2013 Oscar Nominations

Best Film
Beasts Of The Southern Wild
Django Unchained
Les Miserables
Life Of Pi
Silver Linings Playbook
Zero Dark Thirty

Best Director
David O Russell – Silver Linings Playbook
Ang Lee – Life Of Pi
Steven Spielberg – Lincoln
Michael Haneke – Amour
Benh Zeitlin – Beasts Of The Southern Wild

Best Actor
Bradley Cooper – Silver Linings Playbook
Joaquin Phoenix – The Master
Daniel Day-Lewis – Lincoln
Denzel Washington – Flight
Hugh Jackman – Les Miserable

Best Actress
Jessica Chastain – Zero Dark Thirty
Quvenzhané Wallis – Beasts of the Southern Wild
Jennifer Lawrence – Silver Linings Playbook
Naomi Watts – The Impossible
Emmanuelle Riva – Armour

Best Supporting Actor
Alan Arkin – Argo
Robert De Niro – Silver Linings Playbook
Tommy Lee Jones – Lincoln
Christoph Waltz – Django Unchained
Philip Seymour Hoffman – The Master

Best Supporting Actress
Amy Adams – The Master
Sally Field – Lincoln
Anne Hathaway – Les Miserables
Helen Hunt – The Sessions
Jacki Weaver – Silver Linings Playbook

Best Foreign Film
War witch
A Royal Affair

Best Adapted Screenplay
Beasts Of The Southern Wild
Silver Linings Playbook
Life Of Pi

Best Original Screenplay
Django Unchained
Moonrise Kingdom
Zero Dark Thirty

Best Animated Feature Film
The Pirates! Band Of Misfits
Wreck-It Ralph

Best Original Song
Before My Time (Chasing Ice) – Music and Lyric by J. Ralph
Everybody Needs A Best Friend (Ted) – Music by Walter Murphy; Lyric by Seth MacFarlane
Pi’s Lullaby (Life Of Pi) – Music by Mychael Danna; Lyric by Bombay Jayashri
Skyfall (Skyfall) – Music and Lyric by Adele Adkins and Paul Epworth
Suddenly (Les Misérables) – Music by Claude-Michel Schönberg; Lyric by Herbert Kretzmer and Alain Boublil

Music (Original Score)
Dario Marianelli – Anna Karenina
Alexandre Desplat – Argo
Mychael Danna – Life Of Pi
John Williams – Lincoln
Thomas Newman – Skyfall

Seamus McGarvey – Anna Karenina
Robert Richardson – Django Unchained
Claudio Miranda – Life Of Pi
Janusz Kaminski – Lincoln
Roger Deakins – Skyfall

Costume Design
Jacqueline Durran – Anna Karenina
Paco Delgado – Les Miserables
Joanna Johnston – Lincoln
Eiko Ishioka – Mirror Mirror
Colleen Atwood – Snow White And The Huntsman

Make-up and Hairstyling
Howard Berger, Peter Montagna and Martin Samuel – Hitchcock
Peter Swords King, Rick Findlater and Tami Lane – The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
Lisa Westcott and Julie Dartnell – Les Miserables

Film Editing
William Goldenberg – Argo
Tim Squyres – Life Of Pi
Michael Kahn – Lincoln
Jay Cassidy and Crispin Struthers – Silver Linings Playbook
Dylan Tichenor and William Goldenberg – Zero Dark Thirty

Production Design
Sarah Greenwood and Katie Spencer – Anna Karenina
Dan Hennah, Ra Vincent and Simon Bright – The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
Eve Stewart and Anna Lynch-Robinson – Les Miserables
David Gropman and Anna Pinnock – Life Of Pi
Rick Carter and Jim Erickson – Lincoln

Sound Editing
Erik Aadahl and Ethan Van der Ryn – Argo
Wylie Stateman – Django Unchained
Eugene Gearty and Philip Stockton – Life Of Pi
Per Hallberg and Karen Baker Landers – Skyfall
Paul N.J Ottosson – Zero Dark Thirty

Sound Mixing
John Reitz, Gregg Rudloff and Jose Antonia Garcia – Argo
Andy Nelson, Mark Paterson and Simon Hayes – Les Miserables
Ron Bartlett, D.M. Hemphill and Drew Kunin – Life Of Pi
Andy Nelson, Gary Rydstrom and Ronald Judkins – Lincoln
Scott Millan, Greg P.Russell and Stuart Wilson – Skyfall

Visual Effects
Joe Letteri, Eric Saindon, David Clayton and R. Christopher White – The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
Bill Westenhofer, Guillaume Rocheron, Erik-Jan De Boer and Donald R. Elliott – Life Of Pi
Janek Sirrs, Jeff White, Guy Williams and Dan Sudick – Marvel’s The Avengers
Richard Stammers, Trevor Wood, Charley Henley and Martin Hill – Prometheus
Cedric Nicolas-Troyan, Philip Brennan, Neil Corbould and Michael Dawson – Snow White And The Huntsman

Best Animated Short Film
Adam And Dog
Fresh Guacamole
Head Over Heels
Maggie Simpson in ‘The Longest Daycare’

Best Live Action Short Film
Buzkashi Boys
Death Of A Shadow (Dood van een Schaduw)

Documentary Feature
5 Broken Cameras
The Gatekeepers
How To Survive A Plague
The Invisible War
Searching For Sugar Man

Documentary Short Subject
Kings Point
Mondays At Racine
Open Heart

  1. ank_16n 11 years ago

    my only Disappointment is No Ben Affleck for best Director Category …..
    haven’t seen Silver Linings Playbook but is Bradley Cooper so good in movie to get a Oscar Nomination ??

  2. sputnik 11 years ago

    Kathryn Bigelow has been royally snubbed. She definitely deserved an Oscar nomination for Best Director. Its ridiculous that Steven Spielberg gets nominated for basically making a school stage play Lincoln and she does not. Glad that Jessica Chastain has been nominated at least for Best Actress. Hated Sally Field and she has also been nominated.

    I liked Amour except the final scenes. A foreign language movie has got nominations for Best Picture, Best Director. I think it will now win Best Foreign Language Film. Happy that Emmanuelle Riva has been nominated for Best Actress. Disappointed that The Intouchables was not nominated.

  3. Shinji 11 years ago

    I was thinking the same that why the Bigelow isnt nominated!

    Btw has anyone seen silver lining playbooks? i heard of it for first time today ( and who says oscar nomination doesnt get u audience 😉 ) I am looking forward to checking it out.

    • sputnik 11 years ago

      Oscar nomination does get an audience if not in theaters at least on DVDs.

  4. narad_muni 11 years ago

    This link tells about some of the hits n misses of this Oscar nominations.


    I saw Django unchained and loved it…it is definitely one of Tarantino’s better works. All the actors delivered superb performances… DiCaprio absolutely locked in the wicked role. Christopher Waltz was the scene stealer… the introductory scene was awesome…very well deserved nomination though I haven’t seen all the movies mentioned here.

    • sputnik 11 years ago

      I liked DiCaprio but I was expecting more after having seeing the trailer. Liked Sameul Jackson too and I prefer both over Alan Arkin in Argo. I liked Alan Arkin but its like they nominated him because he is old.

      The bigger snub according to me was to Kathryn Bigelow. Argo is like a amateurish film in front of Zero Dark Thirty.

  5. hithere 11 years ago

    I don’t like same movie nominated in evey category. Since the votes are tallied from many thousand members, I expect certain randomness but Oscars nominations have certain orderliness.

    Saw “Beasts Of The Southern Wild” couple of days back but don’t know what to make out of it. The girl has done a fabulous job. If they nominate for concept then Looper has a good concept (but didn’t like the second part).

    • sputnik 11 years ago

      Was thinking of watching Beasts Of The Southern Wild for like last two weeks but have been putting off because of the feeling that I might not like it. Will watch it today or may be tomorrow.

      I did not like Looper. The concept is pretty stupid. They have problem disposing off the bodies. They can tie someone up and send then back to be killed buy why can’t they kill and send the dead body to be disposed off?

      My comment about Looper from December Movies thread.

      “Watched Looper. Did not like it – some convoluted logic.

      Did not like Joseph Gordon-Levitt. He is more of a sidekick. Every time I see him I am reminded of Third Rock from the sun. Bruce Willis was good but doing his usual stuff.

      And if you are going to set a movie in the future why set it in 2044 when most of the present people would still be alive. Its like they wanted to show that flying bike and telekinetic nonsense but at the same time show Kansas just like it is now because of low budget.”

  6. Bored 11 years ago

    LOL @ Life Of Pi getting so many nominations – another SDM repeat.
    The white world just loves to see India from their own stereotyped viewpoint which is exotic and degrading at the same time.

    • Suprabh 11 years ago


      Have you seen Life of Pi ? Because someone who had seen that movie won’t make such a senseless statement. 80% of the movie is not about India or its exoticism as it takes place on an ocean and is more of a cast away kind of a deal. Life of Pi is different from SDM by more than a thousand degrees. Anyone who thinks otherwise is un-understandable

  7. Bored 11 years ago

    Rewatch the first part, listen to the accent … or maybe just watch it without the masala viewing mentality for a change? May help …

    • Suprabh 11 years ago


      I live in US and I have talked to people about this film. They do not talk about exotic India or the accent. You are generalizing the film because its by a foreign filmmaker and that it features an Indian protagonist. The topic of liking or discussion is the film’s story and the journey of the protagonist- the basic plot of surviving on a boat with a tiger in the middle of an ocean and the rest of it. The protagonist could well have been a chinese or an American for that matter and the film would have been similar in terms of impact. Indian or No-Indian doesn’t have to do a single thing with the film.

    • narad_muni 11 years ago

      It is totally unfair to compare Life of Pi with Sdm in the manner they show India.
      Life of Pi just uses India as a backdrop of the story and in no way it tries to show India in poor light.

      SDM on the other hand was made to show India in the most terrible way possible as a backward, corrupted, immoral, decaying country to satisfy the goras. Danny Boyle is a great film maker but I hate this movie.

      Having said that, I did not find Life of Pi anything great…neither from a philosophical or from enetertainmen point of view…the message is not very clear and the movie gets monotonous in several occassions.

  8. cr7 11 years ago

    Critics Choice Award .List of winners

    Best Picture – Argo

    Best Actor – Daniel Day-Lewis, Lincoln

    Best Actress – Jessica Chastain, Zero Dark Thirty

    Supporting Actor – Philip Seymour Hoffman, The Master

    Supporting Actress – Anne Hathaway, Les Misérables

    Young Actor/Actress – Quvenzhané Wallis, Beasts of the Southern Wild

    Acting Ensemble – Silver Linings Playbook

    Best Director – Ben Affleck, Argo

    Original Screenplay – Quentin Tarantino, Django Unchained

    Adapted Screenplay – Tony Kushner, Lincoln

    Cinematography – Claudio Miranda, Life of Pi

    Art Direction – Sarah Greenwood/Production Designer; Katie Spencer/Set Decorator, Anna Karenina

    Editing – William Goldenberg and Dylan Tichenor, Zero Dark Thirty

    Costume Design – Jacqueline Durran, Anna Karenina

    Makeup – Cloud Atlas

    Visual Effects – Life of Pi

    Animated Feature – Wreck-It Ralph

    Action Movie – Skyfall

    Actor in an Action Movie – Daniel Craig, Skyfall

    Actress in an Action Movie – Jennifer Lawrence, The Hunger Games

    Comedy – Silver Linings Playbook

    Actor in a Comedy – Bradley Cooper, Silver Linings Playbook

    Actress in a Comedy – Jennifer Lawrence, Silver Linings Playbook

    Sci-Fi/Horror Movie – Looper

    Foreign Language Film – Amour

    Documentary Feature – Searching for Sugar Man

    Song – Skyfall, performed by Adele/written by Adele Adkins & Paul Epworth, Skyfall

    Score – Lincoln

    The Critics’ Choice Genius Award – Judd Apatow

  9. sputnik 11 years ago

    ‘It was also hard to avoid the quirks of academy voting. Although the Oscars are considered an overarching seal of quality, the nominations for all but best picture are decided by a small group, known as a branch.

    So even though the Directors Guild of America is composed of nearly 15,000 members, the academy’s director branch is far smaller, made up of about 360 people. Voters list their five choices in what is known as a preferential balloting system, with every member being credited with only one vote.

    According to Steve Pond, an Oscar pundit with the industry website the Wrap, a director needs just 62 votes to land a nomination — a startlingly small total that can lead to surprising choices.’


  10. sputnik 11 years ago

    Have not seen Life of Pi yet but have to disagree on Slumdog Millionaire. When I initially started watching SDM (this was just before it was nominated) I thought Oh not another Hollywood movie on Indian poverty. But I liked the movie a lot. Initial part was about poverty but then it also showed the development later on with the buildings and all the outsourcing. And it was about a poor guy who wins a Crore on the show and how he happens to know the answers due to his life experience. I don’t think people in West liked it because it showed poverty or the exotic India. It was liked by them because it was a underdog story.

    Ironically KBC has taken the movie as a model for its show now by inviting poor people and making them win Crores.

    I think we Indians are quite defensive about poverty but it is a reality. We just want to close our eyes and pretend its not there. I went to Agra a couple of years back and people from around the world come to see the Taj Mahal. And you can see people defecating on the streets while traveling on the train and poverty all around. We ignore this and pretend its not there but the westerners who come there will not be able to ignore it.

    If you want to watch poverty in the west watch Beasts of the Southern Wild.

    • Baba Ji 11 years ago

      i dont think indians pretend that poverty doesnt exist. they opppose the idea of highlighting it exclusively while ignoring the developments.

    • narad_muni 11 years ago

      r u still an Indian? Asking coz u say ‘We Indians’.
      I dont have anything against NRIs..but when they settle abroad and still pretend India to be their country, I find that hypocrisy.

      About SDM, it was one of the most terrible movies based in India…it has demeaned and showed India in the worst possible way in every aspect..not only poverty.
      Have u seen pather panchali by Satyajit Ray? It shows poverty, extreme poverty but then it also talks about the triumph of the human spirit amongst all adversities and poverty.
      Even the call centers u speak of are show in a such a poor shape where ppl sit on each others’ lap, have zero knowledge, and guards answering calls – wtf was that? All bcoz the Western audience will get some ego boost and have gr8 fun making fun of Indian call centers.
      It made money and won awards bcoz it showed India the way Western audience wants to see India.

      I still get furious when ppl talk abt this film… Fuck u Boyle .
      I like Danny Boyle as a film maker, he is very talented

      • sputnik 11 years ago

        I can change your statement and say that anyone who who does not live in the slums taking offense about how someone else showed slums in his movie is hypocrisy.

        If you got offended by the call center thing watch the movie Hello where all the westerners who call are idiots.

        I have not seen Pather Panchali but that movie has been criticized as showcasing poverty to the west too.

        • hithere 11 years ago

          I think that is a valid opinion and many people have that opinion. My disagreement is mainly it is not a well thought position.

        • narad_muni 11 years ago

          Look, I am not going to play with words like u…

          Can u just answer me – r u an Indian or not? If not, u can’t make statements like we Indians. U can give your opinion, anyone can…after all “opinions r like assholes, everyone has one”. But my point was you calling yourself as Indian.
          I won’t call myself as ‘we slum dwellers’.
          So, I guess u do not have a point and u sudn’t be writing ‘we Indians’.

          2nd, about Pather panchali, I have read the novel…it is one of the best novels ever written. It talks about the triumph of the human spirit amidst all adversities including poverty and Ray depicted it very well in the trilogy. Whoever thinks that it was selling poverty did not understand the movie.
          Have u seen the movie? The moments between Apu and Durga will make u feel so happy even with all the poverty all around. If u havent seen it, watch it – it is one of the very best Indian movies ever. Considering u see movies from all over the globe in different languages, u should give this highly acclaimed ‘Indian’ movie a shot. I know u love n care for India

          • Suprabh 11 years ago

            I agree about Pather Panchali. It doesn’t glorify poverty, rather it talks about making it through during misery and poverty. Pather Panchali in fact starts off with the basis that its a poor conditions that we are dealing with but even then , it shows how poverty doesn’t necessarily have to be ugly and that how someone’s below par life style can still be their way of living and nothing to be ridiculed. Its way more identifiable to any Indian (even though its 50 year old) than a Slum Dog Millionaire.

          • sputnik 11 years ago

            I am still a Indian citizen so yes I have every right to use “We Indians”. Just because you live in India you don’t become more of a Indian citizen than me.

            If you are not a slum dweller then why do you care about how slum dwellers are portrayed in a movie. And if its about the image of India getting spoiled in the west then you don’t even have to answer anyone because you are not a NRI like suprabh who has had to face some uncomfortable questions about this.

            As I said I have not watched Pather Panchali. Nargis is supposed to have accused Satyajit Ray of “exporting poverty” and asked him to make movies about “Modern India.” ‘And After watching the movie, François Truffaut is reported to have said, “I don’t want to see a movie of peasants eating with their hands.”‘ So now diss Pather Panchali too.

          • Baba Ji 11 years ago

            “Just because you live in India you don’t become more of a Indian citizen than me.”

            no , living in india makes him more an indian citizen than you. let me ask you spuntik. do you like the way the FBI is presented in Indian films? they are shown as morons of 1st order. what do you think of the way the muslims are presented in films like kurbaan and aamir? if you think that such ghettoised representation is authentic,then sure you can have no problems with the poverty in SDM.

    • Suprabh 11 years ago


      I don’t understand your view about SDM. I had a completely eye opening experience about the west during the release of SlumDog Millionaire. Even though people loved the movie, I faced a whole lot of questions fro people saying – “Does India really have pools of shit lying in the city” ? “Is that how poor people behave in India.” Do you have that pretty girls in india (they meant Frieda Pinto and by pretty they meant exotic)… They were behaving as if India is some backward country and they got to see that same shit on screen. It was terrible experience for me.

      • sputnik 11 years ago

        I don’t know if the people you encountered were racist or just curious 😀

        All I heard about SDM was that the day after the Oscars a Gora colleague joked “Now you guys are going to take our awards too?”

        I did not watch the movie in theater but my Indian friend who saw the movie in the theater said the westerners liked the movie a lot and that they were standing in the aisles and did not leave till the whole Jai Ho song played in the end credits.

        And as far as shit scene is concerned Danny Boyle had a shit scene in Trainspotting too which was worse than the SDM scene. I decided to stop watching the movie after that scene 😀

        As far as pretty girls comment a Indian friend studying in another university once said that his Gora classmates asked him how do Indian girls keep getting those Miss Worlds and Miss Universes when the Indian girls in college are not pretty at all. But then we ourselves used to lament that there is not a single good looking girl from India in our Masters class.

        • Suprabh 11 years ago

          It was not just about the people that I encountered. SDM became sort of THE picture of India and In my opinion, it was a pretty hollow picture.

          You are talking two different things here– Appreciation for the movie may not actually come from Watching misery of a country but from the entertainment value of the movie itself. However, the impact isn’t limited to oscar nominations or Exotic Indian chics. The whole SDM phenomenon was built and sold over the “Lets go watch a 3rd world underdog story- They have cows on roads and pool of shit” and thats what people started buying.

          • sputnik 11 years ago

            I don’t think it was sold on ““Lets go watch a 3rd world underdog story- They have cows on roads and pool of shit”

            It was sold as a underdog story and a story of love triumphs all.

          • Suprabh 11 years ago

            The promos quite easily depicted that it was more about an Indian Slumdog and his coming out of shit story to win 20 million rupees rather than love triumphs all.

      • hithere 11 years ago

        Have you seen Trainspotting?
        Danny loves Shit 🙂

    • hithere 11 years ago

      I agree..I think it goes with mentality that My kid may be stupid..I can say and do whatever in my house. But when neighbor or anybody not of house says something similar about the kid, you become defensive.

      Narad_muni – Most of the people who comment about NRIs have no valid locus standi themselve to comment based on their contribution to India. Many people say they live in India and know how general India is thinking. I am afraid an average person doesn’t interact with more than 1000 people on ayn issue. Think of that sample out of billion and you will realize how ridiculous it sounds.
      Don’t majority of people defecate in open or no proper toilets in India? Don’t we make all kind of infrasture but rarely put money and effort to maintain it? There are good and bad in every part of world but it is important that citizesn realize what are their shortcomings of country and correct them instead of ignoring them.

      ps -I may agree or disagree with Indian nuclear position, But I do take umbrage when types of Arundhati Roy go to foreign land and take anti-India nuclear stand and kind of give perception that she represents Indian public view .

      • narad_muni 11 years ago

        So, I need NRIs to give me gyan about my country…LOL
        Yeah yeah u know better.
        . at least, I earn my money here and pay 50% of it as taxes. SO, yes, I do contribute to the development of my country.
        I do vote and try to choose an able government.
        Even if I interact with a handful Indians, whats the issue bro?

        And who is denying poverty and the lack of wholesome development in India?
        Some ppl still defecate in the open at some places but not eveywhere…there is filth in every country even the mighty USA.My point is what the film maker is trying to showcase here – he is trying to showcase everything is bad in India – right from poverty, filthy,prostitution,children getting amputed for begging,terrible call centers,even the host of the game show – every fucking thing is bad in India.
        U say there is good and bad abt every country – I agree. what good does SDM show about India?

        Can u tell me what u r doing for India?

        Fact is – most NRI’s leave India coz of more money n better lifestyle n then they behave as if their hearts are aching for India.

        I know this is a NRI heavy forum and I will be outnumbered. So I rest my case

        • hithere 11 years ago

          Why do you use a forum made in USA? Or use iPhone or similar instrument? Your comment is nothing very similar to what Thackeray says at state level, you are saying at National level. If you are self sufficient you should be using things made in India only?

          Do you know India needed to put its gold reserve as collateral for repayments of loan in 1991? Do you think Indian foreign reserve is filled by exports? A lot is filled by NRIs.

          “Can u tell me what u r doing for India?”

          Yes, people leave India for better opportunities. Is there anything wrong? They probably return more to India than had they stayed in India.

          “So, I need NRIs to give me gyan about my country”
          Why? Just by leaving your father’s house doesn’t mean that you can give constructive criticism?

          • narad_muni 11 years ago

            yes, u r the man!
            Your heart aches for India… u do more for India than Indians. So the moral of the story is – if u want to do something for the country, u sud leave the country first. Hats off dude!

            What a stupid argument about made in India only goods? LOL.

            And dont talk bull crap abt foreign reserves. NRIs and foreigners invest here for the sole reason of making more returns out of their investment not for the betterment of the country.

            Anyways, I am not defending India and its issues. If u r not an India, u can’t call yourself We Indians, period.
            The whole arguments started from that.

          • hithere 11 years ago

            Most of the remittances (60%) are for family maintainance, Which goes into economy.

            And everyone who is earning in India is doing so for giving taxes to Government not for self?

            If you leave your parents house, you should disown the surname? or if you leave your State your are no longer Tamilian or UPite?

  11. sputnik 11 years ago


    This SDM trailer was posted on Oct 30, 2008 and I don’t see anything that you are talking about. The movie got critical acclaim at film festivals first and released mainstream in Jan 2009.

    I am sorry but I feel that this criticism of SDM comes more due to embarrassment that there is a India out there like this which we don’t want to even acknowledge. People can google Dharavi and watch the images for themselves.

    • Suprabh 11 years ago

      even that trailer you posted has slum kids running around on garbage and, filthy trains. Here’s another example from 4 years ago

      Also, if you observe carefully, there was just too much stress on Slum and slumdog and that kind of became the portrait of the film. It gave a wrong image of a nation which is so much more than that.

      “I am sorry but I feel that this criticism of SDM comes more due to embarrassment that there is a India out there like this which we don’t want to even acknowledge”

      No, the criticism is not because of that. You have to understand how many gangsta movies dealing with dark allies of Boston or Chicago make it big like SDM and reach to a global audience. SDM was a big movie made by a big director and backed by a big studio and it reached a large audience in the whole world.

      To an average Indian – Talking strictly from movie oerspective–US is all about tall buildings, flashy cars and better lifestyle. Not even 10% is aware of the dark side. But SDM made sure westners know about the pools of shit and over populated Railway stations and slumdogs and not about the Big IT giants or the upcoming urban quality of the country.

      Picture this: How many people in India (amongst the Urban Multiplex going audience) got to see City of God compared to SDM in the west or even in Brazil.

      • sputnik 11 years ago

        So a movie should not show slum kids running on garbage? I have seen a beggar eat from trash. If tomorrow some foreign filmmaker made a movie and showed that people will be up in arms against that. Filthy trains are a reality but I don’t even remember the filthy train part. All I remember was them selling stuff in a train which again is a reality and them trying to steal. It also showed high rises, lots of cars stuck in traffic what about that? It did not show bullock carts in Mumbai did it?

        I don’t understand this objection. The objection is about showing something that we don’t want others to see because it will spoil our image even though it is there for everyone to see.

        All gansta movies are not the same. It was not some depressing boring movie. It was a entertaining and a feel good film and that’s why it did well.

        There are Hollywood movies which show poverty too like Million Dollar Baby, The Pursuit Of Happyness, Winter’s Bone, 8 Mile and so on.

        As far as perception of US/West that’s not the only thing Indian movies show. According to Indian movies US/West is also about women who are sluts/moral less/characterless who don’t care about marriage/family and men who are racist/bad according to Indian movies. We don’t object to those in Indian movies do we?

        SDM was in English. City of God is a movie from Brazil. How many people watch a subtitled movie in India/US?

        • Suprabh 11 years ago

          No, sluts, moral less woman/ men are shown in desi movies too. Moreover, if you are talking about the culture thing then let me break the news to you: The culture of sleeping around with whoever and whenever (read: Slut by some) is kind of something that Indian Urban multiplex audience likes and want to have the same in their environment too. The whole concept of dating and then saying I love you or live in relationships is west driven. So the only people who will not like it are the Khaps or moral police officers who in any way are not the audience of any western movie.

          Million Dollar Baby and Winter’s bone’s display of poverty is hardly the issue in those two movies and you can check how well these two movies along with 8 mile were distributed , released and performed in the overseas arena, especially in countries like India.

          glad that you brought the point of City of God not being in English language– Thats exactly my point. The core movie which depicted the poor situation of another country was made in its language and hence no popularization, and here’s a movie (SDM) which focussed on slumdogs and people who can’t speak any language other than vernacular hindi, being made in English- just to cater to a global audience- don’t you get the reach and hence responsibility of such a movie?

          You don’t understand the objection, because perhaps, you did not have to face the other side of its impact. I can understand because I was asked all those questions and that too in a somewhat uninvited manner.

          • sputnik 11 years ago

            I don’t know if you misread my comment or not. I was referring to movies where the Indians are always greater than the goras because of their culture/Sanskriti.

            Poverty is hardly the issue in Million Dollar Baby and Winter’s Bone but it is in SDM? MDB does not have a feel good ending like SDM. Did you miss that?

            What about the movie Gandhi? Why was it made in English? You cant make a native language movie and expect it to have a global reach?

            So tell me how many from the Hindi audience watched Telugu movies of RGV in subtitles? But at least some people watched Rakta Charitra where characters were speaking Hindi while it was set in a place where people don’t speak in Hindi. And if some Hindi filmmaker made that same movie people would have said that it portrayed south in bad light.

            What about movies like Peepli Live/DG or recently or any old movie which shows villages/poverty? If you show Lagaan they might ask you similar questions? Show them Matru that released just this week and you may get similar questions.

            The last para of your comment reinforces what I said above that the objection is because of the embarrassment of having to acknowledge it.

          • Suprabh 11 years ago


            Do you think, everyone thinks the way you have a perception of them? Why do you think, I’ll be embarrassed if someone asks me about the filth or poverty in my country. How do you know, I won’t have a response for them or not?

            If I can acknowledge something to myself, I have no reasons to get embarrassed in front of a person who has a half baked idea from watching a half baked movie. Peepli Live/ DG are not movies that glorify poverty. Peepli live was a movie never meant for audiences in New york, the same way MILK or promised land isn’t a movie for someone in Kanpur- The audiences matter. And Lagaan was infact shown to the west and No it did not get the same reception in terms of misinformation as SDM did.

            You are basing your arguments on movies like Peepli, Matru or any other such indegenous movies that hardly will ever be shown to core Western Audiences? You think an tell me does Slumdog Mill fall in that category? It was a british movie and that director’s perspective about India and hence a hollow view of things?

            Please make it very sure, no one is talking about accepting the truth- because that is not the issue here– the issue is depiction of the truth to a different world (read: glorification of poverty)

            P.S. I feel that Rakhth charitra and RGV argument did not make any sense.

  12. sputnik 11 years ago


    You are the one who said you had to answer uncomfortable questions about India post SDM. I did not make any assumptions.

    “Peepli Live/ DG are not movies that glorify poverty. Peepli live was a movie never meant for audiences in New york, the same way MILK or promised land isn’t a movie for someone in Kanpur- The audiences matter. And Lagaan was infact shown to the west and No it did not get the same reception in terms of misinformation as SDM did.”

    That’s complete BS. Peepli Live was premiered at the Sundance Film Festival and DG was premiered at the Toronto Film Festival. PL would not have done even 1 Cr in India if Aamir had not used his goodwill to promote it as a comedy. And we all know how good DG did after the weekend. If you think they do not glorify poverty show it to the goras that asked you the questions. Lets see if they ask any questions about the poverty of Nathu or reporters analyzing his shit.

    Lagaan was loved at the film festivals and it did get an Oscar nomination but nobody from the mainstream public in the west watched Lagaan. It did less than 1 million dollars in US. It was a foreign language movie and too long. My roommates tried to show the movie to my gora neighbors after the Oscar nomination. We had to explain some cricket rules initially but had to stop because they got bored. And if some goras ask questions like does India still have village like the one in Lagaan or do all Indians still wear those dresses we should diss Lagaan?

    The point about Rakta Charitra is same as SDM. If you want to reach a larger audience then make it in a language they can understand. How many people would have watched Gladiator in Roman?

  13. Suprabh 11 years ago


    Uncomfortable does not mean getting embarrassed to answer a question. the discomfort can also come from the anger or frustration at the impact of SDM.

    Again, you are missing the point about DG/Peepli- did it have a mainstream release like SDM ? How many of your Gora friends know of a movie called Peepli Live? You are asking me to show these movies to Goras? Why not show City of God or a movie that shows shit about US Indians? Why not that? You have made a mindset that SDM did nothing wrong..while the fact of the matter is, the movie was presented to the West to be lapped up. The fact that it was an entertaining underdog story made its reception even favorable and thats where the whole Impact thing began.

    The fact that Lagaan did not earn more money had less to do with its content but more to do with the fact that it was a 3 hour long movie with subtitles.. Had that movie been in English, it would have been a fairer comparison. So the fact remains, it did not evoke such sentiments calling it hollow from whosoever in the west that saw it, while criticism for SDM was fairly common.

    So you do make a valid point about reaching to widespread audience involves making the movie in popular language– and hence the responsibility to present in a more honest manner. Lagaan was never meant to be an Oscar movie– its merit got it to do so. SDM on the other hand was made that way and yet it did not justify its treatment of the country it was based on.

    • sputnik 11 years ago

      PL/DG did not have a mainstream release because they were not in English and definitely not as entertaining as SDM. And SDM was supposed to go straight to DVD too.

      Since you said PL/DG don’t glorify poverty I asked you to show that to people who asked those questions to you. City of God is a Brazilian movie made by a Brazilian so how does showing that to people in India change their opinion about US? There are lot of movies that show shit of US but if people in India are only interested in movies which show skyscrapers or those science fiction or action movies whose fault it is?

      Yes Lagaan was never meant to be a Oscar movie and it did not do well with the mainstream western audience because of its language and length. But what if it was in English and only 2 hrs in length? If goras started asking questions “Whether India is still like that? Do Indians still dress like that? Do Indians still have Kings? and so on” does Lagaan become a bad movie?

      If some stupid people make a stupid assumption or generalize that everyone is like what’s shown in a movie it is not movie or filmmaker’s fault.

      P.S. I have not watched City of God. I remember watching the video cassette in my college video library but by that time I had stopped watching subtitled films because I did not like most of the ones I had seen by then.

      • Suprabh 11 years ago


        Its not relevant if you talk in terms of “what ifs and What if nots”…You are talking about what did not happen and what could have happened. The whole truth that PL/DG wasn’t shown to a mainstream audience suffices the fact that its not meant for them and I cannot predict what would have been their reactions. There are a lot of movies that are made showcasing various countries’s problems and they are accepted like that. Peepli Live was a cause based movie, SDM was NOT.

        Your comments reflect that you insist that its not the filmmaker’s fault- whereas the truth that a movie about another country (which is fictitious and not a Gandhi story) is made by a director who neither has lived in that country nor understands what he is trying to show, then the onus is indeed on him to own up the faults (whether to a stupid audience or a sensible one).

        didn’t we all unanimously criticize Yash Chopra when he showed Srk diffusing a Bomb with blind consent of the Gora Policeman?

        • sputnik 11 years ago

          So why do you think PL/DG were premiered at Sundance/Toronoto if they were for Indian audiences. It is entirely relevant because PL/DG are getting away with the same thing because they did not became hit/famous and its SDM’s fault because it became hit/famous.

          Just because some people came up to you with questions or some drew wrong conclusions its bad but other movie is good just because you think is good and they did not see it. So show it to them and lets see what they have to say.

          You yourself are generalizing every gora because a few goras asked you some questions.

          Criticizing logical flaws is different from criticizing something which is true for fear that it will lead to bad image.

          • Suprabh 11 years ago


            PL was an issue based movie.. It was meant to show the issue of a developing country. Even if it did become popular, it would have still remained an issue movie, just like Promised Land will be. The Indian after wathcing Promised Land would say, you know they have fracking based problems in the US…It would hardly lead to making an image of the country

            About DG- I don’t even think DG would have had any impact as far as poverty is concerned, because frankly I don’t remember any poverty moments let alone for the Goras.

            However, SDM was a “tale about the country”… I am not generalizing every gora out there…I am making my argument based on opinions of some Goras that I interacted with about this movie and based on my own opinion of the film.
            But what different are you doing in that case- You are degeneralizing (if thats a word) everyone because you have a notion in your head that –all this criticism is only because it leads to bad image..when I already stated instead of bad most people think its incomplete/hollow/shallow image.

  14. sputnik 11 years ago


    “no , living in india makes him more an indian citizen than you.”

    No it does not. Just because someone is working and earning over there and they pay taxes because they have to you they don’t become more Indian. And who knows if the person living in India made that choice to live in India when he had a better opportunity to go abroad or he is just talking out of resentment because he could not make it to US/UK because he did not get a visa or a college admission.

    That way every one should live in their own state. If you leave your state and work in another state for more money or for better life than that person should not call himself Bengali or Marathi or so on?

    I don’t know which movies you are referring to about the FBI. Kurbaan was a bad film and most importantly a boring film. Aamir again I had issues with the final scene and how everyone is involved with the phones. I did not criticize the poverty and filth that it showed.

    • Baba Ji 11 years ago

      we wil talk about NRIs “indianess’ later. that is a separate debate in itself.but i am more interested in your own hypocritical stand regarding the opposition to muslim ghetoisation in movies but admiring the gheotised represntation of indian society in SDM.

      this is what you said to suprabh :

      “The objection is about showing something that we don’t want others to see because it will spoil our image even though it is there for everyone to see.”

      very good.how progressive.Then why you have issues with NY and aamir climax?seems like you dont want the world to see the “real” face of muslims? 😉 let me tell you many agree that the muslim ghetoisation shown in those films is a reality. so you dont want to see reality bcos it will “spoil” your image to the world? 😀

      • sputnik 11 years ago

        Ghetoisation is your favorite term not mine. You first need to understand what a ghetto means.

        The movie started off with the poor kids in the slum. So it should show palaces there? Then it showed buildings, skyscrapers offices, cars and so on too. It showed the developing side too.

        Slums are a reality. Its not some made up stuff. I criticized the logical flaws in NY.

        Do you even read what I say. I said I had problem with Aamir dying with the bomb when he could have just thrown it somewhere.

        I like movies like Zero Dark Thirty, Hurt Locker and Black Hawk Down. So don’t give me this BS about me worrying about some image getting spoiled.

        • Baba Ji 11 years ago

          dont get angry bcos i ruffled your feathers 😉 it seems you are still avoiding the debate.the moot point.I have enuff archives of what kinds of problems you had with NY,aamir and kurbaan. 😀 lets not get there

  15. narad_muni 11 years ago


    there are no more nested replies allowed..

    So, about slum dwellers, I am not going to say ‘We slum dwellers’.

    And I have just learnt on tanqeed that NRI people help India more by staying outside. Guess something beneficial came out of this arguments 😀
    So, I guess you are more of an Indian citizen than me 🙂

    About answering people, believe me I do interact regulalry a lot with lot of US folks and we have had discussions about this movie. One of the US folks who visits India often himself did not like the portrayal of India in the movie because he has SEEN how things are.
    Apart from that, I absolutely get furious thinking that some goras who have never been here having some orgasmic pleasure and making fun watching the terrible portrayal of India in this movie.
    And about Pather panchali, see the movie and then talk. It will be more meaningful.
    And Pather panchali is absolutley gem of a movie that remains relevant even now. Pather Panchali is setup in the 1950’s in a small village not in the mordern post-liberalized India. If u want to talk about the movie, please watch it first!

    • sputnik 11 years ago

      Nested replies work only till 5 levels.

      And I just learned that people are helping India just by staying and working there 😉 You make it sound as if working to earn a living for yourself is desh bhakti and as if you are in the army fighting on the border.

      Yes NRI people help India more by staying outside. They decrease the Indian population thereby using less resources of India and also decreasing competition with fellow Indians in jobs 😉

      The criticism I mentioned about Pather Panchali was not mine. It was what happened back then. There are villages in post liberalized India too and someone can watch PL/MKBKM and come up with silly objections too.

  16. sputnik 11 years ago


    “most people think its incomplete/hollow/shallow image”

    You are again generalizing your opinion as everyone’s opinion. It wasn’t a tale about the country. It was based on a story written by an Indian Vikas Swarup.


    • Suprabh 11 years ago

      Come on Sputnik. Ye toh Hadd ho gayi yaar. Now Do i have to tell you what a director’s job is. Do you think Vikas Swaroop portrayed India the way Danny showed it. Lets say he did, do you think there was not more to the book… Lets no go into that discussion., otherwise you may have to return to this discussion after reading “Q & A”

      And No I am not generalizing my opinion. I am stating it. I am telling you I and other of my opinion find it narrow.shallow/hollow image of India.

      • sputnik 11 years ago

        You thought SDM showed India in a bad light and I disagreed. Director’s job is to make a good movie and if a movie has logical flaws or showed things which are not true point them out. Director’s job is not to make a tourism ad for a country.

        If Vikas Swarup has no problem with how Danny Boyle adapted his novel then why should I or anyone else care.


        • Suprabh 11 years ago

          Swaroop had no problem because he got a fat cheque and royalty money from SDM ticket and DVD sales.

          Director’s job is not to make a tourism ad. That doesn’t mean he will show a couple of AIDS patient and portray that the whole country is fucking each other to AIDS.

          Its as simple as that- your view will change once you will realize the impact. Because you haven’t seen it you think, the bunch of people I interacted with are morons. I am not denying their low IQ levels, but thats how impact works. These are the same people who deduced poverty out of Ray’s movies when it didn’t even glorify poverty. The same people fall prey to the shit movies like SDM throw out.

          I wonder how would Andhra population in US react if the Americans made a whole feature film where they just showed that All South Indians have brought to US is hyderabadi biryani, dowried wives turned unskilled IT workers and bad accent. Would you then call it a complete picture?

          • sputnik 11 years ago

            I knew you would come up with the fat cheque and royalty money thing.

            If a director shows a couple of AIDS patients then it exactly means that there are a couple of AIDS patients. It doesn’t mean that the whole country is dying of AIDS. If someone makes that analogy then something is wrong with the guy who is making that assumption not the director.

            As I said before SDM showed slums only in the initial part but you are making it sound like the whole KBC cast and show was set in a slum, the call center was set in a slum and so on.

            After telling me “You are talking about what did not happen and what could have happened.” you are asking me to comment on a hypothetical movie? Hyderabadis themselves made a movie called Angrez with a song called Hyderabadi Biryani and it has also what some people call “bad accent” and what others call being true to own roots and not aping foreigners.

            You liked Argo and called it the best picture of the year. How come you did not care about how the Iranian population was shown in it? Do you think Iranians like the way they have been portrayed in it?

            I don’t care if Argo showed Iranians in bad light as long as it stayed true to the actual things that happened. The movie obviously discarded the Canadian involvement but then added stupid scenes of them going out and getting stuck which never happened and the whole ludicrous airport runaway scene when that thing never happened. The movie should have ended with them boarding the plane itself just like it happened in real.

          • Suprabh 11 years ago

            There is a diff between Argo and what you choce to ignore while watching Argo. There is a scene where the Pentagon is discussing why Iranians are so furious and they give the reason of the shah putting Iraninans through all those attrocities and miseries. Not for one frame, Argo tries to takes side- It tells you the story of CIA operation rather than making it political or communal.

            yes it should mean a couple of people having AIDS but its not the same when the director tries to cash in on the misery and portray the whole country like a disease center.

            So, now you are defending the movie by saying the KBC set should have been inside a Dharavi slum and then my argument would have made sense to you?

            I gave that movie example because you are stuck on the belief that its the viewer’s fault that they percieve things to be shallow and not the maker’s fault that he/she made it shallow.

            I personally do not care about their bad accent even though I dont like it- its their thing, but I have heard so many Americans complain about it, that its easy to say they think its bad.

            My point is – as a director, when you are making a movie about another nation, which is meant for a diverse and outside audience, then there is a responisbility on you. You cant just highlight one part and be done with it. If SDM was a movie about America with a small bit about Indian slum kids, then it won’t have made much of a difference, but the movie was about Indi and became an image of it.

  17. narad_muni 11 years ago

    “And who knows if the person living in India made that choice to live in India when he had a better opportunity to go abroad or he is just talking out of resentment because he could not make it to US/UK because he did not get a visa or a college admission.”

    So u think that ppl who stay and work in India are here coz they dint have an option to go abroad..WOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
    what noble thougts?
    Now I understand why u din’t have any problem with the depiction of India and Indians in the movie. this argument has been an absolute eye-opener for me. Thanks!

    Congrats though belated! For getting admission in US college and a job in US.
    I am angry at you coz I couldnt make it to the US.
    BTW, did u top IIT or what? I am not that good.

    One small note – There was a guy in our college class who was pretty terrible in studies and to be fair, lacked IQ compared to others. He got a college admission for masters in USA (you should know better than me how to get admissions in US colleges, 🙂 ) and then completed Phd and happily settled there. Not saying everyone who goes to US are substandard but there are a good percentage of ppl like these who do land up with college admissions or jobs in US if he is desparate about going there.
    So, if u r patting urself on the back or getting some ego boost as u got a college admission or some job in the great USA, well……so be it 😀

    • Baba Ji 11 years ago

      that is one horrendous comment from sputnik. each and ever word can be taken apart. but i will leave it for some other time. right now i am focussed on the gheto argument

    • sputnik 11 years ago

      You are the one who started by saying I should not refer to myself as an Indian just because I do not live in India.

      Read the first line of that statement too. And I know some people that I mentioned in the second statement too.

      Well I know some people who were horrible at studies and who are doing well in India/US/UK/Aus too. So doesn’t make any difference.

      I did not start patting myself on the back. You are the one who started patting yourself on your back for staying in India and working for yourself/family.

      • narad_muni 11 years ago

        My entire argument is a person who does not stay in India is not in the same position as me or someone else who stays here….and prolly that is the reason SDM dint pinch u as much as it does me.

        u cud have relatilated in all possible manner but din’t expect such a terrible comment from u to defend urself.

        Anyways, NRI’s ki jai ho! I salute the love and contribution of NRI’s to India.

        • sputnik 11 years ago

          A part of the movie was set in slums. Just because someone else lives in India in some other part it does not make him an expert on that place. The point is whether the place shown exists or not.

          Anyways your comment asking Indians who live abroad to not call themselves Indian is more offensive than my comment which was a general comment.

          • narad_muni 11 years ago

            Yeah…yeah… u r right,
            I asked u a question – r u Indian? U dint answer at first.
            Now that I know u r an Indian citizen, u r technically correct in calling urself an Indian.
            Did I ever call myself ax expert in slums? LOL!

            Btw, your love towards your country and its people is truly exemplary.

            Thanks for enlightening me!

  18. Author
    aryan 11 years ago

    Bombay Jayashri Oscar nominate Lullaby song from Life of Pi

  19. Tulmul 11 years ago

    Let me put just one Line on the debate going on here among very erudite and bright minds…

    I know poverty is real and sweeping it under the carpet is like ostrich act, but I also feel showing it by Western fellows is not just a cinematic art but has Historic narrative behind it and they dont want this narravtive to break down… Historic narrative was, is that India is land of Femine, snake charmers and Jugglers and 30 million Gods…

    • sputnik 11 years ago

      SDM did not show famine, snake charmers and jugglers and 30 Million Gods 😉

  20. Tulmul 11 years ago

    It seems you Missed Operative word “Narrative” … The variables may change but Narrative remains same, Poverty is same.. I used old word Famine 😉

    • Baba Ji 11 years ago

      spuntik is not known to understand metaphors and hints. you need to spoon feed him to make him understand. talking from experience.

    • sputnik 11 years ago

      Any movie that shows poverty can be criticized using same yardstick but anyways some people see ulterior motives in everything.


      Yes you are the Baba – the expert on everything. I am just a ordinary guy and how can I understand anything without your spoon feeding and hints? 😉


      LOL at Inland Empire.

      • Baba Ji 11 years ago

        sputnik – i am not an expert on any topic.you know i am a believer in “sputnik presents”. 😀 yes your comments on indians made me say that. but it was in jest,nothing serious.

  21. Serenzy 11 years ago


    “P.S. I have not watched City of God”

    :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(

  22. Tulmul 11 years ago

    Its not ulterior motives, same can be said that one just ends the whole discussion abruptly with this word. I stated a fact which history bears. One has to just peep into history.. Historical narrative take lot of time to fade or change… I wont go into that…and abt SDM its was not worth Indian film awards save oscar..

    • sputnik 11 years ago

      SDM deserved every Oscar that it got that year.

      These were the nominations for Best Picture that year.
      The Curious Case of Benjamin Button was a boring lengthy movie trying to be a Forrest Gump
      Frost/Nixon was good but not as good as SDM.
      Milk was again not Best Picture material. Sean Penn was good and that’s about it.
      The Reader was just soft porn.
      Slumdog Millionaire was the best of the lot.

      Same with directors. David Fincher, Ron Howard, Gus Van Sant, Stephen Daldry who made those movies were not as good as Danny Boyle.

      Whether it was editing/cinematography or background score or song SDM deserved those awards.

      Now suddenly Indian awards have become standard? I thought nobody cares about Indian awards and can be bought by money or won in lieu of performances 😉

  23. FS 11 years ago

    Don’t teach me Patriotism because I liked Slum Dog Millionaire 🙂 however I don’t have faith in any awards…. Editing part of Slumdog along with its Music was the best thing in the film. Worst part was 5-10min appearance of Frieda made her a kind of DIVA in western world where as the four kids were not given enough credit for their performance.

    • sputnik 11 years ago

      Patriotism? You are not Indian because you live abroad dude 😉

      Yeah she got lucky because of the movie. I liked the little kid who played Jamal – Ayush Mahesh Khedekar the most.

  24. Tulmul 11 years ago

    Reader was soft porn that SDM was XXX of Poverty. Lol

    Indain awards was sarcastic, I have said it many times, Oscar is not perfect and movies can be lobbied for, SDM and another one I rmbr was during 9/11 time when they were forced to give award to black guy 😛

    SDM was as I said sold on that historic narrative that’s still prevalent in Western world about India.

    • sputnik 11 years ago

      Same arguments going on since beginning. Its bad because westerners showed it. I am finally out of this.

      No awards are perfect and neither are the Oscars.

      “If SDM won oscar as you said based on merit and it richly deserve so then BG shud have won all awards in India, National and Others so called ……”

      Well if you think so good for you and for BG.

  25. Tulmul 11 years ago

    If SDM won oscar as you said based on merit and it richly deserve so then BG shud have won all awards in India, National and Others so called …… 😀

  26. Tulmul 11 years ago

    Every Nudity is not Porn. period.

    and there is hell of difference between Nudity and Vulgarity.

    Just she had physical scences with child ????

    Then why not you hold same yardstick for SDM, which was Shit poverty porn and No shit can be saved by Gr8 music or songs… 😛

  27. sputnik 11 years ago


    Wow. You are using one line/scene from Argo to say that it does not show Iranians in bad light. You are not an Iranian so you have no locus standi to decide whether Argo presents a true or complete picture of Iran to the west.

    This is what Iranians have to say about Argo.

    Here is a writer of Iranian descent


    Iran plans film to ‘correct’ Ben Affleck’s ‘Argo’


    ‘Iran’s state-run IRNA news agency called Argo “Hollywood’s latest failed attempt to confront the Islamic Revolution” – and replete with complaints that the movie portrays all Iranians as stereotypically aggressive and unrefined and fails to give viewers enough historical context. (Pirated copies of American films typically become available in Iran a few months before the films open in the US, and are easily accessed by the public.)

    “Argo makes the people of Iran look like they have no self-determination, and indisputably support violence,” writes Meysam Karimi in a lengthy review for the popular Iran-based film magazine website, Moviemag. “For me, as an Iranian … this makes [the storyline behind] Argo much less believable.”

    Iran’s semi-official Fars News Agency labels Argo “anti-Iranian” and painted the film as a flop. ‘


    Now what happened to your whole thing that a director has to give whole picture and not hollow picture?

    So this means Ben Affleck was wrong according to your own logic and Argo is a bad movie.

    • Suprabh 11 years ago

      No Ben Affleck was wrong according to Iraninans the same way SDM is wrong according to Indians. I am no one to comment on the Iraninan accuracy of Argo , if the people of Iran find fault with its depiction of truth- In such a case Ben affleck is wrong. I commented on the movie being best of the year and I have also said SDM was an entertanining underdog story. The only thing I have commented as problematic is its shallow depiction of India and thus its impact.

      In the same vein SDM is not a wrong movie for the Americans-because they don’t realize the impact or know the complete truth-rather its a wrong movie for Indians.– get the difference??

      I have not commented/citicized your liking or getting entertained by the movie. I have only commented against your speech about how all other Indians are embarrassed and defensive, while your notion of them is the only correct thing here…and that the problem is not with SDM but with the viewers.

      • sputnik 11 years ago

        While commenting on Argo being the best of the year you did not take into account whether it presented a complete picture of Iran or if it presented a good image of Iran to west did you? Then why this yardstick for SDM?

        Anyways you can think its hollow depiction or that it is presenting a bad image of India to west. I disagree and I still stand by that little speech. If the movie showed something totally made up which was not true then I can understand the objection.

        And anyways here is the Trainspotting toilet scene.

        • Suprabh 11 years ago


          Do you see any americans disliking SDM ? Do you see Nepalese criticizing Argo? Do you see Hindus criticizing the Jews criticizing Telangana or Khalistan issue?

          Why do you see Indians criticizing SDM?

          Why do you see Iraninans criticizing Argo?

          There’s a reason to things. If you can’t see it, the problem is not anyone else’s.

          • hithere 11 years ago

            “Why do you see Indians criticizing SDM?

            Why do you see Iraninans criticizing Argo?”

            It could be that things are represented wrong(like In Indian Jones2 that Indians are eating what not)…But with SDM…As I commented earlier…… I think it goes with mentality that My kid may be stupid..I can say and do whatever in my house. But when neighbor or anybody not of house says something similar about the kid, you become defensive.

            ps – If someone from inside starts criticizing the kid we normally say – घर का भेदी लंका ढाए (Ghar ka bhedi lanka dhaye) .

          • sputnik 11 years ago

            I am sure there are many Americans who dislike SDM just like they are for all movies.

            There are lot of Americans who criticize Israel about the Palestinian issue and there are lot of people outside of US who criticize US for its policies.

            As far as SDM/Argo Indians criticize SDM or Iranians criticize Argo because they think it hurts their image. No one on this thread or those who criticize SDM has said Danny showed slums in India which do not exist in reality. All the problem is of image.

            Any movie can be criticized using this image nonsense. People can criticize any Indian movie which shows poverty as peddling poverty porn too. Just because some people have double standards they don’t criticize an Indian movie that shows the same poverty but that’s not my problem.

            Why stop at countries. Only filmmakers of a particular region should make movies about that region. If anyone makes a movie about any other region than his hometown lets call that bad from now on.

            So let’s start. MKBKM made by Vishal from UP has been deliberately made to show Haryana in bad light. RGV from AP deliberately showed Mumbai’s underbelly instead of showing how good Mumbai is in Satya. Mani Ratnam a south Indian made Roja to show Kashmir in bad light. He should have shown the good side of Kashmir. I can come up with more examples but you should get the drift.

          • Suprabh 11 years ago

            Do you think I do not get your point? I have been getting it since argument # 1. But what you don’t get is why I or others having same opinion as I do, are so particular about this debate. Its not because we get embarrassed to hear bad things about our country from some white guy who hasn’t been out of Kansas forget US, but its because the movie in debate is acting like a calendar of India showing poverty, misery and sickness on every page. You are talking from a point of view where you think showing slums, poverty or misery isn’t bad because it exists. If thats the case then why were you agreeing with Salman on that interview video where he said, “I dont think there’s the need of showing kiss or sex on screen– the demand of the film is all bull shit”.. People do kiss in real life and they do fuck each other when they are aroused. So how is that not natural to show on screen, Its just that when someone of the same ideology suited you, you chose to accept it and now when there’s criticism against the same thing, you choose to defend it.

  28. hithere 11 years ago

    I had issues with Indiana Jones and Temple of Doom, But I have no issues with SDM. I think Boyle showed how you can make proper Bollywood movie in English. I don’t think it deserved all the awards but then there are many which win when there are many deserving left out.
    Frieda over achieved from whatever her miniscule role was. It was not her fault that she did a good job with PR and landed in all the Hollywood movies which takes so long for many.

  29. sputnik 11 years ago


    I said this.

    “At 15 min he says no script in the world requires kissing and that without this kiss its going to be a disaster and says they go to the bathroom also in the morning show that too. I kind of agree with Salman.”

    Salman Khan Interview With Komal Nahta on Dabangg 2

    You missed my “kind of agree” 😉

    And I agreed with what – that a kiss on screen does not add to the story/screenplay? I can’t think of any movie off the top of my head where a kiss was absolutely essential to the screenplay. I can think of only Basic Instinct where the sex scenes were integral to the screenplay.

    How do you show a slum kid without showing a slum? How do you show a story of poor becoming rich without showing poverty?

    • hithere 11 years ago

      “I can’t think of any movie off the top of my head where a kiss was absolutely essential to the screenplay.”
      Raja Hindustani 😉

    • Suprabh 11 years ago

      ‘Ye toh har baat ko apne mutabik modne wali baat ho gayi…Kind of agree , agree na raha aur sara tanqeed , tanqeed na raha’ 😉

      So If as a director I am showing that two lovers are getting sexually attracted (Romeo+ Juliet) to each other or that a husband and wife are trying to reignite the lost passion in their marriage (Blue Valentine) how is a Kiss or a love making scene not absolutely essential to the scene. (I can quote about 100 more movies )

      Now before you try and tell me why its not absolutely essential- I’d like to tell you that it will only be your lone view of it, and you’d be ignoring a thousand conflicting viewpoints – just like the way , its your view point that SDM is an innocent movie ignoring a thousand different viewpoints that It is in fact guilty.

      Anyways, like all debates this is going to an end with open ends. And I am tired of it too. To each their own and to slum, sex and moan 😉

      • sputnik 11 years ago

        Kind of agree means agree but certain conditions apply 😉

        You can also show lovers kissing or having sex by showing flowers touching each other birds pecking and so on … purani films nahin dekhi. If you don’t understand metaphors ask Baba 😉

        Seriously speaking I don’t hate a movie or slam a movie just because it had kiss/sex scenes unless they distract from the movie.

        “Anyways, like all debates this is going to an end with open ends. And I am tired of it too. To each their own and to slum, sex and moan ;)”


      • Baba Ji 11 years ago

        suprabh, sputnik ke saath mactha pachi karne ka yahi anjaam hota hai. he is like abhijit mukerjee. he wont bend his opinion in anycase.

      • sputnik 11 years ago

        Liked In the Realm of the Senses though it was explicit.

        Nagisa Oshima, Iconoclastic Filmmaker, Dies at 80

        Nagisa Oshima, the iconoclastic filmmaker who challenged and subverted the pieties of Japanese society and the conventions of Japanese cinema and who gained international notoriety in 1976 for the sexually explicit “In the Realm of the Senses,” died on Tuesday at a hospital near Tokyo. He was 80.

        A scene from Mr. Oshima’s “Death by Hanging” (1968), which addressed the prejudicial treatment of Japan’s Korean minority. More Photos »

        His office said that the cause was pneumonia, the Japanese news media reported. He had been ill since having a stroke in 1996.

        Mr. Oshima belonged to a generation of filmmakers for whom artistic and political rebellion were one and the same. At the height of his career he worked at a furious pace, most productively in the 1960s, reinventing himself as a matter of course. Radical but never dogmatic, his films rejected ideology even as they insisted implicitly that cinema was a political tool.

        He remains best known for “In the Realm of the Senses.” Based on a true story that scandalized Japan in the 1930s, it tells of a maid who falls into a sadomasochistic affair with her employer. It features unsimulated sex and culminates in a graphically depicted castration.

        The film became a sensation and the subject of censorship battles in several countries. In the United States, the Customs Service barred it from being shown publicly at the New York Film Festival in 1976, calling it obscene; the decision was overturned about a month later by a federal judge.

        Even before this defining scandal, Mr. Oshima relished the role of enfant terrible. He was a founding figure of the Japanese New Wave but claimed to detest the idea of such a grouping and told an interviewer, “My hatred for Japanese cinema includes absolutely all of it.” His documentary “100 Years of Japanese Cinema” (1994) concludes with the hope that Japanese cinema rid itself of its “Japaneseness.”

        But in film after film Japan was Mr. Oshima’s great subject, specifically the Japanese psyche and the damage it had endured from centuries of feudalism and later from World War II. He once said that the goal of his films was “to force the Japanese to look in the mirror.”

        Mr. Oshima was born on March 31, 1932, to an affluent family in Kyoto with samurai ancestry. He studied law at Kyoto University and became active in student politics.

        After graduating he worked as an assistant director at the Shochiku studio and was soon promoted. Even in his first two films, “A Town of Love and Hope” (1959), a tough-minded adolescent melodrama, and “Cruel Story of Youth” (1960), a feverish tale of troubled teenagers, Mr. Oshima’s sympathy for the young and dispossessed is evident.

        “To make films is a criminal act in this world,” Mr. Oshima wrote in a 1966 essay. Most of his protagonists were outlaws, and his films often showed criminal behavior as a product of society or as a reaction against it.

        The event that ignited the Japanese student protest movement — the 1960 renewal of Japan’s mutual security treaty with the United States — also galvanized Mr. Oshima’s filmmaking.

        “Night and Fog in Japan” (1960), his first explicitly political film, details the infighting among a group of student radicals. Days into its run, in the wake of a political assassination, Shochiku pulled the movie from theaters. In response Mr. Oshima quit the studio and set up his own company.

        Like “In the Realm of the Senses,” many of Mr. Oshima’s films were inspired by real-life events. “Violence at Noon” (1966), about a triangle that forms among a serial rapist and two women who protect him, was based on an actual case, as was “Boy” (1969), about a family whose son is forced to fake traffic injuries in an extortion scheme.

        “Death by Hanging” (1968), about a Korean man sentenced to death for rape and murder, addresses the prejudicial treatment of the Korean minority in Japan.

        A restless innovator, Mr. Oshima switched genres at will and sometimes created his own. “Death by Hanging” goes from a documentarylike tract against capital punishment to absurdist farce. “Three Resurrected Drunkards,” a 1968 slapstick comedy, stops midway through and replays the first half, with crucial variations.

        Mr. Oshima never developed a stylistic signature and in fact veered between extremes of style. The 100-minute “Violence at Noon” includes some 2,000 edits, while “Night and Fog in Japan,” filmed in long takes, is composed of fewer than 50 shots.

        After directing 18 features (and many television documentaries) in 14 years, Mr. Oshima slowed down in the 1970s. In middle age he also became a fixture on Japanese television talk shows.

        Mr. Oshima recalled that “In the Realm of the Senses” had originated in a meeting with the producer Anatole Dauman, who had worked with many French New Wave directors and who proposed a collaboration, saying to Mr. Oshima, “Let’s make a porno flick!” Mr. Oshima asked his colleague Koji Wakamatsu, a prolific director of politically minded soft-core erotica, to serve as a producer as well; together they had the film processed and edited in France to circumvent Japanese pornography laws.

        Mr. Dauman also produced “Empire of Passion,” the more subdued 1978 follow-up to “In the Realm of the Senses.” Another period piece about adulterous lovers, “Empire” won Mr. Oshima the directing prize at the Cannes Film Festival.

        Among other later films, “Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence” (1983), a prisoner-of-war drama starring David Bowie and Ryuichi Sakamoto, was shot mainly in New Zealand. Mr. Oshima, collaborating with Luis Buñuel’s frequent screenwriter Jean-Claude Carrière, also put a twist on the French sex farce with “Max Mon Amour” (1986), which paired Charlotte Rampling and a chimpanzee.

        His final film, the 19th-century samurai drama “Taboo” (1999), which he directed after suffering his first stroke, continued his late-career theme of forbidden love, bringing to the surface the homoerotic currents of “Mr. Lawrence.”

        Mr. Oshima’s survivors include his wife, Akiko Koyama, an actress who appeared in some of his films, and their sons Takeshi and Shin. In 2011 Ms. Koyama published a memoir, “As a Woman, as an Actor,” about her life with Mr. Oshima.

        Mr. Oshima saw his reputation somewhat eclipsed as his productivity dwindled, although that had changed in recent years with traveling retrospectives and the increasing availability of his work on DVD.

        Testifying in a Japanese court about “In the Realm of the Senses,” Mr. Oshima formulated a defense that could apply to almost all his work: “Nothing that is expressed is obscene. What is obscene is what is hidden.”


        • hithere 11 years ago

          Baba ji would say, you liked it because it was explicit 🙂

  30. sputnik 11 years ago

    What the Oscars missed: That other foreign film

    2) “Les Intouchables” (France)

    In being overlooked for the foreign language shortlist, at least French film “Les Intouchables” (“The Intouchables”) lived up to its name. The movie, a peculiar comedy about a quadriplegic and his caretaker, bears all the hallmarks of a surefire Oscar winner, not least because it has been championed by Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein. The odd-couple plot sees wheelchair-bound millionaire Philippe strike up an unlikely friendship with immigrant caretaker Driss. The frank and funny exchanges between the two very different men transcend class and race, offering both of them a new lease of life. Despite being steeped in the kind of corn syrup that Academy Awards panelists normally devour for breakfast, its laughs are fresh as well as warm. The film has proved wildly successful in both the French and international markets, more so than France’s last Oscar big hitter, “The Artist.” But its over-reliance on stereotypes could have prompted judges to wrongly categorize it as a somewhat dubious comedy about race and disability.

    ‘9) “Gangs of Wasseypur” (India)

    How India goes about selecting films to enter into the Oscars is beyond me. This year, the selectors chose a low-wattage, campy tearjerker about the relationship between a deaf-mute boy and an autistic girl called, appropriately, “Barfi!” (Okay, it means something different in Hindi). Meanwhile, the real masterpiece was Anurag Kashyap’s marathon “Gangs of Wasseypur” — which received a standing ovation when it was screened at the Cannes Film Festival in 2012. At a whopping 318-minutes long, the two-part, cow-belt crime noir uses the disputes among three rural criminal empires to address the legacy of British colonialism, Hindu-Muslim conflict, the grim reality of India’s coal industry, Indira Gandhi-style socialism and the breakneck scramble for wealth that began with liberalization in 1991. All with a wit and verve that prompted comparisons to Quentin Tarantino, Sergio Leone and Francis Ford-Coppola. (See also Kashyap’s “Gulaal” (2009) and “Dev D” (2009) — both of which might have done India proud, as well.)’


  31. sputnik 11 years ago



    Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Leading Role
    DANIEL DAY-LEWIS / Abraham Lincoln – “LINCOLN” (Touchstone Pictures)

    Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Leading Role
    JENNIFER LAWRENCE / Tiffany – “SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK” (The Weinstein Company)

    Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Supporting Role
    TOMMY LEE JONES / Thaddeus Stevens – “LINCOLN” (Touchstone Pictures)

    Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Supporting Role
    ANNE HATHAWAY / Fantine – “LES MISÉRABLES” (Universal Pictures)

    Outstanding Performance by a Cast in a Motion Picture
    ARGO (Warner Bros. Pictures)
    BEN AFFLECK / Tony Mendez
    ALAN ARKIN / Lester Siegel
    KERRY BISHÉ / Kathy Stafford
    KYLE CHANDLER / Hamilton Jordan
    RORY COCHRANE / Lee Schatz
    BRYAN CRANSTON / Jack O’Donnell
    TATE DONOVAN / Bob Anders
    CLEA DuVALL / Cora Lijek
    VICTOR GARBER / Ken Taylor
    JOHN GOODMAN / John Chambers
    SCOOT McNAIRY / Joe Stafford
    CHRIS MESSINA / Malinov

    Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Television Movie or Miniseries
    KEVIN COSTNER / “Devil Anse” Hatfield – “HATFIELDS & McCOYS” (History)
    Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Television Movie or Miniseries
    Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Drama Series
    Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Drama Series
    CLAIRE DANES / Carrie Mathison – “HOMELAND” (Showtime)
    Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Comedy Series
    ALEC BALDWIN / Jack Donaghy – “30 ROCK” (NBC)
    Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Comedy Series
    TINA FEY / Liz Lemon – “30 ROCK” (NBC)
    Outstanding Performance by an Ensemble in a Drama Series
    HUGH BONNEVILLE / Robert, Earl of Grantham
    ZOE BOYLE / Lavinia Swire
    LAURA CARMICHAEL / Lady Edith Crawley
    JIM CARTER / Mr. Carson
    BRENDAN COYLE / John Bates
    MICHELLE DOCKERY / Lady Mary Crawley
    JESSICA BROWN FINDLAY / Lady Sybil Crawley
    IAIN GLEN / Sir Richard Carlisle
    THOMAS HOWES / William
    ALLEN LEECH / Tom Branson
    PHYLLIS LOGAN / Mrs. Hughes
    ELIZABETH McGOVERN / Cora, Countess of Grantham
    SOPHIE McSHERA / Daisy
    LESLEY NICOL / Mrs. Patmore
    AMY NUTTALL / Ethel
    DAVID ROBB / Dr. Clarkson
    MAGGIE SMITH / Violet, Dowager Countess of Grantham
    DAN STEVENS / Matthew Crawley
    PENELOPE WILTON / Isobel Crawley
    Outstanding Performance by an Ensemble in a Comedy Series
    AUBREY ANDERSON-EMMONS / Lily Tucker-Pritchett
    JULIE BOWEN / Claire Dunphy
    TY BURRELL / Phil Dunphy
    JESSE TYLER FERGUSON / Mitchell Pritchett
    NOLAN GOULD / Luke Dunphy
    SARAH HYLAND / Haley Dunphy
    ED O’NEILL / Jay Pritchett
    RICO RODRIGUEZ / Manny Delgado
    ERIC STONESTREET / Cameron Tucker
    SOFIA VERGARA / Gloria Delgado-Pritchett
    ARIEL WINTER / Alex Dunphy
    Outstanding Action Performance by a Stunt Ensemble in a Motion Picture
    SKYFALL (Columbia Pictures)
    Outstanding Action Performance by a Stunt Ensemble in a Television Series
    Screen Actors Guild 49th Annual Life Achievement Award


    • cr7 11 years ago

      good to see jnifer lawrence winning best actress . truly deserving . happy for bryan cranston too. he is fantastic as walter white in breaking bad.

Leave a reply

Log in with your credentials

Forgot your details?