kissed and time stood still, so rhapsodised the magical crooner Nat King Cole, rocketing cupid into zillions of thrilled romantic hearts! There was also, ugh, a flip side too. This lot declared love is a mango and, worse, Love is just a 4 letter word, re-enforcing the point of kill-joys who believe that love really is just a drug, biologically and emotionally programmed for transience and against all delusions of foreverness. Women continue to be angry, upset and confused about this scenario. How can all that passion and poetry – they ask – during those enchanting halcyon days of courtship suddenly hotfoot into nowhere-land, replaced by a pragmatic, practical & horribly (un) romantic entity? Is it then true that men are more seduced by the thrill of the pursuit than the conquest? Embarrassing, inconvenient and uncomfortable as it may seem, some men perhaps agree. “Maybe we are made that way! I have to confess that it was a huge challenge for me to win Laila, given her classy background, dazzling looks and hoity-toity airs. I managed to do it with an audacious strategy that – luckily – worked: Be insulting, dismissive, rude and mock her celebrated good looks, background and lifestyle, all the time telling her how hollow and superficial her life is, how her friends really are her chamchas [not real friends] and how those arrogant airs that she puts on are nothing but a defence mechanism against her total lack of self-confidence. It took time, boss, but it finally worked! Today, she is my wife – despite the near-cardiac arrest of her parents – and all is cool. She is grounded, real and even agrees that she lived a fake life.” Laila goes along but makes a slight detour. “Sushil is right when he says that he tore my mask to introduce me to myself and the real world. His approach – rough, direct, aggressive, totally devoid of polish, class or politeness – was certainly a culture shock but I guess the searing truth got me. Also, the complete lack of the visual playing moony-eyed devotee/chamcha, was attractive. Inverted snobbery, I have to confess, worked.” However, after marriage, that very directness that appealed to her so much simmered down. “He was a sweet and caring husband but the attractive rough edges, the straight no-bullshit talk had almost vanished. He was busy and distracted. I so miss the turbo-charged volcano he was. He was so so different!” Men complain – that like lyric, poetry and epic – passion of the courtship kind will shift from a raging fire to a warm, cosy glow. “Boss, like sexual hi-jinks, it has an expiry date too and if you don’t agree, drop into your friendly, neighbourhood nursing home for a close-up of over-ambitious guys who insisted on wanting to do … Yesterday once more!” The men add that women totally believe that the earlier junoon and paagalpan is a part of the overall romance package they bought into and if one per cent is missing ever – in word, thought or deed – its chaos! Yaar, ab to biwi hain, not gasp-pant object of desire, so calm down, chill and taste the coffee. Kaun samjhaye?! Women are not amused at this typically chauvinistic, patronising, dumb, insensitive, corny and obtuse observation. Does the chase only rock till the conquest happens and, once achieved, like animals, is devouring the only thing on their mind, instead of fostering, nurturing, caring or bonding, taking the relationship to the next level? Confesses a distraught 28-year-old Ayesha Sehgal, home-maker with two small kids, aged 5 & 3, “I was so bewildered and disappointed at Akhil, when soon after our blissed-out courtship phase, honeymoon and early days, he started changing. It started when I became pregnant. I expected special attention and caring which just didn’t happen. Forget flowers and gifts, even the earlier tons of calls and texting took a huge hit and became minimal. He was there for me and I really can’t put a finger on where he went wrong, but somewhere, the magic had evaporated. I’ve often tried to figure out the reason but failed. Many of my friends have similar stories to tell, so all is clearly not well in the state of shaadi-nagar!” Marriage counsellors, behavorial scientists and social commentators believe it has to do with men being chronically lazy and totally secure once the ‘campaign’ is won. Since it’s a done-deal, baat khatam! It also has to do, some believe, and women please don’t scream, about women too pulling back on their looks and figure post-marriage and certainly post-kids. A friend swore he heard his once-very-attractive 26-year-old colleague coolly say “yaar, shaadi ho gayi, bachche ho gaye, not competing with Kat or Dips for my hubby’s attention, so what’s this big obsession of retaining looks and hot figure? That’s for the insecure types, compulsive attention-seekers or females who are seen as furniture at home by the hubby. I am in a comfortably secure and happy state. Period.” Truth to tell, there are no easy answers. However, in the year 2015 when both women and men – in their respective ways – have taken such giant leaps towards achieving their future, it might be wise to pause and reflect on the basics that define the human condition, factors that colour, grace and caress the most significant space of all – the space between the heart. Agreed it’s a fiercely consumerist world, success at any cost is the new aphrodisiac and battle of the sexes continues to get more over-heated each day with egos going through the roof, but point is – why continue to play the silly, stone-age hunter-hunted game? Why believe in your own market-driven mythology and chase shadows leading to doom? Why not just be yourself – warts and all – bereft of posturing and masks, celebrating simple, uncomplicated joys like togetherness, loyalty, trust, integrity, caring? Try it, and love could well make a glorious return journey, even post-marriage! (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: Why as we enter marriage, love exits

Author

Zee News Rajasthan

Editor

Monojit Lahiri

Home

Live Tv

Latest

World

India

Business

Entertainment

Sports

Opinions

Videos

Photos

Gravitas

Lifestyle

Science

Tech

Rajasthan News in Hindi: In-depth coverage of Rajasthan Crime, Political News, Education, Rajasthan Weather Update and Latest Rajasthan News on Zee News Rajasthan.