Tag Archive: 30’s & 80’s


Born into a Buddhist family, I grew up considering myself a Buddhist. And growing up I did believe and practice the philosophical side of this so called “more of a philosophy than a religion” religion. Which I genuinely believed in the past, was to be an honest; good hearted, intellectual, kind, caring, loving, open-minded, understanding, empathetic, humane; human being. But having lived in Sri Lanka, a so called Buddhist country for 19½ years altogether (6 years in a row in my teens; between the ages of 12½ to 18½; and now, for just over 8 years so far, plus short periods of times in between), I found the practice of Lankan Buddhists as the most evil practice anywhere; with the most cruel, inhumane, Buddhist people I’ve come across (so far as I am concerned at least) in the world. A Buddhist country that has given me sooooo much of stress, depression and misery; I’d be an idiot to have any love for this country or this extremist religion.

Lankan people, in general tend to possess, very extremist ideologies; no matter what the religion or race (after all, there was an almost 30 year unnecessary civil war between the Sinhalese and the Tamil, which could have been resolved eons ago without so much bloodshed, death and destruction). One can understand illiteracy and poverty as a core reason for such ignorance and hatred (although poverty is no excuse for cruelty), but the more educated, so called intellectual, rich, sophisticated (whether one is actually sophisticated and hold any form intellect, among Lanka’s rich n’ pretentious elite, is quite debatable; money does not bring about intellect or sophistication) society of Sri Lanka, are no better; when it comes to religious and racial extremism. Especially when it comes to foreign delegates; you’ll find Lankan’s all smiles and welcoming (but these smiles might not be genuine); behind a foreigners back, Lankan’s can be sarcastic, with crude humour. Or, they might directly say something utterly insulting and racist, in their own mother tongue; but with a plastic smile pasted on their face; so as to not let the foreigner know, how locals actually feel about their alien presence here. Why? you wonder. One, Travel is a major industry in SL, and the country’s economy grows through tourism; as well as foreign aid (another reason to have kept the war going on for so long, from both sides). Of course, this reason mainly applies to people with an actual understanding of economical growth (or lack of it), in the country. And Two, Sri Lankan people are rarely honest. They can be sadistically blunt and sarcastically insulting to other Lankan’s quite directly; and never necessarily show any genuine friendship and love to anyone, in general. A fake friendship could exist, if it reaps benefits. People here are not ashamed of doing anything wrong, just getting caught. Of course all this is in general sense, that applies, not to everyone, but, to the majority of this hellish country. A country that’s quite literally “hot as HELL”, although that’s not the only thing that makes this country hell on Earth. Paradise, it definitely is not!!!!!

What’s worse is this ingenuine hypocritical traits are passed down by parents to their young. I’ve met and heard people, especially Sri Lankan’s living abroad in secrecy (illegal immigrants), who are teaching their children, to do wrong; but not get caught. Plus, Lankan’s tend to teach kids all these false customary acts of tradition, but no real respect and/or etiquette. In fact, the tradition of going down on all fours in front of elders, as if to give them a blow job, is pretty distasteful. The way heavily cleavage women, squat down with their heaving breasts sweeping the floor, in front of horny orange robed monks, the hypocrisy and fakeness of it, is pathetically disgusting. Oh, it doesn’t matter how indecent people are in behaviour; and how disrespectful their actions tend to be; so long as, end of the day, they squat and pretend to show respect in front of their elders and other fraudulent monkeys (umm!! I mean monks). Respect should lie in one’s heart, without real respect, all these brainwashed robotic customary acts are baseless and utterly ridiculous.

Look at all the Temple Bullshit, in Sri Lanka. All blindly following customary acts, given down by traditions, which are less to do with Buddhism, and more to do with fear motivation. So basically if I don’t go and worship at the temple, and get blessings from a dead man (for the Buddha died centuries ago), bad things will happen to me, no matter how good a human I might be. Doesn’t that make Buddhism, Evil???? I highly doubt religion is meant to be so vengeful. In fact according to Buddhism, one is not to blindly accept everything given down by tradition. There is so much unnecessary evils that take place in this country in the name of culture, false pride, fake sense of patriotism and inhumane archaic traditions. The simple act of piercing a baby girl’s ears, ’cause girls are supposed to have holes, including in their ears, is quite a distasteful tradition. If a girl (or even a guy) want’s to wear rings, they’d pierce all over their body if they desire to, when they grow up. Why put a baby girl through so much of pain and tears in the name of tradition????

Premarital sex is a no no. Yet people do practice it, in secrecy, and then they hypocritically talk about Lankan culture, and all that nonsense, as if the utmost devout. Marriage is a license for people to have sex here. Most men here being Mama’s boys; the mother is the servant and the wife the prostitute (or the wife could encompass both traits, equally). Virginity, especially in (unmarried) women, is held with high regard. A married couple indulging in a sexual relationship (immaterial if they procreate, or just have sex for sexual pleasure) is acceptable; but a decent good person, who might want to be in a proper relationship with one person (but does not believe in the concept of marriage), is shunned if he desires to have sex, even if it’s just with one partner. A man being a bachelor, does not mean he’s a playboy. There are more promiscuous individuals, who are actually in wedlock, than out of it. Not that there is anything wrong with being promiscuous, if one is open about it, and doesn’t use people, to their advantage. I, aged 42, am still a virgin; partially by choice. And I’m neither ashamed nor proud, of the fact that I don’t have sex life, and never had one. And nobody has the right to judge me for it. And I don’t believe in the fact one should stay a virgin, till they get married, either. Marriage is not a necessity for me, neither is sex. But yes, the desire for sex exists. Of course, I want to have sex, it’s normal, but with a person I am attracted to. I have fallen in love many times, but ’twas always unrequited love, thus nothing happened. The point is, being a pretty decent fellow, I don’t believe in jumping into bed with any Tom, Dick, or Hariendre, walking down the street. Nor do I believe in the concept marriage (it’s not a necessity for me to legalize a sexual relationship, not that I’m against it). So I find myself fighting both worlds, the side that thinks I’m a loser for not having sex, for not having gone on a date, and the side that thinks I ought to get married. I don’t believe in getting married for the sake of it either. Wouldn’t I be ruining two lives, if I did so??? I am as open minded as you get. Way too open minded an individual, with a brain of my own, thank you, for such a narrow minded country. So basically, neither do I believe in jumping into bed, or taking the plunge into matrimony, to please others. Period!!! Anyway, if I had a partner ( I wish I did, or do, in the near future, at least once); and we wish to get married, I highly doubt we’ll be able to get married the way we’d want, in a society still residing in the dark ages.

Plus the hypocrisy of weddings in this country, where do I even begin. The show and pomp weddings in the name of tradition, or worse Buddhism (as Buddhism is the exact opposite); tend to be the worst. It’s interesting how so many couples climb the Poruwa (wedding altar) in their glittery gaudy traditional attire, as if they were the virgin Mary, prior to the ceremony. Makes old hags very happy. Don’t get me started on how people suck up to the older generation here, and then degradingly make fun of them behind their back. As I stated earlier, no real respect exists here. Plus, the so called Lankan traditional weddings have very little do with this disgraceful country’s traditions or actual religion. The Bride dressed in white (a western tradition started by Queen Victoria); of course here it’s a Kandyan Osariya worn in white by the bride, with a lot of jewelry, and one long necklace, appropriately placed as if cover their breasts and vagina (whilst the lusty blood red Osariya actually feels more traditional; and appropriate, considering the fact, how many brides are actual virgins to don the virginal white on their wedding day); the bestman/men, pageboy/s, bridesmaid/s and flowergirl/s; the pouring of milk of clay pots stacked on top of each other (à la the champagne being poured on stacked up crystalware, in the west); the cutting of Kiribath (milk-rice pudding) since the late 90’s (similar to cutting the wedding cake, another copied western tradition); etc etc ….. An elegant grand wedding, if one desires it, is fine; but hypocriticality of calling it as per Lankan culture, or worse as per Buddhist culture (where as Buddhism is about simplicity, and grand scale weddings are not); and the use of the Nilamé kit/Tuppotia (a traditional show off garb worn by Kandyan Lankan’s attributed to the temple known as the Dalada Malgawa; especially donned at the Dalada Malgawa Perehara (parade)) is what’s wrong. Again the fact that the Nilamé kit, is attributed to Kandyan Buddhists, itself is a wrong concept. Buddhism is the exact opposite of the show and pomp, practiced by the Dalada Malgawa; where Buddha’s tooth relic is placed inside a gold gilded mini stupa, and no one can actually see the relic, but the admire the gold casing it’s covered up in. It definitely looks beautiful, but how do we really know, their is a relic in there, let alone a Buddha’s tooth??? And the treatment, torture and use of chained up Elephants by the Dalada Malgawa; to be showcased at the Perehara; is pure Animal Cruelty!!!!!! Completely goes against the teachings of Buddhism.

Of course, Animal rights activists in Colombo argue that these Elephant in Sri Lanka should be protected because it’s a Sub Species; found nowhere else in the world (which is an argument more to do with a Sri Lankan ego, than Animal Rights). BUT,  Sub species or not, imprisonment and maltreatment of animals is still imprisonment and maltreatment; be it Elephants, Oxen or Dogs. Animal torture is still animal torture, be it a unique Sri Lankan species of Elephants or not. Besides the Dalda Maligawa Perehara is all show and pomp, in the name of Buddhism. That’s the biggest irony; again, “Buddhism is the exact opposite of showing off”!! Going back to the hypocrisy of Lankan weddings for instance; what’s worse is that they have weddings at temples as well (temples never had weddings here in the past, but it’s like Buddhists are competing with Christians, for Christians do have Church Weddings). The wedding, in the proper sense, was meant to be at the Bride’s family home, and Home Coming function, at the Grooms. What’s even worse is that, at these weddings sometimes the  groom comes to wedding seated on a chained suffering elephant. Or even a teary frightened little baby elephant. Surly people can’t be that ignorant, not to notice an animal suffering. No animals should be used in this manner!!!

And getting back to the ridiculous show and pomp padres in the name Buddhism, hosted by the famed Buddhist temple in Kandy; the act of participating in the perahara is also very traumatic for the elephants. Elephants don’t like bright lights and loud noises, and they are alarmed by objects moving rapidly at the edge of their field of vision. Even a tourist watching the show should realize how stressed these elephants in deep distress are. So these animals that are among the most intelligent on the planet are being repeatedly subjected to traumatic experiences in the name of human pageantry. And, as I stated earlier, according to Buddhism people aren’t suppose to blindly carry traditions, handed down by ancestors. If the use of/harming of, Animals, were officially banned; then this Perehara nonsense would have to stop, automatically. It won’t completely put an end to ill treatment of animals; but it’s a start. Look at Canary Islands and Catalonia, they banned bullfighting, despite it being a brutally famed Spanish tradition. Animals, be it Elephants or bulls, aren’t lucky to take part in these festivities, for they’ve been tortured to a point they don’t even know that they are elephants/bulls. These animals are meant to be wild and free, with their own families, not meant to used for sick pleasures of the inhumane human beings. Eating meat might be a necessary evil (though that’s also debatable), ill treatment of animals is not!!

Everything from illtreatment of wild animals, to illtreatment of domesticated animals exists. How Cattle and Poultry are treated here, is a different argument; but let’s get to the fact how pets are mistreated here, especially Cats & Dogs. Doggism exists to the utmost in this Doggist nation of so called Buddhists. There have been many factual articles of how dog meat was being sold as venison, and other meats; and small fish from dirty canals were being sold as seafood. Most victims of these cons, happen to be foreign tourists, who love to try out local delicacies (and they sure do, unknowingly). In July this year, many prestigious Sri lankan Universities, poisoned stray dogs in the most inhumane manner and watched them screeching in pain for hours as they died. Pregnant cats were being buried alive. And many more stories emerged with pictures and video clips in newspapers and social media. What a lovely Buddhist country this is?? Yes, they can be so proud of this nation???

Of course, local Buddhists believe, humans are a superior being, and that humans that have been bad in previous births, are reborn as animals; thus they feel it’s OK to illtreat animals, and to turn a blind eye to animal suffering. Buddhism does NOT SAY, it’s OK to illtreat animals, even though the theory of Karma and rebirth, exists in Buddhist scriptures.

Karma itself is a questionable subject. Karma sounds really great in theory. So people who ill treat you, will get it back someday. It could be in their next birth. But their is dark side to this. So if you have apparently done something unthinkable in your past life, you are doomed in this life no matter what you do? nor matter what a good human you are? I’m not taking about rewards, but just to be content with life. But apparently I can’t because I was apparently a monster in my past birth?? That’s terrible!! So basically there is no hope what so ever for a peaceful happy life. Karma is a bitch!!!! Of course I don’t believe in re-birth. In the sense, that there is no factual proof of it’s existence. But I keep an open mind, so I don’t really say, that re-birth does not exist per se, but that I don’t know. And to be quite honest, nobody really knows what happens after one dies, until they actually die. It might be the end of it, or heaven and hell (as Christians believe), or re-birth, or something else entirely. Nobody really knows, with a 100% assuracy. And I’m in no hurry to find out (even though there have been times so depressing, that I’ve felt the desire to find out, but no, not in any real hurry).

And getting back to dogs, and concept of apparently humans being re-born as dogs, or other, according to their karma, brought forward from their previous life. If being born a dog, is to atone for a sin committed in your past birth; one ought to wonder, aren’t dogs way kinder and innocent than humans. In fact, Dog is better than God. Of course, the Buddha is not a god, but supposedly a great human being, who walked the earth centuries ago. Yet all humans are flawed creatures, nobody is perfect. BUT the Buddha was supposedly a perfect mortal being. Yet, if you think of it, as Prince Siddhartha, he got tired of having sex with his woman, and thus finally abandoned his wife, and new born baby. Sure, he gained enlightenment or whatever later; BUT what he did at that moment is unapologetic. To leave his wife, at such a crucial moment in their life. A very selfish act. And for all you know, the Buddha was gay; that might be the reason he grew tired of constantly screwing a woman. Yet ironically, Homosexuality is frowned upon, specifically by Lankan Buddhist. Further proof of his sexuality could be the fact, when the Mara (a demon in Buddhist mythology, considered as fact, by most Buddhists) sent his beautiful daughters to seduce the Buddha, he wasn’t perturbed. Because he was so pure, or was there another reason for it? Jokes apart, if Buddha, or any religious leaders were actually homosexual (and there is NOTHING wrong with being gay), the irony is, that the Most homophobic societies exists within these religious circles. While religious people ought to be more open, accepting, kind, generous and non-judgemental.

People here tend to show prejudice to everything possible. Let’s take a look at peoples preference towards the fairer skin tones, as an acceptance of beauty. Buddha was supposedly beautiful, because of his fair skin. What proof is there, that he was fair??? It’s pretty much similar to the portrayal of Christ as white. Christ wasn’t Caucasian, as he was from the middle east, but he could’ve been fair skinned. And Buddha being from Northern India (he was born in Lumbini, Nepal of today, back then Lumbini was part of India), it’s possible that he was fairer. But fairness does not necessarily mean attractiveness. There are lot of dark skinned, or jet black, people with sharp beautiful features, who tend to be just as attractive, or even prettier. The Indian sub-continent tends to be favourable towards the fair skin tones. But, North India, Nepal & Pakistan, tend to be fairer skinned anyway. Sri Lanka is a BLACK Country (or at least dark skinned); here the prejudice is far more absurd, of “the pot calling the kettle black” syndrome, quite literally. But being black skinned is not a fault. Fairer skinned people here insult Dark skinned people & Dark skinned people here tend to insult darker skinned people, and so on, even with the use of the ‘N’ word (used in a more derogatory sense, than a friendly manner). Once when somebody, almost as dark as me, called me a Nigger; I told him, if he actually said that to a black person (meaning people of actual African decent) he would have got it. The irony is, that whilst studying in New Delhi, a group of Africans, called me “White”!!!! Back in my mid-20’s, when I came to Sri Lanka, with a superb Modeling Portfolio, done in Delhi; I tried give it a try here. I was asked to bleach my skin. Am not ashamed of my dark skin, but Lankan’s do have a major complex about their complexion. And I wasn’t as dark as I am today. The guy, who called me a “Nigger”, bleached his skin, went onto be a quite good looking model (endorsing ‘Fair & Handsome’ fairness creams) and a pathetic actor (that people adore), in Sri Lanka. Am glad of my decision not to take that false route.

Whether Buddha was fair skinned or not, nobody would really know, but I doubt he would have differentiated among skin tones, or put labels on standards of Beauty. Sri Lanka’s racism is far worse, than that of the British, America or Australia; where too racism exists, besides being multicultural societies. Of course Sri Lankan’s do have a dislike for Caucasians as well, but just that (as I mentioned above), they bow down to white skin, but back bite like anything. They are not genuine about their racism. European tourists are called Sudha/Sudhi (a derogatory term for white skinned male/female), or Karapota (Cockroach, maybe ’cause of the white blood roaches tend to have); but Karapota is more of a term used for the Dutch & Portuguese Burgher communities here. Muslims are called Tambia, and so on. You find Racism in SL, towards skin tones, other religions besides their own, and other races besides their own; et al, and is far worse, than anywhere else. The rest of the world, most people know about it, be it corruption, racism, violence etc etc … Very few have even heard of the insignificant dot of island on the world’s map, or it’s disturbingly negative attributes.

Of course, this actor I brought up earlier wasn’t a bad person, as such. I just brought him up as an example, how dark skinned people insult other, even slightly darker than them, to the extent of using the “N” word (I’ve gone through far worse psychological, and to some extent physical, abuse, especially through the hands of Sri Lankan’s, and more specifically by Lankan Buddhists, residing all over the world). No, the untalented superstar of Lankan cinema, in not a bad person, but just a bloody fool, and quite an unhygienic one at that (the irony of people disliking dogs, and other animals, because they feel animals are unclean, is quite laughable; my dogs are way cleaner than most people in this country). And this person is an advocate of Buddhism in the country. And a vegetarian (how much of a vegetarian is another debatable fact, a lot of fishertarians call themselves vegetarians. Fish are living things that can feel too, and they suffer the most, caught in a net, as they die; and don’t get me started on seafood that are boiled alive). I am not a vegetarian, but I don’t behave like I’m going to die without meat. I can go for/and have gone for, months without eating any meat. But most non-vegetarian Buddhist here behave as if they are die without meat. Their greed for animal flesh, or in any other manner, is revolting. Of course, this does not mean, just ’cause a person is vegetarian, they are better people, or that they treat animals with love and kindness. All religions, and races, within this country prefer to believe, only their beliefs/race is right, and the best. But Buddhism, which is not meant to discriminate, tends to be the worse kind of supremacist attitude prevalent in this so called Buddhist nation.

Look at the Sri Lankan flag itself, with a devilish looking Lion holding the sword, and archaic representation of Sinhalese supremacy (thus the country itself has this archaic mentality of the dark ages, respecting a royal lion of an  non-progressive nation), with the Bo-leaf on the four corners (symbolic of Buddhism), of the maroon background (maroon colour represents the Sinhalese race). But what’s worse is, who or what is the lion showing the sword to?? The Green & Saffron stripes, representing the Hindu’s & the Muslims, respectively. So basically, instead of protecting the minority groups of the country (the Christians & the Catholic Burgher’s are not even touched upon) the lion is saying, don’t fuck with us Sinhalese Buddhist, we rule!!! Either way, why should the flag have something to say for, or against, any religion or race. Shouldn’t it represent something a bit more universally significant, blending harmoniously with flags of other nations, in simplicity; without trying to ape an archaic royal mentality.

The Swastika, is an ancient symbol in Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism, attributed to the Aryan race. Again peoples fascination for fairer skin, can date back to the Buddha’s era. The Buddha himself being from the Aryan race (non-Buddhist are known as anāryas) was supposedly beautifully fair skinned (as mentioned above). So the Aryan race is fair skinned, and our own roots are Indo-Aryan, but through evolution under the hellish sun, we have really dark skin, yet our sharp features give away our Aryan roots. But what’s wrong is the Swastika’s racist roots, that gave way to Hitler’s Nazi regime to use it as the symbol of Aryan supremacy. And even today white supremacists, neo-Nazi groups, use it. And in Sri Lanka, it has become a symbol of Buddhist supremacy. And it’s interesting to note, how a lot Sri Lankan’s believe Hitler was right to cleanse the world of Jews. Plus local Buddhists attitudes towards the Muslims is pretty much the same as Nazi attitudes towards the Jews!!! And there are various schools of thought when it comes to Buddhism, and Sri Lankan’s feel, only their Buddhism is correct; even which they don’t really practice properly.

Even still, what proof is there, what Buddha was to have said, was actually said. Buddhist preaching were never written down at the time of the Buddha. Buddhists text were first said to be written down about 400 years after the death of Buddha. Prior to that, doctrines were passed down orally, from generation to generation. And like Chinese Whispers, the doctrines would have changed completely by the time the texts were finally written down. The best religion to me is humanity, to be a good decent human being. Something badly missing in this country. And that’s what the crux of any religion is, which has been distorted by time. More so, in this narrow minded country where a falsified Buddhism is held with high regard.

The irony of it all. In my late 20’s whilst living in England, I was so much more into Buddhism (without ever looking down on any other religion), that practically every Sunday, if possible, I’d go to a Thai Buddhist Monastery there (which again for Sri Lankan’s is a problem, as that is not supposed to be our kind of Buddhism), to meditate. So in England I was more of a practicing Buddhist, and when I came to Sri Lanka, the hypocrisy of it all here, got me off it. By my 30’s I was more of a Free Thinker than a Buddhist, but I still had respect for the religion I was born into. But just over two years ago, I was being so stressed by cruel Buddhists of this country, that I finally renounced the religion and denounced the practice of it in Sri Lanka. I lost any love I had for this country in my mid-30’s, after having being patient for so long; and finally removed Buddhism and lost all respect for the hypocritical sadistic practices and attitudes of Sri Lankan Buddhism, a few months after I turned 40!!!!! In fact, I had gone through so much pain, that particular day, that I did a kind of personal blog post, that I had never posted before, despite all the stress and depression I’ve gone through most of my life, surviving on my own. See my post Day of Depression from September 2015. The day I finally removed Buddhism!!!!!!

Evil forces of Sri Lankan Buddhism, prevented me from working on this post (as it has been doing for ages anyway, trying to prevent me from Blogging about anything, period); but I persevered. I started working on this over a month ago, but I finally got to finish it today. Hope I’ve manged to make all the necessary points I needed to.

Nuwan Sen n’ Social Issues

 

Advertisements

Photograph-V

On Facebook, I was challenged; on the 1st of November, Year 2017, to post a Black&White picture per day, without posting any people, and no explanations, yet it had to do with my life. This was a 7 day challenge, that ended today. Whilst, the rest of the photographs are pretty self explanatory (to some extent at least), this is a picture, which is very personal, and has to do with my childhood on wards, till date. It does not simply depict my love for Books & Films!!!

So here is an explanation for this picture, I posted on FB, for Day V (i.e. 5th November 2017) :-

So past 4th midnight, I thought of posting something uniquely personal for Day V, of the B/W photography challenge. I started taking out the close near dear reads and views, from my shelves, and set them on my bed. It was already next day, with 9/10ths of a moonlit sky shining above the wet clouds outside. At 00:55 am, 5th morning, I took the snapshot. Yet, ’twas a pity, I won’t be able to explain it. But today morning, after posting the last picture of the challenge, I went back to this. And decided, I can’t explain it on FB, but I have a Blog, where I can.

So the picture; let us start with Audrey Hepburn. So, as many of my fellow bloggers and close friends are aware, that Hepburn happens to be my all time favourite actress. I’ve been a fan of hers since I watched My Fair Lady (1964), as a little kid, back in the mid-1980’s. I wanted to grow up and marry her, and remember asking my mum, how old Hepburn was (of course I realized Audrey Hepburn was somewhat older than me, but what I didn’t realize at the time was that this musical, set during the Edwardian era, was made long before I came into existence). Anyway, Audrey Hepburn starred alongside the suave gentleman, Gregory Peck, in ROMAN HOLIDAY (1953), which happens to be my all time favourite movie. I watched this in the summer of 1994, just before my 19th Birthday, whilst living in New Delhi, India. Plus, 1994 was the best year of my teenage life (coming of age in Shit Lanka was a nightmare, so it was a refreshing change to go back to India in 94′, after a hellish six year stay in monstrous Lanka. And now am back, going through a lot of stress due to being stuck in a narrow minded extremist country like Shit Lanka. Been here for just over eight years now. Getting anything done in SL is a hassle, including trying to work on this simple blog-post without unnecessary disturbances and distractions). Anyway, even though a fan of Hepburn since childhood, it was once I watched ROMAN HOLIDAY, I truly fell in love with Hepburn. AND soon both her debut movie; about a Princess walking around the scenic architectural delights of ancient Rome, in modern day Italy, as a commoner, having an accidental fling, a tragic love story set in 24 hours, this B/W tearjerker romance that pulls at your heartstrings; along with Hepburn herself, became my all time favorite movie, and actress, respectively. I was simply smitten by her charmingly naturalistic acting. In 2003, after handing in my final dissertation titled “Marriage on Hitchcock Films: From Rebecca to Marnie”, for my MA in International Cinema, at the University of Luton, Luton, UK; I treated myself to an Audrey Hepburn Box-Set of Video Cassettes, which included my all time favourite, ROMAN HOLIDAY. The cassette cover that can be seen on the picture above.

Having mentioned Hitchcock, many of you know Alfred Hitchcock is my all time favourite director; and that REBECCA (1940) happens to be my favourite Hitchcockian classic. Thus, when I was studying his movies, doing an out and out psychoanalysis of varied character sketches, from his best period of Hollywood movies (his first 25 years in Hollywood) for my final dissertation of 25,000 to 30,000 words; I bought some of his movies, and rented others, in Oslo, Norway (as that’s where I resided, during my final semester, as I had no classes; thus working full time 5½ days a week, and concentrating on my dissertation on Saturday evenings and Sunday the whole day; I was exhausted). The video tape of REBECCA which can be seen above was one of movies I bought. But there is more of a history I share with Hitchcock’s REBECCA. I fell in love with this hauntingly magnificent tale of woman living under the shadow of her husband’s dead first wife; when I first saw it as a kid, in the mid-80’s. So this most probably was my all time favourite, till I watched ROMAN HOLIDAY, almost a decade later. Around that time, at school, The British School, in New Delhi, India, we had to write a film review. REBECCA being fresh in my mind, I remember writing my very first film review, on this noirish perfection by Alfred Hitchcock, aged 11; whilst I was in Senior-I. Later, aged 12½/13, I read Daphne du Maurier’s Rebecca (on which the Hitchcockian masterpiece was based on). And this so called women’s book, my very first piece of Adult Fiction, instantly became my all time favourite novel, and it remained no.1 till aged 20, I read the English translation of CITY OF JOY, a French novel by Dominique Lapierre. I bought the book of CITY OF JOY (pictured above) in 1994, though I read it later. And from the age of 20, till now (I’m 42 now), it has remained my favourite novel. BUT, am currently reading Arundhati Roy’s latest novel, THE MINISTRY OF UTMOST HAPPINESS (pictured above as well), since I located it at the end of August 2017 (yup, am a very slow reader; and it’s not like I get to read my book every single day); and THE MINISTRY OF UTMOST HAPPINESS seems to be fast becoming my all time favourite. That I’ll know for sure, once I finish reading it.

From Novels, to non-fiction; FREEDOM’S DAUGHTER: LETTERS BETWEEN INDIRA GANDHI AND JAWAHARLAL NEHRU 1922-1939 (also pictured above), edited by Sonia Gandhi; happens to be my favourite text of non-fiction; which I read in my mid-20’s. When it comes to print media, there seems to be a major Indian connection. It’s just a mere coincidence. But still, even though with unfortunate Sri Lankan roots, that constantly try to pull me down into the mud with them, I was born and brought up in New Delhi, India. And I had a pretty good childhood (maybe not necessarily a great one, as I was badly bullied in school, it was still better, than when we ventured south into an inhumane and war torn island). Thus having such a strong Indian connection (altogether spent 17 years of my life in New Delhi, 12½ years in row); and a soft corner for my Birth city; plus being a movie maniac; I cannot, not add, my favourites in films, to do with India. My favourite Indian movie, is a Bengali/English bilingual Art House Movie, from the state of West Bengal, directed by Aparna Sen. I bought the DVD of THE JAPANESE WIFE (2010), which can be seen above, along with Kunal Basu’s book of Short Stories (one of which happens to be the basis of this movie), when I visited New Delhi in November/December 2010, on holiday. This was a holiday I took to India, after a break of 9½  years. Aged 35, I thoroughly enjoyed the short story, of The Japanese Wife, as well as the movie. Having watched Indian films throughout my life (especially Bollywood movies, though I happen to be a bit of an Art House snob), it’s amazing how Aparna Sen’s cinematic adaptation of THE JAPANESE WIFE, ended up becoming my favourite Indian movie ever. But having been brought up on Bollywood commercial cinema, I cannot not point out my favourite commercial Hindi Film, from Bombay (now Mumbai) from the state of Maharashtra, India. Mahesh Bhatt‘s ARTH (1982), the DVD of which can be seen above as well. ARTH; which I actually first saw as a kid, and few times later; is a reel life adaptation based on Mahesh Bhatt‘s real life extramarital affair with actress Parveen Babi, who suffered from schizophrenia. A tragic beautiful mind, that soon left the film industry once her illness was out in the open, thanks to this excellently made movie. died under mysterious circumstances, in 2005 (see my post related to her Death Anniversary from January 2013).

Speaking of extramarital affairs and coming back to short stories, I read Anton Chekhov’s THE LADY WITH THE DOG (pictured above), an adulterous love story, when I was 15. This Russian romantic short, happens to be my all time favourite short story, till date (du Maurier’s The Apple Tree, comes a close second). My favourite novella (a text too small to be a novel, yet way too long to be considered a short story), happens to be Truman Capote’s BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY’S (pictured above as well); which I bought, and read, in 2009, whilst living in the most beautiful city in the world, Paris, France. Fell in love with this beautifully written piece of prose, a quick read (Anthony Burgess’ A Clockwork Orange, happens to be next favourite novella, and I love Kubrick’s surreal adaptation, from 1971, of the book, as well). The movie version of Breakfast at Tiffany’s (1961), which also happens to be among my favourite films, directed by Blake Edwards, also stars my all time favourite actress, Audrey Hepburn.

So, I’ve come a full circle, from Hepburn to Hepburn!!!! Almost like a of .


#‎NuwanSensFilmSense
Bookish Nuwan (NS)

Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë, happens to be one of my favourite epic novels; a condensed version of which, we studied in Grade 8 (at Stafford International School), when I was 13 years old. Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre too I read in my early teens; and later saw the extravagant play, based on Jane Eyre, by a British drama troop visiting New Delhi, India. So, having read two of the sisters works, out of the trio of published Brontë writers; Les Soeurs Brontë (1979), English title – The Brontë Sisters, supposedly the most accurately bleak biopic based on the lives of the famed Brontë’s; was definitely a must see for me, as both a lover of literature, and a diehard Film Fanatic!!!! And so I did, yesterday evening, when Les Soeurs Brontë, was telecast on TV5MONDE.

Pascal Greggory (as Branwell), Isabelle Adjani (as Emily), Isabelle Huppert (as Anne) and Marie-France Pisier (as Charlotte Brontë); in André Téchiné’s Les Soeurs Brontë (1979)

The title, Les Soeurs Brontë (1979), is a tad misleading, as there is a lot, over an hour, about the depressing life of the artist, Branwell Brontë (played by Pascal Greggory), the less famous brother, of the Brontë sisters. Thus the film ought to have been aptly titled, The Brontë Siblings, or simply The Brontë’s (or Les Brontë’s)!! The version I watched was the 115 minutes long movie, which was released at the 32nd Cannes Film Festival in May 1979; competing for the prestigious Palme d’Or. The original (unreleased) film is said to be around three hours long. I’d love to watch that version as well. Hopefully it will be released in it’s entirety on DVD, someday.

There have been very few English Language Biographical films/television mini-series, on the lives of the Brontë’s. Yet, ironically, this French epic, happens to be the most accurate re-telling of the Brontë family on the Big Screen. Set in wet and windy Yorkshire, the movie tells the story of the lives of the Brontë siblings, as adults. Thus, the two elder sisters, who died, aged 9/10 and 11, are not spoken of. We see the three famed sisters and only brother, living an averagely well enough life, though it’s still a pretty stoic existence, in the countryside. The mother is long dead, thus the rest of the household comprises of; their ageing, Anglican Minister, father; a spinster aunt (which hints, determining the fate of the Brontë children) and the housemaid. At the beginning of the movie, the brother, Branwell Brontë, paints a a portrait of the four living siblings; which is admired by the entire family. They have an artist in their midst. A painting, which later on, Branwell erases himself off of, as he nears his own death from depression.

The Three Sisters: The original Bramwell Brontë painting of the famed Brontë sisters (before they were famous)
Bramwell Brontë erased himself from the painting.

The tale of the Brontë’s is really a tragic one. And the movie is filmed beautifully, with superb cinematography, creating the atmosphere of pure misery, with a backdrop of a dull, dreary, cold, uninviting, capture of the Yorkshire moors. Despite leading an ordinary life, that won’t really amount to anything; these three Victorian women desire to make something of their lives. We see, a pre-20th century feminism, a 19th century subtle boldness, the three encompass. They aren’t very vocally vociferous about not being just household creatures serving men, but they somehow manage to enforce their desires in a very patriarchal society. Charlotte Brontë (Marie-France Pisier), the eldest sibling, is the most ambitious. She somehow convinces her aunt, to permit her to go and study French, in Brussels, Belgium; along with her younger sister, Emily Brontë (Isabelle Adjani). She wishes to come back and open a school. However, Emily ends up despising Brussels, especially as the two English Protestant sisters have to deal with residing in a Catholic country. Charlotte endures without agitation, as she wants to somehow study, at the same time we see her silently fall for her much older teacher. Meanwhile, Anne Brontë (Isabelle Huppert), finds work as a governess, with a wealthy English family. While the three sisters are away, the unsuccessful Branwell, has to deal with the death of their aunt; who dies from exhaustion from constipation. Funny, as it might sound today, it is sad, at one time such a thing existed, as medicine wasn’t advanced enough for ageing people suffering from constipation. Her death, gets all the three sisters to stop their academic/working lives and come back home; for the sake of their father and brother.

Father & Daughter: Patrick Magee & Isabelle Adjani in a scene from the film

From here we see a lot about Branwell Brontë. His affair with an older married woman. Him not achieving anything through his literary works. His depression when his lover leaves him (she leaves to be with her children, once her husband dies). To his ultimate demise. Of course the lives of the rest of the sisters are shown too; but he seems to be the protagonist for most of the film, until his death. Meanwhile, we see the father’s support of his children’s wishes; their father, Patrick Brontë (Patrick Magee). It’s as Branwell Brontë nears his death, from drugs and alcohol; we see the trio of Brontë sisters secretly publish a book each, under a male pseudonym.  Soon two of the sisters succumb to tuberculosis, and Charlotte Brontë is the only living sister, by the Operatic end of the movie. Charlotte too died young, at the age of 38.

With a great cast, the movie is well acted, perfectly directed, beautifully photographed; yet not without a few minor flaws. Branwell Brontë’s story is a bit of a bore; but overall, the entire movie is slow paced anyway. But the darkly depressing portrayal of the Brontë’s, make the icy brilliance of the movie, extremely realistic. With very naturalistic performances, we feel what they are going through. We feel the depressing tone of the film to near perfection. It’s hard not to be annoyed at Branwell Brontë though; and admire the sisters, especially Charlotte and Emily. Both Branwell and Charlotte suffer through unrequited love; but Charlotte bears it all, with a strong mind and unbroken spirit, even though with a broken heart, and ends up publishing a novel, which Branwell never gets to know about. But Branwell, when ditched by his older lover; takes refuge in alcohol and Opium; dies of tuberculosis, and passes his illness onto his two younger sisters, Emily and Anne, as well. Charlotte Brontë was, less than a year, older than Branwell.

Marie-France Pisier as Charlotte Brontë, in a scene from Les Soeurs Brontë (1979)

It’s sad, when the movie ends, we realize that none of the Brontë family members were aware of the three sisters accomplishments, other than the trio themselves, and most probably the father. The mother, the brother, the aunt, et al are dead, by the time the books are published and credited to the three sisters.

Marie-France Pisier, steals the show, as the eldest sibling, Charlotte, who survives everything, and everyone, that tries to pull her down. After Pisier, Isabelle Adjani, who plays Emily, is the next brilliant character sketch. Emily loves to trek through the moors, in men’s clothing. Not that she is a tomboy; but she dresses in trousers, as a practicality; as she tells her maid, “it makes me walk faster”. But she’s careful not to let anyone see her dressed in that manner, other than her own family. For a Victorian Lady to be dressed in trousers would have been a scandalous affair. Isabelle Huppert plays the youngest, and doesn’t have the sense of psychological strength of her elder sisters. But the dullest character is played by Pascal Greggory. Who to is actually superb, in doing a character role of a very weak human being. All the actors are superb, including stars like Patrick Magee, Hélène Surgère and Jean Sorel; to name a few, in their supporting roles. Hélène Surgère plays the aptly named Madame Robinson; the older married woman who seduces Branwell Brontë. I think the biggest flaw of the movie is that, too much of the plot is focused on Branwell Brontë; though the title suggests otherwise.  Yet, trust the French to bring out a masterful retelling of three of greatest writers of British literature. However, Patrick Magee, who is Irish; spoke his lines in English, and then dubbed into French. Though, I hate the idea of a movie dubbed in a different language, in general (I prefer reading subtitles in English of foreign language films I don’t understand); it really works well here.

The Three Actresses, who played the Brontë Sisters: (L to R) Marie-France Pisier, Isabelle Huppert and Isabelle Adjani

Overall a beautifully executed piece of cinema, a well made period drama, just slightly less than excellence for a few minor flaws.

Les Soeurs Brontë (1979)
My Rating: Near Excellent – 9/10!!!!


#‎NuwanSensFilmSense
Bookish Nuwan

Quoting Parveen Babi

 

The essence of spirituality lies in being a good human, and following, good, positive principles
– Parveen Babi
     (1949 – 2005)

 

Parveen Babi with Shashi Kapoor, in the late 70’s, on the sets of Kaala Patthar (the film was released in 1979)
The Film was based on the Chasnala mining disaster of 1975

Amitabh Bachchan & Parveen Babi in a scene from Deewar (1975)
This tragedy was loosely based on the life of notorious Indian gangster, Haji Mastan

Parveen Babi with her (then) life partner, Kabir Bedi, in ROME, in 1976

Lovers in Rome: Kabir Bedi and Parveen Babi, in 1976

Amitabh Bachchan & Parveen Babi, in the biggest Bollywood blockbuster of 1977; Amar Akbar Anthony
A comedy about three brothers, brought up in three different faiths; Hindu, Muslim & Christianity. The Big B and Babi starred in a number films together, and all of them super-hits

Pink n’ Blue, I Love You
Hema Malini (dressed in pink) in the titular role, of Raziya Sultan (1983), along with Parveen Babi (in Blue)
This bio-pic is based on the life of Queen Razia Sultan (1205 – 1240), the only female to ever rule the Delhi Sultanate; and this was one of the rare Bollywood commercial films to tackle Lesbianism (although the lovers were shown in a purely platonic sense, it was well hinted)

Nuwan Sen’s Film Sense
#‎NuwanSensFilmSense
Nuwan Sen (Quoting Quotes)

Welcome to September 2017!!!!!

Come September, and signs of fall, with it’s colourful Autumn leaves should be taking form, on one side of the globe; whilst blossoms with a hint of Spring ought to be appearing on the other; while here in the tropics, of heaty humidity, the monotonous weather never changes, much like anything else, ever (at least never for the better).

Yet, lets welcome this new month with open arms; and let us keep hoping, against hope, that things shall improve. So, to all my fellow bloggers, wish you a great new month!!!!! 😀

So to start this month off, I have a questionnaire, related to Films, and this month of September 2017!!!

Q.1 What’s the first film that comes to your mind, when you hear the name ‘September’?

Q.2 What’s your favourite film, with ‘September’ in the title?

Q.3 Have you seen any, or are you planning to watch a, movie today, the 1st of September, Year 2017?

Q.4 Is/Are there any movie release/s, this month, wherever you reside, that you are really looking forward to?

Q.5 Is/Are there any film related function/s, this month, wherever you reside, that you are really looking forward to?

Nuwan Sen’s Film Sense

 

Hattie mcDaniel as Mammy in Gone with the Wind (1939)

If Americans think that one of the biggest racial issues Trumpland is facing today, is the viewing of Gone with the Wind (1939); they’ve totally gone BONKERS!!

The Orpheum Theatre, in Memphis, Tennessee; recently pulled out the showing of this iconic Hollywood epic, on the grounds it was too insensitive for modern audiences. That’s soooo stupid. Are they insane??? Gone with the Wind, especially taking into account the time period it was made in (minus modern day technical wizardry), happens to be one of the greatest Hollywood creations ever. Plus, it’s my second favourite film ever (pls also see my post My Favourite movie by decade, My Favourite Oscar Winner per decade from March 2014; and my list of critiques Why I love …. from November/December 2012 on IMDB)

.

Happy Friendship Day 2017

A very Happy Friendship Day, to all my friends, all around the globe!! To Real life Buddies, to Reel life Characters!! To Best of Pals, to Blog Pals!! To Live Mates, to Virtual Mates!! To Life Pals, to e-Pals!! And to Family, that I actually have a Friendship with, and not associate just for namesake!!

Enjoy

Nuwan Sen ❤

**Special Note**

To all my faithful bloggers, sorry I haven’t blogged in a while. A lot of depressive forces prevented me from working on this blog. But don’t fret, I shall be back in the World of Blogging, ASAP!!!! 🙂

NS.

There’ve been quite a few fantastical tales, on celluloid reels, of humans falling in love with the unreal, and vice versa. Lets take a look at some great, and some far from great, renditions of this unusual phenomena, explored mainly on the Big Screen. Fairy tales for more mature audiences (teenagers and/or adults), if you may.
What brought about this sudden urge to write about unrealistic romances, portrayed in a realistic style on celluloid? I watched, Her (2013), back in March 2015 (on 22nd), and never got to write about it (of course films today aren’t made on celluloid, but am speaking in a general term, to reference cinema of the past). Plus it brought about memories of some really great films (as well as certain terrible movies), I’ve watched in the previous decades, going way back to my childhood.

In Her, a writer, Theodore (Joaquin Phoenix) falls for an electronic voice, without a body (voiced by Scarlett Johansson). In Lars and the Real Girl (2007) a lonely, simple headed, man, Lars (Ryan Gosling) falls for a sex toy, a female without a voice.

In Ruby Sparks (2012) a writer, Calvin (Paul Dano) creates a fictional character Ruby Sparks (played by Zoe Kazan) that comes to life. He fall in love with her, but treats her like his possession, in contrast to the sex toy, to whom, Lars, tends to show so much respect and affection towards. Ironically Lars doesn’t treat the sex toy as play thing, but Calvin treats Ruby, as a toy, making her do what he wants. An egoistical male’s god complex, of being in control of his woman. While Lars of Lars and the real Girl and Theodore from Her, are the exact opposite. Of course, when Theodore finds out the voice of Her is ‘in love’ with thousands of other human beings, he starts to feel jealous, knowing he wasn’t special. While we sympathise with Theodore and Lars, we can’t help but feel Calvin is a bloody prick.
Stranger than Fiction (2006), has a similar unreal premise, but am yet to watch it, so I shan’t comment on it further.

In the animated movie, Corpse Bride (2005), a man, Victor Van Dort (voiced by Johnny Depp), accidentally marries a corpse (voiced by Helena Bonham Carter). Of course in this case, it’s the corpse, who falls for the human. Yet, the corpse, itself, was a human being once, who was tricked and murdered by her paramour, on her wedding day. Similarly in the comedy, Memoirs of an Invisible Man (1992), an Invisible man (Chevy Chase) and a woman (Daryl Hannah), fall for each other, yet the invisible man, being an actual human being, it makes it comparatively realistic. As in the case of Mr. India (Anil Kapoor) in Mr. India (1987), a vigilante who can become invisible with help of a devise created by his late father, happens to be the romantic object of many a women. He is still a human being. Yet, we see, the reporter, Seema (Sridevi), fall for the invisible vigilante, than his human self. In fact, she initially despises ‘Mr. India’ in his human form as Arun Verma, unaware that he is in fact her invisible hero. In Hollow Man (2000) and Invisible Strangler (1978), once the protagonists of these movies, find they can get away anything, in their invisible form, nothing stops them from acting on their lustful desires, committing rape/murder, on beautiful women.

In various superhero tales, you find a similar dilemma, as in Mr. India, faced by the love interest of the story. In Superman (1978), reporter Louis Lane (Margot Kidder) falls in love with Superman (Christopher Reeve), who actually is an alien from a distant planet. But she refuses to acknowledge, the affectionate advances from her co-worker Clark Kent, who happens to be her superhero in his human avatar. There have been quite a few ‘Superman’ films since.

Of course Superman is from another planet. But if you take other superhero’s; American conceptions like Batman (played on the Big Screen by many stars from 1966 till date), Spider-man (Nicholas Hammond, in the 70’s, Tobey Maguire, Andrew Garfield & Tom Holland, this century), or Bollywood creations like Shahenshah (Amitabh Bachchan) from Shahenshah (1988) and Krrish (Hrithik Roshan) from Krrish (2006) and Krrish 3 (2013), sequels to Koi…. Mil Gaya (2003); in all these stories, the superhero happens to be human, with superpowers, but their leading ladies don’t necessarily, easily, fall for the man, but have more of a desire for the vigilante, unaware the two are one and the same. In love with not just the unreal, but impending danger as well. Dangerous, risk taking, hero’s, seem sexually more appealing to the fairer sex, than a realistic human companion. These kind of films actually also put pressure on growing young men. As kids, most guys like the idea, of imagining themselves as superhero’s, for fun. But when in their teens, it’s more to do with appeasing the opposite sex, through false perceptions of masculinity, showcased in such movies. Sometimes foolishly young men might try and take unnecessary risks, just to get the attention of their female peers, with disastrous consequences.
If you take classic fairytales, we read as little children, like Beauty and Beast and Princess and Frog, this phenomena of man and beast is nothing new. Yet at the same time, both the ‘Beast’ and the ‘Frog’, are actually human beings, making it somewhat acceptable for children. If you take Greek mythology, there is the famous tale of Minotaur, where the Minotaur is the result of the Queen of Crete mating with a white bull. Added to which there are plenty of tales of Gods and human love stories, as well, in Greek Mythology. Then there is Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Nights Dream. There have been plenty of movie versions of these classic tales and great old literature. In I, Frankenstein (2014); as I stated on twitter ‘another 21st century ruination of a 19th century classic’; this dull horror movie ends with the hint, that Frankenstein’s monster, a man made being, has found a human companion, after searching for over 200 years. On a lighter vein, in not so great films (yet no where as near as terrible as I, Frankenstein), like the comedy, Hercules in New York (1970), Arnold Schwarzenegger falls from the skies (and not to forget Schwarzenegger’s ridiculous Terminator franchise, from 1984 onwards, with the craziest and cheesiest storylines, ever). Like in Corpse Bride, a man accidentally awakens a goddess, in the near pathetic, Goddess of Love (1988), while in Love-Struck (1997) we see a woman who doesn’t believe in love (Cynthia Gibb) fall for Cupid (Costas Mandylor) and vice versa; and Cupid has to decide if he wants to leave his immortal form, and become human. Similarly in City of Angels (1998), an angel (Nicolas Cage) gives up his human form, for his love for a human being (Meg Ryan). Date with an Angel (1987) is about another union between a man and beautiful angel.

In the 80’s and 90’s, there were quite a few teen comedies, based on this concept of unrealistic love, helping a young man find the perfect looking partner, especially if the lead character is a geek or considered a loser, who cannot attain the affections of the opposite sex.

Weird Science (1985) and Virtual Sexuality (1999), are two films I haven’t watched, but the concept of the two teen movies, are the same. In Weird Science, two geeks create a ‘perfect’ woman (Kelly LeBrock), while in Virtual Sexuality, a girl creates herself a ‘perfect’ man (Rupert Penry-Jones).

Similar to Corpse Bride and Goddess of Love, in Mannequin (1987), an artist (Andrew McCarthy) falls for a Mannequin (Kim Cattrall). Big (1988) and Date with an Angel; the two movies combined resulted in the crappy Bollywood take, that was Chandra Mukhi (1993). The film was so bad, that it was credited as being a Salman Khan idea (the lead actor of the movie). Getting back to Tom Hanks, star of Big, back in the 80’s he did a lot of run on the mill comedies; that weren’t great, but were enjoyable enough, thanks to Hanks. In Splash (1984), we see Hanks falling for a mermaid. This adult fairy tale, is similar to the classic children’s fairy tale, The Little Mermaid.
Funny though, how all these Hollywood romances, dealing with unreal love, where the perfect looking lover, be it a mannequin, a fairy, a goddess or mermaid, were all hot white women. What happened to the browns, blacks and yellows? Where are the gays and lesbians? Are they considered less than perfect???? Added to which why is it most of time a man finding the perfect mate? And that too preferably a Blonde one? Even better if the blonde’s in a red hot attire? Like the sequence in The Matrix (1999), where Neo (played by Keanu Reeves), suddenly turns to take a good look at a blonde in a red dress. Why did she have to be blonde? What if he saw an African-American? or an Indian beauty? What if he turned to look at a man? Even in Virtual Sexuality, though it’s creation is a male, the man is a white male, Blond, with a perfect physique. Of course when it came to the Bollywood films, the perfect hero/heroine are both Indian’s, obviously. But United States of America, is a diverse country with all colours and creeds, where the indigenous people of the country are actually Red skinned, not white. Yet the 80’s (and 90’s to a certain extent) target audience, were the straight white American youth. Even though these reached beyond borders. And in a way, 80’s was one of the worst periods for Hollywood, with a load crappy B-movies, being made. Not all, but most, including these fantasy flicks.

Getting back on the topic of films based on unrealistic romances, there are some interesting films of ghosts and people falling for one another. Like in Corpse Bride (discussed above), these dead spirits were humans at one time, and are scavenging earth ’cause of some unfinished business. In the classic Bollywood film, Ek Paheli (1971), a modern man, Sudhir (played by Feroz Khan) falls in love with a mysterious woman (Tanuja), whom we discover later, to be a spirit of a dead pianist, who had committed suicide, during the Post-war era. The only way for the two to be together is, if Sudhir leaves his bodily form, releasing his spirit. Similarly in Somewhere in Time (1980), a modern day Chicago playwright, Richard Collier (Christopher Reeve) falls for a photograph of an Edwardian beauty, a stage actress, Elise McKenna (Jane Seymour). He manages to travel back in time through self hypnosis (see my post DVD Films From Last Month PART-II from December 2014). Yet, they can’t be together, as he’s thrown back into the late 70’s, due to a small mistake, he made, where she doesn’t exist anymore. The only way for them to be together, is for him to die of a broken heart, and letting their spirits unite in heavenly paradise forever.

In Paheli (2005) the exact opposite happens, a woman falls for a ghost, who’s taken her husband’s human form, and trapped her real husband’s spirit.

In Ghost (1990), when a banker, Sam Wheat ( Patrick Swayze) is killed by his best friend, he tries desperately to communicate with his fiancée, an artist, Molly Jensen (Demi Moore), with the help of psychic, Oda Mae Brown (Whoopi Goldberg). While in Love Can Be Murder (1992) a ghost of a former private detective brings chaos into the life of a living private detective, (Jaclyn Smith).

Then, there are on-screen figures/cartoon characters, where the real world intervenes with the celluloid/animated characters. In Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988), an animated character; based on classic Hollywood stars, Rita Hayworth, Veronica Lake and Lauren Bacall; seduces more than one human in the movie, and spectators alike. Purple Rose of Cairo (1985), has a movie character, walk off the screen and seduce his most ardent fan.

Getting back to man and beast/alien, PK (2014), sees a humanoid alien fall for a human. E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982), shows a great friendship between an alien and a human child. Planet of the Apes (1968) there is a famous kiss, between a man and an ape. In The Animal (2001) a man becomes sexually attracted to a goat in heat. He talks to the goat while rubbing her back and sloppily kisses her on the head. He then slaps her butt. All the popular Hulk films have a love interest

The Sixth Sense (1999), Warm Bodies (2013), Transcendence (2014), The Fly (1958 & 1986), The Ghost and Mrs. Muir (1947), Bewitched (2005), Pleasantville (1998), Ex Machina (2014), all have similar unusual human and non-(real)human interactions.
The Stepford Wives (1975 & 2004), tells of how an intelligent woman finds it difficult, to integrate into a narrow minded society, when she moves into a new neighbourhood. Of course, all the wives (in the original 75’ film) turn out to be machines (while in the 04’ version, only one husband turns out to be a robot, while the other wives have been brainwashed). This is also symbolical, of how difficult it is, when a lone intellectual person gets trapped in an archaic society, that constantly tries to drag him or her down with them. I personally know how hard is to stay afloat, without changing for the worse, living in an extremist narrow minded country. It’s not easy not to be influenced by negativity. And just like Katharine Ross (in the original), and Nicole Kidman (in the comical remake); I have to fight to stay sane, not to be swayed by the rest.

In Moon (2009), we see a clone in love with the image of a dead human; while in The Space between us (2017), a human born in Mars feels like an Alien on Earth; and falls for a human, who decides to leave with him to Mars.
Then there are people who fall for wordsmiths, that they’ve never met. In Saajan (1991) we see a woman (Madhuri Dixit) fall deeply in love with a poet (whom, nobody knows what he looks like), when a man claiming to be the poet (Salman Khan) seduces her, she falls for him. But does she truly love him? If he turns out not to be the poet, would she still love this man? In the Bengali (Bengali/English bilingual)Art Film, The Japanese Wife (2010) and the Hindi (Hindi/English bilingual) Art Film, The Lunchbox (2013), two people have an entire love affair through letters, without ever meeting each other. In The Japanese Wife, they even get married; through ink.

Last but not the least, lets have another look at the union of onscreen humans & Aliens (besides ‘Superman’). Similar to Meet Joe Black and Paheli (as spoken of earlier) Jeff Bridges in Starman (1984), plays an alien who clones himself, into a dead man’s form; and gets the widow to help him escape. In The Man Who Fell to Earth (1976), David Bowie plays a humanoid alien, sleeping around with women of earth. And not to forget the Vampires/Werewolves and human unions; in films like, Nosferatu (1922), Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979), The Hunger (1983) and the recent Twilight franchise.

Some great films on this unusual conception, some terrible, and some in between. But when they bring out something exceptional, those films are really worth checking out.

An ode to unrealistic romances.

Nuwan Sen’s Film Sense

Special Note: I actually worked on this post, one day (on the 22nd of April 2015), exactly a month after I watched the movie, ‘Her’, in March 2015, I wrote most of In Love with the Unreal, and left it incomplete, hoping to work on it the next day or so. I never got back to it, and left it pending. Then, five months later, in September 2015, I re-worked on it a bit, stopped, and didn’t touch it at all through out the Sweet Year of 2016. So it was just hanging there, untouched and incomplete.…That is until today. This was my second incomplete post, from April 2015, that I left unpublished; the other being The Beatles in Art movements through the ages. But I did mange to post in … the following month, May 2015. Anyway, back in April that year, I hardly got anything much done, so far as blogging was concerned. I only posted one blog-post, i.e. The Great Villain Blogathon: Juhi Chawla as corrupt politician ‘Sumitra Devi’ in GULAAB GANG (2014), on the 15th of April, 2015. Now there are no more pending posts. All done!!

Nuwan Sen (Pending Posts from April 2015 !! All Complete!!!!!)
Also see (my), Nu Film Site of Nuwan Sen – Nu Sense on Film (nu Sense on Film), started in August 2015.

Now though, later in Year , am actually planning to close nu Sense on Film!!! I prefer to continue blogging here, on No Nonsense with Nuwan Sen.

Nuwan Sen

French, Socialist Party member, 39 year old Emmanuel Macron, is the new President of France. Vive La France!!

Emmanuel Macron with his wife; the new First Lady, Brigitte Macron; at the Inauguration, yesterday.

Macron, who ran under the banner En Marche! (a centrist, liberal movement, founded by Macron, which encapsulates a balance between social equality and a certain degree of social hierarchy, without going into extremes) won, by a decisive margin, at the Presidential elections, defeating Marine Le Pen, on 7th May 2017. He was inaugurated into office yesterday, 14th May 2017.
This is exactly what the world needs now. Youthful, progressive, modernists, but with intellect, wisdom and maturity, of a 65 year old; to bring the world into the future. Open minded, great progressive minds, the likes of, what former Presidents, John F. Kennedy and Barack Obama were to USA, former Prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi was to India; and what current Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau is to Canada today. Not ridiculous leaders like, America’s George W. Bush (jr.) & Donald Trump; or even worse, the pathetic Shit Lankan Presidents, with archaic, crude, extremist, mentality, that lead/have led this country for the last 28 years. J.R. Jayewardene was the only good President SL ever had, and no doubt the best Prime Minister this corrupt island has even seen. Devil’s own country, with their love for Devilled food; inhumane hot headed humans, and a heat, as hot as hell.

Kudos to France, for electing a young modernist. Let’s hope for the best!!

Wishing Emanuel Macron, all the best, in his future endeavours.

Nuwan Sen n’ Politics
Nuwan Sen n’ News ( The Front Page)


(1929-1993)

Remembering Audrey Hepburn, on her 88th Birth Anniversary!!!

Audrey Hepburn; a brave kid during the second world war who participated in the Dutch resistance, a beautiful young ballerina, a Tony & Oscar winning actress of the stage & screen, a Hollywood icon, a classy Fashionista, a kind humanitarian, a caring philanthropist, and a Goodwill Ambassador for UNICEF; who gave herself completely to serving poverty stricken, and ailing, children, across, Africa, South America and Asia!! A modern day saint!!

A mini-pictorial tribute, to this unique personality!!

Nuwan Sen