Archive for the ‘Pandora’s Box’ Category

Angels , Demons and reliegion

angels and demons film

I do wonder what is wrong with all these organizations that demand banning a movie just for the reasons that they feel it may harm their propaganda.  Film is an art and art needs its creative space. Of course there has to be some boundaries for this creative space.

But who should determine the boundaries. Whether it is the body which is set for the purpose or certain groups which claim to be the guardians of the human souls.

There was a lot of hue and cry on Da Vinci code.  When it came out as a book, as well as it was adapted to the silver screen. The religious leaders demanded the ban as if it would bring an end to their religion in the world.  They said it would mislead the devotees to lose faith, put their institutions in bad light. Of course we know and have heard that film is a powerful medium. But is it so powerful that it can change the minds of millions of people just by one film view.  If so I really wonder why so many movies that are made against the social evils worldwide are not able to bring in the desired social change. Why we are not in a better world by now.angels and demons film 2

Both the Da Vinci code Book and Film are read and seen by millions of people around the world. Whether it brought an end to the religion or any religious institution? I hardly doubt  if there were any instances where the viewers or readers of Da Vinci code decided to denounce their religion.  I have heard many of my religious friends saying that the movie indeed make them bond with the god more. Whether they bond more or not surely the religion in question did not have any set back due to the Da Vinci code syndrome.

Now once again the book “Angels and Demons” of the same author is adapted to the silver screen. And as expected there is demand for banning the movie. Now our religious leaders have had their way.  In India they have agreed to release of the movie if censor board cut certain scenes and give it an “A” certificate.  

I don’t know when our religious leaders will come out of the fear psychosis. Why they so strongly believe that people cannot decide what is right and wrong, what amount to fiction and nonfiction, why they fear so much of losing their base just because of a film. Why they don’t have confidence in themselves or their institution or on the disciples.

It is unfortunate that the groups like this can dictate terms to censor board.


Angels and Demons’ to hit Indian screens with cuts

angels-and-demons-1Mumbai: Representatives of Christian organisations who viewed the Hollywood film “Angels and Demons”, based on a book by “The Da Vinci Code” author Dan Brown, agreed to its screening in the country if the censor board cut some scenes and gave it an ‘A’ certification.
Like in the case of “The Da Vinci Code”, they
said the new film should have a disclaimer before and after the film saying it was a work of fiction. The special screening was arranged after the Catholic Bishops Conference of India sought a ban on the film in India. They said it contained scenes and dialogue which they claimed were false and portrayed the Catholic Church in negative light.
The film’s world premier is on May 15. CBCI spokesperson Babu Joseph said they agreed not to insist on a ban as the censor board agreed to cut the scenes which showed violence inside a church and a bishop using abusive lan
guage. Tom Hanks returns to play Robert Langdon, the Harvard University

professor, investigating a murder in which the victim is branded with the illuminati sign.

Courtesy: Ashley D’Mello | TNN,movie

Why not to ban Angels and Demons

The Angels and demons -silver screen adaptation of  Dan Brown novel by the same name, is all set to release on mid may. But it has already stirred the controversy with  Christian leaders in India demanding a ban on the films release in India.

Magic carpet had carried a post on the controversy and Tina  has commented why she feels Angels and demons should not be banned.


Hello carpet, Just saw the article title and was curious, since I have read the novel atleast 5 times!! This is another case of a book misunderstood, just because it revolves around a pope and few characters from Vatican.No one who saw the last Dan Brown novel ‘The Da Vinci Code’ brought on silverscreen by Ron Howard, will say that it was blasphemous.

Infact, it brought Jesus Christ closer to our hearts. In the discussed novel too several lesser known papal rituals have been described with simplicity and care that can be attributed to good faith and understanding. ಓದನ್ನು ಮುಂದುವರೆಸಿ

Angels and Demons



The Catholic Church in India has demanded a ban on the release of a film based on Dan Brown’s bestseller “Angels and Demons”, alleging that it was an attempt to malign the Christian faith.

The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India (CBCI), the apex body of Catholic Church in the country, also warned that the film’s “unqualified” release in the country can cause “disquiet” within the community and it is “disturbed” at this.

“We ask for banning of the controversial film in India where Christianity is still in the process of being understood by large section of society,” Stanislaus Fernandes, Secretary General of CBCI, said in a letter to Censor Board Chairperson Sharmila Tagore.

“To present the Holy Bible and its sacred messages in a distorted manner is an insult to Christianity and its followers, not only in India but also all over the world,” he said. The film will be released in the country on May 15.

Mr. Fernandes said the CBCI was “disturbed” as the film “attempts to malign Christians and their faith through deliberate distortion of facts”.

“Angels and Demons” is a mystery-thriller which revolves around the quest of fictional Harvard University symbologist Robert Langdon to unravel the mysteries of a secret society called the Illuminati and to prevent a plot from annihilating Vatican City.

Slumdog Millionaire- more blunders

specialscreeningslumdogmillionaire2mp6ice2tqalMagic carpet had published the letter by Suguna pointing out a factual error regarding the author of ” Darshan de Ghan Shyam.

Now Pramod has send us info about the site ” IMDbPro” which has listed several goofups in slumdog millionaire film.

Factual errors: In the movie, the correct answer to the question of who wrote the song “Darshan Do Ghanshyam Naath” is shown as 16th century poet “Kavi Surdas”. However in reality, this song is written by Gopal Singh Nepali for the movie Narsi Bhagat (1957). This song is also credited as traditional and originally written by 15th century poet Narsinh Mehta, whose life that film is based on. (Many, including the film, mistakenly attribute it to the 16th-century poet Surdas due to the fact that Surdas was blind and the song is a prayer asking God to “appear” before him, for his “eyes thirst for Your sight”.)

* Audio/visual unsynchronized: In the scene where Javed is partying with his friends and Latika is held captive, the audio playing in the background is from the movie ‘Don’, whereas the visual shown on TV is from the movie ‘Yuva’.

* Anachronisms: Although the events of the movie are set in the summer of 2006, the cricket match being played at Javed’s house between India and South Africa was played in 2007.

* Continuity: When Salim and Jamal find Latika in the dance studio she is seen without and then with a nose ring.

* Anachronisms: The scene where Jamal tries to steal food, hanging upside down on the train shows a window which had removable bars (it’s like a fire escape). These kind of bars were not installed until after the 2002 Gujarat riots.

* Anachronisms: The trains on which Jamal and Salim escape and live for many days have compartments painted in blue color. The blue color compartments came into existence at a later date. The compartments were painted Red back then.

* Anachronisms: In the scene where Salim and Jamal are working the crowds at the Taj Mahal, Jamal has a new $10 bill in his hand. It would be impossible to have a new bill in 2002 when they were issued in 2006.


* Revealing mistakes: When older Jamal punches older Salim, you can hear Dev Patel’s British accent come out when he was yelling at him.

* Factual errors: The cricket match shown between India and South Africa was played in the Belfast, whereas the commentator says that its being played in the Wankhede Stadium in Mumbai.

* Continuity: While in the police station Jamal drinks down a glass of Chai and sets it on the table in front of him. In the following shot the glass is full again.

* Factual errors: When Jamal explains the answer for “truth alone triumphs” question, Jamal asks the inspector for the price of Pani Puri, but the video shown is that of Dahi Puri.

* Continuity: When Jamal is asked by Latika to leave the mansion and forget about her, he accidentally pulls up one side of his collar when taking off his apron. However, in the next shot, his collar is down again. When he actually leaves the mansion his collar is up once again.

* Factual errors: When the policeman handcuffs Jamal to the chair he uses handcuffs that click shut. In India, Darby handcuffs are used.

* Anachronisms: The movie shows news reports from Live India, a television channel. The plot says that is 2006, but Live India was launched in 2007. It was previously called Janmat.

* Anachronisms: At the end of the last song and dance sequence on the railway platform, hoardings for shows on NDTV Imagine (and entertainment TV channel) are prominent. NDTV Imagine launched in 2008 and the promotion could not have began in 2006 – the year where the story of the film happens in.

* Factual errors: At the end of the movie when Javed is with his bunch of girls and asks them to dance to the song ‘Aaj Ki Raat’ which is from the movie ‘Don – The Chase Begins’, the television actually shows the song ‘Fanaa’ from the movie ‘Yuva’.

* Factual errors: The movie is clearly made for a Western audience, because the Indian number system (which would be used in an Indian show) would write 10 million as 1,00,00,000 not as 10,000,000. It would be called “1 crore.” The term 10 million would not be used.

* Revealing mistakes: You also hear Dev Patel’s British accent when he tells the host (Anil Kapoor) in the bathroom that he will “not be a million-ahe.”

* Continuity: A large pimple on the right side of Jamal’s face appears then disappears then reappears, depending on whether he is being interrogated by the police or is answering questions as a television game-show contestant, even though those events supposedly occurred in the plot within a span of just a few hours.

* Continuity: The host used the words “cell phone”, which are mostly used in North America, while India and most of the world uses the words “mobile phone”.

* Plot holes: The original TV show “Who Wants to be a Millionaire” is recorded in studio. The show that we see in the film is broadcast live, however this raises the incongruence that the person from home can easily see the question on the TV taking plenty of time to come up with an answer before receiving the actual call (which as we see is dialed to a mobile number). With this both the need to have the questions reread on the phone, and the time limit itself, lose credibility.

* Factual errors: In the final question the name of Alexandre Dumas in incorrectly spelled Alexander.

* Factual errors: SPOILER: In the beginning of the film it says it takes place in 2006. But when Jamal wins the show, the check says 2005.

* Incorrectly regarded as goofs: While driving the car after escaping from Javed and going towards meeting Jamal, the scar appears on right side of Latika’s face although it is on left side of her face before the scene when Salim slips her hair and in rest of the movie. However, Latika’s face is seen in the rear view mirror of the car; therefore, the scar on her left cheek appears to be on the right cheek.

* Incorrectly regarded as goofs: Jack Hobbs (the question about cricketers scoring first class centuries) is partly correct with the answer of 197. Jack Hobbs has stated that although 199 were done in a technical sense, as 2 of these were in exhibition matches they should not count and as such have never been officially recognized by Wisden Cricketers’ Almanack. A quote from Jack, ‘Don’t include those,’ he told the late John Arlott. ‘They were exhibition matches. Vizzy wanted to list our hundreds on the walls of his pavilion. We knew we’d got to score hundreds – so did the bowling side. They were not first-class in any sense.’



* Incorrectly regarded as goofs: The young Salim and Jamal are shown to attend a primary municipality school in Mumbai. These schools do not have The Three Musketeers in syllabus. However, this could have been a school that was built in the slums by an external organization such as a charity.

* Incorrectly regarded as goofs: Both Jamal and Salim speak fluent English when they’re teenagers. The movie was originally supposed to all be in English, yet the actors that played young Jamal and young Salim had some trouble with speaking English. Director Danny Boyle asked producers to have the beginning in Hindi, and colored the subtitles to make them more appealing. From the storyline, Jamal and Salim probably learned from tourists.

* Incorrectly regarded as goofs: After revealing the answer to the question of which cricketer has scored to most first class centuries, the host reveals that Jack Hobbs scored 197 centuries. In fact, he famously fell one short of the 200 milestone by scoring 199 centuries. However, both figures can be accepted as correct. The Association of Cricket Statisticians and History, in 2006, revised the status of many 19th Century and pre-War matches, which produced new statistics, giving Hobbs 199 first-class centuries. However, Wisden, often seen as the “cricketing bible”, declined to recognise the new figures and still records Hobbs as scoring 197.

* Incorrectly regarded as goofs: In one scene, when teenage Salim and Jamal are at the Taj Mahal, there is an external shot where a passing guard looks at the camera and says, “Stop filming. Stop filming.” This was included purposely by director Danny Boyle for the sake of realism.

Slumdog – a blunder???


The entire film slumdog millionaire is based on the television quiz program, Kaun Banega Crorepati. In the film protogonist Jamal malik becomes millionaire by giving correct answers to the questions. Once the jamal gives the answer , computerji locks it and declares it right or wrong .

But Suguna in a letter to Indian Express

says that the director Danny boyle ‘s computerji is wrong.  Yes it is the “author of darshan De Ganshyam ” .  the right answer to this question as per the film is a factual error and she wonders how such mistake can be made, and what research the Boyle team might have undertaken.

Below is Suguna’s Letter from Indian Express.


“I’d like to point out a serious error in the film. In the quiz, Jamal Malik is asked, “Who wrote the bhajan, Darshan do Ghanshyam?” The correct answer in the film is said to be Surdas. This answer is incorrect.

The bhajan is featured in the film, Narsi Bhagat (about the eponymous Gujarati saint poet) made by Devendra Goel in 1957. Even then, the song is attributed to Narsi Bhagat (as was the custom with classical poems and dohas) as suggested in the last few lines, Narsi ki yeh binati sun lo, bhakt vilasi re. I had experts (including the old music director of the film, Ravi) check and they confirm that G S Nepali wrote the bhajan but attributed it to Narsi Bhagat.

I wouldn’t quibble about this normally but this is a film about a quiz show and how the protagonist keeps winning. He picks the blind, Surdas’ name because he recalls a young singer friend who is blinded to beg. This gets him closer to the big prize. But the poem has nothing to do with Surdas. A simple Internet search would have given them the right answers. You can check the same in

What were the team of Slumdog doing if not checking the veracity of the answers that is so basic to the script? Did they believe that since the bhajan was from an old obscure Hindi film, nobody would notice? Would our cricket-crazy country be sitting back and ignoring the error if Jamal had picked ‘Ricky Ponting’ in the ultimate question and computerji had said it was correct? Would a line from a Shakespeare sonnet be attributed to, say, Byron go unnoticed by scholars of the English language? I think this error needs to be pointed out to Danny Boyle and Co especially as the film is up for the Oscars. ”

IIFA Awards – ho hum!!


Sometimes, people tend to go bonkers inspite of holding an international repute and lots of respect. IIFA awards night was certainly no exception to this rule and the ’sarkar’ family of bollywood looked too raunchy hoisting themselves all along, once again through IIFA. When you say you have this platform to represent Indian Cinema to the international audience, you should be really careful. It better not be a ‘one family show’ which it has been, since its inception. What are you trying to prove, anyway? Is it a ‘Kaun banega bollywood ka badshah’ contest?

As I watched the IIFA night unfold on my telly screen, I could not help but to sympathize with the audience who were exposed to the typical fanfare of our cinema, sans the major players!!!! The ceremony was too conspicuous with the absence of major stars like Shahrukh (Who seems to have sworn to abhor IIFA till Bachchan Saaab’s reign is on), Salman (Who took all the limelight from the Bachchans last year), Hrithik (Too confused about the camp politics, maybe!), Priety Zinta (Busy gathering info on cricket), Shahid and Vidya (Do we know the reasons? ahem..), Sanjay, Dharmendra clan and Amir, who of course does not attend these tamaashas.

Most of the show would have been digestable, if not for the terrible two – Boman Irani and Riteish Deshmukh. In the beginning itself, their proclamation that they were going to be terrible hosts – came very true. They jumped like monkeys, they wallowed in their sarcasm and spoofed like it was their sole business. I couldn’t understand why they were shouting all along. Maybe their headfones were defunct, or they had some hearing disorder or they thought most of the audience had hearing disroder, I tried to console myself thus. Still the urge to get out there and ask them to take a chillpill it was getting stronger. Wish someone told them how terrible they were. They made jokes on everyone including the Senior Bachchan, as if the award functions were meant for that. Though the spoofs on Sarkar, Om Shanti Om and Guru were okay, the one’s on Taare Zameen Par was in very bad taste. The duo made remarks on Amir’s absence in all the award functions. A superb movie such as ‘Taare Zameen Par’ wasn’t properly mentioned. Instead Boman and Riteish came up with a spoof that portrayed the movie in bad taste to the audience. The movie, for the first time in the history of Indian cinema brought out the problems of a totally neglected chunk of society effectively and what does our so-called international Indian film fraternity do? They promptly spoof it and laugh it off. Shame on you guys!! Time to grow up, period. Why are we being so hard on each other? Karan Johar was seen smiling at all the Shahrukh Jokes, being the only representative of the Khan camp. It looked like the Bachchan family hasn’t taken the world tour rejection very kindly and was hell bent on venting it’s fury that night. Vivek Oberoi looked smiled excessively. Saif looked creepy with his shades on. Otherwise the happy couples looked great, held hands and posed well.

Govinda and Akshay were their usual charming self. They performed with an amazing energy which only comes with years of hardwork and a penchant to entertain. Harman baweja dispelled all the controversies of being a Hrithik-lookalike by dancing miserably. Priyanka was mesmerizing. Kareena and Katrina should seriously consider hiring some good dance trainers. Shyam Benegal’s award was sensible and so was Mumtaz’s. But there were certainly better music compositions last year than AR Rehman’s for Guru. Chak De India found some mention. Everyone wants to be in the next Shimit Amin movie after shahrukh’s success. Many people who really represented movie industry looked totally out of place, sidelined and uncomfortable, faking smiles for the benefit of camera. Why is it that there is no representation for regional cinema when ‘Indian’ cinema is presented on an international platform? Are regional movies not equal to hindi movies? if yes, is bollywood being properly represented through IIFA? If yes, it’s time to cackle and say boo. If no, it’s time to grow up, IIFA. 

Any comment?

Mr vaariyar has a point to make. shall we discuss this opinion on the oscar winning german movie-The Lives of others. your comments are welcome either in english or Kannada


send your comments to

this is a film that demonizes the former east german communist regime with usual demogagy of west ‘individual freedom’ etc….. not at all a balanced view of whatever negative developments that would have happened.