To some of us it might seem as a hyperbolic event! But the truth is much different. The strategy on the part of IPL administrators to popularize the tournament abroad in other cricket playing nations has turned out to be an unsuccessful one.
I chanced upon to read an article about Pakistani players angry about being snubbed in the IPL-3 Auctions. In fact, in similar fashion, the IPL was snubbed in South Africa drawing lesser crowds from South Africa as well as attracting lesser interests from India. An anonymous blogger added some attraction to the behind the scenes from the Kolkata Knight Riders team.
Otherwise, the IPL was a mere run-of-the-mill last time. But the latest attempt to revive the interests might start to work well in the cricket crazy nation. Do Indians feel much acknowledged and have their interests revived in the IPL after the IPL's failure to establish itself abroad? Or forget the abandonment in the last season and embrace the new season as faithful audience?
But the Back In India campaign is nevertheless blatant and overt in using a failure to create success. This indicates how such an overtly commercial phenomenon can turn out to indulge in such lame attempt to attract the audiences in any way possible.
What is debatable is not the strategic decision making of the administrators but their ways in attracting the necessary audience to survive. Both the Back In India slogan and campaign seem to be very much of a lame attempt that tries to cover up a past mistake. But then the audiences are the ones who have to look at the campaign in the right way.
IPL is a treasure hunt for player delinquencies and infinite controversies in which case the game seems monotonous than the anonymous blogger. IPL has initiated the very first of controversies through the omission of Pakistani players which might be another notoriously, infamous tactic on finding the headlines or the omission of Pakistani players was intended for security reasons or for other international players to feel comfortable playing the game!
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Aayirathil Oruvan Review
In the last post, I strayed away from the topic to give you a perspective of original writers and plagiarizing reviewers. But here, I will post a review of the film.
Let me tell you that the film is a gruesome, mind-blowing adventure and a roller coaster ride on subtly interwoven messages for the mankind and creative, aesthetic and fantastic fantasies. The story is entirely unpredictable which leads people to call it as straying away from the plot.
It is said that cliche is loved and that a few of us have wanted the film to be cliched. A number of good films lose out due to this expectation. The story takes unpredictable turns and eventually ends in a sober mood which tells upon the overall feel of the film.
The three lead characters set out on an expedition (though partly two with the objective) to find a lost civilization of the Cholas. The breathtaking ride takes us on a high speed screenplay fostered by unexpected twists and turns. The second half establishes the plot and it is only in the second half that you get to know the basic plot of the film. Till the very end, almost towards the end of the third act, you are left in the dark about the plot.
The film takes the point of view of the Cholas and glorifies them, which may be debatable on various fronts - more towards the objective of the film and on why it does so, as in the film. Aayirathil Oruvan turns midway into the mystic and the occult and right when we fear such an orientation of the story, we are blessed with historic revelations on the civilization of the Cholas.
Some of the websites have given honest reviews while some others very biased towards describing the film a crass take on civilizations. The film fails to make an impact at the end not because the story goes wayward but because on the part of the Cholas, the defeat is partially accepted by the Cholas (unusual for the protagonists to suffer towards the end in films), and that the climax was not an emotional resolution of the events that happened before.
This is a most commonly misunderstood or misread phenomenon that the film fails to make an overall impact. This is because the climax should be a resolving of all the problems that we witness.
Music score was racy and very much unexpected from a youngster as G.V. Prakash who has scored moderate in all his previous films. Ramji did great with shooting the vast expanses. Karthi is identified as an actor who doesn't feel a stranger even in the very first of the two films and we may have to consider that this film was signed when his first film was not released. Reema Sen added a bold look to the role and much decree seems to have come from the director in shaping her role.
Andrea seems to show more of her interest in singing than acting which seems to tell upon her in the film as well. Parhiban's role is as unexpected as possible and he seems to justify the role offered with much delight.
Finally, Selvaraghavan turns the biggest star of all with his ability to make a film that surpasses years of expectations and sets new standards. Some of the visual spectacles in the film are never before seen in the history of Tamil Cinema. Selvaraghavan must be truly lauded in making such a film!
 |
| My eBook (Version 1) |
It is said that cliche is loved and that a few of us have wanted the film to be cliched. A number of good films lose out due to this expectation. The story takes unpredictable turns and eventually ends in a sober mood which tells upon the overall feel of the film.
The three lead characters set out on an expedition (though partly two with the objective) to find a lost civilization of the Cholas. The breathtaking ride takes us on a high speed screenplay fostered by unexpected twists and turns. The second half establishes the plot and it is only in the second half that you get to know the basic plot of the film. Till the very end, almost towards the end of the third act, you are left in the dark about the plot.
The film takes the point of view of the Cholas and glorifies them, which may be debatable on various fronts - more towards the objective of the film and on why it does so, as in the film. Aayirathil Oruvan turns midway into the mystic and the occult and right when we fear such an orientation of the story, we are blessed with historic revelations on the civilization of the Cholas.
Some of the websites have given honest reviews while some others very biased towards describing the film a crass take on civilizations. The film fails to make an impact at the end not because the story goes wayward but because on the part of the Cholas, the defeat is partially accepted by the Cholas (unusual for the protagonists to suffer towards the end in films), and that the climax was not an emotional resolution of the events that happened before.
 |
| My eBook (Version 2) |
Music score was racy and very much unexpected from a youngster as G.V. Prakash who has scored moderate in all his previous films. Ramji did great with shooting the vast expanses. Karthi is identified as an actor who doesn't feel a stranger even in the very first of the two films and we may have to consider that this film was signed when his first film was not released. Reema Sen added a bold look to the role and much decree seems to have come from the director in shaping her role.
Andrea seems to show more of her interest in singing than acting which seems to tell upon her in the film as well. Parhiban's role is as unexpected as possible and he seems to justify the role offered with much delight.
Finally, Selvaraghavan turns the biggest star of all with his ability to make a film that surpasses years of expectations and sets new standards. Some of the visual spectacles in the film are never before seen in the history of Tamil Cinema. Selvaraghavan must be truly lauded in making such a film!
Aayirathil Oruvan - Selvaraghavan The Filmmaker
A film enthusiast as me would any day be compelled to boast of a film like Aayirathil Oruvan. Nevertheless, I would look into the film in the perspective of a reviewer (though not as critic) as well as the one who enjoyed the film whistling on special scenes. It is common practice that I clap for scenes which others do not, understanding the greatness of a scene through subtle clues that directors employ!
But others do not and whoever comes to movies with me gets embarrassed though I do not, clapping untimely. I read a few of the reviews before writing one myself. I could see that those who reviewed did so taking four points here and there from other websites and fused them to review an original film with original screenplay.
I hated the irony of plagiarizers reviewing original work. Perhaps they were content writers working for websites and had to make quick bucks reaching deadlines. Or perhaps they were not able to review at all. Worse, they didn't watch the film.
Coming to the film, I would say that the film is a tribute to the Indian Film Industry and many film buffs could be offended, if the film is not taken to the film festivals the least. Selvaraghavan has surpassed years of craving and made the impossible, possible.
I could see how the content writing reviewers took a high ground and stared on the film through a narrow hole. Plagiarizers taking high ground was seriously offensive to me. They were not to judge an original work which involved years of hard work. Those blatant attempts at finding faults on the film are not as successful as the movie is.
Let me tell you reviewers(or content writers - I would request you to not demean the profession as I am also part of you), reviewing a work is not about taking the high ground but about looking at the work with a honest pair of eyes. Selvaraghavan has done something remarkable which I do not mean to say that we should turn a blind eye to all possible flaws that might occur while writing a film or while making or the liberties that are self-allowed to point them out.
I may also agree that your reviews were honest and I was offended by the usage of other work to review an original piece of work. A writer is one who is able to think independently on anything and I laud selvaraghavan on the same. In my last post, I spoke about originality of work and seemed to discriminatingly favor a writer for the originality he possessed.
But now, I would not hesitate to call a filmmaker right for the honest attempt he has made in stretching the benchmark on the quality of films that are to be made in the future. He has surpassed years of collective aspirations. He has also sent a strong message across that so much can be done with hard work, perseverance, passion and talent than mere experience!
But others do not and whoever comes to movies with me gets embarrassed though I do not, clapping untimely. I read a few of the reviews before writing one myself. I could see that those who reviewed did so taking four points here and there from other websites and fused them to review an original film with original screenplay.
I hated the irony of plagiarizers reviewing original work. Perhaps they were content writers working for websites and had to make quick bucks reaching deadlines. Or perhaps they were not able to review at all. Worse, they didn't watch the film.
Coming to the film, I would say that the film is a tribute to the Indian Film Industry and many film buffs could be offended, if the film is not taken to the film festivals the least. Selvaraghavan has surpassed years of craving and made the impossible, possible.
I could see how the content writing reviewers took a high ground and stared on the film through a narrow hole. Plagiarizers taking high ground was seriously offensive to me. They were not to judge an original work which involved years of hard work. Those blatant attempts at finding faults on the film are not as successful as the movie is.
Let me tell you reviewers(or content writers - I would request you to not demean the profession as I am also part of you), reviewing a work is not about taking the high ground but about looking at the work with a honest pair of eyes. Selvaraghavan has done something remarkable which I do not mean to say that we should turn a blind eye to all possible flaws that might occur while writing a film or while making or the liberties that are self-allowed to point them out.
I may also agree that your reviews were honest and I was offended by the usage of other work to review an original piece of work. A writer is one who is able to think independently on anything and I laud selvaraghavan on the same. In my last post, I spoke about originality of work and seemed to discriminatingly favor a writer for the originality he possessed.
But now, I would not hesitate to call a filmmaker right for the honest attempt he has made in stretching the benchmark on the quality of films that are to be made in the future. He has surpassed years of collective aspirations. He has also sent a strong message across that so much can be done with hard work, perseverance, passion and talent than mere experience!
Sunday, January 10, 2010
1 idiot Vs the 3 idiots - Chetan Bhagat and Aamir Khan
We may see that plagiarism has been turning a debatable issue and controversies toward a piece of creative work, inclusive of plagiarism, either help market the work or create a notoriously infamous perception on the piece of art!
As a blogger, we may not orient ourselves towards supporting writers but what we may assume of the Chetan Bhagat - Abhijat Joshi, Rajkumar Hirani and Aamir Khan row is that it may be a gross misunderstanding of terms implied in the agreement made between both the makers of 3 idiots and also Chetan Bhagat.
It seemed all too notorious on the part of Aamir Khan, Rajkumar Hirani and Vidhu Vinod Chopra to blatantly deny the authorship to Chetan Bhagat and claim it as a different story from the original Five Point Someone.
Definitions go that an author is the one who creates the original work, the spark, or the idea and any manipulation of the original might be termed Adaptation or when done without permission from the author, plagiarism. Also when the writer is not given due credit.
If the 3 idiots is not the story as in Five Point Someone, then why use certain elements of the Five Point Someone at all? Why make a story with the original idea of Five Point Someone, as both readers of Five Point Someone and the audience of the 3 idiots are aware.
How come authorship is denied to the right levels to Chetan Bhagat, when they have placed his name on the rolling credits as in the agreement? The definition of Ghost Writing goes like this, a ghostwriter is one who writes on the idea or inputs of someone else's original idea. Hence, in this case, Abhijat Joshi may be called the Ghostwriter of Five Point Someone's screen version.
The original idea, however, determines who the author of the story is than a writer who adapts it for the Screens. But, it has gone so grim to a place where both Chetan Bhagat and the makers of 3 idiots have gone about throwing blatant comments at each other.
Definitions on authorship deny authorship to any manipulation of the original idea or work and as popular culture goes, any manipulation of the original is a mere adaptation. Let Rajkumar Hirani, Vidhu Vinod Chopra and Aamir Khan contest the film in the Oscars for best screenplay and ask them if they would contest the film on "Best Original Screenplay? or Best Adapted Screenplay?"
An answer to that question would be rightly justifying their statements! I say this knowing fully that the film, even if it may, contest the Oscars in the Best Foreign Language Film category!
It also looks at the same time that the Chetan Bhagat 3 idiots controversy makes more news than the film 3 idiots itself and hence, this might be intended for publicity. But the ultimate answer to this controversy and the judgement on the same might be better left to the people who have both seen the 3 idiots as well as read the Five Point Someone!
And as readers of the Five Point Someone and audiences of the 3 idiot, you can guess if the film is based mostly on the book or not!
As a blogger, we may not orient ourselves towards supporting writers but what we may assume of the Chetan Bhagat - Abhijat Joshi, Rajkumar Hirani and Aamir Khan row is that it may be a gross misunderstanding of terms implied in the agreement made between both the makers of 3 idiots and also Chetan Bhagat.
 |
| My eBook (Version 1) |
Definitions go that an author is the one who creates the original work, the spark, or the idea and any manipulation of the original might be termed Adaptation or when done without permission from the author, plagiarism. Also when the writer is not given due credit.
If the 3 idiots is not the story as in Five Point Someone, then why use certain elements of the Five Point Someone at all? Why make a story with the original idea of Five Point Someone, as both readers of Five Point Someone and the audience of the 3 idiots are aware.
How come authorship is denied to the right levels to Chetan Bhagat, when they have placed his name on the rolling credits as in the agreement? The definition of Ghost Writing goes like this, a ghostwriter is one who writes on the idea or inputs of someone else's original idea. Hence, in this case, Abhijat Joshi may be called the Ghostwriter of Five Point Someone's screen version.
The original idea, however, determines who the author of the story is than a writer who adapts it for the Screens. But, it has gone so grim to a place where both Chetan Bhagat and the makers of 3 idiots have gone about throwing blatant comments at each other.
Definitions on authorship deny authorship to any manipulation of the original idea or work and as popular culture goes, any manipulation of the original is a mere adaptation. Let Rajkumar Hirani, Vidhu Vinod Chopra and Aamir Khan contest the film in the Oscars for best screenplay and ask them if they would contest the film on "Best Original Screenplay? or Best Adapted Screenplay?"
 |
| My eBook (Version 2) |
It also looks at the same time that the Chetan Bhagat 3 idiots controversy makes more news than the film 3 idiots itself and hence, this might be intended for publicity. But the ultimate answer to this controversy and the judgement on the same might be better left to the people who have both seen the 3 idiots as well as read the Five Point Someone!
And as readers of the Five Point Someone and audiences of the 3 idiot, you can guess if the film is based mostly on the book or not!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)