Less pressure in doing multi-starrers: Parineeti

Mumbai, Jun 3: Investigators will subject the cloth allegedly used by actor Sushant Singh Rajput to hang himself to "tensile strength" analysis to determine whether it can bear the weight similar to that of the filmstar, as part of probe into his death, an official said on Friday.

Rajput (34) was found hanging at his suburban Bandra residence on June 14.

According to the investigators, the actor ended his life by hanging himself from the ceiling using a green coloured night gown made of cotton.

No suicide note was found from the spot, the police had said then.

Besides viscera from the actors body, the police also sent the gown for chemical and forensic analysis at the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) in suburban Kalina, he said.

It will take at least three more days to get final forensic report, the official said.

To ascertain the exact cause of death, forensic experts will check pattern of ligature marks around the actors neck and also determine the strength of the gown with the help of "tensile strength" analysis, he said.

The tensile strength test will technically establish whether the cloth can bear around 80kg, the weight of the actor, he said.

The test will help determine if there was any foul play, the official said.

Tensile strength is maximum load that a material can support without fracture when being stretched.

Viscera analysis will help in checking whether there were any traces of chemical, poisonous or narcotics substance in his body, the official said.

"Usually, it takes eight to ten working days to get s report from the FSL in regular cases. But since this case is sensitive, experts are taking more precautions to avoid any kind of error in their analysis," the official said.

The forensic report of the actors mobile phone is also awaited, he said.

Recently, the police received the final post-mortem report of the actor from Cooper Hospital, which mentioned the cause of the death as asphyxia due to hanging"

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.

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".