bollywood Bhansali slapped by protestors for alleged distortion of history,Anurag Kashyap calls it Hindus Terrorism

[jalebi_bhai]

5 minutes ago, Mariyam said:

I am *not* talking about the tweet. My comment is regarding the title of the thread which is very misleading.

So what would be a more apt title? Anurag Kashyap calls Hindu Terrorism a reality? 

 

 

[Laaloo]

Hindu Terrorism

[jalebi_bhai]

2 minutes ago, laaloo said:

Hindu Terrorism

Like the meaning has changed at all  .

[Laaloo]

[jalebi_bhai]

3 minutes ago, laaloo said:

Pakka info? 

[Malcolm Merlyn]

7 minutes ago, laaloo said:

 

Arrest him.

[Tibarn]

2 hours ago, Mariyam said:

^^

 

The most damning indictment of humanity is that people are quick to vehemently opposing the quality of the films that Bhansali makes and not the fact that he was assaulted by people who in all probability have no idea what the film is about. No director is going to give away the script.

 

Making a terrible movie is still a legal activity. Trashing the film maker and breaking his equipment isn't.

 

To quote Nietzsche: Convictions are more dangerous foes of truth than lies

 Nice putting an unrelated Nietzsche quote. 

 

You are making the assumption that the people have no idea what it is about. You being ignorant of history doesn't mean others are as well. The most damning indictment of humanity is that  you are supporting a mass murderer and rapist.  Spin it however you want to. 

 

Also, next time, quote me if you have something to say to me. 

Edited January 28, 2017 by Tibarn

[Malcolm Merlyn]

7 minutes ago, laaloo said:

 

Arrest him.If this is true.

[jalebi_bhai]

7 minutes ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

 

Arrest him.

Have to change the thread title again.

[Yoda-esque]

Crap Bollywood,crap movies

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[Muloghonto]

3 hours ago, jalebi_bhai said:

He has effectively called it an act of Hindu terrorism. No spin involved and no need to whitewash his sins. This is par for the course with Bhaiwood intellectuals.

Bhai, i hate to say this, but this is terrorism. I don't know why so many people see terrorism as jihad or shootings, the whole basic premise of terrorism is to sow terror through acts of violence and illegal activity. That is effectively being done here.

 

And for those who say 'Bollywood twists facts', welcome to entertainment industry. This isn't a BBC/Doordarshan  documentary, its a movie. I've never seen a historical movie- Bollywood or Hollywood- that sticks true to known history. There is always some fudging done, some love angles/drama angles invented.

 

[Laaloo]

2 hours ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

 

Arrest him.

Pata nahi. 

 

2 hours ago, jalebi_bhai said:

Pakka info? 

 

2 hours ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

 

Arrest him.

Fb pe tha

[jalebi_bhai]

1 hour ago, Muloghonto said:

Bhai, i hate to say this, but this is terrorism. I don't know why so many people see terrorism as jihad or shootings, the whole basic premise of terrorism is to sow terror through acts of violence and illegal activity. That is effectively being done here.

 

And for those who say 'Bollywood twists facts', welcome to entertainment industry. This isn't a BBC/Doordarshan  documentary, its a movie. I've never seen a historical movie- Bollywood or Hollywood- that sticks true to known history. There is always some fudging done, some love angles/drama angles invented.

 

There is more to this than meets the eye. All the details regarding the incident haven't come out, so let's not arrive at any concrete conclusions yet. Here is another side to the story:

 

Quote

"I do not support any violence and the Karni sena had gone there to oppose the shooting and talk to Bhansali but he refused to meet and three bullets were fired in the air from his security men which led to provocation and commotion," Lokendra Singh Kalvi, founder patron of the outfit said at a press conference.

He said that distortion of historic facts will not be tolerated at any cost, which was well communicated to the film maker five-six months back in Mumabi.

"We came to know about the dream sequence of Alauddin Khiji, played by Ranveer Singh, through Singh's interview which quoted him as saying that he was ready to accept the role of villain in the film provided there were intimate scene with Deepika Padukone, who is playing the role of Rani Padmavati, are included in the film," he said.

Kalvi said they demanded that whatever bonding Ranveer Singh and Deepika Padukone share in their personal life should not be picturised in the film for which Bhansali was ready.

"We asked him to not even go with dream sequence in which Khilji dreams of love scene with Rani Padmavati for which Bhansali sought a time for two days.  Seeking a two-day time shows that there is something about the dream sequence in the film," he pointed out.

He also asked whether Bhansali can make a film against Hitler in Germany.

"We cannot tolerate the move to tarnish the history of our legendary ancestors. Rani Padmavati had made supreme sacrifice by doing Jauhar with 16,000 women in Chittorgarh fort to save herself from Khilji. Her character was like Sita so how the filmmakers can present such hurting things in the film,” claimed Girraj Singh, president of Rajput Sabha.

Mahipal Singh, the state president of the Karni Sena, said that they were trying to protect the history. "We had gone to talk to them but bullets were fired in the air which provoked the members. It was me who tried to stop the members from assaulting Bhansali," he sai

 

http://www.timesnow.tv/india/video/will-oppose-any-distortion-of-historical-facts-karni-sena/54871

 

The above report seems to suggest that there was a coercive provocation from Bhansali's side, using guns no less. Is it fair for me to call Bhansali a terrorist or a terrorist abettor?

 

It is easy for us to lecture, but a lot of communities take their history and historical figures very seriously, none less than the Rajputs. They are the biggest stakeholders in the legacy of their heroes/heroines. Bhansali is not doing them a favour by using their heroes/heroines as characters. I don't support senseless violence and vandalism over a movie, like happened in the case of PK, but this case is slightly different. 

Edited January 28, 2017 by jalebi_bhai

[jalebi_bhai]

5 hours ago, Cricketics said:

I haven't seen any of Bhansali's movies in a while but why do people care so much about him continuing to make films. If you hate his movies, just ignore his movies and move on. 

 

People in India are getting crazy and becoming too sensitive like people from other parts of the world.  People need to control their enthusiasm and keep it from getting it better of them. Attacking Bhansali is totally wrong, or attacking any movie director for that matter. 

There is a sequence in the film which shows Rani Padmavati romancing Alauddin Khilji. It's not about whether you hate his movies or not. Movies influence minds and if they influence people wrongly, then it is an issue.

 

Local communities are the custodians of their heroes' legacy and Bhansali doesn't have the right to tarnish it. This wasn't an impromptu protest. These groups had reached out to Bhansali earlier:

 

  

 

[Muloghonto]

32 minutes ago, jalebi_bhai said:

There is more to this than meets the eye. All the details regarding the incident haven't come out, so let's not arrive at any concrete conclusions yet. Here is another side to the story:

 

 

http://www.timesnow.tv/india/video/will-oppose-any-distortion-of-historical-facts-karni-sena/54871

 

The above report seems to suggest that there was a coercive provocation from Bhansali's side, using guns no less. Is it fair for me to call Bhansali a terrorist or a terrorist abettor?

 

It is easy for us to lecture, but a lot of communities take their history and historical figures very seriously, none less than the Rajputs. They are the biggest stakeholders in the legacy of their heroes/heroines. Bhansali is not doing them a favour by using their heroes/heroines as characters. I don't support senseless violence and vandalism over a movie, like happened in the case of PK, but this case is slightly different. 

1. The problem is, there is no valid argument towards holding so-called 'strict adherence to authentic historical facts' when one is making a movie. 

As i noted before, plenty of movies/TV series exist in the historical fiction genre where characters are invented, characters are given fictional viewpoints/acts etc. all for the sake of dramatization.

And if it comes with a disclaimer that it is a fictional work & not meant to be taken literally, there is no logical basis in opposing it. 
When we have fictional stuff about Queen Elizabeth I, Elizabeth II, heck, even Jesus in hollywood, it looks stupid for Bollywood to get all the stick for 'not sticking to historical facts'.

 

2. Arguing 'stick to historical facts' for Indian history is like telling an arab to stick to democracy. We, as a civilization, suck at recording history and keeping history separate from propaganda. Most of our history pre-British is open to interpretation, because we have so many contradictory accounts, no complete records, no authenticity tilt from a single Indian source, etc. All we have, for our ENTIRE corpus of Indian history, is contradictory accounts from Puranas (where we have numerous case of Vayu Puran contradicting Bhavishya Puran contradicting Brahma Puran), blatant myth-building like the accounts of Rajatarangini from Kalhana and oral traditions.

So its a bit rich getting all hoity-toity about 'historic authenticity', when we are the DEAD LAST civilization, in history of ancient, settled civilizations, for recording history. Even the Cambodians have a more consistent historical record than us ! 

Heck, even 1000 years ago, our history was called trash (justifiably so) by noted historians like Al-Biruni, who despite being muslim, was keen to recognize that the west (Rome/Greece) did history far better than his Arab lot but is totally flabbergasted by what rubbish passed for 'history' in Indian sphere. And that is telling- because we cannot just dismiss it as 'He is an arab, he obviously hated Indian kaffirs and gave us a bad rep' - not when he is extolling the Muslims to record history like the Greeks (who are also Kaffirs) and there are plenty of Arab-Iranic scholars who marvel at Indian superiority in Scientific & mathematical books (demonstrating that their view of India/Indian contributions isn't uniformly bad).

 

[jalebi_bhai]

21 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

1. The problem is, there is no valid argument towards holding so-called 'strict adherence to authentic historical facts' when one is making a movie. 

As i noted before, plenty of movies/TV series exist in the historical fiction genre where characters are invented, characters are given fictional viewpoints/acts etc. all for the sake of dramatization.

And if it comes with a disclaimer that it is a fictional work & not meant to be taken literally, there is no logical basis in opposing it. 
When we have fictional stuff about Queen Elizabeth I, Elizabeth II, heck, even Jesus in hollywood, it looks stupid for Bollywood to get all the stick for 'not sticking to historical facts'.

 

2. Arguing 'stick to historical facts' for Indian history is like telling an arab to stick to democracy. We, as a civilization, suck at recording history and keeping history separate from propaganda. Most of our history pre-British is open to interpretation, because we have so many contradictory accounts, no complete records, no authenticity tilt from a single Indian source, etc. All we have, for our ENTIRE corpus of Indian history, is contradictory accounts from Puranas (where we have numerous case of Vayu Puran contradicting Bhavishya Puran contradicting Brahma Puran), blatant myth-building like the accounts of Rajatarangini from Kalhana and oral traditions.

So its a bit rich getting all hoity-toity about 'historic authenticity', when we are the DEAD LAST civilization, in history of ancient, settled civilizations, for recording history. Even the Cambodians have a more consistent historical record than us ! 

Heck, even 1000 years ago, our history was called trash (justifiably so) by noted historians like Al-Biruni, who despite being muslim, was keen to recognize that the west (Rome/Greece) did history far better than his Arab lot but is totally flabbergasted by what rubbish passed for 'history' in Indian sphere. And that is telling- because we cannot just dismiss it as 'He is an arab, he obviously hated Indian kaffirs and gave us a bad rep' - not when he is extolling the Muslims to record history like the Greeks (who are also Kaffirs) and there are plenty of Arab-Iranic scholars who marvel at Indian superiority in Scientific & mathematical books (demonstrating that their view of India/Indian contributions isn't uniformly bad).

 

Look, just because we've set a poor precedent in the past with regards to documenting history doesn't mean that we shouldn't improve on it now. What Hollywood does is honestly their business.

 

Are you suggesting that the locals should not have protested at all?  

[gattaca]

By looks of it he wants it to be controversy and make more out of it by portraying un verified facts.

[MechEng]

4 hours ago, jalebi_bhai said:

There is a sequence in the film which shows Rani Padmavati romancing Alauddin Khilji. It's not about whether you hate his movies or not. Movies influence minds and if they influence people wrongly, then it is an issue.

 

Local communities are the custodians of their heroes' legacy and Bhansali doesn't have the right to tarnish it. This wasn't an impromptu protest. These groups had reached out to Bhansali earlier:

 

  

 

 

It would be very arrogant of Bhansali if he ignored this. Bollywood now is filled with narcissistic elites who have no respect for traditions, even the Hollywood which is run by liberal-left wing don't make movies where they hurt sentiments of people by distorting history, except if it's an anti-Nazi movie.

[MechEng]

10 hours ago, kosingh said:

Man, this wave of nationalism, jingoism,religious fanaticism sweeping the world is scary. 

This is what happens when one exploits civic rights and ignores civic responsibilities. 

[Mariyam]

10 hours ago, Tibarn said:

 Nice putting an unrelated Nietzsche quote. 

 

You are making the assumption that the people have no idea what it is about. You being ignorant of history doesn't mean others are as well. The most damning indictment of humanity is that  you are supporting a mass murderer and rapist.  Spin it however you want to. 

 

Also, next time, quote me if you have something to say to me. 

I didn't quote you then. Read properly. I have quoted your post now.

 

I didn't know that Sanjay Leela Bhansali is a mass murderer or/and a rapist. 

Would you care to show the rest of us where SLB has indulged in these grievious crimes.

 

Also I'd appreciate if you could point out the exact posts where I've supported any mass murderer and/or rapist.

 

The quote isn't unrelated. Just that you haven't been able to comprehend the connection. Don't project your lack of comprehension skills as a standard for the rest of the board.

Edited January 29, 2017 by Mariyam