Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Congress manifesto silent on national security: Modi
March 25, 2009 20:52 IST
Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi on Wednesday said that the Congress' election manifesto, released ahead of the Lok Sabha polls, lacks the will to fight terrorism.
"Congress manifesto has not shown any political will to fight terrorism, naxalism or insurgency," he said.
"The criminal silence of the Congress on the important issue of terrorism and coastal security should ring alarm bells for the nation," Modi said.
"Terrorism has bogged us down, naxalism has spread in a big way, Maoist violence in Nepal has burnt us and Taliban power is increasing in neighbouring countries like Pakistan and Bangladesh. India has to face these problems in near future," he said.
"The vote bank politics of Congress, it seems has played a major part in not declaring any focused strategy by the party to fight against the menace of terrorism," Modi said.
Speaking about the November 26 Mumbai terror attack, the chief minister said, "The Congress manifesto is silent on coastal security which is an important issue after the Mumbai terror attacks as terrorists had come to Mumbai via sea. Gujarat has a long coastline and people here doubt Congress' intention".
"Terrorists using latest technology and increase in number of cyber crime and economic offences by them has also created a feeling of insecurity among people," he said.
"It is for the people of the country to seek answers from the Congress on why its manifesto is silent on such important issues, Modi said.
King of swing falls for the girls
by Jenny Roesler
For the last fortnight, the king of Pakistan cricket has been striding around North Sydney Oval, looking predictably suave in well-fitting shirts and purple-tinted sunglasses. Wasim Akram is in Australia to commentate on the Women's World Cup for ESPN Star Sports and, ever too cool for school, he refused to do his homework.
He arrived here not knowing the names of any players, realising that his co-commentators would give excellent assistance. He notes that he never even studied his opposition when a player, then again when forming a powerful alliance with Waqar Younis, he didn't have to.
Now he knows all the top women and their world rankings. "I've been impressed by the standard of the cricket ability, the standard of the fielding, the standard of the talent - they've got every shot," he enthuses. "The fielding was phenomenal. For England, New Zealand and Australia, the fielding was mind-blowing, I was amazed."
It didn't even take a fortnight for Wasim, who had never seen women's cricket before - unless you count a brief hour at the World Cup final at Lord's in 1993 - to become a big fan and an important, if unofficial, ambassador.
From the moment he began commentating on the opening Australia-New Zealand match, it was obvious he was impressed, and perhaps even surprised. As Karen Rolton smoked a bullet through point, Wasim asked his co-commentator: "Is Karen mainly an off-side player?"
That instant she cracked a sweet pull to square. Within overs, Wasim was confidently announcing, as if he had always known, "Karen, of course, can play shots all round the wicket." He was smitten.
His favourite players are Rolton, Mithali Raj, Suzie Bates, Claire Taylor, Laura Marsh and Holly Colvin - notably all batsmen or spinners. One thing he would like to see is batsmen going after the slow bowlers. "I haven't seen anyone attacking the spinners, playing with the spin, using their feet, apart from a few of the seniors."
The absence of pace bowlers in Wasim's list of notables is attributable to the fact that they could be even stronger, and so have more speed. "They're not genuinely sharp, but they can become sharp if they play a longer version of the game - at least two-day cricket where they can bowl a lot more overs and, by doing that, their bowling muscles will get strengthened and their pace will increase.
"That's what happens with fast bowlers. If you've got to play one tournament in two years or five one-day internationals, you're not going to improve your pace."
But his dream is likely to remain such. If anything, more one-day and Twenty20 cricket is being played than ever before - with no winds of change on the horizon. For years the only country to play two-day domestic cricket, Australia finally wound up playing such long matches a few years ago, while Tests have been waning.
I turned briefly to Wasim's fellow commentator Belinda Clark, the manager of Australia's Centre of Excellence, for her comments. "As a player, I think that developing that opportunity to play in all forms of the game is really important," she agreed. "I think, really, in terms of international exposure, it's going to come through one-day and Twenty20 cricket for the girls.
"I agree with him that [longer cricket] plays a very important role in developing not only bowling skills but the ability to bat for long periods and actually learn the game is done in the longer form of the game. The harsh commercial realities are that that's going to be difficult to do going forward."
Finances have played a pointed part in this World Cup. The best-funded team, England, won the US$45,000 prize fairly comfortably - sending a clear message to other boards.
But as well as monetary assistance, the game needs prominent advocates such as Wasim. Australia has an official ambassador in Ian Healy, a perfect fit, as his niece Alyssa is a junior Australia player, and he even flew himself in for the final. More big names actually discovering the game is a big aim, however, which is where Wasim's opinion really counts.
So impressed has he been that he is keen to spread the women's word among the male bastions. "Of course I will be saying the standard is really good and we should support it - and I will support it all the way.
"They just need to play a bit more cricket to get more exposure and then they'll improve as players as well," he says. "I think that women's cricket has a future for sure."
Jenny Roesler is a former assistant editor at Cricinfo
© Cricinfo
Triple failure of CC2C, Billu, D-6 alienating audience from Bollywood?
am pained. First quarter of 2009 is turning out to be one of the worst seasons for Bollywood in the current decade. At least in the earlier years, there weren't too many movies releasing at the beginning of January (Bollywood jinx factor) and then late February/early March (school/college examinations). However, 2009 has been an exception with not one, not two but multiple films releasing practically every week. Not worrying at all about the Board examinations being underway and the target audience i.e. youth keeping away from the theaters, Bollywood is witnessing dozen odd releases practically every month.
I am pained because the result has been hardly heartening, as evidenced in the fate of five films that released over the weekend gone by - Firaaq, Aloo Chaat, Barah Aana, Straight and Lottery. None of the films has done well at the box office and performance of some of these films has been pathetic to say the least. Collective theater occupancy of these five films has been less than 50% if one looks at the opening and poor reviews and reports have further marred the prospects.
I am pained because Firaaq got some good critical response coming its way but collections were shocking all over. The film has hardly been seen by the audience which otherwise could have helped it grow with word of mouth. Other than Firaaq though, none of the other films could even gather any good reviews. While Straight and Aloo Chaat have been ripped apart by most, Barah Aana has seen somewhat better response from the critics but equally poor response from the audience. Frankly, there were hardly any out there who had even heard of this Naseeruddin Shah, Vijay Raaz and Arjun Mathur starrer. As for Lottery, it didn't see a decent multiplex release and worse, wasn't even reviewed by the critics.
Billu Barber I am pained because there is something really going wrong with the film releases this season. And there is one simple reason for this - 'Money saved is money gained'! Audience is looking at saving money for a film that seems promising from the very onset. On a regular weekend, at least a couple of these five films could have taken a favorable start. However, complete disinterest of audience in movies is stemming from the fact that they are just not in mood of watching small films at theaters.
I am pained because based on my conversations with 'aam junta' as well as industry insiders, I have realized that the absolute turnaround amongst audience when it comes to Bollywood flicks has stemmed from the triple failure of highly hyped films like Chandni Chowk To China, Billu Barber and Delhi 6. 'Aisa lagta hai jaise sabka Bollywood films se vishwas hi uth gaya hai' - is the sentiment amongst all. When one film is a hit, audience loves to visit theaters and watch the next one in subsequent week. And so on and so forth. This was evident in August/September last year when success of Singh Is Kinng followed by Bachna Ae Haseeno had made way for multiple small and medium budget films week after week like Rock On, Welcome To Sajjanpur, A Wednesday, Phoonk, 1920 etc. The free for all run of hits was too good to be true but that was a fact. Of course each of the films, were well made as well but the fact is that audience was 'willing' to spend money in theaters week after week even as the term 'recession' was making a loud announcement all over.
The subsequent months saw a dip with the failure of Karzzzz but 2008 end saw a grand revival with huge blockbusters like Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi and Ghajini. Audience was willing to give Bollywood another chance but as stated earlier, the biggies in Jan/Feb 2009 spoilt the show and it was back to square one.
Chandni Chowk To China It's not the audience to be blamed, it's the films!
Junta has given its verdict loud and clear. It has to be really very high quality films that have to arrive at theaters to entice audiences back. And it won't suffice to see just one or two good films coming in; there have to be a line up of interesting projects. No wonder, the months of May/June become crucial because there is a lot riding on films like Kambakkth Ishq, Kaminey, Luck, Love Aaj Kal, Life Partner, Shortkut - The Con Is On and Kal Kissne Dekha, each of which would be arriving one after another.
Here is looking forward to a better season ahead with some quality projects that would make the audience wake up to the magic of Bollywood. Once again!
Fingers crossed!
Monday, March 23, 2009
Box Office Analysis of Aamir Khan
1988-90 : A star is born
Aamir Khan was launched by his uncle in 1988 movie Qayamat se Qayamat tak. The movie was superhit and can make a claim to make a paradigm shift in the type of movies from 80's(masala action) to 90's(romanctic).
The movie itself made Aamir khan a star. 1989 was a bad year as it only had one notable movie in Raakh,which flopped. By this time Aamir khan had signed many movies and most of them were flopping.
1990 saw Aamir back in form with the biggest hit of the year in Dil. The movie put him back on track.
Rankometer: By the end of 1990, with two superhits under his belt Aamir khan was a new BO force to reckon with. How will he fare in the future only time will tell. Amitabh Bachchan and Anil Kapoor were the top 2 stars right now. Aamir Khan, Salman Khan, Sanjay dutt and Sunny deol were the other saleable stars of the era.
1991-94 : Finding Ground
1991 Saw many Aamir movies releasing most of them flopping again. Only Dil hai ki maanta nahi was a city success. By this time Aamir knew he couldnt do so many movies at a time, and he started a first of its kind one movie at a time law for himself.
In 1992 Aamir only had one release in Jo Jeeta Wohi Sikandar. The movie saw the combo of Mansoor and Aamir coming back together after QSQT. It was touted as the next big movie for Aamir and though there is no doubt the movie was liked, it didnt translate to much moolah, with the movie ending as a Average Grosser.
1993 had Aamir doing 2 movies out of which Hum Hai Rahi Pyar Ke did well which was a mild Hit. The movie also won the Director National Award.
1994 also saw only one release from Aamir in Andaz Apna Apna and though the movie went to become one of the biggest cult movies of india, it again did only coverage business.There have been many version of the movie's success ranging from flop to decent only in mumbai to average. It can safely be said that the movie didnt do much magic at the Box office.
Rankometer: It can be easily said that the above 4 years were what Aamir definitly didnt want after a great start to the career. There were two things which helped Aamir at this point, one he was doing very less movies(only 4 moives last 3 years, whereas 4 movies a year was the norm at that point) and lack of any superstar in Bollywood.(Big B, Anil,Sanjay all out of race)
1995-96 : Superstardom Finally Arrives
After looking for an outright hit for many years, Aamir finally struck gold in 1995 with Rangeela.
He had a failure in Akele Hum Akele Tum though.(His last movie with mansoor as director)
1996 was a big year for Aamir khan when he delivered one the biggest hits of the 90's in Raja Hindustani.
The movie put Aamir right in the top league and for some late months of 1996, he was number 1 in bollywood.
Rankometer: Aamir khan kept churning out very less amount of movies during this period. And the consecutive success of Rangeela and Raja Hindustani has indeed made him a big force to reckon with at the Boxoffice. It was the time of the Khan trio formation and Aamir was easily part of the top 3 at that point in bollywood.
1997-99 : Years of Consistency
1997 was again a good year for Aamir as he had a good hit in Ishq, which was his only release that year.
In 1998 Aamir again had only one release in Ghulam which did decent business for its budget.
1999 saw Aamir in Sarfarosh which did good business and Mann which managed did coverage Business.
Rankometer: Blame it on his one movie at a time technique or he incapability to generate interest in big movie makers, this period at best was decent for Aamir Khan. He had the consistency, his acting capabilities were being liked, but in the last 3 years he just didnt have the Box office record to break into SRK and Salman at that time. His strike rate was very high though compared to all and failure was indeed very far away from him. All this did lead him to be being still a big star at the boxoffice.
Salman,SRK,Sunny,Aamir and Ajay devgan were the top 5 stars by the end of 1999.
2000: Year of Humiliation
Aamir's Only release of the year, Mela, turned out to be one of the most embaressing moments of his career.
With the thought that he might recreate a Raja Hindustani all over again, Aamir joined forces with Dharmesh Darshan, but it backfired big time as the movie was a flop.
Rankometer: After a Bad year in 2000, Aamir's rating did fall a notch and was clinging on to top 5 slot.
One thing was for sure that his masala directors from the past Darshan(RH) and Indra Kumar(Dil,Ishq) had started failing him big time in Mann and Mela. So to find new ground he will have to go out of his comfort zone, that was the bottom line.
2001: Transformation Personified
By 2000, Aamir had reached a plateau in his career and it looked like going nowhere for sometime, but then came 2001.
This year he had the Oscar nominated Lagaan, which was a huge hit and the cult classic Dil Chahta Hai which too did very well with its intended audiance.The year proved very profitable for Aamir as both the movies were diametrically opposite of each other.
Rankometer: This year put Aamir right back in the top league. With hrithik facing torrid weather Box Office wise and Salman too not doing that good, Aamir was right behind SRK and Sunny deol.
2002-04 : The Vanishing Act
From 2002 to 2004 Aamir didnt have any single release.
Rankometer : It has always been a highly debatable topic that this vanishing act was beneficial or not for Aamir. During this time SRK had huge domination at the Boxoffice, Hrithik restored himself and salman too had a mini comeback , though Sunny went into oblivion.
The writer is of the view that you only have a bad year if you release a movie and it doesnt work, so Aamir's star status remained intact even though he was out of the game. Interestingly it might be pointed out that he may be working on his brand name,perception and perfection etc as a lot of that will be on show in the coming years, but then its all speculation.
2005-Present : Career hits an all time high
Aamir made a comeback with the Mangal Pandey in 2005 which was hugely hyped.
The movie did take a huge opening(biggest ever at that point), but faded soon to be a average grosser in the end. It was a bitter sweet experience as Aamir knew his star status was intact(as seen in the opening), but the movie didnt do as well as expected(as Aamir must have thought of it as his next lagaan).
2006 was a big year for Aamir. He had two huge hits to his name that year.
Fanaa turned out be a massy affair and did very well on the Boxoffice.
Rang de basanti too did amazing business and it was indeed a mixture of different kind of movies.
2007 saw Aamir in a new avatar as a director. He Directed, Produced and had a supporting role in Taree Zameen Par. The movie was again a huge hit.
In 2008 Aamir Starred in south remake Ghajini and the movie went on to break all boxoffice records by a margin.
Rankometer: With all this amazing success in last few years, Aamir is seeing his best time ever at Boxffice.
He along with Hrithik and SRK form the formidable top 3. There is basically nothing much to choose between them right now. These 3 along with Akshay kumar form the top 4 superstar league in Bollywood right now.
How much success or failure Aamir khan will see more only time will tell.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Champions League draw --------- Liverpool face Chelsea; United meet Porto; Arsenal tackle Villarrea
Liverpool and Chelsea will renew their UEFA Champions League rivalry at the quarter-final stage, while Manchester United will face Porto and Arsenal will meet Villarreal.
The four Premier League clubs have been kept apart in the early stages of the competition but at least one is certain to exit Europe after Liverpool were pitted against Chelsea for a fifth successive year.
Rafa Benitez's Reds, who thumped Real Madrid 5-0 on aggregate in the last 16, will be at home for the first leg of their clash with Chelsea.
The Blues beat Liverpool in the semi-finals last season and have been in fine form since the appointment of Guus Hiddink as manager.
Holders Manchester United will fancy their chances of making it through to the last four after being paired against Portuguese underdogs Porto, with the first leg to be played at Old Trafford.
Arsenal, fresh from beating Roma on penalties, will travel to Villarreal before tackling the Spaniards at Emirates Stadium in the second leg.
In the fourth quarter-final, highly-fancied Barcelona will take on a Bayern Munich side that hammered Sporting 12-1 on aggregate in the last round.
The semi-final draw was also made in Nyon and the winners of the tie between Liverpool and Chelsea will face either Bayern or Barca.
United will face Arsenal in the last four if both sides come through their quarter-finals.
Champions League quarter-final draw
Villarreal v Arsenal
Manchester United v Porto
Liverpool v Chelsea
Barcelona v Bayern Munich
Ties to be played on 7th/8th April and 14th/15th April.
Champions League semi-final draw
Manchester United or Porto v Villarreal or Arsenal
Barcelona or Bayern Munich v Liverpool or Chelsea
Ties to be played on 28th/29th April and 5th/6th May.
Pope: Condoms aren’t solution to AIDS; they make it worse
FROM CNN’s Jack Cafferty:
It’s time for the Catholic Church to enter the 21st century; or at least try to drag itself out of the 13th. On his first trip to Africa, Pope Benedict XVI said condoms are not a solution to the AIDS epidemic; rather, they make it worse.
Pope Benedict XVI believes condoms hinder the AIDS crisis.
In his first public comments on condom use, the pope told reporters that AIDS “is a tragedy that cannot be overcome by money alone, and that cannot be overcome through the distribution of condoms, which even aggravates the problems.” Huh?
Since becoming pope four years ago, Benedict has stressed that the church is on the front lines of the battle against AIDS; with the Vatican encouraging sexual abstinence as the way to stop the disease from spreading.
Obviously that message hasn’t delivered the desired results in Africa where parts of the continent have been ravaged by AIDS. Not to mention right here in our nation’s capital: a new report shows three percent of Washington D.C.’s residents have HIV or AIDS. That translates to almost 3,000 people for every 100,000 population. That figure represents a “severe epidemic.” One health official says Washington’s rates are higher than parts of West Africa — and “on par with Uganda and some parts of Kenya.”
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Box Office Analysis of Shahrukh Khan
1992-94 : Early success
SRK made his debut in 1992 smash hit, deewana. He played the flambouyant lover of the heroine. Though it was a supporting role basically starting in the second half but it made him a star.
That was followed by chamatkar and Raju ban gaya gentleman in the same year. Both movies did coverage business with the later being the flavor of the urban areas, according to the setting.
With the successful year in 1992 , SRK had announced himself as the newcomer to look forward to ( along with Ajay Devgan).
1993 was a critical year as SRK as it established him as a Box office force. He had 2 clean hits in Darr and Baazigar. He was appreciated in both roles and if that was not enough he gave a career best performance in Kabhi haan kabhi naan the same year, though the movie itself only did average business.
1994 was a calm year for SRK, he only had one release in Anjaam which did only coverage business.
Rankometer : By the end of 1994, Bollywood was looking at a unique situation for itself , with not superstar ruling the roost. The retirement of BIG B and the spectacular fall of then superstar Anil Kapoor and the unfortunate arrest of Hot property Sanjay Dutt led to this situation. The top 5 actors at that time with no order will be the Khan trio, Anil Kapoor, Ajay devgan with Sunny doeol and Akshay kumar being other stars of the moment.
1995-98 : Claiming the Empty Throne
1995 was the landmark year for SRK. He delivered an All time hit in DDLJ and a Huge hit in Karan Arjun.
His Raam Jaane was a mild success too. He did have many flops at the time also but considering the monumental concentrated success led him to claim the empty top slot in bollywood.
1996 was cold year for him, with nothing working for him. By the end of this year his top slot was a bit a shaky with Aamir khan( Raja Hindustani) coming too close for comfort and infact had indeed removed him from the top slot for some time.
1997 would be the deciding year for SRK and he delivered in style. His Dil to pagal hai did superhit business.
Pardes again did Hit business and he had a city success in Yes Boss. His hold was tight on top slot right now.
1998 Saw SRK give one more All time hit in KKHH and he was at peak situation right now. He became the only star since Anil Kapoor to have back to back superhit+ movies in two years The only small concern right now was that he was having some flops too with didnt auger well with a top slot situation. Will this be a real danger only time will tell.
Rankometer : By the end of 1998 SRK had taken the top slot in Bollywood. Salman Khan was very close at this point( has been all thorough though). Aamir khan,Sunny doel and Ajay Devgan rounded up the top 5 at the time.
1999-2001 : Cracks in the Armour
1999 turned out to be a bad year for SRK , he only had one release in Baadshah and though the movie did average business, a lot more was expected from the team that brought Baazigar.
Another reason was that competition from the peers was at an all time high with Salman khan hitting his peak.
2000 was a turning point year in SRK’s career and also in Bollywood in General. Never before a Superstar had been lauched and been accepted the was Hrithik Roshan was. HrithikMania was at Zenith that year.
SRK did have a hit in Mohabatien and a mild success in Josh. The former was more known to be defeated in the opening week Diwali war with Hrithik(with his Mission Kashmir). But all these successes were like noises in the debut year of Hrithik.
In 2001 SRK had a Huge hit in K3G, but as it was amalgamation of a galaxy of stars, he got very less due in the real outcome.
It was the craze of Gadar and the Dual combo of Lagaan/DCH that was driving the nation that year.
One more alarming thing for SRK at this point was that he was having flops galore, for each sucess he had 1 or more flop.
Rankometer : All the above led to a situation of ambiguity over SRK future as a top star. He was no longer the undisputed no 1 star. Sunny doel was real hot proposition at this time. Hrithik and Aamir were having great time too. Salman was having problems so was clinging on to 5th slot.
2002-04 : Years of Domination
In 2002 SRK launched a mission to make no 1 undisputed. He gave biggest grosser of the year in Devdas and a interiors hit in Hum tumhare hain sanam.
2003 was again a solid year for SRK, he had a clean hit in Kal ho na ho and a decent success in Chalte Chalte.
2004 was probably the best year ever for SRK. He had a superhit in Veer Zaara, a hit in Main ho naa and the National award nominated role in Swades( though the movie flopped). These successes put SRK back on top.
Rankometer : With the vanishing act of Aamir khan, Extinction of Sunny doel/Govinda kind of heroes,nose diving of Hrithik’s career(though he gained grond in the middle of the period) and salman trying to comeback, SRK had a clear field but the question was of deliverance and he did deliver. With 6 success in 3 years he was back on top.
2005-Present : Times have Changed
After years of good performance, 2005 was a bad year for SRK, he had only one release in Paheli and the movie flopped miserably(without even a initial). Aamir khan a celebrated 1st week comeback in Mangal Pandey(though movie fell heavily). Salman/Abhi had good year in 2005. Akshay Kumar was gaining ground.
2006 was a unusual poor year by SRK’s standards. First release KANK saw a huge initial due to accumulation of huge star cast and hype, but the movie fell on face in the weeks following ending in a semi-hit to hit situation( a disapointment considering it was KJO-SRK combo).
Don although a clean hit didn’t get its due to reason unknown. It was Hrithik Roshan(with a dream year) and Aamir khan to took the limelight away this year.
2007 had SRK in great form. He had OSO and CDI both blockbusters, but as it would had been destined it coincided with a fantasy year for Akshay kumar and King kumar was more in news than king khan.
In 2008 SRK struck gold in Rab ne bana di jodi but again was overshadowed by Aamir Khan(Ghajini).
Rankometer : Last few years have seen new records being made by actors other than SRK.
2006 : Hrithik has a unheard of(since the time khanna and bachchan) top two grossers in bollywood history(Here emphasis should be paid on all time bollywood history rather than that particular year) in Dhoom 2 and Krishh.
2007 : Akshay Kumar has 4 clean hits, not done since Big B in 1978.
2008 : Aamir Khan has biggest Grosser ever in Ghajini.
All this has resulted in a never heard of top 4 superstar league in bollywood. No one is undisputed.
SRK’s career has come a full circle, as he started when bollywood was looking for a superstar and now bollywood has superstars galore. How many peaks and troughs SRK will see in future only time will tell.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Harry Potter and Half Blood Prince
Superb trailer looks like a epic film . one of my fav book of the series . bring July fast.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Move Champions League final from Stab City
It takes a special kind of idiocy for UEFA to continue pushing Rome as an acceptable venue for this season’s Champions League final.
Beautiful and romantic as it is, the character of the Italian capital changes when European football drops in among the relics and trattorias. Suddenly, the knives come out and the dimly lit, tree-lined streets around the Olympic Stadium become the scene for a sinister game of dare, with potentially fatal consequences.
It is why the city has long been established as a perilous place for visiting fans, a reputation confirmed during another disturbing week of assaults and stabbings.
Italian supporters ambushed one Arsenal bus, blocking its progress with a car, hurling stones and bottles at the windows, before slinging a burning flare inside the vehicle. In the scramble to escape, one supporter was knifed.
Despite being kept inside the ground after the final whistle for more than two hours for ‘their safety’ — yes, over two hours — supporters were attacked again on their way out. In the city, two other English fans were treated for head injuries, one suffering cuts to the face.
Arsenal, a club with no record of hooliganism among their followers in recent times, were so concerned about the threat of violence they took the precaution of texting emergency telephone numbers to every fan. It was a considerate and sensible touch and distinctly at odds with UEFA’s attitude, which can be summed up as little more than a shrug.
In the face of mounting criticism, UEFA blithely announced they will ask for an increase in the number of police on duty in Rome, but have no intention of relocating the game.
The reason? UEFA say: ‘Moving to another place would probably put the arrangements in danger. It would be less safe.’ This is patent rubbish. We haven’t even reached the quarter-final stage, with two months left to make fresh plans.
More likely, UEFA have already block-booked the top hotels and restaurants in Rome and would their corporate jolly disrupted. But only a fool would deny Italy has an enduring problem. In Turin, just 24 hours before the Arsenal assaults, two Chelsea fans were stabbed — in the buttocks this time, a particular specialty of this nation’s cowardly assailants.
The attacks were not what the authorities like to dismiss as ‘isolated incidents’ either. There is a catalogue of knife crime around the Olympic Stadium stretching back many years.
I can recall 14 Liverpool supporters being stabbed in Rome eight years ago. Three Middlesbrough fans were knifed in 2006 in a coordinated raid on a bar by the Ultras. A season later, a total of 16 Manchester United fans were stabbed and returned home forever bearing the scars of their visit to the Eternal City.
But when UEFA had a chance to proclaim how much they abhorred this habitual violence in Rome, what did they do? They handed the Champions League showpiece to ‘Stab City’.
It’s perfectly feasible that two English teams could meet in the final again, a combustible situation at the best of times, but infinitely worse when the city’s local hooligans regard the football party held on their doorstep as an invitation to slice and dice the visitors.
These knife crimes should be making headlines, yet a few paragraphs dotted about various news pages was about as excited as anyone seemed to get. Maybe the crimes committed by these scumbags are minor in the grand scheme of things — unless it’s your father or son in the casualty ward, that is.
But there is a game I always like to play in these circumstances. I try to imagine what the media coverage would be like if the situation was reversed.
Just pretend for a moment that, God forbid, Italian fans had been stabbed at Stamford Bridge. Or that a bus full of foreign supporters had been set upon with flares and rocks outside Old Trafford, with one suffering knife wounds.
Do you think that episode would have passed almost unnoticed? Or do you think the news would have been broadcast from Boston to Beijing, with television camera crews trampling over one another to interview the victims? Do you think it would merit a few paragraphs in the broadsheets, or do you suspect that MPs would be fighting one another to appear on Breakfast News urging an immediate ban, as UEFA launched a full inquiry into the ‘scourge of English hooliganism’?
There is no dispute we have our own cretins. Travelling abroad with an English club can be a source of great shame when you see some of the plankton we allow beyond our borders brandishing British passports. But our shortcomings should not stop us recognising dangerous negligence by others.
Despite claims they have improved in recent seasons, Italian policing at football events remains unashamedly basic. It’s baton charge first, ask questions later. A Premier League match might be a family experience, but an excursion to a Champions League match in many countries is simply too threatening to risk taking children.
Add in the downright inept stewarding at Serie A grounds, something I experienced for myself at the San Siro a fortnight ago, and the situation is often abysmal.
Not for everyone, of course. The line of UEFA courtesy cars and limos that snakes through the cordons under police escort remains untroubled by anything outside the tinted windows.
This, presumably, is why the governing body remains certain Rome will be a safe location for Europe’s football finale, despite all the evidence to the contrary.
What would make the UEFA committee sit up and take notice? A knife in the backside, perhaps? A death? It seems
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Why are Premier League teams so dominant in the Champions League?
In the past four seasons, the Premier League has provided nine of the 16 Champions League semi-finalists, five of the finalists and two of the winners. Spain, in the same period, has yielded three semi-finalists, Italy two and the Netherlands one. The Premier League has become, fairly incontrovertibly, the dominant force in Europe at the moment.
But these last four years are unprecedented, and with all four Premier League sides well-placed to progress to the quarter-finals, there is little reason to believe the hegemony will not continue. Which begs the question of, why?
Money, money, money and its lack of even distribution
The obvious answer, of course, is money. The various television deals, huge attendance figures and marketing potential combine to make the Premier League the richest in the world. The most recent Deloitte figures for the league as a whole covers 2005-06, and places the Premier League top with an average revenue of $700m, Serie A second with $490m, the Bundesliga third on $389m and La Liga fourth on $275m, with Mexico's Primera Division fifth.
So the correlation is not direct – those figures show how far ahead the Premier League is, but do not explain the relative underperformance of the Bundesliga or the overperformance of La Liga. Part of the issue, of course, is that the money is not distributed evenly.
Spain may be fourth overall, but Real Madrid and Barcelona, according to the figures for 2007-08, are the first and third richest clubs in the world. Manchester United are second, Bayern Munich fourth, with Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool fifth, sixth and seventh. Milan, in eighth, are the highest ranked Italian club. Again, it can be seen that there is no direct correlation to success.
That is partly because reported revenue does not necessarily translate to the ability to pay the biggest prices in the transfer market. That may be because of outstanding projects that need paying off, such as Arsenal's stadium, or it may be related to the structure of the club. A rich individual owner can spend much more readily than a club directed by a plc board.
The three rough eras of the Champions League – Italian (until 1988-89 to 1998), Spanish (1999-2004) and English dominance (2005-) – correspond with the ability of clubs in those countries to outstrip the others in transfer spending. Between 1984 and 2000, the world football transfer record was broken nine times by Italian clubs. Only twice in that period – when Alan Shearer moved to Newcastle and Denilson joined Real Betis, was the record held by non-Italian clubs.
The moves to Real Madrid of Luis Figo in 2000 and Zinedine Zidane in 2001 took the record to Spain, and ushered in their period of dominance. Transfer fees as a whole have dropped since then, but the four biggest moves since 2004 have all been to English clubs.
Money has also allowed English clubs to bring in specialists. Put bluntly, the great difference between English clubs and Italian or Spanish clubs now is not the native players, but the quality of the imports. Against Real Madrid almost a fortnight ago, to take just one snapshot of England's pulling power, Liverpool had four members of the Spain squad that had won Euro 2008; Madrid had two.
Foreign players and coaches have brought new ideas and, while the Premier League's Big Four all play in very different ways, a general balance seems to have been achieved between physicality and technique. The way United and Liverpool were able to retain possession last week, certainly, is a leap forward from the way English sides were picked off in away ties in the nineties.
Continuity and competitiveness
Perhaps the biggest advantage English clubs have, though, is that for the past five seasons, the same four clubs have qualified for the Champions League, with the addition of Everton in 2004-05. Spain in the same time has produced nine different Champions League qualifiers, Italy eight, and even Germany, restricted to three qualifying places per season, six. That gives English sides greater financial clout, a greater sense of security, and greater experience of European competition.
Which raises questions about the relative competitiveness of the domestic leagues, and how big a factor that may be. If the Big Four always remain the Big Four, why do they not suffer from a lack of competitiveness? Igor Biscan makes this point about the Croatian league: Dinamo Zagreb win the league at a canter every season, and so they lack the battle-readiness to compete against comparable sides from other countries when they face them in the Champions League qualifiers or the Uefa Cup.
Assessing relative competitiveness is hugely problematic, not least because there are so many different competitions with the same league: the title, Champions League qualification, avoiding relegation …. Surveying the figures, though, one fallacy emerges: the commonly expressed belief that it is beneficial for sides to be either so far ahead or so far behind in their domestic title race that they can concentrate on the Champions League.
In the past decade, only two sides have become European champions while coasting to their league title: Barcelona in 2005-06 won the league by 12 points and Porto in 2003-04 by eight. Similarly two sides have won the Champions League in the past decade knowing long before the season ended that they would not win their league, but would almost certainly qualify for the following season's Champions League: in 2002-03, Milan finished 11 points off the top, and five points above fifth, and in 2001-02, Real Madrid were nine points behind the Spanish champions and six points above fifth.
In each of the other six seasons, though, the Champions League has been won by a side that has had to keep battling until the end of the season. Manchester United's two Champions Leagues came in seasons in which they won the title on the final day, as did Bayern Munich's in 2001. In the other three seasons, the title was won by sides struggling to qualify for the following season's Champions League.
Milan finished only three points above fifth in 2006-07, while Liverpool in 2004-05 and Real Madrid in 1999-2000 both finished fifth, narrowly missing out on the fourth-place finish that would have guaranteed Champions League football the following season.
A similar pattern emerged in the Euros last summer. The group winners were known after two matches (a flaw in the head-to-head method of ranking sides who finish level on points). All four rested significant numbers of players for their third group game. Three of those four – Portugal, Croatia and Holland - then lost their
quarter-finals, while the other, Spain, produced their least impressive performance of the tournament, beating Italy only after a 0-0 draw and penalties.
Rotation is necessary in modern football – as the diverging fortunes of Manchester United, with their huge squad, and Aston Villa, with their slender one, indicate – but rhythm and momentum are also important. That is true not just in terms of playing style, but also psychologically: it is possible to focus too much on one competition.
The most extreme case is Internazionale who, having won Serie A three times in succession with their major rivals hamstrung by various problems, need to win the Champions League to feel any sense of fulfilment. That serves to increase the pressure: watching their timid first-half performance against Manchester United last week, the thought occurred that they might be daunted less by their opponents than by the magnitude of their own need.
Had Helenio Herrera's Inter beaten Celtic in the 1967 final, they would have become the second side to lift the trophy three times; the night before the game, the defender Tarcisio Burgnich recalls being kept awake by the sound of team-mates in neighbouring rooms vomiting with the tension. Exhausted by nerves, they were overwhelmed by Celtic's onslaught. Inter have not won the European Cup since and in a sense that neurosis has never gone away. When league titles no longer give validation, it is magnified.
Stretching domestic hegemony to breaking point
Competitiveness, though, is only good up to a point – too much of it, and players will become exhausted. It has become common to read or hear claims that there are no easy matches in English football, and that even the bottom sides give the top sides a game, as though poor foreign sides take a glance at the odds, then roll over and die. This is punditry from the school of Corporal Jones, and bears no scrutiny.
Even crude measures of competitiveness give some indication. Last season, the team finishing fourth in the Premier League, Liverpool, averaged 1.05 points per game over the course of the season more than the side finishing fourth bottom, Fulham, the greatest such gap recorded in any of Europe's major four leagues over the past decade. That gap has been greater in the Premier League than in Germany, Italy or Spain in eight of the past 10 seasons.
The suspicion must be that that figure will remain high. The Premier League is becoming more stretched. Over the past five seasons, the Premier League champions have finished an average of 24.0 points above fourth and 29.6 points above fifth. In the five seasons before that, the figures were 16 and 20.4. Given that increase has happened at a time when fourth seems to be moving increasingly far from the rest, the suggestion is that, not only is the hegemony of the Big Four increasing, but gaps are increasingly opening within in. Arsenal's struggles and Villa's improvement may be the beginning of a change, but it is too early to draw firm conclusions.
A similar process of stretching has happened across Europe over the past five years, but the gaps are smaller. Only Italy, where the champions have, on average, finished 24.4 points above fourth over the past five seasons has a bigger gulf, but that is almost entirely down to Inter's dominance – in 2006-07, they won the league by 22 points – which is why that figure must be taken in conjunction with the difference in points per game between fourth and fourth bottom: just 0.55 in Italy that season. Inter were simply better than a mass beneath; it wasn't indicative of an increasingly stratiated elite pulling away from the rest. And even then, the gap from champions to fifth was only 25.8 points, almost 15 per cent lower than the figure in England.
Again, such things are speculative, but it may be that the Premier League has hit upon a middle ground conducive to success in the Champions League. There is a sufficient gulf between top and bottom that key players can be rested, or certain games taken at half pace, but equally sufficient good sides to provide the tough encounter that ensure players do not lose their edge.
And that perhaps is the biggest threat to English hegemony: just how sustainable is the apparently ongoing stretching?
Monday, March 9, 2009
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Pak bus hero's brother was a jihadi in J-K: report
IBNLIVE
London: Pakistani driver Mehar Mohammed Khalil whose quick thinking saved Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore has an altogether different story to tell.
Khalil’s younger brother, Shakil, was a jhadi killed by Indian security forces in Kashmir in anti-militancy operation in 1995, a news report has said.
“In 1995 his younger brother, Shakil, was killed fighting for a jihadi militant group in Kashmir," The Times reported.
According to the report, Khalil welcomed his well wishers in the backdrop of “a photograph of his dead brother, with a Kalashnikov rifle over his shoulder, a camouflage cap on his head and a radio in one hand".
Printed in Urdu across the photograph were the words ‘Mujahid martyred in Kashmir. Died in Udampur, India, August 25, 1995. Codename Abdullah.' the report added.
As he spoke, a relative whisked away the photograph of his dead brother.
"He is also a supporter of Jamaat-e-Islami - the Islamist political party - that wants to impose Sharia across Pakistan and to use the army to kick India out of Kashmir", a British daily said.
Dhoondte Reh Jaaoge And 13B Open To Dull Houses
Boxofficeindia.Com Trade Network
Dhoondte Reh Jaaoge opened to a poor 10-15% response. The reports are mixed and it remains to be seen what it can do at the box office
Karma Aur Holi was extremely poor at 5-10% and has little chance at the box office
13B opened to a poor 10-15% response. The film is being liked a some section of the audience but it remains to be seen if it can show in collections
Kisse Pyaar Karoon is very poor in week one with 50 lakhs nett business. DISASTER
Delhi 6 falls heavily in week two with a 5 crore nett week. The two week total is 27.50 crore nett. The film will suffer losses in the 10-15 crore region. FLOP
Billu adds 1 crore nett in week three. Three week total is 22.75 crore. FLOP
Dev D is rock steady with 1.10 crore nett in week four. The four week business is around 14 crore nett. ABOVE AVERAGE
Slumdog Crorepati is super strong with 1.25 crore nett in its sixth week which is much higher than its fifth week total of 71 lakhs. The film has now netted 12.50 crore in six weeks. SEMI HIT
Shahid Kapur’s bike was the centre of attraction among the boy brigade at Yash Raj Studios
l-r: Imran Khan, Shahid Kapur, choreographer Marzi, John Abraham and Abhishek Bachchan |
On Friday, Ranbir Kapoor, Imran Khan and Abhishek Bachchan, who were at Yash Raj Studios, had a major distraction. No, it was not any hot and sizzling babe that caught their attention but Shahid Kapur’s trendy Yamaha MT 01 bike.
An eye witness informed, “On completing his work, Shahid was all set to leave on his bike when Abhishek Bachchan, Imran Khan and Ranbir Kapoor, who were in the vicinity, gathered to check out Shahids’s bike. Abhishek especially was so impressed with it that he immediately called up good friend John Abraham, who was doing a promotional shoot for New York in the same building, to come and see the bike.”
Ranbir Kapoor on Shahid’s bike |
Meanwhile, Kabir Khan, New York’s director, who was surprised at John’s sudden disappearance from the shoot, came down to the scene of action, while searching for John. And within no time he too joined the gang and the banter continued…
Boys will be boys!
Friday, March 6, 2009
IPL on, but no matches on day of counting: Lalit Modi
16:49 IST, Friday, March 06, 2009 (New Delhi)
Modi said the IPL was on with the duration of the tournament remaining the same but a revised schedule would be released soon. "We are making a new schedule for IPL matches," he said.
"It's a cumbersome process, because there are blackout dates in several cities due to elections," the former RCA President said.
However, the venue for the opening game of the tournament has been shifted from Jaipur to Mumbai.
Rejecting speculations that the event may be held in another country, Modi said there was no question of moving to another country.
He said that he was looking for alternate venues to allocate IPL matches other than the fixed eight cities.
"We currently have over 14 cities that are available to stage matches, we now have to reduce that list to eight," Modi said.
The IPL organizers tried to avoid a delay to the event by earlier saying they would not need national paramilitaries to provide security, and could get by with local police forces in the host cities.
Modi said he was thankful to the Home Minister for receiving assurances on security.
"We're extremely grateful and thankful to the Home Minister for his clarification that security will be provided for IPL matches," Modi said.
"There's no reservation about security, we have our security experts in and holding discussions with them," he added.
Earlier in the day, Home Minister P Chidambaram had said that Cricket was safe in India but IPL dates needed to be reworked.
Butt out Blatter - our recipe has best ingredients
Sepp Blatter used a phrase to express his view of English football this week. L'appetit vient en mangeant. The appetite comes with the eating, is the translation. 'It means when you are at a good table you like to eat more and more,' Blatter explained, helpfully. 'It is the story of the Premier League.'
Of course, if anybody knows the whereabouts of a good table it is a man at the head of a major sports administration. You should see these guys go to work. Blatter's organisation, FIFA, even has an anthem, composed by a German organist, Franz Lambert. No doubt if Blatter had his way we would all stand for it. This is a man so high on self-importance he pronounces on resolutions in Palestine and North Korea, as if he is part of the solution.
True story: Before Christmas, I was in the British Airways lounge at Narita airport, Tokyo, returning from the Club World Cup. These places tend to get crowded before trans-continental flights, but in centrepiece position were a table and chairs that had been reserved, something I have never seen in an airline lounge.
This was going to be special, I thought, Gordon Brown or royalty at the very least. And then in walked Geoff Thompson, former chairman of the Sheffield and Hallamshire Football Association and now a vicepresident of FIFA, and his wife.
Lackeys fussed as they were seated in their reserved places. Now, if a bloke who never stuck his head over the Soho Square parapet while supervising close to a decade of chaos as chairman of the FA gets this treatment, can you imagine what life must be like for Blatter, the man currently lecturing the Premier League on the subject of greed?
Blatter's trick - favoured by his friend Michel Platini, president of UEFA, too - is that he takes the evils of the game worldwide and attributes them to English football.
At a FIFA meeting in County Down at the weekend - held at the Slieve Donard hotel, recently subject to a £15million refurbishment and now claiming to be one of Europe's finest resort spas - Blatter warmed to what is now his standard attack on English greed.
'The four English teams in the Champions League, including substitutions, had nine English players,' he said, 'but there were 20 or 21 Brazilians, 21 Italians, 16 Argentinians and I don't know how many Africans. Do you think that is right? I was in Brazil and spoke to President Lula, who said please do something to stop the exodus of Brazilian players.
The African market is practically drained.' To hear this, one would think it was the Premier League that had sucked Brazil dry.
Yet the four English teams in the Champions League fielded a total of four Brazilians: Denilson of Arsenal, who would not have played had Cesc Fabregas been fit, Alex of Chelsea, who would not have played had Ricardo Carvalho been fit, Fabio Aurelio of Liverpool, who had six years at Valencia before arriving at Anfield and is so Brazilian that he holds an Italian passport and has not represented his country since the 2000 Olympic Games in Sydney, and Lucas Leiva of Liverpool, who was on for approximately one minute during second-half injury time.
Nobody in his right mind would suggest that the Brazilians playing for English clubs last week represented a plundering of natural resources. If they returned, en masse, to their native country tomorrow, neither the quality of football nor the attendances at matches would improve.
By contrast, the four continental teams that the English clubs faced - Real Madrid, Inter Milan, Juventus and Roma - fielded nine Brazilians, including some useful ones like Adriano and Julio Cesar.
And if there were six African players in action for English clubs compared to just two spread through the opposition, could the reason be that some players prefer not to play their football against a backdrop of monkey chants? After all, Zenit St Petersburg field an admirable number of Russians but when Dick Advocaat, their coach, admits supporters would not allow the signing of a black player it rather takes the gloss off that achievement.
The fact is that Liverpool had as many English players involved as Inter Milan did Italians, and Chelsea and Manchester United had more. There were two Italians on the field for Inter at the San Siro, but only one made the starting line-up and the other, substitute Mario Balotelli, has been Italian since August 13, 2008.
Chelsea fielded four Englishmen with substitute Michael Mancienne; Manchester United had three, even with Paul Scholes left out and Gary Neville and Wes Brown injured. Theo Walcott would have started for Arsenal, if fit.
This is not ideal, we know, which is why so many are rooting for Martin O'Neill's Aston Villa. But to massage the figures to suggest English football is a wild exception, or that the most successful teams in the biggest European leagues are very different, is disingenuous.
Juventus are truest to their national roots, although that might be a result of the exodus that followed their recent demotion for rigging matches. Claudio Ranieri, their coach, used 12 players against Chelsea and eight were Italian.
However, one of them, Mauro Camoranesi, born in Tandil in the south-west of Buenos Aires province, chose to become Italian only after failing to make it into Argentina's national team (the way that Manuel Almunia, the Arsenal goalkeeper, could still end up an Englishman if Fabio Capello decrees, despite being born in that most Spanish of towns, Pamplona in Navarre).
Camoranesi's adopted nationality is significant because, for Juventus, eight out of 12 nationals (two thirds) does sound a lot better than seven out of 12 (just over half). Yet Camoranesi wears his Italian ethnicity lightly. Born in Argentina, his first club was Mexican, his second Uruguayan, he went back to Argentina for a year, then to Mexico again, before arriving in Verona, Italy, at the age of 24. Yet no doubt he will be one of the 21 Italians that Blatter claimed played in Europe last week.
By contrast, Blatter never allows England to take credit for the British and Irish players who are the products of the English league, preferring to lump them in with the foreigners in his speeches.
Yet if Aaron Ramsey of Arsenal, plus Ryan Giggs, Jonny Evans, John O'Shea and Darren Fletcher of Manchester United were brought into Blatter's calculations that would have given England, or the English system, the claim to 14 representatives in Europe last week, not nine.
And without wishing to steal a man's nationality, using Camoranesi as the yardstick, why shouldn't this be? Ramsey, signed by Arsenal in the summer, was the product of Cardiff City, a Football League club, while the Manchester United quartet were all members of the academy at Old Trafford. It is impossible therefore to divorce their success from English football, particularly when players who were active for seven formative years in the Americas can now be paraded as Italians.
Yes, we would all love an English league made up of wonderful English players - just as we would like our own lane back at passport control, but that isn't going to happen, either - and never forget, we did not start this.
The first English winners of the European Cup, Manchester United, beat a Benfica team coached by a Brazilian, Otto Gloria, and inspired by players such as Eusebio and Mario Coluna, the captain, born in Mozambique.
Liverpool's first European Cup win was over a Borussia Monchengladbach team including striker Allan Simonsen, a Dane and European Footballer of the Year. The manager of Liverpool's next European Cup final opponents, Club Brugge of Belgium, was Ernst Happel, an Austrian, and his team included two Norwegians, an Austrian and a Hungarian.
Bobby Houghton, the manager of the Malmo team beaten by Nottingham Forest, was English, as was Hamburg's striker the next season, Kevin Keegan. His manager and one of his team-mates were Yugoslavian.
The Real Madrid team that lost to Liverpool included another Englishman, Laurie Cunningham, and a German and was coached by a Yugoslavian, and the Bayern Munich team defeated by Aston Villa was coached by Pal Csernai, from Hungary.
When Liverpool defeated Roma, two opposition players were Brazilian and the coach was Swedish. That night, a Zimbabwean goalkeeper called Bruce Grobbelaar was on the winning side. He became the first foreigner to win a European Cup medal with an English club: by which time English clubs had lifted the trophy eight times.
So, all that has happened is that English football has evolved to embrace the sense of internationalism that has been alive in mainland Europe for 50 years; and because the Premier League is a financial powerhouse right now, and its elite boosted by money from UEFA's Champions League, it has done this bigger and better than was previously envisaged.
Now, the very clubs that patented the idea of the foreign coach and the star foreign player are being beaten at their game and they do not like it.
They run to Platini or Blatter to sort it out and they come up with bad ideas such as linking transfers to revenue streams, or re-introducing employment laws that take against the principles of the European Union.
They claim no grudge against the English, but how can this be when the criticism takes in every negative about the best of the Premier League but finds no room for its positives? All that has changed is that our foreign players are now better than their foreign players. At the top end, English football is no longer a haven for the old and the lame, but the young and ambitious.
Yes, we would like Arsene Wenger to pick more English players but, deep down, this is not a case of England eating more and more, but of Europe falling out of love with its old recipes.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Rolls Royce new stunner
Revenue share terms: Producers, exhibitors negotiations on; exception made for Akshay Kumar's Tasveer
As was first reported by Businessofcinema.com the Producers' Guild decided not to release any new movies from 3 April onwards. The decision still stands two weeks after it was made! Producers still haven’t begun marketing new movies on any media. However, the Guild has made an exception for Percept Picture Company’s Akshay Kumar starrer Tasveer directed by Nagesh Kukunoor, which will release on 3 April, and the strike will now commence from 4 April.
Speaking to Businessofcinema.com, Producers' core committee chairperson Mukesh Bhatt says, “Only Percept’s Tasveer will release on 3 April, after which there will be no releases in cinemas until a solution is arrived at. The exhibitors need to understand that producers are asking for legitimate prices.”
When queried as to for how long movies will not release in cinemas, Bhatt says, “If there is no solution, then we may have to explore the alternative of releasing movies in single screens only.”
For Tasveer, which will release in cinemas on 3 April, the revenue sharing terms are yet to be negotiated between Percept and the exhibitors. “We are working round the clock for Tasveer’s release on 3 April,” Percept Picture Company IPR and distribution head Ashok Ahuja tells Businessofcinema.com.
Due to the tussel over revenue sharing terms, some of the films that are likely to be put on hold include Vishesh Films’ Jashan, Anil Kapoor Films and Studio 18’s Shortkut, Vashu Baghnani and Reliance Big Pictures’ Kal Kissne Dekha and Mukta Arts’ Paying Guest.
Aishwarya and Abhishek @ "Ravana" set.
Katrina Kaif to tread a different path
Abid, Bollywood Trade News Network
While taking a look at the films mentioned above we see that there is a variety in the roles that Katrina has chosen. All her characters are very different from the earlier glam doll, dumb belle image (apart from a NAMASTEY LONDON). Her roles are full of substance and will give her ample scope to showcase her acting prowess and help her cement her place on top of the ladder.
All the best Katty Baby!