And The Good News Is...
That Saawariyan has flopped. Ok not flopped, but has been distinctly underwhelming, having been beaten soundly by "Am I Gay" Khan
One there is no danger of the fad of heroes exposing their posterior catching on. Call me old fashioned but I find no aesthetic pleasure by watching sculpted male butts*, biceps fine, calves good, six packs bring it on, but as someone who doesn't profess love that dare not speak its name, and is not greek, the behind is best unseen.
Second I think Bhansali is easily the most over hyped director presently in Indian cinema. My experience of his films is at best mildly irriating (HDDCS) to "please someone kill me" (Black). It is maddening to see the hype that he has earned for being "sensitive" filmmaker. Now I don't claim to be connoisseur, life being too short and bladder too small to take things which are projected 36 frames per second seriously. However Bhansali doesn't deserve the accolades. Sensitivity for him means hamming, garish sets, color schemes lifted out of some adverts assaulting the sense and overwrought emotional clieches serving as drama. It is reassuring when his work is judged once in a while for what it is which is a mish mash of borrowed idea with generous doses of melodrama.
PS. Rani Mukherjee* as a prostitute is irritating, she tries too hard unlike Neha Dhupia who is a natural playing "woman of trade" or Konkana Sen Sharma for "ugly female who is fooled by guys who happen to be closet gays"[ Mad at streetcar or something -ed, no just having fun. Good]
PPS Based on unreliable observation of hostel. Why, to straight males, male doing dirty things with male is a turn-off, whereas female doing dirty things with female is a turn-on.
* Also I find her husky voice unnerving, reminds me of a girl who sat in front of my bench and flirted with every boy except me. But then she was hairy, so I think it is not too bad.
** Once again, I ask the question. Why is that women torture them by waxing all to allure male of the species and why is there absence of feminist voice.Frankly I think that a feminist utopia will be full of hirsute females. Knowing only one feminist, answer is requested.
4 comments:
Err. There is something called hygiene, sire. Hence the need to be hairless.
Although feminazi do give up shaving. So do the French women. Considering the french women get laid enough, leads one to hypothesize that either a) Hairy females are not as big a turnoff as say Deepika Padukone or b) French males have low requirements.
On other hand, it could just be that all females have pain fetish. Which would explain why we like natural childbirth. And having kids in general.
[That should get all the females mad at me. Having the male ire (for being feminist)was not enough]
French women do wax. At least the ones connected in various ways to my insti do.
Waxed skin looks good. I know its social conditioning which makes me says so, but within the universe of relevance, it's true. Hairy women either look scary, or look like young boys. Most importantly, waxed skin feels good.
Vaise bhi, hair development is linked to testosterone (apart from inheritance, etc.). This, I think, is the basis of the origination of the social dichotomy of needs to wax/ doesn't need to wax.
Sakshiji
Hygiene is all right, but depilating all the body hair below eyelashes, a bit excessive me thinks.
By the way your aspersion against Deepika Padukone is duly noted.
Ritwik,
Yes but my question is why should females undergo torture to please MCP like you :-)
@Gaurav - Hygiene is all right, but depilating all the body hair below eyelashes, a bit excessive me thinks.
Moustaches are not sexy on everyone..
Post a Comment