Lajja is a masterpiece!!!
Aadil Moosa
I would just like to tell people about Lajja. I am smitten by the movie. It
was brilliant!!
First of all let me start by saying that the perfomances of the actresses
awesome. Madhuri, Manisha, Mahima & Rekha were absolutely something. For all
those who feel this movie is one of those men-bashing movies, think again.
This movie was enjoyable and yet conveyed an excellent theme. Mahima was
really something in the film. The scene where she confronts her future-in
laws had my heart beating. Madhuri was excellent as Janki. Rekha's
performance is golden!! Manisha too has did an awesome job with her
character!!! This is the first time in an Indian movie where the guys (Anil,
Ajay & Jackie) are just supports to the female counterparts. There are parts
of the movie that wont leave you.
1. Mahima performance
2. Madhuri's infectuous laughter
3. Rekha's gut wrenching screams for her mother.
This is just to name a few. The support cast was also great. This movie is
for all those who prefer GOOD CINEMA.
The movie gets a 10 out of 10 from me.
Way to go Rajkumar Santoshi!!!!!!!!!!
Gafoor
news:3b969...@news1.mweb.co.za...
> 2. Madhuri's infectuous laughter
is very irritating.
> This is the first time in an Indian movie where the guys (Anil,
> Ajay & Jackie) are just supports to the female counterparts.
Ajay Devgun walks around with a dagger lodged in his back for 15
minutes
I think.
Habshi
you missed the first time and how much you will enjoy seeing it again
and even better than DVD is watching these movies on the big screen.
And Madhuri has given just about the best performance in her
life on par with Khalnayak . Just loved her bashing of Ram and
Lakshman.
On Wed, 5 Sep 2001 23:59:12 +0200, "Aadil Moosa" <moo...@mweb.co.za>
wrote:
Aadil Moosa
I am from South Afrcia and let me tell you, the only other two movies which
got critical accliam here in South Africa was for Kuch Kuch Hota Hain(For
its popularity) & Lagaan(For its content as well).
The third movie is Lajja and that too for its content. What was so wrong in
the film that people are saying it wasnt nice? It seems that when a movie
like comes out from Bollywood, there is always controversy. Why?
This is an excellent film that deals with the reality of life. How many
women have ben raped without seeing justice? When a film is made about this,
then everyone is quick to jump.
How many women have become independent of their families? Today in modern
times this happens alot, yet if a women has to be seen woth a guy then
everyone naturally everyone assumes something is going on between them
(Mahima & Anil) in the movie. Yet when a film is made about this, there is a
big uproar.
i can carry on.
Face it, The movie is Reality and i appreciate the fact tha Rajkumar
Santoshi has made a movie like this!
Habshi
this movie , it will confirm all their ideas of Hinduism .Dunking
one's head in cow urine straight from the cow ! (dont know of any
Hindu who does this but it must happen or RJS wouldnt have shown it )
, killing female babies , caste oppression -and the most heart
rendering scene is when Rekha beats her head when she learns her son
is seeing a diferent caste girl , and of course Madhuri's wonderful
tirades against God Ram .
However they will miss the point . That in Hindu India one can
do this and the govt will protect you as the vast majority of Hindus
believe in free expression , diversity and tolerance (be friendly to
all creatures . Always verify for yourself and never accept the word
of Gurus -gita and ramayana ) while in Pakistan Islamic oppression
means that a similar criticism of the Prophet , Allah or any of their
relatives merits a death sentence enforced by the govt under its
blasphemy laws . That is why humans are trying to flee all Islamic
countries . They want to be free to express themselves and read
differing opinions . So this movie in fact is a tribute to Hinduism .
On Thu, 6 Sep 2001 03:23:17 +0200, "Aadil Moosa" <moo...@mweb.co.za>
wrote:
just for the record:
Habshi
and the most heart
rendering scene is when Rekha beats her head in fear and despair when
she learns her son is seeing a diferent caste girl , the daughter of
the headman
Habshi
a King distant from Ayodhya and not related to Rama at all .
Islamists however love to make up these stories in the hope
somebody will take them seriously . It is true Rushdie mocked Hindu
Gods and goddesses but not in terms descibed here as anyone can read
the real print and not the fake 'electronic ' edition !! of Satanic
verses can read for themselves but poking fun at the dieties is an
honored tradition amongst Hindus and makes their dieties more lovable
than a fearsome Allah who does not exist .
Nasser Khan wrote
Salman Rushdie on Rama
by Suresh Naidu
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Hindutva (ie. Aryan Vaishnava fanatic) brigade has propagated
Salman Rushdie as a hero for insulting Islam. `Freedom of Speech' the
Brahmans cry, and call for an un-banning of the book. However, Rushdie
deserves more credit for exposing the fallacies of Vaishnava
fundamentlalism which so supports him. He has brought up the subject
of Sita's whoredom with Ravana and Rama's drunkeness and lechery.
Good. Now, using their same argument of freedom of speech, let us see
what Rushdie has said about Rama and Sita ?
" Here was a lecherous, drunken Rama and a flighty (*) Sita; while
Ravana, the demon-king, was depicted as an upright and honest man ;
Gibreel [ Rushdie himself ] is playing Ravana, ' Georgr explained in
fasinated horror. `Looks like he's trying deliberately to set up a
final confrontation with religious sectarians, knowing he can't win,
that he'll be broken to bits.' "
-- { `The Satanic Verses', p.539. }
" (*) flighty : "Easily excited", "easily aroused sexually." Does not
mean "full of flight," as one running away from illicit sexual
advances, but as one who is sexually frivolous and irresponsible."
Deedat sums up the Satanic Verses' picture of Rama and Sita :
" Rama the 7th incarnation of god [ Vishnu ], according to the Hindu
religion, venerated and worshipped by hundreds of millions of Hindus
in India, is character assassinated as a lecher, one given to
excessive sexual cravings and debauchery, and the demon-king is
portrayed here as a righteous man. And Sita is painted as a flirt.
This is typical of Rushdie."
However, Rushdie has exposed a suppressed historical truth here.
Historical research has shown that
Rams married his sister Sita { `Incest' }.
Rama was a bastard, his father being the disciple of the monk
Kalaikottu Miuni and not Raja Dasaratha of Ayodhya { Beast }.
Hence, Salman Rushdie deserves praise for exposing the truth about
Rama, the murderer-god of the fanatic Vaishnava religion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References & Notes to the Electronic Version
{ `Deedat' } = `The Satanic Verses unexpurgated' , by Ahmad Deedat.
{ `Satanic Verses' } = `The Satanic Verses' , by Salman Rushdie,
Viking, New York 1989, ISBN 0670825379
{ `Beast' } = ` Rama's Bastard Birth and His Mother's Beastiality with
a Horse' , published by Telingana Nadu Journal, Hyderabad 1999.
{ `Incest' } = `Rama's Incest with His Sister Sita' , Telingana Nadu
Journal, Telingana Nadu 1999.
Notes to Electronic Edition
{ Deedat } -
http://www.unn.ac.uk/societies/islamic/about/respond/satanicv.htm
Denesh Bhabuta
> the vast majority of Hindus
>believe in free expression , diversity and tolerance (be friendly to
Bwah hahahaha.. what a joke. Surely Mo you can;t believe this.. come
on, you are the perfect example of how this is *NOT* the case.
Denesh
--
Denesh Bhabuta
www.10quid.co.uk - domain, webspace and mail facilities for £10
www.dedi-serv.net - Dedicated Servers from under £75 per month
Denesh Bhabuta
And this is the 'tolerance' you were talking about in your last
posting?
Hemant
Habshi <hab...@anony.com> wrote in message news:<pc2fptctu9pfpn75b...@4ax.com>...
Habshi
habits . Just look at Hindu dominated south india , Kerala . Karnatka
etc. free of caste and religious strife and compare it with the
backward north which came under Islamic one God rule
{$D...@cyberstrider.net
> There are some very bad Hindus who have picked up Islamic
> habits .
Your quote about Rekha in the film is *NOT* an islamic habit.
Go anywhere in India - or even visit a Hindu community in
the UK - look at you yourself - and you will note is is
a general characteristic... everyuone tends to get wrapped
up in their own small narrow caste/creed/religion and do not
want to let anything else in. This holds true of many within
Hinduism and any other religion.
Grow up Mo...
Denesh
--
Denesh Bhabuta
Cyberstrider Limited - www.cyberstrider.net
Aexiomus Limited - www.aexiomus.net
Habshi
Dacoits go on killing, looting spree in train
LUCKNOW, SEPT. 6. In a daring operation, dacoits shot dead three
persons, including two policemen, abducted two jawans and looted
passengers in a speeding train near Patiali railway station in Uttar
Pradesh on Wednesday.
Ten dacoits boarded the second class compartment of the 5314 down Agra
Fort train at Ganjdudwara station and stopped it at Narthar by
defusing the vacuum when 30 more dacoits joined them, official sources
said. They then started looting the passengers.
The Railway Protection Force personnel on board the train challenged
the dacoits who opened fire killing three persons, including two
policemen, and wounding two. The dacoits before making good their
escape abducted two jawans.
Anita Bora
The hype surrounding Rajkumar Santoshi's Lajja spoilt the magic of
going to the movies for me.
Who'd want to watch a film, least of all review it, when its minutest
detail was general knowledge?
Thanks to a 'sneak preview', I already knew the film was based on the
many faces of Sita -- with four of Hindi cinema's top actresses --
Manisha Koirala, Mahima Chowdhury, Madhuri Dixit and Rekha essaying
the leads.
I am aware that Santoshi's inspiration was the gang rape and killing
of a Dalit woman, whose son dared to marry an upper caste girl.
What's left for me to tell?
Not very much.
So, what I've tried to do instead is answer a few of your questions.
Questions that might have cropped up if you've been victim to the
blitzkreig of sneak previews, slide shows and interviews with the
cast.
Questions like...
Are there really 17 stars in the film?
Yes. And more. After the first ten, I lost count. But watch out for
the dramatic entries of Urmila Matondkar, Madhuri and Ajay Devgan
amongst others.
How does Santoshi saab make the women dance to his tune?
With the exception of Rekha, all of them do dance to his tune. Urmila
sizzles in a pelvic crunching club number while Sonali Bendre
demonstrates her visage and graceful movements at a shaadi reception.
Madhuri is at her vivacious best in the Badi mushkil number with
Manisha matching her step for step.
With so much dancing then, when does the women's rights thing crop up?
That's the interesting aspect. Despite the song and dance routines,
the four leading women do make an impact. This, while sharing three
hours of screen time. An achievement in itself.
Santoshi manages to evince the best from his leads.
Vaidehi (Manisha) -- the protagonist, plays the lost, naïve woman on
the run from a callous and selfish husband (Jackie Shroff). A
sensitive performance.
Maithili (Mahima) with a single shaadi sequence impresses with her
bright and spunky portrayal as the bride who decides her father's had
enough of humiliation on her wedding day.
Ramdulari (Rekha) is at her dramatic best as the village midwife, who
is courageous enough to stop a man from killing his baby girl. But
she's rendered powerless by the village baddie, after her son falls in
love with his daughter.
Madhuri slips into her role as Janaki, the heroine of the village
nautanki group with consummate ease.
As 'Sita' on stage who asks 'Ram' (her lover) to go through the agni
pariksha and as the unwed mother, Madhuri dazzles us with a class act.
With her dancing skills on display and the histrionics to highlight
her versatility (especially in the scene where she confronts her
mentor, the leery Purushuttam (Tinnu Anand)) no one can match Madhuri.
More than focus on women's rights, what the film tries to convey
through the saga of events, is a picture of the atrocities committed
against women. This, seen through the eyes of Vaidehi, who literally
runs, stumbles and falls into situations around which the smaller
stories are woven.
To Santoshi's credit, the narrative, although jerky in bits, is held
together nicely.
What do the men do?
Another interesting question.
As the director highlights issues that are basically women-related,
Lajja could well be called a 'chick flick'.
But it's the men who are the surprise package.
A weighty Jackie relishes his wife-beating, insensitive, unloving
husband role.
And then there's Anil Kapoor, a small time thief, with heart enough to
save a marriage.
Devgan in a swashbuckling role is a winner, because he seems
completely in character with Balwa -- the avenger, the jungle fugitive
who appears wherever evil comes a-lurking in the form of the villain
-- Danny Denzongpa.
Why can't villains stop wearing kohl? I'm positive Danny would be
even more menacing without it.
Gulshan Grover as Danny's younger brother repeats the performance he's
already played in countless films. But their cameos do create an
impression.
If I had my way, the film's tag line would read: The many faces of
men!
Are all the men bad, then?
Well, the rich ones are devoid of a conscience or are totally
spineless daddie's boys.
And the poor ones have the right values but no respect.
Let's not dwell on that aspect, Santoshi's story doesn't deal with
them!
What about the much hyped about 'rape' scene?
No fear!
It's one of those 'sensitively' handled ones, with Rekha handling it
with panache. And a lot of vocal chord exercise.
Is Lajja the 'chick flick' of the year?
Haven't quite figured out yet. I was confused when I came out of the
theatre.
The film has its light moments (thanks to Johnny Lever), dollops of
drama and busloads of action. And a social message.
But the ability of the powerful cast drowns the message it's trying to
convey.
That's the problem with making films with a social cause with mass
appeal.
Does it have a happy ending?
The challenge of films like this one is to get it to a cohesive end
where everything falls in place, so you feel complete when you walk
out.
I am not sure Lajja scores here. But it does make a strong appeal at
the end in the form of Vaidehi who finally speaks out against
oppression.
Her 'shame' is conveyed through a powerful speech, which some people
might consider preaching, but probably essential to make sure we get
the message and take it to its finale.
Personally though women beating up the baddies won't solve too many of
our problems.
But there's humour in the surprise ending, which you'll discover when
you watch the film.
A few questions still hover in mind, which deal with the premise of
the film.
Why did an influential, rich man -- Jackie Shroff -- agree to an
arranged marriage to the middle class Manisha? Surely, there are rich
people in India too?
Why did it take Mahima a trip to the marriage mandap to find out that
her college sweetheart was actually a spineless fool?
But, let's not go there...
Santoshi deserves more than a generous dose of credit for trying to
portray both sides of the story -- through powerful and well sketched
characters and treading into a territory which not too many mainstream
directors explore.
Is Lajja a worthy watch?
Haven't I told you enough already?
ALSO READ:
The music review
All you wanted to know about the film
Habshi
words instead of killing each other as would happen in some other
countries . For example when Manisha says to her husband that his best
friend wants to sleep with her , he says 'well nothing can happen
without your consent can it ? So dont worry about it !'
aryanviking
Habshi wrote:
---> when you are a drunkard anything can happen without your consent!
Virendra Verma
> I would just like to tell people about Lajja. I am smitten by the movie. It
> was brilliant!!
I saw the film over the weekend. It was great except usual non-sense
about Sita's episode. Why the director has to bring Sita's story into
the film? This episode has nothing to do with the plight of women in
India. It is unrealistic too because I have not seen or heard any case
where general public has insisted on Sita to take 'agni pariksha' with
real fire. On one hand, these underworld gangs say that Ramayana is
fiction and in the same breadth they cite Sita's misery as the
evidence of all the atrocities Hindu culture imposed on women. You
must learn and research Hindu literature first before you associate
Hindu mythology to present Indian conditions.
If you look at Hindu literature, women's place in Hindu society had
been equal to or greater than men in all respects - be it religion,
education, war and social culture. There is no religion on earth
except Hinduism that elevated woman to God level. Remember familiar
Sarsawati, Lakshmi, Durga and Parvati. Who was security women in
Janak's Fort if women were just confined to four walls of the house?
How about mathematician Lila Vati? Lakshmi bai gave a fierce
resistence to British.
The real reason for the plight of women in India has to do with greed,
education, corruption and politicisation in the country. Since greed
is in human nature, there is no credible law enforcment agency in
India today which has guts to put these greedy parents into jail.
However, older generation need education.
Regards,
-- Virendra
Karen Lofstrom
Virendra Verma wrote:
> If you look at Hindu literature, women's place in Hindu society had
> been equal to or greater than men in all respects - be it religion,
> education, war and social culture. There is no religion on earth
> except Hinduism that elevated woman to God level.
Ah, c'mon. There are goddesses in many religions.
As for women's place in Hindu society -- speaking only from what I've read
(news, novels) and seen in films, I would NOT like to be a woman in some
traditional Hindu families. Married to someone of my parents' choice,
expected to be a quiet and obedient servant to my husband, slapped or
beaten if he chose, forbidden to remarry if he dies. Or perhaps just
killled because my dowry was insufficient.
It's true that many religions don't rate high on the "friendly-to-women"
scale. I'm a Buddhist and Buddhists have often been misogynists. I'm also
sure that there are millions of Hindus who feel that the highest ideals of
Hinduism do NOT condone forced marriages, wife-beating, or dowry murder.
There are probably a fair number of Hindu feminists. But still ... you
have to admit that there are millions of Hindus with extremely
conservative notions re women's place.
--
Karen Lofstrom lofs...@lava.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW! IMPROVED! ECONOMY SIZE!