The Female Sports Fan!!??

Men have historically drawn the lines around sports as male territory. Female encroachment is viewed with suspicion by some. For these gatekeepers, fandom is not measured by affection or loyalty toward a team, but by knowledge of its statistics, plays and history.

It is one thing to be home with a bunch of friends and debate and discuss about the latest in Bollywood, party circuit, office gossip, but completely another to be discussing the latest in sports. The weirdness is thrown to an altogether new level when you realize that the girls are not only involved in these debates but also holds on to their own.

Over the course of 3 years, I’ve overseen debates with women arguing about the Chennai Super Kings, Mumbai Indians, Kolkata Knight Riders, and more. When I say debate, it’s exactly that. They know exactly who’s playing for whom, where the games are being held, the personalities of their team, the whole thing. It truly is a sight to sit back and stare at watching a female vent and erupt at the sight of her favorite team’s batsman is giving up, or a bowler not bowling well , or anything that suggests he isn’t doing his job. I’d go so far to say there aren’t too many feelings better than that.

Cricket will always be my first love, and for any man who has a particular sport as their first love, you can ask that same man how he feels when he sees an woman share a similar passion for the game and can break it down to a T. During the last IPL season, you had female cricket fans who were just as invested into the games as the guys were. They’d cheer on their team, cuss out a player, motivate them, and anything else it took to be a part of the game, and do so in an authentic way.

So, why is it that this still small group of female fans looked in a different light? Why do they have to prove their interest in the game each time they want to be involved in the game? Why are they subjected to questions about their knowledge each time they speak of their love for the game / sports? Why is it acceptable for a guy to have an opinion on soaps & reality shows and not acceptable for a woman to have an opinion on why Raina should be picked over Rohit??

As a heavy cricket season is around the corner, I’m sure there are going to be loads of friends turning up at my place or vice-versa. I, for one would like the female participation to go up during these meets. Let us create our own fantasy leagues, let us have your perspective on why Dale Styn should play for CSK, discuss why is SA a better cricket team than England etc etc.

Go ahead, make the hardest guy smile, make a grown man cry. We will not insult your intelligence by asking you to name the playing eleven. Let us leave the name game for the college kids. Let us enjoy the sports season together and derive equal pleasure out of it. Let us enjoy cricket the same way we enjoy the 9 am show on a Sunday. Let us discuss the game just the way we discuss Rahman Sir’s music.

Thanks in advance for all female sports fans (my wife, in particular) for enhancing the sports experience of everyone involved.

Mr. Smith goes to Washington – A 79 year old classic

If there is a better movie about human ideals, I’m yet to see it.

The 1930’s were a tumultuous time for the world, more so for America. The great depression had forced millions into poverty. The democracy of America was falling apart and communism and Fascism were on the rise. Just before the official breakout of World War 2 in 1939, Frank Capra’s “Mr. Smith goes to Washington” released in theatres. The movie was a instant hit and provided people with a sense of hope in regard to the past, present and future of the United States and the ideologies for which it stood.
Frank Capra and James Stewart combined to take on the Washington elite with this dramatic comedy about a naïve Washington outsider who gets appointed to the senate and stands alone against corruption and graft.

A classic David v/s Goliath tale, the story is the struggle between good and evil. In typical Capra (And maybe, 1930’s) style, the protagonist and antagonists are exaggerated so that there is no confusion as who is who. A timid and idealistic Mr. Smith takes on the mighty senators. This was probably one of the earliest movies to suggest the government as corrupt.

In this “once in a lifetime” role, he plays the perfectly homespun, intelligent, boyishly good-looking, nervous, senate elect who is thrown into the mix of power and corruption. Stewart is brilliant as the idealistic and awestruck kid from the backwoods who is overwhelmed by the glory of Washington, with its monuments and history. He also brings along a whole treasure chest of bumbling comedic sight gags that make him all the more lovable in the part. The look of absolute awe on his face upon first witnessing the Capitol Dome appears truly genuine, despite the fact that he was merely acting against a projection. As the story gets more complicated, and his character is developed further, Stewart is even better.There has only ever been one human being alive who could play Jefferson Smith, and that is of course James Stewart.

Not to go unrecognized are Jean Arthur and Claude Rains performances, in which they were also nominated for an Academy Award. Both of these actors were incredible and so well suited for their roles. Rains’ performance in the final scene of this film was memorable, as the pressure of Mr. Smith’s honesty and integrity start to wear on his conscience.

The real achievement of the film, though, is to portray a political system that immediately echoes the ones we’re familiar with. Through the antagonist characters: the corrupted Senator Payne (Claude Rains) and Edward Arnold as Jim Taylor, the ruthless tycoon who owns the media and controls the power, “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” allows us to revisit the intricacies that still exist today within the political system and how some of the branches involved can lead to spheres that have nothing do with values and ideals. The all-time complicity between the media and politics is highlighted with such boldness that makes us wish we’d had more Jefferson Smiths today. But we don’t, because to be elected, one must pledge allegiance to these driving forces. In the name of progress, of economy, the big guys take the biggest share of the pie and leave the crumbs for people.

Capra’s direction is flawless, capturing the feel of tradition in Washington and producing the best acting from his lead. He had an uncanny ability to tug at our base human emotions and elicit direct responses.Nominated for an Academy Award, Capra lost out to Victor Fleming and Gone with the Wind.7 years later, he would go on to direct James Stewart in another wonderful movie, It’s a wonderful life.

Mr. Smith Goes to Washington is a lovely movie. Age will always remove the realistic qualities of such films, but this remains a worthwhile film to watch, both for the entertainment value, as well as the political aspects of it. Although made over 70 years ago the story is still relevant and maybe even more so today, than it was then.

(THIS POST WAS WRITTEN FOR & PUBLISHED IN www.madaboutmoviez.com on 30th Aug, 2012)

Remembering Tony Scott

I was 13, when I saw Enemy of the state (EOTS). It was the same year I saw Kuch kuch hota hai and Pyaar to hona hi tha and I remember thinking what would it take to make a movie like EOTS in India. Back then, I did not know about  the concept of editing, cinematography, screenplay etc. No movie had given me the sense of thrill, adrenalin, like EOTS. It was the first film that got me thinking about the aesthetics of film making. I was blown by the pace of the movie. I rushed to the nearest Crossword (It was 1998 and I had not even heard of Google) to seek more information on the movie.

It was then, that I came across the name, Tony Scott.

There is a popular line in Top Gun, "I feel the need, ... the need for speed!" this line alone sums up what people / admirers like me loved about his movies. Top Gun, made Tony's career and also defined and set a tone for commercial hits in the late 1980s. 

Scott was one of the first to extensively use flash cut editing, slow motion action sequences, extreme close-ups, and super - saturation and / or high contrast grainy visuals - techniques that would come to be employed by many subsequent filmmakers including Micheal Bay, Peter Berg and Oliver Stone.

His spinning camera shots and tight snickery-snack approach to editing were derived directly from two of his biggest influences : his years working in TV advertising and MTV.

A lover of fast cars on and off the screen, Tony was adept at injecting thrills into his slick films. This was hugely loved by his fans and hugely hated by his critics. All the slickness and technical wizardry rarely brought him critical acclaim and his movies were always unfairly and unfavorably compared with the more ambitious, deep and sentimental works of his older brother- Sir Ridley Scott. 

Unlike Ridley, Tony was never nominated for an Oscar. Nonetheless, several of Tony's films were rewarded with huge commercial success. 

Top Gun immediately  opened the doors to huge funding and big proposals.He then went on to direct Beverly Hills Cop 2, Revenge, Last boy scout and Days of thunder which paired him with Cruise again.

Just when people thought that he was content making actioners with Jerry Bruchiemer, he popped a surprise in 1993. He adapted the script of  a certain young man, called Quantin Tarentino. He scottified it and showed the world that his movies are not only about technical glitz. that even he can direct a movie with sharp and witty dialogues, handle an ensemble cast with panache.

He then settled into directing a sequence of highly entertaining, star powered thrillers like Crimson Tide, The Fan and Enemy of the state, each with convincing performances from Denzil Washington, Robert de Niro and Will Smith respectively.

Over a period of time, as he directed movies like Spy Game, Man on fire, deja Vu, Taking of Phelham 123, he not only concentrated on style but these films also gained subtlety and sophestication. His charecters became more complex and darker, dealing with complex emotions. 

His movies gave simple pleasure. There was a musicality to everything. he made complex scripts seem beautiful and engaging.

I have always felt that critics took his skills for granted and did not appreciate the artistry he brought to the table. To call him as just an "action filmmaker" would be huge injustice to him. Few people combine talent and artistry the way Tony Scott did.

 Deep down, I know that this is not the best eulogy written in your name, but I also know that words wont do justice to your work.

I shall miss your movies Mr.Scott. May your soul rest in peace.