Charulata

We're in. Hello everyone, and welcome to yet another episode of the Bollywood Cinema Club. I am the culture cast Chris Stashe and I am joined. On every episode of The Bollywood Cinema Club, we take a look at Indian cinema past or present, and we don't we talk about it because as well as pretty much west, it's it's not something a lot of us are familiar with. I'm a little bit more familiar than my two guests, but by the end of this episode, I think we might be having a different tune that we're all singing.

I am joined by my good friend. He is the co host of Movie Geeks United. He is their home entertainment correspondent. Your Friend and Mine Adam Long Hello, Hello everybody, and all the way from the East Coast as well. He is a radio host Every Sunday, also author of Barney Miller in the Files of the Old One too.

Your friend and also your friend and Mine Otto Bruno Ris Adam. Nice to see you guys again. Yes yeah, yes, yes, yeah yeah. It's been a while. It's been a month since we since the three of us talked.

Yep. I mentioned the name Saja heat Ray and used Chris said, who yeah, boy's thanks for that Auto. And we do agree on the correct pronunciation this time. I'm around I Yes, Ray Yeah, we all know how to pronounce it now. So on this episode of the Bollywood Cinema Club, we are going to be taking a look at one of Satya Jit Ray's more influential, famous, kind of important, critically and critically acclaimed and acclaimed by the audience as well, nineteen sixty four's drama Shahru Lata.

So the film is based on a book called NaSTA Oh God, I need to make sure I get this right nastan Earth by Robin Dronath Tagore and its stars Sumatra Chatterji, Mahabi Mukherji, Salin Mukherji and Sayamal Goshal. And the film is all about the titular Sharrulata, a woman who well, she's a rich woman who's bored and her husband brings in his brother in law to uh well keep her occupied. And you've seen movies before you can probably picture where this goes. But likelihood as you've seen this movie, because this is a pretty important Indian sin him a film and siccite you get Ray for that matter. But let's just cut right to the chase.

Adam, I want to know your initial thoughts on nineteen sixty Four's Well, Um, there are a lot of mysteries in the world. There's the Bermuda Triangle, there's the uh the mysteries of Stone Hinge and the Nazca Peru lines. And among those mysteries would be this film. And it's a high status in cinema. Because I was not a fan of this film.

It was a I must admit, and I'm gonna be honest, it was a tortuous experience to get through this for me. I was I was not expecting you to say that at all. I am lord, Yeah, I'm in the minority on this, and I you know, but I cannot tell a lie. I cannot and I will not tell a lie. I could sit here and you know, I mean there's some there's some good aspects in the story.

I get where what he's trying to put a ross, but his style just does not appeal to me at all. And I knew we were in trouble ten minutes in, because ten minutes into this film, nothing absolutely nothing of note had happened except for h you know, we see the one of the main characters, just hambling about in the room where she's at and she ten minute. It takes her ten minutes to pick up a pair of binoculars and start looking out the window, and I thought, oh boy, here we go. You knew better. It did not get any better from there, I mean, and there was there were scenes that were just interminable in this film that just went on and on and on.

There was a whole sequence that sat in the garden where they're having a discussion about a discussion about writing, in which I think is great stuff. Some of the dialogue is good, but it just goes on and on. And then there's a party later on that her that the husband has, and that again goes on and on and on, and it's like, you know, I don' don't think he maybe in other subsequent films he was a little more succinct in his storytelling, but with this film, I don't think he met a scene that he could shorten. I really don't. And it was just, you know, and I think the pacing of the film just muted my experience.

I couldn't get any of the good stuff that's in there, and there is some good stuff to be gleaned from the film. I'm not saying it's a it's a terrible film, and that it's not that it doesn't have some important messages, you know, but the style of the film was just it just really turned me off. And I just didn't you know. And I think I'm going to disappoint you guys on this one because I'm not gonna have a lot of insight because I just don't feel like I you know. But I did make a few notes here, just very quickly.

Uh you know. Uh, they say this is one of his favorite, the director's favorite film. Uh. You know, I think that a lot of his critics have said that his films are too slow and there are too many extended scenes. Um, and there's you know, but the problem here for me was there are a lot of scenes without the tension or verve or indeed much of anything happening at all, as I mentioned with the uh the Amall and uh shau Lata in the Garden and the h the Indian liberal intellectuals as I previously mentioned.

And uh, I think also another problem with this film is that he tried to tackle too much and in the process he watered down or he left some unexplored key element. There's a subplot about the treacherous brother who absconds with newspaper funds and uh, you know this sibling conflict conflict, Uh, it seems like it comes out of another movie. It comes out of nowhere, you know. And it doesn't really jail with the the story of the growing attraction between the the the cousin and the and the neglected wife. It just seems like it doesn't doesn't even jail and um, you know, it takes the focus away from what should be the vital center of the film for me, which was the uh you know, the the love story, which um, and then there's the triple free the triple freeze ending at the end of the film, which is you know, revered in cinema, as they say, and uh it uh it features as its third leg a horrified servant in He's you know, there's like three different characters who are freeze frame and one of him as a servant.

Well, that to me was nonsensical because we've seen him well I don't know what, maybe two minutes max in this film, and he's suddenly important enough to include in a freeze frame at the end of the film. And I'm just sitting here, you know, slapping my hands in what what the hell? I mean, what's what's this all about? You know? Uh So, anyway, I think the acting was good.

Uh you know, the actors were they they played the parts with great relish, and I think they they did a good job with what they had to work with. But his storytelling just did not jibe with me. And it's just a personal preference. So it's not a reflection on the quality of this film. It's just a personal preference for me.

It didn't didn't job with me, and I uh so, that's that's my take on it. I'll not belabor the point, but that it just wasn't a good experience for me. And uh so, there we go. Adam's body was just rejecting the movies. He was turning off like George C.

Scott and turn off. I get it. I get it. I mean, I understand. I I have seen movies where it's just like this is just a slog, like it's it's it's just it's just a slog.

So Otto, Otto, tell me a little bit about your your take on sharrud Latta. What would you do with the show Chris right now that I felt the exact same way. I will. You gotta tell me, buddy, you gotta tell me if you say you didn't like it, We'll still figure something out. I because I am You guys don't know what I thought.

No, you know what's interesting is well, I must preface this as being the unexperienced American. I'm not very proud to say this, but I had never seen an Indian film before. So this is the first Indian film that I've ever seen. And I think I've mentioned to you before Chris and I don't know if we've mentioned it last time the three of us talk. But I do have a real problem with films that I think directors don't know how or refuse to edit, and they just go on too long.

I didn't have that experience with this, possibly because it was my first experience with an Indian film. It's you know, when you're watching a film like this for the first time. Obviously I don't speak the language, so I'm reading the subtitles and I'm trying to read the subtitles. I'm trying to take in what's happening, and I'm trying to also look at the photography house I'm being filmed. Um, but it's it is interesting though.

I will say this, I like Adam was concerned in the first ten minutes because there is almost no dialogue in the first ten minutes, and for me, that is a warning signal because I'm I'm a word heavy person. I like dialogue in film, and of course, if you're a film person, you know you should really like visuals. But I love dialogue. So I was worried the first ten minutes, but then after that I certainly got into it. You did kind of see some of the things that were coming.

Um. You know, initially when they send for the cousin to or excuse me, he sends for his brother in law to keep his wife, who's the brother in law's sister, to keep her company and have her bring along his wife to do so you know, you assume that there's that's where the conflict's going to go. And then you're kind of surprised by the appearance of his cousin into the mix as well. Um. But I mean in those first ten minutes, you are immediately told that this is a woman who is bored and unfulfilled.

I mean, it's very obvious from the get go. And then as time goes on, you you know, you also learned that she is very bright and very intelligent, and in fact, at one point, fairly early on, the cousin is talking to her and her sister in law, and the cousin says something about the traditional Indian woman and the new woman, and the sister in law is clearly the traditional wife and charlou or Sharlata, but they call her Sharhu. I think in the film, she's clearly a new woman, but she's stuck in a traditional uh you know, household. The whole thing with the glasses, the opera glasses. I found interesting she is.

I interpreted that as saying she's nothing but a spectator to life. She's not involved in it. In fact, I don't think. I don't think we ever see her outside of the home if I'm if I'm not mistaken. Um.

And it's funny, you know, when you see that first scene of the husband where he walks past her two times and doesn't even look up. And I don't know how you guys felt, but initially I'm thinking, oh my god, is this guy one of these you know, kind of abusive you know, head of the household. He just he wants nothing more but for her to wait on him kind of situations. And it's really not I mean, he's not a bad guy, think at all. No, he's not.

He's just so caught up in his love of what he's doing, his newspaper. And it's not just the newspaper, it's it's a it's as we know now, it is the beginning of what will eventually, although it'll take decades, big changes in India and him his society that you know, you could argue from what we the little we learned about his newspaper, he's helping to usher in these changes. Um, so yeah, he's not a bad guy. And of course throughout it, you you know, he talks more than once about you know, the thing that's most important is truth, and then he talks about trust on a in a couple different times. And what's interesting later on late in the film, for me, what I what I thought was quite poignant was the fact that that the cousin Amal loves uh Shahru and she loves him, although it's neither it's never said by either of them, but the cousin also has such a love and admiration for his cousin that he that he's in pain both ways, you know, because he would never betray him.

So I thought, you know, and in terms of the in terms of the slow spots or the long you know, whatever it was. I mean, I think I said last time we talked, that I had read before that Ray was considered to be like the Felini of Indian cinema. So I was kind of prepared for this to be, you know, a more intellectual, I guess, for lack of a better word, intellectual type of films. So I did. I wasn't expecting, you know, a roaring comedy or anything like that.

I was expecting this to be somewhat existential, so I wasn't disappointed. But overall, um, yes, it is slow, it is quiet in many ways, but ultimately I found it to be very compelling. I will also agree with Adam at least for this film. It sounds like he didn't like the freeze frame ending. I'm not big on freeze frame endings.

I always think they're a little a little too artsy for me. Um, kind of like arts for the sake of art. But otherwise, I know, I liked it. I thought it was a good film. I thought it was a solid film.

So I think I'm I think I'm kind of in between. I, you know, Adam, agree with almost everything you've said. You know, it is a it's a long movie. There's scenes that are very drawn out. It does feel I'm not gonna say like it's treading water, but it is just kind of it's just kind of going.

I don't not going without purpose, but because of how directionless it feels at times, because it can't decide in not because it doesn't have a direction to go. I think that's not the case at all. And you're very mention and both of you have it's nothing, it doesn't have a direction to go. It almost goes tries to do too much, and by doing too much, it feels completely direction lists. Because yeah, there's the whole Boupati owns a newspaper, but he is the one who can't get out of his own way to be around his wife because he's throwing himself into the newspaper.

But like you mentioned, Otto, we know where the newspaper goes, we know what the newspaper ends up being a part of. It ends up being a part of a very important movement to get the Brits out of India. So the I mean obviously in sixty four they would have already known that. So I mean obviously, if you're an audience, remember watching this in sixty four, you're cognizant of Okay, well, the newspaper blah blah blah. Fine again, we're cognizant the three of us, even as Westerners in twenty twenty two about it.

But I think because they try to have that, and then they try to have the Amal Sharho kind of love triangle, and then they also have her that her older brother is the one. So his brother, Bupatti's brother in law is also trying to defraud them because he lives with them. I just I enjoyed it, but I think it does way too much to the point where the storyline that we're supposed to care about Shahru and Amal, the main story the love triangle between the three of them, between her her, I guess, I guess is it her cousin? I guess it's her cousin, right, Yeah, so it would be her. He would be her cousin in law, right, And in fact, he says he calls her cousin in law more than once, right, So he and her that should be the main focus.

You can give the Boupati story plenty of time on screen to kind of have an interesting counterpoint or show how much he cares about her, how much he throws himself into his work, and how how much progress he's making in spite of hindering his own marriage to his wife. But I just feel like they had three four stories and they should have done two of those. Do the Bupati Amal Charlatta love triangle and do the Boupati. You know, the newspaper is important, it's going to change the world. I don't need the oh you know your brother is your older brother is here defrauding us like it's it's that's given two scenes, literally, like two scenes in the movie to what end, to show that not everybody was on the same page, that people can be terrible.

It's weird. That's not the story the movie is telling anywhere else. It's a pretty mature story. I mean, even the way the love triangle kind of solves itself or is solved is a much more mature way of telling it than you would see from a lot of American cinema or cinema in general, like this is a rather mature way to handle a love triangle story. Is it completely well thought out?

I don't think so, but I appreciate that it's not just oh and then you know he murders the brother or something, because again, like that was my mind when all kinds of places. When I read the synopsis, it's like, well, he brings his cousin in law in and his cousin in law and his wife all in love. Like that could go anywhere where this goes is it's interesting. It's not much they could have done more with it. Frankly, that's kind of what it just in a lot of ways.

I'm kind of with you, Adam. I don't what drew Satya Jeet ray to make this film is an interesting question because, like you mentioned, he kind of cites this as one of his his favorite movie. There are plenty of critics that are like, this is an amazing and important film, and it's like, what am I missing? Or maybe not even what am I missing? But what are you seeing that I'm not because I enjoyed it, but not some sort of grand revelation in cinema, and definitely not an Indian cinema that's for sure.

Yeah, I would agree. I yeah, I think you're right on the mark. And it's funny you mentioned, you know, the Fellini that was mentioned earlier, you know, the similarities to Fellini, you know. And I always had a little bit of a problem Felini too. I like the early black and white stuff, but when he goes to color, uh that stuff, just the charms of those films eluded me as well.

So I know I'm in the minority on that. And uh So, anyway, so and I think there's a little of an element of the style of filmmaking Felini had in his later years that's on display here. Uh And that, like I said, it's it's just a personal preference, I think, you know, as far as now you know, it's funny because Bergman films, Ingmar Bergmann, they are slowly paced, a lot of them, there's not a lot of action there. And yet I a lot of those appealed to me. Not all of them, some of them I'm not super crazy about.

But there's a lot, a huge percentage of Bergman films that really do appeal to me. Uh. And it's it's a similar style, but this one, you know, for some reason it's it's charms elude me and U, I uh, you know, it is what it is. Well, I think a lot. I think, I think at least for me.

You know, it kind of just goes to the core of the story, which is it's it's a it's a rich woman who's bored. Yeah, like I the the the kind of important aspect of the story about her not feeling like she is part of She doesn't want to be part of society the way society is now. She wants to write and be a learned woman, which, like we've kind of already mentioned, there's this whole back and forth about are you a an original woman or a new woman? And it's like a, you know, a new woman doesn't know you know how to make the food correctly, but the old woman does, or the old style of woman, but the new style of a woman can write and do all these other things. And it's like, lean more on that because that is could be more interesting to mind, there are some interesting places to go there, But then that would require the brother in the hit, the husband's brother in law and her brother.

That would require more of that story, which they barely do anything with on its own. So I just I just can't put my finger on what exactly outside of the main story, all the other plot points were trying to get at. I just, you know, well, you two have put me in an untenable position. I am going to really have to defend this film against you too. I did.

I didn't dislike it, It's just it felt directionless, which may again, maybe that's the point, and I'm just complaining. Like you said, Adam, maybe we're just subjectively have a problem with it. I know objectively that this is a great film. I know you do as well, Adam. You watch more, you watch more new stuff than I, so you know, I know, you know how to I know the three of us know how to separate the two.

But like it's an objectively good movie, I just think it just it's not. I don't really care about a rich woman's plight the way they tell this story, because she just seems kind of bored. Well, I think maybe that's why the film is slowly paced. Maybe he's trying to put us in the headspace of the boring. Well, then I'm gonna bore the audience to tears, and that way they'll know what this woman is.

This woman's life is like, so maybe he was playing a sly trick on us and we didn't even know about it. So all right, now, now, wait a minute. Have you seen any Bergman films a long time ago? Okay, because yes, me too. It's been a while since I've seen.

But I saw at one point because I took a class on Fellini and Bergman, so I saw aout eight or ten Bergman films, and there were some Bergman films that I that I really liked, I thought were quite good. And then there were many Bergman films that I watched that I literally would have rather sat in a room and watched paint Dry, Okay, because it would have been the same thing, But at least I would have gotten a high off the smell, I would agree. I would agree there's some in their Cries and Whispers as a film that's highly revered that I've tried to watch that three times and I've yet to get on its wavelength. And but now, say, Autumn Sonata is a phenomenal film, I think because you know it's it's and I have some personal experience in this matter with my own father.

The mother in the film is very much like my father was and so, uh, you know, I identified with that personally. So Autumn Sonata is one of my favorites, and there are a few others. Ironically, I think the one that he made there was an English language film with Elliot Gould, The Touch, is one of his better films on New Quentin Tarantino really likes that one. Wow. No, here's the thing, because you you, Adam, you mentioned the later Bellini films, and I actually tend to agree with you on that.

I have trouble getting through some of the later Belini that that some people consider masterpieces like Julietta and The Spirits. Uh, that that's a tough one for me. Um and and nowadays, I mean you guys have both said that this a long film. This was an hour and fifty seven minutes. Nowadays, that's a short film compared to yeah, films that they put out now that are two and a half hours or more.

That drives me nuts. Well, well, Otto, let me tell you a lot of contemporary Indian cinema is that long. But the thing is it holds your attention the entire time. Again like this is this like this, in my mind is indicative of the expectation one might have when I say to you, Indian cinema, it's this high high quality in some ways areadite filmmaking style, and there's nothing wrong with it. But it is not for everyone.

And I'm not saying that for the three of us, because you don't just happen upon this movie. Somebody doesn't just put this on for you and say, hey, take a look at this movie from sixty four. You have to go out of your way to find this movie. So we knew what we were getting into. Again, it's a it's very well regarded film.

Oh yes, academically well regarded. It's Criterion. There is a really really, really really good essay that you can find on a Criterion website called Charlotta Calm Without Fire Within by Philip Kemp. He wrote it when they reissued the film in twenty thirteen, and he talks about why this film is kind of so important and who loved it, and Jehan Luke Godard apparently really loved this is one of the Goodart's favorite films. I know, it's just how you're having me questioned myself because I cared for Gunnar, but I'm there with you.

I tried Breathless a couple of years ago. I got that as a Christmas present about four or five years ago. I barely could get through it, and I know it was It's a huge, hugely influential film, and again I just I wondered what I was missing, but I was mostly bored by it, to be quite honest, from when I remember, Breathless was one of Godard's more watchable film, right, it is, it is. It's I've tried some of the others, and yeah, they're they're even they're even less engaging. And I have to agree with Quentin Tarantino.

He always talks about the Jim McBride remake of Breathless being better than the nineteen fifty nine version, and I kind of am right there with him, and that is sacrilege to say that to a lot of people, but uh, yeah, I have to because it's more interesting to me, you know. So I actually I have to say, Chris, I actually had a lot. I mean, I have last of a problem with Adam's take on this film, because it's quite clear that Adam just, I mean totally did not like this film. You keep saying like, like, for example, the one thing I'm confused about is you saying it was hard to follow because there were so many different stories. I didn't really I didn't really feel that way.

Um, I didn't feel like it was hard to follow. I felt it's just it felt direct. It felt like it didn't know which direction to go in as a movie because it split itself too far across the board. I would have preferred more of Madhmabi Mukherji and Sumitra Chatterji together, just them spending time together. I liked that.

I get that, why get why we don't get more of it? But at the same time, it's the like Adam already mentioned, it's the emotional core of the movie. I could watch the two of them on screen for an hour or two, just the two of them. They have a lot of chemistry together. Sumitra Chatterji is a very charismatic actor without having to do much, which I really appreciate, a very just naturalistic way of being charismatic.

He's not trying to be charismatic. He just is, which comes across the way she receives him because he seems he doesn't seem disinterested in her, but he never says I love you to her. He's not effusive with his love towards his cousin in law. He's just, you know, he's astounded by her ability to write. He's astounded by her ability to kind of be on his level, at least academically.

He believes she's probably much more gifted that he is in reality. But I like all of that. It's just I'm actually going to just say I could have used another thirty minutes. I had no problem with how long this movie is. I wish they had given more of the things that worked and less of the stuff like Boupati at the newspaper just talking about how he's going to help with Indian independence.

Like I don't need that scene. I know, I know that that's what is what's going on here, but I don't think. I don't feel like that was overdone. I mean, I feel like it's it's I mean, the point is that it's showing. It's just there to kind of present to you why he's maybe not giving the attention that he should be giving to this woman.

And yet at the same time, he's not totally ignorant of her. For example, he's aware that she can write, because he tells his cousin, I'd like you to encourage her to write more. But if I say that where she won't do it. And so he is, you know, he's aware of her talents and abilities. He's aware that she is even though she certainly is fulfilling the requirements of a traditional Indian woman.

He's also seems to me to be pretty aware that she is also a new Indian woman. And at the you know, at the end there before he you know, before he accidentally discovers that she's in love with his cousin, but right before that, he makes the proposal that he started the paper again and that she'll handle all the Bengal stuff and he can handle just the English political stuff. And he thinks that's a great idea. So that means he's willing to share this baby of his, this newspaper that he held, you know, we can argue he held more dear than anything, and he's willing to share it with his wife in a late nineteenth century So that's huge. I just think, you know, I do think the relationship between a male and Charhou is the obviously the emotional center of the film, but I think that it's um, you know, it's not just the love story.

It's also the issues about fidelity and trust and honesty, and uh, you know the other thing, the other character, which we haven't discussed. You're right that the brother in law, that character is not in any way drawn out. I will get I will agree with that part of it. That's like a very flat, one dimensional character. The sister in law is somewhat interesting because she is more the traditional Indian woman, and it seems to me, particularly at the end when she's getting ready to leave, it seems to me that she also, in her own way, loves Amo.

Not quite as intensely and not quite in the same way as Cheru, but she does as well. And of course she has no nothing in her arsenal like Charu does in terms of her writing ability and her ability to talk to him and share his interests on the same intellectual level. So I thought her character was kind of interesting and what that represented for that period of time, I don't know. Maybe if I watched it again, I'd be bored by it, But certainly on this first viewing again is that it's literally the only Ray film I've ever seen, and the only Indian film I've ever seen, So I can't judge it against his other works, but I guess I'm the guy who liked it the most. And it's nothing wrong with that.

I'm telling you. It's the first ray film I've ever seen, and the first Indian film I've seen as well. I'm right there with you, and uh, I'm not going to let that hold me back, though, I promise. I'm going to uh, you know, be open minded and and and uh, you know, for future works from this director and from Indian cinema in general, because I should be more knowledgeable about it. I'm aware of it.

I'm a little embarrassed that I haven't investigated a little bit more, but uh, you know, it's just sometimes, I mean, I appreciate the social context that they're trying to work into the film here. I mean, there's some important social issues that are being investigated in this film. I mean, let's not you know, let's let's you know, not make light of that. I may be by some of the statements that I said, and I don't want to. I don't don't want to be misconstrued because I think that the social elements of this film are very important issues to discuss, about women being respected and treated equally instead of being treated as you know, A second class citizen in the home and uh with the man and having all to say so and all that type stuff that's you know, uh, there's a lot of that that's explored in this film, and so that stuff is important.

It's uh, it is stuff that's worth noting. It's just the style Ray's style in this particular film was was just it muted a lot of that form of my enjoyment for the film. And so but I'm not going to put give short shrift to the things that are being explored here because there are some important there's some meat here, I guess is a good way to put it that we should uh make I want to make sure that that's uh, that that is noted well. And I think to your point, you know, I would think that in a lot of ways, that's kind of the big takeaway here is what the the over overarching message is and kind of what what Ray is driving at with you know, setting it in highers, you know, upper class society, and you know, how does upper class society deal with you know, the woman's place in the household at the time or what does that mean at the time, and how and how could you how could you be progressive at the time, because again, what we're seeing here is, you know, pretty pretty progressive female character, a pretty progressive male husband character.

I mean again, we're not having Bupati goo no and hitting the pen out of her hand and saying you can't do this. He like you mentioned Otto and Adam, he is fostering that he is, he is wanting that to grow. She's the one who says, I don't want to write, I don't want to do these things for fear of I guess rejection for it not being as good. And I appreciate the message of the film that you know, even sometimes you don't believe in yourself, the belief may come from the position you least expect it. Because at the time, this is very atypical.

The woman's place was in the house. That's still the way it is now in plenty of places around the world that aren't progressive. It's not oh everything's fine now, that's not the case very much. So go watch any amount of topical news coverage. For most countries that have issues with this kind of stuff still having issues.

India still has issues. This country, we still have issues. But I appreciate that in the context of this film, we're seeing progressive characters written smartly and progressively. And I can commend Ray for that because that was not what I was expecting at all. I was not expecting.

Again, even the cousin in law is pretty progressive. He doesn't just blow up their marriage for his own selfish needs. He is an adult about it. He understands, you know, he's His entire conflict is should I be with her? Or should I go off and live what sounds like a pretty awesome life in every account, you know, go marry a woman whose family is rich.

They're gonna move to England. You're gonna be able to walk the streets of England and do whatever you want, essentially, And that's what he does well. But but remember that his cousin was telling him that they would send him to law school to be a barrister, right, And he doesn't want to be a barrister because the cousin is talking about how exciting it would be to be in the English court room and hear all the legal debates and all this while the cousin is listening to him, and all he's dreaming about is the romanticism of the travel right. And it's basically the you know, being able to go anywhere other than the India that he's seen so far in his young life. Yeah, he wants to walk the rain soaked streets of the UK.

I mean that's I mean, that's what it is. It's like you said, it's this romanticized idea. Again, we don't know if it ever actually comes to fruition. He just leaves at the end. But it again, I do like that they keep kind of reinforcing even if everybody is kind of on the same page, not everybody's on the same line, because again, like you've mentioned, the brother or the husband is you know, he's only he's so motivated by one singular idea, and so he even when he's talking to his cousin in law or his cousin or anybody else, he can't get out of his own way, which I'm sure we all know people like that.

So again, I appreciate the realism with which the film is presenting itself. It is presenting I think, for the most part, really well thought out characters, even if they're a little one note. They don't feel, they don't feel when they're talking one dimensional. Does that make sense? They have like one defining characteristic and that's it.

But Raid is a good job of kind of expounding upon that one idea. Well, the other thing I thought was interesting that you just mentioned a moment ago too, is why she kind of holds back from pursuing the writing. And you know, is it because she's just lacking in confidence. I actually originally write it a different way, and that was the husband is kind of telling your own you should write, and then he says to the cousin, she won't do it if I tell her. And then even when the cousin does it, like basically the writing aspect of it doesn't seem as important to her.

She just wants these guys attention. She wants some love from somebody. And you know, I think that's the thing with the husband because remember, at one point, the husband is talking with his cousin, and I think it's when I think it's when the cousin gets published and he and the at first his cousin is you know, the husband is impressed because he thinks he's gotten published for having written some kind of article, like journalistic article, and then when he discovers it's you know, more literature type stuff, he's he's just not interested because he's not interested in that stuff. And that's why I feel too, Like when when she writes and a Mile is so impressed by her writing and he's like stunned by how good her writing is, and then she says, I'm never going to write anything again, because he's now he's still more interested and amazed and paying attention to what she's written.

She just wants someone to pay attention to her, you know. And she wants some romance, some loves, some attention, you know, some personal attention, I mean. And that's how I read it, I mean how I perceived it, and I could be wrong, but but that's the magic of movies. I guess we all interpret it as we want. But um, and by the way I did think, And this goes back to something Adams at the beginning.

I was struck near the end of the movie and a couple different scenes because it is such a quiet and slow paced, slow moving film that when she does show emotion, she really got to me, like she really sold it to me, because she had been holding back so much for so long that I thought when she did get emotional and really made an impact, well, well yeah, her show of emotion at the end of the film is one of the more one of the more powerful moments in the film. I will give you that that that certainly does that. That is a very powerful scene. M Like I said, it was, there was just too much before that that kind of muted everything. I keep saying muted.

That's the key word here, I think. But it's it's true, it's true. Well, it's it's it's one of those movies that this is an elevated piece of cinema. It just is. I mean, there's you know, there's no two ways around it.

We talked Bergman, We've talked Felini, We've talked good Dard. Like those names. You're not mentioning those names, and you're you're not watching a good Dard film and then sitting down and watching a J. J. Abrams movie in the same breath.

You can, you can go and sit and watch those movies in the same day, but you're not watching one in response to the other. This is you know, that's not the expectation with Goodard. These are important films that are meant to be studied and watched over and over again and used to interpret the rest of his uvra through those films. Similar to this film. I would wager a guess if we sat down and watched another saiyageat Ray film, we would go, well, here's what we've seen X, Y and Z from this one, and A, B and C in this one, and here's how X is B in this one?

And why is A and that one? And that kind of thing. That would be my interpretation of this, having not seen any other sayat Ray films, primarily now because I'm not going to just watch him without having an opportunity to talk about him. Because this movie is important, we know that. But the Apoo Trilogy, I'm curious, now, what does what is that?

Because it's pretty well regarded, talked about rather glowingly anytime I've read anything about it. It too, is a Criterion Collection film, you know. Again, we talked a little bit when the three of us talked about Harry and Tonto about the Criterion Collection and kind of all of the the kind of the weird things going on with Criterion. But this movie makes sense that it's a Criteria movie. One.

It is totally fits within that world of elevated cinema that's important, that's trying to say something or trying to do something. Or have something to say about the culture at the time. What are the films? What are the titles of the films that are in that Apoo trilogy? You know, isn't it's uh Pat Panchali, Operadito, and The World of Appoo, which all came out before these, you know, almost a decade before these.

This movie comes ow, yeah, late mid to late fifties. I think, yeah, yeah, if you wanted to do a the Definitive Criterion double feature, you should do Armageddon and this film. That would be the Armageddon, the Rock and Charla. There you go, the I'm Totally Confused trilogy. Yeah, and maybe throw in pink film ingoes while you're right, the I'm Confused trilogy along with a shit eating film, just because so it's you know.

The other thing that's interesting about this movie, you know we've kind of mentioned some of the more kind of social aspects to it is, you know, when this movie comes out in sixty four, Can rejects it, which makes Bergman very angry. Bergman is one of the people who is protesting this movie, not being involved in Can. But if you go and look at the response at the time, all very positive. Look at the response now there's people talking about you know, it's slow, but it's slow, but you know, the opulence that it that it portrays within the film, the kind of extravagance of the place that they live counter pointed against the kind of hum dramedy of their life. I mean, you know, they live in the opulence, but their lives are so boring, like you know, like it's that contrast, right, you know, and we've we see it in other kind of more contemporary things, but it's done better here because we've kind of mentioned it a little bit already.

In a lot of these stories, Charlouolatta would be a wholly unlikable character in a lot of ways, and she's not here. I appreciate that kind of it wouldn't be subversive, but it would be I appreciate that this story is walking a very fine line because by the end of this movie, I don't feel, you know, oh, well, Charloulatta is trying to be with his cousin in law, but you know, but she's a terrible person. It's like there's none of that. It's resolved in a very realistic way, I feel like, a very plausible way. I mean realistic clause.

Well, I don't know what what am I off track here? Autos making faces him? Well, no, but only because I'm interested in that. You read like, did I miss something? I didn't read them.

I didn't see it as them living in opulent I mean, it's a pretty nice it's a very nice house, isn't it. Or am I crazy? Yeah? But I mean it's not. It's a it's a big place.

But I mean his his business is in the bottom half. The brother in law, you know, steals whatever money he steals, and the whole thing goes under. I mean, you know, if he's if he had that much wealth, it wouldn't have all been locked in a little safe in his place. Uh, there's not. I didn't see like a lot of tons of expensive furnishings or things like that.

I don't know. I didn't. I didn't. I didn't read it in that. I don't know.

His wife is allowed to sit in the house all day, and that'd do anything allowed or requires. The movie never makes that, The movie never takes a stand. I don't know. I got the feeling that that's that's what was what was expected of a woman in late nineteenth century India. But again, you but again, they do have a woman in the house even though it's it is his it is her brother's wife.

I they're acting like their housekeepers, is what it feels like? Or am I or I Again, maybe I'm misinterpreting this movie entirely incorrect. Maybe it's semantics too. When you I mean, when you say opulence, I just think of right, I'm thinking of opulence of the time, you know, like we I have seen plenty of movies set in period India that are not this. And then I watch this movie and they're living in a very nice house.

It has a courtyard. You know. Let me put it this way, if you had this house in India right now, you would be considered middle upper class. Still, now you know what I mean, Like, maybe it's not opulence, but it's a bigger and nicer house than I live, and that's for sure. And again, yeah, his his money does get stolen, but I think the amount of money that he takes us a lot of money.

I think that's that was my interpretation, was he steals a shitload of money and abscons with it. Because again, by the end of the movie, they still have the house, they're still living in the house, and restart the newspaper. So maybe it's not all he had to go to the other guy to get the funding to start the new that's fair, that's fair. But I again, I don't know, Maybe that was my that's my read up. But again, the character that she is and the way she's written is so atypical for this kind of movie.

There's not a malicious bone in her body. She again, she's given a fair amount of autonomy as well. Yeah, she gets upset at the end about them all, but you get the sense she'll be fine. It's not a devastation to her life. And now she can't move on, and that again, I appreciate that the filmmaker is mature enough to not give the characters what they want in a way, to withhold that from the characters and see what comes of that, as opposed to just oh, well she's with him now and the husband newspaper fails and he you know runs, you know, runs off and lives on his own on the street or something.

But certainly you didn't see it at a happy ending. No, no, god no, Yeah, but but I mean again, what what is a happy what is this movie's happy ending? Well, and of course see now now I would say the realist that I am, that's the reality of this depiction, is that what is the happy ending? Well, are there really any truly happy endings? Um?

I mean the happy ending for her and maybe for a Mile too, would have been for them to go off together. But it's not a happy ending because then they're both hurting someone that they care about. Plus it's destroying the guy that they care about. So it's not him. But I don't know if I go so far as to say it's she'll be like she's certainly affected by his leaving.

Sure, oh yeah, for sure like that. But now Bupati has discovered and she didn't. And keep in mind the way he discovers, he discovers not because she tells him, but because he observes her lamenting a Mile's leaving. So now she's hurt Bupati, who she didn't intend to her, and she's hurt a Mile I mean, so she's I don't she'll have a lot to overcome, I think, um, emotionally sure. By the way, the big lesson that this taught me is never never talk to yourself out loud, and never assume you're alone because you don't know who's who's in the house with you, So don't don't be talking and saying terrible things out loud because you never know who's listening.

Good advice learned. Yeah, I think though, I mean, you know, I don't. I didn't want it to come off as kind of dismissive. You know, she'll be okay. But I think to your point, it's life is not as easily kind of written down right like there have been plenty of in our own lives, happy endings and not happy endings.

How you want to interpret it, I mean, it's not there's no ending until it's absolutely definitively over. So any day can end on a high note or on a low note. The day that they happens on a rather low note. But the ending, I didn't interpret it as completely negative. I interpreted it as he finds out.

But he's extending his hand in kind of a you know again. My interpretation is he's extending his hand to her because he wants he wants to do better, and by her hand meeting his in the freeze frame, they want to try to maybe do better together. Do they succeed? Is it all roses? Probably not?

Or are they together by the end of it, who knows, But I think it's a realistic ending. It's a hopeful ending, but it's not a and everything worked out in the end, and I don't need that. And the narrative would not be suited by such a hard stance being taken, given that the movie kind of doesn't take a stance throughout on a lot of other things. Oh, and now it's a happy ending like that, doesn't That wouldn't gie with me with the rest of the movie. Adam, You've I'm gonna guess you've seen more stuff.

Certainly you've seen more recent stuff than I have. But who else uses this freeze frame a lot? I don't like it? Well, Uh, Scorsesey obviously used it quite a bit, especially and uh good Fellas and Casinos, so those that's that's a technique that he has used more than once, shall we say, But I think he uses it to good effect in terms of the the where he chooses to use it. I think it works in tandem with the film projects that he intended that he does use it in.

And uh, I think uh, let's see, um, Alexander Payne has used it obviously with an election he used it to good effect in his nineteen ninety nine film Election quite a bit. And those are two examples that come to mind from the last twenty five years or whatever, or thirty years, I should say, thirty thirty two years since Good Villas. So yeah, and there are there are others, but those are just a few that come to mind. But you know it, freeze frames are effective if you're using it for the right material. You know, it depends on the material.

But sometimes it can be um less effective, shall we say, in terms of it depends on what you shoot, where you choose to use it, and how so it's a it should be something that should be applied liberally, shall we say, or conservatively, I should say not liberally. Some some directors really use it pretty liberally, I would. Yeah, that's what I was trying to say. It's too liberally used, but should be applied conservatively. Let me correct that.

I mean that statements I think and I think Ray uses it rather well. I mean again, where he uses it, I think works. I think it does kind of verge on being a little much, I will. You know. What's what's funny is I did read a fair amount about the first ten minutes of the movement, as I'm sure we all did.

And how kind of effusive everybody is with the praise about the first ten minutes of the movie. I get it, but I don't need to see it again because that makes sense, you know what I mean, Like, I appreciate it, thank you. It was great. You've set the tone, You've set the mood, and you kind of set the expectations that I should have for the character of Charu. But it is a little much, I mean, you know, but that's the intention of the filmmaker, is I think for us to feel like the existence that Charo has is not for her in the way that she wants it to be.

Like you mentioned with the opera, glasses auto kind of a viewer in your own life from you know, looking from in the glass cage looking out. I just don't need to do it for ten minutes. That was interminable for me, I must admit, And that just really put me in a bad frame of mind. I should say, so didn't help. Here's another interesting a question though, how much like I wonder how differently audiences might have viewed that in nineteen sixty four as opposed to us viewing it now in twenty twenty two.

Now that we've gone through I mean all of us have had a lifetime of fifteen thirty second commercials, MTV movies and TV shows now where no shot is you know, lingered upon for more than three or four seconds. So I wonder how that affects I read of it, you know what I mean? Well, that's true. I liked what the hell's that movie called, the one with Daniel day Lewis There will be blood? That movie doesn't have to dial upe for the first half an hour.

Yeah, that's true, But that that filmed, to me, there's something going on. It's a busy, busy quiet But that's the problem. Yeah, that's that's the difference between this film nothing, absolutely nothing of note. And I think of certain directors who wouldn't have been caught dead having ten minutes go by with nothing happen. I'm thinking Alfred Hitchcock.

There's no way Alfred Hitchcock, who was at the peak of his powers when this well he was kind of on the way down actually when this film was made. But you know he had been in the years prior to this, at the peak of his powers, and you would have never caught him with a film where there's ten minutes of just somebody rambling around with a pair of opera glasses or Billy Wilder. So, you know, there were a lot of directors who, you know, their styles were you know, they they they weren't gonna, they weren't going to do that sort of thing. But I think it was more of your foreign film directors that had a more subdued approach. Maybe I don't know.

I think that's that's just an American film style that I think has been prevalent for most of the history of film, I think, in my opinion, But what do I know. I'm gonna say, I'm certainly no expert on foreign films. I mean, I like the ones I've seen, But I do think what you're saying I tend to agree. I think certainly the foreign films that I have seen, by the directors that I have seen, like Feline and Bergman and Renoir and people like that Kurosawa, I think generally speaking, those giants of foreign cinema are quite often more focused on metaphysical questions. Yeah, you know, very angst ridden ruminations about you know, the meaning of life and relationships and all of those things, and yes, And American films have always been and I like this about it, that have always been more about storytelling, I think, which is a little different.

That's true. Yeah, Eric Rohmer is a good example of somebody who doesn't have a lot of action in his films. And I've seen quite a few of his films, but his films, to me, are never boring. There's not a lot of action going on. They're very dialogue driven.

But I love the majority of his work. So you know, if there's interesting conversations to be had, then that can be as interesting as having NonStop action. To me, if you have characters, but you know, she's in complete silence in the first of this film. There's absolutely there's no conversation. There's nothing but her just uh, you know, walking around, and so that you know, it's just it's it's a different uh you know, it's a it's a different type of thing.

So it's muted, like you said, it really is. But isn't it possible that he I mean not possible. I'm assuming he did that on purpose to try to make us feel as comfortable and is as or as uncomfortable excuse me, and as stilted and stifled as she is. Yeah, as I said earlier, he was maybe he was trying to get in a very subtle way, Hey she's boring, and I'm gonna make you bored as well. You show you.

I'm going to tell you how how she feels, how bored, how boring. So let's all get bored together, how about it? And again, if that's the intention, because if we if we ask her, what's the intention, is it successful? Yeah, it's yeah. If he's trying to bore us, then he succeeded quite well swimmingly.

Will I would say, yeahs company, that's right, there we go. But I think for me it is just there's something for me, it's just it's too much of a vague rumination on these things. And it's not like you've mentioned Adam a lot of the time, I guess Otto like us, you both have a lot of the times when it's a movie like this, the director is really like they're going for it with whenever they're trying to say And this is just not that this isn't going for it, but it is a very different way of going for it, a very like you mentioned Adam, muted, subdued, very laid, back way of going for it, which is fine just for me sitting with a character for ten minutes and then the character. In a lot of ways, she is the main character in this movie, obviously, but in a lot of ways, she's just kind of there.

A lot of the times she's just kind of in the scene, which again that's a point obviously, Sanjit Ray is making a point by her and a lot of the scenes just being there. There's a scene where a mall is on the ground writing in the journal that she gave him and she's just swing and on the swing, which you want to talk about a scene that gave me motion sickness. Holy cow. He stays with her on that swing for quite some time. Yeah, bring out the drama meane, Yeah, it was.

It was. It was a lot. I mean it was a lot. But at the same time, it's those shots are the moments in the movie where I feel like Ray is You're really trying to like he don't don't you get it? Like don't you get it?

And like I appreciate it. But for me, this is for me, this is not the way I would have gone about it. This is not the way that interests or excites me. As a filmgoer, which is fine. Subjectivity and objectivity are important to have conversations about.

When it comes to criticism, you know, it's just the same. Yeah, it's the same sort of criticism that was thrown against Michael Cimino and he did Heaven's Gates the same sort of thing. To me, I see them as different opposite sides of the same coin. I mean, because there's these long you know, it's a beauty, beautifully shot stuff, but it just goes on forever, forever, you know. And yet people were so critical of Michael Chimino and his transgressions on a film like that, but this film is in the same ballpark, and yet he gets a pass.

I don't get it. I mean, you know, it's just I don't understand that. But anyway, again, what do I know. Well, I'm with and I'm with you in a lot of ways. I mean, look, the book is written by Robin dranof Tajoor and I believe they have said more recently it may have been based off of his own life, which is kind of fucked up because in reality, the Shahru character in real life killed herself.

Oh so that is pretty bad. Yeah, I can't get much worse than that. No, So it's interesting some of this. Maybe Robin Dranaf kind of atoning for what he believes his part in all of it was. Again, this is just supposition.

This is recent supposition that it may be based on his life and things that happened to him with his own I guess sister in law and brother. So because he may have been the one that the sister in law fell in love with, because his brother is older than him, the sister in law of his brother. So maybe that's what it is. It's a little bit of reality being made fictional. But for me, there are better ways to tell this story that don't feel so meandering.

I can appreciate it for what it is. We've all seen it now. I like what Ray is going for. I'd be interested to watch more. This may not be something I ever returned to, unfortunately.

Frankly, what's the name of that book again? Because I thought it was I thought it said it was based on a story called The Broken Nest or Nasa and Trinn is the name of the book by Robin Draha taj Or Yep, The Broken Nest, which I was, which honestly would be a great name for this movie. Title. Yeah, yeah, that's a fantastic title. Yeah, definitely, Yeah, yeah, it's it's it's it's an interesting movie and it's again as as the first time I'm seeing a sun Jet Ray film, I'm not sure how motivated I am to watch another one right now, at least, well, now that you've mentioned it, I'll have to try to watch.

I'll have to see if they have all three of that trilogy on Criterion. It looks like they have at least two of them, so I would I would assume if they have two of them, they would have the third one on there, but never assume, so right, not with Criterion. Yeah, but I'm also with you, um Adam too, I like I like dialogue, So that's the other reason why I assumed I would be you know, the odd man out on this one. But I know I like dialogue. That's why I love uh Renoire's films.

Uh you know, Grand Illusion and Rules of the Game, and I mean very rules of the Game, especially very dialogue driven. But it's oh yeah, it's fascinating and it's just you know, um, but that might not be the kind of filmmaker that Ray was. I mean he might have. You know, like we said, we're all kind of none of us really know because this is apparently the first ray film for all of us. Chris, you've seen other Indian film.

But you were just talking about what was that when you were talking about before we went out in the air, it was it sounded like more of an action, Oh triple r. Yeah, it is. It is a It is a big budget action, plenty of cgi um and all kinds of practical it's it's insane. And again, Indian cinema, ostensibly Indian cinema could show it to you and show you this movie and show you that movie and say both Indian cinema. You can't draw a line.

You can draw a line, but like the line is going to be very convoluted and all over the place, but you can get there. But I mean it would be like it would be like talking about movies from the forties and drawing a line to Marvel movies. It's there, It's not going to be a direct line. It might take a detour you turn somewhere. But that's the thing.

I mean, this is a this is an important movie whatever that means, right, Like that's the problem and it's it's a lot of it's There are plenty of movies like this, and a lot of our Criterion movies where it's it's important. It's entertainment value may or may not exist, but it's an important movie that well you know earlier too about the idea of subjectivity, Because if you want to bore the hell out of me and maybe dissuade me from watching a movie, tell me it has a lot of CGI in it. And I like the play. Yes, I'm right there with you, agreed, agreed. But at the same time, if you're showing me something interesting, what that s GI that I've never seen before, then I'm on board.

It's if you're just doing the same third act thing over and over and over again, which we see so many marvel doing, then it is just the same thing. I mean, that's the thing. It's CGI through the lens of Indian cinema, not through Western cinema. I see what I mean, And so inherently it's already more interesting than just you know whatever Iron Man four or five to six seven or Captain America five and six. It's it's how are we using that technology and how do they use it?

Which is I mean again. This is a drama love story told in a way that an Indian filmmaker would make it, not the way an American filmmaker would make it at the time. So that's why I appreciate this movie. But I think I am with you Adam was not the biggest fan. Just wasn't wasn't This was not for me.

Clearly, this does not resonate with me the way a lot of other Indian cinema films have. This is like the first time actually wow, yeah, well, don't let me sway you one way or the other. I think it's I mean again, even though it's even though subjectively I wasn't the biggest fan. I think, like yourself, Adam, you probably agree objectively obviously it is a movie that is worth a deeper discussion than just what did you like it? Yes or no?

Like there's more to it obviously, Oh yeah, a lot of great area is there a lot of great areas? So otto final thoughts on charou Latton final thoughts is I was almost afraid someone intimidated to watch this because it was my first Indian film ever. I was kind of insecure. I thought I might be the only one who wouldn't like it. This is before I saw it at all, and I agree.

Like I said at the top of the program, I agreed with Adam. The first ten minutes had me concerned, but after that it did draw me in and it will, I certainly hope, but will make me want to seek out more more ray films, UM and more other Indian films, because again it's a it's a totally untapped area for me of films that I've never ever seen. So uh again, did I think it was the greatest film irisad No, But I liked it, and I let's say this, I appreciate it. I appreciated it. What about you, Adam?

Well, you know, like I said, there are some important social issues discussed in the film. I think it's uh, you know, for anybody who's a serious scholar of foreign cinema, this is a landmark film and uh, you know it's talked about. I mean, you know, you can't underestimate it's importance. So for that, if you're serious about film history and if you're going to talk about films, you you should be serious about it. You know, it's worth investigating just to to uh, to have some exposure to it.

So that you can know what what what it's all about, you know, And and like I said, go into it knowing that it's slowly paced and that it's going to take its time, and there are some subplots that really don't belong there. But at its core there are some good h there's some good social social things that are social cues and not cues, but social subjects that are discussed. Let's just say that. So and I agree with both of you. I think, you know, it's a movie that obviously strikes upon a lot of issues that you know in the late you know, eighteen ninety seven and on.

That's, you know, something that is still important now in a lot of ways to cultures around the world. But it's got an interesting message, It's got an important message. And yeah, was it for me? No? Can I appreciate how important it is to raise filmography to what he would you know, was working on, would continue to work on.

Yeah, I can kind of see and kind of assume maybe and would know what we say about assuming, but what I would be getting into should we should? I? Should anyone watch another ray film? All that out of the way, I will echo exactly what you said, Otto, I can appreciate this movie. It is just not didn't resonate with me the way a lot of other films happen.

And that's okay. Not everything has to Not everything's going to I think for the most part, like ninety percent of the movies I watch are kind of I'm kind of interested in or leave some sort of impact. That ten percent is kind of always the issue. But the ten percents rather small group of movies. It's a large group of movies, but it is a smaller group of movies than the other ninety percent.

So sometimes it's just a movie with something to say, and I'm not necessarily super in tune or listening with my entire brain. It's not something that's going to be a return watch, but it was something I'm glad I watched the first time. So so on that note, Adam, where could people find you on the internet should they be looking good? Question? Well would be Movie Geeks United, dot com and all the places where you get your podcasts.

I'm we put up a Blu Ray four K episode every month where we cover all the physical movie releases. We do that. We take those at the end of the month and so we can cover everything that's been released, because we don't want to do it at the beginning of the month. So because some of these titles get shifted, you know, for different reasons, so we want to make sure it's actually out there before we talk about it. And you can find those shows at all the places where you get your podcasts.

And I do a column, a weekly column rounding up both theatrical and physical releases at Focused newspaper dot com that's published every Thursday. And so those are a few places that you will find my work. What about you, Otto, Well, I can be found wandering around a giant Indian house doing needle point, trying to find myself in my place in the world. Auto understands the Charlolotta lifestyle. Apparently he really resonated with this movie because he lives in a giant house and he's just actually, I live in a very small house.

No, they can, let's see I do. I do a weekly radio show on Jazz ninety point one in Rochester, New York. I can find it at www dot Jazz nine on one dot org and they can find me Chris in the pages of Barney Miller and the files of the Old One too, of my first book that I, as you well know, I poured my heart and soul into. So literally every page has a drop of autos. Plus that's what they that's what they printed it with.

Yeah, all right, we need we need a couple of ounces. We're gonna mix it into the all of the ink for your book. That would be weird, but hey, I appreciate your commitment to the craft, as they say. As for me, Bollywood Cinemaclub dot com is where you can find this show. Weirdingwaymedia dot com is where you can find all the other shows that I work on, including a culture cast where this show came from, because that's where we were doing Indian Cinema before we spun it off into its own show.

You can find this show on any podcatchers that you use, iTunes, Spotify. We're there. Give us a rating and a review helps us out, helps people find the show. And yeah, as for the three of us, Otto, Adam, thank you so much for joining me. Next time, if we do another one of these, let's let's do something that's just completely one eighty, don't total what eighty even Well, I appreciate you getting me to watch any Indian cinema I'm very happy that I have now seen an Indian film and will hopefully see more.

So I'm right there with you. I appreciate be invited. I probably wouldn't have done this on my own accord, so I'm glad I did. I'm glad I had that experience. And yeah, we'll make sure to catch up the next episode