★★MaLiK★★Fahadh Fazil★Nimisha Sajayan★Mahesh Narayanan★Streaming now on Amazon Prime★

[Perumthachan]

Athinu Iraq govt... The civil government is a federal republic. Avide shariah onum ila. Civil govt is more secular than Pak govt ha. Sharia is brought by illegal & terrorist groups like ISIS and such.

what are you trying to say?

[cinemabrantan]

I agree. Still my question is not answered. Which portion in Take Off is Islamophobic? What does it selectively reveal or conceal to nurtrue prejudices against Islam?

@Iyyer The Great

Since only you asked.

In a brief, the film claims to be based on real life incident. The real life nurse who was taken to terrorist custody is merin m Jose. But the film has to change it to a 'muslim character'. It can be argued that it is just a cinematic liberty for better story telling. But thats the whole point! If you look through it carefully, it will reveal the hidden structures of phobia. You can try to reimagine the movie with Merin ( the real life ) as protagonist instead of sameera and can see the whole movie (reel life) will collapse to make sense. How Merin can help others to escape pretending as muslims etc etc..so the reel life is not at all revealing the real and conceals islamophobia through its structure.

Detailed reading

https://navamalayali.com/2017/05/30/...eEa7LTzsDwZWfE


https://youtu.be/NB-ts0NtoZo

[cinemabrantan]

the movie takes place in a predominantly muslim populated iraq and goes on to show a small period in their history when the country is being held hostage by isis which happens to be a militant group steeped in islamic terrorism... the one-line of the movie is about simple people getting caught in the web of religious fanaticism... the movie, deliberately or accidentally (depending on how you see it) claims that it is dangerous to go work in a country that is guarded by sharia laws...

Okay..So the basic setting of the story itself..But personally I do not consider that as Islamophobic since it is not the makers' creation or imagination. It is just the depiction of a reality. There is no manipulative approach or propaganda..

I agree with Iyer. That's not Islamophobia. To say what it is, let me quote critic g p ramachandran..

മെറീന എന്ന ക്രിസ്ത്യൻ സമുദായക്കാരിയെ മലയാള സിനിമയുടെ ജനപ്രിയാഖ്യാനത്തിനു വേണ്ടി സമീറ എന്ന മുസ്ലിം സമുദായക്കാരി ആക്കുന്ന രാസ വിദ്യ അദ്ദേഹം തുറന്നു കാണിക്കുന്നതിനെ നാം എങ്ങിനെയാണ് കാണാതിരിക്കുക? ഈ ജനപ്രിയാഖ്യാനത്തിനകത്തെ മതപരിവർത്തനത്തിലൂടെ നിർമ്മിക്കപ്പെടുന്നത്, മുസ്ലിം സമുദായം എന്ന ഒറ്റ ശിലാഘടന പോലെ തോന്നിപ്പിക്കുന്ന കേരളത്തിലെ മതപൗരോഹിത്യവും കുടുംബാധികാരവും ഇറാഖിലെ സൈന്യവും വിമതരും ഐ എസ്സുമെല്ലാമടങ്ങുന്ന ഘടകങ്ങളെ ഏകോപിപ്പിക്കുന്ന, പൈശാചികതയോളം വീർപ്പിക്കുന്ന പ്രതിനായകത്വമാണ്. പർദയിടാൻ നിർബന്ധിക്കുന്ന, ഭർത്താവുമായുള്ള ശൃംഗാരങ്ങൾ ഒളിപ്പിച്ചുവെക്കാൻ പ്രേരിപ്പിക്കുന്ന, വിധവ എന്ന ?സ്*ഫോടകത്വ?ത്തിൽ ആപേക്ഷിക വ്യക്തി സ്വാതന്ത്ര്യത്തിൽ പോലും ജീവിക്കാനനുവദിക്കാത്ത, അതേ മത-സാമുദായിക-ആത്മീയ-വിശ്വാസ-രാഷ്ട്രീയ സംഹിത തന്നെയാണ് ഐ എസ് പോലെ ലോക സമാധാനത്തിനും ആധുനികതക്കും പരിഷ്*ക്കാരത്തിനും എല്ലാം വിഘാതമായി നിൽക്കുന്ന സർവായുധ സൈന്യ സന്നാഹങ്ങളും കൈക്കലാക്കി മുന്നേറുന്ന ഭീകരരെയും സാധ്യമാക്കുന്നതെന്ന പടിഞ്ഞാറൻ മാധ്യമങ്ങൾ മുതൽ ഇന്ത്യൻ ഫാസിസ്റ്റനുകൂല പൊതുബോധം വരെ പങ്കിടുന്ന സാമാന്യബോധത്തെ അതിശക്തമായി പിന്തുടരുകയും പുനരുത്പാദിപ്പിക്കുകയും ചെയ്യുന്നതു കൊണ്ടാണ് ടേക്ക് ഓഫ് മലയാളി പ്രേക്ഷകർക്കും ഏറ്റവും ജനപ്രിയമായി മാറിയതെന്നതാണ് വാസ്തവം.

Just imagine the same movie with the real person,with her identity and context, who faced the problem and we will understand what the movie is manipulating.

[vipi]

Maheshiinte reply Valare clear aayirunnallo. It is his movie.. Full script vaayichit venda ennu vekkan ulla ella rightum samayavum athile actorsin undayirunnu.. The reality is ee movies cheyyunna samayath she was not in a position to reject those movies. She was doing any movies which was coming to her.. Kannada masala movies vare cheyunundayirunnu. At that point of time it was not at all a Parvathy Movie in any sense. These movies raised her star value. Appo dialogue adichit karyamilla..

Pinne Islamophobia enthaanu Parvathik manassilayilla ennath Mahesh paranhathaan Parama Sathyam.. Chumma kadadach vedi vechathaa.. Pinne Parvathy parayunna ella karyavum arhikkunna avanhayode puchich thallam ennath kondu kooduthal ithine kurich discuss cheyyunnilla.. enthaayalum ithokke advantage aayi vannathe ullu Parvathik. Kure swayam high intellectual chamayunna teamsin avar bayankara nilapaadulla aalu ennu thonni.. That?s all..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mahesh ith parvathy ude movie alla...paravthy kk islamophobia enthaanennu ariyilla ennokke paranju..but film ne base cheyth ath clear aakkiyilla ennu thonni...

Parvathy de eattavum valiya double standard enthaanennu vechaal,I think Take off n Moideen ee 2 films vech eattvaum kooduthal nettam undaayath parvathy kk aanu...IFFI il oru Indian actress nu 1st time aanennu thonnunnu best actress kittiyath...athellam vaangiyitt ini ee films kond thanikk onnum nedaan illennu aayappol,ayyo ithil ingane oru kuzhappam undaarunnu ketto,njn arinjillaarunnu ennu paranju athinte director e thettukaaran aakki pullikkaari oru hero image undaakki...atleast avar ee islamophobia ulla films il njn ariyaathe act cheythathaanu,athinulla awards enikk venda ennu enkilum parayanamaayirunnu...

ith pole thanne serious issue aanu raachiyamma...athil okke avar media de munnil enikk onnum parayaanilla ennu paranju mungi...

[Akhil krishnan]

Nimisha Sajayan In MALIK





Sent from my LLD-AL10 using Tapatalk

[Perumthachan]

Just imagine the same movie with the real person,with her identity and context, who faced the problem and we will understand what the movie is manipulating.

any movie should have conflict for the plot to move forward. here, you have iraq and isis on one side, both of which represent a community. for the conflict to take place, you need someone on the other side. retaining the identity and context of the real nurse would have made it seem like christianity is the solution to islamic terrorism. instead, the movie shows that, situations and experiences makes a person question his own identity and how that identity has undergone a bent or twist by some for their own gain. sameera and isis commander are the two diametrically opposite sides of the muslim community and the movie goes on to show which of the two is right.

[cinemabrantan]

the movie takes place in a predominantly muslim populated iraq and goes on to show a small period in their history when the country is being held hostage by isis which happens to be a militant group steeped in islamic terrorism... the one-line of the movie is about simple people getting caught in the web of religious fanaticism... the movie, deliberately or accidentally (depending on how you see it) claims that it is dangerous to go work in a country that is guarded by sharia laws...

any movie should have conflict for the plot to move forward. here, you have iraq and isis on one side, both of which represent a community. for the conflict to take place, you need someone on the other side. retaining the identity and context of the real nurse would have made it seem like christianity is the solution to islamic terrorism. instead, the movie shows that, situations and experiences makes a person question his own identity and how that identity has undergone a bent or twist by some for their own gain. sameera and isis commander are the two diametrically opposite sides of the muslim community and the movie goes on to show which of the two is right.

As I already mentioned makers have every right to take such cinematic liberties. But then they can't masquerade it as showing the real. They can't just argue that their representations are all simply innocent, and so , no one has right to criticize its content. By depicting muslim communities to such 'diametrically opposite side of divide', the film start to, knowingly or unknowingly, nurture prejudice among viewers that they can easily start identifying/fearing every muslims of their like and dislike to one side they wish to do, irrespective of what is real (which is never black and white). Thus it becomes a textbook example of Islamophobia and one propagated by movie has potential to go dangerous proportions in a place like kerala.

Now all of this could be unintended by makers. This doesn't make it bad as a movie either. But some one need to point out the problems.

I will only say, let the makers make the movie as they wish . Let the critics do their part to show the problems with representations as they wish.

[kandahassan]

Nimisha Sajayan In MALIK





Sent from my LLD-AL10 using Tapatalk

kidu ..........

[Perumthachan]

As I already mentioned makers have every right to take such cinematic liberties. But then they can't masquerade it as showing the real. They can't just argue that their representations are all simply innocent, and so , no one has right to criticize its content. By depicting muslim communities to such 'diametrically opposite side of divide', the film start to, knowingly or unknowingly, nurture prejudice among viewers that they can easily start identifying/fearing every muslims of their like and dislike to one side they wish to do, irrespective of what is real (which is never black and white). Thus it becomes a textbook example of Islamophobia and one propagated by movie has potential to go dangerous proportions in a place like kerala. Now all of this could be unintended by makers. This doesn't make it bad as a movie either. But some one need to point out the problems. I will only say, let the makers make the movie as they wish . Let the critics do their part to show the problems with representations as they wish.

if your dilemma is in the makers vs critics standoff, it is something i am least concerned about. both have their stomachs to feed. what i wanted to put forth is, you chance upon a real-life incident out there which deems to be cinematic material, but the context and surroundings of the lead character/s are not so appealing, then i don't find any reason why a film-maker should not take 'liberty' to flesh out the characters by placing them in a different mileau.

[cinemabrantan]

if your dilemma is in the makers vs critics standoff, it is something i am least concerned about. both have their stomachs to feed. what i wanted to put forth is, you chance upon a real-life incident out there which deems to be cinematic material, but the context and surroundings of the lead character/s are not so appealing, then i don't find any reason why a film-maker should not take 'liberty' to flesh out the characters by placing them in a different mileau.

Sure, I think already answered my stand on that.