One more swayamvar is just over, after the much talked n discussed Rakhi’s swayamvar. Well, this gimmick has become the order of the day to acquire national fame for sure and international fame in select countries up to some extent. The end result is national wastage, total foolhardiness and mere tamasha for all small screen lovers. Yet, we all watch with serious concern,,, coz we are fools , hehe.
Who benefits out of such trash REALITY shows,, it’s the promoters of these programmes, advertisers, tv channels, media and actors who never saw the light of the day. Do we really need to air such programmes? What effect do such serials have on younger generation (mostly school goers)? Couldn’t the money spent on these jhatka serials be better spent on classy, educative and society related serials which leave a message for the masses and impact every house. Who will think about these questions,,, who will shake up” Mandi House” for finally according approval for airing these serials,,,, and who will bring changes in quality of tv serials. All are pertinent questions and surprisingly crores of people in the most populated country in the world can’t reach a popular consensus on how to bell the cat. Wow that’s an achievement in itself.
Does anyone remember the aftermath of last similar serial starring Rakhi. Did she marry the finally selected groom? No one knows,,, the public and fans were made were taken for a ride,, and who bothers after the show is over…REMEMBER MERA NAAM JOKER…. WHO IS THE JOKER,,, KEEP GUESSING.
Rahul’s reality show was no different and went down the same lane as well. Aspirant girls ,, sorry women( no offense meant please), looked awful, dressed so shabbily and lacked real personality requisites like wits, humour and maturity,, that’s what one makes out after watching those untidy, poorly directed shows. Am sure Rahul would have got a better match for him had he just advertised in newspapers. The Big Boss hero has tried very hard to tarnish his image and reputation through this show.,, his laughter helped him do that too.
Once again, like the previous reality show, wrong lessons and messages were conveyed to all viewers and homes. The fallout could be in questions or action form. Some of them are,,,, Is this the correct way to select a bride,,,, should the girls be so cut throats in life to achieve what they want,,, some young girls will lose focus on their work or education and try to emulate these contestants which can be really harm full for their life and careers, school girls will learn the art of Bitching,,,, showmanship will assume importance in projecting good image of girls since their families are also incorporated in this race, ,list of fallouts is endless,,, and so is the fan following.
ANYWAY, THE SHOW MUST GO ON AND IT WILL GO ON,,, WE JUST WAIT N WATCH WHO WILL BE THE THIRD ONE FOR SUCH REALITY SHOW,, BOLLYWOOD FIGURE OR STREET ROMEO OR SPORTS PERSON OR A FOREIGNER ,, LETS WAIT AND WATCH,,,,,,,
BEWARE—YOUTH OF INDIA—WATCHING SUCH REALITY SHOWS MAY HAMPER YOUR THINKING ABILITIES AT THE TIME OF SELECTION OF YOUR BRIDES

Nikhil

digital producer, blogger, obsessed with music and web technologies, loves basket ball, tennis n traveling.

Website - More Posts

‘It’s so hard to find quality time for ourselves nowadays. Even if we go out for a quiet dinner, my husband’s phone never stops ringing. So we end up not having a good time and eventually fight,’ said Maneka Singh, a 29-year-old housewife.

Many men and women complain of their partner’s pre-occupation with mobiles, laptops, MP3 players, iPods, videogame consoles and other hi-tech gizmos.

Indore-based Roshni Wadhwani, who has been married for nine years, says: ‘My husband checks the talk time on my mobile. We always fight when he questions me on why the balance amount is low because he has to refill it. It is very irritating.’

Aditya Kumar, 22, says his girlfriend nags him about his excessive use of the cell phone, laptop and Playstation.

‘My girlfriend forever fights on these issues. ‘Who were you talking to?’ ‘Why couldn’t you call me instead?’ ‘Why are you on the laptop?’ ‘Don’t work on it while talking to me’ – these are just some of the statements I get to hear from her almost every day.

‘At times she goes so crazy that she starts making comparisons between the laptop and herself and asks me who I love more. It’s insane,’ Kumar rued.

According to leading psychiatrist Sanjay Chugh, a lot of couples approach him with similar problems.

‘Many a time partners complain that the other person loves his or her laptop or cell phone more than him or her. Or that the technical equipment is his or her first love!’ Chugh told IANS.

‘They would feel unattended and unimportant as the partner is spending most of his or her time using the gadget. This becomes a source of distress for the other person leaving him or her to feel discontented and dissatisfied,’ explained Chugh.

Even Samir Parikh, chief of the mental health and behavioural science department in Max Healthcare, agrees.

‘Fights happen when one partner ends up substituting the personal or social time and it gets replaced with time used on technology, whether for work or for recreation,’ Parikh told IANS.

Nikita Sharma, another housemaker, says she gets really upset when her husband can’t take out time for her, even during breakfast, as he gets busy attending official calls from 9 a.m.

‘In the morning he gets calls and during the day he does not want me to call because he gets disturbed. By the time he comes back home he is either so tired and exhausted that he just wants to crash on the bed or turns to the computer to finish his pending projects.

‘There is hardly any quality conversation between us,’ she said.

Experts suggest that to resolve such technology-related relationship issues, partners must be able and willing to spend quality time with each other, share thoughts and feelings and also take regular breaks together.

‘Making each other feel loved and cared for are essential ingredients that can keep couples strong enough to live through the rough phases of life – related or unrelated to technology,’ said Chugh.

….Source

Nikhil

digital producer, blogger, obsessed with music and web technologies, loves basket ball, tennis n traveling.

Website - More Posts

Other than Slumdog, I have seen only one film out of the other four nominated. But I’ve read about all of them. The one that I saw is The Reader. The subject is far more intellectually challenging, emotionally moving and morally disturbing than Slumdog can ever hope to be. Not since A Last Tango In Paris has nudity (both male and female) been so necessary to a film’s narrative, and so non-titillating and so touching. A film which stretches over 30 years and with essentially only two characters, and yet a film that is as gripping as a thriller. It’s a film that, as my friend told me, demands and requires to be seen in one sitting, with no interruption by commercials and visits to the loo.

But look at the themes of the other movies that were nominated this year. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, the love story of a man who is born as an extreme geriatric and keeps getting younger and dies as a newborn. Only for a brief period of time are the man and his beloved around the same compatible age. Of course it’s an impossible concept and completely unbelievable, but it’s a high concept. Milk is about the first openly gay man to be elected to public office in the United States; Frost/Nixon about the first interview disgraced US President Richard Nixon gave, to has-been TV journalist David Frost. For both of them, it is a chance for redemption, for a somewhat sane life. These are all big themes. I am not doubting Slumdog’s quality as a film in any way. Danny Boyle is one of the most talented directors around. But comparing Slumdog to The Reader is almost impossible. It’s like comparing A Christmas Carol to Great Expectations.

Scrooge won, little Pip lost. But that’s the way it has been with the Oscars. Sometimes the nominations reflect the mood of America’s liberals, sometimes the winners reflect political correctness. In 2006, the following five films were nominated: Good Night and Good Luck, Brokeback Mountain, Crash, Capote and Munich. Good Night and Good Luck is about a TV broadcaster who took on the McCarthyist witch hunt in the 1950s; essentially about freedom of the press. Brokeback Mountain deflated the entire mythology of uber-macho frontiersmen by portraying a deep homosexual relationship between two cowboys. Crash interlinked several stories to study racism in all its forms and in startling ways. Capote was about the gay writer Truman Capote who travels to the South of the US to write a book on two multiple murderers. Munich told the story of the Israeli agents who hunted down the Black September terrorists who killed Israeli athletes during the Munich Olympics, and asked the question: To take revenge, do we become as base as the men who are our targets?

There’s a clear pattern: anger over the Iraq war, the stifling of the media, the stranglehold of neo-conservatism, the contempt for minorities. The denizens of Hollywood were simply reacting to their world as they saw it. The other major critically-acclaimed movies of that year were Transamerica, about one man’s battle to change his gender, and Syriana, which told Americans that their nation’s policies were largely responsible for Islamist terrorism.

Then there’s political correctness. Gandhi won Best Picture over ET. The Academy decided that the biopic of a great and influential leader was more “important” than the woes of a cute alien stranded on our planet. (This incensed Steven Spielberg so much that he decided to give the Academy the “important” films they felt comfortable with, and made The Colour Purple – which didn’t win any Oscars – and Schindler’s List – which raked them in.) Tom Hanks won his first best acting Oscar for Philadelphia, as much for his acting as for being the first major star to portray a gay man suffering from AIDS. In Hollywood, that’s called “courage”.

So The Reader can’t win. After all, its female protagonist is a former Auschwitz guard who let 300 Jews burn alive in a locked church. The film’s position on morality is too nuanced for the general Academy member to grapple with with any success. But Kate Winslet can be given the award for best actress. By taking this controversial role and baring her body so naturally for the purposes of art, she has shown “courage”. Milk is about homosexuality, so Sean Penn gets the statuette for “courage”, but not the film. Benjamin Button, which was co-produced by its star Brad Pitt, is probably seen as too much the case of an actor showing off, while being aided by more-than-state-of-the art visual effects. Frost/Nixon? Who’s interested?

So Slumdog has won, and we should really rejoice for the six children who acted in it, for they are the real stars of the film. We should rejoice for AR Rahman, though the music he has got his two Oscars for is not even of his average quality, forget his sublime and exhilarating stuff. But the Academy has decided. But I really think it’s a bit too much if we take this as a victory for Indian cinema. It’s a non-Indian film which happened to have an all-Indian cast. We shoot entire films abroad nowadays, especially in the US, remember?

The writer is the editor of the RPG Group’s soon-to-be-launched current affairs and features magazine, ‘Open’…Source

Nikhil

digital producer, blogger, obsessed with music and web technologies, loves basket ball, tennis n traveling.

Website - More Posts