I'll completely buy this argument! I recall in one his interviews given for a 
Malayalam channel around 6-8 years back he'd said - "if the song situation 
requires that you have to cry, then the song itself should make you cry, if it 
is a funny-humorous situation then the song should make you laugh..." Guess 
those were the times when ARR and his team did 100% justice to each and every 
song in an album and at the worst perhaps 1 out of 5 songs would get a 3/5 
rating, the rest would be 4 and above. However, lately dare I'd say 50% of the 
songs in a album are just making it to a 3 rating. I said this in an earlier 
post - my guess is that he's in a complete experimentation mode....something 
big will eventually come out of this experiment... I'd just give it some more 
time. After-all he too is a human being with so much strength, intelligence and 
capacity....I'm not comparing here, but could/can Beethoven or Yanni or MJ or 
Hans pull off a south Indian folk
 song? No right? Maybe considering each one's musical brilliance, they 
could..but perhaps only after multiple attempts. And ARR is not going to be any 
different when it comes to newer genres 

ciao / Gopal

PS: This too is the best part of this group, able to critique logically (almost 
every time :) )
--- On Tue, 31/8/10, AJ <[email protected]> wrote:

From: AJ <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [arr]problems with the CWG song - did ARR feel truly inspired?
To: [email protected]
Date: Tuesday, 31 August, 2010, 7:15 AM







 



  


    
      
      
      I really think ARR worked hard on this song, but perhaps worked too hard, 
if you know what I mean?  His best songs are created when they are from his 
heart more than from his head.  Was he really inspired to do a theme song about 
sports, since I know that ARR was never a passionate sports fan and didn't 
follow teams much as a youngster?



Maa Tujhe Salam and the entire Vande Mataram album was ARR's baby because it 
was about India as a country..about the 50th anniversary and the whole 
significance of that.  ARR, as a very patriotic citizen, felt very inspired to 
create a whole album in honor of that.



In this case, he was "asked" to compose this song.  Yes, it's a patriotic song 
too, but not in the same emotional league as Vande Mataram from ARR's 
perspective.



It's not fair to compare Maa Tujhe Salam with this song for these reasons alone 
IMO.



I may be wrong about the above......just speculating here.



--- In [email protected], "Raghu" <arr_ra...@...> wrote:

>

> i do not think price tag is any issue here..

> 5.5 is not a thing compared to overall some 10,000k +

> 

> 

> 

> --- In [email protected], shai <nbk4692@> wrote:

> >

> > guys,

> >  

> > honestly i love the song but ...i think the main problem and the critcizm 
> > that is going on is becoz of the '5.5 cr' price tag ...this alone have 
> > increased the expectations to other universe it self....but i really think 
> > that 'maa tujhe salam; is worth more than 10 crore...clearly those who 
> > disappointed with the song is expecting another maa tujhe salam which i 
> > think is ridiculous...if u really want maa tujhe salam like a song then 
> > better play the song itself for the CW why create another 
> > one...?inspirational song will inspire u straight away,no need time for it 
> > to grow..if it doesnt inspire u nor gives u a spirit ,that means the song 
> > have failed for its purpose...for example the K'naan song for the world cup 
> > 'Wavin flag'..that song doesnt need time at all...[but if u listen to other 
> > K'naan's songs u wont wave ur flag]  ....

> >  

> > i seriously dont think shakira's waka waka is anywhere near to this song...

> >  

> > but the english rap part in the song is soo flat..but the ending with 
> > bangra style was awesome

> >  

> > listen to it without thinking it was made for CW..then u will feel it

> >  

> > i pity or boss for the critisizm he is facing now

> >  

> >  

> >  

> > shai,

> >  

> >  

> >  

> >  

> >  

> > * smileys  just for fun

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > .

> >

>





    
     

    
    


 



  





Reply via email to