Should movies like Adipurush be given a chance? - Page 4

Pen

You are going to be a good one to look into this and share your knowlege on the topic.

Pen tag me to your answer.

I am totally against making mockery of religion.

There should be some sanctity.

I am against toys, video games, cartoons based on gods.

It ruins sanctity.

Period.

I can see why Sikhs, Muslims, Buddhists, Jains, are not keen on novels, films or serials on their gods or gurus or saints or prophets.

We do NOT need films or entertainment to make religion cool or palatable to kids or teens. Period.

It is a deep philosophy. It is not a bunch of cool characters.

I have had debates on this forum earlier also and disliked creative liberties makers of Mahabharat, Ramayan, Mahadev took in their shows. Or limits people crossed in debates or fan fiction.

There is NO reason for Hindus to later say their sentiments are hurt or their gods are not taken seriously or people take liberties with their gods and legends, if they themselves make or encourage such content on own gods or use names of own gods lightly.

I mean I have seen many themselves call any gossiper or agent provocateur in real life as Narad Muni or if anyone gets angry they say meri teesri aankh khul gayi. Or late Manmohan Desai had justified his affairs saying he just lived up to his name and was surrounded by gopis (as Manmohan was one of Lord Krishna's names).

Hindus themselves use references to gods so lightly. Films and TV shows use it even more lightly and there are idioms or sayings based on texts.

That is bound to have some effect and have kids use references to own gods lightly and not respect them or interpret them with atleast bare minimum respect.

I have seen many Hindus boast saying we are liberal or we have no rules or we cannot be kattar like others.

Well no one asked you to behead or kill someone for hurt sentiments but do not be so casual or open either that people cross all limits and there is no sanctity left.

I cringed at dialogues of Adipurush I got to see online. WTH is jali na by Ravana who was a scholar and a great Shiva bhakt? And WTH was 'tel tere baap ka, kapda tere baap ka, jalegi tere baap ki'? Is this how you want to show Lord Hanuman speak? A god who is worshipped for wisdom, strength, is using such roadside rowdy language?

Just to compete with web series or appeal to youth that is addicted to Prime, Netflix?

Why also ignore Indian set up or culture and interpret Ramayana and Mahabharat in visuals and aesthetics of Benhur, Gladiator, Troy, GOT? Why make gods dress like Roman or Greek warriors or show sets and scenes like GOT or Planet of Apes?

Just because you think youth and urban class would not like original or will only find wannabe Hollywood versions fine?

I have seen Chinese and Japs make films based on their legends and keep it authentic. They never copy Hollywood. Why only Indians gotta ruin own epics and copy HW?

The makers of Adipurush and its writers would have been facing lawsuits if they did it to other religion or its epics or would be running for security cover by now.

Mere online backlash is not enough.

I have seen scholars critique even BR Chopra and Sagars' versions of epics. Forget improving or correcting that, we have fools going even lower? Sinking even further?

I think I have made my stand clear and do not like cartoons or films on religious figures and dumbing it down so much that there is no respect left and the deity becomes a mere character.

I hope I have given a satisfactory response to your question.

I'm not super well-versed in Ramayana and other epics so please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think people tend to be a little more sensitive when it comes to Ramayana just because it's so heavily involved with religion. Whereas if we were to compare it with, as you said, Greek mythology... very few people care about the creative liberties that are taken with Greek myths because one, they're not tied to any particular religion, and two, they're more rooted in literature than history (I mean, I learned about Greek mythology in English class and also because we had to read the first Percy Jackson book).

Retellings of Greek myths are treated the same way as retellings of classic fairy tales like Cinderella. Retellings of an epic would be a completely different story, I mean, just look at some of the criticism that Vaishnavi Patel received for Kaikeyi. I don't think the two should really be compared.

Well said. People treat Hindu mythology same as Greek, Roman and Egyptian forgetting that latter are not that linked to religion and can be treated more like literature hence interpreted any way.

But Hinduism is an actively practised religion and Indians are sensitive and emotional about faith, so it is not advisable to treat Hindu mythology as mere literature or characters that can be imagined in any way one wants.

There is a limit to creative liberties one can take with a volatile subject like religion and deities that are worshipped by billions.

The disrespect for such a cultural good as the Ramayana reflects the disrespect for human values, for positive qualities that humans have that can overcome the negative ones.

Adipurush reflects a thought-process where religion has become a mere tool for other interests.Even if only "based" on the Ramayana, the spirit of this epic should be respected, not distorted and - although unvolontarily - ridiculed.

Hello, the topic was a task. I would like to thank all of you for participating in the discussion.

And I agree with you all, Ramayana shouldn't have been distorted like this 🤗

Please feel free to continue the discussion!

Originally posted by: foreverlazy

I'm not super well-versed in Ramayana and other epics so please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think people tend to be a little more sensitive when it comes to Ramayana just because it's so heavily involved with religion. Whereas if we were to compare it with, as you said, Greek mythology... very few people care about the creative liberties that are taken with Greek myths because one, they're not tied to any particular religion, and two, they're more rooted in literature than history (I mean, I learned about Greek mythology in English class and also because we had to read the first Percy Jackson book).

Retellings of Greek myths are treated the same way as retellings of classic fairy tales like Cinderella. Retellings of an epic would be a completely different story, I mean, just look at some of the criticism that Vaishnavi Patel received for Kaikeyi. I don't think the two should really be compared.

Hello, the topic was a task. I would like to thank all of you for participating in the discussion.

And I agree with you all, Ramayana shouldn't have been distorted like this

Please feel free to continue the discussion!

Originally posted by: TheMinion

Hello, the topic was a task. I would like to thank all of you for participating in the discussion.

And I agree with you all, Ramayana shouldn't have been distorted like this 🤗

Please feel free to continue the discussion!

When after the 'love-is-in-the-air' for certain actors/actresses came a string of threads about 'guessing the movie', I thought of a game and looked what had been written about "Table No 21".

Such a good idea for a game!

So, I was aware and tried to respect almost every thread by posting something, especially in threads where there hadn't been many replies.

Now, knowing the assignment, I reread some threads and I have to say that they all tried to make it interesting.

I'm curious about the next task 😊

Originally posted by: carisma2

The names have been changed. Which means it's not a historical event movie depicticting the history like for like. It is a movie that is intentionally based off the event. In that, they will make huge changes.

I don't think I have a huge problem with the name itself because most of them as far as from trailer they have used synonyms instead what we say it commonly. Ram's other name is Raghav and Sita ji's other name is Jaanki. However, my problem is with the name of movie itself "adipurush" - Adipurush name is used for the Shiva - Shiva's one part carries masculine energy and the counter is feminine energy. If they would have named the movie something like "Purushottam" which means greater than the greatest man, it would have been much more appropriate.

Hence I am not sure, before the movie went to the floors how much emphasis was made around the depiction and made clear by the makers what the audience is to expect.

I agree with Natu, that if Lohe ki Lanka was a major thing in the actual story, then something like that should have been picked for the movie.

As a younger generation, I see Minions point of let's educate the generation in a way they will enjoy it and in bitesize version.

But then that again comes to the same thing, is this movie educating or not? In which case should the alterations be acceptable as it's not adhering with the correct history.

So it has to be accepted, to take this movie for what it is. A movie based off Ramayana only. But even then comes the other debate, the Movie is called Adipurush. The First man. As it is believed Lord Rama is the reincarnation of Lord Vishnu in human form. So then, it is keeping to the roots and clearly stating that this is Rama's story.

If it was Ek Adhesh Purush or something then that would have separated it somewhat.

But Ravans name is the same.. so.

But end of the day as all movies, it will be down to own perception as to how they see it, if they are happy and don't mind the changes or those who wanted to keep it more realistic.

Whenever working with such concepts the makers have to be very clear in all aspects.

So whilst writing this and researching on the movie. I conclude.

Adipurush

The Ram song ref

Ravan name

It's giving identity to the figures of history. So in which case They needed to stick with the real details. Coz in a way it is a story of the religion. So that's how it's gonna be looked upon.

If the makers would have made certain of taking care of these things then yes, it can be viewed differently. This is too familiar, to familiar so I say alterations are not a good idea for the public.

I like the cast. I mean Kirti for me is just wallpaper. So I don't know what she will do in this. Otherwise I haven't a problem with the cast.

The VFX is quite bad. Worse than Pathans.

If it was normal history, like on a king etc.. differences can be adapted. When it comes to religion.. ppl will feel strongly about it.

Cast was misfit for sure. In Ramayna, Ram is depicted as a gentle with soft look and has such an aura that with his mere look people start to get teary-eyed with the wholesomeness that they felt. Prabhas IS handsome, however with the macho man look, it just took away Ram's essence. With Sita ji too, I find Kirti to be bit more on a harsher side - probably someone like Alia would have been a better cast since she has this innocence to her face. Ravaan - idk, I haven't seen the movie so I have no opinion it. Just to put it for you, even though Ravaan is considered to be villain and was from a Rakhasa clan - he is depicted in Ramayna as a highly sophisticated, highly intellectual with the knowledge of all scriptures and highly devoted person but his vices which is represented as his heads took him to his downfall.