Sandy’s take on ‘Conversations with Mani Ratnam’ by Baradwaj Rangan

LINK

Knowing how reticent filmmaker Mani Ratnam can be, one has to congratulate writer and reviewer Baradwaj Rangan who gets the maker to articulate so substantially in his book, ‘Conversations with Mani Ratnam’ that released last month.
Rangan is an erudite film critic, whose reviews stand apart from the rest as cerebral and nuanced pieces . Not everyone finds his writing style accessible, yet, his is an opinion always worth having.

The reviewer originally had plans of going ahead with a standard narrative style for his book, with quotes from the maker. But after a few conversations with Mani both decided to opt for a Q&A format. This could have been dicey if the filmmaker had not opened up in the manner that he does. But as it turns out, Ratnam seems to have accorded due importance to the project and seems to have been involved closely with it.
Expectedly, Rangan is the right man for the job. It’s easy to see that he is an ardent admirer of Ratnam’s cinema. In an age where good Indian films is a rare occurrence, and thinking filmmakers a disappearing breed, Ratnam stands out as an auteur whom an erudite reviewer like Rangan would quite naturally be engaged with.
Mani Ratnam during the conversation seems at times impatient with Rangan for reading too much into individual scenes and situations in his films, and you smile knowingly. However, as you read further, you realise that much of what you see in his cinema is indeed well-thought out, with sub-text and so on. So him chiding Rangan for it seems amusing. The two get on quite well, though Rangan’s reverential tone is clear. At some places the director gets defensive about a certain point of criticism even if Rangan words it most tactfully. Then the atmosphere gets a bit heated up, with Ratnam getting slightly cutting in his remarks. But for most part, Mani seems like a sharp, astute man, sometimes sarcastic but with a rough affection that is touching. Rangan too plays his part admirably. He is unfailingly respectful, but never desists from his line of questioning when he can help it. He persists with some points to seek answers even when Mani appears to snub it in the first attempt.
Many illuminating points come up in the book for the reader. Like why he takes the action to Delhi in ‘Mauna Ragam’. It is because, he replies, the new place – cold, strange and alien – enables in externalising the heroine’s feelings about her marriage.
In ‘Ravanan’ – the beautifully surrealistic scene of Aishwarya falling from the cliff – works sublimely to show Vikram falling fatally in love with her.
The book talks a great deal about the craft of filmmaking, so the interview should be of immense interest to film students or even movie buffs who watch cinema with some intensity. But not everyone will summon up enough patience to go through the whole book. Divided into several parts, each section talks about one major film. This is a good move. Though the content overlaps and this could not have been helped in a free-wheeling conversation, it allows the reader to skip a certain film he hasn’t seen.
I was also not particularly interested in detailed analysis of films I didn’t think very highly of. And since a great many of Mani’s films do tend to be emotionally less satisfying in the end, where something somewhere seems to go wrong, the superb parts never adding up to a fulfilling whole, I must confess to getting a little exhausted with the exercise.
Still, this is a valuable endeavour and these conversations from an intellectually gifted filmmaker like Ratnam with undeniable prowess in his field is something worth preserving.

Posted by Sandhya Iyer

About these ads

120 Responses to “Sandy’s take on ‘Conversations with Mani Ratnam’ by Baradwaj Rangan”

  1. Interesting take, Mani does seems like someone who does not take criticism well. ( eg. retort to Big B)
    I think every Filmmaker reaches his/her peak and then it is downhill….Yash Chopra, Raj Kapoor, Subhash Ghai, Manoj Kumar, J.P. Dutta, Prakash Mehra,
    …and now it is Mani Ratnam’s turn !!!!! hota hai, duniya hai !

    • But in Ratnam’s case the very films that are considered disappointments on release are then celebrated as standard-bearers when the new ones release! It’s quite amusing really and then when you remind people of what they once might have said or believed they refuse to accept it. Ratnam, as I certainly keep saying here, has had underwhelming if not worse returns on almost all of his most ambitious films for about twenty years now. So he’s spent most of his career living with this sort of disappointment! His prestige is still untainted. Partly because he’s always ahead of the curve even when people dismiss his films they can’t quite say he’s past it. There are just too many strengths on display even for the superficial viewer. So his is by no means a case of decline but that of a filmmaker who is simply not interested in easy commercial formats. He’ll do it once in a while if his back is really up against the wall but even here not without some twists! Kadal confirms all of this. He’s actually made a very ambitious film here, not one less ambitious than Raavan in many ways even if it doesn’t have the same kind of mounting or production challenges and so on. Some years ago in a similar situation he made Alaipayuthey (Saathiya original). But here in Kadal he’s not doing anything half as easy as that though after Raavan(an) he could easily have made a ‘by the numbers’ coastal love story.

      By the way I don’t really believe Raj Kapoor declined either. His last film was one of his biggest hits, the one preceding this was also successful. In the 70s he had Mera Naam Joker where he was just ahead of his times and then a massively successful and hugely iconic Bobby. SSS was clearly a misfire though a film which has not been forgotten. Not it is true that as a pure artist Raj Kapoor is less interesting beyond a point. After MNJ, perhaps because of the heart-breaking failure of that film, he embraced a very easy commercialism that he never quite got out of his system. He even resorted to what I would consider an element of the grotesque in some of his later films. Something I have less taste for if at all. But nonetheless he was in total control as a filmmaker. It’s not like some of the other examples on your list who one wondered if they had even been good directors looking at some of their weaker attempts! Of course most of these names wouldn’t be comparable to Raj Kapoor even at their peaks! Getting back to the original point though Ratnam hasn’t done a Raj Kapoor, still a more common path to follow. He’s gone in the other direction, he’s pushed the envelope more. and not because he’s lost control but because he’s wanted to make his kinds of films. He’s created enough cultural capital for himself to keep doing so. The last film where I think he really wanted a commercial success was Guru and much as one might like this film for very many justifiable reasons and much as I would even say this is a somewhat more deceptive film than people might think the fact is that is simply not as interesting and certainly not as radical as Dil Se or Yuva or Raavan (just to remain restricted to his Hindi works).

    • Arturo Belano Says:

      To be fair to these filmmakers, it *is* always downhill once you’ve reached the peak…

      • I don’t accept these terms for Ratnam as I’ve already explained but leaving this aside I’m a bit skeptical of these divisions in most cases. Not because there aren’t talents who clear do have their post-peak phases but for the reason that often a ‘shifting of gears’ in a career is not adequately judged in the present. It often takes a generation or more before people start accepting the evolution of the artist on his (or her) own terms. In the initial round ‘later’ phases are judging to be deviations (or the falling off) from a peak-period plenitude. To offer a quick example here Kurosawa’s late Kagemusha (incidentally my favorite among his works) was for a long time considered a quintessential period film of the director’s that for all its strengths couldn’t come close to matching the energy and vitality of his older Samurai films. Ran on the other hand was never negatively judged because as a Shakespeare adaptation it was instantly accessible. Over time though there has been a revision of these views. Kagemusha is very much a companion piece to Ran and both are autumnal works, the former even moreso than the latter in some ways. Kurosawa’s designs here are very different from what he displayed in his ‘peak period’ films. To repeat GF’s phase this film operates in a world where the gods have fallen, where things are already at a certain end. The whole film is more or less like a dirge. From the very beginning we see how the ‘double’ is being employed. So already here there is a clue that we have not really the great heroes of the past but ‘fakes’ of a fading one. and Kurosawa sets it at a seminal moment in Japanese history (battle of Nagashino) beyond which ‘modern’ Japanese history begins for many scholars. In any case it’s an extremely complex work in a variety of ways and has some of the greatest moments in all of the director’s work including that incredible slow motion sequence with the battle’s aftermath and the horses and so forth. There’s so much going on here that one wonders how it was ever missed! But it was because people compared it to the the peak films and found it wanting. I offered the Godard example the other day. Once again his 80s phase is a receiving a great deal of critical attention these days. The examples could be multiplied.

        All this does not mean of course that artists cannot be post-peak. Just that this division is employed for so many careers that one should be a little wary of it. The greater talents often start anew once they reach a certain peak which is to say they realize that they’ve exhausted their own interrogations of a discourse. Now one can debate how successful all these stages are but these must be recognized as such. So for instance very many people have problems with the Ratnam who developed in the 90s. The more abstract worlds of certain key films. Dil Se for instance cannot be adequately judged by comparing it with Nayagan. It’s a very different film altogether. Or Raavan is in one sense closely allied with Dil Se but in another has important links with Kadal. One can judge these films any which way. All I’m suggesting is that it’s not adequate to compare them to earlier phases in the director’s career and find them wanting when the filmmaking choices in each case are so drastically different. It’s one thing to do this with a director who essentially makes the same film again and again and quite another to do so with Ratnam. Not suggesting you intend any of this but I increasingly find myself not very interested in these neat peak/post-peak divisions.

  2. Nayakan>Iruvar>Dil Sey..>Yuva>Guru>Raavan
    and from what I hear about Kadal- is not so good, so the journey is downhill….LOL!!

    • The other fims besiides the above of his that I have seen are Roja and Bombay , which were pretty good too.
      Raavan mein thoda sarak gaya tha bas…….

  3. Arturo Belano Says:

    ” In an age where good Indian films is a rare occurrence, and thinking filmmakers a disappearing breed”

    This simply isn’t true: there are lots of good films being made in India but in order to find those it is important to not mistake commerical Hindi or Tamil movies for the whole of Indian cinema.

    Also, everyone thinks. Whether they think for themselves is an other thing.

    • yes but one would be hard-pressed to find overall a better commercial industry than Tamil in India presently. Whatever its inadequacies you don’t get too much more variety than in this case. I am certainly not intimately familiar with every Indian industry by any means but I do know something ‘of’ them. Once you get past the major production sites in this sense you essentially have either very small industries that are often producing good work or else those that are cruder variants of the larger models. However if you meant just individual works then it’s true that you can shop for a Marathi film here, a Bengali film there, or whatever. But this would always have been a valid exercise. In a country the scale of India you would always be able to find in any given year a number of significant films if you covered the entire gamut of film production. Speaking for myself though I remain concerned about the more institutional forces (behind the major industries) because these are for better or worse models for everyone else. Even within Bollywood for that matter there have been very hopeful signs for very long, certainly a number of interesting films. But here too there isn’t the right sort of institutional framework within which such works could truly become influential. In Tamil cinema the new wave for instance is very organically connected with audience tastes and the larger evolution of an industry. In Hindi you have the likes of Dibakar Bannerjee who more or less seem to be doing their own thing. Which is fine. But notice how the very moment at which his kind of filmmaker is greatly celebrated and finds a certain segment of the audience that lionizes him is also the very moment when the worst kind of bargain basement entertainment is also very successful. Because the institutional forces are on the side of the latter but allow the former a certain space or better still ghetto to operate. This is better than nothing. But the Tamil new wave deal for instance is often the dominant discourse in Tamil cinema today. Yes they have their own masala excesses and so forth but increasingly the A-grade bandwidth for this genre is shrinking. It’s not like Telugu cinema where the same Bollywood impulse dominates (almost all of the masala remakes are off Telugu originals anyway).

  4. Kadal, a love story set in the backdrop of the sea and lives of fisherfolk, was among the biggest flops of the director. With distributors marching to his house asking for their money, the police has now given protection to the director.

    http://www.firstpost.com/bollywood/mani-ratnams-kadal-collapses-at-box-office-director-in-trouble-620001.html

  5. Another one such director is N.Chandra, and also Raj Kumar Santoshi….

  6. Mihir Fadnavis ‏@mihirfadnavis
    Favoritism is ok but to write a book, write a defensive glowing ‘review’, then defensive piece, then a LONGER defensive piece is ridonkulous

    सर झुका, Master हूँ ‏@CilemaSnob
    +And then he wrote a book on the filmmaker. Reviews his latest film w/o disclaimer abt the book. Wrote one more post about his review post+

    सर झुका, Master हूँ ‏@CilemaSnob
    +And has now written one more post. And am sure this wont be the last. One film to test you biased meter and you fail so miserably. waah

    • my response on twitter:

      [The Raavan logic emerges here with @mihirfadnavis all over again. Everyone has disliked Kadal, the film is a flop, so why does Rangan dare to defend it?! This is the mob mentality. When a lynching is in progress don’t be the person trying to save the poor guy. Since everyone else is part of the lynching they must have the right reasons! So the ethic @mihirfadnavis and others of his ilk subscribe to is that of a lynch-mob.

      Allow me some laughter if someone who works for Midday chooses to question the ethics of Rangan or suggests that he's lost respect for the latter because of a perfectly pertinent and intelligent post. Leaving aside the fact that Fadnavis never finds it necessary to point out the corrupt practices of much of the media/trade establishment in Bombay, and just how nakedly and crudely these things happen. At Midday Fadnavis ought to have special insight in these matters! It’s a total cesspool with the Bombay film media. But the likes of Fadnavis have nothing to say about this. The problem they have is with Rangan! It is a bit like having a problem with Truffaut because he co-authored the same sort of book with Hitchcock and this because he was always a huge Hitchcock fan. His opinion then shouldn’t amount to anything. So all of Truffaut's opinions on Hitchock's failures will have only been defensive pieces!

      It is the oldest trick in the world to not argue with the substance of a piece and use abstractions like 'defensive' and what not. Once again no way of saving a guy from the lynchmob. You might have justice on your side, you might have the higher morality (or the only possible morality) on your side but the onus will still be on you to prove this before an audience of er... not exactly persuadable types!

      The list of films in every industry of the world that were once panned by both critics and audiences and were slowly recognized over time as important or great or greatest are enough to comfortably fill up an encyclopedia! Not that one necessarily expects such education from the staff at Midday! Just as we don't exactly consider all the lynchmobs of history to be as justified in their actions as they might have imagined committing those acts.

      Fadnavis is a symptom here. Of his own lack of ethics in a variety of ways but also of a much deeper malaise within the establishment he occupies and equally one within the viewers he often speaks to. Far greater directors than Ratnam have been booed by audiences and mauled by critics. The films still survive, the audiences have expired, the critics have entered the dustbins of history.

      Most people watching a film don't like it. Nor do most of the critics. In India this problem gets particularly thorny because most critics have simply no real qualification in any sense to write what they do on countless films. But even leaving this aside so what? If judgments in the present are all that count half the artworks in every art form would have vanished a long time ago! Opinion isn't valuable based on the numbers or whether the person writing such a piece is with an overwhelming majority or a minority of one. What matters is the substance of what is being said. One can engage with it, argue with it, respond to it. Admittedly all of this is a bridge too far for the likes of Fadnavis. Specially so when it's someone like Rangan on the other side. One learns (or one does not if one is Fadnavis) over time that serious opinion isn't just about mouthing the latest American colloquialisms or being part of a colonized yet chauvinistic class for which Adoor Gopalakrishnan might as well be the name of a satellite.

      One cannot do anything about those who cannot or will not read as Derrida used to say. Except engage in the kind of violent response I have here though I fully realize that Fadnavis and his class are least bothered by all of this and will go about profiting from their bankruptcy as before. Once again this isn't only about Fadnavis. It is about many many others. Too many really. The overwhelming majority in fact.

      I am all for iconoclasm. Anyone and anything can be questioned but there is an ethics of doing so. ]

      • should add here that there are plenty of Fadnavis types within the audience too. The hardest thing to argue for before an Indian audience is a film that both audiences and ‘critics’ have dismissed. And vice versa! Going by this logic one should have the greatest respect for the porn industry which in the US has revenues that outmatch those of most other entertainment streams combined!

        • @ satyam(putting my arms around a distraught satyam)–i can empathise with u and can fully appreciate the ‘frustration’ u feel @ the ‘system’
          BUt unfortunately, if one wants to play the ‘system’, one cant be ABOVE it–
          Its like Naseer pouring acid on anything and everything on the ‘system’ and considering himself above the ‘system’ while still lamenting & expecting the ‘system’ to deliver!
          One has to strut his/her stuff WITHIN the parameters of the game
          COMMERCE IS a big part of the game nowadays
          U cant buck it just by taking two newbies from film families who act for free (@ so late in the ‘flop curve’)
          These ‘changes’ were needed earlier….
          Sometimes its an easier /better option to admit–
          mistakes have been made & lessons have been learnt!
          cheer up now mate …

        • rangan of course has a right to like it, i don’t even question his integrity. and he has defended many a lesser films (jthj anyone?).
          but i do believe he should have refrained from reviewing this considering the book just came out, or at least put a disclaimer on his initial review and moved on. mani hardly needs defending, and doing so only makes things worse.

          • “i do believe he should have refrained from reviewing this considering the book just came out, or at least put a disclaimer on his initial review and moved on. mani hardly needs defending, and doing so only makes things worse.”
            Egg-jacktly–nice point anya
            Now when even rangan die-hards like anya admit this, there HAS to be some truth to this
            cmon satyam–chillax –dont be depressed–smile ;-)

          • This is absurd: why should writing a book on someone require a disclaimer?! That bolsters his credentials as a Ratnam expert, if anything!

          • disclaimer etc is just a technical issue–doesnt change the real picture
            as anya said–”mani hardly needs defending, and doing so only makes things worse.”
            the bigger picture is that one hope mani survives this big debacle…which doesnt seem certain at the mo

      • Well said Satyam. Also remember that Fadnavis is the same guy who said that he wanted to have sex with GoW

      • Satyam, just wondering if you have found absolutely nothing ‘gratuitous’ or ‘implausible’ about some of the most insanely stupid ‘anti-Rathnam’ comments present on this thread (Atleast GF dared to point this out)

        • Satyam still has his sanity, Saurabh, I’m not so fortunate. No reason one should be otherwise compelled to respond to frankly absurd commentary…

        • Bachchan1 to 10 Says:

          I believe Satyam Sir has given an apt reply to Mihir Phadnis (who is this guy btw?) on twitter over the weekend. Phadnis had quite a few negative things to say about Rangan’s piece defending Ratnam on various occassions after the release of Kadal. Not sure if Satyam sir has produced that essay here, I shoudn’t do it with out his consent. If you like you can look up Satyam Sir’s response on twitter. Here he does not defent Rangan or Ratnam, Sir has just posted his views on how the negativity comes about just like the case was with Raavan. It’s interesting read Saurabh, Do check it out.

          • Bachchan1 to 10 Says:

            Haha, I should have read above. You may delete this Sir. My apologies.

          • http://satyamshot.wordpress.com/2013/02/06/sandys-take-on-conversations-with-mani-ratnam-by-baradwaj-rangan/#comment-209610

            there is an ongoing discussion on this in the relevant thread on Rangan’s blog. I referenced my comment there as well. At some point Fadnavis showed up and said he had only said something mild and produced the least objectionable of his three tweets, conveniently ignoring the other two. I then pointed this out. However Rangan, who saw everything, quite understandably didn’t want it degenerating into a set of twitter quotations and urged me not to put up more. But he has otherwise responded to this issue a couple of times. My most recent comment there is in moderation.

            http://baradwajrangan.wordpress.com/2013/02/08/lights-camera-conversation-hardboiled-tweets/#comments

            Fadnavis of course had no response even on twitter.

          • my most recent comment is also now visible on that Rangan thread…

          • Bachchan1 to 10 Says:

            Thanks Sir, Will read up those comments, On Fadnavis who is this guy really? Apart from working with Mid-day, What importance does he really have? Does his one line on twitter or statements carry and weightage with the respected critics or cinema lovers? On many occassions when I wanted to check out the early reviews on Abhishek’s films (early on friday here), Fadnavis had some really nasty things to say about Jr. That makes me think if he is Kashyap’s disciple? And not only Jr. he had some absurd things to say about other actors and filmmakers. Is he just one of those sour grapes kind of a person? Ha.

          • He’s no one special, one of a number of ‘critical’ brat-pack voices that have emerged in recent years. Not sure about his history with Abhishek, don’t know anything about it.

          • Bachchan1 to 10 Says:

            Thanks, yeah I guess we can find dime a dozen of these type of critics. Oh yeah, I have tried to see public views on twitter every friday when Jr’s film releases and this guy goes bashing on Jr’s films and his performances, I dont think he even spared DMD. Though some films may invite criticsm but felt he was just taking out some personal vendetta against jr. There were some horrid statements. (seemed like he was a Salman fan who wasn’t too happy with Aish being married to Jr)

          • Bachchan1 to 10 Says:

            Read your comments on Rangan’s blog, they are all logical arguments supported by some good examples and facts, really good read. Fadnavis is at it again, Just saw his last comment taking a dig. Don’t waste your breath over such people sir. Like I said yesterday, They are dime a dozen. Who doesn’t know the difference between Ojective Journalism and Subjective Film reviews.

        • I’ve said so much in the past Saurabh, I even said a number of things over the past week, not sure if it was this thread or one of the Kadal ones.. one gets tired eventually! Plus even as I argue a lot with people I am often reminded of what the Mad Hatter said to Alice about how “you must be mad” or “you wouldn’t be here”! If one has to establish how important Ratnam or if one has to argue for his cinema at that very basic level perhaps it’s one’s own mistake for even pursuing this absurd exercise. GF mentioned this the other day but if you break into a Sajid Khan party (which is more or less what Bollywood is on most days) and start talking about Ratnam the fault lies not with those already at the party but with you!

          • I have read all your responses but what surprised me was the fact that you decided to rebuke me for a rather harmless comment on Abhishek (which might have been a little but was factually correct) but did not even care to point out some extremely senseless comment here. I don’t mean to say that you are unfair but frankly speaking this did irk me

          • Saurabh, first off I did not ‘rebuke’ you. That’s too strong a word. I just felt that a number of your remarks were gratuitous in this context and pointed this out. It wasn’t meant any more seriously than this.

            Secondly I have argued tons of times on Ratnam with a number of people here. Just with Alex I’ve had very many sharp exchanges on this. The problem though is that ultimately either the other person is ‘listening’ or he or she isn’t. So despite pointing out the obvious if people insist on saying the very same things again and again it’s hard for me to launch into the same ‘essay’ every single time.

            Now with you I made that remark. Perhaps you don’t agree. That’s fine. But if you want to keep making what I consider gratuitous remarks that’s upto you but I wouldn’t keep mentioning it every single time.

            Notice how Bored shows up every few days only to say something ridiculous about Abhishek and then leaves. I don’t take him seriously so I don’t respond to this 99% of the time. However I don’t wish to encourage trolling either so one of these days he might find himself barred if he continues this. But as things stand I ignore him.

            On Ratnam the fact is, and I hate to put it as bluntly as this, but it’s very hard to make a Bollywood-drowned audience see some sense in the matter. I nonetheless argue a lot of times but some of the comments are so idiotic it’s hard to say much beyond a point.

          • “But if you want to keep making what I consider gratuitous remarks that’s upto you but I wouldn’t keep mentioning it every single time. ”

            But I don’t think I was continuosly making gratuitous remarks remarks regarding. And I was not talking about Alex here (GF has replied to the said person). Anyway since I do not see you agreeing to anything here there is no point in carrying on with this conversation.

          • Not sure why you think this is such a big deal. as I said I wasn’t rebuking you or anything.

          • omrocky786 Says:

            Re.-And I was not talking about Alex here (GF has replied to the said person). Anyway since I do not see you agreeing to anything here there is no point in carrying on with this conversation.
            Arrey mere jumma jumma chaar din key Chamchey..seedha seedha bol no, yey isharey kyon kar raha hai….. 24 hours SS par baitha rehta hai aur chugalkoree karta hai…chal bhaag !!!

          • omrocky786 Says:

            hate when 30-35 year olds complain like 10 year olds- aapney ussko kuch nahee kaha lekin mujhko itnee jor sey daanta !!

          • Rocky – aapko Shobha nahi deta.

          • omrocky786 Says:

            sorry Munna…if you think appropriate – you can delete my comments..
            P.S. aaj bade dino baad Neelu jee kee yaad aa gayee…LOL

          • Rocky – aapko Shobha nahi deta.
            Munnabhaiyya..yeh doon-vs-doon kaa mamla hai…purana badla hai…aap dur hi rahiyay.
            Aside: rockyji ki lakhnavi andaz ki gaaliya kafi entertaining hai.

          • omrocky786 Says:

            Di ..aap aaj full on Narad Muni ka role play kare rahe ho…..sahee hai !
            NaRathnam NaRathnam…………

        • No need to delete that comment Munna Sir. Did not get offended or anything. But hey I am not 30-35.

          • omrocky786 Says:

            for some reason I think you are atleast that old ..but don’t care or don’t want to know…..
            NaRathnam -NaRathnam !!

    • Perhaps Mihir Fadnavis needs a disclaimer? i.e. that ever since Rangan won the National Award, the knives are out?

      I have never come across such bankruptcy, namely that a chap has to be apologetic or defensive about writing a book — that writing a book on someone, far from showing the depth of the author’s engagement with the material, “actually” is evidence of bias. It’s almost comical — or would be, if it weren’t incoherent and frankly, un-educated.

      By the way, the concept of “bias” and “favoritism” doesn’t make sense where critics are concerned: because CRITICS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE “BIASED” IN THIS WAY! The very essence of criticism is making and drawing distinctions, and talking about preferences. i.e. taken to their logical end, statements like Fadnavis’ would suggest that a critic who says “X is the best film of the year” is biased against all films that aren’t X; or that someone who writes a book on a subject is actually disqualified by virtue of his expertise (“hey, let’s not call the biographer of Gandhi for his opinion on Gandhi on a news show, he’s already shown what he’s about! Let’s get guys who know nothing about Gandhi!”). [Aside: I might add that no-one has suggested that Anupama Chopra, a self-confessed SRK fan and author of a book on him, should be disqualified from anything, or that she should set out a disclaimer.]

      • “The very essence of criticism is making and drawing distinctions, and talking about preferences.”

        You’ve hit the nail on the head. The problem is never about the preferences one has but how one talks about them or defends them as the case might be. Of course one doesn’t need to defend a preference but then one cannot call out others for bothering to defend their choices. And yes using that logic a scholar on any subject should be ashamed of his ‘bias’!

      • because chopra doesn’t have the standing of a rangan (she doesn’t review vvc productions films, so even she follows some kind of rule here, though not the same thing)
        and no, writing a book on ratnam doesn’t make him a ratnam expert. although i agree he knows more about films (and probably ratnam) than most of these ‘critics’.
        i think nobody would have raised an eyebrow if he had just written the review and moved on. for some reason, he decided to follow-up with other pieces. he has a right to do it, others have a right to question it.
        and i found the post itself pretty unnecessary. people on social media trash films! people sometimes say bad things about you on your blog! did he just realize this? he sounds more naive than anything else. may be he was just upset. why not just ignore such people?

      • This is an excellent comment and I’m in complete agreement.

  7. well said rocky–have to agree with u here
    thanks for bringing out this perspective on this blog –cheers

    • you bet….

    • Mani-The TWEAK-too little, too late….

      “With distributors marching to his house asking for their money, the police has now given protection to the director”
      NOow i dont want to sound as if im happy or enjoying manis current plight! I am honestly not!
      I am infact disappointed since i respect mani as a person and moreover as a premier indian filmmaker–it pains to see him in the dumps like this!
      Poor Ann jo also commented how shocked he was to see kadal bombining crtiically and commercially even on home turf!
      I was NOT surprised and with due respect–coudl see it coming–one can refer to the archives and some of my ‘deabtes’ with mani sympathisers (well im one as well) but also with some who insist on defending everything attached to their icon sometimes to the detrmient of the poor ‘icon’.
      I cant pull out the link but i did mention the need for certain TWEAKS to survive and flourish in an increasibnly commercialised and competitive environment.
      I INSISTED that this TWEAK has to be SPONTANEOUS, NOT FORCED and imprtiantly much ealrier in the SEQUENCE OF FLOPS.
      Slowly ones cycle of flops catch up and tweaks get immaterial since people move on

      I have NOT seen KADAL but can VOUCH it will be better quality wise than 99% of current indian flicks—but whats the RESULT?
      DISASTER-critical and commercial

      When a ‘detachment from reality’ is coupled with ARROGANCE and pseudo INTELLECTUALISATION and RESISTANCE ot change whilst being REASSURED wrongly by an army of APOLOGISTS–this is what happens

      Sane Impartial voices like Utkal uncle and even Anya were Muffled or ganged up against!!
      IMPARTIAL (though not sure baout ‘sane’) voices like mine were also ignored (since I cant be muffled Lol)

      Now this is the NOT the ONLY film thats BOMBED
      MULTIPLE films bomb every month
      but this one PAINS me more than them
      since this has probably taken in its wake probably the career of the BEST living indian directors currently

      BUT will LESSONS be learnt –lets hope for the best….

      • AA ..IMO this is Mani’s Mera Naam Joker…..he will now make a Bobby kind of Bourgeois friendly movie and then all will be welll…
        the Raavan IMO was a bigger mistake……it was too commie leaning !!

  8. agree that his movies are much better most of the times to other movies ..except for Raavan I have liked all his movies that I have sees, but GOD he ain’t !!

  9. hahah rocky–lol @manis mera naam joker
    Agree that he will make a ‘burgeoise friendly movie”but not sure of the “all will be well”
    Audiences and most importanlty the poor souls who lose money dont forget easily and why should they?
    Mani isnt getting younger anyways..
    I hope he bounces back though
    But more importantly hope
    LESSONS are learnt ;-)

  10. “I have liked all his movies that I have sees, but GOD he ain’t !!”
    totally agree rocky
    finally some sane voices (other than mine lol)

    “but GOD he ain’t ”
    haha –the fact that this simple FACT about a human not being GOD needs to be emphasised repeatedly here–highlights certain key findings on fan hysteria and default positioning here
    high 5–rocky, anya and other ‘sane’ voices here

    ps–somewhere utkal uncles soul may be chuckling
    but hey–lets not chuckle at manis debalce

    im genuinely concerned about manis plight and ‘security being called’ to protect him from angry distributors
    Hope mani survives and strikes back…

  11. Lol, the comments here really attest to the fact that audiences deserve the movies they get. It’s no wonder guys like Sajid Khan rub your noses in his periodic excretions and laugh all the way to the bank afterwards.

  12. ha its THIS default defense that needs to be curbed
    How/where did sajid khan come in
    Obviously theres a LONG WIDE space between manis current slot and sajid khan–THAT needs to be explored…& without being defensive/biased

    • AA borrowing your phrase- ARROGANCE and pseudo INTELLECTUALISATION .
      Gorrila’s comment and Gorrila’s Friend’s comment- two sides of the same coin !! LOL!!!

      • “Gorrila’s comment and Gorrila’s Friend’s comment- two sides of the same coin !! LOL!!!”
        hahaha ROFL rocky–thats the comment of the day! ;-)
        Gorillas friend= GF?
        PS–hope gf doesnt mind–hes already quite angry @ manis plight–cant blame him though–like i told satyam, i will advise him to just chill & not be depressed..

        ps2–lol @ arrogance and pseudointellectualisation–yeah i sometimes use these terms when the setting is apt–this one was..

      • Agar yeh comment humney mara hota toh hamey “snarky” kaha jata. Aur rahi baat kadal (tamil) movie ki. Kyun bhai…aab flop movie bananey kay liyay hum director ko crucify kartey hai?! Kab say? RGV nay kahi kaha tha…ki once you have a hit…you then have the creative license to do whatever (basically your belly is full so you can do what you want not what you have to)…well that is true in almost all professions…right?
        P.S: Rockysaab aapney special chabbis dekhey? Chakas movie hai…jarror dekhna.

        • Di- ya I am waiting for the DVD to come out…..

          • theek hai…par big screen mai dekko…paisa wasul hai. ;-)
            On sajjid khan analogy that ‘intellectuals’ are pointing to: why not praise Pandey, Kashyap..many others who are fine movie makers, risk taking movie makers? The holy trinity only praise Mani and few others (who cast junior issliyay shayad?). Bas dhal mai kuch kala hi kala hai. Anyhow I feel sorry of the ‘intellectuals’ who cannot enjoy a good movie and have to go into ‘deep’ analysis…counting how many times there was long shot of people walking towards camera. Arrey enjoy the movie. I was in middle school in Mumbai when actually these fake cbi did their “training” session at TribhuvanDas Bhimji Jewellers. Now if someone makes ‘rooted’ movie like this…you still have to criticize it somehow…shayad junior ko nahi liya issliyay..kattey angoor types. LOLZ

          • because I don’t consider them the equals of Ratnam! It’s not as if everyone who does something meaningful is somehow in the same league. On the Abhishek think I have great regard for Rohit Shetty and Mehra but I hardly place them with Ratnam either. If it were just about Abhishek I’d be praising Gowariker and now Umesh Shukla in the same way! Meanwhile if it were just about Abhishek with Ratnam I wouldn’t be fighting so much over Kadal!

            As for the rest I’m rather sorry for you that you think the only choice is between Sajid Khan and Kashyap! First off I can assure you that I don’t watch Ratnam movies simply as a philosophical exercise. I do happen to enjoy them a lot. But secondly I am a huge fan of very commercial cinema (not just in India). But I must confess my standards are a bit higher here than the stuff Sajid Khan dishes out! In other words I cannot enjoy just anything!

            As for the ‘intellectual’ bit this is another boring dig. It reveals a particularly ‘desi’ mindset in these matters where there are only two kinds of people in the world when it comes to watching movies. On the one side the type who enjoys movies purely instinctively and presumably keeps his or her mind in a cryogenic state for the duration. Then in the other corner you have the dreaded ‘intellectual’ for whom watching the movie is akin to a waterboarding exercise that he or she nonetheless submits to to be able to jot down notes later. For the former watching a film seems to have all the naturalness and unthinkingness of defecation, for the latter all the enjoyment is kept constipated while those bezels of wisdom are extracted from the work. I suppose someone like Fadnavis bridges the gap when he says that the experience of watching GoW was like “having sex”! Since then I’ve started pitying his sex life but that’s another matter.

          • omrocky786 Says:

            Di -I think Satyam and Q have enjoyed Masala Hindi cinema and actually are well versed with it …..so no problem there…but overall you are right.

          • Special 26 is an entertaining movie but made in “Race” mode. Instead of Turkey you have rooted places like Jaipur, Kolkotta..But There are just too many holes. It seriously needed a good editor and movie would have been far better.

          • lol SatyamDada at “keeps his or her mind in a cryogenic state for the duration.” and sex life of Phadnavis (or whatever)…chalo he has it atleast ;-)
            @rocky: I know. my peeve is that “they” already make their minds BEFORE going to movie. e.g. it is already decided that Talaash is good movie (inspite of no gaalis–now how many of you have actually gone to kamaatipura and heard the language there? It is ‘worst’ then GoW) inspite of it being THE most dishonest movie!! And then the worst icing on the cake is reviewing (e.g. gow) WITHOUT even seeing it!!!! Waah. Talaash didn’t have even the basic things like the dress code correct and “they” went on and on abt what a gr8 “noir” movie tha…blah..blah. Bus “noir” hai issliyay accha hai!!!
            Then Special chabbis, which is really a good movie on every level (except maybe editing and romance angle) they will go on and on about how bekar it is (because it is already decided based on maybe that we have policy to criticize someone called Pandey/kashyap no matter what). Critical appraisal jaisa bhi toh kuch hota hai ya nahi? My peeve then is with how black and white the reviews (indeed) are!!! Kadal=all good. Special 26=all bad!

          • Who on earth are you referring to? Satyam hasn’t even seen Special 26 so where is the question of him offering an opinion on it? As for Talaash not everyone here was singing its praises. I for one thought it was a pretty bland affair.

          • Di, the problem here is that you take your own likes and dislikes as somehow factually valid and the opinion of others as dishonest and evidence of a vast conspiracy even when there are long pieces arguing one way or the other. So I loved Talaash, I wrote a piece on why I liked it so much, I even called it possibly my favorite Aamir film even at that early stage among all his works over the past decade or so. This without suggesting that it was necessarily the best film he’d one from a critical perspective. So I wasn’t arguing it was ‘better’ than Lagaan or DCH or MP, just that I liked it more. And again I proceeded to explain why. You are certainly free to disagree but not about things I am not saying. So my problem isn’t the language one way or the other (not was this my point with respect to GoW). Nor have I ‘reviewed’ GoW. I am referring to a larger set of issues to which Kashyap too has been susceptible (from my perspective) and the previews of GoW suggested this was the case here too. This is not reviewing a film! Similarly how people live and talk in Kamathipura is wholly irrelevant to the success or failure of Talaash as I see it. It is not meant to be that kind of docu-drama. Talking about dress codes is frankly ridiculous. Once again you assert that Special Chabbis is a good film. As if your opinions on this or Talaash or GoW were straightforward facts! By the way most reviewers loved GoW, most of them liked Talaash too. So you’re certainly in a minority on those, specially GoW.

            I’d say this yet again. Your problem is with some of the views expressed here, you do not engage with the substance of the debate, and you keep asserting this kind of bad faith on everyone’s part. So take Abhishek. You dislike him, I am in the opposite corner on him. That’s fine. However the moment I write notes on why I like his work you make statements like ‘see the fact that you praised Abhishek in ‘x’ film and not Saif (or whoever) in ‘y’ film’ shows how biased you are’ or ‘that fact that you didn’t go gaga over Vidya Balan in one film and then loved Rani in another once again shows you’re biased’. In all of these statements your own opinion acts as a standard. But beyond this rather than engage with what I’m saying your claim is that I am somehow inventing an argument to get to a result! With respect no one who seriously reads those opinions could ever think this.

            Similarly there are others like yourself who think I like many Abhishek films or almost all of Aamir’s films but don’t have the same reaction to other actors. Well it’s because I like these actors at least partly based on their choices. I am hardly celebrating BB and D3 or even necessarily Umesh Shukla’s film! While I do like watching Abhishek and therefore might be willing to watch a number of otherwise mediocre films for him where I would not do the same for many other stars (this is hardly a great mystery! this is true for everyone with respect to their favorite stars or actors) this doesn’t mean that I start admiring those films all of a sudden. Just because Aamir’s in D3 or Abhishek’s in it doesn’t mean it’s fine cinema but if this film has a better script than the last one and/or if it allows the two male stars to have an interesting face-off I might enjoy it a lot, for that terrain. I still wouldn’t call it great cinema!

            So there is no conspiracy here. Your problem is essentially with the views expressed here by myself and some others. If you absolutely cannot imagine a world in which people think Abhishek is a good actor while not thinking as highly of some other also good actors, if you find it impossible to believe that even appreciating Vidya Balan one could not be her greatest fan, in other words if you cannot imagine opinions that differ radically from yours and are still valid then the problem lies with you and not with those who are at the very least willing to explain their views.

          • Speaking for myself, I liked Talaash quite a lot. It’s in fact one of my favorite films from last year. The most interesting aspect of Talaash was the relationship between Aamir and Rani.

            I didn’t really care about the Kareena angle and even figured out the twist before the interval.

            I thought the film’s music was fabulous and it was very well integrated into the film.

            It’s the third film from Aamir (after Ghajini & Dhobi Ghaat) which explores the central theme of “loss” involving him…perhaps it’s deliberate, I don’t know, but he’s been successful in creating three different worlds, which I had no trouble identifying with.

          • I liked Talaash more than any other film last year though again haven’t seen GoW yet. Will concede it had some problems but these weren’t major ones for me.

          • @satyam: why are you dragging poor Abhishek into the discussion?! I don’t think I (ever) hate(d) him…at least not anymore. Somewhere…I am in fact always rooting for him and I think he will make it big in his 40s!! Anyhow I don’t equal success in career as just fame and 100 crore…one can be a flop actor and still be most happiest in life..which is ultimately more important in life. If one thing doesn’t work out (acting) one should be willing and open to change (e.g. Matt Damon’s friend did it recently)
            On Talaash: I had written all my ‘objections’..so wont’ repeat it here. I just don’t think there is intellectual honesty (or any sort of honesty) but lets just agree to disagree here.

          • Yes but I’m not debating your Talaash views nor am I suggesting that you’re dishonest because you didn’t like this but liked Kahaani! Which is your position where my views are concerned. So I’m afraid I can’t quite agree to disagree when the debate is about whether I’m being dishonest or not! It’s like I call you a liar and you object and I then say ‘let’s agree to disagree’! LOL!

            I only brought in Abhishek because most often you question my honesty when it’s about him. Just today and yesterday you’ve said a number of times that I am against directors who don’t sign Abhishek and for those who do!

      • Since you’ve directed this comment at me I’ll say this. You’re enjoying this Ratnam stumble without any sense of the film in question. You’re basically unhappy with him because he made a “commie film” and I’m guessing that pitiful rationale makes it open season on his future low points. Which is fine. Just so that we’re clear on where some of these unfortunate perspectives are coming from.

        • LOL GF, will not deny that I am kind of Unhappy with Mani for Raavan……
          However I really do enjoy his movies and songs and would never wish anything bad for him. IMO he is like Hrishikesh Mukharjee. combining art and commerce beautifully.
          Aside- last time I checked Sajid Khan’s movies have never done well in TN, also Kadal bombed in TN, so clearly EVEN the so called Class audience ( ie TN) did not understand his genius.

      • And as always I love seeing those who otherwise see Tamil movies as frequently as a Halley Comet’s sighting suddenly taking an interest in things when it serves some random agenda.

  13. I don’t mind defending Ratnam, it’s actually fairly easy given the quality of his filmmaking, and what the audience goes in for on the other side. And especially against people who don’t have a clue and who on the one side rail against “bias” while happily joining the bandwagon of the vacuous tweeters.

  14. agree about the vacuous tweeters
    Just read certain tweets, rangans post
    but numbers dont lie beyond point–its a reality that kadal has failed critically & commercially
    needs 2 b acknowedged..

  15. It’s very easy to acknowledge these things and pat yourself on the back without interrogating the types of films that actually are successes critically (though, really, who on earth cares given the types of critics out there) and commercially. But as I said, audiences deserve the films they get.

  16. Leave Mani alone and let him deal with the situation. Every third producer director faces this kind of situation which includes names like Raj Kapoor and Guru dutt. Comparatively actors are safe as they dont lose much. Financial discipline is a must for anyone in risky business. I am surprised to see KH and Mani Ratnam to be in such financial problems. They need sound secretaries and chartered accountants. even Bachchan faced many problems like his ABCL becoming unviable. Yet he bounced back and see where he is today.

    • a lot of this is exaggeration. The film has not worked but the budget figures being quoted in some of the articles (50 crores) are simply ridiculous. But again they do this every time with his films. Ratnam is actually a very good manager in these matters. On Raavan Nahta himself months later said it hadn’t worked but hadn’t lost much. Now I’m not saying Kadal isn’t a serious failure but I don’t believe all the figures that are being thrown out.

  17. sanju–forget bout mani–
    im worried bout satyam–hes gone all quiet..
    can someone take away all knives, razors, ropes etc away from him plz–and yeah also the bottle!

    ps–dont worry satyam–Will start another of my proftable spoofs soon–u will more than break even from that!
    remember my spoofs have yet to flop–they are flop proof lol

    ps2-latest news flash–race2 becomes the FIRST 100 crore + hit for everyone involved—saif, john, deepika, jacky, Ann jo kapoor, ample amisha–will be throwing a party soon–
    doesnt look nice with mani gloom around…

  18. This SHOULD be made a policy in ALL theaters..in the USA in general and in INDIA in particular..the nuisance of texting or twit-vomitting DURING a movie show is disgusting, crude, cheap, and mannerless with a capital M..

    http://cf.drafthouse.com/she_texted_we_kicked_her_out2.html

    I think that video also should be played in ALL theaters…

    • Gosh..you touch a pet peeve of mine! The theater I went to, desis brought their young children, grown ups talked incessantly, texting or turning the phone on during movie screening, checking messages, chomping food loudly, making loud comments on the movie….one couple was even fighting…somehow desi junta feels it is “ok” because rest of the people are desis. To top it off, during the climax scene the video went off! So we had audio and no video. This is after charging good $12 tickets! …this is major reason for not checking out hindi movies in theater. I wait for good copy dvd and watch in my home theater! I have never had texting junta in AMC/Regal during English movies so far. Inspite of all this..I felt special chabbis was worth the trouble ;-) :-)

  19. counterpoint- see I am fair , LOL!!!
    A colleague was recently attacked for his positive review of a film simply because he had authored a book on the filmmaker. This, despite the fact, that he had mentioned that in the review itself (This amounts to full disclosure).

    Additionally, my colleague had expressly put it on record in the book that he’s a fan of the man. You cannot be more honest than this.

    So maybe I should start with this piece with a disclaimer too.
    I am a huge Kamal Haasan fan – to an extent that I believe that the difference between Kamal fans and others is that true Kamal Haasan fans are also smart enough to criticise his films. They are quick to see how The Scientist became Neela Vaanam.

    I also know Mr. Haasan personally because I was once involved behind the scenes in organising the Chennai International Screenwriting Workshop. He’s always been an inspiration to me as a filmmaker and my film begins with thanks to him.

    So, when his partner Gautami was telling me about their new portal Maiam, I had in fact suggested, that I would like to review ‘Vishwaroopam’. I told her that maybe I could write a very critical piece on the film once I had watched it and that they should carry it to establish the credibility of the website.

    She was game. I was excited because I really wanted to find out if they would carry a bad review. Too bad we can’t find out now.

    Because the day the film released, I messaged her back saying I cannot do it. I loved the film. It didn’t make any sense for Haasan’s own portal to carry a positive review.

    Coming back to my colleague and the controversy of social networks attacking critics, I must admit that it’s quite a difficult task to resist from replying to people. Because the idea of a social network is to socialise with people. And when you are a film critic, everyone has a counter opinion.
    http://ibnlive.in.com/news/critical-analysis-of-vishwaroopam-polarisation-and-duality-from-a-fans-point-of-view/372122-8-68.html

  20. For the fans of GOOD cinema…………
    Sudhish Kamath brings five game changing directors – Thiagarajan Kumararaja (Aaranya Kaandam), Bejoy Nambiar (Shaitaan), Balaji Tharaneetharan (Naduvula Konjam Pakkatha Kaanom), Karthik Subbaraj (Pizza) and Balaji Mohan (Kaadhalil Sothappuvathu Yeppadi) in a single frame for a feast of a conversation.

  21. Thanx folks for this lively and interactive followup discussion –in the ‘pseudo intellectual’ debate from above…

    Don’t wanna take sides (yet) –all that matters is that all reasonable points of view are expressed
    And common sense is also represented by some –bcos it’s not that ‘common’ after all ;-)
    May join when free–carry on folks..
    Ps: sme good points from all parties here …

  22. Will just add — just read bits– Di & rocky in top form — carry on ;-)

  23. Kya Di -no pat on my back for the brilliant word I coined for Narad Muni- NaRatnam- NaRatnam ?????

    • Jaisey America mai Jewish logo ko kuch kaha toh nazi yaa anti-semite kaa label de detey hai…wasey SS par Ratnam/Abhishek kay barey mai kuch kaho ya na kaha, toh underground jana padega…. Aside: aapkey creativity kaa kapil dev ki dadhi ki tarah koi jawab nahi.
      Aside 1: Ratnam kay Kadal mai low tide hai…par swimmers phir bhi diving karna chahtey hai. :-)

  24. omrocky786 Says:

    Re.-Aside 1: Ratnam kay Kadal mai low tide hai…par swimmers phir bhi diving karna chahtey hai.
    ha ha, Line of the day !!!
    aside- lekin underground kyon jaana hai, apne baat kaho aur aagey badho. Satyam has never hidden his love for Amitabh, Abhishek and Ratnam, and he is within his rights to be biased regarding their work….the imp thing is that he tries not to be insulting or condescending ( unlike some other people)…..
    Aside 2- I was one of the few who thought that Abhishek was NOT overshadowed by Hritik in D-2 !!! ab kya karen, Bachchan parivar ka Prem hee itne hai !!!
    Aside-3- IMO you crave a bit too much acceptance from Satyam…Satyam ek Mithya hai , woh ho kar bhee nahee hai, wof sarvvyaapi hai, sargyaani hai , aur kahin bhee nahee hai , bilkul Nasamajh bhee hai !! LOL!!!!!

  25. omrocky786 Says:

    Munna bhai aap toh part of management ( CTO) ho yaar !!
    Aside- having the same problem, where I can not reply to a comment but can post as a new comment.

    • It is not management but rather whom you know more closely. So even if you say something disagreeable, I won’t bother me much because I know where you stand.
      I see you spar with your friends at this blog with left leaning views, but there is no ill feeling.

      I think problem occurs when you don’t know the other person and comment on someone without substance. I don’t think it is wrong to comment without substance. But If I have to criticize, say my criticism of Sajid Khan and Mani Ratnam would be very different. I may not like D6 completely, but the movie requires better criticism than what I reserve for Om Shanti Om.

      • “It is not management but rather whom you know more closely.”
        Thats what I am saying all along. If you are on “friend list” then you can say whatever and it would be “agree on all counts”…if you are not..then bhagwan bachao apko…din kaa raat…raat kaa din!

        • I will have to disagree. I’d like to consider myself to be on the “friends” list here, but I have wildly divergent views on Abhishek or Raavan, Dum Maaro Dum etc. Don’t think I’ve ever been hounded because of that.

          • You are absolutely a friend Saket..

            Of course the more important point Di fails to understand is that it’s ultimately about the substance of the discussion and not about who’s a friend or not. The only place where this is relevant is that one might know the friend enough to be able to better contextualize the responses or (as Munna has suggested) one might be able to joke more with such a person. But the idea (that Di regularly advances) that there’s some sort of double standard that’s operative is completely ridiculous.

            Of course the amusing thing is that Di regularly says this stuff and no one stops her. Not sure what more she needs to be convinced about the ‘fairness’ here!

          • You are absolutely right Saket. I have had many debates (some heated ones as well) with Satyam but I do not think he (or GF and Q for that matter) has ever been unfair or rude with me. And unlike you I have not even known these guys long enough to be called a ‘friend’

            Do think though that Satyam can sometimes be slightly less harsh on Di.

          • I’ve never been harsh on Di.. but sometimes I just have to respond in the language that the question is addressed (to paraphrase something from Trishul). It’s perfectly fine to disagree on everything but if one constantly suggests there are ulterior motives or that ‘anything goes’ because of ‘friends’ this is quite unfair. I have nothing against Di though. She’s always welcome here. LOL, now I sound like the Biden impersonation on SNL on the subject of McCain (‘he’s a friend but he’s crazy’!).

  26. omrocky786 Says:

    Here is my fav. Kadal( Sea) song …….

  27. looks good

  28. Where is the author of this post on the Blog’s burrrday , she always brought the news on the ground for us.
    Aside- MNJ is my all time fav movie and have seen it so many times…..so how was comparing Kadal ( which I have not seen) to MNJ insulting to Mani Saar is beyond me….
    Munna- agreee with rapport that you develop overtime with fellow bloggers does help….

    • ThAnx for that update-forget about profit /loss-seems manis personal security is at threat…
      Also –”But the plot strays from what it had initially set out to tell – about good and evil, retribution and forgiving – to accommodate a romance between Thomas (Gautham Karthik) and Beatrice (Nair). A trifle forced, even silly it appears. We are foxed when we find that Beatrice despite having the IQ of a two-year old (or something to that effect) is adept as a midwife, handling complicated cases.
      She also falls in love with Thomas and sings a couple of songs (one in an exotic costume), that is when she is not playing hop-scotch. There are other holes in the script, like, for instance, why does Berchmans wait for years to take his revenge against Samuel – and that too after an accidental meeting.”
      Hmmm

  29. omrocky786 Says:

    What Hmmmmm?
    do you want to be in the list of “request to be yelled at by the owner “???

  30. omrocky786 Says:

    abey o’ -100 mein 5 kam double a ,aisa hole karenge key pata nahee chalega kee Money kahan sey bole , aur Raat mein Nam kya karen..
    Abhi ko shrek kyon bola bey ?????

    • Abhi- shrek … Take it ha

    • “abey o’ -100 mein 5 kam double a ,aisa hole karenge key pata nahee chalega kee Money kahan sey bole , aur Raat mein Nam kya karen..
      Abhi ko shrek kyon bola bey ?????”
      Mere khyal sey aap Anurag kashyapji kay main dialogue writer hai! Why didn’t I have such ‘colorful’ friends when I was growing up!! I didn’t even hear one single gaali, even :-(
      I had to ask everyone why the innocent bangali name was a gaali in that song…roflol..

  31. omrocky786 Says:

    Lekin Big B ko kuch mat kehna……..LOL!!

    • Big b is immune from crass criticism …
      Even abhishrek–well is satyams fetish-so will do…
      Ps–as for ass-.ole, reminds me of a joke –but will leave it as of now-on ss bday :-)

  32. omrocky786 Says:

    NaRatnam NaRatnam………..

  33. omrocky786 Says:

    LOL di, just wordplay,
    Alex please don’t mess with 786. varna Vijay, Coolie and Khiladi teeno mil kar marenge…

  34. Ha that’s y i stopped … Also not good on Ss bday…
    Also let’s spare 786–apparently an Islamic number besides bachchan connexion..
    Ps: rocky seems to have got some student extra testosterone (perhaps with Di around ) :-)
    Carry on folks…

  35. omrocky786 Says:

    Here is my fav Saagar ( Kadal) song from my fav. Hrishikesh Mukharjee movie …and Yes I will take a Hrishikesh movie over mani’s movie any day !!! Saagar sey Gehra Jaam !!!!

    • Yeah –thats a good song (for di!)
      Btw u both know that it will be valentines day in a few hours –enjoy di & omrocky :-)

  36. omrocky786 Says:

    I would pefer the AuDi over the KuDi………..

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s