Posts Tagged ‘Fashion’
By SHAHEEN PARKAR (Mid-Day; December 18, 2009)
Why Gauhar Khan is opening up way after Rocket Singh’s release
All this while, Gauhar Khan preferred to remain mum about Rocket Singh and the buzz about her so-called ‘cold war’ with Shazahn Padamsee who also features in the film.
“I was under contract with Yash Raj not to speak till the film releases. I wanted to respect it even though others may not have,” says the model-turned-actress. “I did not want to have any bad vibes around nor upset anyone. I only wanted my performance to do the talking which I am glad it did.”
At a private screening she received compliments from Yash Chopra as well as her co-star Ranbir Kapoor’s parents Rishi and Neetu Singh. “They telling me that I had done well in the film was huge for me. I was so jittery but the response has been overwhelming.”
She states that after the screening, she went up to Shazahn and wished her luck for her first film. “I don’t even know Shazahn and we didn’t share screen space. Nor were there any film-related events that we would be together. So I really don’t know where all this crept up? Guess this is what happens when there is a PR machinery at work.”
At the moment, it’s only acting for her. “The fashion world and ramp is out for me now. I only want to concentrate on movies.”
She was picked up for Rocket Singh during her television outing Jhalak Dikkhla Jaa. Most viewers would remember her as an extremely emotional contestant who cried often. “But that’s how I am, even off-screen. I always get emotional. I cried even after Rocket Singh’s screening!” she says.
Aan- Men at work-Did a dance number in Madhur Bhandarkar flick
Phir Hera Pheri-Was to be launched in this film. It never happened
Ashutosh Gowariker rubbed Madhur Bhandarkar the wrong way when he took digs at Priyanka Chopra at an awards function not so long ago. She was starring in Fashion then and the director Madhur Bhandarkar hadn’t taken too kindly to the remarks. However, when the wives are close friends, the animosity is bound to not last long.
As predicted, the two are friends again after having made up. No one knows who extended the olive branch, but the two have reconciled.
The patch-up happened a few days ago. A source reveals, “The relationship between the two families was too strong to be broken. Madhur’s wife Renu and Ashutosh’s wife Sunita, in particular, were very friendly . They are back to being thick friends again. None of them will tell you who took the initiative to patch up. All’s well that ends well.”
When asked to confirm that all was well between the two families now, Sunita Gowariker maintained, “It always was,” and added, “There was never a fall out for a patch-up to happen.”
Both sides take the same stand. Renu Bhandarkar said, “Everything is fine between Madhur and Ashutosh. Sunita and I meet up frequently. There is no problem.”
|Renu and Madhur Bhandarkar||Sunita and Ashutosh Gowariker|
The trouble had started brewing when Priyanka won the best actress award for Madhur’s Fashion. Ashutosh compared Priyanka with Aishwarya and expressed his shock for Aishwarya not winning the best actress award as she was also nominated for Jodhaa Akbar in the same category. Madhur had shot back in the press, saying, “Ashutosh’s viewpoint was in a very bad taste, because it was a public podium where you just cannot demean anyone, especially Priyanka Chopra who, besides the fact that she had acted in my film Fashion, is also a dear friend.”
After that, both of them wanted to release their films (What’s Your Rashee? and Jail) on the same day at the box-office. That IMPAA did not permit Madhur to release it on the same day is another story.
At any rate, it’s all in the past now.
SUBHASH K JHA Times News Network (BOMBAY TIMES; December 7, 2009)
Rumour has it that Priyanka Chopra and Shahid Kapoor, who were “good friends” during the making of Kaminey, are no longer on talking terms. But destiny continues to play cruel games with them.
In Madhur Bhandarkar’s Fashion, Priyanka, who played a model, displayed a mobile number on screen at every audition. Now, Shahid, who plays a film aspirant in Ken Ghosh’s Chance Pe Dance, was also spotted displaying the same mobile number in the theatrical trailer, which is being aired with Kurbaan.
Guess neither Priyanka nor Shahid wanted it this way but as luck would have it, both the films Fashion and Chance Pe Dance are being presented by the same film corporation (UTV). The unimaginative creative team must have taken the liberty of passing of what was once Priyanka’s to Shahid.
So, who does this number belong to? Shahid or Priyanka?
When we probed further, it was revealed that the number displayed on both Shahid and Priyanka’s audition board actually belongs to Ram Mirchandani, who was once working in UTV and is now with another corporate.
Soon after Fashion released, Ram had made his displeasure known about getting a hundred phone calls a day from people who thought that it was Priyanka’s number in real life.
Now one wonders whether Ram will still continue to get as many phone calls after people see the number displayed by Shahid, who is currently riding a wave.
A source says, “If it had struck Shahid that the number he was holding on the slate is the the same one that Priyanka had used in Fashion, he would probably have asked the writers to change it. Now he has just to live with the fact that what was once Priyanka’s is now his by default, if not by design.”
Commenting on the story, Ram says, “I didn’t know that Shahid was going to be displaying my number on a slate for Chance Pe Dance. Ken Ghosh and Shahid told me about it after they had shot the scene. They told me it was done in good faith and I should be a sport. I don’t think Shahid or Ken knew that Priyanka has used the same number in Fashion. It is just one of those coincidences.”
TEAM BT Times News Network (November 19, 2009)
Poor Madhur Bhandarkar. The Bollywood filmmaker, who’s just had a critically acclaimed release in Jail, finds himself in the dock once again for rape charges by aspiring actress Preeti Jain dating back to July 2004. Fortunately, the Andheri Metropolitan Magistrate who rejected the Versova Police’s adverse report of the charges from back then and decided to conduct an inquiry into the case, has not ordered Bhandarkar’s arrest. The flamboyant filmmaker is not unduly worried by this development. “But my family is going through trauma,” he admitted to BT. It is a bittersweet moment for him. The news comes at a time when he is in Egypt attending the Cairo International Film Festival where five of his films — Chandni Bar, Traffic Signal, Page 3, Corporate and Fashion — are being screened as a tribute to Indian cinema. “My films reflect society and are liked by the classes and masses,” said Madhur, “I’ve got name and fame after a struggle, and I request society not to make a judgement until the case is over, so please don’t give me a trial in the media, I have faith in the judiciary.” But, the question uppermost in people’s minds is this: is Madhur a victim of the country’s rape laws? The filmmaker, naturally, thinks so. “It also amounts to blackmail,” he alleged of this sordid bit of dirty linen that was washed in public by the starlet.
Facts of the case
In July 2004, Preeti had lodged a complaint with the Versova Police against Madhur alleging he had raped her 16 times between 1999 and 2004 under the pretext of casting her as actress in his films. Madhur insists the complaint was of “cheating” and did not mention rape.
Our View: Irrespective of what relationship they shared, how can what happened between Madhur and Preeti amount to rape? She claims she was raped 16 times in four years, which is not like saying several times in one night. If this was rape, what prevented her from going to the police after the first incident? Why wait four years? And what prompted the complaint? Was it outrage, jealousy, indignation, a burning desire to teach the man a lesson? If Madhur had promised to cast her in his films, and if he had honoured this alleged commitment, would their alleged sex still be rape? The humiliation, the hurt, the abuse of body and soul that is caused by rape, is as much the 16th time as it would be the first… and any woman suffering this exploitation for four years and then crying rape, sounds like she’s complaining against rejection. Not the sexual act itself.
What is Rape?
The dictionary defines it as “the unlawful compelling of a woman through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse; and the act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person”. The Supreme Court’s expansive interpretation of rape in recent years has been to stretch the ambit to include consensual sex based on ‘‘false promise to marry’’. What was clearly never in its contemplation was to bring the casting couch — promise to give work in exchange of sex — under the definition of rape. Even if Preeti’s allegations are taken at face value, it is debatable whether they constitute prima facie evidence to try Madhur on the charge of rape. The allegation, if a promise was made and broken, is a case of fraud. But when sex is involved, courts tend to treat it as a case of rape. Sex by deceit. The opening made by the Supreme Court to provide relief to those who had been deceived into having sex on false promise to marry cannot be pushed further for the sake of those who claim to have been deceived similarly by false promise to give work.
The idea that sexual intercourse between a man and a woman can occur only if they intend to marry clearly has no place in a liberal society. Also, if the woman gets into a physical relationship because she has been fooled into believing that marriage is on the cards, we may question the morality of the man, but is it not extreme to equate his deception with rape? We would suggest that it is time the law adopted a more nuanced approach to what is universally acknowledged to be a complex issue. Having a breach of promise law to deal with such cases would be more suitable than clubbing it with rape, which is an extremely violent offence.
Is having sex for work any different from prostitution?
This does not come under deception and so on or being conned on the basis of a false promise of marriage, etc. In the case of the casting couch, the lady gives consent as she has been promised something and if she is able to prove that she was deceived into giving her consent then it does attract the provisions of the law… but this, of course, is quite difficult to prove.
— M N Singh,
Former Mumbai Police Commissioner
The starlet cannot say it’s rape. She can call it cheating. She cannot say that “I had sex with him because he promised me work.” This kind of deal is anyway not legal. She had no business to sell herself for a role. If she had alleged (and could prove) that the filmmaker agreed to marry her, then this would have been worth considering. But as it is, she has no case here. If she was a commercial call girl, then this would perhaps fall into the category of prostitution.
— Majeed Memon,
TIMES NEWS NETWORK (BOMBAY TIMES; November 14, 2009)
The super light, strong and stylish notebook is an ultra-portable PC with killer styling, and comes with an 11.1 inch scratch-resistant, widescreen display. What’s more, its wireless technology, camera and microphone are all built-in. The VAIO X series range starts from Rs 64,990.
By Subhash K. Jha, November 12, 2009 – 10:44 IST
Jail which opened last week would serve as deterrent for potential law breakers. Or so director Madhur Bhandarkar would like to believe.
“Anyone would think twice before committing a crime after seeing in my film what life is like inside a prison,” says the director.
Madhur Bhandarkar’s Jail opened below expectations. The hard-hitting director has no qualms in admitting it. “It was a slow starter. But collections have picked up from the third day,” says Madhur, and adds, “You’ve to admit it requires guts to make a film set in a jail. The other film releasing with us was a light fun filled entertainer. We were fighting formidable competition since Ajab Prem Ki Ghazab Kahani was a lavish film. Ours is 12-crore rupee film and we’ll recover our money. The producers are happy. There are still the satellite rights to be sold.”
Madhur fights off comparisons with between Jail and his last film. “Fashion was a glamorous glossy big-budget film. Jail is a grim and honest look at life in a prison. It has a strong word-of-mouth element.”