Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 11147 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2009 10:12 pm Post subject:
It's a Bollywood flick! That's been and is being NWO knobbled.
When last week Mundra's Shoot On Sight opened in London he was accused of exploiting and distorting the facts behind the gruesome tragedy that happened a year ago. Mundra is unfazed and says the dead guy's family is being incited into causing trouble. "I'm used to my biopics getting into trouble. I'm sure you remember the problems that were caused by Bhanwari Devi when I made a film on her gruesome gang rape (Bawandar). More recently, after Provoked about domestic violence, I went through a similar ordeal. And now my Sonia Gandhi epic has been put on hold on request from the Congress until the general elections. It can never be done with the Congress' active participation. But I hope we can eventually make the film without them breathing down our backs with litigations."
Jagmohan Mundra's film on terrorism in trouble Click here to add this article to My Clips
By Subhash K. Jha, September 2, 2008 - 11:15 IST
Jagmohan Mundra whose career is substantially based on biopics of famous people stands accused of exploiting the tragic killing of the innocent Brazilian bystander Jean Charles de Menezes in the July 2007 tube station bombing in London.
When last week Mundra's Shoot On Sight opened in London he was accused of exploiting and distorting the facts behind the gruesome tragedy that happened a year ago. Mundra is unfazed and says the dead guy's family is being incited into causing trouble. "I'm used to my biopics getting into trouble. I'm sure you remember the problems that were caused by Bhanwari Devi when I made a film on her gruesome gang rape (Bawandar). More recently, after Provoked about domestic violence, I went through a similar ordeal. And now my Sonia Gandhi epic has been put on hold on request from the Congress until the general elections. It can never be done with the Congress' active participation. But I hope we can eventually make the film without them breathing down our backs with litigations."
And that's precisely how Mundra feels at the moment. "The accusation that I've exploited the real-life tragedy in Shoot On Sight is totally unfounded. The relatives and family of de Menezes are being provoked into making these statements. None of these protestors have actually seen the film. It reminds me of what happened with Salman Rushdie after he wrote The Satanic Verses. Not too many had actually read the novel when a fatwa was passed against him. So I don't know what they are protesting about. Also the flak from the British press includes statements on how Shoot On Sight is like a TV drama. I don't take that as an insult. I've great respect for the TV medium."
Mundra admits Shoot On Sight had a lower opening in London than his earlier biopic Provoked. "That's because Provoked featured Aishwarya Rai, a known international name," says Mundra implying that Naseruddin Shah doesn't have the same international appeal. "Naseer has brought his own amazing insights into the role. And if Amitabh Bachchan had played the part as I had planned, he'd have imparted his own gravitas", adds Mundra.
About Naseer refusing to dub the Hindi version of Shoot On Sight Mundra says, "I respect his decision. But I also have to respect my producer's decision. They need to earn back their money. And what is wrong with Brits talking in Hindi? Didn't Robbie Coltrane argue Aishwarya's case in Hindi in Provoked? What about all the Japanese characters in the World War 2 epic Tora Tora Tora speaking in English? And in Devdas we heard the characters talking in Hindi when they were all speaking in Bengali in the novel. Cinema is all about suspension of disbelief. It's also at the end of the day a commercial venture. My Indian producers need to make back their money when they release the film on September 19. And I'd rather have British characters making themselves comprehensible to audiences in Rajasthan and Bihar than be linguistically correct."
Sighing Mundra ends, "Let's hope my distributor Pyramid does a better job of my Shoot On Sight than they did with their last film Mukhbiir."
http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/news/2008/09/02/11868/index.html
Quote:
A film that shows how gutless Britain has become
Michael Prescott
Wednesday, 6th August 2008
Michael Prescott — who was a passenger on the King’s Cross train on 7/7 — applauds a movie inspired by the terrorist attacks. But why is nobody keen to distribute it?
The world has an estimated 798 billionaires. Thousands more people are each worth hundreds of million. Any one of them is in a position to blow £8 million on a whim. Only one of them has decided to gamble that amount on a film about how Britain views its Muslims in the age of Islamist terror. Aron Govil is an Indian-born Hindu who has lived in New York since 1970, gradually accruing wealth through his activities in industry and the energy business. Eighteen months ago a friend showed him a movie script set in London, inspired by the 7 July Tube bombings and the shooting of the terror-suspect-who-wasn’t, Jean Charles de Menezes....
http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/880091/a-film-that-sh ows-how-gutless-britain-has-become.thtml
Like most films (i.e. non-big budget blockbusters, and the majority of British films), it got a limited theatrical run and then a DVD release a few months later. My copy of the latter arrived a couple of days after the December release date. How, exactly, is this film being "suppressed"?! As you say, it's effectively a Bollywood production, and how many of those play in the average local multiplex?
Is Tony Gosling there? How did he rate the factual accuracy of the ITV Menezes killing drama docu' that aired 9pm last night? I only caught the last 15 minutes but it made the police look clueless idiots the bit I saw. Also, contrary to the testimony of all witnesses, it had the firearms squad shouting "armed police!.." when entering JCM's carriage.
The film makers repeatedly showed JCM swiping his oyster card, i can't seem to get anyone to confirm this was or could have been a factor in identifying "the suspect". Apparently Brixton tube was shut that day so JCM caught a further bus to Stockwell, how did the police not know he was not a bus bomber?
The film is still looking for distribution Nick or has that escaped your notice?
Dozens of films fail to secure widespread distribution in the UK, and some do not even get a DVD release. Many British films get neither.
Shoot on Sight got a limited cinema release, and was then rushed to DVD a few months later, which is hardly unusual, by any means. Take the relatively high-profile film Flood, which was made at the same time. Despite starring Robert Carlyle, Tom Courtnay, David Suchet and Joanne Whalley, it was only screened in a handful of London cinemas, and was then promptly released on DVD, before turning up in an extended form on ITV. If Shoot on Sight is being "suppressed," then so is Flood.
Looking at the British Board of Film Classification's website, of the last twenty films directed by Jag Mundhra before Shoot on Sight, only one got a cinema classification - indicating that it got some form of release - as well as a video classification, while only three more got the latter. In other words, out of twenty films, only four got any sort of legitimate distribution in the UK.
When you have time, I would suggest that you have a look at the BBFC's database*. Try selecting films only, with a date-range of any particular month last year. It only returns the first 50 titles, but that won't matter, as it's still a reasonable sample. I think you'll be surprised at how few titles you've even heard of, let alone seen. Looking at the 50 that come up for January 2008, there are perhaps 14 that I recognise the titles of. This is the reality of film distribution in the UK, and that fact that one particular production hasn't done as well as you personally may wish doesn't change it.
Is Tony Gosling there? How did he rate the factual accuracy of the ITV Menezes killing drama docu' that aired 9pm last night? I only caught the last 15 minutes but it made the police look clueless idiots the bit I saw. Also, contrary to the testimony of all witnesses, it had the firearms squad shouting "armed police!.." when entering JCM's carriage.
The film makers repeatedly showed JCM swiping his oyster card, i can't seem to get anyone to confirm this was or could have been a factor in identifying "the suspect". Apparently Brixton tube was shut that day so JCM caught a further bus to Stockwell, how did the police not know he was not a bus bomber?
No one remember the Turkish film of a fictional character journying through war ravaged Iraq?
Kurtlar Vadisi Irak.
Even with Hollywood actors it was practicaly outright banned here and in the States! _________________ 'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'
“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”
Why hasn't this been all over the cinemas?
Too good for race relations?
It had a run in London cinemas and was widely poster-advertised in the capital. If it had been playing to packed houses, undoubtedly it would have been screened further afield. Many films get this sort of testing-the-water screening pattern - if they're successful, the distribution gets expanded, if not, it doesn't. This is a matter of economics, not politics.
No one remember the Turkish film of a fictional character journying through war ravaged Iraq?
Kurtlar Vadisi Irak.
Even with Hollywood actors it was practicaly outright banned here and in the States!
"Banned" in what sense? It got a BBFC cinema certificate here and was certainly screened in the US and released on DVD there. More to the point, how many other Turkish-language films get wide distribution in either country?
Considering that Battle for Haditha, Redacted, The Mark of Cain, Rendition, Extraordinary Rendition, etc. have had much higher cinema, DVD and television profiles, there is little to suggest that the only issue with both Shoot on Sight and Kurtlar Vadisi Irak, is that they are simply not good enough commercial proposition to merit wider distribution than they actually got. As stated previously, Shoot on Sight was screened in cinemas, and you can bet your life that if it had been phenomenally successful, then its distribution would have been ramped up accordingly. There was ceratinly enough advertising and press coverage that many Londoners could not have failed to have been aware of it, but clearly not enough of them were interested in seeing it.
So what if Kurtlar Vadisi Irak had "Hollywood actors"? Plenty of high-profile actors appear in films that end up languishing in obscurity. In fact the DVD of Shoot on Sight demonstrates this quite well, as it also contains trailers for four film featuring fairly well-known actors, i.e.:
Stuck - Mena Suvari, Stephen Rea
Animal 2 - Ving Rhames
The Gene Generation - Faye Dunaway
Red - Brian Cox & Tom Sizemore
But how many of these films has anyone even heard of, let alone actually seen?
No one remember the Turkish film of a fictional character journying through war ravaged Iraq?
Kurtlar Vadisi Irak.
Even with Hollywood actors it was practicaly outright banned here and in the States!
"Banned" in what sense? It got a BBFC cinema certificate here and was certainly screened in the US and released on DVD there. More to the point, how many other Turkish-language films get wide distribution in either country?
Considering that Battle for Haditha, Redacted, The Mark of Cain, Rendition, Extraordinary Rendition, etc. have had much higher cinema, DVD and television profiles, there is little to suggest that the only issue with both Shoot on Sight and Kurtlar Vadisi Irak, is that they are simply not good enough commercial proposition to merit wider distribution than they actually got. As stated previously, Shoot on Sight was screened in cinemas, and you can bet your life that if it had been phenomenally successful, then its distribution would have been ramped up accordingly. There was ceratinly enough advertising and press coverage that many Londoners could not have failed to have been aware of it, but clearly not enough of them were interested in seeing it.
So what if Kurtlar Vadisi Irak had "Hollywood actors"? Plenty of high-profile actors appear in films that end up languishing in obscurity. In fact the DVD of Shoot on Sight demonstrates this quite well, as it also contains trailers for four film featuring fairly well-known actors, i.e.:
Stuck - Mena Suvari, Stephen Rea
Animal 2 - Ving Rhames
The Gene Generation - Faye Dunaway
Red - Brian Cox & Tom Sizemore
But how many of these films has anyone even heard of, let alone actually seen?
So are you saying the films are trash because they are foreign?
Anyway Kurtlar Vadisi Irak premiered to around 5 UK cinemas around a backdrop of Press Ridicule. It has never seen UK DVD release and if you can send links to any US release then fine. I never found any.
My copy came from Germany where it allegedly did well, but then there is a huge Turkish minority in Germany
Oh and it was a big budget film for Turkey, have you seen it? _________________ 'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'
“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”
Oh and if you think Brazil in its original form is not fit for UK consumption for the aforementioned reasons think again!! Nick Cooper
Why are some political films so hard to get and others not I wonder?
Why do bands of a cetain ilk get signed and others not I wonder?
Care to take this further? Care to rummage through my record collection??
Why is it that when searching for the Lyrics of 80s band Club Nouveau the only ones shown are the non political songs?
Come on M8 Censorship is real, and growing get used to the idea! _________________ 'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'
“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”
No one remember the Turkish film of a fictional character journying through war ravaged Iraq?
Kurtlar Vadisi Irak.
Even with Hollywood actors it was practicaly outright banned here and in the States!
"Banned" in what sense? It got a BBFC cinema certificate here and was certainly screened in the US and released on DVD there. More to the point, how many other Turkish-language films get wide distribution in either country?
Considering that Battle for Haditha, Redacted, The Mark of Cain, Rendition, Extraordinary Rendition, etc. have had much higher cinema, DVD and television profiles, there is little to suggest that the only issue with both Shoot on Sight and Kurtlar Vadisi Irak, is that they are simply not good enough commercial proposition to merit wider distribution than they actually got. As stated previously, Shoot on Sight was screened in cinemas, and you can bet your life that if it had been phenomenally successful, then its distribution would have been ramped up accordingly. There was ceratinly enough advertising and press coverage that many Londoners could not have failed to have been aware of it, but clearly not enough of them were interested in seeing it.
So what if Kurtlar Vadisi Irak had "Hollywood actors"? Plenty of high-profile actors appear in films that end up languishing in obscurity. In fact the DVD of Shoot on Sight demonstrates this quite well, as it also contains trailers for four film featuring fairly well-known actors, i.e.:
Stuck - Mena Suvari, Stephen Rea
Animal 2 - Ving Rhames
The Gene Generation - Faye Dunaway
Red - Brian Cox & Tom Sizemore
But how many of these films has anyone even heard of, let alone actually seen?
So are you saying the films are trash because they are foreign?
Not in the slightest, since many of my favourite films of all time are "foreign" in one form or another, but even then few of them were an outstanding commercial succes in the English-speaking world.
Quote:
Anyway Kurtlar Vadisi Irak premiered to around 5 UK cinemas around a backdrop of Press Ridicule. It has never seen UK DVD release and if you can send links to any US release then fine. I never found any.
Candian company DVD Box Office is usually good for obscure releases, and indeed they do have it listed under the English language title:
My copy came from Germany where it allegedly did well, but then there is a huge Turkish minority in Germany
Oh and it was a big budget film for Turkey, have you seen it?
Having a big budget in the country of origin doesn't usually count for much when it comes to selling a film to English-speaking audiences, who generally dislike dubbing almost as much as they dislike subtitles. Those aren't my prejudices by any means (I vastly prefer subtitles to dubbing), but the simple fact is that distributors have an uphill struggle with foreign-language films, and very few making more than even a moderate commercial impact.
No, I haven't seen KVI, but I have no aversion to doing so. By the same token, though, have you seen Shoot on Sight, which is far easier to obtain? I had the DVD on pre-order before it came out, but haven't had a chance to watch the whole thing yet. From what I have seen, yes, it is competently made on a technical level, but the script is rather heavy-handed and "obvious". It also really shies away from parallels with JCdM, as the actual circumstances of the shooting are quite different.
Oh and if you think Brazil in its original form is not fit for UK consumption for the aforementioned reasons think again!!
Sigh! I never said I thought it was, just explained that it is hardly unique in not getting wider distribution. There are many very good films that never get into cinemas or even onto DVD, and eventual limp onto some late night TV slot on BBC2 or C4.
Quote:
Why are some political films so hard to get and others not I wonder?
The question is more why are some films so hard to get and others not, full stop? There's an American film about Ecstasy from a couple of years ago that seems to be their answer to Human Traffic and as such treats the subject in a far more realistic and less hysterical manner than the mainstream, but the makers are struggling to even get it onto DVD. However, until recently films that are overtly political or politically subversive invariably struggled, mostly because audiences in general simply aren't interested.
Quote:
Why do bands of a cetain ilk get signed and others not I wonder?
Care to take this further? Care to rummage through my record collection??
Why is it that when searching for the Lyrics of 80s band Club Nouveau the only ones shown are the non political songs?
Come on M8 Censorship is real, and growing get used to the idea!
Of course sensorship is real, and as someone who has more long been interested in films and television from a historical and cultural perspective, I'm more aware of the subtleties of it than most people, but not every case of a programme or film not being shown, or shown in a more limited way than some people might like, can be attributed to it. If there is a perception by those who have control over broadcast or distribution don't think eneough people are interested in seeing it, then few people will, but that's true for all programmes and films, not just political ones. The reality is that even when something is "available," the audience self-censors, as the sad fact that more people will repeatedly watch the puerile antics of Ultimate Force than ever watched Battle for Haditha or The Mark of Cain proves.
Last edited by Nick Cooper on Thu Feb 26, 2009 2:47 pm; edited 2 times in total
Cheers for the reply, sorry I kinda sounded off but it is all getting to me now. Soon I dare say some bastage will soon be trying to snatch my vinyl out of my hand
I can see also now you where not intentionally trying to derail the thread
The Turkish version of KVI is best, Iraqi spoken in Turkish and English spoken in er English, you don't really need the subtitles anyhow its all pretty straight forward. It carries many of the outragious things happening in Iraq that managed to find themselves in Western Media.
It is not the best movie by far but it sure is a welcome change to see an Arabic perspective film! All the more I say
With modern media today it surprises me how our leaders can wage this endless war I understand how the Germans did't have a chance with regard to propaganda, but today we have no excuses for letting this strife continue! _________________ 'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'
“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”
wow thats very Acid Also no doubt insiration for Orbital's 'Satan' ep. _________________ 'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'
“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 11147 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2009 11:51 pm Post subject:
This film has been suppressed big time. No distribution is basically a killer.
The same way the NWO killed off the Rank Organisation by buying up the distribution (cinemas) and closing them off to Rank.
Anyway here's a very little known docudrama about Jean Charles' last minutes. Remember the BBC filmed a docudrama and then shredded it!
This film has been suppressed big time. No distribution is basically a killer.
The same way the NWO killed off the Rank Organisation by buying up the distribution (cinemas) and closing them off to Rank.
Anyway here's a very little known docudrama about Jean Charles' last minutes. Remember the BBC filmed a docudrama and then shredded it!
This film has been suppressed big time. No distribution is basically a killer.
Plenty of films get little or no distribution. Flood was made at the same time as Shoot on Sight, with as big names in it, got a comparable amount of publicity and news coverage, yet fared little better. Considering that Shoot on Sight did get shown in London cinemas, and has been released on DVD (through which many film make the bulk of their profits), what exactly is your evidence that it is being "supressed" other than you thinking it should have got wider distribution than it did?
The film was widely advertised on billboards in London, so it was hardly being kept "secret," but by the same token there is no evidence that it resulted in the few cinemas that were screening it playing to packed audiences. If that had happened, one could question why the distribution wasn't extended, but it didn't, so we can't. The fact that ITV's docu-drama on de Menezes managed to draw just 1.4 million viewers in a mid-week primetime slot probably explains why they weren't rushing to watch Shoot on Sight, either.
Quote:
The same way the NWO killed off the Rank Organisation by buying up the distribution (cinemas) and closing them off to Rank.
An interesting theory/attribution.
Quote:
Anyway here's a very little known docudrama about Jean Charles' last minutes.
Little known, no doubt, becuase of the extremely amateurish nature of it.
Quote:
Remember the BBC filmed a docudrama and then shredded it!
Er.... no they didn't. The production was halted in the development phase:
What is your take on the ITV docu-drama, Stockwell, Nick ?
I thought it was fairly well done, but could have benefitted from another half-hour duration (i.e. 75 mins rather than 50 mins). I don't think the issue of the quality of the "suspect" photograph and that failure to obtain/distribute a better one was adequately explored. Viewers will have been given the impression that the photo available was very poor, but not that a better one was available. The same applied to Jean Charles communications with his work colleague on the morning - I don't recall seeing any explanation of why he made the journey he did, got off the bus at Brixton and then reboarded, etc.
One thing that was a surpise was how clearly it showed that the lateness of the firearms team was partly down to the job being assigned to the shift that didn't come on until 07:00, and - apparently - no attempt being made to bring them in early or to overlap with whoever was on until 07:00. I don't think the press has paid much attention to this angle in the past, but it seems a major failing, although quite believable that it could have occured in the context of how SO19 seems to be run.
Is Tony Gosling there? How did he rate the factual accuracy of the ITV Menezes killing drama docu' that aired 9pm last night? I only caught the last 15 minutes but it made the police look clueless idiots the bit I saw. Also, contrary to the testimony of all witnesses, it had the firearms squad shouting "armed police!.." when entering JCM's carriage.
The film makers repeatedly showed JCM swiping his oyster card, i can't seem to get anyone to confirm this was or could have been a factor in identifying "the suspect". Apparently Brixton tube was shut that day so JCM caught a further bus to Stockwell, how did the police not know he was not a bus bomber?
...What about these points Nick? (Tony doesn't entertain people who sympathise with some of Dr.Wood's 911 theories me thinks)
Is Tony Gosling there? How did he rate the factual accuracy of the ITV Menezes killing drama docu' that aired 9pm last night? I only caught the last 15 minutes but it made the police look clueless idiots the bit I saw. Also, contrary to the testimony of all witnesses, it had the firearms squad shouting "armed police!.." when entering JCM's carriage.
The film makers repeatedly showed JCM swiping his oyster card, i can't seem to get anyone to confirm this was or could have been a factor in identifying "the suspect". Apparently Brixton tube was shut that day so JCM caught a further bus to Stockwell, how did the police not know he was not a bus bomber?
...What about these points Nick? (Tony doesn't entertain people who sympathise with some of Dr.Wood's 911 theories me thinks)
Yes, I noticed that it showed the officers shouting "armed police" while coming down the escalators/on the platform, but I'm pretty certain that they weren't shown doing so in the train car itself, although I'd have to check my recording to be sure.
As to JCdM's use of his Oyster card, it's certainly been established that he did so. However, we don't know whether or not the card was actually registered or not. When first introduced, you had to have an earlier-era Travelcard photocard if you were putting a season ticket longer than a week on an Oyster card, but I think that may have been phased out by July 2007. If he used his card for only weekly Travelcards or Pre-pay, it may not have been registered, in which case it wouldn't have been any use for identification purposes.
It is, of course, an unanswered question as to why he was not deemed enough of a threat on a bus or even on foot beforehand to intercept him them, as it's clear the surveillance team were keen to do. ITV's drama had them requesting to, "do a stop from cover," and the use of this terminology is significant. It suggests that the officers wanted to challenge JC from a distance, with enough cover and/or separation between them and him to minimise any potential risk. It's notable that some early news reports erroneously claimed that the surveillance officers were not armed*, but we now know they were. My reading between the lines is that there was an unwillingness to "trust" the surveillance officers in carrying out the stop, but this is less a reflection on them as on SO19's self-promotional tendency to claim that only they should be doing that sort of thing. In one sense it's remarkable that the insitutional arrogance and inflexibility of SO19 was a major factor in what happened, yet they have more or less escaped censure on that level.
Maybe the unwillingness was that someone had a wisper in his ear 'we need a fatality to persuade the public the threat is real'? just a thought that will never be answered _________________ 'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'
“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”
This obvious factor of whether or not JCM's TFL Oyster card could have identified him in 2005 has never been made public suggests it probably was the case he could have been identified from his TFL Oyster card, given the proven untruths stated by the met police in this case "jumped the barrier" "heavy coat with wires sticking out" "ran from police" "CCTV not working" "we shouted armed police"etc..
How can we clear up the confusion over whether the ITV film makers, contrary to every witness testimony under oath, showed the gunmen shouting "Armed police!" when entering JCM'S tube carrriage. Can it be downloaded anywhere? youtube?
The fact the police let JCM take two bus journeys and get on the tube at Stockwell suggests entrapment and intentional killing for some reason, was Menezes being eliminated?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
I understand how the Germans did't have a chance with regard to propaganda, but today we have no excuses for letting this strife continue!