“How far that little candle throws its beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world (Dans quelle mesure cette petite bougie jette ses rayons! Donc, brille une bonne action dans un monde corrompu)“
~ William Shakespeare
My personal approach to Smart Content Marketing led to higher visibility and engagement for my content, along with producing quality link backs from authoritative websites. Its approach is to utilize content curation for achieving greater content marketing needs.
Content curation can organize a large set of information in one place for the readers as per their interest. The readers find the information from a single platform. Used as a marketing tool, the curation helps to raise the publication of businesses’ information for the online readers, as well as, create backlinks for the contents you want the engagement for.
#1 What is content marketing
#2 What is content curation?
#3 How to curate content
#4 Content curation best practices
Total Page: 1
Either you’re selling a product through your website or advocating your services online, everything boils down to how web users perceive your website. A major ranking factor in Google is determined by your website’s usability; how your website design appeals to your users and how does Google perceive your website.
An ethical approach to make a website appealing for web users and search engines is defined by the use of SEO friendly practices. All you need to do is follow the basic rules of incorporating essential elements into your website design.
#1 W3C compliance/Web quality & standards
#2 Conversion targeted webpage layout and types of landing pages
#3 Website rudiments
#4 Web aesthetics, and evaluating web aesthetics
#5 Benefits of reducing page weight
Total Page: 14
The screen is a magic medium. It has such power that it can retain interest as it conveys emotions and moods that no other art form can hope to tackle. ~S.Kubrick
As confessed in my previous article on Room 237: Documentary, my love for Stanley Kubrick is undeniably a never ending saga of honesty and respect for his works. Starting from Fear & Desire (1953) and ending at Eyes Wide Shut (1999), every motion picture made by him managed to grasp my senses and left me bewildered for days. There are many things in his movies which I fear watching for the second time, some are very hilarious which I can never get enough of and few are a totally placid in almost every sense.
Watching the final sequence of 2001: A Space Odyssey; when Dr. Bowman travels through the atmosphere of Jupiter (Planet) and the transition of him, a man, into a Starchild, left me delirious for hours. I fear watching the sequence for the second time.
When Peter Sellers donned the character of the Dr. Strangelove (A cynic, war mongering ex-Nazi ), I felt a sense of hilarity in the overall absurdity of colonial tensions between nations and at the very cause of war. Seller calling “Mein fuhrer” to the US President and adding a Nazi salute adds charm to the overall content of the movie. This is one scene, I can never get enough of.
The reason why critics and the then general audiences mauled Kubrick and his movies makes me smirk, because, they are the priceless pieces of a greater art. Despite, being ratified as worthless crafts by audiences back then, his movies, over the time, gained the massive cult status and his characters remain alive still today; Alex DeLarge, Hal 9000, Lolita, Dr. Strangelove, you name’em.
His curious observation of the unseen and un-experimented subjects left us in awe; be it the subject of pedophilia in Lolita, ultra-futuristic theme of 2001: ASO or the taboo-ish jamboree of Illuminati groups, paganism and mass-orgy in Eyes Wide Shut. A perfectionist and constant improviser, Kubrick’s test with various genres, subject and time never failed him nor the audiences. A pioneer in many of cinematic achievements, he made his movies to quench his own discreet and sublime ideas and premises.
A film-maker who never managed to win a single Oscar (Best Director), for which he can be considered the Leonardo DiCaprio of the Directors, but I must admit, he was out of the league entirely. He managed to make movies equal in realism to Italian Neo-realist cinema and in glamour to big-budget Bad ASS Superhero flicks of Hollywood; his is a versatile craft very few film-makers can ever master (Other being Steven Speilberg and Coen Brothers).
An adamant director and a thrifty producer, he never made a bad movie. Every one of his movies, over his filmy lifespan of 48 years in which he managed to make only 13 motion pictures and 3 short movies with an average of 4 years in between his next release, are considered the masterpiece of modern cinema. Rarity of commercial themes and budgets were common traits of his modus oeprandi, yet he never failed to deliver a finest product on the table.
2001: ASO, Spartacus and Barry Lyndon are ranked among the epics of Hollywood’s ever produced. Dr. Strangelove, Lolita and A Clockwork orange are among the highly lauded and critically acclaimed movies ever.
1. Slow and protracted scenes
Scenes from his movie 2001: ASO lasted for more than 15 minutes; when Dr. Bowman is pulled into a tunnel of colored light and other cosmological Shits of Jupiter, and also when he deactivates HAL (Hal 9000) for its mischief, which were weirdly long and slow. The sedated scenes often became the major trademarks of Kubrick’s craft which were later followed in Barry Lyndon, A Clockwork Orange and The Shining.
Capturing the time and space of entirety of a particular sequence [2001: ASO] were followed religiously by Kubrick, for whom there were no cutting shorts. When a scene required to be long, he made them generously long.
2. Reverse tracking shots
After Hitchcock, Kubrick would be the one who popularized the dolly zoom method of tracking shots in the movies. The popular scenes from Paths of Glory tracking Col. Dax (Kirk Douglas) walking in the trenches, A Clockwork Orange tracking Alex Delarge (Malcom McDowell) walking around the London mall and Gny. Sgt. Hartman (R. Lee Ermey) and his recruits marching in Full Metal Jacket were all done using reverse tracking shots.
3. Subliminal messages
The Shining is probably most famous among audiences for the subliminal messages it purportedly tried delivering. The length of controversy of discreet messages went furor, even Rodney Ascher (Room 237) made a documentary film on it.
Lolita happened in the spring of 1962. An independent venture of Kubrick and James B. Harris, Lolita became the most controversial movie of the time. Their experiment with the sensitive subject of pedophilia and lust landed the movie in troubles with the censors. The British Board of Film Censors rated the movie ‘X’ therefore, barring the audience under the age of 16.
Despite, the comments it may have received from the then audience and the critics later, Lolita opened up a space for film-makers to make and promote movies as they pleased.
The year 1964 began with the release of Dr. Strangelove or…, a comic take on Cold War and the brewing hatred between two giants of the World; USA and Russia. Assimilating the great cast, creating life like sets and adapting a dark story of war and nuclear weapon into major motion picture was quite a tough task for Kubrick.
Peter Sellers as the Dr. Strangelove himself and his alien hand syndrome, along with addressing the US president with “Mein Führer,” stole the show entirely. The implications of the movie is to portray the dire consequences of brewing hatred among two nuclear powers of the world, along with a comic gesture on what could happen to the world if a nuclear war is to take place!
The most challenging and expensive venture of Kubrick has to be none other than 2001: A Space Odyssey. Made in 60s’, it explored a Science-fiction tale of how the world, mankind and Space would land up in the 21st Century. Kubrick employed the specialists from the fields of science and technology, Arts, Special Effects and Sounds to give his movie a real-life like experience.
From building a rocket capsule to creating a cosmological phenomena of an unseen Jupiter’s atmosphere, he mastered the craft of making stories that are far-sighted and thoughtful.
Most critics and audiences panned the movie when it was first released. Today, it’s a cult and is used in reference to every possible space exploration movies made post-2001: ASO.
The year 1971 ended with the horrors of Alex DeLarge‘s criminal past. As it happened, a controversial story of A Clockwork Orange established Kubrick as the film-maker who could make movies on any subject given, despite the level of visual intolerance it could render On-screen. Alex’s character portrays a sociopath; he glorifies rape, assault and loot. He’s an imagery of evil, yet the movie established him as a profound character of behavioral psychology and morality.
It’ was banned in UK for 27 years, following the controversy surrounding the violence occurred in the English society which were believed to be inspired by the movie.
Alex’s story was followed by the exploits of the 18th century Irish Adventurer in 1975, when the year ended with the Luck of Barry Lyndon. A movie of epic proportion, after Spartacus, Barry Lyndon explored the rise and fall of a hearty character –Barry Redmond, an Irishman who managed to experience the harshest treatments and sweetest pleasures the world has ever to offer.
3 hours long, the movie is considered one of the finest movies of Kubrick. Despite its rather slower and darker tone, the movie doesn’t fail to capture your attention and constant critical consensus. It’s a masterpiece!
Ryan O’Neal, donning a Victorian-aged suit with a curly blonde locks and quirky smile, shines throughout his adventures in the movie.
Professed as an Erotic-Thriller by the critics, Eyes Wide Shut took on the complex premise of Illuminati gathering and quasi-religious sexual rituals. Exploring the taboo subjects, Kubrick’s approach went towards showing how a regular family suddenly erodes because of the effects of unforced measures of relationships. Sexual fantasy, envy, dishonesty and boredom are its common themes.
Released few months after the death of its Kubrick, Eyes Wide Shut remained his final ever project which marked his 13th motion picture and end of his career.
The 400 Blows (1959) presents the then France as it was. The troubled life of Antoine is saddening yet witty and his troubles glorify the grandeur of French Cinema. An important movie of the French new wave.
Seeing the Paris of 50s’ is like watching a Cabaret with a glass of Chardonnay in one hand and Romeo y Juliet on the other. The black and white texture gives a stark contrast between the backdrop and the characters (The backdrop blends in with the scene and never once overshadows the forefront characters). The plots are simpler and the story is the simplest of them all. Can it be called a worthy contemporary of the Neo-realism? Well, Yes!
The 400 Blows explores the underlying ideas of post-war french society and its effects on the younger generation. Set in the 2nd half of 20th century, the time of greater inventions and sociopolitical improvements, the modus operandi is a clash between new and older France. Antoine Doinel (Jean–Pierre Léaud), the protagonist, carries the sole tiresome weight of the new wave cinema over his tiny shoulders throughout the movie. He, a figure of hope for every teenagers who have been struggling with their emotional tragedies and identity crisis, gives life to the troubled character of Antoine, a troublemaker.
François Truffaut’s (Director) approach has been to show the world his own younger life through a cinematic kaleidoscope. The movie may seem like the reflection of today’s world, because it’s about the everyday story of us. Other than the emotions and tragedy, he succeeded in adding some wit to the script, which could have been much more sadder than it’s generally seen.
To add further, The 400 Blows also belongs to an Escapist genre. The French New Wave it is, but it also carries the qualities of Escapist cinema. The protagonist and the very motive of the movie establish a point of escaping the brutal past, be it a personal troubled life or the scar left by the war. The then society is the very villain of the movie, and Antoine solely survives its wrath.
Post-WW II France, a nation formerly occupied and controlled by the Axis power, was built on an idea of escaping it’s horrendous past. To assimilate with the western nations, France introduced teaching English in their schools. Proper etiquette, better education and brighter future were as important the social issues back in France as they are now everywhere. The treatment of naivety was harsher with greater repercussions; nevertheless, the government believed that was the right way to improve its already ill-manifested denizens.
The inhumane approach of treating the culprit was well observed in the then France. Children for their delinquency were reprimanded and isolated. [In one scene of the movie, 3 girls, possibly younger than 10, are seen caged inside the detention center. Those young kids left alone by their parents for their just misdeed are treated with such rebuke that even the current treatments of the correctional facilities around the world may seem childish.]
French new wave took an initiative of showing everything that was wrong with France and its modus oprandi. It’s idealism were mere doctrines which badly needed to be updated. [There’s no way but to escape the horrendous brutality of the system, and escape is what the protagonist does. He escapes his tragic familial confinement, then he escapes from the juvenile detention home.]
The 400 Blows “Les Quatre cent coups” (1959)
Directed by François Truffaut, Written by F. Truffaut and Marcel Moussy, Produced by F. Truffaut and Georges Charlot, Starring: Jean-Pierre Léaud, Albert Rémy, Calire Maurier and others
Distributed by Cocinor
In form, “12 Angry Men” is a courtroom drama. In purpose, it’s a crash course in those passages of the Constitution that promise defendants a fair trial and the presumption of innocence. It has a kind of stark simplicity.
~Roger Ebert (Film Critic)
Sydney Lumet‘s maiden direction provides an important insight on analysis and questioning of the human conscience and bigotry, moreover why it should and shouldn’t accompany jurors during any case. A method with which a court announces the decision against any accused is supposedly the just moral duty the jury members must perform, as their ultimate decision has direct influence on someone’s life and death.
12 Angry Men doesn’t start with 12 men grudging. The question of reasoning and desire for justice raises an angst among them to become angrier. The exasperation starts from the warming temperature of the room, it convulses into hatred starting from biases, prejudice and carelessness, and finally subduing into a vex for a fairer trail.
A debate on a fairer judgement by the jury is the only theme of the movie. Solving the criminal case isn’t the motive but sending a young man to death is. The 12 men jury composed of unlike individuals in a compact room on a hottest day possible to reason over passing a verdict, where only one stands up for a fairer judgement and 11 other are recluse into their conformity of the accused’ guilt, is what 12 Angry Men is all about.
Juror #8 (Henry Fonda) is the one who champions the cause for accused’s innocence, and the whole movie follows the unabated debate to prove one man’s point as a reason for general consensus, hence saving someone’s life.
The assertive dialogues and the greater gesticulations of actors add life to the script, which could have been duller for full 95 minutes. Fonda’s immense persuasion and tense in bringing facts and possibilities into his arguments brings a general disapproval from fellow jurors, however, his presumptions help change the stubborn decisions of 11 others. Every evidence here is based on an assumption and every reasonable decision is made out of it!
Set in a single room the entire time, the movie shows nothing of the trail, court-room drama or duller arguments made by the attorneys but only the discussions of jurors before reaching the unanimous verdict. Evidences are shown only second-hand, as reasons for disposition of the case are thrown here and there to prove reasonable doubt for guilt. The background score is less yet subtle. The camera is centered on human emotions and facial expressions. None of the casts misses any important scene nor anyone of them lacks a powerful dialogue to support their character. The brilliant use of visual cues and camera angle adds subliminal elements to the movie which can only be felt in audience’s subconscious. Lumet’s unorthodox treatment of a sensitive subject on-screen comes out to be alive and amazing.
Not Guilty – 1/11
Not Guilty – 2/10
Not Guilty – 3/9
Not Guilty – 4/8
Not Guilty – 5/7
Not Guilty – 6/6
Not Guilty – 7/5
Not Guilty – 8/4
Not Guilty – 9/3
Not Guilty – 10/2
Not Guilty – 11/1
Not Guilty – 12/0
The jurors’ argument covers presumption of innocence and persuasions. Reasonable doubt is the burning factor among the few jurors, enlarged and popularized by only Juror # 8 to provide a fair judgement from fairer -supposed to be, jurors. If all the 12 jurors, based on their personal biases and prejudice without reasoning or fact finding, declare the case against the accused, the young boy will face capital pubishment. Juror #8 never confirms that the boy is guilty or not nor does he confirms his facts, his presumptions are all based on a reason for factual premise of the evidences and witnesses provided, therefore, his matter of persuasion among other 11 jurors is to look into things more tactfully and not judge the matter in a flick of second.
Logical reasons and Persuasions are all it takes for one person to correct the misconceptions of other. Persuasion is what Juror #8 uses to make other jurors to not decide on a whim, more importantly not on what they’ve heard and saw on the court but personal assurance of what could be correct and what couldn’t.
The tension’s born out of personal differences, personality conflict and body languages. As jurors find more reasons for the accused not being guilty, they channel their anger against personal biases and prejudice. At the end, the justice is served! All thanks to the value of reasoning and persuasion that helped change the 11 jury members’ conceited ideologies into a fairer and unanimous verdict.
12 Angry Men (1957)
Directed by Sydney Lumet, Written by Reginald Rose, Produced by Henry Fonda, Reginald Rose, Starring: Henry Fonda, Lee J. Cobb, E.G. Marshall, Martim Balsam and others
Distributed by United Artists
As mentioned in the title itself, I shall only and only be talking about the character of Cate Blanchett in her 2013 movie, Blue Jasmine (Dir. Woody Allen). Following the uproar of audiences and critics regarding Woody’s new movie’s vast similarity to Tennessee William‘s novel and her character Blanche Dubois, I’ve considered comparing the two leads.
(Blue) Jasmine or Jeanette Francis was an adopted child spoiled by her parents since her early age. Raised in a homely environment, she grew up to be successful than her sister Ginger (also adopted) in finding a better (richer) husband and uptown life. She loves the song BLUE MOON by The Lorenz Hart-Richard Rodgers, which she keeps relating to a moment she spent with Hal when they first dated. Dropped out of the final year in the college, she marries a business tycoon, Hal, and lives a lavish life in her Park Avenue home, sometimes, Hampton; often touring Europe, sailing, cruising and shopping in Manhattan and Monte Carlo, before being busted for Hal’s financial scams, and later being bankrupted.
On her last legs, Jasmine’s left poor. She moves into Ginger’s place in San Francisco and tries her luck being an independent woman. She has a fine taste for men and hooks up with this rich yet loving widower, Dwight, while lying about her past. She’s abruptly dumped by Dwight after finding out the truth. In despair and delusion, she walks out of Ginger’s home only to find her place on the streets, contemplating on her misdeeds yet being nostalgic and remembering the song Blue Moon.
Here are some of the major contrasting difference I find in Jasmine and Blanche. Jasmine (nee. Jeanette) is a delusional, pretentious, alcoholic, pill-popping and nervous-wreck protagonist of Woody Allen’s movie –Blue Jasmine (2013), whereas, Blanche DuBois is a delusional, pretentious, alcoholic and nervous-wreck protagonist of Tennessee William’s book –A Streetcar named Desire (1947). Blanche’s left a mad woman at the end, whereas, Jasmine’s left with a broken soul. Blanche’s unable to connect with reality, whereas, Jasmine’s living in a surreal spectrum. Blanche’s searching for a companion and a shoulder to cry on, whereas, Jasmine’s looking for a rich guy who can give her Golden days back. Jasmine talks to herself or create a imaginary audience to talk to when being alone, Blanche seems non-interacting with herself but keeping her thoughts to herself often debating with herself inside her mind. Blanche’s afraid of her fading beauty, while, Jasmine is content with her long-lasting youth.
Some major similarities are; the pretentious parade of Status Quo never leaves any of them, while both are often haunted by their pasts. Hailing from the South, both of them spend most of their time drinking and being delusional.
Jasmine as well as Blanche demands for pity and greater sympathy from the audience. Both are lost souls.
In Reel Life
Jasmine is a strong-willed woman and she does what is required from her to get back on her knees, whereas, Blanche strikes as a low self-esteemed, self-assuring and a non-competing woman. Jasmine’s a modern day Blanche with a striking personality and a bag of Chanel.
Jasmine enters the screen with her Southern charm and wit. Despite her bankruptcy, she flies first class. She carries this panache of royalty that even her sister, who has known her the entire life, is amused by her presence. Wrecked by her former marriage, damaged personality and financial loss, she finds her recluse in her pills; anti-depressant and anti-stress.
She can’t find a proper job nor complete her studies. More often, she’s lost in the state of delusions; talking to herself on the middle of the street and staring at blank spaces. She despises having an affair with least-charming or least-rich men.
She’s the only reason why her husband went to jail and died, the only reason why her step-son left home and started a meager life in a record shop, and the only reason why she couldn’t find a better life post-conviction, failing miserably in everything else she tries her hand in, except spending money and posing.
She’s glorifies a disillusioned persona who can’t keep up with the reality; can’t accept life as it is and abandons every important relationships one can ever enjoy in life. Narcissist by nature and highly pretentious, she loses everything she ever owned, except her Chanel bag and set of posh couture.
By the end of the movie, Jasmine is nothing more than a pill-popping hobo in the state of trance and a zombie sitting alone on the street waiting for something unreachable.
I have a soft spot for people like Jasmine. I disdain them yet feel a regret for witnessing a sad period of their life. May she had made gazillions of mistakes, she’s now a woman in distress and a lone survivor. She got what she’s supposed to get, therefore, she deserves my sympathy.
This is how Vanity Fair puts Blue Jasmine:
“Woody Allen’s Blue Jasmine Is Perhaps His Cruelest-Ever Film.”
Blue Jasmine (2013)
Directed & Written by Woody Allen, Produced by Letty Aronson, Stephen Tenenbaum and Edward Walson, Starring: Cate Blanchett, Alec Baldwin, C.K. Louis, Sally Hawking, Bobby Cannavale, Andrew Dice Clay, Peter Saarsgard and others
Distributed by Sony Pictures Classics
His movies are famous for their violence and bloodshed; their blaring soundtracks; their offbeat, Pinteresque dialogue; their startling performances from actors you had almost forgotten about.
Quentin Tarantino‘s movies are mostly made up of nonlinear narratives. His movies are subject to Glorification of violence. His subjects are revenge and justice, which are indifferent from many other filmmaker’s subjects, however, what he can make out of it can completely be different in projection from the others. He’s inspired by movies from different genres made in the past, he brings old elements in his own story and mash’em up into a single theme containing of a justice seeking protagonist. He’s an amazing collaborator and a magnificent music connoisseur —picking background scores himself for his evenly eclectic scenes from the movies.
Tarantino’s repetitive and very much predictable, yet his craftsmanship is on a level of a such class that he can always get away with it by creating a niche piece of thoughtful movie that can cache on his superb direction and trademarks.
Starting from Reservoir Dogs to Django Unchained, his movies experienced a gradual development in story telling. His characters grew up and so did his film-making ability. He leaped from only telling an amazing story through nonlinear narratives and his Trademarked elements to more of a conventional narratives with his Trademarked elements still intact and flourishing.
The Tarantino we know today is different from the Tarantino that existed 10-15 years ago. His craft haven’t changed much and he still carries the same panache as before. His movies still follow similar story line; Loss, trail, retribution and revenge, however, his ability as a film-maker has grown to even wider and unimaginable horizons and he can now implore things that were rarely seen in his previous movies. We all know him best for his rougher cut movies, now they are more fine cut and well-tuned.
Grindhouse is the most commercial theme of Tarantino’s movies. He creates an unimaginable concoction of Grindhouse with spaghetti western and slasher. Now, slashing always has a greater purpose in his movies. Beatrice Kiddo couldn’t have gone away without slicing, dicing and chopping her enemies nor Sin City could have even more brutal without it.
There are many ways of torturing a character in Tarantino’s universe, you can either shoot them with a shotgun from a close range, cut off their limbs with a Ninja sword or just pluck out their eyes so they can’t see again their entire life. He can bring out the aesthetics and beauty of action well contrasted with the backdrop of the scenes; be it machine gun shooting Nazi occupied Germany, the Antebellum era with black slaves plucking out cotton or the fast food joint at Los Angeles.
“Music sets your soul free.” Sure it does! He has a rare quality of picking unconventional sound for the very right scene. Isn’t it weird to hear a Jazz playing in the background when Django’s busy killing his enemies in a White supremacist South? That’s very unconventional.
1. Blood Spillage
Tarantino pleasures blood. Blood plays a significant role in his movies. A movie without fountain of blood spouting out of someone recently sliced arm is non existent in his world. The gushing out of red fluid from a human body describes the occurrence of two things, either the crime has been committed or the justice has been served.
The malevolent practice of glamorizing blood spillage defines Tarantino’s style of brutality.
Tarantino loves massacre. The protagonist’s lust for killing and finding the way through to accomplish the mission is what drives the entire movie. It won’t start until the protagonist kill his first victim and move on through the large crowd of dead before killing the only person that matters.
Homicide has a greater purpose of retribution for Tarantino and his characters. Killing is a need but pleasure. Antagonists in his movies are surrounded and covered by numerous henchmen or bodyguards, taking them off before killing the antagonist is essential because; to ensure nobody comes around from the back and stab you while your on the verge of your mission and to minimize the chance of leaving behind a potential nemesis.
3. Triumph of Truth and Justice
Tarantino supports the very idea of Truth and Justice. Audience may find his movie violent and all gore but that doesn’t mean the theme of it’s all about killing people. The greater idea is always the triumph of truth and justice through retribution. A protagonist always finds a way to seek justice, in the case of Tarantino’s movies they only find it after quenching their thirst for revenge by killing every man on sight that differs with them.
It’s has never been a case when an antagonist has gotten away from the final scene without getting what he deserves. Beatrice Kiddo manages to kill Bill at the end and quench her revenge, so does Lt. Aldo Raine, he carves a SWASTIKA over Landa’s forehead to remind him of his wrongdoing for all his remaining life, and Django avenging the brutal torture he and his family suffered from the Slave owners and their henchmen.
At the end, Justice is always served. May the degree of treating a crime differ from many conventional films or what’s defined by the Standard Law, the ultimate reason for which justice stands is always served at the end.
(Best Tarantino’s movies, listed #9 to #1)
Jackie brown (1997)
Death Proof (2007)
True Romance (1993)
Sin City (2005)
Reservoir Dogs (1992)
Django Unchained (2012)
Pulp Fiction (1994)
Inglorious Basterds (2010)
Kill Bill (2004)
The compulsion to seek sexual gratification by secretively looking at sexual objects or acts; the actions of a Peeping Tom.
Voyeurism gratifies sexual arousal, so does the Pornography! The concept of pornography is described by the ideas of taking sensual learning to the next level, so does Voyeurism!
Voyeurs are motivated by the curiosity of experiencing moments that generate sexual gratification, sensual pleasures or answer simple queries on ‘anatomy’. Peeping through a window or a key hole, setting up a discreet camera in a room or watching from inside the cupboard, are few prime voyeuristic acts that we know of, and couldn’t deny of not doing at least once a lifetime.
One major similarity between these two is that we don’t watch Porn in public neither do we voyeur around in front of others. Both are a covert mission operated at own risk. These days, with the advent of digital entertainment; TV, Internet and Cell phones, and quicker access to information, the whole hubbub of enjoying porn has been much easier, so has been the act of hiding oneself in a corner and exploring the world of sexual fantasies which we once enjoyed through a key hole.
Many nations do consider voyeurism to be a grave crime. Though the rules and the treatment of the crime may differ, societies have never denied referring it as an impious act, a treachery and a greater guilt. Catholic Churches, since their inception, managed to define and accommodate voyeurism in their philosophies, called: common sins committed by men. According to the church, it as a heinous act of criminality; act against God’s teachings, for which one must be punished for grave sins they committed. The consideration of declaring it an act against God’s teaching has made a permanent place in their theory.
My point, we are a curious beings, we learn from our experiences, we sought knowledge on the subjects we are not known of, be it carnal. Considering the facts, can voyeurism be ever stopped? Even discouraged, can anyone really control themselves from not assaulting others’ privacy, one way or the other? May we describe it as an immoral act for which one must be punished, the weight of intentionally denying the opportunity of learning what one always have been curious about can not be dismissed, therefore, voyeurism as well as pornography can never be considered crime. Let us be humans and learn from our own faults, shall we?
It cannot be called a crime for motivating a crime, thought it can be described as a “reason for the crime” in a court, does it make a greater guilt for an accused to be banished from the society?
An over-exposed cleavage of a busty woman or her bulging bottoms undoubtedly arouses sexual desires in many straight males, or lesbians. Now, can her attire or fashion sense be charged for a criminal offence? May it inculcate a reason for crime, but will defining it morally or ethically wrong and banishing it from her closet serves a greater justice? Will voyeurism stop? BTW, it shall sure reap a woman from her right to clothing.
The more we discuss about it, the more complex it tend to be. Some Experts suggest that pornography can be used for treating Voyeurism. My Question, can a digital form of voyeurism help eliminate a physical voyeurism in any way? I personally don’t think so! Will this work for juveniles, whose instance for voyeurism exceeds that of an adult; to whom the moral policies of a society is hard to apply?
We all are a “Peeping Tom.” Pornography and voyeurism go hand in hand, and one defines other, but are they motive for crime?
Based on a socialist theme in an Agrarian society of Western Gujarat, Mother India (1957) accounts lives of countless Indian women who were and still are bound by their Indian values and beliefs, and are forced to advocate the greater cause of personal sacrifices for others.
Cultivating in the backyard of rural India, the aesthetic value of the movie largely remains of portraying the meager lives of poor citizens of newly formed nation. It emphasizes on the idea of building a greater nation through hard work, implementation of traditional values and establishing agricultural industries in every corner of the nation. Other associated ideas of the movie are; championing the cause for equal opportunities, importance of education, female prowess and fair loaning policy in the villages.
Marking the 10th anniversary of the Independence of India, the movie materializes the idea of portraying greater patriotism, struggle, social accomplishment and advancement of woman’s role in the society in through theatrical gesture. Mehboob Khan channelized a great deal of effort to bring his niche art among the audience. As opposed to Katherine Mayo’s book “Mother India,” which primarily criticized Indian culture and the role of women in the society, Khan made his movie with the exact title of Mayo’s book to juxtapose with the contrasting theories presented by her —to deliver a message, despite our roots in social modus operandi which is seen as primitive in nature, the nation isn’t unfamiliar with the changing concepts of society.
Critically acclaimed and awarded with countless accolades, Mother India stands out among the greatest movies ever made in Indian cinema history. The Khan’s most ambitious project and Nargis’s most challenging character portrayal of her time, it is still remembered and applauded by critics and audiences alike.
The greater idea was to bring India into the attention of the world. To inform the citizens of the world about the newly formed yet independent nation. It demanded India’s share of respect and position among the elitist of the nations. Inspired by the Italian Neo-realism cinema of Europe, Mother India applied similar aesthetics and nature of capturing a developing nation. It’s known to have run in theaters for more than 4 decades. Film-makers, audiences and several key social stakeholders still look up to it for greater examples of cinematic and artistic triumphs and social struggle and patriotism.
Immediately after the independence, the first Prime Minister of India, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, administered his iconic idea of socialism and human resource empowerment for build and organizing the petty Indian states and its people into a strong nation of like-minded citizens. The very idea of “Aam Admi” championed by Nehru was to facilitate equal priority to every citizen of the nation. A country where more than 80% of people were farmers by occupation, a socialist theme of governance was essential to build the initial steps for future development. India, today, runs through liberal and capitalist yet meager socialist practices, however, the initial ideas were developed from Nehru’s socialist inputs. The Movie, as well as Nehru, championed the cause of developing a new nation through initiation of agricultural enterprises and equal participation of working class citizens. With ever present male-dominance in the society, mass poverty and unfair loaning and lending system, the need of resurrecting an imagery of a God like and ferocious woman was essential. The male class was corrupt and polluted. Women were always known for being the ultimate Sacrificer, Caregiver and Nurturer in the Hindu society, therefore feeding the idea of representing a woman as the protagonist of the movie was challenging yet overtly ambitious.
Nargis Dutt, the protagonist of Mother India, portrayed a role of a Mother (Radha) in both metaphor and metamorphic manner. She bears a patriotic emblem of her nation. Her righteous deeds throughout the span of movie; raising children during difficult times, disapproving of selling herself off for money and the ultimate decision of taking life of her beloved son to protect woman’s chastity and values, makes her an ultimate Hero, a figurine of bravado. Her portrayal of an Indian woman opposes every bit of the theory opined by Mayo.
Media Vision has recently published an Infographic showing the timeline of changing facets of Social Media, from 2004-2014. The advent of internet has led to a boom of digital marketing. A lack of presence in the internet is considered a sign of illiteracy by digital marketers and internet pundits.
Social Media, a social hub for exchanging information in return of good referrals, has been the buzz since the innovation of digital marketing. An intelligent approach to manage social media can create a brand awareness among many online customers. From a targeted Fb post to a 140 character led tweet, social media awareness can be a pivotal step in redefining business goals.
British left India in 1947. The dawn of August 14 saw the creation of a new nation, Pakistan, and the midnight of August 15 welcomed an independent nation, India. What follows these grand events is a sad tale of inhumanity, ingenuity and violence on the both sides of the border.
Based on Bapsi Sidhwa‘s novel “Cracking India,” Earth explores the lives of the greater inhabitants of Lahore during and after the partition of 1947. Shown from the perspective of an 8 years old Parsi girl, it makes a contrasting analysis of lives before and after the partition.
Lenny Sethna or Lenny baby is a polio stricken 8 years old Parsi girl residing in the Lahore (In Pakistan) region of British India. Her everyday life revolves around her nanny Shanta, a Hindu woman, staffs of her house and the friends of Shanta; Dil Nawaz, Hassan and others. Her parents are well-known and respected in the society and they are known throughout the events for remaining neutral between the brawl of Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs.
In span of few months, Britishers leave the unruly subcontinent to the ill-prepared and zealous statesmen. The insurgence of equal share in running the nation by Hindus and Muslims creates a rift among the community, working class men and political parties. The removal of British insignia creates a communal tension between the Muslims and Hindus. As a result, the entire northwestern and eastern regions are demarcated from the modern day India, hence, giving birth to Pakistan. What follows is communal tension, bashful pride, malevolence, hatred and massacre.
Hassan is the protagonist, so are Shanta and Lenny baby, while Dil Nawaz is the antihero or primarily the antagonist of the story.
Dil Nawaz’s sisters migrating from the Gurdaspur region of India are massacred by the Sikhs. In fit of rage, Dil looses his temper and turns into a killer. A once charming, non-violent and reasonable man is now a bloodthirsty war-mongering brat, killing everyone who tend to differ. In fit of jealousy, he kills his own friend, Hassan, the Sikh members and assist in raping the love of his life, Shanta.
Lenny baby is still young to make anything of the events. Still naive in reasoning, she partakes in the defeat of Shanta, her nanny. The ripple effect of violence and ethnic cleansing manages to swipe entire regions near Pakistan and Indian border, hence, killing millions.
Deepa Mehta’s approach in adopting the story by Sidhwa is to take on the darker side of modern civilization. Though, based on a micro scale of interpreting lives of a small community of Lahore, the subject overwhelmingly grabs the toll of violent outtakes occurred during and after the partition.
Religion and demographic dominance of Muslims over Hindus and Sikhs in Lahore culminates into massacre of innocents. The inhabitants are forced to leave town and migrate to Hindu-majority state of India, and so do the Muslims from the neighboring India to Pakistan.
Once friends, the people turn against each other and kill for the sake of religion. What British left behind becomes the reason for war and autocracy.
It also sheds light on the fact that the ruination of greater India wasn’t because of British but the selfish reasons of fellow countrymen. The want for a separate nation and bureaucratic privileges created a reason for the breakage of greater India. The trickery of politicians and selfishness over patriotism/nationalism was the precursor of the partition. The takers took the power and fame while the poor and insignificant class of society suffered the major losses. The two nations turned foes.
Following the success of Fire (1996), Mehta gave a similar expression of unconventional take on the subject matters for films. Packed with some subtle performances and linear story-line, Earth is an example of greater film-making.
Dil Nawaz is an antihero. A once suave, reasonable and delectable man turned into a war-mongering citizen. Grown with an astute belief of non-violence, love, cooperation and joy, Nawaz shines as a messiah till the first half of the movie. He puts a smokey mascara, Soorma, and dons a Taqiyah.
He loves Shanta but Shanta loves his friend Hassan. He catches them making love. The added tragedy of the rape and brutal murder of his sisters arriving to Pakistan from India after the partition enrages his fury and drives him into madness. Out of jealousy and revenge, he avenges the death of his siblings by killing innocent people of other sects. He even kills his friend, Hassan, and assists in raping Shanta.
He’s quite a reasonable man. He brings smiles by quoting his romantic couplets and selling delicious ice-cream, however, the turn of the eventscreates a villain out of him.
The portrayal of Dil Nawaz by Aamir Khan (Actor) is immensely likable. He can charm the audiences with his wit and also grow hatred in them with his volatile attitude. His prolonging silence, deafening stares, mute between the dialogues, innocent looking face, slightly hunched posture and grim and tenacious gesture gives life to the character of Dil Nawaz. His demeanor of betraying and relishing the violence adds a multifaceted and multidimensional qualities to his overalls.
All in all, Aamir shines in the entire movie.
Directed by Deepa Mehta, Written by Deepa Mehta and Bapsi Sidhwa, Produced by Anne Mason and Deepa Mehta, Starring: Aamir Khan, Nandita Das, Rahul Khanna, Maia Sethna and others