Jump to content

Re-release of 'Nanak Shah Fakir' , chalked in for 13th April


jkvlondon
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 3/16/2018 at 7:20 PM, jkvlondon said:

 

The speaker states that the movie is essentially a lie because the actor playing Guru Nanak is not in fact Guru Nanak ji. Which is true. 

Then he also states that the actor speaking the words of Guru Nanak is also unacceptable.

I want to quibble with this a bit: When kathakaar says "And then Guru Nanak said such and such", he's also mouthing what he purports to be the actual words of Guru Sahib, which is also a "lie". 

And Suraj Prakash is also a lie, by the same standard. And when the kathakar mouths the words, he's basically speaking in the voice of Guru ji.

So, why is that OK, but it's not OK when accompanied by an animation of Guru Sahib?

Also, the vast majority of Sikhs don't have a problem with still-life paintings of Guru ji, so why an objection to animation?

I do agree with not having actors playing Guru Sahib.

Do note that I'm not saying we should have this movie, or these types of movies. Just asking questions. Also, I don't think that these types of movies should be made by random Sikhs. First, the whole panth should agree that it wants to make such a movie. If there is not agreement, then don't make it. If there is agreement, the SGPC should make the movie, and release it for free after it recoups its costs. 

The movie should not be a money-making vehicle for private entities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

I was a bit skeptical when you said a review by a "gursikh", but I read a few articles on the site skeptical of Dhunda, Harjinder Dilgeer, and Nanakshahi calendar, so it seems OK. 

The article says the movie reduces Guru Sahib to the status of a mere man, and not God himself. Also, Guru Sahib speaks out in Gurbani against Ras Leelas and the like. There was always a tradition of sakhis, but never of actually playing out the role of the Guru like the HIndus do.

Also, anything remotely likely to offend Hindus or Muslims was self-censored, like Mecca turning, watering fields from Haridwar, refusing Hindu marriage ceremony. Also, he doesn't show the deer Guru Sahib boiled at Kurkshetra turning into rice pudding. Why not?

What is Sikka's agenda?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

do you think he had two cuts of the film  one to get approval initially and one which was for the cinemas which suit the diminishment of Guru Nanak Devji etc ? because it is too fishy that they  sat through the film and didn't notice the glaring omission of Naam Japna ...  Sikka sounds pushy because he is kind of adamant that it will be shown internationally . 
I noted that he did not correct mistranslation of gurbani in subtitles , guess 3 years is not enough to proofread and consult ?

 

Possibly. 

By the way, is the 45-yr old looking man with a long black beard supposed to be Bhai Mardana ji? Thank God Sikka didn't depict Bhai Mardana with his mustache shaved off like Muslims like to do.  I don't think I could stomach that.

That, btw, is the problem with representations. When you just say "Bhai Mardana" the audience of a kathakaar can imagine him like they want. Once you fix an image as a representation, you necessarily have to come down on once side or another. Sabat surat or jihadi beard? Etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, BhForce said:

Possibly. 

By the way, is the 45-yr old looking man with a long black beard supposed to be Bhai Mardana ji? Thank God Sikka didn't depict Bhai Mardana with his mustache shaved off like Muslims like to do.  I don't think I could stomach that.

That, btw, is the problem with representations. When you just say "Bhai Mardana" the audience of a kathakaar can imagine him like they want. Once you fix an image as a representation, you necessarily have to come down on once side or another. Sabat surat or jihadi beard? Etc.

Most likely Mardana, like Guru Nanak ji had an uncut beard, as did most Muslims/Commoners in the Delhi Sultanate. Guru Nanak ji are known to have worn a seli topi (woolen hat) which many saints wore back then. Mardana ji may have also worn a seli, or a makeshift turban. Mardana ji were a Marasi from backround and most likely was born poor. I don't think poor people back then could afford razors etc. Probably affluent Muslims had the commodity of using razors and styles for their beards and hair

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 5akaalsingh said:

Most likely Mardana, like Guru Nanak ji had an uncut beard, as did most Muslims/Commoners in the Delhi Sultanate. Guru Nanak ji are known to have worn a seli topi (woolen hat) which many saints wore back then. Mardana ji may have also worn a seli, or a makeshift turban. Mardana ji were a Marasi from backround and most likely was born poor. I don't think poor people back then could afford razors etc. Probably affluent Muslims had the commodity of using razors and styles for their beards and hair

Also when Bhai Mardana asked Guru ji how to become a sikh first hukham was to keep kesh intact , a fact most fools who claim they are sikhs of Guru Nanak Dev ji  not Guru Gobind Singh ji are unaware of . The film  seems to be pointless and misrepresents sikhi as just liberal airy fairy langar servers which there seems to be  a decided agenda to reduce us to...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

Also when Bhai Mardana asked Guru ji how to become a sikh first hukham was to keep kesh intact , a fact most fools who claim they are sikhs of Guru Nanak Dev ji  not Guru Gobind Singh ji are unaware of . The film  seems to be pointless and misrepresents sikhi as just liberal airy fairy langar servers which there seems to be  a decided agenda to reduce us to...

All Guru's are Guru Nanak Sahib Ji but reincarnated in human form, which is what I heard.

(I heard, not I said)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SGPC are the biggest hypocrites of all time. First, clearing the film to release, much to the dissent of many Sikhs. Then, a week before the release they join them in protests. If you have seen the movie and found it wrong, at least tell that to the producers etc. They throwed so much money on promotion and stuff, only to face the wrath of most Sikhs.

Saying that, I remember  a video of Bhai Jagraj Singh(RIP) of BoS where he specifically talked about Nanak Shah Fakir and said he didn't like the fact that Guru ji were presented like a walking statue. He said that it would have been better to get an Amritdhari Singh in the role of any Guru, rather than an animation than never speaks. He specifically quoted Guru Gobind Singh ji's Sarbloh Granth "Khalsa mero roop hai khaas, khalse mai ho karo niwas". If a Khalsa is so dear and beloved to Guru ji, then why not get a Khalsa to act Guru ji?

Who made the rule that Gurus should not be acted, anyway? The SGPC? I mean they have no problem with animations of Sahibzade and Mata ji, where the dialogues are pure fiction..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

first hukham was to keep kesh intact , a fact most fools who claim they are sikhs of Guru Nanak Dev ji  not Guru Gobind Singh ji are unaware of .

Probably, though the Gurus didn't object or discriminate against Sehajdhari Sikhs, who later in history helped the Khalsa, during the most difficult of times. But, being born in a Sikh family and having no serious threat or difficulty, keeping their hair, is the least someone can do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 5akaalsingh said:

SGPC are the biggest hypocrites of all time. First, clearing the film to release, much to the dissent of many Sikhs. Then, a week before the release they join them in protests. If you have seen the movie and found it wrong, at least tell that to the producers etc. They throwed so much money on promotion and stuff, only to face the wrath of most Sikhs.

Saying that, I remember  a video of Bhai Jagraj Singh(RIP) of BoS where he specifically talked about Nanak Shah Fakir and said he didn't like the fact that Guru ji were presented like a walking statue. He said that it would have been better to get an Amritdhari Singh in the role of any Guru, rather than an animation than never speaks. He specifically quoted Guru Gobind Singh ji's Sarbloh Granth "Khalsa mero roop hai khaas, khalse mai ho karo niwas". If a Khalsa is so dear and beloved to Guru ji, then why not get a Khalsa to act Guru ji?

Who made the rule that Gurus should not be acted, anyway? The SGPC? I mean they have no problem with animations of Sahibzade and Mata ji, where the dialogues are pure fiction..

Guru Sahiban made the rules themselves even Guru Gobind SIngh ji told crying sangat from his pyre do not attach to this body attach to the Gurbani ... they also banned us from making asthaan rememberance on that jagga ... Naam is everything

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use