Gun now moves to ur editor who ought to be explained abt prompt publishing of reviews.

Here is the “slipper” review

http://www.glamsham.com/movies/reviews/30-movie-review-aaja-nachle-110702.asp

“On the flip side, you see guruji flinging a slipper in jest at Dia while having his meal and the next moment he digs the same hand into his plate (yuck). A scene later, Dia tip-toes in home late with slippers in hand and immediately sits at the dinner table to eat with her father. Also, there is no attempt on Dia’s part to find out whether her parents are dead or alive, when she visits her village after 11 years. But yes, she wants to save Ajanta! ”

Thank God you don’t take too many notes too

Allow me to make a point about your [there's] nothing new here for anyone who’s been following my writing for a while. Now I’m not sure if I will have entirely gotten my point across but here’s a try: Recognition and spontaneous/instantaneous recollection of aspects of an artist’s work is one thing. It exactly corresponds to what you say to Vijay above: “…it’s simply that some of us absorb some things better than others…” No further explanation needed. But listening to the said artist open up and talk, in a casual setting, just about anything (and especially if they are discussing personal inclinations, points of view, perspectives…Those oh-so-rare nuggets that form the very framework of that bottomless well from the depths of which emerge all that work we love…) is quite another. The latter is something one can never have enough of. Like comfort food, it is both highly palatable and nourishing — to your body, mind and soul. It doesn’t get’s stored in your memory cells but gets instantly digested, distributed, leaving you craving for more. So yes, you may have “rambled” similarly a million times. We read, we listened, we absorbed it, digested it, got the nourishment and now it’s all gone. So say it again, please! It’s not like that wonderful line you wrote describing the courtroom sequence song in your JBJ review. Now when that line showed up in your “Say No Say No” post, there was instant recognition. (Ask us for explanations and we draw a blank. Does it require detective work to dig up that info? Heck no. It was instant recall in its purest form. Now that’s part of how some of us process your work — subconsciously savor, store, recall.) But when it comes to hearing you say things like “..where I’m watching it yet am able to stand back a bit. I can’t explain this,” we want to hear it again, and again, and then some. We never tire of it. Because it’s stuff about the process of art – that evanescent, ephemeral gossamer-that-defies-grasping. Not the unchanging product that once you put it out there, gets absorbed (and stored) in its entirety (by those with an in- built propensity to do so). But it’s the process (that yields the product we so love) many of us find endlessly fascinating. Because there is no “real” process, yet there is something. So each time you try to deconstruct it in response to some eager beaver’s question, although it feels like deja vu to you or to some others, to many of us out there even a seemingly run-of-the-mill response packs a certain freshness. Because it’s eagerly consumed under the obvious-yet-not-quite premise that something like writing, whether in its freest or best-disciplined, is beyond explanation. Will anyone ever tire of watching a child take its first steps? To me listening to a writer (or any artist e.g. ARR for music lovers) whom I deeply respect and whose work I often look up to talk about process is exactly that. Inspiring. Fresh. Admirable. Every single time.

Now, have I rambled on and on or gotten my point across? You tell me.

So I guess it requires a certain conditioning of the mind, a certain mindset(or “detachment” as you call it) to do what you guys do movie in and movie out.

Shilpa: Thank you. That was beautiful.

Suggu: Thank you. I’m not a fan of stars myself — and I’m glad I work for a paper that does not force me to hand them out.

snigdh: Really? “thousands of reviews?”? Thanks for reading this one too.

vivek gupta: I hope to make the list like last year’s. A lot of people liked that format.

Ramsu: Thank you. If a film wants to achieve lightweightness and does manage that, then it’s succeeded, no? And like I said, there a ton of earlier films you could go back to for the “magical-outsider-shaking-things-up” angle. I just went with the oldest I could think of, with Midsummer Night’s Dream.

Vivek: That thing about not washing hands… Are you serious?

SB: Thank you. Did you land up here from the rediff link?

S: Yes, you’re absolutely right — nothing new here for anyone who’s been following my writing for a while.

Sagarika: Must check out Ramsu’s blog. Thanks for the tip. And S wasn’t talking about being a Rediff regular so much as being *here* often. I’ve made these points several times earlier.

Vijay: I hardly talk about technical details — maybe BGM (like I talked about ARR’s electric guitar in Rang de Basanti), but then I absorb music fairly easily and that sticks to my mind. But yes, when I know it’s the film of a particular director, I try to see it a couple of times — like Omkara, Guru (and these were my longer reviews). And I guess when you say “if you are absorbed so much in watching the film,” there’s a certain detachment there for me — where I’m watching it yet am able to stand back a bit. I can’t explain this. Maybe if you see films as often as I do, you lose the pleasure of completely “falling” into it, but gain the advantage of perspective. I honestly can’t say. But otherwise, a simple look at the cast list can bring back names and memories — and that’s all you need, really. I know you were perhaps looking for a “process” and I wasn’t able to give you one, but I guess it’s simply that some of us absorb some things better than others, and in my case it’s movies/music. You ask me what I read in this morning’s paper, and I wouldn’t be able to tell you the first thing