Crisp Bytes SC - 14th May 13 - Page 8

Originally posted by: -B.N.K-

kya yaar kabhi toh meri post paar liye kaar ...itne bhi childish nahi hai

Originally posted by: arshicritic

see again, you set my mood right, and made me laugh

Originally posted by: arshicritic

@ Toni

I was as you say tomato face and 🤬


Now I am
🤗🤣

You are pagal

Originally posted by: -B.N.K-

now u r hug karke floor me roll .. 😆 so u can get blow job ... okey .. i will take blow job too

🤗🤗 🤗

dont ask me abot blow job ..main bacche hoon 😆😆😆..shana started it .. its a great post

https://www.indiaforums.com/forum/saraswatichandra/3584787/just-blow-it-saras-way

Originally posted by: smrth

Arshicritic,

@ Questions.."Why an altered end? Wud it not compromise integrity of work?..."

Well, what if writing's integrity- entire built up, even ideological essence- was massacred in original itself? ...Let me use your example. This wud also help combining two perspective, viewer's (disappointment) and author's (flawed- of course subjective, but arguable)

In Pride and Prejudice, Ms. Austin had written a well reasoned and consistent (to entire built up) ending. And there is no problem there for any continuity the end. But what if she would have written a) 'realistic' retreat or b) an unrealistic idealism in the end? Something like...

a) Elizabeth gets prevailed by Lady Cathy in believing possible social harm to her beau as charged of a 'polluting' association. And she decides to remove herself. Would it be in with the character, story line?

b) Even worse- this is something much more far fetched and only for the sake of comparison here- what if Austin wud have written- Darcy agreeing to marry other sister Lydia in finding her on brink of social ruin (substitute here 'social work for mass' in SC) and Elizabeth nudging him for it?🤢🤢 Would not we cringe, " Thank God! Ms. Austin wud nt have imagined so in her wildest nightmare?" But assuming she wud have...wud we defend such a version in a 'purist' adaption'??...

Well something exactly in line of these 'wild analogy'- a) and b) combined- has been written by G.M.T.in the end. So what end shud we have? Purist or rationalised?

Originally posted by: smrth

This brings us to a paradox. We are sufficiently dazzled by author's formidable command; linguistic, story telling, intellectual sweep. Most would like to appreciate the genius. And yet some collapses prevent the final respect...

so here the serial is working some reconciliation with the character for us.There are major changes and aided with an able performance it clicks for better. In a way, it avails a favourable closure with a great work. I don't mind it so far...

Originally posted by: arshicritic

good point Samarth,

an example here - My Fair Lady and Pygmalion

Saw MFL, loved it, later read abt it and found that the end had been changed in the movie to the more romantic one

went and read pygmalion. the two match beautifully except for the end. So the precedent was set by GB Shaw

and weak saras - my mom says the same, so I guess even the gen before us could not relate to him, so we wouldnt relate to that Saras at all.

I guess purist or rationalised are opinions which we will keep debating on it. As long as SC has a compelling narrative and a good story line, is what will keep us with it.