There were a lot of good and realistic movies were made this year in bollywood and still the jury picked an awful movie. Few weeks ago, I read an interview of Vidhu Vinod Chopra in which he claimed that Dharam and Gandhi My Father don't deserve the selesction becasuse no on has seen those movies. It was as if he was comparing those movies to D grade movies. And I would like to tell him that his movie Ekalaya was also a big flop in India. So why didn't the jury select movies like Gandhi ( WHICH WAS TOTALLY DIFFERENT THAN HOLLYWOOD'S VERSION OF GANDHI,WHICH WAS RELEASED IN 1982), Dharam, PARZANIA, BLACK FRIDAY, Chak De India or may be BHEJA FRY? They had all these great movies.
Eklavya dnt deserve even 1% to go to Oscars..I would say, why was ths movie made first of all...It was BULL- SHIT....ppl selecting the movies must understand that the selected movies represent Indian cinema and face of india....they should be more responsible and sensible in thr decisions..
RE:The most pathatic movie of the year: Eklavya
by Rangesh AB on Oct 03, 2007 03:18 PM
i agree with u chief... this shows how pathetic the jury can be, its not film fare we're competing with for god sakes'
RE:The most pathatic movie of the year: Eklavya
by sonia roy on Oct 05, 2007 12:28 AM
Just because SRK's movie went to Oscar so this time the Bachchans have to be represented to the Oscar table, that's the only reson why it got nominated. India is so corrupted that even stupid movies like "APNE" might show up for Oscars next year. Eklavya does not deserve to be in the Oscars.
Dharam's director says that 'Eklavya' was boring and did'nt do well. I say 'Dharam' did not even complete one week and most cities in India. It did not release in overseas market where hindi movies do very well these days. This has become customery to question the selection of any film by the directors/producer of the movie that lost the race. I do not see why Dharam was to be selected. I have no huge love for Eklavaya, but DHaram isn't a great movie either...just becuase it talked about religion without big names and songs and dances? People say Chak de could have been better. I bet chak de would have lost in the initial race becuase for oscars jury chak de is a very old theme. There have been so many moveis made in hollywood on the same theme/story. Chak de was a good movies, but not fit for oscars. I also question our fixation with oscars, why oscar is big for us, why we think that they are always right in there selection of the best movies or other awards? Whywe need to get a stamp of approval from oscars to get our movies recognized in the world? Let me tell you after spaending 6 years in the US, I can say the Indian films do very well here. Indian, Pakis, B'deshis, even philipinos watch Indian films. Time will come when other will follow the suit. So, no need to fight over it.
RE:Why Dharam??
by ann on Sep 30, 2007 06:49 PM
you can not deny the fine quality of Hollywood films. They spend so much effort on every little detail. 4 or 5 movies every year are piece of art.Saying all that I think Onkara is the best choice for Oscar. The plot is complicated and it makes you think about the choices every character makes in this movie. The acting is superb. The only other movie which would have been better than Onkara is "Blue Umbrella". Sadly these kind of movies bomb in India and no body hears about them.
RE:Why Dharam??
by joe v on Oct 04, 2007 04:58 PM
Good.. finally two sensible messages. good arguements from both. Ok, my addition is this - Oscars are not a big deal for us, at the same time, oscar winning movies are usually masterpieces. Ofcourse there have been exceptions. Next, Oscars are given off by the North American Film Academy for Hollywood released movies. we have no business there in the first place as a country. the "India's official entry" is a completely wrong useage. whom are we trying to fool here ? Its actually "Bollywood's official entry" Last, yes ann, few hollywood movies have a level of standard that i wish the bollywood guys reach soon. and i agree with OmKara being a really decent choice.
Even AB and VV Chopra cant see this movie twice ... after making this movie VV realised that how he bad at movie making and AB understood that he has mislead the indian junta when there was no any information i mean in 80s.
RE:Shahrukh
by Amrit Sen on Sep 30, 2007 03:51 PM
What a great analysis!!!!!!! I am very impressed RGV. first u say srk doesnt know to act, but most of our mainstream heros dont know to act. Woh ek haklu hai, but i dont remember any movie except Darr where he stammered. When did he copy AB, i cant see from where did that come from. You also said he doesnot innovate, well for ur info om shanti om has a very innovative subject and that is why he has built his body. Copying Salman Khan?? Infact salman tries to copy evrything that srk does including the Mayur Suiting advertisement
RE:Shahrukh
by Neha on Sep 30, 2007 03:36 PM
both of you sadist people .if you want to speak bad about shahrukh atleast speak in a correct forum ,now where did shahrukh come in between eklavya and dharm
