Jaipur theatres stop screening of 'Panipat'; read why

News Network
December 10, 2019

Jaipur, Dec 10: Several theatres here stopped screening Ashutosh Gowariker's "Panipat" on Monday, amid criticism by Jat groups over the film's portrayal of Bharatpur's Maharaja Surajmal. Jat groups and political leaders, including state ministers, have criticised the portrayal of Maharaja Surajmal and demanded a ban on the film.

The state government has also sought a response from film producers over objections to the movie. According to the management at some cinemas, the shows were cancelled in view of growing resentment and protest against the film. The shows were cancelled at several cinema halls, including Raj Mandir, Cinepolis and Inox theatres at Jaipur. "All shows of the film have been cancelled. The 12-noon show had to be cancelled due to a protest. No untoward incident was reported due to police presence," Raj Mandir manager Ashok Tanwar said.

"Several cinema halls have discontinued the screening of the film in view of the protest. Cinema halls have to bear the brunt in such a situation against a film which is being screened after clearance from the Censor Board," Raj Bansal, general secretary of the Rajasthan Film Trade and Promotion Council, said. He said the central government should form a committee to examine the a film's script and content before sending it for clearance to the Censor Board. "I am writing to the information and broadcasting minister to raise this demand. Earlier, the industry suffered due to protests against Padmaavat," he said.

An Inox official said in a statement that the screening of the movie at the multiplex in Jaipur was stopped. On the other hand, the state government sought a response from film producers. A delegation of the Jat community met Additional Chief Secretary (Home) Rajeeva Swarup, demanding a ban on the film. "The community leaders have expressed their sentiments against the film. We are seeking a response from the producers through the film distributor," the officer said. He said the government would look into what it could do within the ambit of law. Meanwhile, protests against the film were held in Jaipur, Bikaner and Bharatpur. In Bharatpur, Tourism Minister Vishvendra Singh, MLAs Wajib Ali, Mukesh Bhakar and Ramswaroop Gawadia demanded a ban on the film. Protesters damaged a lobby of a cinema hall in Jaipur. A complaint was filed with the Mansarover police station against the film producers.

Complainant Ramavtar Palsania alleged that the producers had distorted historical facts and insulted Surajmal. The complaint was kept for a probe and no FIR was registered, SHO Sunil Kumar said. Additional Police Commissioner (Jaipur) Ajay Pal Lamba said adequate security arrangements had been at the theatres where the movie was screened. "Police is alert and no one will be allowed to disturb law and order. Adequate security arrangements are there where the movie is being screened," he said.

Meanwhile in Rohtak, the All-India Jat Aarakshan Sangarsh Samiti sought a ban on the film with its national president Yashpal Malik alleging distortion of historical facts. The organisation demanded legal action against the film producer besides a ban on it in Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan and other places. Earlier, Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot told reporters that sentiments of people should not be hurt and it would be better if the film was screened after people's satisfaction. "I believe that art and the artists should be respected but they should also take care that any caste, religion, class, great personalities and gods are not insulted," Gehlot said.

"The reactions that are coming about the portrayal of Maharaja Surajmal ji in the film... such a situation should not have been created," the chief minister said, adding that the Censor Board should intervene and take cognisance of it. The movie is based on the Third Battle of Panipat fought between the Maratha empire and Afghan king Ahmad Shah Abdali in 1761.  

Arjun Kapoor plays the role of Sadashiv Rao Bhau, commander of the Maratha army. Bharatpur king Surajmal is shown as having denied help to the Maratha army. About two years back there were protest in Rajasthan and some other northern states over the portrayal of legendary Rajput queen Padmini in Sanjay Leela Bhansali's "Padmaavat".

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 18,2020

Mumbai, Jul 18: Filmmaker and Yash Raj Films (YRF) chairman Aditya Chopra on Saturday recorded his statement with the Mumbai Police in connection with actor Sushant Singh Rajput death case, an official said.

Police have sought information about a contract signed between Rajput and YRF from Chopra who visited Versova police station this morning and left after four hours, the official said.

The "Chhichore" actor, 34, was found hanging at his apartment in Mumbai on June 14. No suicide note was found from the spot by the police.

The police are investigating allegations that professional rivalry, besides clinical depression, drove the actor to suicide.

Police are also trying to understand the reason behind Rajput ending his contract with YRF, the official said.

Earlier, the police had recorded statement of YRF's casting director Shanoo Sharma.

The police had recorded statements of 34 persons, including Rajput's family members and close friends like actors Rhea Chakraborty and Sanjana Sanghi, in connection with the case.

Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh on Friday dismissed the need for a CBI probe into the death case of Rajput, saying the Mumbai police are capable of handling the matter.

On Thursday, Rhea Chakraborty demanded a CBI inquiry to understand what "pressures" prompted Rajput to take the extreme step of suicide.

Rajput starred in films such as Shuddh Desi Romance', Raabta, Kedarnath and Sonchiriya. But his most prominent role came as cricketer Mahendra Singh Dhoni in the biopic, MS Dhoni: The Untold Story.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
January 9,2020

Mumbai, Jan 9: A day after Deepika Padukone visited the JNU campus to express solidarity with students who had been attacked, her film "Chhapaak" made another splash on Wednesday over the name of its antagonist.

While Deepika was the focus of many a discussion on social media and beyond for showing up at a public meeting in the university, the film, based on the life of acid attack survivor Laxmi Agarwal, was also making news for quite another reason.

In what could well be a storm in a 'Twitter cup', "Nadeem Khan" and "Rajesh" began trending on the microblogging site after a magazine article claimed the name of the antagonist had been changed. By 4 pm, 'Nadeem Khan' clocked close to 60,000 tweets and 'Rajesh' close behind with 50,000.

In 2005, Laxmi was disfigured for life when a man called Nadeem Khan and three others allegedly hurled acid at her in Delhi's upscale Khan Market.

In the film based on her life, the narrative remains the same but the names have been changed. So, Laxmi is 'Malti' Agarwal and Nadeem becomes 'Babboo' aka 'Bashir Khan'.

On Wednesday, Swarajya magazine wrote an article headlined, "The Ways Of Bollywood: In Deepika Padukone-Starer Chhapaak, Acid Attacker Naeem Khan Becomes ‘Rajesh'." "As part of a backlash against Padukone's JNU 'meet and greet', social media users researched the names of the characters involved in the movie Chhapaak and conspicuously found the name of main perpetrator Naeem Khan absent," the article alleged.

But in the Meghna Gulzar directed film, there is no mention of any Nadeem or Naeem Khan. Moreover, Rajesh is the name of Malti's boyfriend.

Minister of State for Environment, Forest and Climate Change Babul Supriyo jumped into the controversy, saying it was another example of "absolute hypocrisy".

"...When you say all characters are fictitious and don't have any resemblance with living beings and all of that, this is absolute hypocrisy. When you change the name which also changes the religion, it has been done very deliberately," Supriyo told a TV channel when asked to comment on the controversy.

South Delhi BJP MP Ramesh Biduri also called for a boycott of the movie.

With Deepika grabbing attention by going to JNU, many appreciated her 'silent solidarity' but others criticised her for "supporting the Leftists" and said it was a promotional stunt ahead of the release.

"#BoycottChhapaak" was trending on Twitter as was "#ISupportDeepika".

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 10,2020

Feb 10: Bong Joon-ho’s film “Parasite” starts in a dingy, half-basement apartment with a family of four barely able to scratch out a life. There must be no place to go but up, right? Yes and no. There’s nothing predictable when the South Korean director is on his game.

This dark, socially conscious film about the intertwining of two families is an intricately plotted, adult thriller. We can go up, for sure, but Bong can also take us deeper down. There’s always an extra floor somewhere in this masterpiece.

It tells the story of the impoverished four-person Kim family who, one by one, and with careful and devious planning, all get employed by the four-person affluent Park family — as a tutor, an art teacher, a driver and a housekeeper. They are imposters stunned by the way wealth can make things easier: “Money is an iron. It smooths out all the creases,” says the Park patriarch with wonder.

Bong, who directed and wrote the story for “Parasite,” has picked his title carefully, of course. Naturally, he’s alluding to the sycophantic relationship by a clan of scammers to the clueless rich who have unwittingly opened the doors of their home on a hill. But it’s not that simple. The rich family seem incapable of doing anything — from dishes to sex — without help. Who’s scamming who?

Bong’s previous films play with film genres and never hide their social commentary — think of the environmentalist pig-caper “Okja” and the dystopian sci-fi global warming scream “Snowpiercer.” But this time, Bong’s canvas is a thousand times smaller and his focus light-years more intense. There are no CGI train chases on mountains or car chases through cities. (There is also, thankfully, 100% less Tilda Swinton, a frequent, over-the-top Bong collaborator.

The two Korean families first make contact when a friend of the Kim’s son asks him to take over English lessons for the Park daughter. Soon the son (a dreamy Choi Woo-sik) convinces them to hire his sister (the excellent Park So-dam) as an art teacher, but doesn’t reveal it’s his sis. She forges her diploma and spews arty nonsense she learned on the internet, impressing the polite but firm Park matriarch (a superb Jo Yeo-jeong.)

The Park’s regular chauffer is soon let go and replaced by the Kim patriarch (a steely Lee Sun-kyun). Ditto the housemaid, who is dumped in favor of the Kims’ mother (a feisty Jang Hye-jin.) All eight people seem happy with the new arrangement until Bong reveals a twist: There are more parasites than you imagined. The clean, impeccably furnished Park home will have some blood splashing about.

Bong’s trademark slapstick is still here but the rough edges of his often too-loud lessons are shaved down nicely and his actors step forward. “Keep it focused,” the Kim’s son counsels his father at one point. Bong has followed that advice.

There are typically dazzling Bong touches throughout. Just look for all the insect references — stink bugs at the beginning to flies at the end, and a preoccupation with odor across the frames. And there’s a scene in which the rich matriarch skillfully winds noodles in a bowl while, in another room, duct tape is being wrapped around a victim and classical music plays.

Bong could have been more strident in his social critique but hasn’t. There are no villains in “Parasite” — and also no heroes. Both families are forever broken after chafing against each other, a bleak message about the classes ever really co-existing (Take that, “Downton Abbey”).

“Parasite” is a worthy winner of the Palme d’Or at the Cannes Film Festival, the first South Korean movie to win the prestigious top prize. The director has called it an “unstoppably fierce tragicomedy.” We just call it brilliant.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.