logo

88 Responses to “Raging Bull : Sudhir Mishra speaks on the Oscar Controversy”

1. Shripriya on September 27th, 2007 4:50 pm

   If you feel the pool you are being forced to select from is not indicative of the cinema on offer, then why can’t a jury member recuse himself? Isn’t that better than picking between what you feel are average choices?

   Why say BF should have been there now, after the fact? Why not say it then? Why not say - I can’t judge a list that doesn’t include BF, that doesn’t include X or Y.

   I agree that it is not cool to accuse a jury of being “bought”, but by the same token, if it is respect the jury wants and they feel that the choices in front of them are sub-par, walk out…

2. suzy on September 27th, 2007 7:07 pm

   Shripriya:
   Next time you are the member of a Jury, you should just back off. You should stand on a soap box and refuse to do anything unless BF is nominted. You should act on your principles and refuse to work towards a consensus. It is such bullshit, when people just talk in the air. PFC is becoming a forum for personal aggrandizement and backbiting. There is something to be said about the crab analogy….

3. Ogleonist on September 27th, 2007 8:10 pm

   Suzy, why are you targetting her and making it so personal ?
   There is a point to what shripriya says. If I know that I am being part of something which might not look honest to some people, then be it… why to get angry about it?
   Whenever any umpire give a wrong decision on the field, do you see him getting angry later on, and giving explanations to people who accuse him as being biased ?
   Mistakes happen… sometimes you know the consequences, sometimes you don’t… in either case, there is no point in ranting about it.
   And if you do get angry, then definitely people would question your motives… its very natural and human… accept it…(when I get get angry defending myself on some false accusation, ppl say that ‘truth hurts’ so i m being angry…)
   The point is… All of us react in the same manner…

4. Shripriya on September 27th, 2007 8:11 pm

   Suzy,
   I don’t think you understand the point - it is not just about working towards a consensus - if you fundamentally feel that you are not choosing from among the best choices out there, will you state your case while you are in the process or afterwards when criticisms mount?

   Let’s take a real jury - where you have to convict or set someone free. If you believe the person should be convicted (or set free, either side - it’s just an example), your first job is to try to convince others. If you cannot, you are allowed to stand your ground and have a hung jury where a decision cannot be reached.

   Thanks for your sentiments that “It is such bullshit, when people just talk in the air.” I see you are victim to that too. Since you know nothing about me, who are you to judge whether I’ve done that or not? I have done it in the business world which is what I am familiar with, thank you very much.

   The reality is that I think quite highly of Sudhir Mishra - and I am curious why he put himself in a situation where he is so upset and has to defend himself. Surely there are other options… Plus I find Nihalani’s statements ludicrous - you finalized the short-list: the jury can pick any one. If you wanted more choices, then present more choices to the jury!

   Please, share with us what you would have done instead…

5. Shripriya on September 27th, 2007 8:14 pm

   ROFL - I just realized I made a freudian slip!!- to clarify, I meant, I have recused myself and refused to judge something if the quality was not there.

6. oz on September 27th, 2007 8:34 pm

   - suzy, that’s unfair… PFC comments is made up by what readers bring to it. And just going off on Shripriya, which I still don’t understand why? Come on, there is more to this… please come forward and help us in bringing different points of view but just going off wouldn’t be a good thing even in person… that was harsh… if you would like to express yourself come forward and write on PFC via iView…

7. Qwerty on September 27th, 2007 10:30 pm

   Well, Suzy has a point…I mean for Shripriya to say that Mishra should have walked out if BF wasn’t a part of the line-up is simply unbelievable..! Does the world begin and end with BF? Or is it simply pfc that begins and ends with BF? And I think Mishra should be felicitated for agreeing to be a part of a committee that he thinks was sub standard….at least he felt he was doing his part to contribute to the overall situation by bringing some quality to the table. It’s a lot better to fight the good fight, than walk out like a coward and blame the whole world from under your rock…

8. George on September 27th, 2007 10:49 pm

   Sudhir mishra feels sad that HKA dint make it thro and he has the ryt to be sad and angry about it … but i dont understand y he goes back to the statement … “did i accuse neone then when paheli got thro and not HKA?” .. so does tat mean that the jury wud keep doin this again and again as an act of revenge !!!
   if my movie dint go thro to the oscars then the deservin movie this yr also shud not go thro !!! is tat the attitude ??? i hope not !! neway

   well tats just part of my doubt !!!
   india is never gonna select the ryt movie unless we have a quality jury !!! and the process needs to be analyzed in a more detailed manner !!!
   and i personally think that its our misconception that “oscars” look for indianess and indian culture in movies sent from india!!! if i am wrong do correct me !!!

   Sudhir mishra questioned “I saw list of people who have questioned in some newspaper today. They have never made a good film in their life. I am sorry to say this but they have made bloody shit all their lives. First look at yourself, look at your films. So don

9. devayon das on September 27th, 2007 11:34 pm

   @George and Sudhir Mishra:
   I think Sudhir-ji, after having been accused of corruption and having spoken out on PFC, now has the added perspective on what to do and what not to do when, if ever, he is on a jury.

   So, Sudhir-ji, I think you should reconsider and be part of future juries because you now have an added “arsenal” of perspective and wisdom

10. Rony D'costa on September 28th, 2007 12:07 am

    Can someone tell me who decides the jury? i am completely clueless about the way all this functions.

11. anurag kashyap on September 28th, 2007 12:55 am

    I think we should talk about the process and not the jury. Anyone who has been on a jury knows the constraints. You can probably mention or ask why that film is not there, nothing more. Problem is that why does one need to submit a film for any awrds or selection which should anyways be including all films released in that stipulated time period.. be it national awards, filmfare, oscar or whatever.. you make selections for film festival, you make selections for nominees, not eligibility.

    as far as sudhir is concerned, i can vouch for his honesty and if BF wasn’t there only people that can be blamed for it is ME and my PRODUCER. we were careless. Infact Rahul Dholakia also didn’t know that you have to submit your film for the selection.

    we need to have a consensus on one thing.. what film is going to represent us
    1. the biggest hit of the year/most popular film
    2. the most critically acclaimed
    3. the film that went to the most festivals
    4. the film most likely to be catering to the oscar perception i.e. most likely to win.

    we should have all states sent their one chosen film, or a jury that considers all released films.

    some consensus needs to be arrived before we can point our fingers at anyone.

12. ritchik on September 28th, 2007 1:17 am

    I THINK ITS THE SAME EVERY YEAR, each year no matter whatever film is selected there is always going to be a few people who are going to agree with the choice and some who wont, those who would not agree is bound to protest against the choice and try to find conspiracy theories such as the jury being corrupt, its pretty normal ut that doesnt mean anyone should get offended by it, i would cite the example given by someone above that when an umpire gives a wrong decission public is going to accuse him, but he shouldnt get angry as long as he knows the choice he made seemed the best to him at that point of time.
    i do agree with sudhir sir that we need to form a panel to search out good regional cinema check which one of them fits the oscar bill perfectly.
    the jury needs to be updated as well it must have people who has the capability to judge a good film from a not so good one and in this eery good film maker in our country should step forward and not just say that he would not like to be a part of any jury anymore. its high time people take some serious initiative to make the presence of indian cinema felt at the oscars.

    and anurag sir i agree with u compeltely its high time we stop pointing fingers at others as we do in every single situation and do something so that come next year we are not sitting infornt of our pc’s debating which film should have been sent to the oscars.

13. Rony D'costa on September 28th, 2007 1:33 am

    Anurag,”the film most likely to be catering to the oscar perception i.e. most likely to win.” i agree with this point completely. because oscars is just another competition where we have to compete with the world.i have observed that the jury there likes films which are topical. in that sense Black Friday was an apt choice.why didn’t you send it then?

14. Vasan Bala on September 28th, 2007 1:48 am

    the best film I saw this year “Paruthiveeran” was no where….not even mentioned….gone are the days when a regional film was even considered…the criterion is will they be able to promote it once they are there…do they have the means and resources to do it….if it’s an Indian representation then why not support it till the end….whats the meaning of calling it an Indian selection then….if the job is to just select and not support it further….then the Government has no right to select films…if it means the film is on it’s own….here on

15. ashwin on September 28th, 2007 1:54 am

    i feel sudhir’s anger is justified…
    u can question the choice but not the jury…
    u cant take potshots at the integrity of a man without proof

    thankfully sooraj barjatya didnt get up and complained of favouritism…vivaah too was in the recknoning….

16. Raging Bull : Sudhir Mishra speaks on the Oscar Controversy on September 28th, 2007 1:55 am

    [...]

17. Rony D'costa on September 28th, 2007 2:10 am

    Vasan,

18. sourav on September 28th, 2007 2:12 am

    Lets not lose our objectivity here..lets not crucify people before analysing the actuality.

19. Pratim D. Gupta on September 28th, 2007 2:49 am

    The first respect, what Sudhirji is talking about, should come from the writing itself…

    “Haradha Bannerjee who will never get any award

20. aditi on September 28th, 2007 2:50 am

    If an acclaimed film-maker is part of a jury and is unhappy with the majority decision, then the least he/she can do is to express at least some anguish about the whole process as well as the choice rather than DEFEND the jury’s decision — this was seen in the case of Saif (national award) as well as Eklavya (Oscars). We understand that there are constraints, such utterances by “different” film-makers can be de-motivating for aspiring ones Sir!!!!

21. Mainak on September 28th, 2007 2:59 am

    Doesnt matter whatever the fuck Sudhir is saying now…
    We respect him too much…
    And I wish he had resigned from the jury the moment he saw the crappy films that was submityted. Instead of sitting on it for god knows how long.

    Why didnt he quit the jury when he realised it was all fuck all?

22. Joyjeet on September 28th, 2007 3:25 am

    This isn’t Sudhir’s blog people. He is not addressing US. He is not throwing allegations or trying to draw sympathy. (He doesn’t need to, any case).
    It’s Phoenixu who is bringing it here. (Good job there Phoenixu. Thanks). Between the two, it was informal talk. So, Shipriya, Suzy & others, there’s no point raising fingers at Sudhir & telling him what to do & what to refrain from. He must be knowing well for himself.
    Anurag is right. We should scratch our heads on how to choose the right film… the one most likely to win at the Oscars. Like Ronny, many of us are clueless on how the jury is picked.
    But Anurag, getting states to send their picks may not be worth it. It can jolly well run into more bureacracy, get infintely more long drawn & end up with zilch results.
    My opinion (whatever it counts for) is there should be least

23. RK on September 28th, 2007 3:38 am

    Angry Young Mainak Babu,
    Real life especially in India does not go ahead in the same manner with repeatedily used “F” word as it goes ahead in Hollywood films.
    What you could have done if BF was submitted but still Eklavya/Dharam/Guru or any other film was selected by same jury? Its hypothetical question though because this did not happen.
    Jury members are not supposed to pick and choose the films released all over the year. Producers send their films.
    Everything works under given circumstances. Jury members were given few films, they selected one out of them. One may discuss their decision but in a sane way only.
    Dissatisfaction over any issue should pave way for improvement and hope wrath generated on this years decision will force responsible authorities
    to make a properly defined guidelines.
    Asa Anurag has suggested in his comment 11, there should be properly defined guidelines and beyond and above all the things there should be TRANSPARENCY in everything. In the era of right to information, TRANSPARENCY may be the solution.
    They are not selecting chief of secret agency, they are not selecting which material should be used in Nuclear reactor.
    Its insane, inhuman, impolite etc etc to call a jury corrupt without having any credible evidences.
    This is stupid on part of Director of Dharam to say that she got bored while watching Eklavya. She may get boredom while watching any previously OSCAR winner film. she was not the jury member.
    Same way it does not suit a senior director like Vinod Chopra to call Dharam as a S…. film. One may not like a film for particular reasons but candidates who have submitted their films cant use such languages for each others products. If Dharam’s director thinks Jury was corrupt and Vinod Chopra used evil means to manouvour the decison in his favour then she has IPC to take care of corruption and she must go to court with proper evidences.
    If everything is for the sake of registering the dissatisfaction then in civil society a properly approved civilized language is available.

24. Raging Bull : Sudhir Mishra speaks on the Oscar Controversy « Filmi Khabar on September 28th, 2007 3:44 am

    [...] Posted by aksfilmi on September 28th, 2007

25. night on September 28th, 2007 4:51 am

    V interesting as always from Mr. Mishra. I don’t know about Eklavya, but I understand his anger. And I don’t think that some of you sould be blaming him for Black Friday’s non submission. That is the fault and responsibility of the producers and director of the film, so if you’re gonna blame someone, blame them. And if you read -he did ask where was Black Friday and Traffic Signal? He also made a case for regional films which are mostly ignored. Don’t hear the rest of the jury speaking up.

    Btw and no offence, but this post needs a serious spell and grammar check!

26. night on September 28th, 2007 4:57 am

    Oh and the comments about Ray (and the Oscar injustice), couldn’t have said it better myself ^:)^

    “Ray was never sent, I didn

27. night on September 28th, 2007 5:14 am

    Just read Anurag Kashyap’s comments.

    “Infact Rahul Dholakia also didn

28. Honhaar Goonda on September 28th, 2007 5:38 am

    Rahul Dholaki’s Parzania does not meet the Oscar ’s Foreign Category Rules, since the movie is in English. So Oscar would have rejected the film on that ground, i think. It is not eligible

    “A foreign language film is defined as a feature-length motion picture produced outside the United States of America with a predominantly non-English dialogue track.” http://www.oscars.org/80academyawards/rules/rule14.html

29. RK on September 28th, 2007 5:47 am

    H:G, so HKA, Black and Mr and Mrs Iyer like films are not eligible in the category of foreign films, where more than 75% parts were in English.
    If you know what academy authorities will do with a film having no or minimum dialogues like Pushpak?
    Warrior had some technical problems as perhaps it was understood as British film.
    Britain’s language is English but its foreign country for USA, how they deal with Bristih films? or say Australian or a canadian film?

30. Honhaar Goonda on September 28th, 2007 6:03 am

    if we strictly go by the above definitions, then i don’t see those films getting picked for the first round or getting an entry.

    pushpak would be considered as a silent film, so that def would not matter much, i guess.

    the warrior was rejected because it was in hindi, which is not a language of UK. something like that… i think.

    i am not sure about the rules. i just read those rules yesterday.

31. suzy on September 28th, 2007 6:15 am

    I was not raving and ranting! I was not being personal either. I was supporting Sudhir’s point of view!I was just making a point that people in this industry just love to criticize and pull people down. The lady from the business world should definately know about consensus building. She is right that I don’t know her! But to talk of a real jury in the same breath as the jury for film selection…., just boggles the mind! There is no life and death situation here. Your opinion is not the only objective reality here. Its just that- your own opinion. Lets not just be so full of ourselves that we cannot see the credibility and honesty of others!

32. rajeev on September 28th, 2007 7:02 am

    i dont believe all this explainations now, jury has to come out when their selected does not even make to the top 5, its not that we have to reach to top 5, but when better movies were there, why r average movies send as official entry..those who had voted eklavya, should come out and talk about their point of view for selecting eklavya with details with their knowledge of cinema and not selecting movies like BLACK FRIDAY, DHARMA and not even considering movies besides hindi languages.

    many people r saying , we cant talk about the jury people coz we dont know personally and their views, but when a person makes a movies like “sins and red swastik”, what u expect me to talk ? im not an cinema theory expert,im an movie buff but little bit i do understand of cinema, and it shocks, me such people r head at such important posts

    and why r some people saying that why didnt when paheli was selected nobody made such chaos, there was disappointment among people, but when again n again same mistakes r made, how can people expect us to keep quiet.

    anyways, whose movies r send as official entries, should understand , getting “nomination in top 5″ is more important, than getting label of “official entry of indian movie”.

    and i think film mkaers should be honest enough to understand at what level their movies stand, and give chance to better options

33. dazedandconfused on September 28th, 2007 8:40 am

    There have been a few comments berating the Chairperson of the jury and basically questioning the competence of a person to judge good cinema because he has made movies like ‘Sins’ and ‘Red Swastik’.

    Now I think that’s bit unfair. I mean am sure that movies at the end of the day is also a business and one can’t conclude a person’s knowledge of good cinema just based on his recent filmography only. I mean even the Bhatts make a particular kind of formula film nowadays. And Mithun, who is a damn good actor used to act in all those crappy B-grade movies shot in Ooty. But they all made money! And doesn’t mean that they don’t know good cinema from bad…

34. machismo on September 28th, 2007 8:50 am

    @Honhaar Goonda, I think the rules have changed a bit after The Warrior was rejected due to language, now I think if the language is one of the offical language of the country it can be selected, hence Water being Canadian got selected.

35. Shripriya on September 28th, 2007 9:51 am

    My point was not about Black Friday. It was about the fact that if you believe you don’t have a good set of options to select from, why choose at all? Change happens when people insist on things being done differently. Sometimes you may have to insist on that while you are in a jury, in the middle of a process.

    Suzy - er… clearly you don’t understand the “analogy” I was trying to make. That you always have the right to stand your ground in any jury and stand up for what you believe in. Clearly Sudhir Mishra believes that great films (not just BF) was not there. To quote him “he FFI needs to do lot more homework

36. night on September 28th, 2007 10:08 am

    Must say, Shipriya has a point there. They need to sort themselves and their selection process out first before they send out films to international functions. And sure, Sudhir could have raised those issues, but again, what could he do if those films were not submitted? We need to be clear about how films are selected/submitted first.

37. V.P. Jaiganesh on September 28th, 2007 11:45 am

    OSCARS themselves have become so shallow these days. It has become more of rewards rather than “awards”. The person hasn’t got any awards for his good work. OK, lets reward him/her with an award even if his/her work isn’t the best in the race. So I really feel sad for worthwhile people with worthwhile things to do spending their worthwhile time trying to send films for this crapfest.
    Considering the parody Oscar is becoming, “Eklavya ” the stupid old royal guard is probably the best choice from India. Makers of other movies can feel better as theirs hasn’t become a “branded product” to be marketed and “show cased” in parties to be consumed like alcohol. For all worthwhile purposes, there is always festivals like Sundance and Cannes where the real worth is weighed and show cased. Offcourse that is where the bengali and kerala gems that Sudhir is wondering about are making their mark. Any which ways you look at it, Oscars have become an American show, celebrating americanness and corporatism and all the hoopla tand hype that goes on in India about Oscars is absolutely a shameful reflection of our intellectual subservience to the west.

38. Johnny Gaddaar on September 28th, 2007 12:35 pm

    This question might be out of context here:

    With all the VVC discussions happening…Does anyone know why Pradeep Sarkar left VVC despite of fact that VVC was the one who backed him for Parineeta?

    I tried to google to get some info…but

39. turrtle on September 28th, 2007 1:42 pm

    It seems to me that Pradeep Sarkar was not bound by VVC. Pradeep Sarkar-VVC were not as deep in their friendship-business-backing as are, for example .. VVC-Hirani.

    Pradeep Sarkar must have been contacted by yashraj, for an idea, and thereon the script must have been developed. I say this because ‘Laaga Chunari’ seems to be a Rani mukherji-acting-skills-showcase vehicle.

    I would not read too much in this move

40. sm on September 28th, 2007 2:24 pm

    There is one thing that I just can’t believe in this discussion, as well as the previous one on the Oscar nomination. It is why people like Anurag Kashyap, who have been in the industry for a reasonable length of time, say that they didn’t know that they had to submit their film to the FFI to be considered for the Oscar selection. Even a casual film watcher like me, with no connection to the film industry whatever, and who doesn’t even live in India, knew that. I always thought that was a weak point in the Indian selection process, but why wouldn’t someone in the industry know?

    Secondly, why, why, does everyone here keep talking about the “Oscar jury” or the “Oscar committee”? Is it just that people in India are so used to having all awards determined by a small handful of people? The Academy Awards are voted on by the entire membership of the Academy, or a relevant subportion thereof (that is, the technical awards are voted on by members who are specialists in that field — writers vote on the writing awards, editors on editing, and so on). Thus, there is no point to try and read the minds of this mythical “jury”. When you are dealing with hundreds of people, there is no simple formula that can be trotted out to fulfill.

    The choice of Jeans, I have read, was dictated by the fact that its producer was US based, and was thus thought to have “connections” in Hollywood. The greatest sufferer from this submission, in my view, was the entry which was sent the following year, Hey Ram. I think Hey Ram is a brilliant film, and indeed, this opinion is shared by many “western” viewers and critics who have seen it in various film festivals, but I doubt that anyone in the Academy even bothered to see it, having been burned by Jeans the year before.

    As far as I can judge by the articles and interviews published about the FFI’s selection process (in this and previous years), they seem to assume that “westerners” like to see the “color” of India, want an “Indian” story, that the award is determined by “connections” and marketing. The point about marketing began to come into play after Aamir Khan’s efforts with Lagaan. What is conspicuously absent from all discussions that I have read is any mention of cinematic merit.

    As far as the rules on foreign language submissions go, they are readily available at the website of the Academy: http://www.oscars.org/79academyawards/rules/rule14.html

    To summarize, the rule used to be that the film had to be in a language other than English, and must be an “official” language of the submitting country. This is why films from the UK used to be in Welsh or Gaelic, and from Canada in French. This is also why The Warrior was rejected. However, this rule has now been changed, so that the film merely has to be in a language other than English, but that language does not need to be a language of the country submitting the film. This is why “Water” could be submitted by Canada last year. It also clearly states that only one submission is allowed from each country. So Mr. Mishra’s idea that India should be allowed four nominations won’t work, though I think it is an interesting point to bring up with the Academy. But I think India’s problems with the Oscars are all more to do with the way things work in India, rather than the U.S.

41. Vijay on September 28th, 2007 2:34 pm

    sm - very well said. I certainly agree with you that Mr. Mishra’s idea to have multiple entries is not feasible, because if one country is given that luxury, every other one will ask for it too. And with 60 different countries submitting 4 films…well you do the math.

    The Academy’s system is organized enough. It is as you said, about us taking a proactive step to ensure that the good films are considered by the FFI jury.

    For example, in the case of Anurag, he was told by Adlabs and Manmohan Shetty that Black Friday was submitted. He was under the impression that the job was done, and was awaiting the jury decision. After the decision was announced, he got a rude shock that Adlabs did not even submit the film! AND, this happened as Mr. Mishra pointed out in an interview also because the jury is not allowed to speak about anything during the selection process outside their members. How stringently these rules are enforced is not for me to comment on, but at least that is the reason given for why Anurag and some other filmmakers were not alerted when BF was missing from the pile.

    This needs a huge change. If even one single jury member feels that a particular film which deserves to be looked into has not been submitted, he/she should have the freedom to go to the media, or call the producer/director and invite them to submit the film. That way a lot of directors can also be saved from underhanded ways of their distributors or owners of their film so to speak.

42. jayzee on September 28th, 2007 9:59 pm

    i still can’t understand why someone like Sudhir Mishra agreed to be a part of the jury which was headed by some C-grade director (sins and red swastik!!). i mean, will say.. coen brothers be part of a jury headed by say the director of a soft-porn film?
    Mr.Mishra says “i didnt know who was on the jury..” then why be a part of it? what if unknowingly to him half of the jury were VVC cronies?
    I have immense respect for your craft Mr.Mishra, but once you are part of a jury and there is a decision taken, then you like it or not you are bound by it. As someone pointed out in an earlier post, a real jury person cant come out in the open after a person is executed and then claim that he thought the oppposite just because it is not the popular opinion…
    (iam bracing myself for some scathing comments now!!!)

43. The Narcisist on September 29th, 2007 12:52 am

    Maybe I’m going on a tangent, but I fail to understand the hype behind the oscars. Why are we so fixated with the Oscars, thus making the ultimate barometer for a film’s prowess? Why do we conveniently forget many other achievements garnered by our movies in fests around the world?

    Give this an honest thought - would americans/europeans be just as passionate and driven if we had a best foreign film category in our own filmfare/screen/IIFA awards? Instead of wasting our energies debating on this inane topic, we might as well watch good indian cinema that has done well at Cannes or Berlin or Venice.

    Just my $0.02

44. The Narcisist on September 29th, 2007 1:07 am

    And a rejoinder to that….

    If you’re really so fixated on academy-induced nirvana, then do it right. Rather than sending movies that you like, send movies that the jury there would lap up.

    RDB turned up to be a dud last year. Thats because the jury at the Oscars would hardly identify with the rustic and laid-back life of Dijjay and company or for that matter, the revolutionary transformation later on. What could have sold far better there was the universal appeal of Gandhi in Lage Raho… or that of Shakespeare in Omkara. Oscars today are not about how good a movie is…its about how slickly its sold to the jury. The very fact that Scorcese won it for probably his worst movie is ample proof of the fact.

    2 more cents for y’all!

45. cinenausea on September 29th, 2007 4:04 am

    sudhir,
    no one who knows you would accuse you of corruption. Its evident. However, that brings us a whole new point. What is alarming then, is your taste in cinema. If you think Ekalavya was fair to be part of the list, then i am upset because i always thought you had better taste. Besides which, you suggested that Traffic signal should also have been in the shortlist. Thats scares me even more. Traffic signal is a much worse film.
    Whats up with your taste buds?
    Don’t be angry with those who accuse you. Simple matter is that most of us admire you as a filmmaker. But when you do something like this, we get hurt. And express it in our own way.
    Trust me. If subhash ghai were to be in your shoes and had made the same decision, we wouldn’t have cared. Because we don’t expect anything from him. He is not part of my life. But you are, to a lot of people. Look at this from this perspective and you will understand why so many of us feel letdown by you.
    Its your time to contemplate.
    Or do you think we expect too much from you and that you are not what your fans think of you?
    Time to contemplate.
    regds
    cn

46. suzy on September 29th, 2007 5:24 am

    I don’t think Sudhir meant that several films from India should be nominated. I think he means that several regional and other quality films be sent to the Jury for consideration and then a short list be drawn up. It has to be up to the producer to send their film by the deadline date. Once a short list has been finalized, the nominee has to be determined by a democratic vote. For people to then start crying and running to the courts claiming that their film is the greatest and should have been nominated, is amazing. Once the procedure is established, you have to abide by it, however flawed it may seem to you.

47. jayzee on September 29th, 2007 6:36 am

    Now there’s news that the Bombay High Court has issued notices to FFI opining that Eklavya’s selection looks ‘prima-facie biased’. What tripe! I mean where did the court come into picture? And how has it come to this conclusion?
    Courts in india have suddenly turned into some sort of alternate rule. They seem to decide the yardstick for everything!!
    And all this for what! Oscar nomination!! really this must be a bad dream!

48. night on September 29th, 2007 6:44 am

    A couple of corrections:

    #27 should read: “Until now it seemed like a combi of biggest hit/popular…and the film most likely to be catering to the *Indian Jury’s* perception of an Oscar film.”

    #36 should read: “We need to be clear about how films are selected/submitted first BEFORE we lay blame.”

49. sourav on September 29th, 2007 6:44 am

    Is it a piece of confirmed news. when the legislature fails..judiciary come and then ultimately the army which is chimerical

50. Betsy on September 29th, 2007 6:51 am

    Hi All,

    You think User Generated Movies should be featured in the Oscars too?

    An example of a promising project is Lets Film (See: http://www.LEtsFilm.com )

    LetsFilm.com is trying to make the world’s first mainstream collaborative movie - i.e. from content and ideas submitted by people from all across the world.

    Should there be a separate entry for UGM?

51. night on September 29th, 2007 6:53 am

    I’d like to add that though I don’t think Sudhir should be blamed for absent films, I don’t quite buy his enthusiasm for Eklavya either…

    And wtf re the Bombay High Court?!?! This is getting way out of hand! It’s just a FILM for god’s sake, not life or death!!!

52. night on September 29th, 2007 7:00 am

    More from VVC below….the latest is that he doesn’t own a cell phone :d

    http://www.mid-day.com/hitlist/2007/september/164731.htm

    Y’know fair enough if certain people think that Eklavya wasn’t the right choice, but this scale of hoo-haa is too much. Why wasn’t this much fuss made over Paheli and others?

53. night on September 29th, 2007 7:04 am

    =)) Anupam Kher joins in (note the mention of Ang Lee):

    http://www.mid-day.com/hitlist/2007/september/164733.htm

54. night on September 29th, 2007 7:17 am

    Rediff readers as entertaining as always:

    http://in.rediff.com/movies/2007/sep/25msg.htm

55. Jwalant on September 29th, 2007 9:40 am

    High court has contended that selection of Eklavya is biased.

    http://www.rediff.com/movies/2007/sep/29oscar.htm

56. machismo on September 29th, 2007 1:17 pm

    wow talk about a speedy trial when it comes to trivial stuff. way to go High Court.

57. sm on September 29th, 2007 3:41 pm

    I think when the High Court says “prima facie evidence of bias” it just means that there is enough of an argument presented for the case to be taken up by the court, and not dismissed out of hand. The court may still find that there is no evidence of bias when it actually hears the case.

    But I agree, this is a ridiculous step. All it does is completely invalidate whatever film is submitted to the Oscars. A better way to ruin Ekalavya’s chances couldn’t be found. Much more than sending ridiculous films like Jeans (which seems to be benchmark of idiocy, lol), this kind of infighting and backstabbing certainly presents India and its film community as a bunch of immature, unprofessional whiners, not ready for the big time. It may be a stretch, but I couldn’t help thinking of the way the British (and the Muslims, before them) benefited by the infighting between Indian kings. And now I read that several Hollywood studios are “poised” to gain entry into the Hindi film industry, with producers and directors slavering at the prospect of being funded by them.

    The court’s hearing isn’t scheduled until Oct. 10, while the first step of the Oscar marketing is a panel discussion at the Asia Society on Oct. 1, I thought? Way to go, India!

    I completely agree with Suzy’s comment #46, above.

58. Jwalant on September 29th, 2007 3:48 pm

    SM,
    Who was chairman of Jury that sent Jeans? Usko Joote maarna chahiye.

59. sm on September 29th, 2007 4:00 pm

    Jwalant,

    Sorry, I don’t know. I wasn’t following Hindi films then. You might be able to find out via a Google search.

60. aj on September 29th, 2007 8:40 pm

    wasnt this ranjit bahadur they are mentioning in all these articles ,also the editor on chameli??

61. rajeev on September 29th, 2007 9:22 pm

    does jury changes every year?

62. night on September 30th, 2007 4:26 am

    “What could have sold far better there was the universal appeal of Gandhi in Lage Raho

63. Jwalant on September 30th, 2007 8:38 am

    Night,
    Not many. Infact Dharm has excellent soundtrack. I have not seen the movie since it did not have a US release but will probably watch on DVD. I repeat soundtrack is awesome

64. The Narcisist on October 1st, 2007 2:20 am

    If at all there has to be a re-evaluation, would it have to be only between Dharm and Eklavya? Why should other good films be left out now? And would this set a precedent? Food for thought!

65. night on October 1st, 2007 2:51 am

    @Jwalant - thanks, have heard good stuff about the ’spiritual’ soundtrack of Dharm - blend of classical and contemporary with vedic chanting I believe.

    Any film with Pankaj Kapur in it is def worth watching.

66. night on October 1st, 2007 3:44 am

    Farah & Sajid hit back:

    http://www.indiafm.com/features/2007/10/01/3083/index.html

    http://www.indiafm.com/features/2007/09/28/3071/index.html

67. ridemghost on October 1st, 2007 9:15 am

    I dont think Farah or Sajid deserve a mention on this blog any day. There is something in their films that makes me puke and I cant be that harsh on my stomach

68. Raging Bull : Sudhir Mishra speaks on the Oscar Controversy on October 1st, 2007 6:45 pm

    [...] PFC [...]

69. anjali on October 2nd, 2007 12:44 am

    Hey nice profiles of Manish Acharya and Navdeep Singh in Indian Express on Sunday…. here’s the link: http://www.indianexpress.com/sunday/story/222174.html

70. DPac on October 2nd, 2007 4:45 am

    thanks for the link anjali…
    it sure was a great read!!

71. anjali on October 2nd, 2007 4:56 am

    Your welcome DPac!!

72. Dev on October 2nd, 2007 6:32 am

    Work on your transcribing! Numerous distracting typos in this article.

73. Mohit on October 2nd, 2007 6:57 am

    Lets come back to the Oscar controversy, I dont think a court can give judgment on anything as subjective as movie, how can a court judge that a perticular movie is better than the other? can describe which is a good movie? I didn’t liked the movie Black Friday, but that doesn’t mean that court will one day pass an order to ban me from watching movie? Most of the people liked Black, but I think it was bad, people liked Chak De, but I will anyday like to see the original plot “Remember the Titans” or “Pride”. what if somebody goes in court and court send me to jail for not liking these movies? if court is there to decide which movie should be sent to Oscars then why to have Juries? aren’t we going to see more and more Movie makers going to the court to for judgment which court should not pass. I dont know but I think Court can not decide anything abt arts. BTW M.F. Hussain matter is entirely different.

74. Sushovan on October 2nd, 2007 8:50 am

    Mohit,
    I tend to agree with all of that you wrote. Going to the court was ridiculous. Once a jury has decided something one should stick to that decision. Good or bad.
    But then i think there is a major flaw in the whole process of selection of the Jury itself.Its like “The Chronicle of death foretold”, the result is known before the events take place.
    A better way would be to invite entries from the Junta. You and me.People who have seen and loved the movies.This will ensure atleast mention of some of the best regional films too.The job of the jury would then be to see all these movies, shortlist the best and select one from those.The jury’s job should not be made easy.
    Coming to why Sudhir is Angry. I think he didn’t get his way in the jury.
    And yes, you are right Black was not a Good Movie.I didn’t like it either.I didn’t like the other Bhansali movies either.
    Sending Chak De will not serve either.Chak De is a Hollywood remake. I don’t think the goras will like to see a Hindi version of their own film.

75. Johnny Gaddaar on October 2nd, 2007 8:57 am

    @ Sushovan

    ChakDe - a Hollywood remake….Lol!!!
    Its taking might be inspired from a lot of hollywood movies….but pls…from no angle it is a remake….
    every underdog story follows the same pattern…that does not make a movie a remake…

    Black was selected in 2005’s top 10 movies by a European magazine (It came 5th)…

    Nothing personal…..Not liking Black has become some sort of a Status symbol…

76. Sushovan on October 2nd, 2007 9:10 am

    Yes Johnny Boy,you are right. I rephrase what i wrote earlier. Chak De is a Rehash of a no of Hollywood Movies.

    Black was Top 10 in 2005?? Wow that’s great. But i still don’t like it.

77. Johnny Gaddaar on October 2nd, 2007 11:09 am

    A few links about the same:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4568360.stm

    http://in.rediff.com/movies/2005/dec/29black.htm

    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1351397.cms

78. Mohit on October 2nd, 2007 1:12 pm

    @ Johny Gaddar
    “there can be only on hooligan in a team, and in this team I am the one..” does this dialogue sounds familier? ok I will give you one more ” I dont knw whether you like each other or not, but after tommorrow’s game you all are going to respect each other”… and another ” Iwont tell you how to play today.. I just want you to play for yourself..” I’ve got more…

    the last scene of India-Australia hockey final, India just wont the match and the whole team is celebrating and the whole stadium is enjoyoing team’s win but a man standing lonely is the Coack Kabeer Khan, for a second it looks as if he got his glory back…

    now if u can get the CD of the movie “Miracle”, go and see the actual shot which is picked as it is by Shimit Amin, still miracle scene is so beautiful that chak de could not match it…

    BTW the dialogues I told are from the movie “Remember the Titans”, and it is not the only movie, Pride, the same story line based on swimming, Miracle Based on true story of American (Ice) Hokcey team winning over USSR.. and many more similer films…

    PS: dialogues are not accurate, I just posted the outline of them…

79. indianeinstine on October 4th, 2007 2:15 am

    sudhir,u didnt yell wen HKA was not nominated………WHY?and now u dont want others to protest too.u want them to prove dre caliber b4 doin so.i dont buy dt sudhir.secondly i dont understand the jury’s fetish 4 desert & camels.i herd smwre dse tngs represent indian culture,ethics and all dt shit.dse films look like fancy dress paricipent to say d least.
    if v indians cant tolerate dse movies 4 three hrs how cud dey?i doubt dey even watch d whole movie.dre r 100s of movies 2 choose frm.Lagaan made it 2 d finals so movies wid rural backdrop get d 1st preference.its a pity is raat & HKA was not considered.and sudhir ill like to mention dt urs & vvc relation goes long back,both of u vre involved wid d making of Jaane bhi do yaaron.isnt it?

80. gurusirjee on October 4th, 2007 4:06 pm

    Mr Dddddha: vvw had no creative input into Jaane bhi do yaaron besides lending his name to one of the main characters. There is no denying the fact that vvw, Kundan Shah, Sudhir Mishra, Aziz Mirza et al.are contemporaries and more than acquaintances. Well so are Karan Johar, Aditya Chopra, Goldi Behl etc. And your point is…In European Cinema too, many of the great directors are friends, and so should they recuse themselves from judging each other’s work? Strange words indeed!

81. Adi on October 6th, 2007 4:06 am

    hmmm..funny how we never gave the jury selction process a serious thought.
    More than 80perc of the people in our country have a liking for escapist cinema ( mainly because of the way of life here)

    So it is but obvious that that a jury that is not selected carefully for a more mature cinema will vote for a movie like Eklavya … sigh..leave alone eklavya i am yet to get over their predilection for paheli over HKA !!!!!

    With all due respect to Mr. Mishra’s point of view , at least the outcry for Dharm made an impact that was long due…

82. Anushri Rao on October 7th, 2007 9:52 pm

    
    I do wonder what kind of a precedent this whole outcry on part of the producer of Dharm against the jurys decision will set…We can now expect more of the following:
    Miss India’s, Miss worlds , and Miss Universe pageant losers or runner ups will now question their respective jurys and catfight over who is more beautiful.I think our very own Ash and Sush can flag off the protests, followed by music reality show runner up, Amit Paul or whatever his name was.
    Schoolkids will have petty fights with teachers on why so and so got more marks than me, I think I am better.
    Cricketers will cry foul over why so and so got the man of the match..
    All the filmfare, IAFA awards and screen awards will have petty nitpicking and protests..with our bevy of heroines staming their dainty Jimmy Choo clad feet and heroes tearing out each others recently transplanted hair.
    My point is if you cant bring yourself to respect a jurys decision, please dont participate in these competitions, you have to respect that the jury is usually a varied number of people, not necessarily people rooting for certain so called filmi camp. Do you honestly think if someone like say, Karan johar was part of a film jury, he would root for a typical yashraj type peachy cream film…honestly, I dont think so, because a jury has the integrity to not play personal favourites.
    My point is basically that as long as we have a jury thats large and varied, I dont think we can go wrong. We must at all costs respect the jury. And if our films dont win oscars, either we have to make better fims or accept that their tastes in cinema are very different from ours and we dont really need to match up.I think Lagaan deserved an oscar,it transcended lingual and cultural barriers. I wish this whole Dharm bit had happened before, and maybe we could have then had the inspiration to take the Oscars to court for not selecting Lagaan!I think we should grow up, enjoy good world cinema,and the film festivals and not take the awards so seriously…ITS JUST AN AWARD

83. parth on October 8th, 2007 3:35 am

    Can we send ‘Johnny Gaddaar’ now???

    Let Chopra send ‘Eklavya’ as ‘independent’ entry..

84. Guru on October 8th, 2007 6:35 am

    From a nobody, the Dharm lady has become a somebody. There is never any bad publicity. Just ask Salmaan Khan and Sanjay Dutt. The Courts are going to prolong the drama and she and her team will give interviews and talk about discrimination against women and new directors and blah blah blah……! Everyone will be talking about the film now instead of the 5 people who initially saw it. Way to go lady. You surely have arrived.

85. Mohit on October 13th, 2007 9:20 am

    News Just in… Film Federation has just been Disolved… on Eklavya issue…

86. oz on October 13th, 2007 11:10 am

    Mohit, any links to the news @85?

87. Mohit on October 13th, 2007 11:41 am

    This News is just came in… you will get the detail in the Newspaper here is PTI take on this. It doesn’t say anthing abt disolving the jury but it is saying about some ” Corrective Measures”…

    FFI to meet tomorrow to take “corrective” action
    Mumbai, Oct 13 (PTI) The Film Federation of India (FFI) is meeting here tomorrow to decide on “corrective course” needed to be taken in the wake of the controversy of the selection of Amiatbh Bachchan-starrer film “Eklaviya” for the Oscars, FFI Chairman Vinod Pandey said tonight.
    “We are meeting tomorrow to take a corrective action as I feel the present selection committee may be asked by the Bombay High Court to take a self-correction course”, he said.
    The nomination of “Eklaviya” as India’s official entry for the Oscars in the foreign language category has been challenged in Bombay High Court by Bhavna Talwar, director of “Dharam” which lost out to the Vidhu Vinod Chopra movie.
    The Los Angeles-based Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences has asked FFI to decide by October 17 to either reconfirm the entry of “Eklaviya” or find an alternative to it.

88. NoVaDJ on October 15th, 2007 5:44 pm

    I found these two links about the subject:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7045480.stm

    http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/536641/1405550

Leave a Reply

Our Comments Policy : The following kinds of comments are troll capped, blocked and/or commenter's identity reported publicly: Verbal abuse, personal attacks, hate statements, spam, trolls, advertising. Please assist us in keeping the comments clean. Use the contact form to let us know if you find unwarranted comments on PFC. Thank you.