Latest news with #Juggernaut
NDTV
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- NDTV
"Amitabh Bachchan Should Have Married Rekha": What Umrao Jaan Director Told Actress's Biographer
It has been decades since Bollywood's biggest superstars, Amitabh Bachchan and Rekha, last shared screen space. But trust lovers and watchers of showbiz to never miss a what-could-have-been theory. Headlines on film portals once buzzed with reports of Rekha's rumoured association with Amitabh Bachchan. Then there was the entire casting and making of the movie Silsila by Yash Chopra, with the late director himself saying how he got actor and wife of Amitabh Bachchan, Jaya Bachchan, to agree to be on the same set as Big B and Rekha. What Umrao Jaan Director Said About Rekha And Amitabh Silsila hit the screens in 1981, the same year as Rekha's seminal film, Umrao Jaan. Umrao Jaan is set for a re-release later this month, and it is worth revisiting what director Muzaffar Ali once said about Rekha, and her relationship with Amitabh Bachchan. In Rekha's biography, Rekha: The Untold Story (Juggernaut, 2016), author Yasser Usman writes about director Muzaffar Ali telling him what he thought about the entire Rekha and Amitabh Bachchan saga. The Untold Story "She [Rekha] is a very sensitive woman... Amitabh Bachchan used to come and sit on our sets, during the Delhi shooting of Umrao Jaan. That's a fact. Whenever referring to Amitabh, she always spoke using 'inko, inhone', like women do who consider themselves married. I think she considered herself married," Muzaffar Ali told Yasser Usman, writes the latter in his book. The author goes on to write, "Unlike many of Rekha's and Amitabh's colleagues in the film industry, Muzaffar Ali was not cagey. He was direct and unequivocal: 'She is and she was in love with him. He should have definitely given her an identity. Amitabh should have married Rekha.'" A Marriage, A Rumour, A Movie, A Legend Amitabh Bachchan married fellow actor and his co-star of several films, Jaya Bachchan, in 1973. In the 80s, when rumours of Rekha's association with Amitabh Bachchan were all over glossy magazines, director Yash Chopra gave an interview to BBC Asia 's Sonia Deol about Silsila. Chopra said, "I was always on tenterhooks and scared because it was real life coming into reel life. Jaya is his wife and Rekha is his girlfriend; the same story is going on. Anything could have happened because they are working together." Silsila, a Yash Chopra film about an extramarital affair, did not find many takers in 1980s India. The film was declared a commercial flop. However, decades since, Silsila has gained a cult status; a legend that has endured, largely because of the trio at the centre: Amitabh Bachchan, Jaya Bachchan, and Rekha.
New Indian Express
4 days ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Secularism's Old Soldier
After reading A Maverick in Politics 1991-2024 (Juggernaut), my response was that this is a book written by a brilliant mind. These are not the memoirs of a maverick but a brilliant ideologue caught in a time capsule. It encapsulates the tragedy of the author's life and career as he so honestly acknowledges: 'What remains are the memories and fantasies of yesteryear. …..Coping with failure was more personal. …I just never thought the Gandhi family that had brought me into politics would bowl me out too. Do I regret having quit the Foreign Service midstream to take the plunge into politics? Not for one second. I took my decision consciously, never looking back, knowing that it might end in disaster, not triumph….No, I regret nothing'. Unlike most who are 'born' into politics and do not switch from civil service to a completely different milieu, Mani, as we affectionately call him, refused after moving to politics, to change with the times, or accept that India had changed. He liked his time capsule and unlike Dr. Who, of BBC fame [a British science fiction programme produced by the BBC], refused to emerge from it. The consequences were clear and revealing and frequently tragic.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
11-06-2025
- Politics
- Business Standard
A S Dulat's new book explores betrayal, belief and Farooq's Kashmir
An Unlikely Friendship: The Chief Minister and the Spy Published by Juggernaut 289 pages ₹79 Anyone who knows A S Dulat will know that there cannot be a more unlikely spy: He is amiable, friendly, and operates on trust. His book about his friendship with one of Kashmir's tallest leaders, Farooq Abdullah, is as much a window into some of the most tumultuous and defining decades in the politics of the state as it is a gentle and non-judgemental appraisal of a complex and unpredictable political personality. Sheikh Abdullah and Farooq Abdullah have been the subject of many fascinating studies, including an outstanding biography of the Sheikh by Chitralekha Zutshi (though Mr Dulat differs with Zutshi on some facts and interpretations of events). The relationship between the father and son is important as it is part of Farooq's political inheritance: A mistrust of Delhi and a perennially thorny relationship with Pakistan which never forgave the father or the son for siding with India. The book explores Farooq's relationship with New Delhi under different dispensations. But on one point it is unequivocal — that he never, ever considered independence of Kashmir as a solution. The book describes his meeting with secessionist leader Yaseen Malik of the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) at which Farooq lambasted him for violence against Kashmiris and about the JLKF's dreams of 'azaadi', telling him he was naive and living in a fool's paradise. Given this reality, the book argues, Delhi should have trusted Farooq unquestioningly — which it did not. In full knowledge that Farooq's succession had not been smooth and was challenged by his brother-in-law, Gul Mohammad Shah, in 1984, Delhi put its weight behind the Gul Shah faction of the National Conference, deputing Congress leader Mufti Mohammad Sayeed to support a coup against Farooq's government, dislodging him. There was a background to this, as there always is. But Mr Dulat notes regretfully that Kashmir ought to have been kept out of the kind of power politics that was in place elsewhere in India — it was too important to be trifled with. Farooq got the full-throated support of the Opposition. But it was, at the end of the day, the Opposition. He felt he had been betrayed twice over, Mr Dulat writes: Once by his family and then by the Congress led by Indira Gandhi, his extended family. Other betrayals followed. His right hand man, Saifuddin Soz, was working to undermine him by conducting a dialogue with the Kashmiri underground and the government. Rajiv Gandhi had little time for him, though the two had been good friends. The V P Singh years came and went but Farooq did not get his due. The problem was: No one knew whom to talk to in Kashmir. Dialogues with separatist leaders of the Shabir Shah variety were the flavour du jour. But Mr Dulat says he knew that the only currency that would work, both for Delhi and Srinagar, would be Farooq Abdullah. In 1993, P V Narasimha Rao's government installed the Department of Kashmir Affairs, headed by Rajesh Pilot. In 1994, the US changed its position, openly calling Kashmir disputed territory. Mr Dulat moved minor mountains to persuade the government to see reason and bring Farooq back in from the cold. This was done by making Farooq part of an all-party delegation to clarify to the world that no human rights violations were taking place in Kashmir as alleged by Pakistan. Farooq was superb. Not only did he speak as an Indian, he also challenged Pakistanis to speak to him in Kashmiri The 1996 Assembly elections in Kashmir were a turning point for the state and for Farooq himself — not the least because of kindly, understanding and benevolent statesmen in power in Delhi for however short a tenure, such as H D Deve Gowda and I K Gujral. When Atal Bihari Vajpayee came to power the Jammu & Kashmir Assembly passed a resolution seeking autonomy. Mr Dulat emphasised that the demand was for autonomy, not independence. At around this time, Farooq was made an offer that made his eyes sparkle. What if he were made vice-president of India? Vajpayee was agreeable, and things might have been different if that had happened, Mr Dulat says. It didn't and one more betrayal was added to the layer of mistrust. The National Conference lost the 2002 polls. By now, Omar Abdullah was set to replace Farooq. But as with the Sheikh and Farooq, Omar and Farooq too had their ups and downs.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
26-05-2025
- Entertainment
- First Post
Netflix's 'The Royals' actress Bhumi Pednekar and Ananya Panday like Zoya Akhtar's post that says 'Industry people are shady'
One user commented- 'Totally agree — when the industry starts showing its shady side, it's the universe sending a clear sign.'⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ read more Zoya Akhtar, one of the most gifted filmmakers of the industry, has shared a post on Instagram that has gone viral. It says 'Industry people are shady.' Netflix's 'The Royals' actress Bhumi Pednekar and Ananya Panday liked the post as well. One user commented- 'Totally agree — when the industry starts showing its shady side, it's the universe sending a clear sign.'⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ Sometimes you just have to read between the shadows and move like 'Kahin pe nigahen, kahin pe nishaana'👀 ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ Here's to trusting those signs and playing the game smarter every time.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In an interview with Juggernaut, the filmmaker addressed the much-talked about debate around nepotism. Speaking to the portal, she revealed, 'That is a conversation to be had. Everyone needs to have the same kind of education, job opportunities, et al. But when you turn around and say Suhana Khan shouldn't be in my film, it's banal because it's not going to change your life whether she's in my film or not. You have to talk about what is going to change your life.' Addressing the issue in another interview Agastya is Amitabh Bachchan 's grandson, Suhana is Shah Rukh Khan 's daughter, and Khushi is Boney Kapoor and the late Sridevi's daughter. In an interview with The Indian Express, Akhtar addressed the debate around nepotism in the film industry and said, 'There is definitely a conversation of have and have nots, there is definitely a conversation of people with privilege and those without.'
Hindustan Times
23-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Hindustan Times
Arthur Conan Doyle turns 166: What Sherlock Holmes means to these 3 Indian mystery authors
Authored by: Soumya Duggal Born over a century and a half ago, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was Victorian England's version of a multi-hyphenate. A physician, activist, social commentator and (later) Spiritualist, he was most well-known for his prolific writing career, giving the literary world one of its crown jewels: the razor-sharp but eccentric detective Sherlock Holmes. This 'master detective' archetype shaped the whodunnits of not only Golden Age writers Agatha Christie and Dorothy L. Sayers in the 1920s and '30s, but also Satyajit Ray decades later. As Doyle turned 166 years old yesterday, we spoke to three Indian murder mystery novelists to unpack the enduring appeal of his Sherlock Holmes novels and short stories, especially as modern society challenges the imperialistic notions that shaped the art as well as the artist. 'I first discovered Doyle's novels when I was about 11 or 12. It was a mouldering, old hardback that I randomly picked off a shelf in my grandparents' home in Calcutta. I remember the sheer drama of the stories…the deadly herbs that induced madness (The Adventure of the Devil's Foot), the terror caused by curious dancing stick figures (The Adventure of the Dancing Men),' recalls author Samyukta Bhowmick, adding, 'Children love unsettling, thrilling stories — or at least I did.' Young Bhowmick, enthralled by the vast world penned by Conan Doyle, enjoyed journeying from Mormon country in Utah to the Reichenbach Falls to the dark heart of Sussex, all from the comfort of her cosy bed. Now an author herself, she wrote A Fatal Distraction, published by Juggernaut in October 2024, which follows the unlikely journalist duo Mridula and Monami as they solve the death cases cropping up in the chaotic universe of Delhi tabloid journalism. The novel is a critical but entertaining take on the hypocrisies of media and high society. A post shared by Sam Bhowmick (@sambhwmck) 'The relationship between my detectives is similar to that of Holmes and Watson (and also Poirot and Hastings). My main character also shares some of Holmes's misanthropic tendencies and his sense of his own superiority,' Bhowmick says. 'But,' she further reflects on her own authorial position, 'as an Indian and a woman, I'm also writing a response to Golden Age fiction. It can't just be a homage. I don't occupy the same 'space' in the world as Doyle did, and my characters don't have the Victorian confidence and certainty of a Holmes or Watson.' It's a telling point, for Mridula and Monami are as curious and determined as they can be self-doubting and cautious, priming the readers to relate to and even empathise with the detective figure. Author Divyaroop Bhatnagar, whose Mussoorie Murders was published by Om Books International in September 2023, also discovered the adventures of Sherlock Holmes rather young: 'My father was an aficionado of detective and crime fiction. He died young, but he left behind a vast collection of classic crime fiction. I started reading Conan Doyle probably around the age of 10 and must have reread his Sherlock Holmes stories dozens of times.' Set in the Queen of Hills, Bhatnagar's narrative is built around twin murders, interwoven with a subplot featuring Doyle, Christie and Rudyard Kipling as characters. 'Holmes embodied the perfect example of an intellect sans emotion. Avijit Sikdar, the detective in my novel, shares similarities with Holmes. His love of order, immaculate sense of dress and even the tall, lean appearance are all reminiscent of the great master,' he states, adding, 'Yet, like Hercule Poirot, Sikdar is more human than Holmes.' A post shared by Bookmonk (@readwithjaipahuja) 'Doyle inspired a number of writers in India, most notably Satyajit Ray, whose Feluda is a self-confessed fan of Sherlock Holmes. The Holmesian mystique is strong and lasting. I see young people devouring his books even today,' affirms Bhatnagar. According to Roy, Holmes' investigative process, ostensibly based on forensic acumen and dispassionate truth-seeking, drew upon ethnographic stereotypes of his time to demonise racial 'others' and played upon his readers' fears of alien contagions that might have travelled from the colonies. 'In A Study in Scarlet, The Adventure of the Devil's Foot and The Speckled Band, spaces like South America, Africa and India are represented through strangely horrific indigenous poisons (or even a poisonous snake), all of which are used in murders within England,' she elaborates. Roy's first detective novel, Stroke of Death, published by Hachette India in September 2024, is set in colonised Bengal in the early twentieth century, fusing history and mystery with equal nuance. She concedes that it was initially difficult to ignore Doyle's literary influence while characterising her own detective figure, Inspector Dhananjoy Lahiri. 'Ultimately, though, my novel contains only an obligatory hat tip to Holmes, and distances itself from the long shadow cast by Doyle's creation. As such, Lahiri is someone whose rationality does not overwhelm his sensitivity. He is able to view justice as being far too complex to have simplistic, black-and-white solutions. Not surprisingly, he has read and rejected the Holmesian model of detection!' A post shared by Sejuti | Books | Music | Shows 🇮🇳 (@booksandsejuti) As calls for a progressive, compassionate and equitable society grow, especially in light of climate disasters and geopolitical tensions, it is interesting to rethink the essential traits of the detective. Bhowmick echoes Roy's views on adopting an investigative, critical lens into the archetypes and tropes of our literary past: 'India lurks in the background and subtext of the Holmes stories, imbued with imperialistic prejudices. But such assumptions are in direct contrast to the rational and scientific Holmesian temperament. But again, who can say that Holmes, a habitual user of mind-altering substances, was a purely rational creature — a creation of the head and not the heart?' This might be one answer to the literary predicaments of our time: Should politically problematic 'masterpieces' be banished from the canon, and can art truly be separated from its artist? These questions have knocked down many a classic off its pedestal. And so, perhaps instead of dismissal, we could opt for engagement, full of conformities and departures, appreciation and criticism, pleasure and pain, in favour of an ever-evolving literary tradition.
