A Soldier Reviews ‘Haider’ movie

[Levina]

what about the "lal chowk" scene??

The "hello hello hello" scene??
What about it?

If that so, then I have to say, we are ignoring some hard facts.

Well yeah as a director Vishal Bhardwaj has the right to make a movie but then I guess sensing the present situation the anti-India dose in the movie could have been milder.It leaves us With a bitter towards the end.

Even I dont understand, how it is anti-indian?

If the NYT able to run a story on Guantanamo Bay, and they are not anti-US.

We Indians are very sensitive when it comes to kashmir.
The scene in the movie when Tabu tells Shahid about KK.Menon's deeds was provocative for the Indian audience. We Indians cant take criticism when it comes to kashmir.

 

[jamahir]

The "hello hello hello" scene??
What about it?

your previous post had called the film as point of view of a pro-pakistani kashmiri muslim... somewhere in that scene, shahid tells of kashmir's tiredness with both india and pakistan.

 

[abjktu]

Maybe you can explain why you do not think that movie is anti-India ? Most Hindu and army men seems to think so

I don't see any Bollywood movie nowadays...But i heard that its an anti national movie..anyway..
You are still trying to generalise a community as anti national just because of a movie and calling them as traitors..If thats the case,The movie director,Producers,mostly all actors,crews and the officials who gave censor certification were Hindus..Aren't they also anti national,traitor by any chance??..or is it applicable only for a certain community??

 

[MarkovChain]

We will start becoming another radical nation like our dear neighbour if we keep censoring movies to please public opinion. Freedom of expression is critical to long run democracy.

 

[Levina]

your previous post had called the film as point of view of a pro-pakistani kashmiri muslim... somewhere in that scene, shahid tells of kashmir's tiredness with both india and pakistan.

Which again is not what Indian Kasmiris think....atleast not the majority of 'em.
Those who are practical enough understand that asking for an independent Kashmir is like shooting oneself in the foot.

 

[Saheli]

We will start becoming another radical nation like our dear neighbour if we keep censoring movies to please public opinion. Freedom of expression is critical to long run democracy.

There is no absolute freedom in any country of the world. If there are ideas and ideology which is harmful to the country's interest which is being propagated, then those will not be and should not be tolerated. Your freedom of creativity is not more important that millions who could die in a separatists movement instigated by falsehood and propaganda.

I don't see any Bollywood movie nowadays...But i heard that its an anti national movie..anyway..
You are still trying to generalise a community as anti national just because of a movie and calling them as traitors..If thats the case,The movie director,Producers,mostly all actors,crews and the officials who gave censor certification were Hindus..Aren't they also anti national,traitor by any chance??..or is it applicable only for a certain community??

We have always called seculars as traitors. Most of the seculars happen to be Hindus only.

 

[MarkovChain]

There is no absolute freedom in any country of the world. If there are ideas and ideology which is harmful to the country's interest which is being propagated, then those will not be and should not be tolerated. Your freedom of creativity is not more important that millions who could die in a separatists movement instigated by falsehood and propaganda.

So are you afraid Indians will see it and immediately believe it? People have brains and they can decide for themselves. The ones who are against this movie are the insecure ones who do not believe Indians will support India.

Additionally, by creating this racket, you are instigating a Streisand effect:
Streisand effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The extremists who would have otherwise ignored this movie will now be tempted to see it and take inspiration.

 

[cybertron]

Now are we gonna shoot down a movie as well, just because it has a differing point??

 

[Saheli]

So are you afraid Indians will see it and immediately believe it? People have brains and they can decide for themselves. The ones who are against this movie are the insecure ones who do not believe Indians will support India.

Additionally, by creating this racket, you are instigating a Streisand effect:
Streisand effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The extremists who would have otherwise ignored this movie will now be tempted to see it and take inspiration.

One off movie no one will believe, but if there is a set of movies which talk the same theme again and again, coupled with sympathetic views in media then people will believe. That is why media control is deemed so important and that is the way propaganda works. Those scores of tribals who joined the maoists did not join because each of them suffered some atrocity, but they were brainwashed by people who claimed to speak on their behalf. Much of them the half educated idiots.

2002 was riots but it was propagated as genocide via the media and the same intellectuals who make these kind of movies and to date there are millions who believe it was state sponsored genocide. Where are the brains of these people who you claim are so intelligent?

You are applying wrong analogy here. To fear a Streisand effect and never raise an objection to wrong views would be wrong here.

The extremists were anyway going to watch those movies. It had the appropriate title to attract them. Plus everyone knows or watches the latest movies in India. When the nationalists called for boycotting their objective was to hit the movie makers where it hurts. Their pockets. Even if there is a 10% reduction in viewship, it would have affected their business. It would also have been a legitimate form of protest against antinational jhollawallah media men.

 

[Jackdaws]

We will start becoming another radical nation like our dear neighbour if we keep censoring movies to please public opinion. Freedom of expression is critical to long run democracy.

I couldn't agree more. No one should be stopped from airing their views as far as the views are non-violent.

There is no absolute freedom in any country of the world. If there are ideas and ideology which is harmful to the country's interest which is being propagated, then those will not be and should not be tolerated. Your freedom of creativity is not more important that millions who could die in a separatists movement instigated by falsehood and propaganda.



We have always called seculars as traitors. Most of the seculars happen to be Hindus only.

What nonsense. The US, UK, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Iceland are some examples of countries which offer full freedom of expression.

Can you imagine the British censoring the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in the movie Gandhi directed by a Brit Attenborough with a largely British cast and a predominant British production? Do you think the British people started calling their Armed forces unpatriotic and killers after that?

Tons of anti-American war movies come to mind.

Heck, even Maachis showed the excesses of the Indian forces.

India is too strong a nation and civilization for a movie to matter to it. People need to grow a thicker skin.

 

[Saheli]

I couldn't agree more. No one should be stopped from airing their views as far as the views are non-violent.



What nonsense. The US, UK, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Iceland are some examples of countries which offer full freedom of expression.

Can you imagine the British censoring the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in the movie Gandhi directed by a Brit Attenborough with a largely British cast and a predominant British production? Do you think the British people started calling their Armed forces unpatriotic and killers after that?

Tons of anti-American war movies come to mind.

Heck, even Maachis showed the excesses of the Indian forces.

India is too strong a nation and civilization for a movie to matter to it. People need to grow a thicker skin.

No they do not. There are racist slurs which can get you docked in a lot of these countries. In Denmark you cannot disparage the Queen. So no, there is no absolute freedom of expression.

Plus it is funny you are comparing India with its many many subnationalities with puny ethnoliguistic homogeneous countries like those European states you mention.

LOL. No British would not censor Jalianawala Bagh massacre because they believe it was their right to do so. But they refuse to accept ownership of the Bengal Famines and those millions of deaths and have you seen movies being made of those famines? Also you have no idea of the amount of self censorship which goes on in Britain at every level.

America is not threatened by factions or insurgencies. It does not have a 200 million muslim population with a 1000 year history of conflict with the whites. Nor is it surrounded by hostile states every willing to take advantage of its fault lines.

Every single of your example shows how out of touch with India you are and all your comparison are invalid.

India is wracked by separatism. It went to such a level that MMS and his coterie had decided to make boundaries in Kashmir irrelevant. They wanted to step back from Siachen. Give up on Sir Creek. This was the state level thinking because there are Indians who do not respect the territorial integrity of this country and they are found at every level of the state as well as out of it.

Now add to that a huge section of Muslims who already feel alienated and this sense of alienation just keeps growing with every such story being told about them.

 

[JaiShriAllahNath]

What nonsense. The US, UK, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Iceland are some examples of countries which offer full freedom of expression.

Nope. Movies which expose true history of Europe, Vatican and Christianity are banned. Same with books. Same with media. Infact, West has the most controlled media in the world. Even with money, you can't get "everything" published. Movies which embarrass USA, are not given prime space on Screens. Theater owners in USA reject them preemptively, they refuse to put them on screen. Movies never reach large public. USA has most number of "banned movies" in the world(even though USA produces far less movies than India). India is 100 times more free and open.

A good example is movie on "Truth of 9/11". Another was "Native Americans: True owners of America & Genocide by white men". There are more than 1000 movies, which were not allowed to list across theaters in USA. No wonder, american population is most ignorant people on Earth. Also, we know how USA banned movies which showed founding fathers of USA and their African black-slaves.

Can you imagine the British censoring the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in the movie Gandhi directed by a Brit Attenborough with a largely British cast and a predominant British production? Do you think the British people started calling their Armed forces unpatriotic and killers after that?

UK is a dead nation. Who cares what they do? What Britain decides to do, does not set a "standard" for Colonies or world anymore. That era is over. Influence of English on colonies(India) is decreasing day by day. English is seen with contempt nowadays in India. Same is beginning to happen in Africa.

India is too strong a nation and civilization for a movie to matter to it. People need to grow a thicker skin.

You sound like - "If a woman is strong, she shouldn't mind being raped few times. She should act mature". I find this tendency amongst Britishers who are mentally retarded and sick. Even today, they import Philippine women-slaves, for raising their kids & serving them in bed.

 

[JaiShriAllahNath]

No they do not. There are racist slurs which can get you docked in a lot of these countries. In Denmark you cannot disparage the Queen. So no, there is no absolute freedom of expression.

Plus it is funny you are comparing India with its many many subnationalities with puny ethnoliguistic homogeneous countries like those European states you mention.

LOL. No British would not censor Jalianawala Bagh massacre because they believe it was their right to do so. But they refuse to accept ownership of the Bengal Famines and those millions of deaths and have you seen movies being made of those famines? Also you have no idea of the amount of self censorship which goes on in Britain at every level.

America is not threatened by factions or insurgencies. It does not have a 200 million muslim population with a 1000 year history of conflict with the whites. Nor is it surrounded by hostile states every willing to take advantage of its fault lines.

Every single of your example shows how out of touch with India you are and all your comparison are invalid.

India is wracked by separatism. It went to such a level that MMS and his coterie had decided to make boundaries in Kashmir irrelevant. They wanted to step back from Siachen. Give up on Sir Creek. This was the state level thinking because there are Indians who do not respect the territorial integrity of this country and they are found at every level of the state as well as out of it.

Now add to that a huge section of Muslims who already feel alienated and this sense of alienation just keeps growing with every such story being told about them.

nice reply. U exposed his ignorance totally. LOL

We Indians are very sensitive when it comes to kashmir.
The scene in the movie when Tabu tells Shahid about KK.Menon's deeds was provocative for the Indian audience. We Indians cant take criticism when it comes to kashmir.

You meant "indian muslims" probably?
Indians(Hindus in particular) are most tolerant people on Earth(but this will change in future, so get ready ). The problem is with the non-Hindu part of it as their desert belief system makes them rigid, stubborn and thick-minded. India doesn't like such people. That's the reason, muslims are considered a joke in india.

For example:
when OMar abdullah goes to india, he is welcomed by hindus with warmness, even during floods or any situation.
When Shri.Narendra bhai Modi goes to kashmir, muslims ask - "why u came this day(diwali)?why u not ame that day(Eid)?". (if i was present there, i would ask them back - "does ur allu goes to pee other day, that u can't honour guests on that day? Maybe Shri.Modi thought he is Kafir so he avoided entering muslims home during Eid, as sign of respect to u( )?")

This mental sickness of muslims is a huge problem for whole world now.

 

[gau8av]

nice username @JaiShriAllahNath

 

[Jackdaws]

Nope. Movies which expose true history of Europe, Vatican and Christianity are banned. Same with books. Same with media. Infact, West has the most controlled media in the world. Even with money, you can't get "everything" published. Movies which embarrass USA, are not given prime space on Screens. Theater owners in USA reject them preemptively, they refuse to put them on screen. Movies never reach large public. USA has most number of "banned movies" in the world(even though USA produces far less movies than India). India is 100 times more free and open.

A good example is movie on "Truth of 9/11". Another was "Native Americans: True owners of America & Genocide by white men". There are more than 1000 movies, which were not allowed to list across theaters in USA. No wonder, american population is most ignorant people on Earth. Also, we know how USA banned movies which showed founding fathers of USA and their African black-slaves.



UK is a dead nation. Who cares what they do? What Britain decides to do, does not set a "standard" for Colonies or world anymore. That era is over. Influence of English on colonies(India) is decreasing day by day. English is seen with contempt nowadays in India. Same is beginning to happen in Africa.



You sound like - "If a woman is strong, she shouldn't mind being raped few times. She should act mature". I find this tendency amongst Britishers who are mentally retarded and sick. Even today, they import Philippine women-slaves, for raising their kids & serving them in bed.

That is a ridiculous response. Please provide some source to back your claim. USA is a far more tolerant and open society than India. You can't ban books there; nor can you ban movies. Heck, you can burn the American flag there is you want. Ever heard of movies like "Fahrenheit 9/11".

UK might be a has-been nation.

Your rape analogy doesn't hold true either. In fact, it doesn't make an iota of sense. And are you comparing "au pairs" to slavery? Hahahaha