Group of men play cards mid-flight. Netizens furious over 'train-like' behaviour. Why?
Netizens react
Just when you think you've seen it all while flying, the internet serves up another unexpected scene—this time, a group of men casually playing cards mid-flight, blocking the aircraft aisle with a shawl-strung makeshift table. The video, now viral, is drawing both laughs and fury online, with many questioning the audacity and the apparent lack of basic flight safety awareness.Posted by entrepreneur Mahaveer Jain on Instagram, the clip shows a group of passengers turning the aircraft cabin into their personal game room. A shawl is stretched out between four seats to act as a playing surface, as the men deal cards, seemingly unbothered by the fact that they're blocking the aisle—an essential passageway in case of emergencies or even routine bathroom visits. While some on social media were amused by the railway-style jugaad in the skies, many others weren't as entertained.Comments flooded in, with many users calling out the group for lacking basic etiquette and consideration. Several pointed out how the setup could block access to the restroom and disrupt other passengers, questioning why neither the flight crew nor fellow travellers intervened to stop the activity.However, not everyone saw the incident as a problem. Some viewers felt the card game was harmless and argued that it wasn't disturbing anyone. Others took a more humorous stance, comparing the mid-air scene to the hustle and chaos of an Indian train's general compartment, finding amusement in the unexpected display. The video has reignited conversations around in-flight behaviour, civic responsibility, and what counts as harmless fun versus outright inconvenience.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
6 minutes ago
- Time of India
Are filmmakers being silenced by Arbitrary Censorship?
In a democratic nation where freedom of speech and artistic expression are considered fundamental rights, a string of recent incidents involving the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) has stirred fresh debate around censorship and creative liberty in Indian cinema. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The two most prominent cases—Janaki V/S State of Kerala and Sitaare Zameen Par—highlight a concerning trend: creators are being forced to make politically and religiously motivated changes, often with little or no formal communication, just to get their films cleared for release. A Name That Sparked Controversy The Malayalam courtroom drama Janaki V/S State of Kerala starring and Union Minister was denied censor clearance at the last minute despite being scheduled for release on June 27. The issue? The protagonist's name—Janaki. According to the CBFC, the name, which is another widely accepted form of Goddess Sita, was deemed inappropriate for a female character portrayed as a victim of assault. This sudden decision, lacking any formal written notice or show-cause, drew immediate criticism. FEFKA (Film Employees Federation of Kerala) general secretary B Unnikrishnan during his conversation with The Times Of India asked . 'Many Hindu names are derived from deities—will they all face censorship?' Unnikrishnan, noting that his own telefilm with a character named Janaki had previously passed CBFC approval. This isn't the first time such censorship over character names has occurred. Director M B Padmakumar faced similar pushback over a character named Janaki in his film Token Number. In that case, the CBFC had suggested replacing the name with 'Jayanti' or 'Krishnan'—names that lacked the supposed divine association and only when the name was changed to Jayanti was the film approved for screening. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now CBFC's Micro-Management of Creative Choices If Janaki V/S State of Kerala presents a case of religious sensitivity gone awry, the CBFC's treatment of Sitaare Zameen Par, starring and , showcases an even broader issue—political influence creeping into creative decisions. Bollywood Hungama in its report stated that after being unhappy with the cuts suggested by CBFC's Examining Committee the film was eventually reviewed by the Revising Committee, headed by Vaman Kendre. Their suggestions involved the following changes Replace "Businesswoman" with the gender-neutral "Businessperson." Replace 'Michael Jackson' with the generic term 'Lovebirds.' Remove a visual element tied to the word 'Kamal' (interpreted as a reference to the lotus, the BJP party symbol). Most notably, include a quote by Prime Minister Narendra Modi after the opening disclaimer These demands raise an uncomfortable question: since when did CBFC's role extend to prescribing political messages in fictional narratives? Adding a quote from a sitting prime minister turns it into an ideological imposition. Despite these interventions, Sitaare Zameen Par was eventually granted a U/A 13+ certificate, and the film released on June 20. But at what cost to artistic autonomy? Are Certain Narratives Being Silenced? With growing examples of this kind of interference, one must ask: will upcoming films that delve into sensitive mythological or historical subjects also face similar scrutiny? A case in point is Nitesh Tiwari's Ramayana, starring as Lord Ram and Sai Pallavi as Goddess Sita. The story of Ramayana is inherently complex and filled with emotionally intense sequences—Sita's abduction by Ravana, her Agnipariksha (trial by fire), and her eventual abandonment by Ram despite being pregnant with Luv and Kush. These episodes are not only central to the plot but also deeply embedded in Indian cultural memory. Will the CBFC now raise objections to how Sita's trials are depicted? Will they argue that showing her as a victim undermines her divinity? If using a name like Janaki is already contentious, what of a film that retells her entire journey, including the injustices she faced? This isn't just hypothetical—it's a very real concern in today's political and social climate, where identity, religion, and ideology intersect more than ever before. In the words of the late Satyajit Ray, 'Cinema's job is not to provide answers, but to ask the right questions.' It's time the CBFC remembered that.
Hans India
9 minutes ago
- Hans India
CBFC Religious Objection Halts Suresh Gopi's Malayalam Film Release For Janaki' In title
The upcoming Malayalam film 'Janaki vs State of Kerala', featuring Union Minister and actor Suresh Gopi alongside Anupama Parameswaran, faces an unexpected roadblock as the Central Board of Film Certification has raised objections to its title on religious grounds. The controversy emerged when the CBFC demanded that filmmakers alter the movie's title, specifically objecting to the use of 'Janaki' due to its religious significance as another name for the Hindu goddess Sita. This directive has effectively put the film's scheduled June 27 release date in jeopardy, creating uncertainty for distributors and audiences alike. The film's narrative centers around a woman who becomes a survivor of sexual assault and subsequently engages in a determined legal battle against the state system. This powerful storyline addressing women's rights and judicial accountability was set to reach theaters this week before the censorship intervention. According to the production team, an interesting jurisdictional conflict has emerged within the CBFC itself. While the Thiruvananthapuram regional office cleared the film for release without any title modifications, the Mumbai headquarters has insisted on the name change, creating administrative confusion and delaying the certification process. This development has triggered strong reactions from Kerala's film industry, with various filmmaker associations and industry bodies expressing their displeasure over what they perceive as unnecessary interference. Several prominent figures in Malayalam cinema have criticized the decision and warned of potential protest actions if the demand is not reconsidered. The controversy highlights ongoing tensions between creative expression and religious sensitivities in Indian cinema. Filmmakers argue that 'Janaki' is a common name used across Indian culture and literature, not exclusively reserved for religious contexts. They contend that the character in question represents an ordinary woman fighting for justice, making the title appropriate for the narrative. Industry observers note that this incident reflects broader challenges facing Indian cinema regarding censorship policies and their implementation across different regional offices. The inconsistency between local and central CBFC decisions has raised questions about standardized guidelines and the need for clearer protocols. The film's producers are now caught between maintaining their artistic vision and meeting commercial release deadlines. Any significant delay could impact the movie's box office prospects and distribution arrangements that have already been finalized with theater chains across Kerala and other states. As the standoff continues, the Malayalam film industry watches closely, viewing this as a test case for creative freedom and the extent of censorship powers. The resolution of this dispute may set important precedents for future films dealing with sensitive themes or utilizing names with cultural significance.
Hindustan Times
11 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Prada's 'Kolhapuri chappals' make their runway debut; but this is just another Scandi scarf controversy in the making
The Kolhapuri chappal is now global. Prada's 'Kolhapuri chappals' make their runway debut — but people aren't the least bit happy(Photos: X, Korakari) But that's where the irony lies — for something so deeply desi, and hence expansive, to be considered 'global', contingent on (and only) an unassumingly entitled nod from a luxury stronghold. Prada showcased its Men's Spring Summer 2026 collection yesterday at the Deposito of the Fondazione Prada, Milan. Introduced by Miuccia Prada and Raf Simons, the Italian luxury house's lineup was whimsical, softly futuristic and as it goes, not for the mango crowd. But that's the whole point. The rhetoric and debate over this however, took a back seat in the face of the detail that became the inevitable showstopper — Prada's very own Kolhapuri chappals (although we're pretty sure they won't be calling it that). The slim build, the ring-ed toe and the skeletal frame — referring to these pairs of tan exoticism (sadly), as anything but Kolhapuri chappals, would make for yet another chapter in the growing volume of rooted Indian fashion, being colonised sans a sliver of acknowledgement. did it again There's inspiration, and then there's unacknowledged duplication. There's a third strain to this too — a continued and problematic denial of there having been any appropriation. From the looks of it, Prada was absolutely anticipating the Kolhapuri chappals to land as chic-ly as they did. Each show invite was literally packed with a "leather ring" as a token takeaway for all the attendees. Now need we remind you that the Kolhapuri's USP sits with that toe ring. Magnifying this to broader global narratives, the disapproving reception of Prada's Kolhapuri chappals feels like a Scandi scarf scandal 3.0. We say 3.0, in acknowledgement of the infuriating back-and-forth when it came to asserting the true inspiration behind the viral-for-the-summer 'Ibiza' aesthetic as desi applique work and embroidery. What is the Scandinavian scarf but a dupatta? What are the Ibiza-core minis and skirts but saturated texture on western silhouettes? And what are the earthy Prada 'sandals' but literally Kolhapuri chappals? Wake up babe, we're literally living through fashion.
