As for my own evaluation of his works.  I've seen about 30 films in which he starred and all his directorial ventures. I consider him to be a better film-maker than an actor but sometimes (and i wonder why not always?) his acting is absolutely mind-blowing. I like his acting in Teesri Kasam, Jagte Raho, Awaara, Shree 420, Aag, Barsaat, Chori Chori, Anari, Phir Subha Hogi, JDMGBH, Sangam and  - the last but not the least -  MNJ.  So you can see that  i am very fond of his tramp persona, I like it and i have no problems with his so-called mannerisms.  Among his directorial works i love the 4 great black-and-whites, especially Awaara and Shree 420. The former is of a special significance for me, too personal may be, which is bad for the real analysis of why is it really so good and why has it such an astonishing and lasting - everlasting -  impact on me and on so many others.  The latter is simply flawless as a movie (10 of 10) and the must see for the young generations because it possesses the depth of a tale you want to tell your children to raise them good human beings. And i appreciate your review in it, it was warm, thank you. Of his last works my favourite is the brilliant SSS. And in between lies MNJ which is strange, painful and meaningful, and i really think it was (or is) his greatest. I use to think of RK as of an underrated or better to say unrecognised artiste, philosopher and poet whose destiny was to end up as a "great showman" which was and is an insult. And he had tried to defend himself, to explain himself, to save himsef, to reveal himself and to hide himself in the depths of this film, It was a different task compared to all his other films. And he did it - explained and saved. In fact it was not a commercial film in a commercal world, so its commercial failure did matter only for RK as a producer. But he suffered as an artiste too - because not everybody wanted to listen to and to understand his explanations. As you have said - the audience were like children. So it was the greatest work, very very important fo him personally and for those who really want to understand his comlexities. And that Fellini connection. When I saw Amarcord for the 1st time in the mid 70-s, i knew the connection with Raj - esp with the 1st episode of MNJ. Sorry fo my long speech.

Thanks for visiting, and for your interest in books, to which I attach a particular importance!

Yes, I know I haven't reviewed 1000 splendid suns. I found it fascinating, and yet something stopped me from finalising the review, which I had started. Perhaps the excessive suffering it contained? I don't know that it is more compelling though. Both have a strength and a power that are interconnected, as you know. But anyway, I would probably have to go back and read it again, because it's been maybe two years now!

Thanks for the link, I'm off to see it now. (time elapses...)

OK I'm back! Julia, just to know if I'm doing things properly: is what you call review on Goodreads a short paragraph or two, or should I be looking for something longer? Thanks!

Please, feel free to do whatever you want with the contributions here, you're most welcome. I realise now that Russia being under Western influence much more than in the 60s (cold war permitting India got all the "exotic" appeal) indeed RK wouldn't be as famous today. Besides, there are other more dashing young things in Indian cinema anyway! RK today is for the seniors reminiscing about their youth and oldies fans like us!

BTW, I noticed that you said "RK's greatest work": is that the result of a careful evaluation of his works, or is it a cursory appraisal?

thanks for visiting. May I ask what are you involved in?

Friendly regards.

As to why she didn't make more movies, I know that in the beginning, she had a lot of problem finding funding. Other than that, it's all speculation.

Thanks for your appreciation and for your feedback on sai Paranjpaye's films: do you know what happened, and why she made so little films? Did she have another business? Apart from the well-known three, this one, Katha and Chasme Buddoor, have you seen any more?

This was a small movie that touched me deeply - simply because of how it defines love; and how giving love alone is not enough; one must learn how to accept it. I love Sai Paranjpaye's movies, and I think this was her finest. It's a shame she made so few movies. Naseer and Shabana were fantastic; I don't know that I would put one better than the other - because Shabana had the sympathetic role, and it's easy to feel for someone who is yearning to love, rather than a prickly pear who shuts everyone out. He is flawed, and so I like him the better for it.

the lady seems very similar to mandakini

Yes, your story makes one wonder about the relationship that used to exist between the film-industry and the public: such mistakes come from the fact that the cinema hadn't yet lost its "innocence" - something which Raj Kapoor was precisely making it do, in a way.

I can perhaps illustrate this with an anecdote. I was 8 at the time, telephones in my small Indian city were not that common and still went through an operator, and I got a telephone call in the afternoon. From my school. With the nun wanting to talk to me. I went to answer it in wonder (and dread - because what had I done for such strange step) and my parents hovering around to watch me answer. And it was the Principal wanting me to ask my Dad to ferry them to see "Mera Naam Joker" as he had a car. And he made 2-3 trips to get them all to the cinema. They usually avoided the cinema totally. I think it was the school scenes which attracted them - and now as a grown up I often wonder what they made of the film!

We were taken to the see the film too (along the same lines) and I think the parenst found it an embarrassment whereas we were just too young to pick up anything other than it was quite boring once you had seen the clowns and the trapeze artists!

What did YOU think about it? Let's have your opinion, for a change?

yves

a very interesting commentary at

http://roughinhere.wordpress.com/2008/05/01/the-social-relevance-of-shree-420-to-the-present-day-usa/

cheers

Yes, indeed, quite interesting, but it's a pity that this site seems to be at a standstill, don't you think?

recently while going through 'the dialogue of mother india', i found that some crucial shots at the last of the movie had been deleted. They are as follows:-

1)birju (sunil dutt)showing his mother her bangles after he being shot by her.

2)radha's(nargis) reaction after seeing the bangles.

3)birju's anguished expression that he did all this just to return to her her SYMBOL OF HONOR(bangles).

In the film we see that before dying in radha's lap, birju drops something from his hands which radha is not able to see. But we as audience saw they were her BANGLES! 

                                   Thus, these deletions(mentioned above) create an open-ended conclusion rather than an absolute closure. Without these shots, birju dies a doubly-tragic character,i.e., misunderstood by her mother.