D Js

I just watched this movie today and I did not know that Binnu Dhillon ji was such a fantastic talented actor in emotional scenes. The dialogues are hilarious, and I can totally understand all about the Gora chitta/ kala syah mentality of people in India, because I have seen this happening, in real life. Luckily, our family comes in the TDH gore chitte lambe sohne gabroo munde category, so there was absolutely no problem getting eligible matches for any of us. But our cousins, who are darker in complexion, sometimes feel this inferiority complex, though I must say that they are just as caring, as Lovable, and decent as Binnu. But everybody looks at the exterior being human. When I went to my nanka, Nabha, and met them for the first time, I felt a little superior, being in the gora chitta category. I guess I got a bit spoiled, because I was living in South India, and since childhood, the area in which I lived was very much how fair you are,From all our neighbors aunties, ammas, akkas the lot. So we got really spoiled! And they are much more superior, physically, emotionally, mentally, upbringing wise, decency wise, than I could ever be, I can admit this right now. I am going to watch this movie again. I wish somebody takes the trouble to subtitle it, or asks me to do the subtitling I would be honoured to do that In English, for a foreign market. Well done, again, for a very nice movie.

I normally watch just one or two movies,(the best movies always go unsung- Jimmy Shergill's Yahan 2004, the lunch Box etc... ) in the year, looking forward to HAMID which needs to be released throughout India, on March 15th, but taking the epic part aside, and the costume drama, and the patriotism, I had this feeling of disappointment at the end. Being a historian, I was like What the Hell? Is this a joke? Historically, everybody knows that she died of her wounds, fighting on the battlefield,With more than 22 battle wounds and was cremated at a Hermitage. That is, everybody would know if they would open up their history books Instead of taking their information from their imaginations, to make creative cinema. As for the movie – Killing a tiger? Do me a favour. If the director had gone to Jhansi, she would have been told the story that the little Rao , her childhood friend at Bithoor told her that she was a commoner and that is why she could not ride an elephant, but as he was an aristocrat, he could do that. She immediately picked up a spear, and pricked the trunk and forehead of the elephant, so that it ran away with the little Rao. And then she told him, ""you talk about one elephant, there will be 20 elephants standing outside my door, . All of them saluting me."" We learned this story, in our Hindi class VI lessons. Way back in the 70s. t was then that the pundit saw this little girl and decided that she would be a fit Queen for Jhansi and came to her father with the alliance request. Her little baby was poisoned, when he was less than three months old, by a traitor given money by the British. Kangana has done a good job, of both direction and acting. The visual splendour is indeed splendid. But what's with the flames making an Om symbol at the end, implying "Bharat" is Hindu centric? But why could she not have done some research, authentic and historical into the making of this film,instead of making it a super lady bandwagon? I wrote a well researched bestseller, for American audiences on the Indian mutiny, way back in 1999, selling on Amazon under the name of "A Bright Particular Star", where the real Mannu , with all her trials, tribulations, injustice at the hands of the British, – by the way, she did not know any English, her declaration was In her own vernacular, that she would not give up her Jhansi. She was not fighting for the whole of the Indian subcontinent. She was fighting to survive, against British tyranny. She was just around 18 years old. She took her case to an English court, asking for British justice, but they had already annexed Maharaja Ranjit Singh's Punjab by deposing his queen, Maharani Jind Kaur. Instead of justice, she was told to keep quiet. Otherwise she would be dragged through the streets, and thrown to the British soldiery. That is a historical fact. Now, would any Indian woman, Princess, Queen stand for this? Especially when her treasure had been stolen, and she was exiled to just one small palace, with just some servants to take care of her? . That part of the Indian subcontinent was ripe for mutiny. Also, she died fighting at Kalpi with her five women warrior sisters. She managed to get to the Hermitage of a sadhu who cremated her by burning his hut. At least Kangana's scriptwriter could have gone to Jhansi and listened to the stories they tell, instead of having her Burning herself in front of Hugh Rose. That makes for Excellent cinema, mind blowing, and award-winning, but does not do much for authenticity, does it. So if the future generation of young, impressionable youngsters leave the movie with an impression that she committed suicide in front of the British soldiers, well, well, well. Nevertheless, this is a movie worth seeing, on a weekend, while relaxing. At least it is miles better than Bahubali, Padmavat all of which I HAVE NOT SEEN, because I could not be bothered about CGI generated mythology. Nor over imaginative costume dramas. Star rating for entertainment value? 3.5 out of five. And I call that a good rating, coming from me.

This was one of Ginger Rogers most popular hits, where you are supposed to believe that a woman leaves a baby which is not hers, another woman picks it up and the whole world decides that it is that woman's baby. I must think that Hollywood was under the impression that every person watching this did not know anything about how babies were born. This included pregnancy – nine months. This included how a new mother looked, with a newborn baby. So a young pretty curvy blonde suddenly is considered to be a mother, and she just says that her equally ignorant boss who persists that she is a mother, and it is her duty to take care of her baby is caught when she says "he got me into this fix, he has to get me out of it." Naturally everybody thinks it is the boss is the father, including the hero's grandfather, who is thrilled that he has a grandchild, even if his grandson has not married. The more she protests that she is not the mother, the more everybody persists that she is the mother of that child. Her hitherto quiet sort of wannabe boyfriend decides that if she is already an unmarried mother – bachelor mother – he can go around trying to kiss her, and she has to talk about an imaginative boyfriend, the father of that baby, who beat her to gain the sympathy of her boss. In today's world, the limits of ignorant idiocy is not funny, nor is it supposedly amusing. But, in a land, where TV serials are made, with a laugh track where cackling tells you when to laugh, Friends – Two and a Half Men, even if the line is – I have to go and buy some eggs, cackle, cackle, cackle, one does not think much of the brainpower of the viewers, especially when they make such idiotic movies, super hits. I like Ginger Rogers and Doris Day, but the movies in which they were starred are mostly very stupidly scripted for a totally brainless audience, all under the name of comedy.