Comments on: Rashomon – Three men and some truth

By: movie props

movie props — Wed, 06 Jul 2005 09:34:39 +0000

movie propsmovie replicasmovie propshttp://starwars.everything-discounted.commovie replicasmovie propshttp://starwars.reelawesome.commovie replicasmovie propsmovie replicashttp://starwars.discount-buyer.commovie replicasmovie propshttp://www.movie-replicas.com

By: Lazy Geek

Lazy Geek — Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:02:57 +0000

Kombat, Thanks and it’s true. Look at it not as belling the cat. Look at it as taking time to write me a mail. That’s why not many do that. Otherwise, many are aware of spell mistakes and grammatical mistakes that get sneaked into my posts.

Well, I make sure they don’t happen. Not everytime. Also too much of editing spoils the blog’s life. Then a blog becomes a newspaper. Ofcourse I’m also not comfortable in reading a passage with grammar and spell mistakes. Thanks for putting it so polietly. Will take additional care from the next time. Bear with me.

By: MortalKombat

MortalKombat — Tue, 12 Apr 2005 13:30:22 +0000

Forget punctuation, at first ‘glance’ I got 13 grammatical mistakes. Not being nitpicky just doing my bit to make you a better writer. Honest introspection will tell you that I am not being unjustly critical too..Somebody’s got to bell the cat, you see.

By: raj

raj — Mon, 11 Apr 2005 23:35:13 +0000

Rajs, Couldn’t disagree with you more. On the first line when you said it was your opinion was cool. But then when you genralised your comment that the MANY of us(most of whom you would be strangers) suck, since they pretended the movie was good, you lost the battle there. BTW, the cliched question is here for you to answer before we even start talking more about Rashomon. Can you define acting. Let’s talk about Over-acting then

Hey Lazy,

I got the idea about people here by reading the blogs. I am a frequent reader to most. But lets agree that most are all in their late 20s and 30s and most of them are engineers. Just look at the arguement about Kamal, Rajini, Mani, etc. Its cool to be like that. But my point is, who knows about acting or over-acting? Have you taken a course? Many say Sivaji overacted in many movies in the 80s. Its alright to agree or disagree. But to pretend that you know more than you are is not cool. Other’s who read the blog may agree with you just to fit in the group. Thats all.

Chill!

By: Vijay

Vijay — Mon, 11 Apr 2005 23:22:28 +0000

Swamy, true. Yet another thing where I get skeptical is the whole symbolism thing and how it adds value to a movie. Many time, these desi ppl read the movie reviews, know the intended symbolism in advance and then pretend to like it and praise it after watching the film. Left on their own, I would be surprised if they would have got the symbolism in the first place. Also,How much of symbolism is needed and how much does it add to the viewer’s movie-watching experience, is in itself debatable. I have known some poeple attributing vague symbolisms to certain characters and scenes in films. Whether the director himself intended it or not is another issue Once again its just our tendency, when we watch movies of critically acclaimed directors we search for symbolisms and try to over-analyze the movie.

Lazy, I am cool, just pointing out afew things I have observed amongst the desi audience here in US and also amongst a few back home who watch English movies regularly.

By: swami

swami — Mon, 11 Apr 2005 03:40:59 +0000

I fully agree with Vijay.

For me, cinema has two types of contents. Technical and Emotional.

As a cinema viewer, I attach more importance for emotional content – particularly because I am a novice when it comes to the technical aspects.

And it is very difficult (not impossible) to fully appreciate emotional content across cultures. So, when people claim to have done that, and re-iterate a classic as a classic, makes me very skeptical.

By: Lazy Geek

Lazy Geek — Sun, 10 Apr 2005 09:05:43 +0000

Vijay, Hmmm. you are in a mood to stir things up. Welcome. If for someone a stanley kubrick film seems to you like a documentary, Rashomon would be like Film Division. Since those of them can’t sit through a movie can never criticize others for being pretentious.

I do agree that there are pretence in those respective circles. For example in the theatre circle, some of them are really involved in movies/theatres. A few others want to just hang around with them and keep name dropping during conversations. That’s so common in this dog-eat-dog world. You can’t be critical of them. Survival is a need of the day. So cool-off and watch a jackie chan movie

By: Vijay

Vijay — Sun, 10 Apr 2005 00:22:28 +0000

I have to agree with rajs somewhat. Not on Rashomon, but on some other films. Funny thing is most Indians come here to US mostly exposed to the action blockbusters/comedies of Hollywood. Note: I said most, not all. And then after they are in US and have seen some local sitcoms/movies for a while and are a bit more “americanized” in taste and can understand dialogue in movies better, they look up some top 100 list by Roger Ebert or IMDB or AFI and start praising every one of those movies and calling them as “clasics” and son. A lot of these movies, in my opinion, would mean more to someone who has lived most of his life here in US or simply an American. They are the targetted audiences of these movies in most cases. Imagine an American trying to develop a taste for Tamil movies and trying to see movies like Mudhal mariyaadhai or Devar Magan or Virumandi. Thats the situation most Indians are in. Yet they seem to be a little pretentious with their reviews as if they had seen everything Hollywood has to offer and have the ability to proclaim a movie as a classic just because they liked or they compelled themselves into liking it as it figured in the top 100 list Typical human(or desi) psychology.

I laugh hard when I read such reviews for some of those cold, distant, documentary-like Stanley Kubrick films which demands the utmost patience from the viewer to sit though them.

By: Lazy Geek

Lazy Geek — Sat, 09 Apr 2005 10:55:34 +0000

In my opinion, this movie was ok. There were no layers. It was a very simple movie with overacting. Maybe it was a trendsetter at that time. If you watch it now, it is a very normal movie. I somehow think that many of us just suck up, pretend to like what others think or say is good, just to fit in.

By: balaji

balaji — Sat, 09 Apr 2005 09:48:40 +0000

Hi guru,

there’s an article abt you in Hindu at

http://www.hindu.com/mp/2005/04/09/stories/2005040902050100.htm

May be you knew it already.