Nirbhaya documentary: Why Javed Akhtar, Anu Aga's views differ completely

Don't think this is about attacking the messenger. But, there is no reason for such a controversial documentary to escape criticism. Responsibility comes from many sides which really needs to be analysed and truth be fully exposed. Indian Express link posted by @avi gives an idea how deep the rabbit hole goes. I was totally expecting role of such vested interests from outside India over such cases.

Cases like this will adversely effect the worthy cause which is pursued by Indians already. Progress should not be stopped by such hyperventilated documentaries.
 
Last edited:
Superbad said:
what next? documentaries on serial killers and pedophiles and relate how they think like us all?
Click to expand...
This line is from ayatollah arnab, if you watch a couple of his newshour about this documentary, he refers to the victim as a ten year old. Ten year old ?!? what sort of misinformation is that.

In both the shows. There are instances when there are three people talking and screaming at the same time. about fifteen minutes in you will realise it not worth the time. They are putting on a strong face but they are butt hurt that they did not get the rights which NDTV secured. if you watch NDT coverage its completely opposite in tone.

Its amazing to see how cut throat competitive both channels have become. is this new i dont usually watch either for some time now.
 
Prole73 said:
But, there is no reason for such a controversial documentary to escape criticism.
Click to expand...
welcome.

as i said only credible argument which i personally disagree with is the govt's trope of curbing freedom of speech because we can't handle it yet.

There was a good article in the hindu recently that spoke about autonomy of women, which i though was an interesting angle. all this talk about rape is actually counter productive when it comes to autonomy. because now everybody thinks its not safe for women to be out or they should be accompanied or best of all confined to the home. posts rape stats from the un and you will be pleased to know India when it comes to rape stats is lower than say US or UK as in fewer rapes per 1000.

but somebody made a valid point here many pages back. compare how free women are over there to here and you know the reality. I think women are freer in bombay than in my city but those people are comparing to other countries.

This narrative goes above whether the doc was good or not and moves the discussion to another point altogether.
 
http://m.ibnlive.com/news/nirbhayas...indias-daughter-a-fake-film/533097-3-244.html
New Delhi: While the British filmmaker Leslee Udwin claims that her documentary on the horrific Nirbhaya gangrape and murder case, 'India's Daughter', accurately depicts what happened on the night of December 16, 2012, the sole witness to the barbaric assault on the 23-year-old woman called the film "fake".

Backing the Central government's decision to ban 'India's Daughter' featuring the interview of one of the convicts, Mukesh Singh who blames girls for rape and not men, Nirbhaya's friend Avanindra Pandey accused Leslee Udwin of insensitively handling the issue.

"The documentary is unbalanced as the victim's viewpoint is missing. The facts are hidden and the content is fake. Only Jyoti and I know what happened on that night and the documentary is far from truth," says Avanindra Pandey who fought with the rapists and murderers to save her friend but was overpowered and beaten up brutally.

Backing his claim, Pandey said he had never heard the name of tutor Satendra, who features in the documentary. "Moreover, how does he know which movie I wanted to watch on that night," asks Pandey.

The man who appears as the tutor of the victim in the documentary said, "Avanindra Pandey wanted to watch an action film while Jyoti wanted to watch 'Life Of Pi'."

The interview of the death row convict created a massive public uproar and controversy after it was made public in which he held girls more responsible than boys for rape. Pandey says, "A controversy was created unnecessarily and was sensationalised. The documentary made fun of emotions and questioned the law and order situation in our country."

Pandey adds that even though things slipped out of the government's hand, it took timely action. "The documentary has dented country's image and questioned law and order situation. The documentary showed that any individual can enter the Central Jail of our country and can interview a criminal," Pandey says.

When asked whether he was approached to be part of the documentary, he replied in positive. "I was approached by many people and it started one and a half years ago, in 2013. I did not want to be part of it as I was not convinced by its motive. Also, I was not mentally prepared and had health issues as well," Pandey says.
Click to expand...
 
booo said:
isnt it attacking the messenger? trying to discredit the film maker?
Click to expand...

Yes, that is exactly what is being tried. Irrespective how the interview was carried out (through sublime, counterfeit and clandestine methods), it still shows the world (and primarily us Indians) the harsh reality. That is what is embarrassing, to India. It highlighted the societal and social mechanisms which daily are utilized to subjugate women. Rape is just one of the finality doings.[DOUBLEPOST=1425994685][/DOUBLEPOST]This is interesting, might have been posted here before:

http://www.vice.com/read/why-a-white-girl-writing-about-rape-got-kicked-out-of-india
 
Last edited:
blr_p said:
ok, so why you object to an additional effort in this direction then ? That is comes from a foreigner to me is a bonus. That some one would think of doing something.

But that's not the case with you is it. why is that ?

as for how she got the permission, see my earlier posts.


non-sequitur
Click to expand...

according to you
 
Huge respects to Avanindra Pandey, he dared to stand by some truth even after going through so much. A person like me cannot imagine how much he could be suffering. The psyche of an Indian man. I clearly subscribe to his views.
 
Its not about him, it about her ;)

dont know why he was not in it but its his life and he needs to move on to other things.
 
blr_p said:
Its not about him, it about her ;)

dont know why he was not in it but its his life and he needs to move on to other things.
Click to expand...

Lol....yea. It is about women and the victim. And how we men treat our ladies like fodder and manure. Of course he did go through a harrowing and life-taking fatality. The stance and mindset of Indian society still remains undiminished.
 
^but seriously I am waiting for Leslie Udwin's explenation on why she did not get Avanindra's account. As I said earlier, his account is as important as the convict's account. Also, I would like to hear the account of the lawyer who was fighting for justice to jyothi.
 
booo said:
^but seriously I am waiting for Leslie Udwin's explenation on why she did not get Avanindra's account. As I said earlier, his account is as important as the convict's account. Also, I would like to hear the account of the lawyer who was fighting for justice to jyothi.
Click to expand...

Well said.....!

Maybe he wanted to keep his privacy. Though, to be honest I never thought of that when I watched it. His perspective would have cemented the hypothetical reconstruction of that nights event. Post that his inputs would not have provided much more, keeping in mind the target scope and thematic design of the film.
 
booo said:
^but seriously I am waiting for Leslie Udwin's explenation on why she did not get Avanindra's account. As I said earlier, his account is as important as the convict's account. Also, I would like to hear the account of the lawyer who was fighting for justice to jyothi.
Click to expand...

Didn't he refuse to appear?
 
asingh said:
Lol....yea. It is about women and the victim. And how we men treat our ladies like fodder and manure. Of course he did go through a harrowing and life-taking fatality. The stance and mindset of Indian society still remains undiminished.
Click to expand...

Hope you remember how much that boy suffered when his girl/friend got brutally raped in front of him, himself beaten down violently, and his mental torments which will haunt till his death. He is not a victim, only women can be victims? He's got no soul ? I would've shown same feeling for you, if similar mishap happened to you, though.

Man, you should smell roses after getting up in the morning, it will do good to your mind. And don't use pink tainted glasses, should clear your vision and brains.
 
Last edited:
Prole73 said:
Hope you remember how much that boy suffered when his girl/friend got brutally raped in front of him, himself beaten down violently, and his mental torments which will haunt till his death. He is not a victim, only women can be victims? He's got no soul ?
Click to expand...
of course he does. Would have thought he'd be on the same page as the parents. So i find his statement curious.

One thing that i did not see in the documentary but was in the judgement was these guys tried to run her over before leaving the scene with the bus. he was instrumental in pulling her out of harms way.
 
avi said:
Yup. he refused. May be wanted to move on
Click to expand...
blr_p said:
of course he does. Would have thought he'd be on the same page as the parents. So i find his statement curious.
One thing that i did not see in the documentary but was in the judgement was these guys tried to run her over before leaving the scene with the bus. he was instrumental in pulling her out of harms way.
Click to expand...
Then there is no point coming out after the documentary released and calling it fake. right?
I see two things... its either the director's lack of will to pursue him for an interview or the guy and his lawyers not willing to give it at any cost. either ways, this documentary needs more depth.

but seriously... Life of Pi was like a product placement.
 
Back
Top