And as Hindus or Indians, if we have taken offence to that poster then we're right in doing so. There was noīhakti, shraddha, or emotion in it. It was definitely designed to hurt sentiments. I haven't seen the film but I've seen the poster. We love him, we adore him, we learn from him, and we have highest regards for him. I or the makers of 'Adipurush' definitely do not fall into that bracket. I criticise it and I feel ashamed of belonging to a fraternity where the makers of 'Kaali' share a space with me. Clarifying their stance that 'Adipurush' was made out of respect and reverence to Lord Rama, Muntashir says, "'Kaali' was a wrong portrayal of our highly revered goddess Kaali. Ajay Devgn, Sidharth Malhotra's 'Thank God' and Leena Manimekalai's 'Kaali' are the latest ones to have faced the flak for taking creative liberties. But it is certainly not leather."Īdipurush is not the only film to have hurt religious sentiments in recent times. ![]() The material used for Hanuman Ji costumes is canvas. ![]() How can someone who is a Sanatani, someone who believes in the ethos of Hinduism, can be a part of a film which makes my Bajrangbali, my Hanuman Ji wear leather? It has not happened. Hanuman Ji is not wearing leather costumes. A 95-second trailer is not enough to portray what we wanted to portray. Speaking to ETimes, the film's dialogue writer Manoj Muntashir defends the film saying, "The look of the deities has not been seen completely. Amidst calls for boycott, the makers have received notices and a plea has also been filed seeking injunction on the release of the film. Om Raut's mythological drama 'Adipurush' is in the eye of storm as a section of the audience has taken offence to the depiction of Hindu deities in the teaser that released last week.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |