‘Doctor G’ — A problematic film whose activism gets superseded by its glorification of the toxic ragging culture

A logical fallacy used by film critics and some fans in India is that if a film deals with a social message or a serious subject, it is a good film. No questions asked. Everybody is supposed to accept this mandate; if you do not accept this, then you are a bad person, you have a low I.Q. End of discussion. 

A common trait amongst many Ayshmann Khurrana’s films (with notable exceptions like Andhadhun, Gulabo  Sitabo, Article 15 etc.) is that they lack director’s identity. If you removed the director’s name from films like Badhai Ho, Shubh Mangal Saavdhan, Shubh Mangal Zyada Saavdhan, Chandigarh Kare Aashiqui etc., you would not be able to tell who directed which film; although all of them have a different director, yet they look to be directed by same person. For this reason Bala was a great Ayushmann Khurrana film because, despite having the usual successful elements, it had a strong directorial presence.

© Junglee Pictures

The trouble with Doctor G is that other than being overly run-of-the-mill it tries to be didactic on too many subjects. If it were as funny as the aforementioned films of his, it would be acceptable. This is, however, a deeply problematic film. For a film that champions a few good causes, it condones and glorifies the toxic culture of ragging. This shameless hypocrisy alone nullifies and cheapens the outcome. There is no glory in ragging. No matter who does it, it is toxic. No human being deserves to go through such degradation. If the character were ragged in a different country, it would have been called racism and there would be serious discussions but since the bigotry takes place here itself, we are told that it is acceptable. Some people argue that ragging culture is there to toughen people up. Do racism, sexual harassment, domestic violence, discrimination toughen people? Even if they may, it does not that give perpetrators the right to commit those heinous acts.

Doctor G tries to champion too many issues starting from the embarrassment of a male gynaecologist, complicated relationships, gender equality, a mother’s desire to have her own life, statutory rape and so forth. Thankfully Doctor G is only two hours long, otherwise it would have lectured on drug addiction, illegal mining, human trafficking, unemployment and other problems faced by the ordinary world. The only comedy you see was there in the trailer. Eventually it becomes distasteful and patronising, as if you were tied on your chair, with your mouth taped, and forced to listen to their sermons. 

The film's endorsement of so-called complicated relationships is no better. The complicated relationships suit teenage or immature relationships, but mature adults, doctors in their twenties and thirties pretending to be in complicated relationships look idiots. 

Success can make people defensive. Ironically for someone like Ayushmann Khurrana, who was known to do bold subjects and deviate from successful formulas, he is now trapped in his own image. Since the pandemic, his popularity has taken a nosedive. It is time for him to get out of the treadmill of social messages and surrender himself to his directors with a vision, instead of clueless yuppies and dissemblers.

I would like to make it clear that I do not intend to condemn the idea of addressing social issues through cinema, but it ought be done in a tasteful manner. Not every film has to be meant for entertainment but at the same time it does not mean that every film has to be didactic, sombre or devoid of entertainment. The very point of cinema is to tell stories, different types of stories in different ways. I watch a film to be entertained or to be told a story, I do not pay money to be lectured by the billionaire studio executives.

Short Attention Span Is Not A Virtue

Somehow somewhere a decade ago the word got out that short attention span was “in”. It was the Change, the new-world trend that everybody had to embrace to stay relevant. Around that time came an advertisement that ascribed impatience to great discoveries. It stoked the highly flawed prevailing premise that attention deficiency was the key to success. That was exactly what the Pressure Group needed.

Cut to the present, the Short Attention Span Movement has only become stronger. It is “cool”, highbrow and relatable. It’s the Zeitgeist. Fragmented attention is a sign of intelligence, a trait of genius, a core attribute of extroversion—which in turn is the hallmark of personality development—and a necessity for survival.

With the rise of the Chinese invention TikTok, attention spans have got shorter. What was acceptable to last for an hour or a few minutes, is now truncated to a few seconds. Intellectuals have touted TikTok as the theory of everything: an answer to all questions; a one-size-fits-all solution to our intellectual needs. There are absurd comparisons drawn between YouTube and TikTok when they are as diverse as chalk and cheese. As per the prophecies of social trend influencers, TikTok will replace Netflix, Youtube, cinema, books, e-books, original music, Twitter,  Instagram, WhatsApp, video-games, Amazon; and perhaps supermarkets and furniture in future. Long attention spans are passé.

Such utter codswallop. The sophistry goes on, built on circular arguments and distortion of facts, much like the Newspeak in George Orwell’s 1984.

The ability to focus is one of the most important skills a person can have. Focus is a key aspect in nearly all areas of life. To learn new skills you need focus. A surgeon cannot perform a six-hour surgery with fragmented attention. Moreover, the notion that impatience leads to discoveries is a blatant fallacy. Impatience doesn’t invent vaccinations; there’s a thoroughly rigorous process behind it, which wouldn’t be possible with haste. Inspiration and epiphanies may seem to be sudden but even they won’t appear with impatience. Short attention span is not a virtue. It’s not “hip” or “cool” as purported by Trend Influencers and Pressure Groups.

The hypocrisy—and irony—of this movement is that despite the tall claims made about saving time by shortening people’s attention spans, people are in fact spending more time on social media. It’s fragmented attention, in short spells of time, but the cumulative time is way more than what it was in the early years of social media. Earlier most people would check social media once a day or week but now it’s nearly continuous; the bell icons (notifications) have increased the time consumption. The feature of “likes” has added to the usage with people coming back obsessively, even after minutes of posting, to check the number of likes. How does that save time?

In the same manner, those who gloat about not watching “long” movies spend way more time binge-watching, in their pyjamas without eating or going to toilet, single-story TV shows which are cleverly divided into several episodes, but the time spent on a binge-watching session is way more than that on a movie, even long ones like The Godfather, The Irishman or Lagaan. Yet again, the notion of saving time is misguided. The time expended on social networks or binge-watching television series is way more than The Irishman’s duration. 

Anurag Kashyap’s Next to Stream on TikTok

Keeping abreast with the break-neck, cut-throat modern times, the maverick film-maker Anurag Kashyap’s next will be streamed on TikTok. It will be a saga of 15 episodes, with each episode clocking at 30 seconds. He admitted that he got a little carried away due to his bad habits from the times of Gangs of Wasseypur and before, but assured that he’d keep the length in check in his future films.

“This will bring the industry and cinema owners on their knees. This is the victory of Content. Nothing can stop us now,” snarled Anurag Kashyap.

“Like T10, T20 cricket, TikTok is the future. Nobody has the patience to sit through movies or even TV series. Life is too short to be wasted on books and films, but it’s okay to spend tens of hours every day on TikTok,” proclaimed an over-enthusiastic fan on TikTok at a headlong speed of disclaimers announced in mutual funds ads.

“Maths didn’t help Einstein discover gravity,” another rabid fan wrote on Twitter, conveniently ignoring that it was Issac Newton who had discovered gravity or for that matter the topic had nothing to do with mathematics.

As Anurag Kashyap predicted years ago that people would create high content on their own platforms. TikTok has made the dream come true with mini movies coming from every nook and corner of the country.

Rappers to do Cricket Commentary in England

If inferiority complex were a competition, England Cricket Board, also known as Rebuilding In Perpetuity, will win hands down. Even though The Hundred—a new format of cricket sired by England—hasn’t met with an eager anticipation from cricket lovers in the UK, England Cricket Board are leaving no stone unturned in keeping the game bustling with more and more formats to “save” cricket. They have another format in the pipeline called Fast Five or F5.

The paranoid director of England Cricket Board has revealed that the plan is to get “mums and Chavs” interested in the game by introducing more audience-friendly formats. Fast Five will be a five-over format. The LBW law will be abolished for the sake of simplicity, as cricket is very complicated for common people. Commentators will make way for rappers to modernise the game and make it more relatable. They will use swear words, drug references for the sake of realism, as this is how normal people talk in everyday life. Umpires will wear Capri pants, gold chains and oversized baseball caps with the blessings of pimps and gangstas.

If that doesn’t work, they have plans for another format: Double O. It will be a zero-over format which will absolve cricket of its time-honoured sin of extreme long length.

“People complain that cricket is too long,” whined Methodius Head, the director of English Cricket Board Rebuilding In Perpetuity. “What do you say now? We will be quicker than hockey, football and a two-pump chump.”

My New Blog On The 1990s Indian Television

It may seem difficult to believe that Indian television was quite good before 2000. But it is true. In fact, the decade of 1990s was the golden era of Indian television. Unlike the West, there’s not much documentation of the programmes of that time. I have taken it upon myself to chronicle and reminisce the great era. There are many stories to tell, episode and cast lists to be complied of select programmes; therefore, I have started a new blog specifically for the 1990s Indian television. I first wanted to do it here but I reckoned it would be best to keep it separate.

NinetiesTV.blogspot.com

Twilight Daylights will continue along with Nineties Daylights. The link to the new blog can also be found in my profile. Let the 90s roll again.

Corona Virus Called As God’s Revenge On Extroverts

Extroverts blamed for COVID-19

The Internet is inundated with a viral video of a congregation of extroverts at an underground party during the time of lock-down. Media is blaming extroverts for COVID-19 potentially going out of control. While others are blaming the entire extrovert community for not condemning the reckless action of the culprits.

“Why aren’t extroverted film actors not speaking against the extrovert community? Is extroversion really a lifestyle of peace?” shouted a news anchor, in a sentiment echoed by several introverts.

A YouTube commenter and part-time Godman has held extroverts and travelling culture responsible for the very existence of the deadly virus: “COVID-19 is God’s revenge on us for extroversion and hyper globalisation. Life used to be simple ten years ago but this culture of extreme travelling has disrupted the nature. Now everybody wants to travel everywhere. The bloody globe-trotters should be quarantined for life. God’s message is obvious: keep social distance, stay indoors and give up travelling. It’s poetic justice.

“Travelling itself is the most clichéd hobby. Travelling zealots not spread viruses through unnecessary travelling but show-off their experiences on social media, often amplifying them, which puts pressure on their peers to do the same. They make common people feel bad about their lives.”

A Godman of Yuppies named Anurag Kashyap has blamed love for the pandemic: “Love is a useless and outdated concept. The viral outbreak is Mother Nature’s revenge for the romantic cinema of Imtiaz Ali and Aditya Chopra. Modern audience are too smart and pragmatic to indulge in expressions of love and affection. Cuddling, hugs and kisses should be outlawed as well. It’s obvious that Mother Nature doesn’t want us to love one another. That’s why we have to follow social distance protocol. Hate is much safer than that.”


Netflix uploads Pandemic

Netflix cares for us. As the world is struggling with COVID-19 amidst this uncertain time of disquiet, financial stress, lack of human touch and separation from loved ones, Netflix is doing its bit for the global community. Lest you find yourselves getting distracted from the pandemic, in the event you discover moments of relief, for fear that you may feel good for some time, Netflix is uploading movies related to pandemics and viruses to guide you to the path of a sensible, meaningful and realistic Dark Life.

Cinema Police

Inspired by the religious police of Saudi Arabia and Iran, rabid fans of serious cinema in India have set up Cinema Police. It will be an undercover cinema police, an official vice squad, to enforce people’s observance to serious cinema and strict compliance with critical acclaim. They will be on lookout for people with immoral viewing habits and deviant cinematic orientation. Anybody found guilty would be stoned, mob-lynched or dispatched to Guantanamo Bay.

Millennialism Is Pseudoscience

What year does a person have to be born in to qualify as a millennial? Some say it’s from 1985 to 1996; some insist it’s 1980 to 1999; others lobby for 1989 to 2000; while some others beg that it’s anybody born after the year 2000. There’s another creed that classifies births between 1996 to 2008 as generation Z. There are clueless adults who throw the term millennial at teens, toddlers and even infants. There are adolescents who allege being millennials.

Stop and think. Isn’t it obvious that whosoever propagated this hyper-simplistic distinction did that on purpose to create chaos, ambiguity, hate and to ultimately divide people?

There is no clear consensus on what constitutes as a millennial. There is no ordinance from any government or any agency in the world. There is no theological reference, ritual or symbolism. There’s no legal document that can pass a person’s status as millennial or non-millennial. There’s absolutely no scientific proof of this segregation. It’s just a pseudo-scientific concept like zodiac signs and numerology. It’s no different from creating social divisions on the basis of blood groups or as Vinaya Bansal wrote in his article “the concept of millennials is as useless a concept as creating organization structures based on zodiac signs”.

It’s not only divisive but robs people of their individuality. It destroys diversity, individual spirit and harmony. There will always be difference of opinion amongst communities, cultures, generations or for that matter people. There’s nothing wrong with that. It’s the branding that adds fuel to fire. It’s the obsessive usage of the word, the endless incantations on social media that escalate the hatred.

How differently do we regard people born in AD 991 from those born in AD 983? Are 991-born called the original millennials? For that matter how differently are people born in 200 BC viewed from those born in AD 700? Nobody even cares when births are several decades or a few centuries apart. Years and years hence, nobody will judge a 1970-born any different from a 1999-born.

There are already many divisions in the world in the form of religion, ethnicity, caste, skin colour, nationality, political views etc. In any argument involving the term millennial, replace millennial with any religion; you’d get the same old propaganda used by politicians and religious cults to control people. We can do without another division.

Teenager Depressed After Finding Out He’s Not A Millennial

A teenager is in depression after finding out that he doesn’t qualify as a millennial. Four years ago a lady shouted the epithet at him when he inadvertently spilled her coffee whilst gazing on his phone. After that he started seeing and hearing “millennial” everywhere. The more he noticed it, the more it started resonating with him. He embraced it as his identity and started referring to it as his “breed”, “tribe”, “DNA” etc. He engraved a tattoo bearing the word on his arm and wanted one on his forehead but was talked out of it by his parents. He made email addresses, usernames and social media handles with the coveted name. He participated in millennial pride marches. He passionately believed that he had the right to get offended and outraged if any film or book misrepresented his breed. He took to vandalism, burnt effigies of film directors who misrepresented his community. He filed petitions and lawsuits whenever anything hurt his generational sentiments.

“I gave my blood and sweat to the community. I considered older and younger generations as the antagonists. I adhered to all the tropes of identity and cultism. I believed that my way of life was the only truth and would secure me a spot in heaven,” said the sombre youth Cowan Johar.

The first instance of disenchantment occurred when, at Kartik Aryan Film Festival, he shouted, “We killed party animals!” His remark was met with scoffs and sardonic glances from the congregation. He explained himself diffidently, “Did I pronounce any word incorrectly? Is there something wrong with my English? I went to a highbrow school where my entire family had to go through a series of tests, interviews and lifestyle checks before my selection. The kind they showed in the critically-acclaimed movie Hindi Medium. Oh, that was a rare Hindi film I saw. I am a Hollywood fanatic since birth.”

One of the members in the congregation clarified, “There’s nothing wrong with your English and we don't mind what movies anybody watches. It’s just that you didn’t kill party animals. We did. You aren’t a millennial. You are generation Z. You are too young to be a millennial.” A pregnant silence ensued.

“I bowed out, mortified, under the pretext of answering a phone call. I could hear stifled laughs behind me. I hoped the congregation was ill-informed and the entire episode was an aberration. Then a few days later, my five-year-old niece asserted, ‘Uncle Cowan, I am a millennial. You belong to no-name generation. You are too old to be a millennial.’ Coming from a child prodigy like her, that really got me worried,” said Cowan Johar.

“The rude awakening dawned upon me when,” recounted Cowan Johar, “I proposed to my sweetheart. She turned me down reluctantly: ‘My family and friends won’t let me marry a non-millennial. They are very strict. What will people say? The world won’t accept our love. If you were born 98 days later, you might have qualified as a semi-millennial; even so my family is very particular about the ideology of Pure Generation on which millennialism was founded.’ I realised I had been living a lie.”

The final nail in the coffin came when the state refused to recognise him as the citizen of his dream Millennial Rashtra (nation) and forewarned to banish him lest he supplied documents and proofs of his millennial identity.

Experts have called it a “loss of identity and purpose” in his life which can lead to a sense of alienation and worthlessness. He can lapse into online trolling, war-mongering, drugs and terrorism if his identity isn’t rebuilt. Even so, it would take centuries or even millenniums for him to recover from this trauma. Social activists have advised him to join Generation Z, the subsequent generation, but he has unequivocally rejected the offer: “They want me to convert to a just-another bland, alphabetically-named generation. Haven’t we had enough of Gens ABCXYZ? It just doesn’t have the ring of millennial.”

He has joined a support group where has met people in similar situation. “In particular there’s a 1985-born who has a similar story to mine. After years of championing the notion Millennial Khatre Mein Hai [Millennials are in danger], he was suddenly told that he was not a millennial. He presented a proof from a news report that mentioned Saudi Arabia’s Prince Salman, who’s also born in 1985, as a ‘millennial prince’. However, his plea was quickly rejected following opposing claims from sundry sources. Some custodians of society say that he can be accepted as a ‘borderline millennial’ but not pure millennial, while others argue that any form of acceptance is out of question. Who makes these rules? Is there a book of laws that decides who’s what?” he spoke in a contemplative mood.

“In my childhood we kids from different age groups used to play football in the neighbourhood. We invited one another to our birthday parties without asking who belonged to what brand of generation. Nobody cared who or what was millennial, gen X, gen XX or gen XXX. No one judged you for that,” related a pensive Cowan Johar.

“Politicians exploited me to secure millennial vote bank and now that I am of no use, they have shunned me like people shun their broke relatives. I vehemently endorsed this political party with the hope they would fulfil their promises, including my ultimate fantasy Millennial Rashtra. Now that the Millennial Rashtra is a strong possibility, they tell me that I am not a millennial. At the time of elections, my voter card and passport were enough for them. Now they want me to furnish a pile of documents to establish my generational identity,” he protested.

“Where will I obtain those documents and mathematical proofs from? Is that even possible? Do they even exist?” he collapsed into a fountain of tears, knowing very well the answers to his own rhetorical questions.

Dumbing Down of English Language and Education System

Even as English enjoys a high social-status in the world, the ever-so-defeatist English linguists are ironically fighting their own battles of chronic inferiority complex and paranoid delusions that anything in their purview “is in danger”.

“Like Test cricket, the education system and English literature are losing popularity. People find them complicated. We have to find new ways to solicit students to get them some level of education,” said a rather jumpy Methodius Head.

The proposed curriculum will entail drug references and cutting-edge abusive words to make education more real, palpable, pragmatic, dark, gripping and the usual adjectives in a popular movie’s review. Shakespeare’s literature will be scrapped  because, apparently it’s time-consuming and kids don’t care for it. “It’s easy to enforce customs in the name of youth. People think that they influence trends, but in truth they only like what we want them to like,” Methodius Head quipped with hysterical laughter.

In order to bridge the gap between academic world and real world, Emojis and GIF images will become a part of the new writing standard. A module in Unimaginative Writing and Mundane Elocution is also recommended to subdue any artistic impulse in students.

“At times students will get an urge to speak like David Attenborough or Nigella Lawson. Majority of people don’t speak in that manner; hence, nobody should be allowed to talk like that. Herd mentality must be preserved at all costs. Thence they will be subject to low-quality auditory dyspepsia from sundry sources. Once in a while, they may feel inspired to write like Charles Dickens or Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. This is where we step in with our expertise in inferiority complex. There will be a systematic course of indoctrination to dampen their enthusiasm. Thereafter they will be exposed to mediocre writings of our certain friends on the internet. In time, every sentence they utter will have words like ‘awesome’, ‘crap’, ‘stuff’ and so forth to make the language more accessible to everyone,” declared Methodius Head in a forced Cockney accent.

In the spirit of the obsessive realist revolution, there are also talks of replacing formal-wear, suits, ties etc. with track-suits as “a logical step into the modern world”. Don’t be surprised if the next James Bond walks into MI6 headquarters in a track-suit.

Abusive Language In School Curriculums

Hindi Medium and Super 30 had proved that English was not just a language but high social status. The signs were ominous. In a bid to revive Hindi’s dwindling popularity, education ministry of India has decided to incorporate abusive language in school curriculums. State-of-the-art and old favourite cuss words will be taught. Students will also be encouraged to bring in swear words from their regional languages and dialects. In order to maintain hands-on approach and banality, the syllabus will be overseen by gangsters, pimps, Karan Johar, abusive trolls of social media and Chetan Bhagat’s avid readers. This will also ensure mixed representation in the education system. The goal is to make the education system more relatable, realistic, and practical (or throw in any buzz-word to describe a critically-acclaimed fad).

In addition to that, standard literature will be replaced by abridged screenplays of Gangs Of Wasseypur, Pyar Ka Punchnama and some patriotic biopics etc. to make the language plain, over-simplistic and appealing to the students. “We cannot close our eyes to reality. We are dealing with stiff competition from English. There’s no way to surpass its eminence. We can only try to save Hindi from obsolescence,” barked the spokesperson of education ministry.

“Parents rebuke their children if they use Hindi words in their colloquial language. They have done well in passing on their inferiority complex to the young ones. More and more people are undergoing an un-learning course at Karan Johar Foundation to purge Hindi and Urdu from their brains,” he took a drag off his beedi and continued, “Despite being at the helm of our competition, Karan Johar Foundation, it’s nice of Mr Johar to watch over our syllabus to disperse his first-world chops to our programme.”

The spokesperson insisted, “There’s a dire need to make the language hip and happening. Nobody has the attention span to read books in today’s fast-paced world, that too in Hindi. Imagine how enthusiastic kids will be while mugging up Kartik Aryan’s famous monologue from Pyar Ka Punchnama or while quoting invectives from Gangs of Wassseypur to harass fellow students.”

“Isn’t it inappropriate to teach abusive words to kids?” I protested.

“What’s wrong with abusive language? This is how most people, including teenagers, talk in real world. People shield their kids from harsh realities of life, then they protest that kids are getting too sensitive. Abusive language will toughen them up for future. People want education to reflect real-world issues; they must face reality now” he went on like a kid rote-learning a lesson, in the manner of Kartik Aryan’s dialogue delivery.

In order to uphold the sanctity of realism, Hindi literature will also include English words as well as letters: “Just like how people send text messages in real world, though it gets incomprehensible and quite annoying but such is life.”

While continuing the ground-breaking transformation, the new curriculum will substitute poetry with raps from eminent rappers including Badshah. “Nobody even cares about English poetry, let alone Hindi and Urdu shayari. Poetry is useless and unrealistic like song-and-dance routines in movies. Nobody talks like that in real world. Badshah’s rap typifies modern-day linguistic values. It’s realistic, relatable and practical — realistic, relatable and practical — realistic, relatable and practical,” he chanted the slogan with the fervour of a hired political campaigner.

When contended that nobody even talked in rap or hip-hop in real world, he whispered in an admonitory tone, “No anti-national or low IQ questions please.”

“We want language to be vapid and appealing to the students,” he rambled on.

“How could something be vapid and appealing at the same time? Isn’t that a contradiction?” I asked.

“Haven’t you heard of Facebook and Big Brother?” he quipped, followed by a guffaw.

Algebra facing the axe. Erectile Dysfunction likely to be roped in. 

In a shocking discovery, erectile dysfunction has been found out as the most common problem faced by school boys. Bhumi Pednekar had proved that in her sensible film Shubh Mangal Saavdhan that schools weren’t teaching kids enough on how to cope with life’s problems like erectile dysfunction, but instead wasting time in worthless pursuits like algebra. As a result, Algebra is likely to be dropped in favour of Erectile Dysfunction. Bhumi Pednekar—who’s considered one of the greatest philosophers ever along with Jayden Smith and Mithun’s son Mimoh Chakraborty—has hailed this move as a “victory of content”. Erectile Dysfunction admitted that it was hard to get selected after being down in the dumps but assured that the rise of highbrow content was inevitable. Algebra expressed no hard feelings at the inevitability of being dropped, although reasoned that “instead of going through a long-winded module at school, the students could simply see a doctor but the movie conveniently failed to stress that point”.

How Many More Formats Can Cricket Sustain?

T20 is hailed as the shortest format of cricket but is it short enough? It’s three-and-a-half hours long — longer than an average movie or sport. Any movie longer than two hours and a quarter is met with scornful and hostile reactions; however, the duration of a T20 match is met with a sense of liberation. It’s fiercely argued that T20 is the crowning glory of cricket: for one, it’s short and fast-paced; and apparently nobody is interested in Test cricket. Since the whole fuss of T20 is its short duration, it is still long by global standards. Why be content with just twenty overs: why not ten, seven, six or five overs to put the game on par with elite sports of tolerable lengths to match the rickety attention spans of public? There are more formats mushrooming, as if there weren’t enough already: T10, a ten-over format is sanctioned at club level; The Hundred is soon to be launched by England, a convoluted format of 100-ball innings that will only shorten the game by half hour. When confronted by this question, some fans do concede that the sport will eventually get shorter. So why not do it now? Why not accelerate the “evolution”? It’s not a scientific technology that’s not ready for the present times.

There’s already a barrage of world cups, with nearly one world cup each year. With the proliferation of formats, the world cups will also increase. How many more formats can cricket sustain? Where does this lust for multiple formats end? How many grains of sand can you remove from the heap of sand until it is no longer a heap?

It’s contended that 20-20 cricket is the know-all and end-all of cricket. Wait until the authorities thrust T10, The Hundred, S6, F5 or other skimpier formats. They tell us that we the audience are in control, when in actuality we have no control. They can get viewers hooked on to any format they want; people eventually acquiesce; just like nobody had asked for T20 cricket; international cricket was in great health even before that but they still got public hooked on to it. In truth, people have no choice. People like only what they want them to like. 

Love in Today’s Serious Times

Why This Sanctimony, Serious Cinema?

Serious cinema is important but only when, like everything in life, it co-exists with diverse for forms of cinema. However, when it starts bordering on Fascism then it becomes toxic. Let’s get real Mr Anurag Kashyap. According to Anurag Kashyap, cinema gives people false hopes with regards to relationships by portraying unreal and idealistic relationships. However, when anybody criticises his movies for the unruly behaviour of viewers who were raised on his cinema, he claims that movies make no impact on people’s lives. He cites examples of the failure of anti-smoking campaigns on preventing smoking. He has a valid point: most movies condemn rapes, honour killings, murders etc. but that doesn’t stop people from committing such atrocities. Why this contradiction, Mr Kashyap? Why be so conveniently selective in your criticism?

Older romantic movies were idealistic. People like him blame them for their failed relationships but think about it, back when movies were “impractical” people had much better relationships and marriages. It’s only with the rise of so-called pragmatic cinema that relationships have fallen apart. Now when movies are “realistic” and practical, relationships keep getting worse. People who blame movies for their personal problems are those who cannot accept personal responsibility. Most people like Anurag Kashyap who are anti-thesis to those idealistic movies, have a terrible history of relationships. They are needy, dependent, self-loathing ingrates who were unhappy with their lives even before their relationships. They preach dependence and neediness in relationships. The more obsessed they get with pleasing others the sadder their lives get. They are nothing more than a hipster version of Bajrang Dal, a hardliner group known for beating up couples on Valentine’s Day.

Serious film-makers bore us to death by preaching us to embrace life with its imperfections, accepting people despite their glaring flaws, yet they can’t embrace simple criticism of their films. Anurag Kashyap is at loggerheads with the right-wing but when a kid raised on his brand of cinema threatened him, he didn’t see him a shades-of-grey personality, but rather evil. Serious movie buffs throw temper tantrums whenever anyone disagrees to their cinematic beliefs. Shouldn’t people who criticise their “sensible” cinema be embraced as at least flawed creatures? Shouldn’t they accept our flaws, the way they expect us to celebrate their grey-shaded obnoxious characters? You cannot get everyone to agree to everything you believe in. This is how real world works. Serious film-makers fixate on realism in cinema, but ironically they are the ones detached from reality.

This entire obsession with grey-shaded imperfection is highly inconsistent. On one hand, they preach about putting up with flaws carefully guised as traits. On the other hand, they are busy rearing a perfect breed of children who are expected to get impeccable grades in schools, excel in sports, play musical instruments, learn multiple languages (except for Indian languages), have six-pack abs, sing, dance and do everything that an ideal lead actor does in mainstream cinema. Just look at their contradictions.

Another excuse given for serious cinema is that it toughens people to face harsh realities of life. A fan of Anurag Kashyap, studying at an eminent engineering college, committed suicide because he couldn’t deal with poor grades in college. Clearly, Anurag Kashyap’s cinema isn’t preparing people for real world. The harsh reality is that most of his ilk constitutes of sad and depressed people with some even dealing with alcoholism and drug addiction.

The self-proclaimed sensible film-makers judge, emotionally blackmail and guilt-trip people for finding happiness and success in their lives. They shame people for watching cinema for entertainment but there’s no limit to their own indulgences. They live in extreme luxury, exorbitant house and spend millions of dollars every year on their children’s schooling. And they have the audacity to judge common people for finding pleasure in simple things like movies and love. They tell people to scale down their dreams or not dream at all because in real world dreams don’t come true, which is why people find solace in their depressing and dreary movies. While all these times their fans numb their ambitions, the serious film-makers are fulfilling their own dreams. People who don’t watch their serious movies get called selfish by them and media. Think about it: they expect people to watch their movies and like them. So who’s really selfish here?

Serious cinema is not a guideline for living one’s life. Binge-watching “sensible” movies or TV series won’t help anyone make important decisions in life, it won’t bring prosperity, nor will it get anyone meaningful relationships and most importantly it won’t get anyone a spot in heaven. 

Anurag Kashyap Still In Demand

“Indian actors want to work with Rohit Shetty but Indian public wants Anurag Kashyap’s cinema. Anurag Kashyap is the most popular film director in India. People want to see his movies but cinema owners don’t give them enough shows,” proclaimed Jane Plane at a Flat Earth Society convention.

The entire contingent applauded the speech, followed by howls of approval.

“Anurag Kashyap is more popular than any of those Khans, yet he doesn’t get many opportunities. If somehow he is not that popular, then it’s a conspiracy by Amitabh Bachchan and those three Khan fellows,” orated the ghost of Rajiv Dikshit, also a posthumous winner of Zaid Hamid Conspiracy Theorist medal.

“He is a youth icon. His movies and shows on Netflix India are getting record-breaking views. The budget of the next season of his series will be a whopping $1.5 billion,” reported Propaganda News Channel.

“Even though his films continue to lose more money than ever and his temper tantrums have increased, he is still getting accolades in online comments sections. Though his fans mysteriously disappear from cinemas whenever his film releases, they are quite belligerent on social media,” stated People for Ethical Treatment of Anurag Kashyap.

“His cinematic orientation secured me a place in heaven. His cinema helped me in my day-to-day choices. I am morally superior to all who partake in cinema for entertainment,” asserted a late suicide bomber.

“Watching movies of Anurag Kashyap and cronies has improved my personal and professional life. It has developed my character. I have become smarter than most people. I feel spiritually and socially awakened. I feel like an expert in everything. His cinematic values have also saved my marriage,” said a nondescript man held at a gun-point by a masked person.

“We love Anurag. He’s so adorable,” said no one, not even his parents, not even when he was a kid.

Best Speakers Ever

I received an Urdu song a few days ago: Khabar-e-Tahayyur-e-Ishq sun... jo rahi so bekhabri rahi. I have been passionate about two languages: Urdu and (British) English. They are two of the most sophisticated languages in the world. They have been instrumental in my writing and demeanour. For now here’s a list of my favourite, the most eloquent and charismatic speakers ever pertaining to English (in no specific order):

12. Nigella Lawson.

11. Art Malik: A studious actor and a sublime speaker with baritone.

10. Charu Sharma: He’s a vastly underrated commentator and TV presenter in cricket. He has a wonderfully generic accent with British intonation.

9. Jonathan Agnew: A classical English commentator from the radio and television era and the voice of Brian Lara ’99 Cricket video-game. He is a great story-teller.

8. Stuart Bennett: Also known as Wade Barrett in professional wrestling; apart from that, he is a bare-knuckle boxer and an actor. His pro-wrestling promos are captivating. His voice has the stentorian ring reminiscent of the great Amrish Puri.

7. Phil Brooks “CM Punk”: Although this post is mainly about British English, he’s an American speaker. Apart from his in-ring talent and charisma, his rhetorical skills made him popular quickly. He can deliver promos as long as thirty minutes and still hold audience’s attention.

6. Laila Rouass: She is a quintessential British speaker. She is eloquent and has a charming inflection. Her voice is a delight to auditory senses. She comes from the generation of Video Jockeys who spoke like educated people.

5. Manvi Sinha: She is a news anchor from the era of well-spoken news. There is magnificent cadence to her voice.

4. Lawrence Olivier. 

3. Rowan Atkinson: Perhaps a large section of people outside the west haven’t heard his voice, for he barely spoke in Mr Bean apart from his incoherent mumbling. He has an unmistakable Oxford accent.

2. David Gower: RP has always been spoken by a minuscule section of population in the UK but it remains one of the most loved English accents. It’s hard to find a mediocre communicator with RP. Gower’s speech is no different from his batting: elegant and effortless.

1. Timothy Dalton: He is erudite and articulate. His James Bond movies were neither self-deprecating nor too dark. As for his verbal communication, he is a charismatic orator and a perfect speaker in all regards. He also recited three audio books.

Random Hearts

I haven’t written in a long time. I will post a few random musings:

Language helps us communicate with others, yet despite having myriad of languages and modes of communications, there’s no shortage of miscommunication among humans. One sentence can have different meanings or interpretations. There are different ways to express one idea. People can say something but not mean it. People can say something and mean something else. Ideas can get misinterpreted or distorted. Therefore, words don’t matter. What matters is, eventually, how one feels. There’s no other form of communication clearer than that.

Look for love — and you will find it everywhere.