Well! Padman film revolves around the story of Arunachalam,
Arunachalam Muruganantham, a Tamil Nadu-based social activist who revolutionized the concept of menstrual hygiene in rural India by creating a *low-cost sanitary napkins machine.*
Though, it is said that the film is made on the menstrual hygiene and breaking the stigma attached to it, I wish that may the government also reflect upon it who has recently imposed 12%-GST on sanitary napkins, making it harsh for women who were already poor for the untaxed napkins.
But what is attention-grabbing is that
• Akshay Kumar is Lakshmikant “Chauhan”
Chouhan, Chouhan, or Chohhan, is a Rajput caste from north India.
What was the need to bring a caste in such a biographical based film, whose real hero was born to parents who were hand-loom weavers in Coimbatore, India.
I think bollywood while making movies around biographical themes should be accurate in their facts.
Like, Sanjay leela bhansali whose recent Padmavat created a lot of violence from Rajput karni sena on the portrayal of Rani Padmavat about whom historians doubt that whether she existed or not in reality, and imagine the height of vandalism done in the country in the name of protests, on the other hand a character who existed in reality Alauddin khilji, was all portrayed in dark and savage form, beast sort of style, about which there are doubts whether he was literally like that or not.
I have not watched any of the above movies, I believe one is not released yet, but being exposed so much to the online ongoing fuss, thought of putting it all down.
See! Even if there has to be a drama all along the lines but it is inspired or is along the lines of factual character or biographies then one should be vigilant about it.
According to the Indian Express newspaper 30 September 2017 – To play Alauddin Khilji, a menacing, cruel anti-hero in Sanjay Bhansali’s ‘Padmavat’, Ranveer Singh had explored such hidden depths of negativity that he has actually had to see a psychiatrist to get back to ‘normal’ and get rid of the Khilji influences.
Imagine! An actor, whose work is to act the good and bad roles both, has to visit the psychiatrist to get back to normal, then what about the masses who are actually seeing Aluddin Khilji, and taking that picture all along with them, be it at subconscious level as the representation of muslims as a whole and in general as rulers?
Sometimes, I think that bhansali would not have gone under so much trouble if he has clearly mentioned that no, it is not Rani Padmavati who is portrayed as bad but it is Khilji who is portrayed as beast.
Hmm! Having a muslim name, and writing all this may bring the notion that I am defending Alauddin khilji.
No, I dont know about him much, the little I have gathered and read about him from here and there was that he saved the nation from Mongols and he was not a beast as portrayed in the scenes of Padmavat movie.
From caste to religion, somewhere the bollywood is playing with the twists and turns even while making factual based or along such lines movie.