Nova Posted November 26, 2012 Posted November 26, 2012 Its not that a girl leaves him saying that if Iam with u god will kill u and he gets so upset that he want death for himself everyday and challenge god ' date=' u may think I might be joking ,but I have seen this kind of love , my maternal cousin was in love with a girl ,both of them were in love with each other,but there parents won't agree,so they had to split ,my bro was so upset that he started drinking heavily ,unfortunately his body could not cope with this heavy drinking,he died 7-8 years after his break up ,a month later I was going somewhere and a voice caught my attention "suniye Naveen Yahi rehte hai kahi unka add. Bata denge "when I turn around I asked her who she is ,she said I am Nisha and told what she went through in these 7 yrs she parted ways from her parents ,opened a shop on her own ,so that she is financially secured and nothing comes between their love ,she wanted to marry him ,when I heard her story and realized what they have gone through I cried ,I cried like any thing she asked me what happened ,I told her the truth ,she was devastated ,she didn't cry she was just stunned I can see the pain in her eyes, she just walked away,anushka was so right ki hamari gen ko pyar karna nhi aata,par Jo dekha has to be true love,miss u bro where ever u are.god bless u[/quote'] Sad story. Why does stuff like this happen... people lose love, good friends... hope... Such is life.
Crookbond Posted November 26, 2012 Posted November 26, 2012 Its not that a girl leaves him saying that if Iam with u god will kill u and he gets so upset that he want death for himself everyday and challenge god ' date=' u may think I might be joking ,but I have seen this kind of love , my maternal cousin was in love with a girl [b'],both of them were in love with each other,but there parents won't agree,so they had to split ,my bro was so upset that he started drinking heavily ,unfortunately his body could not cope with this heavy drinking,he died 7-8 years after his break up ,a month later I was going somewhere and a voice caught my attention "suniye Naveen Yahi rehte hai kahi unka add. Bata denge "when I turn around I asked her who she is ,she said I am Nisha and told what she went through in these 7 yrs she parted ways from her parents ,opened a shop on her own ,so that she is financially secured and nothing comes between their love ,she wanted to marry him ,when I heard her story and realized what they have gone through I cried ,I cried like any thing she asked me what happened ,I told her the truth ,she was devastated ,she didn't cry she was just stunned I can see the pain in her eyes, she just walked away,anushka was so right ki hamari gen ko pyar karna nhi aata,par Jo dekha has to be true love,miss u bro where ever u are.god bless u Sad story. Why does stuff like this happen... people lose love, good friends... hope... Such is life. In our society (in general), people do not want to take responsibilities and be held accountable for their own actions. Parents want more control under the pretext (sometimes understandable) of "protecting their kids". Whom do they protect from? Society - who one should not even give a sh!t about. Everyone should be allowed (and infact encouraged) to fail and learn from their mistakes. Our society looks at failures in a downright condescending way and I loathe that attitude. We are yet to mature. In Vayuu1's cousin case, it baffles me to why the parents would want to take a decision for their kids. Suggestions are always welcome but the final decision should be left at the discretion of the individual (in this case his cousin). What is the point of being a parent when you can't support your kid? If everything is hunky-dory anyone can support you. It is when the going gets tough is when you require support structure from your family. Sure - there could be suggestions but these suggestions should be directed towards constructive (and favorable) outcomes. Most of these suggestions are destructive because they do not conform to their beliefs. I find it crazy - for example, I had a cousin with a similar story. I did not agree with certain aspects and frankly told her about it. However, I also mentioned that I am supportive of any decision that she makes. She is happily married for 10 years and still tells me that my support was one of the reasons she decided to take the plunge and it was totally worth it & even if were not she would not regret one bit. One has to take this imaginary pressure out of the equation. Nothing is permanent in life and after every time you fail, you will learn something new. If you live every day of your life like the last day; one day you will be right. ~ Steve Jobs.
1983-2011 Posted November 26, 2012 Posted November 26, 2012 any good comedy movies from this year, hindi or english will do
coffee_rules Posted November 26, 2012 Posted November 26, 2012 Say what? I've done my class X in the 2000s, not the 80s or the 90s. You, in general and not you, in particula, Times and standards change. She is a fatso on today's zero-size standards.
Sachin=GOD Posted November 26, 2012 Posted November 26, 2012 ‘Lincoln’: A More Authentic Wonderment Steven Spielberg’s Lincoln is a work of sufficient richness to instantly invite repeat viewings. It is a history film that dares to pile on verbal and visual details thickly and rapidly enough that a second viewing may be necessary simply to register all that is going on. Dropped right into the heart of the Congress of 1865, you scarcely have time to be introduced to the representatives busily attempting to drown each other out, or to be given much backstory on the alliances and resentments in play in one private parley after another, as Lincoln and his operatives try every form of arm-twisting and patronage short of outright bribery to enlist political support. This is a different sort of piling-on than what was evident in Spielberg’s recent The Adventures of Tintin (2011), where effects were rolled out with a kind of desperation—if you didn’t like that bit of head-spinning trickery, than how about this one, or this? The combination of Lincoln’s many elements—there are scores of historically identifiable speaking roles, including conservative Republican Francis Preston Blair, future White House memoirist Elizabeth Keckley, Confederate vice-president Alexander Stephens, and Lincoln’s secretary John Nicolay—is effected with a deliberation and exactness that consistently skirts the abyss of empty heart-stirring sentiment, the favorite destination of patriotic epics. If the film is moving it is because it is also, by virtue of Tony Kushner’s intricately constructed screenplay, so dry and precise about the political practicalities that are its real subject matter. Lincoln avoids any suggestion of epic; the Civil War is reduced to a close and ugly hand-to-hand skirmish and a battlefield strewn with corpses. Restricting themselves almost entirely to the first five weeks of 1865, Spielberg and Kushner show us for once a Lincoln too busy working to spend much time cutting a sublime figure. The film is not a demystification of Lincoln. The stations-of-the-cross aura that has often hovered around dramatizations of his life is replaced here by a more detached and analytical surveying of circumstances—a surveying that yet manages to instill an authentic wonderment. In Daniel Day-Lewis’s performance—or, more properly, wholesale inhabitation—Lincoln is made more mysterious than ever. It is at once a deeply and uncannily consistent portrayal and a fantastically technical performance with regard to details of gait and gesture—and, above all, voice, since Day-Lewis has emulated historical accounts of Lincoln’s sometimes “shrill, piping, and unpleasant” way of talking. Lincoln’s speech rhythms—his joking interruptions and persuasive self-deprecating feints and sudden bursts of angry contradiction—become the perceptible manifestation of how he manages to exercise his will in the face of every kind of human obstruction. His words seem to emerge from a silence that pervades all his outward actions, as if every time he spoke he were also measuring his distance from other people. To the rural accents of that solo voice is opposed the bellowing chaos of Congress in session, with the likes of Fernando Wood (Lee Pace), the Congressman from New York who led the fight against the Thirteenth Amendment, and his archrival, the abolitionist Thaddeus Stevens (Tommy Lee Jones) indulging to the maximum the nineteenth-century taste for rhetorical vituperation. Spielberg and Kushner have managed to make a film to the measure of its protagonist by making Lincoln about so much more than its subject. American history films from Griffith and DeMille onwards have in general been tailored for an audience presumed to be incapable of absorbing much information or complexity of motive, and the first casualty of this radical oversimplification has been any attempt to show the glowingly invoked “democratic process” in actual detail. Politics, for the most part, has been something that happens off-screen, either too tedious or too depressingly cynical for its mechanisms to be exposed in their full particulars; presidents are more likely to be shown in moments of public grandeur than in scenes of backroom horse-trading. Perhaps it is the era of cable news, with its permanent theater of politics, that has made it possible to engage more vigorously with the kind of historical detail in which Lincoln revels. An audience that has endured the protracted dramas surrounding the passage of the Affordable Care Act and the raising of the debt ceiling, and followed the statistics of political polling as if it were a new national pastime, is certainly ready to contemplate the overt and covert tactics involved in the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment. Kushner’s script is more than just elegant in its compression and exposition. It is steeped in the traditions of a political dramaturgy that were familiar to Shakespeare and Schiller but that have not often been practiced in American historical films. The moments when Lincoln quotes Hamlet (“I could be bounded in a nutshell and count myself a king of infinite space, were it not that I have bad dreams”), Banquo (“If you can look into the seeds of time, / And say which grain will grow, and which will not”), and Falstaff (“We have heard the chimes at midnight, master Shallow”) are a way of nodding to that ancient bond of theater and politics. Acknowledging the need at every turn for shorthand and quick characterization to fit the events into the available time, the film never pretends that the whole story has been laid out. The Birth of a Nation (1915) came to mind more than once while I was watching Lincoln. D.W. Griffith’s work had such an effect on what American movies would be and more specifically what American history movies would be. If movies are indeed “history written with lightning” (in the apocryphal phrase attributed to Woodrow Wilson on first viewing Birth of a Nation), then the scorch marks they leave take a long time to wear away. Aside from the aesthetic mastery of Griffith’s filmmaking, there were his ostentatious historiographic flourishes, his footnoted intertitles, his claims of authoritative recreation. Spielberg and Kushner seem to want to meet Griffith on his home ground for a rectification of accounts, never more so than in the treatment of Thaddeus Stevens (the basis for Griffith’s tragic arch-villain Austin Stoneman). The comic motif of Stevens’s wig sitting uneasily on his bald pate echoes a similar gag in Griffith’s film, and when his mulatto housekeeper and mistress, with whom he had a relationship of many years, makes her appearance toward the end of the film (played by Law & Order regular S. Epatha Merkerson), she is a profoundly sympathetic emissary from a then unimaginable future rather than the vengeful histrionic figure of Griffith’s film (the object, as an intertitle explains, of “the great leader’s weakness that is to blight a nation”). In fact, Stevens’s happy domestic life is pointedly contrasted with Lincoln’s family troubles, laid out in a series of painful scenes with his wife (Sally Field) and eldest son (Joseph Gordon-Levitt). Historians will no doubt find ample occasion to pick apart the details of the film and to question its omissions and emphases and imputed motives. It can at least be said that Lincoln leaves room for such questioning. Its approach is open, not closed. Whatever we see and hear suggests other perspectives, other impinging forces, matter for a thousand other films that have not yet been made. The Reconstruction era, a period whose cinematic representation has been pretty much pre-empted by the Confederate pieties of The Birth of a Nation and Gone with the Wind, would be a good place to start. Not the least of Lincoln’s virtues is to suggest such possibilities. November 21, 2012, 1:55 p.m. http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2012/nov/21/lincoln-authentic-wonderment/
maniac Posted November 26, 2012 Posted November 26, 2012 Life of PI-Wow Just Wow.....incredible movie.....Completely blown away, Didn't read the book though but from what I was told it was nearly impossible to adapt it to a movie ...will read the book now
Nova Posted November 26, 2012 Posted November 26, 2012 Life of PI-Wow Just Wow.....incredible movie.....Completely blown away, Didn't read the book though but from what I was told it was nearly impossible to adapt it to a movie ...will read the book now Did you watch in 3D? How are the visuals?
maniac Posted November 26, 2012 Posted November 26, 2012 Did you watch in 3D? How are the visuals? Yup....saw it in 3d....visuals are unbelievable ....this is a comment I read online and I totally agree with the reviewer When he/she said that 3d in this movie is used to tell a story much like avatar ,than some of the other gimmicky 3d stuff If you decide to watch it...please do in 3d to get ur money's worth....I would highly recommend it
Crookbond Posted November 27, 2012 Posted November 27, 2012 Did you watch in 3D? How are the visuals? Yup....saw it in 3d....visuals are unbelievable ....this is a comment I read online and I totally agree with the reviewer When he/she said that 3d in this movie is used to tell a story much like avatar ,than some of the other gimmicky 3d stuff If you decide to watch it...please do in 3d to get ur money's worth....I would highly recommend it I want to watch it in 3.14 D :aha:
b555 Posted November 27, 2012 Posted November 27, 2012 Did you watch in 3D? How are the visuals? watch it in 3D man just worth it! Really loved the reviews that my friends gave.. it just adds more soul to the story ( the 3D part)
vvvslaxman Posted November 27, 2012 Posted November 27, 2012 Srabanti Chatterjee is hot :woot: Smoking hot !!!
Magneto Posted November 27, 2012 Posted November 27, 2012 Life of PI-Wow Just Wow.....incredible movie.....Completely blown away, Didn't read the book though but from what I was told it was nearly impossible to adapt it to a movie ...will read the book now I'd read the book the moment it came out and have been wondering as to how it can be adapted to a screenplay. Apparently, even Yann Martel has been wondering the same. Good adaptation, the visual imagery showed them the way. Though they have simplified the ending and have left out one incredible scene from the novel, it's one hell of an experience. Watched it twice in back-to-back shows on the 4th day of the Test to get over the defeat. :giggle:
CSK Fan Posted November 27, 2012 Posted November 27, 2012 I'd read the book the moment it came out and have been wondering as to how it can be adapted to a screenplay. Apparently, even Yann Martel has been wondering the same. Good adaptation, the visual imagery showed them the way. Though they have simplified the ending and have left out one incredible scene from the novel, it's one hell of an experience. Watched it twice in back-to-back shows on the 4th day of the Test to get over the defeat. :giggle: I think the simplification of the ending made the story much more subtle. Glad they did not show any imagery for the alternate story, just his facial expression to show how much he felt recalling those moments.
nikred Posted November 27, 2012 Posted November 27, 2012 put spoiler alerts peep. Agreed, MTC kinda ruined it for me. :((
CSK Fan Posted November 27, 2012 Posted November 27, 2012 Lol, what? What did you make out from my post? Unless you have read the book in which case you already know everything. The movie is almost 100% true to the book
coffee_rules Posted November 28, 2012 Posted November 28, 2012 Lol' date=' what? What did you make out from my post? Unless you have read the book in which case you already know everything. The movie is almost 100% true to the book[/quote'] I had read the book and was planning to see the movie. from your post it is pretty evident they changed the ending. So it ruined the movie watching experience for me..:finger:
Magneto Posted November 28, 2012 Posted November 28, 2012 I had read the book and was planning to see the movie. from your post it is pretty evident they changed the ending. So it ruined the movie watching experience for me..:finger: MTC has revealed nothing. :D Go ahead and watch the film. @ MTC - Ditto at not 'showing' the other story. They also added the bit about Pi's girlfriend (not in the novel) which blended pretty seamlessly with the narrative.
maniac Posted November 28, 2012 Posted November 28, 2012 MTC has revealed nothing. :D Go ahead and watch the film. @ MTC - Ditto at not 'showing' the other story. They also added the bit about Pi's girlfriend (not in the novel) which blended pretty seamlessly with the narrative. Agree....I mean before I watched it ,I was told by someone that there was a twist ending but it felt pretty straightforward and made a perfect conclusion to the movie....again I have not read the novel,so it is coming plainly from the movie perspective.
Magneto Posted November 28, 2012 Posted November 28, 2012 Agree....I mean before I watched it ' date='I was told by someone that there was a twist ending but it felt pretty straightforward and made a perfect conclusion to the movie....again I have not read the novel,so it is coming plainly from the movie perspective.[/quote'] The novel is almost on similar lines just that the Japanese guys question Pi a lot more. And the end is much more ambiguous than the way the film ends. Also, in the novel, the key to the entire secret is hidden somewhere in a paragraph in the middle of the book. :-)
Recommended Posts