Get subscribed to our newsletter
Get interesting updates to your email inbox.
There is an influx of new talent. But, there was a phase not long ago when every big named corporate house backed only Page 3 makers who had rapport with stars. The corporate houses bankrolled projects, not content, blindly. So, okay, if you had made a name even as a choreographer or belonged to a family with antecedents or were in anyway close to a star, you were set for multi-crore projects from a corporate house. Banners.
These corporate houses had all the money and no idea of filmmaking. They enrolled marketing graduates. And, filmmaking and marketing were not like selling soap or a biscuit brand. These corporate houses backed names, not scripts or content.
So, if had contacts, you get a two or three-film contract and a budget of, say, 100 crore. If you are Farah Khan you get crores to make a heist film, in mofussil areas which don’t even cost much in the making. If your company is owned by, say, a star like Ajay Devgn, you get 100 crore to make three films. Nobody knew nor cared that the content is what sells. There were ample such examples.
Some of those who were not really filmmakers made money, and the corporate houses which bankrolled such projects were bound to suffer. Most of them have vanished save for the odd one. Even those who still operate have withdrawn from financing Hindi films. They had gotten into something they knew nothing about!
Since these corporates backed only names and superstars, new talent was ignored. They wanted a Khan or a Hrithik, no less! Soon, the negative returns started. First the so called makers let them down and, resultantly, the stars.
It has been a long time since these stars delivered a hit. The stakes were big and the returns poor. One can use the paid media to make a film look like a hit. But, a company’s balance sheet does not write what the paid media writes. So, the corporate houses have withdrawn but, in the process, spoilt the budgeting system of filmmaking in general by throwing monies left right and centre thoughtlessly.
The thing is that, even the non-corporate production houses like Sajid Nadiadwala, BR Films, Karan Johar and T Series et al felt more secure with superstars. But, soon they realised that it was time to balance their act. All such big banners took to promoting new talent and making small or mid-range films. One of the reasons for these makers to divert to new talent was that the superstars had all become producers of their own films or were promoting relatives, and the corporate houses were the suckers who were willing to back a superstar. It did not matter who the maker was!
Karan Johar gave break to three new faces, Varun Dhawan, Alia Bhatt and Sidharth Malhotra. Sajid Nadiadwala gave break to Tiger Shroff, and it worked. Yash Raj Films gave break to Ranveer Singh, followed by many others. In fact, these banners created a talent bank of their own. Most of the actors launched by these non-corporate ownership production houses are today thriving because of this new breed.
Here is a look at the successful films delivered by the new breed of actors as compared to superstars like Shah Rukh Khan, Aamir Khan and Salman Khan. While the score for Shah Rukh and Salman is rather depressing with their last few films, Aamir films come after long intervals. He gave his last hit in “Dangal” three years back. Aamir is the only one who may still continue to enjoy success.
However, the theatres need a regular flow all 52 weeks a year to feed their multiple screens. The superstars of their time could deliver less than half a dozen films a year. Against this, the big production houses wanted to work with only the established superstars. They loved high stakes since it was not a personal risk, they were bankrolled by corporate moneybags.
The artistes too realised that they did not need a producer and that the big daddies of film finance were banking on them, mainly. The producer was a middleman just because he had access to the star. The stars decided to make their own films. Turn self, brother, brother-in-law, wife or other near ones the producer.
When the big banners realised they needed a secondary line-up of production, some of them launched parallel banners. UTV Spot Boy for example, Balaji’s ALT Entertainment and so on. Now, spot boy used to be the lowest rung or help in a film production sets. His job was to serve tea and run errands! Was making films with other actors and not the superstars so embarrassing?
Since the Khans have failed to deliver, you see a sudden outburst of talent which was around but dormant for some time. A 100-crore grosser is basically a media myth hyped thanks to PR-fed reporters.
What is a 100 crore film when the budget of a superstar film is more than that and when a 100 crore only means, say, a 45-crore take-home for the maker? The cinema chains don’t run films for free and 100 crore includes their share plus distribution expenses.
Now, the concept of 100 crore has a totally different dimension altogether. If one considers the kind of films and the actors who carried them in last couple or three years, not surprisingly, the talent and scripts have scored, not the stars.
Not only the new stars, but also some of the other stars who were considered second-rung by the major filmmakers — Akshay Kumar, Hrithik Roshan, John Abraham, Ranbir Kapoor and Shahid Kapoor — have now come into their own. While John has had three notable hits in “Parmanu: The Story Of Pokhran”, “Satyamev Jayate” and “Batla House”, Shahid Kapoor delivered his career best “Kabir Singh”. Hrithik got a hit after a long gap with “Super 30”. Ranbir got his much needed hit, “Sanju”, while also being lauded for his performance in the film. Ranveer Singh, who has been lucky to work mostly with established banners and successful directors, retained his position with “Padmaavat” and “Gully Boy”. Ajay Devgn continues to hold his own with “De De Pyaar De”.
The biggest gainer over the last two to three years is Akshay Kumar. During the current and the last year, he has to his credit as many as four hits – “Pad Man”, “Golda, “Mission Mangal” and “Kesari”. That’s a 100 per cent success ratio.
The filmmaker not having big stars and big budgets to count on have started working on new themes and interesting scripts. This has opened up opportunities for fresh talent, resulting in a line-up box office successes. Between them, Ayushmann Khurrana, Vicky Kaushal, Tiger Shroff, Sushant Singh Rajput, Kartik Aaryan, Rajkummar Rao etc are delivering hits on regular basis. Not to forger the female stars, Alia Bhatt, Kriti Sanon, Shraddha Kapoor, Yami Gautam, Bhumi Pednekar etc. They account for almost half of the successful films of the past two years. And, what is more, this lot has been able to establish connect with the young moviegoer.
These new stars have made the old adage ‘paisa vasool film’ relevant again.
@The Box Office
* This week sees the release of “Prassthanam”, “The Zoya Factor” and “Pal Pal Dil Ke Paas”. Surprising that producers like Sanjay Dutt and Sunny Deol should decide to release their films in what is considered the dullest period of the year. Traditionally, the Shradh period was considered inauspicious for new films to release. But, even if the producers concerned don’t believe in tradition, but a lot of the viewers do, and movie going is not on their agenda.
* Besides, the festival of Navratri is just one week away. The festival is celebrated and rituals followed during these nine days like fasting etc. Also, the performance of Ram Leela rates high on viewer’s list.
* Not surprisingly, the three films have met with a very weak reception on the opening day.
* “Dream Girl” is a hit. The film has collected a solid Rs 70 crore in its opening week.
* “Section 375” remained poor, managing to collect just about Rs 9 crore in its first week.
* “Chhichhore” has complemented its excellent first week collection of Rs 66 crore with an impressive second week figures of Rs 39 crore. (IANS)
"In India, to be born as a man is a crime, to question a woman is an atrocious crime, and this all because of those women who keep suppressing men in the name of feminism."
Feminism, a worldwide movement that started to establish, define and defend equal rights for women in all sections- economically, politically, and socially. India, being a patriarchal society gives a gender advantage to the men in the society thus, Indian feminists sought to fight against the culture-specific issue for women in India. Feminism itself is nothing but a simple movement that pursues equal rights for women (including transwomen) and against misogyny both external and internal. It states nowhere that women should get more wages than men, that women deserve more respect than men, that's pseudo-feminism.
Pseudo feminists state that women deserve more respect and rights, any other gender deserves no respect. They feel that women should be the ones ruling the world and at higher positions. When feminism takes a turn for extremities it becomes pseudo-feminism and people who label themselves as feminists will bash anyone who speaks against even the wrongdoings of a woman. They'll bash women who're wife and sisters for not speaking up and support any women criticizing political leaders even if it's completely irrational. This is where hypocrisy and pseudo-feminism merge with each other.
They take advantage of the rights given to women to protect themselves to threaten other genders. The rights given to women are supposed to make them feel reassured that they can reach out to the judiciary if their rights are being hampered not to threaten to make the victim sound like the culprit.
Follow NewsGram on Facebook to stay updated.
Indian Feminist Movement has made significant progress however, even in the modern world women are still unsafe and are discriminated against when it comes to getting a job, land ownership, and access to education. While filling the official papers it is still asked "Wife of /Daughter of:….."
People in India still continue the practice of sex-selective abortion, abandoning the girl child, not letting girl child study instead they should learn household chores, they are seen as a burden to the family. Such injustices make feminism such an important movement, gender equality is worth fighting for to create a safe environment for women. Feminists over the years have been criticized for focusing on the rights of privileged women and not giving equal representation to poorer and lower caste women, which has led to separate caste-specific feminist organizations and movements.
Some notable milestones in the Feminist Movement
- Raja Ram Mohan Roy campaigned against Sati Pratha (practice in which a widow sacrificed herself by sitting atop her deceased husband's funeral pyre) and child marriage
- Savitribai Phule started the first school for girls at Bhidewada in Pune city in 1848.
- In 1972, SEWA, the biggest trade union for women was set up by Ela Bhatt for women working in the informal sector.
- The Chipko Movement was launched and led by women in 1973.
- #MeToo movement against sexual harassment and abuse was started in 2006 and revived in the year 2015.
People in India still continue the practice of sex-selective abortion, abandoning the girl child, not letting girl child study instead they should learn household chores, they are seen as a burden to the family.Unsplash
Feminism is often misunderstood as pseudo-feminism and hence, becomes the target for public hatred and is accused of wronging other genders under the façade of feminism. It is misunderstood by Indians as female domination instead of gender equality. Indian society and Indian feminists believe that only men are perpetrators of a heinous crime like rape and they refuse to even recognize the men who say they were raped and it's the toxic masculinity in the society that believes how can a woman rape a man? Reality is different from what we believe, women can be the perpetrator too, women threaten to file a case of domestic violence, or sexual assault against innocent people just to fulfill their ego.
Thankfully feminism and pseudo feminism are two separate concepts and feminism is just about equality and not judgment. Indian society and feminists actually need to understand the difference between the two and stop tarnishing the Feminist Movement as a whole.
Keywords: Feminism, World, India, Pseudo-Feminism, Gender
Kerala is a land of many good things. It has an abundance of nature, culture, art, and food. It is also a place of legend and myth, and is known for its popular folklore, the legend of Yakshi. This is not a popular tale outside the state, but it is common knowledge for travellers, especially those who fare through forests at night.
The legend of the yakshi is believed to be India's equivalent of the Romanian Dracula, except of course, the Yakshi is a female. Many Malayalis believe that the Yakshi wears a white saree and had long hair. She has a particular fragrance, which is believed to be the fragrance of the Indian devil-tree flowers. She seduces travellers with her beauty, and kills them brutally.
Yakshi idol in Veroor, Sri Dharamashastha temple Image source: wikimedia commons
The Yakshi is believed to live in a palm tree which can appear like a palace. Victims are taken here before they are killed. Travellers on highways are often advised not to stop near heavily forested areas, or speak to anyone who closely resembles a Yakshi. Some believe she can change form, while other hold to the belief that she doesn't. after securing her victim, the only trace left behind is body parts like hair, nails, and teeth.
They say, like other ghosts, a Yakshi's feet will not touch the ground. This is something to look out for. Mysterious deaths have been reported across the rural areas in Kerala, and all these have been attributed to the legend.
Keywords: Legends, Yakshi, Urban legend, Ghost, Kerala, Myth, Vampire
The LGBTQ+ acronym stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and others. In India LGBTQ+ community also include a specific social group, part religious cult, and part caste: the Hijras. They are culturally defined either as "neither men nor women" or as men who become women by adopting women's dress and behavior. Section 377 of the India Penal code that criminalized all sexual acts "against the order of nature" i.e. engaging in oral sex or anal sex along with other homosexual activities were against the law, ripping homosexual people off of their basic human rights. Thus, the Indian Supreme Court ruled a portion of Section 377 unconstitutional on 6th September 2018.
But the question is, "was India always against homosexuality"? Has the concept of homosexuality being unnatural existed forever? No, in Indian history and Hinduism homosexuality has never been an offense, in fact in several instances it has been depicted how people embraced their identity, be it sexual identity or gender identity. Section 377 was brought to India by the British in 1862, while India was colonized. Even after the Independence, it was only in 2018 that the Supreme Court ruled it as irrational and illogical.
Follow NewsGram on Facebook to stay updated.
Homosexuality in Ancient India
When Supreme Court decriminalized homosexuality in India, there was an uproar about it being a western ideology and liberalism. But in reality, homosexuality has existed since the time of the Vedas. The Gay and Lesbian Vaishnava Association (GALVA) researched and discovered that it was around 3102 B.C. (during the Vedic Age) that homosexuality or non-normative sexual identity was recognized as "Tritiya Prakriti", or the third nature. Ancient India not only made mentions of homosexuality but accepted it as well.
Hinduism is the most vastly followed religion in India. Hinduism does not explicitly mention homosexuality however it does contain a homosexual theme and characters in its text. There have been various instances in our scriptures and texts that have introduced us to LGBT+ characters such as the androgynous form of Shiva and Parvati Ardhanariswara meaning "the half-female lord". One of the most popular and ancient texts on sexuality, eroticism, and emotional fulfillment of life, "Kamasutra" has a complete chapter dedicated to homosexuality and homosexual sex. Numerous Hindu sculptures and temples have statues depicting homosexual activities.
Numerous Hindu sculptures and temples have statues depicting homosexual activities. Facebook
Our Mughals were Queer
Mughals are often seen under the light of cruelty, rigid ethics, nobility, and polygamy. Simultaneously, Mughals are also the ones credited for the emergence of Sufism, abolished jizya tax, love beyond religion, classes, and gender.
In the Baburnama written in memoirs of our very first Mughal ruler Muhammad Babur, several instances documented Babur's infatuation and affection towards a teenage boy named Baburi. We also have multiple Persian couplets as evidence of Babur's affection for Baburi. Mughals engaged in homosexuality and pederasty, and they believed that later was a form of "pure love".
But as time passed homosexuality was suppressed more and more though people practiced it in secret if revealed they were punished. According to the Fatwa-e-Alamgiri Sharia-based text of the Mughal Empire, there is a common set of punishments for homosexuality, which could include 50 lashes for a slave, 100 for a free infidel, or death by stoning for a Muslim.
British Raj and Independence of India
In 1862, Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code that criminalized homosexual sex came into force. Even after Independence in 1947, the section remained a part of the Indian Constitution. There were protests all over the country to give people of the LGBT+ community basic human rights but it was not until 2018 that The Supreme Court of India ruled the portion of Section 377 has unconstitutional and struck it off. One judge said the landmark decision would "pave the way for a better future.". With Section 377 gone are LGBT+ people allowed to fall in love freely? No, people are still afraid to love because of the stigma in our society when it comes to homosexuality; they are seen as lesser humans.
ALSO READ: Significant Support for Rights for LGBTQ+
Although the Supreme Court has decriminalized homosexual activities, same-sex marriage remains illegal in the country. Homophobia is still prevalent in India, and homosexual children would rather commit suicide than come out to society with their true identity, that's how harsh of a world we live in. Lacking support from family, society, or police, many gay rape victims do not report the crimes. In 1977, writer and Indian mathematician Shakuntla Devi published "The World of Homosexuals". It was the first study in the Indian context; the book contains interviews with homosexual men set in the years of Emergency. She wrote, "rather than pretending that homosexuals don't exist it is time we face the facts squarely in the eye and find room for homosexual people." We've had small victories in our fight against homophobia and getting LGBT+ community the rights they deserve as humans, but we still have a long and exhausting fight ahead of us.