The existence of Bihu in Asomiya society speaks volume about Asomiya culture as being agricultural. To begin with, Bihu is a harvest festival. Probably, harvest festivals are the only occasions where we can really trace back our lineage to a pagan, primitive life much before civilization, even before the birth of religion.
We till fields and it gives us provisions. The soil is our mother. We thank her for the crop we gather. We celebrate the fruit of our toil and hope for a better future. This is the how and why a harvest festival.
Surprisingly, however, Asomiya culture is not happy at having just only one festival. Asom has total three different Bihus spread around strategically in different months of the year.
Despite having diverse cultural differences, the ethos of India is finally identical. It is the same root from where various stems of diverse customs and traditions arise. Therefore it is no surprising to see that the major of the three Asomiya Bihus, called Bohag Bihu or Rongali Bihu, have its counterpart in several other Indian communities: Baishakhi in Punjab, Pongal in Tamil Nadu and so on.
Rongali Bihu is the festival of merriment and joy, as the name suggests. It marks the beginning of the first month of Asomiya calendar, Bohag (15th April – 15th May). More than a harvest festival, Rongali Bihu is a spring festival.
Come April, the dead cold of winter is gone. New leaves appear in the tree, orchids bloom, cuckoo sings, time for merriment.
In an agricultural society, men’s life is blend with his animals. The eve of Bohag Bihu is therefore reserved for the animals, especially cows, called Garu Bihu, the Bihu of the cows. In the morning little children gather different vegetables especially eggplants and white pumpkins, slice them into pieces of dice, and make a garland. Then the animals are led towards pond or nearby river, and are given a good wash, and then are adorned with the vegetable garlands. In the evening selected herbs and plants are brunt and the stable is smoked, so that the animals remain healthy for the coming year.
The next day is the day to show respect to the elders and display love to the loved one. Every one touches feet of their elders and seek blessing. Handkerchiefs and Gamochas, towel-like clothing woven locally, is given as a token of love and respect. The household gathers together along with neighbours and relatives and have grind rice with curd and other delicacies prepared for the occasion.
But Rongali Bihu is especially for the younger generation. They gather together in open fields, and perform Bihu dance and songs. This is time for the young people to communicate their love to each other.
Rongali Bihu runs for total seven days. People enjoy themselves at the change of season and prepare themselves for the coming year.
Seasons change, spring change to summer, summer to autumn. Come autumn, the paddy crop is already sprout into young seedlings. We pray God that no flood, no pestilence should mar our harvest. This is the occasion of another Bihu. There is no merriment. The affluence of harvest is not there. We only wait for a better future. Therefore this Bihu is also called Kangali Bihu or poor Bihu. On the day of the Bihu we go to the fields and light an earthen light to praise the Lord of the corps, and the Goddess of wealth, Laxmi.
In the passage of time, and with the blessings of the Gods above, we gather yellow corps like gold. Our toil over, this is the time to celebrate. After many months of poverty, this time even the poorest of the poor have something to each. So this is Bhagali Bihu, the Bihu of the gourmet.
After the harvest done, we gather together in open fileds and arrange a community feast. The whole village, the entire community pours in. We cook together different delicacies, fish and fowl and enjoy a hearty meal in the night in the company of family, friends, relatives and neighbours.
Thus, in Asom, Bihu is a festival of togetherness, an occasion to share joy and merriment and an excuse to say thanks to the power beyond us for its help.
Friday, March 30, 2007
Lost in wilderness
Film: Pathfinder
Directed by: Marcus Nispel
Starring: Karl Urban, Russell Means, Moon Bloodgood, Jay Tavare
The film is the perfect example of being at the wrong place at the wrong time. Some years ago it would have been a novel endeavour, in a Conan the Barbarian sort of way, But after The Lord of the Rings, and more recent Apocalypto and 300, the film looks highly amateurish, like a young girl with no music talent pretending to be Lata Mangeskar!
The ‘before-bullet’ action adventure saga offers nothing new that you haven’t before, and to make the matter worse, everything about the film range from below average to outright silly.
Hollywood’s fascination for pre-history continues forever, yet, looks like every time they want to make a film on American Indians, they fail miserably, the last example being Terrence Malick’s The New World (Kevin Costner’s Dances with Wolves is a different story altogether.)
So here’s the story before Columbus discovered American. Viking warriors from Scandinavia visit the American shore and wreak havoc. During one such raid, a Viking boy was left behind among the Indians. After some apprehension, the Indians took him under their folds and called him Ghost (Karl Urban, Eomer of The Lord of the Rings). As Ghost grows up, the Vikings attack again and this time Ghost must choose between his people and those who raised him.
Beyond this, its all war, swords and gore, decapitation and bloodshed. That’s perfectly all right, only if the scenes looked good. It’s not very difficult to figure out what’s wrong. Precisely, everything. Director Marcus Nispel is no Mel Gibson who could make an engaging film without much of a story. Here the film fall flat, no story, no sign of a narrative, no characterisation — nothing is fully realised. But the biggest culprit is shoddily done editing. You can hardly figure out what is happening at the war scenes. Add to that the poor quality of lighting, you can see the picture, or vice versa.
Probably, it would be a better idea to catch up with Apocalypto or 300, if you haven’t seen them yet.
Rating: ** So-so
Directed by: Marcus Nispel
Starring: Karl Urban, Russell Means, Moon Bloodgood, Jay Tavare
The film is the perfect example of being at the wrong place at the wrong time. Some years ago it would have been a novel endeavour, in a Conan the Barbarian sort of way, But after The Lord of the Rings, and more recent Apocalypto and 300, the film looks highly amateurish, like a young girl with no music talent pretending to be Lata Mangeskar!
The ‘before-bullet’ action adventure saga offers nothing new that you haven’t before, and to make the matter worse, everything about the film range from below average to outright silly.
Hollywood’s fascination for pre-history continues forever, yet, looks like every time they want to make a film on American Indians, they fail miserably, the last example being Terrence Malick’s The New World (Kevin Costner’s Dances with Wolves is a different story altogether.)
So here’s the story before Columbus discovered American. Viking warriors from Scandinavia visit the American shore and wreak havoc. During one such raid, a Viking boy was left behind among the Indians. After some apprehension, the Indians took him under their folds and called him Ghost (Karl Urban, Eomer of The Lord of the Rings). As Ghost grows up, the Vikings attack again and this time Ghost must choose between his people and those who raised him.
Beyond this, its all war, swords and gore, decapitation and bloodshed. That’s perfectly all right, only if the scenes looked good. It’s not very difficult to figure out what’s wrong. Precisely, everything. Director Marcus Nispel is no Mel Gibson who could make an engaging film without much of a story. Here the film fall flat, no story, no sign of a narrative, no characterisation — nothing is fully realised. But the biggest culprit is shoddily done editing. You can hardly figure out what is happening at the war scenes. Add to that the poor quality of lighting, you can see the picture, or vice versa.
Probably, it would be a better idea to catch up with Apocalypto or 300, if you haven’t seen them yet.
Rating: ** So-so
Demystifying Mahabharata
“Yuganta: the end of an epoch”
By Dibyajyoti Sarma
The book has all the potentials of blasphemy. It is a commentary on the Mahabharata by a woman. Karve, however, has a vision. She has the power to see things in unconventional manner, even when she is just describing them.
Karve sees the Mahabharata not as a Hindu religious text, or a literary text of ancient India, but as a way of life. It chronicles of the life of upper class Aryan society, namely Brahmans and Kshatriyas. It deals with characters that are flesh and blood, who are human with all their faults and idiosyncrasies. Even a personality like Krishna is a man; it is the later commentators who elevated him to the status of a god.
The book is a study of the major characters of the Mahabharata, pointing out their majestic qualities and their fatal choices, which ultimately shaped the grand drama of the Mahabharata. If not entirely, the major portion of Karve’s postmortem of the characters is clinical, rational and socio-anthropologically correct. While doing so, however, she intentionally or unintentionally invites controversies. She takes Draupadi’s fate as a wife of five husbands for granted, which is surprising since Karve tries to find a rational explanation for everything that is mystical about the Mahabharata. She is, however, most divisive when she almost convince us to believe that Bidura is the real father of Dharma Yudhisthira.
Barring the introduction, the book contains 10 chapters devoted to characters and issues. Apart from the characters of Bhishma, Gandhari, Kunti, Draupadi, Karna and Krishna, Karve also talks about how the famous Mayashabha was built, the relationship between Dharma and Bidura, the role of the Brahmans in the Mahabharata story and what it means to be an end of an epoch, as Mahabharata heralds the end of the Drapadha Yuga and the beginning of the Kali Yuga.
Karve is at her seminal best in interpreting the story of the burning of the Kandava forest. She questions why two respected people like Krishna and Arjuna should burn down the entire forest killing all its inhabitants, except for the Asura Maya, who as a courtesy to this act, builds the mesmerising palace Mayasabha in the Pandava capital of Indraprastha. She goes on to find out the reason, in the process discarding all the conventional ones; such as it was a divine ordained act. Finally, Karve comes to the conclusion that the whole act was in reality the process of Aryan invasion of Indian mainland, thereby eradicating the indigenous inhabitants of the land. In her scrutiny, the Nagas referred to as serpents in the epic becomes a local non-Aryan tribe who were ruthlessly massacred by the Aryan warriors, Krishna and Arjuna. There is conviction and reasoning in the thesis and it give a whole new perspective to the Mahabharata story (in the final analysis the story turns into story of tribal feud running for three generations: Arjuna massacred the Naga tribe, his grandson Parikshit in turn was killed by a Naga called Takshaka, and finally the entire Naga tribe was slaughtered by Parikshit’s son Janmejaya. It is at this juncture that the story of Mahabharata begins.)
Karve’s hawk-eyed inquiry makes room for none as blemish free. She admires them, but never betrays any sympathy, and in her ruthless analysis we see the players of the Mahabharata stripped from their glories. They appear before us as flesh and bone caught into the existential drama of choice.
In her analysis, Gandhari is a stubborn woman, who obstinately blindfolded herself at the news of her husband’s blindness and in the process never tired to see the reality even the expense of destroying her own clan.
Kunti was luckier. She was at least a queen, even if for a short period of time. But she was married to an impotent man, and had a past, which she could tell no one. Finally, she had five children who could do nothing without her advice. It was a judicious and shrewd decision by Kunti to get Draupadi to marry all her five children. Otherwise, there are possibilities that the Pandavas might have fought against each other for Draupadi.
Karve is somewhat sympathetic to Draupadi. Unlike Sita, who lived in perpetual honeymoon, especially in the forest before Ravana abducted her, Draupadi had to suffer every kind of humiliations. She was dragged to the Kuru court in front of everyone, and most importantly, had to suffer a hard life in the forest without any fault of her own. After the war was over, she had already lost her five sons. Surprisingly, the one fault Karve finds in Draupadi is that she questioned about dharma and ethics before public, an act which she was not supposed to do being a woman. Karve sees Draupadi as an earth woman, a real raw personality who can wait for vengeance patiently, and it arrives, enjoy it in full blood. One man who comes closer to Draupadi in this respect is Bhima, the earthman, representing raw energy.
Karve is most unsympathetic towards Karna, which is startling because for generations Karna is portrayed as a great warrior and an unfortunate man who demands our sympathy (Shivaji Sawant’s famous Marathi novel Mritunjay). For Karve, Karna is uncultured, selfish and unreasonably proud. He is unfortunate all right, but he does not do anything to elevate his status, except for occasional glimmer of greatness. He was the one who suggested the vastraharan of Draupadi. Another evil character that comes through Karve’s discussion is Ashwathama, the son of Drona. Both Drona and his son are incongruous in the military environment of an Aryan society, for they were Brahmans and it was not there job to fight, and finally when they performed the job, it to only to create havoc, the son doing worse then his father.
The interesting part of the book is Karve’s demystification of the character of Krishna. Karve does not believe him as a divine character, but just another Aryan king, an evolved and enlightened one.
Somehow, Karve does not give any allowance for fiction and fantasy. For every divine thing she tries to find a rational answer. She questions who Pandava’s real father were. They were certainly not gods.
The last section of the book is devoted to the discussion of the culture and society of the Mahabharata age, and the process of collecting the epic itself. She describes how the original story is developed into the enormous epic of Mahabharata from a small book called Jaya, meaning victory.
The book is undoubtedly a seminal work in the scholarship of ancient Indian culture and literature.
If you enjoyed Mahabharata and like to believe that there is a seed of real history in its roots, then this book is certainly for you.
The Author:
Noted indologist and anthropologist Irawati Karve is better known for her two celebrated daughters, Gauri Deshpande and Jai Nimbkar. She was with the Department of Anthropology, University of Pune for many years. She is highly respected as a free individual and free thinker. She is famous for being one of the few early women to drive a scooter on Pune roads.
The Book:
Yuganta: the end of an epoch
Iravati Karve
Originally published in Marathi under the title Yuganta by Deshmukh Prakashan, 1969; the book subsequently won a Sahitya Academy Prize as the best book in Marathi for that year.
Translated and trans-created by the author
First published by Sangam Books, 1974
Published by Disha Books, 1991, 1999
By Dibyajyoti Sarma
The book has all the potentials of blasphemy. It is a commentary on the Mahabharata by a woman. Karve, however, has a vision. She has the power to see things in unconventional manner, even when she is just describing them.
Karve sees the Mahabharata not as a Hindu religious text, or a literary text of ancient India, but as a way of life. It chronicles of the life of upper class Aryan society, namely Brahmans and Kshatriyas. It deals with characters that are flesh and blood, who are human with all their faults and idiosyncrasies. Even a personality like Krishna is a man; it is the later commentators who elevated him to the status of a god.
The book is a study of the major characters of the Mahabharata, pointing out their majestic qualities and their fatal choices, which ultimately shaped the grand drama of the Mahabharata. If not entirely, the major portion of Karve’s postmortem of the characters is clinical, rational and socio-anthropologically correct. While doing so, however, she intentionally or unintentionally invites controversies. She takes Draupadi’s fate as a wife of five husbands for granted, which is surprising since Karve tries to find a rational explanation for everything that is mystical about the Mahabharata. She is, however, most divisive when she almost convince us to believe that Bidura is the real father of Dharma Yudhisthira.
Barring the introduction, the book contains 10 chapters devoted to characters and issues. Apart from the characters of Bhishma, Gandhari, Kunti, Draupadi, Karna and Krishna, Karve also talks about how the famous Mayashabha was built, the relationship between Dharma and Bidura, the role of the Brahmans in the Mahabharata story and what it means to be an end of an epoch, as Mahabharata heralds the end of the Drapadha Yuga and the beginning of the Kali Yuga.
Karve is at her seminal best in interpreting the story of the burning of the Kandava forest. She questions why two respected people like Krishna and Arjuna should burn down the entire forest killing all its inhabitants, except for the Asura Maya, who as a courtesy to this act, builds the mesmerising palace Mayasabha in the Pandava capital of Indraprastha. She goes on to find out the reason, in the process discarding all the conventional ones; such as it was a divine ordained act. Finally, Karve comes to the conclusion that the whole act was in reality the process of Aryan invasion of Indian mainland, thereby eradicating the indigenous inhabitants of the land. In her scrutiny, the Nagas referred to as serpents in the epic becomes a local non-Aryan tribe who were ruthlessly massacred by the Aryan warriors, Krishna and Arjuna. There is conviction and reasoning in the thesis and it give a whole new perspective to the Mahabharata story (in the final analysis the story turns into story of tribal feud running for three generations: Arjuna massacred the Naga tribe, his grandson Parikshit in turn was killed by a Naga called Takshaka, and finally the entire Naga tribe was slaughtered by Parikshit’s son Janmejaya. It is at this juncture that the story of Mahabharata begins.)
Karve’s hawk-eyed inquiry makes room for none as blemish free. She admires them, but never betrays any sympathy, and in her ruthless analysis we see the players of the Mahabharata stripped from their glories. They appear before us as flesh and bone caught into the existential drama of choice.
In her analysis, Gandhari is a stubborn woman, who obstinately blindfolded herself at the news of her husband’s blindness and in the process never tired to see the reality even the expense of destroying her own clan.
Kunti was luckier. She was at least a queen, even if for a short period of time. But she was married to an impotent man, and had a past, which she could tell no one. Finally, she had five children who could do nothing without her advice. It was a judicious and shrewd decision by Kunti to get Draupadi to marry all her five children. Otherwise, there are possibilities that the Pandavas might have fought against each other for Draupadi.
Karve is somewhat sympathetic to Draupadi. Unlike Sita, who lived in perpetual honeymoon, especially in the forest before Ravana abducted her, Draupadi had to suffer every kind of humiliations. She was dragged to the Kuru court in front of everyone, and most importantly, had to suffer a hard life in the forest without any fault of her own. After the war was over, she had already lost her five sons. Surprisingly, the one fault Karve finds in Draupadi is that she questioned about dharma and ethics before public, an act which she was not supposed to do being a woman. Karve sees Draupadi as an earth woman, a real raw personality who can wait for vengeance patiently, and it arrives, enjoy it in full blood. One man who comes closer to Draupadi in this respect is Bhima, the earthman, representing raw energy.
Karve is most unsympathetic towards Karna, which is startling because for generations Karna is portrayed as a great warrior and an unfortunate man who demands our sympathy (Shivaji Sawant’s famous Marathi novel Mritunjay). For Karve, Karna is uncultured, selfish and unreasonably proud. He is unfortunate all right, but he does not do anything to elevate his status, except for occasional glimmer of greatness. He was the one who suggested the vastraharan of Draupadi. Another evil character that comes through Karve’s discussion is Ashwathama, the son of Drona. Both Drona and his son are incongruous in the military environment of an Aryan society, for they were Brahmans and it was not there job to fight, and finally when they performed the job, it to only to create havoc, the son doing worse then his father.
The interesting part of the book is Karve’s demystification of the character of Krishna. Karve does not believe him as a divine character, but just another Aryan king, an evolved and enlightened one.
Somehow, Karve does not give any allowance for fiction and fantasy. For every divine thing she tries to find a rational answer. She questions who Pandava’s real father were. They were certainly not gods.
The last section of the book is devoted to the discussion of the culture and society of the Mahabharata age, and the process of collecting the epic itself. She describes how the original story is developed into the enormous epic of Mahabharata from a small book called Jaya, meaning victory.
The book is undoubtedly a seminal work in the scholarship of ancient Indian culture and literature.
If you enjoyed Mahabharata and like to believe that there is a seed of real history in its roots, then this book is certainly for you.
The Author:
Noted indologist and anthropologist Irawati Karve is better known for her two celebrated daughters, Gauri Deshpande and Jai Nimbkar. She was with the Department of Anthropology, University of Pune for many years. She is highly respected as a free individual and free thinker. She is famous for being one of the few early women to drive a scooter on Pune roads.
The Book:
Yuganta: the end of an epoch
Iravati Karve
Originally published in Marathi under the title Yuganta by Deshmukh Prakashan, 1969; the book subsequently won a Sahitya Academy Prize as the best book in Marathi for that year.
Translated and trans-created by the author
First published by Sangam Books, 1974
Published by Disha Books, 1991, 1999
Back to Basics: Welcome to Matheran
Picture this. A place just two hours journey from Pune, covered with dark, dense forest! A place crowded with ruined and deserted 19th century houses! A place where every road leads to some precipice, offering a panoramic view of nature at her best! This is Matheran, the beautiful hill resort sandwiched between Mumbai and Pune.
The best part of Matheran is that unlike many other hill stations, the worst of modern city life is nowhere to be seen. Ignore the market (and the deluxe hotel where you stay), and you are transported into a different world. Get down from the Toy Train at the station and you are back to the British era: forest roads with trees covering your way like canopies, monkeys crossing your path hunting for food, tribal women in their traditional costumes busy with their chores, and ‘rickshawallas’ and ‘ghorawallas’ waiting, at your disposal.
You’d probably like a horse ride. But before that book a hotel room and freshen up. There’s long road ahead. For staying accommodations, you’ve several options to choose from: from swanky ‘The Rugby’, The Byke’ to ‘Usha Ascot’, ‘The Regal’, to hotels such as ‘Girivihar’ and ‘Lake View’. There are also numerous lodges run by the locals.
Now, time for a walk! Don’t bother to wear good clothes in Matheran. While you walk on the roads, the dust of the rust coloured soil would invariably smear you. That’s the beauty of the place. You can begin your walk at any point. Matheran is a land of points. In every corner, there’s a point, each more beautiful than the previous one. There are in all 30 points which command panoramic view of the surrounding countryside.
You can start with Panorama point, king of the points, which offers a comprehensive view of the countryside. Looking eastward you can see a small train winding its way towards Pune. To the south lie the long lines of the Matheran hills. You can also view the village of Neral spreading across the valley like some miniature art. This point is ideal for watching sunrise. Mount Berry near Panorama point is one of the highest of the hills, offering a grand view of the Sahyadri mountain range. The Garbut point offers a brilliant view of the central railway. From Chouk point you can see the southern plateau and the broken ranges of Sahyadri with clustering villages.
Every point in Matheran has tales of the bygone days. There’s Charlotte Lake guarding three points, Lord, Celia and King George point. Lumley Seat was built in memory of the visit to the hill of the Governor of Bombay, Sir Roger Lumley. King Edward point and Coronation point are named after the coronation of Edward VII, king of England in 1903.
The Louisa point is the largest of all the points. At Echo point the hill will reverberate to your voice. You may also be able to see a waterfall in October. The Porcupine point is ideal for watching sunset.
And a visit to One Tree Hill is a must. The point acquired its name from the solitary Jambul tree that stands atop the hill. From here you can view the Bombay-Pune road, and the Chouk village at the foothills. If you are adventurous enough, you could climb down the hilly pathways called Shivaji Ladder to visit the sleepy tribal village below. This was the road through which Mr. Mallet climbed up when he discovered Matheran in 1850.
As a collector of Thane under British Raj, Mr. Hugh P. Malet once visited the village of Chouk, and discovered the hill of Matheran, which till now was a grazing ground. He was so enamoured by the beauty of the hill that he decided to build a bungalow for himself, ‘The Byke’ which is now a luxury hotel. Other British officials followed suit, and soon Matheran become a prized summer retreat. Then arrived the Gujarati and Parsee merchants from Bombay and by the end of 19th century Matheran turned into a thriving little resort with holiday bungalows.
The eight-kilometer Ghat road between Neral and Matheran was completed in 1855. In those days journeys to Matheran were made either on foot or by rickshaws, ponies or manchils. The Parsee gentleman Adamjee Peerbhoy looked for a suitable solution for the road and under his aegis the Neral-Matheran railway line was opened on 15th April 1907.
Today, besides the toy train, which covers a distance of 21 km in two hours to take the visitors to Matheran, there are also hired taxies to reach the place from Neral.
This is Matheran, situated on 18.58 North Latitude and 73.18 East Longitude. The area is about 7.35 sq. km. The highest spot of the hill is 803.47 m. above the sea level. As regards to climate, it is delightfully cool and crisp. In the summers the temperatures read between 20 to 30 degrees Celsius. In the winter season, it hovers between 15 to 25 degrees Celsius.
The original inhabitants of Matheran belong to three classes: Dhangars, Thakurs and Katkaris. They live on the slopes of the hills and speak a corrupt version of Marathi. Though their original occupation was agriculture and hunting, now they earn their livelihood by attending to the tourists.
The chief attraction of Matheran is its long and quiet walks. Sight seeing is secondary. The charm lies in the dusty soil road with evergreen trees to give you company. As you walk, some long deserted bungalows will pop up from inside the greenery, a broken wrought-iron gate will welcome you murmuring the tales of those forgotten days when these empty houses where sheltering people, giving life to this quiet and solitary place. You may also observe the 19th century architecture of these buildings, and marvel at the grand lifestyle the owners of these houses lived. Most of these bungalows are now taken care of by the malis while the decedents of the owners are either in Bombay or abroad. Some of these building are decaying slowly.
Matheran boasts of hundred percent ‘mineral airs’ and a rare silence from the noisy mechanical world, except for monkeys and birds, the horses and the human voices. From Dasturi, in Matheran no vehicle is allowed to enter, keeping the place as pristine as nature made it. You pay a capitation fee of Rs. 25, and you are left alone. You may hire a horse. The charge would vary according to distance; or you can get into a hand-pulled rickshaw.
The idea is to breathe freely and trust your feet. Give yourself a chance to get close to nature. Let your senses rejuvinate from the weariness of your hectic lifestyle. Welcome to Matheran.
How to reach Matheran:
From Pune station board Sinhagad Express to Karjat. From Karjat take a local to Neral. You can also go by Sahyadri Express, which halts at Neral station.
From Neral you can take the Toy train, which will take two hours. If you are in a hurry you can also take a cab to reach Matheran in 40 minutes.
Food and Accommodation:
Accommodation should be easily available, except for April-May, which is the peak season. You can stay at the modest MTDC resort at Dasturi, or opt for various hotels and lodges spreading over the place. If you are not looking for luxuries like sauna, Jacuzzi, or swimming pool, accommodation should not cost you much.
For food, you can rely on M. G. Road, i.e. the market. Try not to carry food while you walk. Monkeys are used to snatching eatables from visitors.
The best part of Matheran is that unlike many other hill stations, the worst of modern city life is nowhere to be seen. Ignore the market (and the deluxe hotel where you stay), and you are transported into a different world. Get down from the Toy Train at the station and you are back to the British era: forest roads with trees covering your way like canopies, monkeys crossing your path hunting for food, tribal women in their traditional costumes busy with their chores, and ‘rickshawallas’ and ‘ghorawallas’ waiting, at your disposal.
You’d probably like a horse ride. But before that book a hotel room and freshen up. There’s long road ahead. For staying accommodations, you’ve several options to choose from: from swanky ‘The Rugby’, The Byke’ to ‘Usha Ascot’, ‘The Regal’, to hotels such as ‘Girivihar’ and ‘Lake View’. There are also numerous lodges run by the locals.
Now, time for a walk! Don’t bother to wear good clothes in Matheran. While you walk on the roads, the dust of the rust coloured soil would invariably smear you. That’s the beauty of the place. You can begin your walk at any point. Matheran is a land of points. In every corner, there’s a point, each more beautiful than the previous one. There are in all 30 points which command panoramic view of the surrounding countryside.
You can start with Panorama point, king of the points, which offers a comprehensive view of the countryside. Looking eastward you can see a small train winding its way towards Pune. To the south lie the long lines of the Matheran hills. You can also view the village of Neral spreading across the valley like some miniature art. This point is ideal for watching sunrise. Mount Berry near Panorama point is one of the highest of the hills, offering a grand view of the Sahyadri mountain range. The Garbut point offers a brilliant view of the central railway. From Chouk point you can see the southern plateau and the broken ranges of Sahyadri with clustering villages.
Every point in Matheran has tales of the bygone days. There’s Charlotte Lake guarding three points, Lord, Celia and King George point. Lumley Seat was built in memory of the visit to the hill of the Governor of Bombay, Sir Roger Lumley. King Edward point and Coronation point are named after the coronation of Edward VII, king of England in 1903.
The Louisa point is the largest of all the points. At Echo point the hill will reverberate to your voice. You may also be able to see a waterfall in October. The Porcupine point is ideal for watching sunset.
And a visit to One Tree Hill is a must. The point acquired its name from the solitary Jambul tree that stands atop the hill. From here you can view the Bombay-Pune road, and the Chouk village at the foothills. If you are adventurous enough, you could climb down the hilly pathways called Shivaji Ladder to visit the sleepy tribal village below. This was the road through which Mr. Mallet climbed up when he discovered Matheran in 1850.
As a collector of Thane under British Raj, Mr. Hugh P. Malet once visited the village of Chouk, and discovered the hill of Matheran, which till now was a grazing ground. He was so enamoured by the beauty of the hill that he decided to build a bungalow for himself, ‘The Byke’ which is now a luxury hotel. Other British officials followed suit, and soon Matheran become a prized summer retreat. Then arrived the Gujarati and Parsee merchants from Bombay and by the end of 19th century Matheran turned into a thriving little resort with holiday bungalows.
The eight-kilometer Ghat road between Neral and Matheran was completed in 1855. In those days journeys to Matheran were made either on foot or by rickshaws, ponies or manchils. The Parsee gentleman Adamjee Peerbhoy looked for a suitable solution for the road and under his aegis the Neral-Matheran railway line was opened on 15th April 1907.
Today, besides the toy train, which covers a distance of 21 km in two hours to take the visitors to Matheran, there are also hired taxies to reach the place from Neral.
This is Matheran, situated on 18.58 North Latitude and 73.18 East Longitude. The area is about 7.35 sq. km. The highest spot of the hill is 803.47 m. above the sea level. As regards to climate, it is delightfully cool and crisp. In the summers the temperatures read between 20 to 30 degrees Celsius. In the winter season, it hovers between 15 to 25 degrees Celsius.
The original inhabitants of Matheran belong to three classes: Dhangars, Thakurs and Katkaris. They live on the slopes of the hills and speak a corrupt version of Marathi. Though their original occupation was agriculture and hunting, now they earn their livelihood by attending to the tourists.
The chief attraction of Matheran is its long and quiet walks. Sight seeing is secondary. The charm lies in the dusty soil road with evergreen trees to give you company. As you walk, some long deserted bungalows will pop up from inside the greenery, a broken wrought-iron gate will welcome you murmuring the tales of those forgotten days when these empty houses where sheltering people, giving life to this quiet and solitary place. You may also observe the 19th century architecture of these buildings, and marvel at the grand lifestyle the owners of these houses lived. Most of these bungalows are now taken care of by the malis while the decedents of the owners are either in Bombay or abroad. Some of these building are decaying slowly.
Matheran boasts of hundred percent ‘mineral airs’ and a rare silence from the noisy mechanical world, except for monkeys and birds, the horses and the human voices. From Dasturi, in Matheran no vehicle is allowed to enter, keeping the place as pristine as nature made it. You pay a capitation fee of Rs. 25, and you are left alone. You may hire a horse. The charge would vary according to distance; or you can get into a hand-pulled rickshaw.
The idea is to breathe freely and trust your feet. Give yourself a chance to get close to nature. Let your senses rejuvinate from the weariness of your hectic lifestyle. Welcome to Matheran.
How to reach Matheran:
From Pune station board Sinhagad Express to Karjat. From Karjat take a local to Neral. You can also go by Sahyadri Express, which halts at Neral station.
From Neral you can take the Toy train, which will take two hours. If you are in a hurry you can also take a cab to reach Matheran in 40 minutes.
Food and Accommodation:
Accommodation should be easily available, except for April-May, which is the peak season. You can stay at the modest MTDC resort at Dasturi, or opt for various hotels and lodges spreading over the place. If you are not looking for luxuries like sauna, Jacuzzi, or swimming pool, accommodation should not cost you much.
For food, you can rely on M. G. Road, i.e. the market. Try not to carry food while you walk. Monkeys are used to snatching eatables from visitors.
Gods and Lovers: Apollo & Co.
DO gods make better lovers than we mortals? Stories of gods in love with mortals are an integral part of Greek mythology; most of these love stories coming to a sad ending.
The arch-looser was Apollo, the god of prophesy and later the sun god, a great archer and a handsome youth.
Apollo fell in love with Cassandra, daughter of Priam, king of Troy. But Cassandra was a difficult damsel to please. When Apollo gallantly declared his love to her street smart Cassandra Replied: “But dear Apollo, you are a god. I am but just a mortal beauty. Is this a good match? Love-struck Apollo immediately asked: “Cassandra, my love, what do you want?” The Princess was waiting just for that moment. She answered: “Apollo, you are a god of prophesy. Make me a prophetess. Then only I will return your love.” As love was always blind, Apollo granted the boon without delay. As soon as Cassandra received her power of prophesy, she informed: “Apollo, dear god, wise people always advice never to trust a god. Tell me, how can I trust you that you love me? Besides, after this power of prophesies, we are equal, you see. Now, I’m worthy of Zeus’s love, not yours.”
Apollo got intolerably angry at Cassandra duplicity. He could do nothing about her power of prophesy; the boon was already granted. But the jilted lover gave Cassandra a terrible curse: She will retain her power, but no body will believe in her prophecies.
Cassandra suffered her fate to the hilt. In the Trojan War she informed her people what was impending, coming of the Greeks, Hector’s death, the Trojan horse. But no one did believe her. Such was Apollo’s curse. After the war was over, and she was given as booty to Agamemnon, she advised the Greek general that he should not return to his kingdom lest his wife murdered him. Agamemnon did not take hid of Cassandra’s mad mutterings and in the process got himself and Cassandra killed by Clytemnestra, his vengeful wife.
As a god of prophecy did Apollo know that Cassandra was going to refuse him? Did he know that poor Daphne would turn into a laurel tree?
Daphne, the beautiful daughter of river god Peneus, dedicated herself to Artemis, goddess of the hunt, and, refused to marry. One day, Apollo, while riding his chariot of sun from east to west, saw Daphne roaming among the woods and, as was his habit, fell instantly in love with her. He descended upon the wood and proposed his love to Daphne, but his object of desire would not listen. Desperate and love-struck, Apollo tried to force her physically. Daphne ran towards the deep jungle to save her izzat. But Apollo would not leave his prize so easily. He pursued her relentlessly. As she ran, she prayed her father to save her from the lusty clutches of Apollo. He father granted her prayers and as Apollo was about to reach her, the river god turned her into a laurel tree (Urvashi too turned into a tree while pursued by her mortal lover Pururuvas). Shocked and devastated, Apollo sat under the tree and wept for his lost love. Finally he decided to give Daphne his final tribute of love by wearing a twig of laurel leaves into his golden crown. Poor Apollo!
Goddesses as lovers suffered even greater tragedy. The Trojan king Priam’s nephew Tithonus, a handsome young man was loved by the goddess of dawn Eos. She also bore him a son, the hero Memnon, king of Ethiopia. But as a goddess, she was not permitted to marry a mere mortal. Eos went to Zeus, king of Gods and prayed for Tithonus’s immortality, which Zeus granted. But in her happiness and in her state of love, Eos forgot to ask for another boon, eternal youth for her lover. Gods were genetically ever-young, men were not. As time passed, Eos remained the same voluptuous and beautiful whereas Tithonus withered away to a decrepit and shrivelled old man who could never die. He was no longer a match for his divine wife and the only thing he could ask for was death. Finally Eos took pity on him and turned him to a grasshopper.
Apollo’s sister Artemis however was smart. She fell in love with the beautiful shepherd boy Endymion and made him sleep eternally so that he could never change and grow old. Adonis was another handsome shepherd loved by two goddesses, Aphrodite, goddess of love and Proserpine, goddess of the underworld. Then poor Adonis was killed by a wild boar. Aphrodite pleaded with Zeus to restore him to her. Zeus decreed that Adonis should spend the winter months with Persephone in Hell and the summer months with Aphrodite.
The tragic chemistry of divine and mortal love in Greek mythology found a happy ending in the Roman myth of Cupid and Psyche. Jealous of Psyche's beauty, Venus, goddess of love, ordered her son, Cupid, to make Psyche fall in love with the ugliest man in the world. The hunter however turned hunted, and Cupid fell in love with Psyche. He carried her off to a secluded palace where he visited her only by night, unseen and unrecognized by her. Although Cupid had forbidden her ever to look upon his face, one night Psyche lit a lamp and looked upon him while he slept. Because she had disobeyed him, Cupid abandoned her, and Psyche was left to wander desolately throughout the world in search of him. Finally, after many trials she was reunited with Cupid and was made immortal by Zeus.
The arch-looser was Apollo, the god of prophesy and later the sun god, a great archer and a handsome youth.
Apollo fell in love with Cassandra, daughter of Priam, king of Troy. But Cassandra was a difficult damsel to please. When Apollo gallantly declared his love to her street smart Cassandra Replied: “But dear Apollo, you are a god. I am but just a mortal beauty. Is this a good match? Love-struck Apollo immediately asked: “Cassandra, my love, what do you want?” The Princess was waiting just for that moment. She answered: “Apollo, you are a god of prophesy. Make me a prophetess. Then only I will return your love.” As love was always blind, Apollo granted the boon without delay. As soon as Cassandra received her power of prophesy, she informed: “Apollo, dear god, wise people always advice never to trust a god. Tell me, how can I trust you that you love me? Besides, after this power of prophesies, we are equal, you see. Now, I’m worthy of Zeus’s love, not yours.”
Apollo got intolerably angry at Cassandra duplicity. He could do nothing about her power of prophesy; the boon was already granted. But the jilted lover gave Cassandra a terrible curse: She will retain her power, but no body will believe in her prophecies.
Cassandra suffered her fate to the hilt. In the Trojan War she informed her people what was impending, coming of the Greeks, Hector’s death, the Trojan horse. But no one did believe her. Such was Apollo’s curse. After the war was over, and she was given as booty to Agamemnon, she advised the Greek general that he should not return to his kingdom lest his wife murdered him. Agamemnon did not take hid of Cassandra’s mad mutterings and in the process got himself and Cassandra killed by Clytemnestra, his vengeful wife.
As a god of prophecy did Apollo know that Cassandra was going to refuse him? Did he know that poor Daphne would turn into a laurel tree?
Daphne, the beautiful daughter of river god Peneus, dedicated herself to Artemis, goddess of the hunt, and, refused to marry. One day, Apollo, while riding his chariot of sun from east to west, saw Daphne roaming among the woods and, as was his habit, fell instantly in love with her. He descended upon the wood and proposed his love to Daphne, but his object of desire would not listen. Desperate and love-struck, Apollo tried to force her physically. Daphne ran towards the deep jungle to save her izzat. But Apollo would not leave his prize so easily. He pursued her relentlessly. As she ran, she prayed her father to save her from the lusty clutches of Apollo. He father granted her prayers and as Apollo was about to reach her, the river god turned her into a laurel tree (Urvashi too turned into a tree while pursued by her mortal lover Pururuvas). Shocked and devastated, Apollo sat under the tree and wept for his lost love. Finally he decided to give Daphne his final tribute of love by wearing a twig of laurel leaves into his golden crown. Poor Apollo!
Goddesses as lovers suffered even greater tragedy. The Trojan king Priam’s nephew Tithonus, a handsome young man was loved by the goddess of dawn Eos. She also bore him a son, the hero Memnon, king of Ethiopia. But as a goddess, she was not permitted to marry a mere mortal. Eos went to Zeus, king of Gods and prayed for Tithonus’s immortality, which Zeus granted. But in her happiness and in her state of love, Eos forgot to ask for another boon, eternal youth for her lover. Gods were genetically ever-young, men were not. As time passed, Eos remained the same voluptuous and beautiful whereas Tithonus withered away to a decrepit and shrivelled old man who could never die. He was no longer a match for his divine wife and the only thing he could ask for was death. Finally Eos took pity on him and turned him to a grasshopper.
Apollo’s sister Artemis however was smart. She fell in love with the beautiful shepherd boy Endymion and made him sleep eternally so that he could never change and grow old. Adonis was another handsome shepherd loved by two goddesses, Aphrodite, goddess of love and Proserpine, goddess of the underworld. Then poor Adonis was killed by a wild boar. Aphrodite pleaded with Zeus to restore him to her. Zeus decreed that Adonis should spend the winter months with Persephone in Hell and the summer months with Aphrodite.
The tragic chemistry of divine and mortal love in Greek mythology found a happy ending in the Roman myth of Cupid and Psyche. Jealous of Psyche's beauty, Venus, goddess of love, ordered her son, Cupid, to make Psyche fall in love with the ugliest man in the world. The hunter however turned hunted, and Cupid fell in love with Psyche. He carried her off to a secluded palace where he visited her only by night, unseen and unrecognized by her. Although Cupid had forbidden her ever to look upon his face, one night Psyche lit a lamp and looked upon him while he slept. Because she had disobeyed him, Cupid abandoned her, and Psyche was left to wander desolately throughout the world in search of him. Finally, after many trials she was reunited with Cupid and was made immortal by Zeus.
Zeus, the King of the Greek Gods
IS there a connection between debauchery and being a king? The answer perhaps would never be known. It however gets more complicated when we talk about gods.
Both Zeus, the king of the Greek Gods and Indra, the king of Indian pantheon are famous for their lecherous character, their fondness for beautiful women and different stories their sexual escapades (Ahalya was molested by Indra who came in disguise of her husband; Zeus raped Leda turning into a swan)
Again, in mythology both are portrayed as protector or saviour. In Indian myths, Indra is sometimes called Purandar, the guardian of the city (Pur). He killed the demon Vritra with his weapon, thunderbolt (made of the sage Dadhisi’s bones). Zeus was the protector of the city of Athens.
Both of them command thunderbolt as their chosen weapon; they are gods of sky, cloud and rain, both preside over their respective heaven, Mount Olympus and Amravati (not to mention Indra’s apsaras such as Urvashi, Rambha, Menaka, and his elephant Airavat.) Zeus does have an elephant because the animal did not exist in ancient Greek and Greek gods flew, did not ride a Vahan (vehicle)
It would be difficult to find scientific reasoning for these curious similarities. Myths were based on human models, some ancient king who was lecherous, but very able and just (the moral and ethical code was obviously different then). Reference to sky and rain signify the agricultural origin of the myth, for early men, rain was the harbinger of spring, merriment and good harvest.
Zeus is not the creator of either the gods or men, he just rules over them (the same is the case with Indra. He was born of Aditi, who is the mother of all the gods and mortals).
Before Zeus, the Titans ruled over the universe. They were the 12 children of Uranus and Gaea, the Heaven and the Earth. Among them Hyperion is the father of the Sun, the moon and the dawn, Atlas carries the world on his shoulders and, Prometheus created the mortals.
Cronus, the powerful of them all, dethroned Uranus, married his sister, Rhea and ruled over the universe. It was then prophesied that his very act of usurping would be repeated by one of sons. Cronus, in fear, began to swallow all his children the moment they were born. When the sixth one, Zeus was born, Rhea offered Cronus a stone wrapped in clothes and sent Zeus to grow up in Crete. Zeus returned back to face Cronus, forced him to disgorge all his five swallowed siblings and waged a war again the Titans. Zeus was victorious in that Titanic war and sent Cronus along with his aids to live in Tartarus, the innermost part of hell (In Roman mythology Cronus is Saturn, god of agriculture, married to Ops, goddess of plenty.).
After Cronus was dethroned, the universe was divided into his three sons: Zeus became the king of the Olympus hills; Poseidon got the seas to rule and Hades, the underworld. Among the three daughters, Hestia was the goddess of heath, and Demeter the goddess of corn and harvest. Zeus married his sister Hera, the goddess of marriage (The Greek gods seem to follow the Egyptian custom of marrying their own sisters. The Egyptian Pharaohs followed the tradition in order to preserve their divine blood.). Through Zeus and Hera’s marriage was made in heaven it was not a happy one. To complement Zeus’s debauchery, Hera was a very jealous wife, who often persecuted Zeus's mistresses and children.
Hera had her reasons. Zeus had many lovers, among goddesses and among mortals, and his off springs were both Gods and Heroes. The line of Zeus’s offspring include, Apollo and Artemis, siblings born of Leto; Proserpine, the queen of the underworld born of his own sister Demeter; Heracles or Hercules, born of Alcmene and Helen of Troy, born of Leda.
Leda was the wife of Tyndareus, king of Sparta. Zeus saw her, and as was his tendency instantly fell in love with her. But he did not have any chance to get close to her. So one day he disguised himself as a swan, went to visit Leda in the garden and raped her. After the union, Leda laid two eggs from where hatched two pairs: Castor and Pollux, and Clytemnestra, and Helen of Troy. The pair of boys was immortals sons of Zeus who transformed them into the constellation Gemini, or the Twins. Clytemnestra and her sister Helen had to suffer mortal fate and played important roles in shaping the flow of Greek mythology.
Athena or Pallas Athene was Zeus’s favourite child. She was born full grown from Zeus mind. Zeus gave her his shield. She is generally identified as the goddess of war. Romans called her Minerva.
After the appearance of Homer’s epics Iliad and Odyssey, Greek Mythology plays down Zeus’s as a Casanova and emphasizes on his role as a protector. In the epic battle of Troy where every God worth his name had an opinion about what should be done about the war and who should win, Zeus remained a voice of reason, commanding authority and forbidding the divine powers not to intervene unnecessarily into human affairs.
In later Greek literature Zeus’s power is recognised unequivocal. He is the master of fate and human destiny. Aeschylus writes:
Now Zeus is lord; and he / Whose loyalty acclaims his victory / Shall by heart’s instinct find the universal key: / Zeus whose will has marked for man / The sole way where the wisdom lies; / Ordered one eternal plan: / Man must suffer to be wise.
Both Zeus, the king of the Greek Gods and Indra, the king of Indian pantheon are famous for their lecherous character, their fondness for beautiful women and different stories their sexual escapades (Ahalya was molested by Indra who came in disguise of her husband; Zeus raped Leda turning into a swan)
Again, in mythology both are portrayed as protector or saviour. In Indian myths, Indra is sometimes called Purandar, the guardian of the city (Pur). He killed the demon Vritra with his weapon, thunderbolt (made of the sage Dadhisi’s bones). Zeus was the protector of the city of Athens.
Both of them command thunderbolt as their chosen weapon; they are gods of sky, cloud and rain, both preside over their respective heaven, Mount Olympus and Amravati (not to mention Indra’s apsaras such as Urvashi, Rambha, Menaka, and his elephant Airavat.) Zeus does have an elephant because the animal did not exist in ancient Greek and Greek gods flew, did not ride a Vahan (vehicle)
It would be difficult to find scientific reasoning for these curious similarities. Myths were based on human models, some ancient king who was lecherous, but very able and just (the moral and ethical code was obviously different then). Reference to sky and rain signify the agricultural origin of the myth, for early men, rain was the harbinger of spring, merriment and good harvest.
Zeus is not the creator of either the gods or men, he just rules over them (the same is the case with Indra. He was born of Aditi, who is the mother of all the gods and mortals).
Before Zeus, the Titans ruled over the universe. They were the 12 children of Uranus and Gaea, the Heaven and the Earth. Among them Hyperion is the father of the Sun, the moon and the dawn, Atlas carries the world on his shoulders and, Prometheus created the mortals.
Cronus, the powerful of them all, dethroned Uranus, married his sister, Rhea and ruled over the universe. It was then prophesied that his very act of usurping would be repeated by one of sons. Cronus, in fear, began to swallow all his children the moment they were born. When the sixth one, Zeus was born, Rhea offered Cronus a stone wrapped in clothes and sent Zeus to grow up in Crete. Zeus returned back to face Cronus, forced him to disgorge all his five swallowed siblings and waged a war again the Titans. Zeus was victorious in that Titanic war and sent Cronus along with his aids to live in Tartarus, the innermost part of hell (In Roman mythology Cronus is Saturn, god of agriculture, married to Ops, goddess of plenty.).
After Cronus was dethroned, the universe was divided into his three sons: Zeus became the king of the Olympus hills; Poseidon got the seas to rule and Hades, the underworld. Among the three daughters, Hestia was the goddess of heath, and Demeter the goddess of corn and harvest. Zeus married his sister Hera, the goddess of marriage (The Greek gods seem to follow the Egyptian custom of marrying their own sisters. The Egyptian Pharaohs followed the tradition in order to preserve their divine blood.). Through Zeus and Hera’s marriage was made in heaven it was not a happy one. To complement Zeus’s debauchery, Hera was a very jealous wife, who often persecuted Zeus's mistresses and children.
Hera had her reasons. Zeus had many lovers, among goddesses and among mortals, and his off springs were both Gods and Heroes. The line of Zeus’s offspring include, Apollo and Artemis, siblings born of Leto; Proserpine, the queen of the underworld born of his own sister Demeter; Heracles or Hercules, born of Alcmene and Helen of Troy, born of Leda.
Leda was the wife of Tyndareus, king of Sparta. Zeus saw her, and as was his tendency instantly fell in love with her. But he did not have any chance to get close to her. So one day he disguised himself as a swan, went to visit Leda in the garden and raped her. After the union, Leda laid two eggs from where hatched two pairs: Castor and Pollux, and Clytemnestra, and Helen of Troy. The pair of boys was immortals sons of Zeus who transformed them into the constellation Gemini, or the Twins. Clytemnestra and her sister Helen had to suffer mortal fate and played important roles in shaping the flow of Greek mythology.
Athena or Pallas Athene was Zeus’s favourite child. She was born full grown from Zeus mind. Zeus gave her his shield. She is generally identified as the goddess of war. Romans called her Minerva.
After the appearance of Homer’s epics Iliad and Odyssey, Greek Mythology plays down Zeus’s as a Casanova and emphasizes on his role as a protector. In the epic battle of Troy where every God worth his name had an opinion about what should be done about the war and who should win, Zeus remained a voice of reason, commanding authority and forbidding the divine powers not to intervene unnecessarily into human affairs.
In later Greek literature Zeus’s power is recognised unequivocal. He is the master of fate and human destiny. Aeschylus writes:
Now Zeus is lord; and he / Whose loyalty acclaims his victory / Shall by heart’s instinct find the universal key: / Zeus whose will has marked for man / The sole way where the wisdom lies; / Ordered one eternal plan: / Man must suffer to be wise.
History
History is not about dates
History is not the worth of some old man
History is not about dates
It is not about kings and
Beautiful princesses
It is not about birth certificates and mausoleums
History is not a map
Drawn by a wary child for
His geography class
History is not about heroes and cannons and death tolls
History is a
Dry black rose
From the garden of Noor-jehan
Which the princess flung away
From the window of her palace
History is a
Dry black rose
Dipped in a gold-platted bottle of
Vinegar
Forgotten somewhere in the attic of time
History is not the worth of some old man
History is not about dates
It is not about kings and
Beautiful princesses
It is not about birth certificates and mausoleums
History is not a map
Drawn by a wary child for
His geography class
History is not about heroes and cannons and death tolls
History is a
Dry black rose
From the garden of Noor-jehan
Which the princess flung away
From the window of her palace
History is a
Dry black rose
Dipped in a gold-platted bottle of
Vinegar
Forgotten somewhere in the attic of time
All sound and fury
A Sound of Thunder
Directed by: Peter Hyams
Starring: Armin Rhode, Heike Makatsch, Jemima Rooper, Sir Ben Kingsley
You’ve seen the dinosaurs as alive as SFX can make them, in Jurassic Park trilogy (that too over and over again, thanks to Star TV!). You have seen all those time-travel movies as well (Time Machine, Back to Future, The Butterfly Effect; and if you haven’t, you haven’t missed much!). Now, do you really want to see a combination of the two in an uninspiringly put together film which look as pre-historic as the dinosaurs themselves.
Famous science fiction writer Ray Bradbury wrote the story, which is great, of course, but not the insipid, half-baked film. Ok, the story first. Welcome to the time-travel safari, where you get to travel back to the Jurassic Age, find you big game, and return back. But you must follow the rules. Predictably, our protagonist fails to follow the rules, and when he returns back to the present, things go awry. The evolution process has changed completely. The butterfly effect, you see. Now suffer!!
In today’s time of special effects where everything is possible (look at 300) you wonder why the scenes neither look good not convincing. Everything looks haphazard. Director Peter Hyams (who directed Arnold Schwarzenegger in End of Days and Jean-Claude Van Damme in Sudden Death) seems to have lost his ways between past and present. The final product, to sum up without wasting much of the precious newsprint, looks like Ramsay brothers trying to make a thriller! It’s that bad.
One question please. What Sir Ben Kingsley doing here??
Rating **
Directed by: Peter Hyams
Starring: Armin Rhode, Heike Makatsch, Jemima Rooper, Sir Ben Kingsley
You’ve seen the dinosaurs as alive as SFX can make them, in Jurassic Park trilogy (that too over and over again, thanks to Star TV!). You have seen all those time-travel movies as well (Time Machine, Back to Future, The Butterfly Effect; and if you haven’t, you haven’t missed much!). Now, do you really want to see a combination of the two in an uninspiringly put together film which look as pre-historic as the dinosaurs themselves.
Famous science fiction writer Ray Bradbury wrote the story, which is great, of course, but not the insipid, half-baked film. Ok, the story first. Welcome to the time-travel safari, where you get to travel back to the Jurassic Age, find you big game, and return back. But you must follow the rules. Predictably, our protagonist fails to follow the rules, and when he returns back to the present, things go awry. The evolution process has changed completely. The butterfly effect, you see. Now suffer!!
In today’s time of special effects where everything is possible (look at 300) you wonder why the scenes neither look good not convincing. Everything looks haphazard. Director Peter Hyams (who directed Arnold Schwarzenegger in End of Days and Jean-Claude Van Damme in Sudden Death) seems to have lost his ways between past and present. The final product, to sum up without wasting much of the precious newsprint, looks like Ramsay brothers trying to make a thriller! It’s that bad.
One question please. What Sir Ben Kingsley doing here??
Rating **
Primeval
Directed by: Michael Katleman
Starring: Dominic Purcell, Brooke Langton, Orlando Jones, Jürgen Prochnow
Probably, this is the trend that Hollywood follows. If a particular film on a particular idea works at the box office, everyone jumps in the bandwagon and compete with each other to outdo it. This film is a serious attempt at outdoing what the previous blockbusters on the same theme achieved.
Two themes that are instantly visible in the film are Africa and violent horror, both of which have made so many appearance in movies that you really do not care. Recently, you saw different shades of Africa in Last King of Scotland and Blood Diamond. At the same time, almost all the violent movies are doing roaring business, look at Apocalypto, 300, The Hills Have Eyes.
The point is that there’s absolutely nothing new for the film to offer, and it makes a serious mistake when the tagline screams: ‘Inspired by the true story of the most prolific serial killer in history.’ You are seriously misinformed, for the serial killer in question is not a man, but a crocodile.
Welcome to the latest addition in the already crowded shelf of monster movies, where, yes you guessed it right, Americans volunteer to save the day. If you are reminded of Anaconda, then you know what to expect from this film.
So there is this six-meter-long, one-ton crocodile residing on a river-island near Lake Tanganyika in Burundi, called Gustave, who is rumoured to have killed over three hundred bathers and travelers en route through the Ruzizi River.
It’s time that the Americans tamed the beast. An American news crew is sent to Burundi, by its network chief to hunt and capture Gustave. Here begins the thrill, as producer Tim Freeman (Dominic Purcell, of Prison Break) and cameraman Steven Johnson (Orlando Jones) joined by two animal experts: one a Steve Irwin-style croc hunter, the other a local named JoJo are set out on a journey up-river in search of their subject. But the deeper they probe into the mystery of this elusive assassin, the deadlier their trip becomes. Not only the croc threaten their existence, there is a warlord too making the things more complicated.
Yeah. Gustave is great, in a Lake Placid way! There are tense moments, not exactly nail-biting, but scary enough. There is African landscape, there is a black guide, there is a skimpily clad white female, there is a fearless hero. Everything is intact. You really do not miss anything (probably, J Lo of Anaconda!)
Finally, do not expect much and you will like the film. Promise!
Rating ** ½ (Good, well almost)
Starring: Dominic Purcell, Brooke Langton, Orlando Jones, Jürgen Prochnow
Probably, this is the trend that Hollywood follows. If a particular film on a particular idea works at the box office, everyone jumps in the bandwagon and compete with each other to outdo it. This film is a serious attempt at outdoing what the previous blockbusters on the same theme achieved.
Two themes that are instantly visible in the film are Africa and violent horror, both of which have made so many appearance in movies that you really do not care. Recently, you saw different shades of Africa in Last King of Scotland and Blood Diamond. At the same time, almost all the violent movies are doing roaring business, look at Apocalypto, 300, The Hills Have Eyes.
The point is that there’s absolutely nothing new for the film to offer, and it makes a serious mistake when the tagline screams: ‘Inspired by the true story of the most prolific serial killer in history.’ You are seriously misinformed, for the serial killer in question is not a man, but a crocodile.
Welcome to the latest addition in the already crowded shelf of monster movies, where, yes you guessed it right, Americans volunteer to save the day. If you are reminded of Anaconda, then you know what to expect from this film.
So there is this six-meter-long, one-ton crocodile residing on a river-island near Lake Tanganyika in Burundi, called Gustave, who is rumoured to have killed over three hundred bathers and travelers en route through the Ruzizi River.
It’s time that the Americans tamed the beast. An American news crew is sent to Burundi, by its network chief to hunt and capture Gustave. Here begins the thrill, as producer Tim Freeman (Dominic Purcell, of Prison Break) and cameraman Steven Johnson (Orlando Jones) joined by two animal experts: one a Steve Irwin-style croc hunter, the other a local named JoJo are set out on a journey up-river in search of their subject. But the deeper they probe into the mystery of this elusive assassin, the deadlier their trip becomes. Not only the croc threaten their existence, there is a warlord too making the things more complicated.
Yeah. Gustave is great, in a Lake Placid way! There are tense moments, not exactly nail-biting, but scary enough. There is African landscape, there is a black guide, there is a skimpily clad white female, there is a fearless hero. Everything is intact. You really do not miss anything (probably, J Lo of Anaconda!)
Finally, do not expect much and you will like the film. Promise!
Rating ** ½ (Good, well almost)
Missing action!
The Marine
Directed by: John Bonito
Starring: John Cena, Robert Patrick, Kelly Carlson, Anthony Ray Parker
If you thought WWE-champion-turned actor The Rock was as wooden as an actor can be, then, ladies and gentlemen, please make way for ‘the next wooden star on the block’ John Cena. What bothers you most about the film is this: Why to cast a person in the lead who can’t even act to save his life (though he ends up saving so many lives in the film!). Just cashing on his popularity in the WWE arena? Then again, it was supposed to be an action film. But where are the action? The Rock was lucky. He was the part of the high-profile projects (The Mummy Returns, The Scorpion King) and did some good stunts too (Welcome to Jungle). Cena is unlucky in the both departments.
Next question. Why the film is called The Marine? Okay, the hero is a soldier. But there’s no war here. John Triton returns from Iraq due to some complications, and goes for a vacation with his wife. He meets some goons on the way, who, in their foolishness, kidnap his wife. Now our good marine has to put his act together and find his wife in the wilderness of South Carolina.
Sounds like good scope for power-packed action! Cena’s muscles are good to look at, alright, but man, where’s the action? Is there aren’t any action, will the explosives do? Or a Sylvester Stallone of First Blood look-alive?
In the end, the Marine is a ho-hum affair, neither here not there. And the lead character’s inability to act makes the things worse. Even his co-starts fail to help him. Being on The Rocks, Van Diesels, they are anytime better.
Rating *
Directed by: John Bonito
Starring: John Cena, Robert Patrick, Kelly Carlson, Anthony Ray Parker
If you thought WWE-champion-turned actor The Rock was as wooden as an actor can be, then, ladies and gentlemen, please make way for ‘the next wooden star on the block’ John Cena. What bothers you most about the film is this: Why to cast a person in the lead who can’t even act to save his life (though he ends up saving so many lives in the film!). Just cashing on his popularity in the WWE arena? Then again, it was supposed to be an action film. But where are the action? The Rock was lucky. He was the part of the high-profile projects (The Mummy Returns, The Scorpion King) and did some good stunts too (Welcome to Jungle). Cena is unlucky in the both departments.
Next question. Why the film is called The Marine? Okay, the hero is a soldier. But there’s no war here. John Triton returns from Iraq due to some complications, and goes for a vacation with his wife. He meets some goons on the way, who, in their foolishness, kidnap his wife. Now our good marine has to put his act together and find his wife in the wilderness of South Carolina.
Sounds like good scope for power-packed action! Cena’s muscles are good to look at, alright, but man, where’s the action? Is there aren’t any action, will the explosives do? Or a Sylvester Stallone of First Blood look-alive?
In the end, the Marine is a ho-hum affair, neither here not there. And the lead character’s inability to act makes the things worse. Even his co-starts fail to help him. Being on The Rocks, Van Diesels, they are anytime better.
Rating *
Beginning of the end
The third installment of the series, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End is ready to hit the screen soon
When it rains, it should pour. At least that’s what Hollywood believes. Not the actual rain though, but the rain of moolah! Some years back Disney Studio released a film called Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl. It was not one of those studio box-office hits. But the swashbuckling saga at the high seas, with Johnny Depp in his most successful role ever as Captain Jack Sparrow did rake moolah. After it was an official big hit, producer Jerry Bruckheimer and the studio thought why not make it bigger. So they planned, not one, but two sequels together making it a trilogy. But there was not much to tell in the saga, except for ingenious action sequences and state-of-the-art photography. So they decided to split one single film into two. (The idea was taken from The Matrix. After the success of the first film, the producers made two more films with a single storyline in The Matrix Reloaded and The Matrix Revolutions!)
So here comes the last part of The Pirates of the Caribbean, called At World’s End. The trailers are already out and the film releases in Indian on May May 25th.
Directed by Gore Verbinski and produced by Jerry Bruckheimer, the film reunites stars Johnny Depp, Keira Knightley, Orlando Bloom, Geoffrey Rush, Naomie Harris and, introduces Chow Yun-Fat as a brand new addition to the Pirates story.
The film picks up where the record-breaking 2006 smash hit left off, with heroes Will Turner (Orlando Bloom) and Elizabeth Swann (Keira Knightley) allied with Captain Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush) in a desperate quest to free Captain Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) from his mind-bending trap in Davy Jones’ locker. With the terrifying ghost ship, The Flying Dutchman, and its commander Davy Jones under the control of the East India Trading Company, there is havoc on the Seven Seas. Navigating through treachery, betrayal and wild waters, the heroic trio must forge their way to exotic Singapore and confront the cunning Pirate Sao Feng (Chow Yun-Fat). Now headed beyond the very ends of the earth, each must ultimately choose a side in a final titanic battle – as not only their lives and fortunes, but the entire future of the freedom-loving Pirate way hangs in the balance.
Good news for us Indian audience is that the film is being released in India at the same time it is released worldwide. So we don’t have to wait much as we do for most Hollywood movies (Just for record, the same thing was done for Revolutions as well.). But we can’t wait for the day, anyway! Herald Desk
Pirates trivia
Some scenes of the film were filmed during the making of Dead Man’s Chest (2006) so that the locations wouldn’t have to be revisited by the crew.
The added attraction of the third installment is an appearance by aging Rolling Stones rocker Keith Richards, who was part of Depp’s acting inspiration, as Sparrow’s father. He has been pursued for a cameo appearance since the first installment of the series.
The crew built a sixty foot replica of the front half of the Black Pearl on the back of a semi trailer in the salt flats of Utah for a shoot with the Shadow of the Pearl. The shoot was scheduled for 19 days, it took 4.
When it rains, it should pour. At least that’s what Hollywood believes. Not the actual rain though, but the rain of moolah! Some years back Disney Studio released a film called Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl. It was not one of those studio box-office hits. But the swashbuckling saga at the high seas, with Johnny Depp in his most successful role ever as Captain Jack Sparrow did rake moolah. After it was an official big hit, producer Jerry Bruckheimer and the studio thought why not make it bigger. So they planned, not one, but two sequels together making it a trilogy. But there was not much to tell in the saga, except for ingenious action sequences and state-of-the-art photography. So they decided to split one single film into two. (The idea was taken from The Matrix. After the success of the first film, the producers made two more films with a single storyline in The Matrix Reloaded and The Matrix Revolutions!)
So here comes the last part of The Pirates of the Caribbean, called At World’s End. The trailers are already out and the film releases in Indian on May May 25th.
Directed by Gore Verbinski and produced by Jerry Bruckheimer, the film reunites stars Johnny Depp, Keira Knightley, Orlando Bloom, Geoffrey Rush, Naomie Harris and, introduces Chow Yun-Fat as a brand new addition to the Pirates story.
The film picks up where the record-breaking 2006 smash hit left off, with heroes Will Turner (Orlando Bloom) and Elizabeth Swann (Keira Knightley) allied with Captain Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush) in a desperate quest to free Captain Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) from his mind-bending trap in Davy Jones’ locker. With the terrifying ghost ship, The Flying Dutchman, and its commander Davy Jones under the control of the East India Trading Company, there is havoc on the Seven Seas. Navigating through treachery, betrayal and wild waters, the heroic trio must forge their way to exotic Singapore and confront the cunning Pirate Sao Feng (Chow Yun-Fat). Now headed beyond the very ends of the earth, each must ultimately choose a side in a final titanic battle – as not only their lives and fortunes, but the entire future of the freedom-loving Pirate way hangs in the balance.
Good news for us Indian audience is that the film is being released in India at the same time it is released worldwide. So we don’t have to wait much as we do for most Hollywood movies (Just for record, the same thing was done for Revolutions as well.). But we can’t wait for the day, anyway! Herald Desk
Pirates trivia
Some scenes of the film were filmed during the making of Dead Man’s Chest (2006) so that the locations wouldn’t have to be revisited by the crew.
The added attraction of the third installment is an appearance by aging Rolling Stones rocker Keith Richards, who was part of Depp’s acting inspiration, as Sparrow’s father. He has been pursued for a cameo appearance since the first installment of the series.
The crew built a sixty foot replica of the front half of the Black Pearl on the back of a semi trailer in the salt flats of Utah for a shoot with the Shadow of the Pearl. The shoot was scheduled for 19 days, it took 4.
Meet the real roadies
Film: Little Miss Sunshine
Director: Jonathan Dayton & Valerie Faris
Starring: Abigail Breslin, Greg Kinnear, Paul Dano, Alan Arkin, Toni Collette, Steve Carell
The Hoover family of New Mexico. Seven-year-old Olive is obsessed with beauty pageants. Her brother Dwayne is influenced by Nietzsche, hates everyone, and has decided to remain mute. Her father, Richard is a motivational speaker yet to get his big break. Her mother Sheryl is a stressed and overworked woman, the latest of her burden being taking care of her gay brother Frank who has just recovered from a failed suicide. Now, the patriarch of the family, Edwin is a heroin-snorting, foul-mouthing old man.
This is the star cast. The story begins when Olive is selected for the Miss Little Sunshine beauty pageant. To keep her hopes alive, the family embarks on a two-day roadtrip to California in a Volkswagen mini bus. On the road, the family members come face to face with their realities. Frank meets his ex-boyfriend, Richard sees his ambition going up in smoke, Dwayne realises that he cannot be what he wants to be, and as Sheryl struggles to protect everyone, Edwin dies of heroin-overdose.
Yet the family reaches California and this is where they realise that what they need more than anything else is each other. And as you shed a tear or two, the family returns home happy as ever.
What’s great about the movie? Charming, precisely. They don’t make movies anymore like this with such well-defined characters!
I mean, at the first glance, the film sounds like one of those movies Hollywood is great at making where a disaster or something makes a dysfunctional family unite together and saves not only their family but the world too. But as the film ends what strikes you is the reality of situations, in a quirky sort of way, of course, which even if you do not identify with, you can connect to.
The film works on several grounds. First, a rock-solid script. Screenwriter Michael Arndt won the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay and this is not a fluke. He knows how to tell the story and he knows how to present the characters. Each character in the family has its individual traits, mannerisms and quirkiness, and the way the screenplay brings them to the fore is just amazing. There are no comments, no heroism, no villainy, but 3D characters as you see them in real life. The grandfather may be an addict and a vulgar old man, but you end up liking him.
Second, the acting for the star cast. Abigail Breslin as Olive literally steals the show. The maturity she displays on screen is just amazing. She’s the centre of the film and she carries the role effortlessly. She surely deserved the Oscar.
Alan Arkin as grandpa takes home the Oscar too, and you had to give it to him. He combines the two roles of an irritating old man and a coach to Olive’s show with such brilliance. And how can you ignore Toni Collette (Muriel’s Wedding, The Sixth Sense)? She is one of the finest actors in Hollywood and she delivers a knockout performance.
Directed by husband-wife duo Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris, Little Miss Sunshine is a small independent film, which was nominated for Best Film of the Year at the Oscars. If nothing else, this should be your reason to watch.
A combination of family drama and road movie, the film is neither a drama, nor a full-blown comedy, but a combination of two --- dark, quirky, funny and full of pathos.
A note on the title. It’s not only the name of the beauty pageant, but also the sun rays, rays of hope that everything's not lost yet. The family's still there.
Rating ***1/2
Director: Jonathan Dayton & Valerie Faris
Starring: Abigail Breslin, Greg Kinnear, Paul Dano, Alan Arkin, Toni Collette, Steve Carell
The Hoover family of New Mexico. Seven-year-old Olive is obsessed with beauty pageants. Her brother Dwayne is influenced by Nietzsche, hates everyone, and has decided to remain mute. Her father, Richard is a motivational speaker yet to get his big break. Her mother Sheryl is a stressed and overworked woman, the latest of her burden being taking care of her gay brother Frank who has just recovered from a failed suicide. Now, the patriarch of the family, Edwin is a heroin-snorting, foul-mouthing old man.
This is the star cast. The story begins when Olive is selected for the Miss Little Sunshine beauty pageant. To keep her hopes alive, the family embarks on a two-day roadtrip to California in a Volkswagen mini bus. On the road, the family members come face to face with their realities. Frank meets his ex-boyfriend, Richard sees his ambition going up in smoke, Dwayne realises that he cannot be what he wants to be, and as Sheryl struggles to protect everyone, Edwin dies of heroin-overdose.
Yet the family reaches California and this is where they realise that what they need more than anything else is each other. And as you shed a tear or two, the family returns home happy as ever.
What’s great about the movie? Charming, precisely. They don’t make movies anymore like this with such well-defined characters!
I mean, at the first glance, the film sounds like one of those movies Hollywood is great at making where a disaster or something makes a dysfunctional family unite together and saves not only their family but the world too. But as the film ends what strikes you is the reality of situations, in a quirky sort of way, of course, which even if you do not identify with, you can connect to.
The film works on several grounds. First, a rock-solid script. Screenwriter Michael Arndt won the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay and this is not a fluke. He knows how to tell the story and he knows how to present the characters. Each character in the family has its individual traits, mannerisms and quirkiness, and the way the screenplay brings them to the fore is just amazing. There are no comments, no heroism, no villainy, but 3D characters as you see them in real life. The grandfather may be an addict and a vulgar old man, but you end up liking him.
Second, the acting for the star cast. Abigail Breslin as Olive literally steals the show. The maturity she displays on screen is just amazing. She’s the centre of the film and she carries the role effortlessly. She surely deserved the Oscar.
Alan Arkin as grandpa takes home the Oscar too, and you had to give it to him. He combines the two roles of an irritating old man and a coach to Olive’s show with such brilliance. And how can you ignore Toni Collette (Muriel’s Wedding, The Sixth Sense)? She is one of the finest actors in Hollywood and she delivers a knockout performance.
Directed by husband-wife duo Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris, Little Miss Sunshine is a small independent film, which was nominated for Best Film of the Year at the Oscars. If nothing else, this should be your reason to watch.
A combination of family drama and road movie, the film is neither a drama, nor a full-blown comedy, but a combination of two --- dark, quirky, funny and full of pathos.
A note on the title. It’s not only the name of the beauty pageant, but also the sun rays, rays of hope that everything's not lost yet. The family's still there.
Rating ***1/2
Cut it out, Ed!
Norbit
Directed by: Brian Robbins,
Starring: Eddie Murphy, Thandie Newton, Terry Crews, Clifton Powell, Cuba Gooding Jr
What’s wrong with Eddie Murphy? After his fantastic performance in Dreamgirls, and after playing all the possible characters in the Nutty Professor series, was there any reason for him to do this film, play three characters, and go on in an extended joke against obesity.
But Murphy has done it, and best you can say that this is a ‘sick’ ego trip (Murphy himself wrote the screenplay with his brother Charles) of an otherwise talented actor. Here, Murphy plays three roles: man, woman and the Chinese guardian; the hero Norbit, the heroine Rasputia and Chinese Mr Wong, Norbit’s sort of guardian. Do you really want to endure the scenes where a fat Murphy deal with a thin Murphy, as the thin one makes fun of the fat one, as the fat Murphy goes all lovey-dovey over thin Murphy while the thin Murphy goes all weak in knees seeing his lady love, while the Chinese Murphy does not seem to fit anywhere.
The male, thin Murphy, a good guy, is engaged to a big, fat, female Murphy. Enters the girl of Norbit’s dream, Kate (Thandie Newton, charming, and probably the only good thing about the film.) and the chase begins to escape the fat Murphy. The stage is set of crude humour, racist slurs and anti-obesity mindset, and things go to such an extent that you feel repulsed by the unfunny gigs.
As the movie ends, you wonder what was all these about? Forget other things, the film is not even funny, in the positive sense of the word. If you thought Shallow Hal (where the hero falls in love with a fat woman thinking that she is slim) was offensive, then Norbit is outright vulgar.
There aren’t much to write home about. Eddie Murphy is competent, no doubt about it, but do really want to see him as a woman (not as a disguise, but a real one)? And, what a talented actors like Cuba Gooding Jr doing here.
The news is that the film opened at the number one slot in the US. So laughing at someone’s size may be a funny business after all. Are you game?
Rating **
Directed by: Brian Robbins,
Starring: Eddie Murphy, Thandie Newton, Terry Crews, Clifton Powell, Cuba Gooding Jr
What’s wrong with Eddie Murphy? After his fantastic performance in Dreamgirls, and after playing all the possible characters in the Nutty Professor series, was there any reason for him to do this film, play three characters, and go on in an extended joke against obesity.
But Murphy has done it, and best you can say that this is a ‘sick’ ego trip (Murphy himself wrote the screenplay with his brother Charles) of an otherwise talented actor. Here, Murphy plays three roles: man, woman and the Chinese guardian; the hero Norbit, the heroine Rasputia and Chinese Mr Wong, Norbit’s sort of guardian. Do you really want to endure the scenes where a fat Murphy deal with a thin Murphy, as the thin one makes fun of the fat one, as the fat Murphy goes all lovey-dovey over thin Murphy while the thin Murphy goes all weak in knees seeing his lady love, while the Chinese Murphy does not seem to fit anywhere.
The male, thin Murphy, a good guy, is engaged to a big, fat, female Murphy. Enters the girl of Norbit’s dream, Kate (Thandie Newton, charming, and probably the only good thing about the film.) and the chase begins to escape the fat Murphy. The stage is set of crude humour, racist slurs and anti-obesity mindset, and things go to such an extent that you feel repulsed by the unfunny gigs.
As the movie ends, you wonder what was all these about? Forget other things, the film is not even funny, in the positive sense of the word. If you thought Shallow Hal (where the hero falls in love with a fat woman thinking that she is slim) was offensive, then Norbit is outright vulgar.
There aren’t much to write home about. Eddie Murphy is competent, no doubt about it, but do really want to see him as a woman (not as a disguise, but a real one)? And, what a talented actors like Cuba Gooding Jr doing here.
The news is that the film opened at the number one slot in the US. So laughing at someone’s size may be a funny business after all. Are you game?
Rating **
Fade and dissolve
An interview with Hungarian filmmaker Can Togay
“The presence of Hollywood is everywhere. It’s one of America’s biggest industry. You can’t just overlook them,” says Can Togay, before accepting the fact that Hollywood has diminished the presence of European Cinema in Europe. “When I was kid, apart of local cinema (1960s and 70s was the golden age of Hungarian cinema), we had the access to, not only the European cinema, but also the world cinema, including American cinema. Those days are gone as Hollywood has taken over. There’s lot to learn from Hollywood as well. But it’s negative impacts on local cinema. Europe is trying to do something about it. But it’s difficult.”
Now 50, listening to Can Togay is like hearing the history of Hungarian cinema from the horse’s mouth. An actor, director and screenwriter rolled in one, Togay has been involved with film since 1970, first as an actor (“I have also acted in Hollywood, in Snipers,” informs Togay.), then as an screenwriter and director. His first directorial venture was The Summer Guest in 1992. “My last film was based on a small village where people do not have access to cinema. Then one of them finds some old movie in a cellar and he begins to edit them and show them to public where people discover a whole new world until the guy dies, and things had already changed by then. The film is called One Winter Behind God’s Back. It was produced in 1999.”
But Hungarian cinema is not very popular, say like, German or French, isn’t it? You want to know. Instead, Togay tells you a brief history of Hungarian cinema.
In 1930s Hungarian cinema would be seen in Germany, Greece and the Scandinavian countries. But after the World Wars, things changed. Through the failed 1919 revolution to the defeat of the 1956 Uprising and its aftermath, Hungarian film-makers and their audiences have had to contend with a multiplicity of problems. 1960s was, however, the time of original Hungarian cinema. By then, the country had entered into a period of relative stability and increasing cultural relaxation, resulting in an astonishing growth of film-making. Innovative and groundbreaking directors such as Miklós Jancsó (Hungarian Rhapsody, The Red and the White), István Szabó (Sunshine and Mephisto, which won 1981 Oscar for the best foreign film) and Márta Mészaros (Little Vilma: The Last Diary) emerged and established the reputation of Hungarian films on a global basis.
The 90s saw the rise of television and newspapers and public slowly began to lose interest in cinema (there’s always Hollywood!). “In last 3-4 years, however, things have gradually changed. People are making cinema, which are shown in film festivals (Togay own film went to the Cannes) but local commercial cinema is also being produced.”
But Hollywood still lurks around. So what the Hungarian audience really prefer. “Earlier, they used to show European art house cinema. Now, its rare. But there is a spate of local commercial films. But they are mostly sentimental, emotional comedies. Nothing more.”
So what the film fraternity is doing about it? “There is a law in the country that states that Hungarian Cinema is a part of the cultural heritage and they must be protected. The government is supposed to fund the local film industry. But these funds are few and far between. As the governments change, so does the policy. Now, we are looking for sources of budget independent of the government, independent of public money.
And how the system works? Can a producer expects to get his money back? “I am not a producer. So I can’t tell you the exact number of viewers,” informs Togay. “Let’s say, there are 3 million potential, I say, potential viewers out of 15 million Hungarian, excluding the children and all. It’s not a big number. The local films are mostly low budget. And if the film has public funding, the producer might just get the money back. Therefore, there’s no other genres in Hungarian cinema except for sentimental melodrama, no thriller, no horror, no crime, nothing.”
What are the other options? “You make an art house movie for the festival circle and try to sell the foreign television rights. It’s better. I think, it’s the situation everywhere,” Togay says knowingly.
These days Togay is busy writing for other director, both big screen and small. “I’m also planning to start my next directorial venture, a German, Austrian, Hungarian project. We plan to start shooting next year.” Then Togay pauses for a moment and says, “I am planning to make it a ‘mainstream art house film,’ if such a thing exist.”
“The presence of Hollywood is everywhere. It’s one of America’s biggest industry. You can’t just overlook them,” says Can Togay, before accepting the fact that Hollywood has diminished the presence of European Cinema in Europe. “When I was kid, apart of local cinema (1960s and 70s was the golden age of Hungarian cinema), we had the access to, not only the European cinema, but also the world cinema, including American cinema. Those days are gone as Hollywood has taken over. There’s lot to learn from Hollywood as well. But it’s negative impacts on local cinema. Europe is trying to do something about it. But it’s difficult.”
Now 50, listening to Can Togay is like hearing the history of Hungarian cinema from the horse’s mouth. An actor, director and screenwriter rolled in one, Togay has been involved with film since 1970, first as an actor (“I have also acted in Hollywood, in Snipers,” informs Togay.), then as an screenwriter and director. His first directorial venture was The Summer Guest in 1992. “My last film was based on a small village where people do not have access to cinema. Then one of them finds some old movie in a cellar and he begins to edit them and show them to public where people discover a whole new world until the guy dies, and things had already changed by then. The film is called One Winter Behind God’s Back. It was produced in 1999.”
But Hungarian cinema is not very popular, say like, German or French, isn’t it? You want to know. Instead, Togay tells you a brief history of Hungarian cinema.
In 1930s Hungarian cinema would be seen in Germany, Greece and the Scandinavian countries. But after the World Wars, things changed. Through the failed 1919 revolution to the defeat of the 1956 Uprising and its aftermath, Hungarian film-makers and their audiences have had to contend with a multiplicity of problems. 1960s was, however, the time of original Hungarian cinema. By then, the country had entered into a period of relative stability and increasing cultural relaxation, resulting in an astonishing growth of film-making. Innovative and groundbreaking directors such as Miklós Jancsó (Hungarian Rhapsody, The Red and the White), István Szabó (Sunshine and Mephisto, which won 1981 Oscar for the best foreign film) and Márta Mészaros (Little Vilma: The Last Diary) emerged and established the reputation of Hungarian films on a global basis.
The 90s saw the rise of television and newspapers and public slowly began to lose interest in cinema (there’s always Hollywood!). “In last 3-4 years, however, things have gradually changed. People are making cinema, which are shown in film festivals (Togay own film went to the Cannes) but local commercial cinema is also being produced.”
But Hollywood still lurks around. So what the Hungarian audience really prefer. “Earlier, they used to show European art house cinema. Now, its rare. But there is a spate of local commercial films. But they are mostly sentimental, emotional comedies. Nothing more.”
So what the film fraternity is doing about it? “There is a law in the country that states that Hungarian Cinema is a part of the cultural heritage and they must be protected. The government is supposed to fund the local film industry. But these funds are few and far between. As the governments change, so does the policy. Now, we are looking for sources of budget independent of the government, independent of public money.
And how the system works? Can a producer expects to get his money back? “I am not a producer. So I can’t tell you the exact number of viewers,” informs Togay. “Let’s say, there are 3 million potential, I say, potential viewers out of 15 million Hungarian, excluding the children and all. It’s not a big number. The local films are mostly low budget. And if the film has public funding, the producer might just get the money back. Therefore, there’s no other genres in Hungarian cinema except for sentimental melodrama, no thriller, no horror, no crime, nothing.”
What are the other options? “You make an art house movie for the festival circle and try to sell the foreign television rights. It’s better. I think, it’s the situation everywhere,” Togay says knowingly.
These days Togay is busy writing for other director, both big screen and small. “I’m also planning to start my next directorial venture, a German, Austrian, Hungarian project. We plan to start shooting next year.” Then Togay pauses for a moment and says, “I am planning to make it a ‘mainstream art house film,’ if such a thing exist.”
Sound of Music
A Conversation with the Bhairav te Bhairavi team of Vijay Koparkar and Milind Oak...
What exactly comes to your mind when you hear the word, classical? Something ancient? Something that you even remotely connect to? What about Classic music? Not for the young people! Not for the layman!
Pandit Vijay Koparkar is an accomplished musician on his own right and he says: “My concerts are always full. Observe closely and you will see that the average age of the audience is above 40. There are no youngsters. Then the thought came to my mind that one day these audience will be gone. Then what? How could music survive without the connoisseurs?”
It was a scary thought. There was a need to do something about it. The first logical question was, why most people shy away from classical music? The answer was simple: People think, to appreciate classical music you have to know the grammar of it. But it’s not always true.
There was a need to do something about it.
That prompted the four old friends from the engineering college days at the COEP—Vijay Koparkar, Milind Oak, Sameer Kulkarni, and Ashish Majumdar — to come together to put up a show called ‘Bhairav te Bhairavi’ (From Bhairav to Bhairavi; Bhairav is a early morning raga of Hindustani classical music whereas bhairavi traditionally is the last raga performed in a session. So the entire programme was planned to be a journey of classical music from the beginning to the end!
But it’s not as simple as it sounds. “We wanted to create a programme to make people think, says Milind Oak, director of the programme. “The whole idea was to take classical music to the masses. And while doing to you cannot have a tutor kind of attitude. It should be all inclusive. We have tried to make the journey an interesting one.”
The core of this interesting journey is a narration which talks about the development of music from the beginning… “In the realm of the beginning was pure consciousness. Complete in itself. That ‘itself’, maybe God or… the Supreme Being…” and goes on to explain the different facets of music… “What is the relation between a composition and a raga? Does the framework of a raga permit the performer, musical liberty? Yes, it does. The composition brings to surface the baava or a mood in a raga. Creativity, the musical liberty lies in unraveling these mysteries, talent in its total truthful…”
The strength of the narration lies not in the way it is written, which is direct and lucid, but the way it interprets the abstract notions of music into concrete rationalisation. As the narration proceeds, it throws before you a question in a logical way… “Does a raga depict a picture?” and then goes to find the answer at the metaphysical level of music. “Philosophy says each raga has a unique color, smell, touch and its own portrayal…”
Before you begin to think the entire programme is about the narration, it is important to mention that the narration is interspersed with musical accompaniment, both in vocal and instrumental, which not only complements the narration, but also serve as a practical demonstration of what the narration is trying to convey. They are both the equally important parts of the programme. It is impossible to separate one from the other.
And it’s not all about abstract sur, taal and raga. “The programme consists of 40% of light music and 60% of classic,” says oak. The light music is collected from popular Hindi and Marathi songs. “Please have heard these songs before without realising that they are based on some or other classic ragas. This is quite a revelation for a layman.”
Presented by Niche entertainment, the programme began its journey with a Marathi narration a year back, written by Sameer Kulkarni, a doctor by profession. Then there was a need to reach beyond the Marathi speaking audience. Thus, the narratives of the show metamorphosised first into Hindi and then into English.
The language of the music, after all, is unique. But how easy or difficult was it to transform the narration into English. “Everything is not in English,” explains oak. “All the musical terms, such as swar or taal remains the same. At the same time the narration is self-explanatory. Talking about how the audience may take it, even for an average Marathi audience, the original programme was a totally different show. And no, the English script is not a translation of the original. It’s almost entirely rewritten. The Marathi version contain may passages from literature. We did not find any equivalents of it in English literature, except for a very few. One thing that we focused on is to engage the concentration level of the audience.”
Now, you want to ask the most important question. Has the programme succeeded in what it set out to do. Oak believes it has. Whenever it is performed, the audience have accepted the novelty. But certainly, it is not as popular as ‘Raat Pashemani Ki,’ a musical show based on Gulzar songs, directed by Milion Oak. “That’s business, and that’s piggyriding on Gulzarsaab’s name,” confesses Oak. “This however, is our how.”
And above all this show is about the reunion of four old friends, four people joined together by the sheer love of music. “This show is not our business. We are doing it for the love it,” says Oak. For last 25 years, he running a Idea franchise, apart from directing plays and TV serials whereas Vijay Koparkar is a known name in the music circle. Scriptwriter Sameer Kulkarni is a medical professional whereas music arranger Ashish Majumdar teaches at VIT. And all of them are very enthusiastic about the programme, despite the fact that there are few sponsors at hand. “If your hobby becomes your profession, there’s nothing like it,” feels Oak. “It’s like coming back to the roots.”
But what a musician of Koparkar’s stature doing here? “Even my fans ask me what I am doing in a show like this. I tell them that this show is not hardcore classical music fans. This show is for the average Joe.
Koparkar leads a team of singers and musicians and guides the narration as it flows. How a professional singer like Koparkar adjusts to performing a raga only for three minutes (for which he may have spent three hours in a concert)? “It was very difficult to begin with. But the format of the show demands it anyway.”
The show is blooming and in June it travels to UK. After the success of live performances, is there any plans to release an audio version of the programme. The opinion is divided here. While Koparkar feels that the audio would be equally effective, for Oak, there’s nothing like the live performance.
What exactly comes to your mind when you hear the word, classical? Something ancient? Something that you even remotely connect to? What about Classic music? Not for the young people! Not for the layman!
Pandit Vijay Koparkar is an accomplished musician on his own right and he says: “My concerts are always full. Observe closely and you will see that the average age of the audience is above 40. There are no youngsters. Then the thought came to my mind that one day these audience will be gone. Then what? How could music survive without the connoisseurs?”
It was a scary thought. There was a need to do something about it. The first logical question was, why most people shy away from classical music? The answer was simple: People think, to appreciate classical music you have to know the grammar of it. But it’s not always true.
There was a need to do something about it.
That prompted the four old friends from the engineering college days at the COEP—Vijay Koparkar, Milind Oak, Sameer Kulkarni, and Ashish Majumdar — to come together to put up a show called ‘Bhairav te Bhairavi’ (From Bhairav to Bhairavi; Bhairav is a early morning raga of Hindustani classical music whereas bhairavi traditionally is the last raga performed in a session. So the entire programme was planned to be a journey of classical music from the beginning to the end!
But it’s not as simple as it sounds. “We wanted to create a programme to make people think, says Milind Oak, director of the programme. “The whole idea was to take classical music to the masses. And while doing to you cannot have a tutor kind of attitude. It should be all inclusive. We have tried to make the journey an interesting one.”
The core of this interesting journey is a narration which talks about the development of music from the beginning… “In the realm of the beginning was pure consciousness. Complete in itself. That ‘itself’, maybe God or… the Supreme Being…” and goes on to explain the different facets of music… “What is the relation between a composition and a raga? Does the framework of a raga permit the performer, musical liberty? Yes, it does. The composition brings to surface the baava or a mood in a raga. Creativity, the musical liberty lies in unraveling these mysteries, talent in its total truthful…”
The strength of the narration lies not in the way it is written, which is direct and lucid, but the way it interprets the abstract notions of music into concrete rationalisation. As the narration proceeds, it throws before you a question in a logical way… “Does a raga depict a picture?” and then goes to find the answer at the metaphysical level of music. “Philosophy says each raga has a unique color, smell, touch and its own portrayal…”
Before you begin to think the entire programme is about the narration, it is important to mention that the narration is interspersed with musical accompaniment, both in vocal and instrumental, which not only complements the narration, but also serve as a practical demonstration of what the narration is trying to convey. They are both the equally important parts of the programme. It is impossible to separate one from the other.
And it’s not all about abstract sur, taal and raga. “The programme consists of 40% of light music and 60% of classic,” says oak. The light music is collected from popular Hindi and Marathi songs. “Please have heard these songs before without realising that they are based on some or other classic ragas. This is quite a revelation for a layman.”
Presented by Niche entertainment, the programme began its journey with a Marathi narration a year back, written by Sameer Kulkarni, a doctor by profession. Then there was a need to reach beyond the Marathi speaking audience. Thus, the narratives of the show metamorphosised first into Hindi and then into English.
The language of the music, after all, is unique. But how easy or difficult was it to transform the narration into English. “Everything is not in English,” explains oak. “All the musical terms, such as swar or taal remains the same. At the same time the narration is self-explanatory. Talking about how the audience may take it, even for an average Marathi audience, the original programme was a totally different show. And no, the English script is not a translation of the original. It’s almost entirely rewritten. The Marathi version contain may passages from literature. We did not find any equivalents of it in English literature, except for a very few. One thing that we focused on is to engage the concentration level of the audience.”
Now, you want to ask the most important question. Has the programme succeeded in what it set out to do. Oak believes it has. Whenever it is performed, the audience have accepted the novelty. But certainly, it is not as popular as ‘Raat Pashemani Ki,’ a musical show based on Gulzar songs, directed by Milion Oak. “That’s business, and that’s piggyriding on Gulzarsaab’s name,” confesses Oak. “This however, is our how.”
And above all this show is about the reunion of four old friends, four people joined together by the sheer love of music. “This show is not our business. We are doing it for the love it,” says Oak. For last 25 years, he running a Idea franchise, apart from directing plays and TV serials whereas Vijay Koparkar is a known name in the music circle. Scriptwriter Sameer Kulkarni is a medical professional whereas music arranger Ashish Majumdar teaches at VIT. And all of them are very enthusiastic about the programme, despite the fact that there are few sponsors at hand. “If your hobby becomes your profession, there’s nothing like it,” feels Oak. “It’s like coming back to the roots.”
But what a musician of Koparkar’s stature doing here? “Even my fans ask me what I am doing in a show like this. I tell them that this show is not hardcore classical music fans. This show is for the average Joe.
Koparkar leads a team of singers and musicians and guides the narration as it flows. How a professional singer like Koparkar adjusts to performing a raga only for three minutes (for which he may have spent three hours in a concert)? “It was very difficult to begin with. But the format of the show demands it anyway.”
The show is blooming and in June it travels to UK. After the success of live performances, is there any plans to release an audio version of the programme. The opinion is divided here. While Koparkar feels that the audio would be equally effective, for Oak, there’s nothing like the live performance.
The next level of epic cinema
Film: 300
Director: Zack Snyder
Starring: Gerard Butler, Lena Headey, Dominic West, Rodrigo Santoro
Director: Zack Snyder
Starring: Gerard Butler, Lena Headey, Dominic West, Rodrigo Santoro
After the staggering success of The Lord of the Rings trilogy, the biggest question in everybody’s mind was, if anyone could better that, as far as action-adventure epic movies are concerned. The answer was an emphatic no. That was the reason cited for the failure of heavy-duty films like Troy, Kingdom of Heaven and Alexander. The next inevitable question was, what’s next then?
300 could be your answer to that. This is an epic action-adventure film that does not even try to match up with LOTR, but moves to the next level. It’s a bit difficult to explain that. Let’s say, you shoot the film in blue screen with human actors, add loads of special effects, picturise each scene with minutest detail, and present the battle sequences with raw intensity, read, graphic violence (you must see each drop of blood pouring from the victim’s body), and round it up with a never-seen-before look (a cross between graphic novels and video games with a dash of film-noir.), and you’re at the next level.
Director Rudolph Maté made a film call The 300 Spartans based on the battle of Thermopylae, in 1962. Graphic artist Frank Miller was so inspired by the film that he created his own version of it in a graphic novel called 300. The present film is based on Miller’s comics. So you see, to use Greek philosopher Plato’s words, the origin of the whole drama is thrice removed from reality. Hence don't look for reality here.
A sword-and-sandal drama, a la Gladiator, the film does not show slightest respect to history and concentrates on the spectacle, an epic battle you’ve never seen before (the rain of arrows over the 300 Spartan soldiers is just marvellous.)!
However, this is a historic epic, based on the Battle of Thermopylae between 300 Spartan soldiers under their king Leonidas (Gerard Butler, of The Phantom of the Opera) and the vast army of Persian king Xerxes (Rodrigo Santoro, of Lost, Love Actually), in 480 BC, before the Spartans perish and before the other Greek states join together against Xerxes in the Battle of Plataea. Here the history ends, though the battle remains.
Anyway, the film’s about the battle and director Zack Snyder (who made the violent zombie movie The Dawn of the Dead) has been successful in doing what he had set out to do. He even offers you an elaborate sub-plot about Spartan queen Gorgo (Lena Heady). But they are all lifted from Miller’s pages, not from history. Hence you see the Spartans as macho men fighting bare-chested without any armour, while a shaved-headed Xerxes is decked in jewellery and nothing else.
The film has already courted controversy regarding historical inaccuracy and instances of racism. That’s however, not the issue here. The issue is the battle itself, and how the film captures it extraordinarily, no, not realistically, but in an impressionistic sort of way. (Never mind, if the animals and monsters remind you of LOTR!)
Within this video game world of ancient Greece, only Butler looks convincing, as he shows off his physique, shouts, and preach patriotism.
No, it’s not Gladiator or The Lords of the Rings, but it’s worth a watch all the same. The future of cinema is here.
Rating: **1/2 (Good, well almost)
300 could be your answer to that. This is an epic action-adventure film that does not even try to match up with LOTR, but moves to the next level. It’s a bit difficult to explain that. Let’s say, you shoot the film in blue screen with human actors, add loads of special effects, picturise each scene with minutest detail, and present the battle sequences with raw intensity, read, graphic violence (you must see each drop of blood pouring from the victim’s body), and round it up with a never-seen-before look (a cross between graphic novels and video games with a dash of film-noir.), and you’re at the next level.
Director Rudolph Maté made a film call The 300 Spartans based on the battle of Thermopylae, in 1962. Graphic artist Frank Miller was so inspired by the film that he created his own version of it in a graphic novel called 300. The present film is based on Miller’s comics. So you see, to use Greek philosopher Plato’s words, the origin of the whole drama is thrice removed from reality. Hence don't look for reality here.
A sword-and-sandal drama, a la Gladiator, the film does not show slightest respect to history and concentrates on the spectacle, an epic battle you’ve never seen before (the rain of arrows over the 300 Spartan soldiers is just marvellous.)!
However, this is a historic epic, based on the Battle of Thermopylae between 300 Spartan soldiers under their king Leonidas (Gerard Butler, of The Phantom of the Opera) and the vast army of Persian king Xerxes (Rodrigo Santoro, of Lost, Love Actually), in 480 BC, before the Spartans perish and before the other Greek states join together against Xerxes in the Battle of Plataea. Here the history ends, though the battle remains.
Anyway, the film’s about the battle and director Zack Snyder (who made the violent zombie movie The Dawn of the Dead) has been successful in doing what he had set out to do. He even offers you an elaborate sub-plot about Spartan queen Gorgo (Lena Heady). But they are all lifted from Miller’s pages, not from history. Hence you see the Spartans as macho men fighting bare-chested without any armour, while a shaved-headed Xerxes is decked in jewellery and nothing else.
The film has already courted controversy regarding historical inaccuracy and instances of racism. That’s however, not the issue here. The issue is the battle itself, and how the film captures it extraordinarily, no, not realistically, but in an impressionistic sort of way. (Never mind, if the animals and monsters remind you of LOTR!)
Within this video game world of ancient Greece, only Butler looks convincing, as he shows off his physique, shouts, and preach patriotism.
No, it’s not Gladiator or The Lords of the Rings, but it’s worth a watch all the same. The future of cinema is here.
Rating: **1/2 (Good, well almost)
Gore Galore
Film: The Hills Have Eyes 2
Directed by: Martin Weisz
Starring; Michael McMillian, Jessica Stroup, Daniella Alonso, Jacob Vargas
It’s raining blood in Hollywood these days. First, it was ancient violence in Apocalypto and then in 300. Now, this sequel to last year’s horror flick The Hills Have Eyes, presents the violence of the future where a group of National Guard trainees find themselves battling against a vicious group of mutants on their last day of training in the desert.
This, in short, is the story.
The previous film was a remake of the 1977 classic of the same name. Despite that, and despite all the killings, the film had some base, saying how the mutant cannibals (no, they’re not zombie, we’re tired of zombies!) were born, as a reaction of nuclear testing. This time no such pretension. It’s manhunt and mayhem from the start to the end for anyone who dares to venture into the uncharted territory of the Mexican desert. (Jason’s woods, anyone!)
In the first film it was an unsuspecting family who were the victim; it touched a cord somewhere. This time, the victims are equally competent in fighting. So it’s a predator versus alien situation out there. You don’t really bother who dies and who survives. This is not the point. The point is the display of violence, to make the sadist in you satisfied. You get what see, no more no less. And apart from the gore (let’s not go into detail about that) there’s nothing to write home about.
The tagline of the first THHE said, Lucky ones die first. This time, lucky ones die fast. And the unlucky ones? The unlucky ones suffer the film till the end. Choose your pick!
Rating *1/2
Directed by: Martin Weisz
Starring; Michael McMillian, Jessica Stroup, Daniella Alonso, Jacob Vargas
It’s raining blood in Hollywood these days. First, it was ancient violence in Apocalypto and then in 300. Now, this sequel to last year’s horror flick The Hills Have Eyes, presents the violence of the future where a group of National Guard trainees find themselves battling against a vicious group of mutants on their last day of training in the desert.
This, in short, is the story.
The previous film was a remake of the 1977 classic of the same name. Despite that, and despite all the killings, the film had some base, saying how the mutant cannibals (no, they’re not zombie, we’re tired of zombies!) were born, as a reaction of nuclear testing. This time no such pretension. It’s manhunt and mayhem from the start to the end for anyone who dares to venture into the uncharted territory of the Mexican desert. (Jason’s woods, anyone!)
In the first film it was an unsuspecting family who were the victim; it touched a cord somewhere. This time, the victims are equally competent in fighting. So it’s a predator versus alien situation out there. You don’t really bother who dies and who survives. This is not the point. The point is the display of violence, to make the sadist in you satisfied. You get what see, no more no less. And apart from the gore (let’s not go into detail about that) there’s nothing to write home about.
The tagline of the first THHE said, Lucky ones die first. This time, lucky ones die fast. And the unlucky ones? The unlucky ones suffer the film till the end. Choose your pick!
Rating *1/2
Manhunt and mayhem
Film: The Hills Have Eyes
Directed by: Alexandre Aja
Starring: Aaron Stanford, Kathleen Quinlan, Vinessa Shaw, Emilie de Ravin, Dan Byrd
It’s raining blood in Hollywood these days. First, it was ancient violence in Apocalypto and then in 300. Now, comes the horror flick The Hills Have Eyes, bringing you the violence of the future, with mutants and all (Okay, we’ve graduated from zombies to mutants, and no, they’re not x-men, but bloodthirsty cannibals.).
Here’s what happening. A family is travelling to California through the New Mexico deserts (the Hoover family of Little Miss Sunshine?). On the way, while finding a shortcut, they’re lost, their trailer conks, and they are forced to spend the nigh in the desert. Here comes the predators, a group of deformed cannibals, result of the atmospheric nuclear tests conducted by USA from 1945 to 1962 in that spot. Till now, you expect the film to be a science fiction horror fantasy. But it ends up being a battle for survival between the family member and their predators. Violence and gore fills the screen as you wait for the film to be over. Even the detailed captions about the nuclear tests fail to give you a rationale as to why all these murders are happening.
The film is a remake of Wes Craven’s 1977 classic of the same name, if it will help any.
The biggest question, however, is: Are horror and violence synonymous? Certainly not. But when you mix them together, the result is what do you see in THHE. There are movements of horror. It’s likely, when there’s a family at the centre of the story. And the makeup artists have done a wonderful job in creating the mutants. But the director Alexandre Aja, while working on the remake, seems to have gone overboard in depicting violence.
This may be a plus, or a minus depending on how do you see it. The choice is yours.
It’s a high-voltage horror violence that may make you ‘sick,’ so take caution.
Rating **
Directed by: Alexandre Aja
Starring: Aaron Stanford, Kathleen Quinlan, Vinessa Shaw, Emilie de Ravin, Dan Byrd
It’s raining blood in Hollywood these days. First, it was ancient violence in Apocalypto and then in 300. Now, comes the horror flick The Hills Have Eyes, bringing you the violence of the future, with mutants and all (Okay, we’ve graduated from zombies to mutants, and no, they’re not x-men, but bloodthirsty cannibals.).
Here’s what happening. A family is travelling to California through the New Mexico deserts (the Hoover family of Little Miss Sunshine?). On the way, while finding a shortcut, they’re lost, their trailer conks, and they are forced to spend the nigh in the desert. Here comes the predators, a group of deformed cannibals, result of the atmospheric nuclear tests conducted by USA from 1945 to 1962 in that spot. Till now, you expect the film to be a science fiction horror fantasy. But it ends up being a battle for survival between the family member and their predators. Violence and gore fills the screen as you wait for the film to be over. Even the detailed captions about the nuclear tests fail to give you a rationale as to why all these murders are happening.
The film is a remake of Wes Craven’s 1977 classic of the same name, if it will help any.
The biggest question, however, is: Are horror and violence synonymous? Certainly not. But when you mix them together, the result is what do you see in THHE. There are movements of horror. It’s likely, when there’s a family at the centre of the story. And the makeup artists have done a wonderful job in creating the mutants. But the director Alexandre Aja, while working on the remake, seems to have gone overboard in depicting violence.
This may be a plus, or a minus depending on how do you see it. The choice is yours.
It’s a high-voltage horror violence that may make you ‘sick,’ so take caution.
Rating **
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)