Ever since it was announced the film has been attracting all kinds of negative publicity . There have been reports about distorting history, taking artistic freedom too far and so.. The sets were damaged and so on. Now that it is ready for release ( the official date is December 1) there are more controversies and threats by all political parties . What are your views on this issue ?
usha manohar wrote:After watching the film I am confused as to why the karnik Sena protested at all because frankly there is nothing that is objectionable , unless they have been cut by the censor board . And the violence and the ban is unnecessary ..
I have always wondered as to why all films by so-called big makers become controversial a few months before their release and give us the feeling that these films would never see the theaters. But they always release on due date and do bumper business. Are these sponsored programs at the cost of public property and innocent lives?
I think the agitation is because the Rani Padmini decided to show herself ( albeit in a mirror) to Allauddin. Secondly, teh act of Jauhar to escape the Sultan show Rajputs followed defeatist practices. These are hurting to Rajput pride and hence the agitation by Rajputs. Others don't find the film objectionable.
MG Singh wrote:The film is now banned in Malaysia. I find it so silly( this ban) when it is freely shown in other Muslim countries like UAE. In fact, I saw it in Abu Dhabi. The Malaysian ban is for showing Sultan Allauddin in a negative way How bigoted some can get !!
So what do you think the movie should be banned in some countries for one reason and in others for a different reason? If you ask my opinion, I have just point - stop playing with the history for the sake of money and publicity. I repeat, censor board must have a uniform rule of rejecting everything that shows wrong historical facts especially in a country with so many religions, casts, faiths and ideologies.
The basic problem lay with Sanjay Leela Bhansali in calling it a historical film instead of fiction because whatever account they have of Rani Padmavathy is sketchy ..but for those who are directly connected it becomes a matter if pride . I am.sure all film makers would be careful in the future , being more sensitive of all cross section of the society rather than appease only a certain Community as has been done earlier.
I have studied and read a lot about Allauddin. In fact, I wrote two articles on him also. The character created in the film by Bhansali is totally wrong. He is a shown as a boorish man, little intellect and no sense of propriety. This is not true, he was a great warrior and man who reformed the tax laws. Allauddin captured Chittor in 1303, but it was to establish his empire and not just for Padmani. The tale is mostly fiction. Allauddin was cruel by today's standards, but it was passe at that time and era. Alauddin should not have been shown as a boorish character who also devoured food like an animal. He was a more cultured man. I object to the portrayal of Allauddin in the film.
usha manohar wrote:The basic problem lay with Sanjay Leela Bhansali in calling it a historical film instead of fiction because whatever account they have of Rani Padmavathy is sketchy ..but for those who are directly connected it becomes a matter if pride . I am.sure all film makers would be careful in the future , being more sensitive of all cross section of the society rather than appease only a certain Community as has been done earlier.
My concern is that why is all such kind of negativity reflected against Hinduism in all such kinds of films, historical or otherwise??? Be it PK, OMG, and now this - there is plenty of negativity, superstitious beliefs, antisocial elements in Islam as well as Christianity. The so-called liberal film makers never dare to make a single film showing negativity in those religions. All that kind of flak is directed towards Hindus, and if they choose to oppose it, why are Hindus then labeled as regressive and intolerant? If they really wish to portray the truth, then they can portray the characters to their true nature. They would not then glorify the cruel, intolerant and tyrant invaders as larger-than-life, do-gooder heroes like they normally do.
MG Singh wrote:I have studied and read a lot about Allauddin. In fact, I wrote two articles on him also. The character created in the film by Bhansali is totally wrong. He is a shown as a boorish man, little intellect and no sense of propriety. This is not true, he was a great warrior and man who reformed the tax laws. Allauddin captured Chittor in 1303, but it was to establish his empire and not just for Padmani. The tale is mostly fiction. Allauddin was cruel by today's standards, but it was passe at that time and era. Alauddin should not have been shown as a boorish character who also devoured food like an animal. He was a more cultured man. I object to the portrayal of Allauddin in the film.
That is a fair analysis, we cannot show anyone in poor light just to satisfy certain sections..however , I would be interested to read your articles, was it here on this site ? If so please do post the links
Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:usha manohar wrote:The basic problem lay with Sanjay Leela Bhansali in calling it a historical film instead of fiction because whatever account they have of Rani Padmavathy is sketchy ..but for those who are directly connected it becomes a matter if pride . I am.sure all film makers would be careful in the future , being more sensitive of all cross section of the society rather than appease only a certain Community as has been done earlier.
My concern is that why is all such kind of negativity reflected against Hinduism in all such kinds of films, historical or otherwise??? Be it PK, OMG, and now this - there is plenty of negativity, superstitious beliefs, antisocial elements in Islam as well as Christianity. The so-called liberal film makers never dare to make a single film showing negativity in those religions. All that kind of flak is directed towards Hindus, and if they choose to oppose it, why are Hindus then labeled as regressive and intolerant? If they really wish to portray the truth, then they can portray the characters to their true nature. They would not then glorify the cruel, intolerant and tyrant invaders as larger-than-life, do-gooder heroes like they normally do.
Kalyani , it s precisely because of what has been happening in the past that Hindus have started revolting and at times they become over sensitive about minor issues and hit back strongly.
I happened to read that the Karni Sena has withdrawn it's agitation against the film and said that the film actually upholds Rajputs pride, what a contradiction!!! Another interesting news I read was that the Karni Sena was celebrating the success and congratulating the Congress party in Rajasthan so one can understand the very devious ways of some political parties to tarnish others and gain sympathy for themselves..
usha manohar wrote:I happened to read that the Karni Sena has withdrawn it's agitation against the film and said that the film actually upholds Rajputs pride, what a contradiction!!! Another interesting news I read was that the Karni Sena was celebrating the success and congratulating the Congress party in Rajasthan so one can understand the very devious ways of some political parties to tarnish others and gain sympathy for themselves..
What nerve they have got!! I am beginning to think what exactly this Karni Sena is and there won';t be any surprise if it is found that the shotcallers in the Sena belong to the Congress and other liberals!
As to the film becoming a hit, even Bhojpuri films do good business and a third class film such as Tiger do business to the tune of 100 crore plus, so not surprised if Padmavat to earned that much. The aesthetic sense and taste of majority of Indians is in any case, substandard and questionable!
Now that Padmavat has been released, people are looking for other movies to create controversies. It seems Manikarma, the movie based on Rani Lakshmi Bai, is being attacked by a group in Rajasthan on the assumption that some romantic scene between the maharani and British official is being shot. The producer has denied the allegations.
jabeen wrote:Now that Padmavat has been released, people are looking for other movies to create controversies. It seems Manikarma, the movie based on Rani Lakshmi Bai, is being attacked by a group in Rajasthan on the assumption that some romantic scene between the maharani and British official is being shot. The producer has denied the allegations.
Jabeen, the film's name is Manikarnika which was the given name for the great queen, it was changed to Lakshmi after her marriage to the Prince of Jhansi Gangadhar Newalkar. I just read the news today that the Brahmin community has submitted a petition against the film as it looks like they have included a love scene between the queen and a British official. Whether the claim is true or not, we do not know, but it is so infuriating. Close on the heels of Padmavati, these filmmakers have once toyed with the sentiments of the public. We all know how valiantly the young queen fought and gave up her life so that she could keep her kingdom safe until her last breath. Just so that dead body should not suffer any kind of violation at the hands of the British, she instructed her trusted followers to set the grass hut, in which she breathed her last, on fire. Portraying even probably a dream sequence like that is an insult to the memory of the valiant queen and I too totally, condemn it. The filmmakers should show some sensitivity to their own country by not playing with history and historical figures as if they were common actresses in masala potboilers.
I have always thought that film makers create controversy just before the release of a movie and include some local/national groups (maybe they pay them for their support). All these films do well on box-office so both the parties succeed in their designs and earn money out of it. But who will pay for the thousands of crores lost in the process by way of loss to public property? I suggest all such agitations/conspiracies should be dealt with strong hands and people responsible should pay the losses.
Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:jabeen wrote:Now that Padmavat has been released, people are looking for other movies to create controversies. It seems Manikarma, the movie based on Rani Lakshmi Bai, is being attacked by a group in Rajasthan on the assumption that some romantic scene between the maharani and British official is being shot. The producer has denied the allegations.
Jabeen, the film's name is Manikarnika which was the given name for the great queen, it was changed to Lakshmi after her marriage to the Prince of Jhansi Gangadhar Newalkar. I just read the news today that the Brahmin community has submitted a petition against the film as it looks like they have included a love scene between the queen and a British official. Whether the claim is true or not, we do not know, but it is so infuriating. Close on the heels of Padmavati, these filmmakers have once toyed with the sentiments of the public. We all know how valiantly the young queen fought and gave up her life so that she could keep her kingdom safe until her last breath. Just so that dead body should not suffer any kind of violation at the hands of the British, she instructed her trusted followers to set the grass hut, in which she breathed her last, on fire. Portraying even probably a dream sequence like that is an insult to the memory of the valiant queen and I too totally, condemn it. The filmmakers should show some sensitivity to their own country by not playing with history and historical figures as if they were common actresses in masala potboilers.
Absolutely !!!! Will film makers ever think that f making films on Gandhi , Nehru or other leaders , with a dream scene added on , in the name of freedom of expression...
Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:jabeen wrote:Now that Padmavat has been released, people are looking for other movies to create controversies. It seems Manikarma, the movie based on Rani Lakshmi Bai, is being attacked by a group in Rajasthan on the assumption that some romantic scene between the maharani and British official is being shot. The producer has denied the allegations.
Jabeen, the film's name is Manikarnika which was the given name for the great queen, it was changed to Lakshmi after her marriage to the Prince of Jhansi Gangadhar Newalkar. I just read the news today that the Brahmin community has submitted a petition against the film as it looks like they have included a love scene between the queen and a British official. Whether the claim is true or not, we do not know, but it is so infuriating. Close on the heels of Padmavati, these filmmakers have once toyed with the sentiments of the public. We all know how valiantly the young queen fought and gave up her life so that she could keep her kingdom safe until her last breath. Just so that dead body should not suffer any kind of violation at the hands of the British, she instructed her trusted followers to set the grass hut, in which she breathed her last, on fire. Portraying even probably a dream sequence like that is an insult to the memory of the valiant queen and I too totally, condemn it. The filmmakers should show some sensitivity to their own country by not playing with history and historical figures as if they were common actresses in masala potboilers.
Thanks for correcting my mistake about the film name. While I do agree that film makers do not have a right to distort history or treat the historical figures as some cheap entertaining characters, my point is one should not create controversy on some hearsays. If any community is concerned about certain aspects of any movies based on rumours, I feel that instead of resorting to vandalism as was done during Padmavat, they should take action to ban it or ask the film makers to make the necessary changes after watching it.
@kiran8