From: mece1e3@Jane.UH.EDU (Arindam Ghosh)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: Sholay was original...not!
Date: 31 Jul 92 15:31:06 GMT
Reply-To: mece1e3@Jane.UH.EDU
Organization: University of Houston

In article <31JUL199210524695@vax2.concordia.ca>, debchat@vax2.concordia.ca (DEB CHATTERJEE) writes:
>
> Dear Arindam:
>
>  I am only `picking' up the portion(s) of your statement here.
>
>In article <1992Jul30.044538.3150@menudo.uh.edu>, mece1e3@Jane.UH.EDU writes...
>>........ (stuff deleted) ....... 
>>In spite of being a fanatic art film lover and commercial film hater I must
>                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^     ?????????????????????
>                         (O.K !!)                     (Why ???)
>
For that first you have to define art film and commercial film.
art film: films created as an way of expressing the director's own self.
Can be full of entertainment value.
commercial film: films created for making money only. Can be full of art
value.
I consider the second class of films as prostitution of arts and they are
not acceptable to me. Note that this is a personal choice.
>>say Sholay had a magic of its own. As Satyajit Ray said in "Our films their
>>films": I cannot think of making a movie with eight songs .........
>         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>          This is the major reason why Satyajit Ray's films have never produced
>          box-office hits. 
You are wrong. Most of his films were quite a hit in Bengal--not blockbusters
but good enough; Ray never neglected the entertainment value unlike some other
film makers. However he did not compromise his principles just to make money.

>>Arindam
>
> IMHO, your comment on films is really surprising ! Not that I hate art-films.
> But, you are a real sick case.
Aren't you going a bit too much as this is a matter of choice. I don't believe
in bans like you and am not going to ban commercial movies.

 Strangely enough, Seven Samurai, directed by
> Kurosawa, remains one of the masterpieces of film history.

Yes of course. He created the movie to express himself not to make $s


> If you go thru'
> Pauline Kael's comments in " I lost it in the movies ", you will come across
> the remark that Kurosawa made the movie for commercial success. BTW, arrogance 
> of Ray is admissable, but, not acceptable. 
Not acceptable to whom? All artists are by definition arrogants. Whether you
accept or not matters little.

> In fact, if Ramesh Sippy had not copied Sholay fro Mag. Seven, and R.D.Burman
> had not copied from Zorba the Greek and the fantsatic belly-dancing of Helen -
> that probably descended upon us from our Moslem conquerors :-), then Bombay
> film industry would be begging on the streets of Chowpatty.
I don't care about the Bombay film industry; so how does it matter to me.

> There has been too
> much copying from Western sources. I am not debating god or bad of it. 

You are thoroughly confused. Copying with proper credits is acceptable in all
arts. I think the most of the problem comes when music directors like Bappi
Lahiri keep on claiming that the scores are his original.

>Just for
> your reminder: Tagore's " Purano sei diner kotha ... " is a DITTO copy from an
> Irish song, and, Yeats helped him with it. This does not undermine Tagore. IMO
> I remain grateful to him for enriching our culture. 
>

> Moreover, elitist attitudes such as yours, amongst actors have often lead them
> to remain isloated.
So? It's one's choice to remain isolated.
> Robert de Niro - the Goodfellas/ Untouchables etc. guy is a
> superb actor in art films like Brazil. Thus, here (West) an actor is just 
> taught to act in terms of money. 

 I don't think the West is the be-all and end-all of civilization

>He does not necessarily bring his ego into the
> whole matter. A director who makes garbage (full of lies) like " Indiana Jones
> and Temple of Doom ",  may also make very good art films. While I would ban the
> garbage, I would patronize the art films he made.
>
I won't ban anything. That's your problem: you can think of the world only in
terms of imposing your choice on other people.

> FYI, I see both art films and commerical films.
>
I do too; that doesn't mean I have to support both.

> Your elitist attitude is really unfortunate. 
What is unfortunate is your attitude of banning whatever you don't like

>
> - deb chatterjee
>(A GOOD SAMARITAN)
Deb, think before you write anything
Arindam
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian