Raajalakshmi O Srikanto - Uttam Kumar and Suchitra Sen Film.

Superlative work of literature and of film, one that discloses in subtle layers veiled to those with less discernment than those cognizant of the times depicted here, of the people and of history of India. And of course, the exquisite pairing of two such beautiful artists as Uttam Kumar and Suchitra Sen that makes it all the more beautiful.

Generally the protagonist here coming across examples counter to general strictures and his sensitivity to women in an era where half of humanity was held not only inferior in most of the worldBut as property of males, to do with as they saw fit, was the refreshingly different factor about this author in general and this work in particular.

The confrontation between the priests and the youth that disobeyed the excommunication order of priests for a house of death, the doctor who solves it in a way they hadn't foreseen, and the very unexpectedly unloved, un-cared-for loneliness of the beautiful young man who isn't even able to get a bit of food at home, his silent virtue in abstaining from hunting birds despite peer pressure of company and his quietly disposing off the alcohol he could have very well imbibed for the occasion, all set off the sketch to a good start.

If this part 27:00 - 48:11 is discussed in literature or critique, either of the original work or the film, it's not famous enough.

But it's on the whole not out of sync with the author, or generally the ethos of the then Bengal, the thinking and literature and films thereof, that on one hand there is the hero representing the modern fearless thinking youth that firmly asserts that there are no ghosts or spirits and if there is anyone who experienced such things either they are lying or had illusions; on the other there is the older villager who firmly asserts that the spot is dangerous at night, and the young man returning safe is a miracle that shouldn't be tried again; then there is the young woman who loved him since her childhood and attempts to keep him safe; and, when she brings him out safe personally on second consecutive night instead of merely sending someone, and asks why he went, he candidly admits to his complete lack of awareness of when or why he repeated the misadventure!

What's more, he even goes on to tell her 48:13 - 48:34 that someone unkniwn calked him and brought him to the place and was with him till he was woken by her and brought out.

So on one hand he's dared and been admired by the silent crowd on the successful completion of the dare on the previous night, and on the other he has experienced something beyond his thinking, and has intellectual honesty and courage to admit it.

This duality, and the attempt to not portray it as battle but synthesis it, often is characteristic of this author, and generally literature and films of Bengal, experience as the province did the reawakening of spirit what with the stupor brought about by the previous colonial regime of a millennium challenged by the new winds that were brought in by the Brits arriving at this entry hate and making the region their head seat of rule for most of their presence, thereby weakening up the soul of India in Bengal.

This is further 48:34 - 53:14 consolidated, with a tad less elusive scene following the departure of her, having asked him to think of her in his bad times even if not in good times, when the doctor settled in the village asks him how long he'd go on being a man without a purpose, and lying about - in a subtle way, this young man then represents Bengal, and most of India too at that, still in stupor despite yet another colonial regime taking over, which the educated doctor attempts to wake him out of, with the same calm and patient solicitude with which he has made helping a poor village and region his life, instead of settling for a life of high society of wealthy that he obviously belongs to - an education and a career in medicine, with a western medicine degree, those days being not quite for those less than wealthy.

Heart of the whole work comes 1:40:00 - 1:42:00, in the conversation where the two entwined souls are attempting to find a way out of the knots they are entangled in, yet unable to join their lives together without each being thrown out of their own social status completely. What follows, 1:42:00 - 1:51:45 - 1:56:00, is the heartbreaking tale of who knows how many millions of lives, young and old, destroyed because of social stigma attached to women not married and not protected by legally appointed males, whatever the name of such legal relationships, while obviously such protection isn't always a home either, and quite often horror.

And thus 2:09:32 one is suddenly clear about the bonds, apart from the love and togetherness of their childhood, that hold the two together - after she left the village, soon she was as bereft of bonds, of caring people, at a young age, as he was seen clearly in the very beginning.

What is a whole interaction in social setup for a wedding in the original work, here comes 2:17:45 - 2:19:15 as a short instruction and promise between the two, before his looming departure to Burma to find work and a suitable position. But here the interlude 2:09:32 - 2:17:45 is very reminiscent of a similar one in Uttarphalguni, with difference of nuance in that here the music accompanies her solitary life, while there it was after she had been found by him, in a life of a private togetherness that wasn't socially declared.

A very satisfactory finale, even though it is one of a separation - perhaps because the two are now bonded by a word he gave her. And the fact that one knows the next two parts of the four volume work, and is familiar with the film versions, is somehow not quite as relevant in this, as is the excellence of this one in itself.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0C4dyITyFhA


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RF93ZJzNCIM

Bengali New Movie Rajlaxmi O Srikanta Full Movie Uttam Kumar, Suchitra Sen YouTube 360p


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2rRigFL0cJ4

Souryatoran - Uttam Kumar and Suchitra Sen Film.

Remake of Fountainhead, which - the author doesn't say so on the book at least, if at all she admits it elsewhere - is in fact very closely based on art and philosophy of architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright, as he himself expresses in his autobiography, apart from his own life and work. This, the author mashed with a part of the famous work of Galsworthy - The Forsyte Saga - involving the architect who designs a house, far away from the town on a hill with much of surrounding land belonging to the estate, for a client whose wife he's completely in love with. Result was the most famous and popular book by this author, Ayn Rand.

Even within the first half an hour it becomes apparent how seamlessly the adaptation of the book into Bengal ethos has been worked, in that for example the servant of the senior maverick architect agonising over his starving, and the hero effortlessly and successfully telling his new eccentric boss to eat, with the servant in tears one can feel, is all very Bengal.

So is the slum exploration of the heroine brought up wealthy but working as a journalist, and the encounter of the couple changed considerably into a far more natural circumstance. Only, subsequent attempt to incorporate a version of the original is out of sync with the spirit.

Sudden view of the quintessential photo on the wall 33:04, The Murphy Baby, favourite of society in India during that era for decades, makes one oh, so nostalgic!

Again, the original bribe turned obsession motif of meeting of the rich guy with the heroine is here turned into a casual glance at the slum turned obsession and a blackmail via taking over all her wealth, with the whole temple interlude cut out and a whole character too, that of Ellsworth Toomey, who was after all Ayn Rand's caricature of Gandhi.

But in the process, it's not just the main couple that's more human, it's the rich guy too somehow more vulnerable, worthy of compassion here.

................................................................................................





This, part two, begins with the hero reinstated as architect, honourably. The poor housing project is here turned into the heroine's dream project and the condition she has agreed to marry the rich guy. The house seems designed by the elder architect that the hero aspired to learn from, and the twists and turns in the couple seem later copied in at least one or two, if not more, Hindi films, where she is upstanding until he reminds her she is at every male's mercy, and she wilts.

Charming detail, sound of wind and rain during the song 16:00. Here on the relationships of the three, too, take a turn quite different from both the originals - Fountainhead as well as The Forsyte Saga - and get closer to films or literature of West, what with the prospective husband being in doubt and seeking to discover their togetherness by pretend absense, but stays yet subtler than the routine drama.

With all those changes, various whole parts dropped and more, arriving at the destruction of the dream housing for poor project and courtroom thereafter is not as organic here as in Ayn Rand's Fountainhead. It's turned instead into a naive leftist utopia where provision of a good housing for poor is all it's needed for them to achieve quality of life.





https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aVOBtkNvfD4

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_WciJPiFlz4

Harano Sur - Uttam Kumar And Suchitra Sen Classic, 1957.

Quintessential Uttam Kumar and Suchitra Sen film and a classic of the era from Bengali films.

Adaptation of Random Harvest by James Hilton. Perhaps with a tad borrowed, in the woman being a psychiatrist at a mental hospital, from Hitchcock's Spellbound. The original, set in wartime England from end of WWI to WWII, has her in other jobs possible for someone from a middle to lower middle class background, going from a bartender to wife to typist, secretary and onwards, on her own capabilities.

Whether thereby, or deliberately - since the other factirs of the original story have been cut out necessarily - it's the heroine's persona and dilemma, agony and problem that is highlighted here, unlike in the original where she remains elusive for much of the story. There, she is a lower middle class simple young girl who happened to find a lost young man escaping the facility he was sequestered at, and having given him refuge, married him, only to lose him - and subsequently when she did find him, the class difference is huge, so she could only wait in the background, hoping he will remember, or give up. Her doctor had told her that any pressure to remind him might damage him for ever, irrevocably. So she waited, and there is the background of the two wars.

Here, his former life is rather in the background unlike the original, even when he has returned, and so is her elevated status of a not only medical doctor but a psychiatrist, and from the moment he enters her life, she gives him increasing priority, until having found him she's content to hide her identity and give up her profession for the time being, perhaps for ever, which seems to be the attempt to integrate the story into Indian ethos! 

Necessarily the counterpart is turning of the official fiancee of his into a virago, upset with the silent mysterious new woman who doesn't fit any stereotype recognisable, and confronting her over and over - unlike the original where there is no such confrontation or even recognition, only the opposite - there, the much younger new entry in his life is nevertheless mature enough to realise he might have asked her to marry him and won't ever dishonour his word, but in reality isn't seeing her, only absent and seeking something lost that isn't her. This was perhaps too elusive and pastel for thisbadaptation, where the lines are far fewer and colours all bold.



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyYg-0YdoLw

Indrani - Uttam Kumar And Suchitra Sen Classic, 1958.

What a perfect pairing of two such beautiful artists!

When one catches a film on TV these days, often it's already a few minutes past its beginning, and often it's only when one knows it's the golden pair of Uttam Kumar and Suchitra Sen that one begins to pay attention. That one gets to see films this way now is already great, and all due to cable.

But seeing it from the beginning, and not missing the vital first few minutes as in this one, is often due to internet, and one must thank technology! So much becomes clearer, the characterisations, relationships, and details that are telling - such as the story being set to pre independence era, although that isn't made clear except when she first finds a job and they set forth to a place they couldn't have post independence.

Wonder if this film was later the inspiration for Hrishikesh Mukherjee's Hindi film Abhimaan, what with the same problem dealt with in both - the couple in love, married newly, has similar talents, he is way ahead to begin with and helps her, but problems arise with her success as he is floundering.

This one begins with the girl's father writing about problems of women finding identity and occupations that take them away from serving their family, just as his first and only child is being born - and he is despondent its a girl. But she grows quietly, educating herself with distinction and clinging on to the necessity thereof so she need not be dependent, and when she finds love, her education is handy immediately, in their being able to escape the wrath of his family that has turned to ill treatment of the couple - but his lack of job and independent wealth brings more problems. This is where, true to the bengal and its literature and films of the era, it turns to the left, with him finding a place in a creation of a refuge for needy,  which - it's implicit, and said too, what with his new mentor tearing up his degree certificates - is supposedly superior a lifestyle.

Funny, the leftist thought seems to force a questioning of why one shoukd do study, research, thesis, .."could you not survive without the fame" asks a co-worker as the guy seeks to work nights to complete his thesis in the scant lamp light in the refuge they are building in the foŕest area in a valley with low hills.

Those were the heyday of the Maoist revolution that reverberated largely in Bengal, with the dire treatment meted out to academics and intellectuals contrasting strongly against Indian ethos of reverence for knowledge and achievements in intellectual sphere, helping rise of the lumpen; that this wasn't exactly leftist or useful to humanity, and was in fact the modus operandi of the fascist and nazi in Europe seems to have either escaped or been deliberately ignored, even pushed under the rug, by the admirers of those revolutionaries across borders East.

And what escapes most, due chiefly to false propaganda by the persecutors, is that this hatred of those that are keepers of knowledge is at the root of this persecution of Hindus and India, and of the Jews through over two millennia until the holocaust last century. For neither of these succumbed as easily as fell the other ancient cultures that were keepers of knowledge before and with these, until,they were destroyed by onslaught of the two waves of conversionist institutionlised religions that swept away and destroyed cultures of Egypt, Persia and much more, across the then known world. These two, in contrast, survived against all odds and every massacre perpetrated. So far.

Here, a melodramatic shortcut seems the final twist, with him rejecting her after she's come to be with him as soon as she kniws his whereabouts, leaving her life and identity behind her, but he can't let her leave while there's a storm that combines with hay roofs and a fallen lamp to set fire to his creation the refuge. And of course, the hero must give a cliche speech to rouse the people out of despondency, with a song too.

Final words of wisdom, as ever here, are from her - for while he might represent West or left, intellectual progressions borrowed from thinking rooted only in thought, she's the deep wisdom of India rooted in soul.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Jjwm9hdhuBw

Nostalgia About Kedarnath, And Watching Kedarnath, The Film Set At Kedarnath

Beautiful setting of the film is the chief reason we went to see it, since it has been just over quarter of a century since we went, and it's unlikely we might again, what with health issues even without landslide fears. And in this the film is far from disappointing - superb scenery and much more so than our rose gold nostalgic memories would have made them, made watching it a breathtaking pleasure most of the time. We had no expectations of the film other than this, so the young pair was a pleasant surprise.

It's only later that it emerges to one just how carefully the film was crafted to stay on the brink where it could, but need not be, interpreted as a message, or a bunch of them, all serving perhaps an underworld diktat, and all equally false.

Reminds one of the time one saw an old classic by a director very revered in highbrow and esoteric connoisseur circles of the intellectual metropolis Boston-Cambridge neighbourhood, at Harvard theatre, and it so happened there were a couple of colleagues there too, so we had coffee at the spot close by after the film. The youngest one of us was quite ardent in his naive bong praise for the film, Autumn Sonata, and the third one said he understood the point of view of each and so was silent. A decade and half later, a similar argument was in Amsterdam at the Riiksmuseum over a painting titled "Arabs" or something including the explicit word but depicting a coal black pair, and I remarked that it was false, while our then host (holder of many passports but not the one he coveted, Dutch) opined - just as the young guy in Boston-Cambridge had about the film - that it was excellent artistically. My complete disagreement in either case, despite the guys assuming compliance from what they obviously assumed was lesser human for obvious reasons, went a long way towards permanent friction.

Why does this film remind one of those completely unrelated topics is obvious to anyone familiar with the deep underlying issues not as hidden here as the guys pretended they were in those two - the underlying issue in each is a fraud perpetrated via an artistic effort to veil the false propaganda. Then, I had called it garbage served covered completely in ketchup, in the first case. But regardless of whether it's ketchup as it could be termed in the second case, or hollandaise in champagne as in case of the first one the film - or in this case a thick cheer with saffron and pistachios served ice cold, the thorn remains unquestionable. And that is the falsehood.

Autumn Sonata was vicious propaganda about evils of women achieving an identity via a superior talent, although nobody ever said a word about need of women earning to support children due to males fleeing from responsibilities thereof - so the issue has never been the actual suffering of the children, which couldn't be worse for a woman with talent and career than for a manual worker exhausted working nine hours a day in high heels serving coffee and burgers. The painting was stereotypical of Europe assuming everyone else is black and they are white, neither of which is true.

This film does not explicitly articulate, but instead skirts the "all but" route, of making the message or propaganda not quite articulated in the dialogue. The message? It could be interpreted as "there is no love jihad, it's about casteism imprisoning youth away from love and girls from right to freedom, minority is noble and majority backward in India,....", - needless to say none of which is not fraud.

Yes, in this particular tale the guy isn't going after the girl deliberately or cheating her of knowledge of his identity or, having married her, then pressuring her to convert; which doesn't prove that that is precisely not happening generally to hundreds, if not thousands, of naive young women who were not brought up to protect themselves against such freedom taken away precisely because they had it, pretty much like the Europe eight decades ago voting a bunch into power that took away votes from everyone and promised it will be for a thousand years!

Yes, in this case the young man is a part of India and not the jihadist mindset that uses rape and physical assault to benumb young girls  into complete submission via total humiliation and calls it grooming - but that is not to say hundreds of young girls haven't suffered it from gangs that inflict it deliberately.

Yes, in this story the guy saves their lives and risks, even gives up perhaps,  his own, but that is not to say hundreds of others in real life don't gangrape and subsequently sell the young woman, who loses her identity and her family and life and freedom and future, all at once.

This film maker plays it safe by saying nothing explicitly while making the message clear as Himaalayan pristine streams still in hills, by deliberately choosing a highly revered shrine of India (would he dare use a locale or object revered by a powerful institution outside India?), by leaving no doubts just how ignoble the choice of the parents is and how wrong the behaviour of the community (would he dare make that assertion in real life stories about the minorities associated with ex colonial regimes by showing facts of their behaviour on film and calling a spade a spade?), and more.

And so, covered in the beauty of Himaalayan ranges and valleys and treks, and the talented delightful young pair, still, rotten at core this is. If one can avoid that core and merely enjoy the beauty by floating above it all, good luck, but chances are the propaganda is a poisonous jet stream of falsehood and it will get you.

And the pity of it all is the offering of the young pair of artists at this alter to falsehood in the propaganda to cover up the jihadist warfare so it can carry on with impunity.

The young hero does his job superbly, of depicting every emotion and flicker of the young man who is outgoing in public purpose but reticent in his private feelings. His willingness to stand up for the needs of his valley, his protecting his clients and his hiding his own vulnerabilities and his anguish, are all very endearing.

The young girl, despite the not quite so admirable character she portrays - she is open in being less than respectful of her elders in a way that leaves one between askance and aghast, and doesn't fight when needed despite the liberties she risks taking when not necessary to risk her everything - is still nevertheless made very endearing by the young debutante from the lineage of half a dozen or so well known lines of lineage.

And the unforgettable part is the tragedy that struck the region, with - the numbers given in film at end - 4,300 lives lost, 50,000 rescued by military and 70,000 missing. We could barely recognise the newly reconstructed trek, so changed is the valley.

But here too the director gave in to the underworld demands, or was it the mafia opposition? He never mentioned the rescue work carried out by various private institutions, because they are associated with the majority of India.

If India isn't whipped continuously as per Macaulay policy of humiliation and lies against it, how will they accept their subjugation meekly? They might rise up and expect a citizenship equal to those tribesmen of non Indian origin who were granted nawabhoods for defeating Indian forces so the colonial regimes could establish a hold, and no longer be ignorant about Nawab being not princes but merely tax collectors!

Funny, the appeasers attempt to trick majority with a silent implication that the unquenched love of the young was what brought on the wrath of heavens pouring down and caused the landslides that were responsible for so much devastation - but they failed to take into account the sureshot weapon they provided the trench against them that are their more than equals, since the film will be interpreted by them as heaven's wrath brought down due to sacred spaces defiled by footfall of the unholy!

And while the appeasers go parading calling themselves secular, it's the trye secular India that's losing the middle ground, since there is nothing more secular than India with her ancient culture, and aligning with India in any way is now branded by the invader appeasers as regressive!


Responding to a comment below another yt video on the topic, by Kanchan Thakur:-

"😡😡

एक लड़की केदारनाथ दर्शन करने जाती है,

वहां मुस्लिम कुली से उसको प्यार हो जाता है,

लड़की का बाप कहता है 'ये रिश्ता हुआ तो प्रलय आ जायेगा' ।

लड़की कहती है

'फिर तो मैं प्रार्थना करती हूं कि प्रलय आये' ।

बादल फट जाता है,

पूरा केदारनाथ डूब जाता है और वो मुस्लिम कुली दूसरे किसी मदद करने की बजाय सिर्फ हीरोइन को बचाता है

और

लड़की के बाप को दिव्य ज्ञान प्राप्त होता है

कि प्रेम में जाती धर्म नहीं होता और हमारा देश गंगा जमुनी तहजीब वाला देश है (जैसे दिल्ली के अंकित सक्सेना को ज्ञान प्राप्त हुआ था) ।

वो अपनी लड़की का निकाह उस कुली से करवा देता है ।

ये कहानी है फ़िल्म केदारनाथ की । 😡

फ़िल्म से एक सीख और मिलती है कि

हिन्दुओ ने अपनी लड़की का निकाह मुसलमानो से नहीं कराया तो प्रलय आएगा ।

बॉलीवुड वाले भांड क्या गुल खिला सकते हैं, समझ से बाहर है.

केदारनाथ त्रासदी में करीब एक लाख लोग मारे गए,

कइयों के तो शव भी नहीं मिले आज तक,

पूरा देश खून के आंसू रोया था, जैसे अपना कोई सगा वाला मरा हो ।

इतनी भयानक घटना पर फ़िल्म भी बनाई

तो उसमें भी लव जिहाद का जहर घोल दिया ।

केदारनाथ पर फ़िल्म ही बनानी थी तो सेना ने अपनी जान पर खेलकर कैसे लोगों की जान बचाई ये बताते ।
सेना का पराक्रम बताने की बजाय एक मुस्लिम कुली को महान बता दिया।

ये वो फिल्मकार है

जो पैसों की खातिर अपनी बहन बीवी बेटी भी सुला देंगे किसी के भी साथ।

क्या फिल्म का नाम केदारनाथ रखकर भी ऐसी घटिया फिल्म बनायीं जा सकती है?

😡😡😡"



Kanchan Thakur - just a small correction, the guy is gone in a landslide as the girl and others rescued watch from the helicopter, it's not exactly a wedding but uncertainty at the end, he is one of the 70,000 missing.  If the father has any second thoughts, they aren't about getting her married to the boy he's known, only about reassessment of his wrath against the boy.

Kanchan Thakur  - another small correction, it's not about a girl going to visit, it's a local girl, although the trailer diesnt make it clear; and she doesn't fall in love just casually, she's intrigued at a connection made as a fanatic cricket fan but also she's very angry and desperate to get out of an enforced engagement with someone who changed his mind about marrying her sister after a childhood connection of several years; so the rebellion is really a cry for help from a young girl in circumstances she has little control over. The film would have been lovely if it were not mixed up in a false propaganda and set in the immensely beautiful place, but we saw it only to relive our memories of the travel.



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=03-KVRmd3xo


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SypmQenLQgs

About The Film Sunju

Quote:- "... hilarious and heartbreaking exploration of one man’s battle against his own wild self and ..." - hilarious and heartbreaking indeed, and superb.

Hard as it is to gain muscles or lose weight, the surprising fundamental similarity of face structure was important to begin with, and the capability of the artist to portray a character mattered - and of course, the protagonist helping wasn't the least.

Never thought one could like a film by this guy, the director. Until this one. Not due to being a fan of the protagonist, either. But RK Jr is always artist par excellence, chip off the old RK! Family tradition at that, grandchildren taking after a grandparent.

One sees the film without expectations or adulation, if one is a fan of neither the director nor particularly the subject - although being open about the subject helps - and one is seeing it partly from curiosity about its being a blockbuster, partly because one has high opinion of the artist playing the protagonist.

One is pleasantly surprised at the turns, the unexpected hilarious moments in so far from ideal or idyllic a life, and finally left wondering why this confused young person was so very targeted. Why there is so much of hate comments on internet about this film and it's subject. Did they not see It?

Some time later, though, it hits one why - why it's hated by so many, why one hasn't done a turnabout in one's negative opinion of the director, despite the surprise of liking a film of his. That is because, as usual, he has poured venom in this film too, and this time the target he aims at is huge.

This film isn't vilifying medical professionals, or faculty of high ranking technology institutions. Here in this film he is gone political, and not just vilifying a party or a bouquet of parties in the political spectrum of india. It is vilifying majority of the nation.

Well done, Hirani, although you have only sold your motherland, and not quite scraped the bottom of the abyss. Not yet. That would be when he does it to all mothers, and one couldn't safely bet he won't.

When the riots happened, and the news about Sanjay Dutt the son of a very respected couple, MP Sunil Dutt and ex MP Nargis Dutt, having possessed an assault weapon illegally and being in custody, this news had exploded, he had explained it describing the situation in detail.

Much of it is in the film, except that the director gas conveniently changed some details, cutting out some vital ones, making it all one sided.

From what one recalls, the family had received appeals for help from riot victims on both sides, and was helping both sides. Here the director shows Sunil Dutt helping only the minority, despite his being not part of it, and the implicit message is thereby to the effect that minority were the exclusive victims. This is far from true, and it's a picture favoured only by fraudulent for propaganda against India.

And the threats he is frightened by are shown as emanating from one side, which again was unlikely, but the next part gets more intricate. 

The guys who brought him the assault weapons are mentioned only by name, never labelled underworld dons that they were even if small fry, and while he is shown helped by someone of minority to dispose it off, the news had to get to the law only because one of the said underworld weapon suppliers squealed after being picked up by the police in context of the riots.

That was due to their involvement in the riots and killings, which isn't mentioned. But the director does take care to have a whole scene about the protagonist disassociating from what seems to be a goon in politics, from the majority, at risk of life, because his father wished it.

Surely his father Mr Dutt couldn't have wished his association with the underworld dons of the minority to continue? There is no mention about any of that. And there are many such omissions, including his first two wives and his eldest child. But there is more, along the director's political agenda lines.

If one wishes to see the protagonist Sanjay Dutt himself, one excellent site is the 58th episode of Saregamapa Little Champs 2017, where he is a guest.

Apart from his candid speaking and sincere demeanour with a humility that's very real, one little detail that's remarkable about his talks in this episode is him mentioning he read most of chief ancient Hindu scriptures during his prison stint, the last time that he was in.

This, the film does not mention. At all.
.................................................


Responding to a comment below another yt video, by Puneet Gandhi:-

"Ranbir Kapoor is 500% better than Varun Dhawan, Arjun Kapoor... But he didn't get good scripts... After Ae Dil Hai Mushkil nd SANJU,, He proved he is best actor of this generation"

He's on the whole done good films with good scripts, even if they weren't blockbusters, a part from a rare YJHD. To say he hasn't got good scripts would be not quite true.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YkBgmse4lQs

Shaadi Mein Zaroor Aana - Vendetta By Spurned Groom

Shaadi Mein Zaroor Aana

This film, that we happened to see recently on tv and recalled having seen promotions of on some talent show, wasn't promoted as a romance or happy film, but nevertheless it was shocking.

Here are my thoughts as posted on the videos of the film on YT , of which the first two links were removed within a day!
........................................................................


HORROR. Not just the film, but the comments justifying the vendetta.

Have there been not enough cases of women persecuted, arms broken, eyes punched, acid thrown at face and body and the girl burnt, gangrape and murder, all just because she thought she could be a doctor, or be educated, or had guts to say no to unwelcome advances of a stranger?

Did they have to make a film where the guy is borderline clean and the male viewership is going ecstatic about punishing a woman for having done well?

When the girl goes taking exams secretly towards selection as a high level officer, and has to choose between a marriage where she won't be allowed by her elders to earn or step out, that's not ok, because she should have not had ambitions of not being a housebound serving woman as all her predecessors have been.

When his mummy demands dowry, and his mama shuts up the boy's dad who might have not insisted on it, that's ok, because, well, boys are bought by girls' parents if they want their daughter safely married.

When the boy's mummy says the groom doesn't matter, his bride can't leave home and must devote herself to housework post wedding, that's ok because the mummy has served everyone so far and must be relieved by the next young bride.

When the boy's uncle accuses the girl fraudulently, of having run away not because of protesting the dowry, but because her education allowed her to come in contact with males and she has been sleeping around, that's ok because he is entitled, just so the girl's parents asking them to return the hefty dowry are silenced.

When the boy goes after her with a vengeance because her leaving him on day of wedding caused him trauma, that's ok, because how dare a female do that, she must obey the male if he wants her! So him accusing her fraudulently and imprisoning her without a shred of evidence is ok, because the female must be taught she can't be a respectable officer of the government,  she must remain the woman in tears whose only power must be purity, of refusing any male an improper advance.

So her choosing to be the woman serving the government in her capacity as an officer is worthy of punishment, but those that demanded dowry, or declared her future must be housework, will for ever remain the valid ones.

This film is a horror film, teaching every viewer that any amount of vendetta for any reason against a female shall be not only justified but found glamorous enough to be subject of a film.

Yes, the guy here is borderline clear to begin with, but that only makes it as much a cleaned up version of the reality of the gangrape and murders, acid and other assaults perpetrated against women who aren't locked in, as DDLJ and Namaste, London were cleaned up versions of the reality that's much closer to Khuda Ke Liye or Shameless.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KG50Uu9v38Q


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x8rV04D_T3U


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr7Wg2a9eGI