I had the fine luck of watching ‘London Has Fallen’ last night – and after watching the movie (it doesn’t matter if it was in random shots), I could not stop myself from writing about it.

Okay, I decided I would not go too deep as it will reduce gravity of my words. I decided to keep it direct – but with a bit of haziness. After all, we all exist in greys – with only occasional interactions with extremities.

The obvious first step or the first brush on penning some words about the movie was going for that little birdie on Twitter. And here a shocking revelation was waiting for me. When I tried my tweet with the hashtag #LondonHasFallen, I found that I was the first person using that hashtag.

Now, it was the first natural hashtag that people should have gone with while writing about the movie. Why they haven’t sounds a bit strange. Anyway, I ‘created’ the #LondonHasFallen hashtag (and felt good on creating something) and went ahead with my tweet.

Now, it is the time for my reflections on the movie:

Well, first of all, the movie is of epic proportions – the kind of destruction, and that too of London, and that too not by supernatural heroes, but by terrorists, is unprecedented.

No other producer or director can think to show London fallen to this extent. No actor can expect that the creative freedom to show destruction can be taken to this extent.

No producer, director or actor can be so unbelievably bold in killing most of important world leaders in one go – an act that #LondonHasFallen does so efficiently.

And where the mastery lies – in the manner all world leaders have shown to be executed – quickly, swiftly (and unbelievably).

The conspiracy has been shown so adept and meticulous that you can see a French President is shown taking waterways to reach London (without the routine entourage and security) or an Italian power couple giggles and ogles from a building and so on.

The meticulousness goes to the next level as the film shows the main protagonist and the side protagonist (here the US President) on the run and terrorists find men and eyes in every part of London virtually hijacking the city – where all layers of defence – aerial or ground forces or from Thames are shown completely fallen – with no trace of their activity.

And when so much of filmmaking talent is oozing here, brimming over, in fact, is spilling over, who cares about CGI or special effects or acting. The epic level of disaster on display takes care of everything. The movie leaves no time to think about storyline, character development or points of logics/ill-logics/bad logics/silly logics/funny logics.

Certainly, the movie that has earned thrice of its budget will remain a ‘lone’ achiever for the years to come. After all, it is rare to see so much of talent – in acting, directing and cinema-making – coming together on a single platform.

Thanks folks for giving us this filmmaking gem – a class act – like a ‘lone wolf’ – a study in point – that will be read again and again.

The film should rightly be spelt as ‘Lon’e’don’ Has Fallen in its respect.

©/IPR: Santosh Chaubey – https://santoshchaubey.wordpress.com/


Funny – at its most insane!
Boisterous – at its most verbose!
Pampered – at its most mollycoddled!
Rowdy – at its most gaudy!
Outrageous – at its most audacious!
Cosmetic – at its most superficial!
Melodrama – at its most dramatic!

The hero:

  • Drives auto-rickshaw, or,
  • Is a bicycle riding college student, or,
  • Is a street vendor of vada-pao, or,
  • A goonda living in a slum.

The heroine:

  • Is from heaven.
  • From a family of high and mighty politicians, or,
  • A larger than life businessman, or,
  • A mafia Don flying in chartered plane.

Rarely, the narrative is developed with role-reversals.

Either the hero approaches the heroine or the heroine has the ‘instantaneous’ love-at-first-sight, no time is wasted in coming to the point – its direct and precise – irrespective of the ‘class’ difference – without going into details – like smooth and efficient!

Love happens so readily – only after few sitcom scenes – and the glues is so strong – that you feel that these films are the true representatives of a ‘classless’ society.

Either love is so ripe or directors are so experienced in these movies that they don’t waste any moment in nuances of going ‘in between the lines’ – or they refuse to see the beauty there that others see!

True post-modernists! Iconoclasts in their own league – so much so – that they have started a league of their own, their ‘own Masala’ within the larger ‘Masala Films’ genre! Proponents and followers of Communism should take their worldview (social take) on society seriously!

(P.S. – While randomly picking up a Dhanush’s movie on TV!)

(P.S. – South Indian cinema produces some of the finest movies in India every year. This is just about the so-called mainstream gibberish that is so prevalent even in the Mumbai cinema or the Hindi film industry – though, even there loves doesn’t happen so readily – and is certainly not ‘class-less’!)


©/IPR: Santosh Chaubey – https://santoshchaubey.wordpress.com/


I remember an answer by the film star Jeetendra that I had heard many years ago while watching random programmes on TV. I don’t exactly remember when but it should be in 90s.

It was about his decision to become an actor. Jeetendra said – after passing B.A. (Bachelor of Arts) in Third Division, I didn’t not have any other option but to join the film industry – where would else I could find a job?

So candid a confession! And it reflects the reality of the Indian film stars (the lead pairs on screen-but not limited to them). When asked about their academic credentials, they don’t have much to talk about. And few of them are as candid as Jeetendra.

I don’t follow film celebrities and content on them. Even then, I can write this much. Conservatively and safely, it is a dicey area for most of them they don’t care about. And with increasing run of ‘film dynasties’ the situation has worsened (stagnated) even further.

But again, the problem is not so narrow in its impact area. And interestingly, the problem is not a problem at all when seen from the perspective of the larger film fraternity.

After all, Indian film industry produces crap in bunches and ‘intelligent, meaningful cinema’ is a feast that is served once in a while.

Yes, there are academically strong and ‘intellectually sound’ film industry professionals, but they are in absolute minority, usually restricted to the expertise areas of filmmaking like direction, concept and design, content research, visualization, art direction, song writing and marketing. Some of them are even in acting.

But for the larger breed, from dynasties to the lot who populate the cast and crew of the crap being produced, year after year, from North to South, from East to West, the crap that is almost the 95% of the total content produced, the scholastics are as dumb a subject to discuss as the ‘elements of intelligent, meaningful cinema’ in the films produced by the ‘elite’ class.

©/IPR: Santosh Chaubey – https://santoshchaubey.wordpress.com/


The competition commission, the anti-monopoly business practices watchdog of the government is facing a peculiar problem.

It is expected to act on a complaint where the complainants and the alleged both share the common traits and some members have been in both of the camps at times. So, before acting on the complaint, the competition commission has to set the guideline to probe this particular case so as to identify the ‘sides’ and the ‘actors’ involved.

Anyway, lets comeback to the complaint.

The commission has been approached by a ‘makeshift’ body of the so-called mainstream commercial cinemamakers’ association. The association has lodged a written complaint against the continuum of the filmmakers engaged in trash filmmaking alleging them of cornering the funds that are scarcely available to the film industry.

The complaint alleges that the flow of the funds to the largely unorganized section of the Indian film industry is a sheer waste of precious resources as its members don’t work for creating critically significant and aesthetically important products that could remain evergreen and could become the identity enablers for the posterity. Instead, they are busy in dishing out overtly gaudy, sleazy, unintelligibly thrilling and amorphously packed bits of entertainment that is absolute rubbish even if compared to the escapist cinema of some of the mainstream cinemamakers.

The mainstream cinemamakers’ body that also represents the many stalwarts of the dynasty cinema in the film industry has said in its complaint that strength of the count and spread of the work of trash filmmakers have reached to the monopolizing levels in the country. They have outnumbered the mainstream cinemamakers and are polluting the creative atmosphere even further by co-opting/forcing the filmmakers engaged in producing different ‘types’ of mainstream cinema to adopt the elements and styles of trash filmmaking in their productions.

The complaint doesn’t name anyone because there are filmmakers that have been straddling through both of the ‘types’. The mainstream cinemamakers body accepts it as a grey area and has requested the competition commission to find a way out of this nagging problem.

It says there is no composite style of trash filmmaking and it borrows and creates aesthetically despicable elements of filmmaking to create and perpetuate frivolous characters that scavenge on the peoples’ urge to get some easily available escapist entertainment and thus harm the notions of a healthy, responsible and participative society.

The competition commission has accepted the complaint for further hearing and action.

It would be interesting to watch how the competition commission tackles this ‘straddling’ problem?

Also, though there is no association to represent the trash filmmakers, their names are an open secret. Let’s see how they strategise to counter this move by their professional brethren.

©/IPR: Santosh Chaubey – https://santoshchaubey.wordpress.com/


What can be the level of trash filmmaking? Can it be scaled? Are there certain qualitative scales available?

What are the major and minor tools of trash filmmaking? What can make for a comprehensive list of such tools?

What motivates people to make obscenely absurd movies?

Shouldn’t such people be medically diagnosed for psychological deformities like a compulsive disorder leading them to draw pleasure in others’ (audiences’) misery?

What pushes for the madness to waste huge sums on petty bums, movies that can kill by their gargantuan stupidity; movies that can easily qualify as a potent tool of torture to expedite nervous breakdown; movies that eat cash only to defecate it with ‘zero’ going into its assimilation to produce something worth ROI?

What should be the mechanism to fix responsibility in case of trash filmmaking keeping in mind the fact that the industry survives on consuming audiences’ time and thus is directly responsible for non delivery of promises in case the viewer feels duped after watching the movie?

The research into the art of trash filmmaking continues..

©/IPR: Santosh Chaubey – https://santoshchaubey.wordpress.com/