Monday, January 24, 2011

Villain TO No Villain

Once upon a time, all the disco_dancing_lovers of the rich bollywood daughters were rejected by their fathers and the hindi film-makers needed no other plot for the 3hrs entertainment. The next decade they became obsessed with the smugglers and mafias crowding India and the major reason why these movies rocked the nation was because of the faces like AMRISH PURI and PERM CHOPRA. Manoj Kumar and Dileep Kumar fought almost all kinds of rich greedy bastards possible in fiction. Meanwhile Amitabh and Dharmendra did the dacoit hunts as adorable-desirable cops. And for the next few years GULSHAN GROVER and RANJIT raped on-screen for reasons that are yet not understood. N if ever we fell short of these plots of revenge/avenge_stories.. then our film makers clung to the safe 1947 independence theme zone... where some miserable english actor is paid to say dialogues like "THUM SAALA INDHIAN DHHOG..." n the reaction is a funny movie_hangover_patriotism.

From 1930s to 2000 bollywood had explored the whole range of villainy. Zamindars to Mafias we handled them all for almost a century. Post 1990 movies introduced a no villain policy to hindi films. Doctor Dang and Mogambo are now long lost. Presenting situations rather than people as antagonists is the mantra for this mature bollywood.

I grew up with this bollywood baselessness and always connected well with it. This changed bollywood with better scripts n dialogues somehow alienates the coarse minds like me.

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Creating Worlds

Personally I feel that there is not much room for critical analysis on a play's prologue and I share this thought with almost all my friends. That day when the self-proclaimed non-geeks_but_literature_lovers(paradox alert) tried to squeeze the shit outta kalidasa's shakuntala, we had a pseudo intellectual symposium about the novel Isha had recently read. The Six Suspects. I haven't yet read the novel but there's a thought in the novel that she talked about and it intrigued me.

She said that the novel talked about the small worlds that we build around us. Our world has all the people we love, we care about. We think it to be a safer and more secure world than the crude reality of the actual world that we live in. The imaginary walls that we build around are meant to shut out misery, death and disease from 'our' people.

All this time we know that these walls will crumble when reality will knock. But still we expect an eternal bliss and immortality without any reason. We know that there is violence in the world. But we expect a reason for it to enter our sphere. It couldn't just another happening when it happens to our personal self. Why don't we feel the same emotional kick when we hear about 'some' disaster that happened to 'someone' and when it happen in my own little world, our friends, our family or the special ones who ever entered the four walls. At this moment our world appear to be a mere facade.

People die and with them crumbles their world which they make and remake throughout their lives. It's not just about the presence of few people who matter to you but about their thoughts and feelings about you which place you in their worlds. We all try to weave people together with the threads of affection and care. But these threads cannot hold the heavy realities that surround us. And a whole world ends when a single person submits to death.

Thinking about and analyzing life must always be avoided. You always face a dilemma... whether life is better as a cynical realist or a lover of life who shuts the gates of reality.