When you look at the response & reviews of Slumdog Millionaire from all over US & UK. It's been overwhelmingly received by the audience & critics in the region, thats the fact. Even if these people blast on the film as "its a usual" thing here, the people in the west have liked it and accepted it. I've heard almost all my colleagues who watched the film (all americans) saying "Its one of the best film i've ever watched". So, its these people's (Priyadarshan etc) inability to take something to the world audience. The kind of reaction they show now clearly indicates, they now realize that they missed to do it and someone from the west have taken a native thing to the west and succeeded in it. It's not Danny's fault or the people who liked the movie. It's the fault of these so called "creative" people as they think themselves they only give good films in the world. According to Priyadarshan, if its a good old and known story / plot that has been an usual in India, why didnt they take it and win this with something they are used to already? It's a pity these people cannot tolerate the success of a foreign man winning so many awards. And they'd never go and win such awards or recognition until they have this attitude of pulling the fellow frog's leg. Better try to achieve than blaming. - Bergin
________________________________ From: V S Rawat <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2009 10:13:07 PM Subject: Re: [arr] Priyadarshan pans Slumdog On 1/31/2009 9:05 PM India Time, _Chord_ wrote: > I've > read Vikas Swarup's novel Q & A. It should have been made by Mani > Ratnam. Then you'd have seen what he would have done with Mumbai." Mani has already made Bombay and has shown organized riots in there. Why does P think Mani would hesitate from showing what Danny has shown. > The angry director wonders why there isn't a single shot in Slumdog > that shows the more aesthetic side of Mumbai? "Why has Danny Boyle not > taken one shot of Marine Drive? Do his slum dwellers exist only within > their slums? It is the director's prerogative to show what his vision is. We can comment on or criticize that vision after seeing the film, but if we expect director to make film as per our vision, then that would be our film and not director's film. There is no rule that good side has to be shown along with bad side. > And look at the absurdities…A boy becomes a national hero > on a game show. People have indeed become national and international celebrities on account of TV shows. > One cop takes him under arrest and interrogates him > relentlessly. Where is everyone else? Is this kind of confinement > possible in this age when television cameras enter your bedroom? The confinement was only for one night or at most less than 24 hours. Nobody might have even come to know about his confinement so they are not able to take any step. As per government rules, even a warrant is not required, even an FIR need not be filed for such a "detention" which is not an arrest. By showing that, Danny has highlighted another ugly part of indian administration. Real Police is much worse than the one depicted by Danny Boyle. > If > one of our filmmakers had made the same film we would have blasted him > out of business." he he he. Our filmmakers have made many films on riots, poverty, torture, and every topic. And we would not have felt bad about our our own filmmakers showing all those bad sides. We are finding it hurting because an outsider is showing us it all. > > "Let them give as many Oscars as they like. We don't need to be > impressed," ends Priyan angrily. Why is he angry? -- Rawat ------------------------------------ Are you searching for a reason, to be kind? <b> Explore, Experience, Enjoy A.R.Rahman - The Man, The Music, The Magic. Only at arrahmanfans.com - The definitive A.R.Rahman e-community. Homepage: http://www.arrahmanfans.com Admin: [email protected] To Subscribe: [email protected] To Unsubscribe: [email protected]! Groups Links
