Latest news with #KashmirFiles
Time of India
2 days ago
- Entertainment
- Time of India
Vivek Agnihotri blames Anurag Kashyap's ‘alcoholism' for making John Abraham-Bipasha Basu film suffer
Vivek Agnihotri reacts to his 'alcoholism' claims on Anurag Kashyap About Vivek and Anurag Kashyap's upcoming projects The long-standing feud between filmmakers Anurag Kashyap and Vivek Agnihotri has resurfaced yet again, nearly two decades after it reportedly began. What started as a creative disagreement during the making of Dhan Dhana Dhan Goal in 2007 has turned into a public exchange of accusations and jabs. Recently, the Kashmir Files director took a trip down memory lane and alleged that Anurag's alcoholism at the time created serious disruptions on to YouTuber Siddharth Kannan, Vivek Agnihotri revisited old claims about Kashyap's behaviour during the film's production. "My film suffered because of it," said Vivek, who added that he himself had battled similar issues in the past. "There's nothing wrong in admitting that and moving forward."'Yaar woh sab chhodo, dekho Anurag raat ko kya bolta hai aur subah ko kya bolta hai ye do alag cheezein hain. Jiske andar hi 3-4 aadmi rehte ho uski kis baat par main kya react karoon?'Vivek Agnihotri stood by his earlier remarks about Anurag Kashyap's drinking habits, stating that while he had spoken the truth, he never intended to paint Kashyap as a bad person. He clarified that consuming alcohol doesn't define someone's character and reiterated that he never labelled Anurag their differences, Vivek did have a few kind words for Kashyap. He praised the Gangs of Wasseypur director's impact on Indian cinema, saying, "There can be only one Anurag Kashyap." Still, he made it clear that his issues with Kashyap's past behaviour are based on real earlier, Kashyap strongly denied the allegations earlier this year. In an Instagram Story, he called Agnihotri a 'jhootha aadmi' (liar) and claimed he was not even present in London, where the film was shot. He further alleged that Vivek rejected the original script by him and Vikramaditya Motwane, opting instead for his own stood by his version of events, claiming that Kashyap had initially taken on the writing duties but eventually passed them off to Motwane. 'Why would a third writer be brought in if the first two were doing their job?' he asked, suggesting that the production team and the crew of 300–400 people could verify the two filmmakers are currently focusing on their respective upcoming projects. Vivek Agnihotri's The Bengal Files is set for release on September 5, while Anurag Kashyap's Nishaanchi hits theatres on September 19. Despite their ongoing public feud, both continue to be active voices in Indian cinema.
Economic Times
2 days ago
- Entertainment
- Economic Times
Vivek Agnihotri blames Anurag Kashyap's ‘alcoholism' for making John Abraham-Bipasha Basu film suffer
Synopsis The long-standing feud between Anurag Kashyap and Vivek Agnihotri has reignited, stemming from disagreements during the 2007 film 'Dhan Dhana Dhan Goal.' Agnihotri recently accused Kashyap of disruptive behavior due to alcoholism during the film's production, while Kashyap refuted the claims, calling Agnihotri a liar and disputing his presence on set. Vivek Agnihotri took a jab at Anurag Kashyap, saying he acts like 'three or four different people in one body." The long-standing feud between filmmakers Anurag Kashyap and Vivek Agnihotri has resurfaced yet again, nearly two decades after it reportedly began. What started as a creative disagreement during the making of Dhan Dhana Dhan Goal in 2007 has turned into a public exchange of accusations and jabs. Recently, the Kashmir Files director took a trip down memory lane and alleged that Anurag's alcoholism at the time created serious disruptions on to YouTuber Siddharth Kannan, Vivek Agnihotri revisited old claims about Kashyap's behaviour during the film's production. "My film suffered because of it," said Vivek, who added that he himself had battled similar issues in the past. "There's nothing wrong in admitting that and moving forward." 'Yaar woh sab chhodo, dekho Anurag raat ko kya bolta hai aur subah ko kya bolta hai ye do alag cheezein hain. Jiske andar hi 3-4 aadmi rehte ho uski kis baat par main kya react karoon?'Vivek Agnihotri stood by his earlier remarks about Anurag Kashyap's drinking habits, stating that while he had spoken the truth, he never intended to paint Kashyap as a bad person. He clarified that consuming alcohol doesn't define someone's character and reiterated that he never labelled Anurag their differences, Vivek did have a few kind words for Kashyap. He praised the Gangs of Wasseypur director's impact on Indian cinema, saying, "There can be only one Anurag Kashyap." Still, he made it clear that his issues with Kashyap's past behaviour are based on real experiences. However, earlier, Kashyap strongly denied the allegations earlier this year. In an Instagram Story, he called Agnihotri a 'jhootha aadmi' (liar) and claimed he was not even present in London, where the film was shot. He further alleged that Vivek rejected the original script by him and Vikramaditya Motwane, opting instead for his own writer. Agnihotri stood by his version of events, claiming that Kashyap had initially taken on the writing duties but eventually passed them off to Motwane. 'Why would a third writer be brought in if the first two were doing their job?' he asked, suggesting that the production team and the crew of 300–400 people could verify the truth. The two filmmakers are currently focusing on their respective upcoming projects. Vivek Agnihotri's The Bengal Files is set for release on September 5, while Anurag Kashyap's Nishaanchi hits theatres on September 19. Despite their ongoing public feud, both continue to be active voices in Indian cinema.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
6 days ago
- Entertainment
- First Post
Vivek Agnihotri calls Animal director Sandeep Reddy Vanga his alter-ego & fearless, says he is showing truth through his films: ‘Does your society respect women?'
Vivek Agnihotri praised Karan Johar, Anurag Kashyap and Sandeep Reddy Vanga for their contribution to the cinema and also defended the latter's way of storytelling. read more Filmmaker Vivek Agnihotri, who is currently gearing up for the release of The Delhi Files and is known for expressing his thoughts in the most unfiltered way possible, spoke about three popular filmmakers - Karan Johar, Anurag Kashyap and Sandeep Reddy Vanga in an appreciative way. The Kashmir Files helmer praised the trio for their contributions to cinema and also defended Sandeep Reddy Vanga's storytelling approach. 'I really want to praise Karan Johar because he changed the commerciability of commercial cinema. He took it to a different scale. And just like how I am the brand ambassador of my films, he is the ambassador of his films. He is the face of Dharma Productions," Vivek told Humans of Bombay. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'Earlier, he used to be introduced as a fashion diva and anchor. But, he is a personality to look up to. Secondly, he took his father's business from a boutique production house to a mass production house. He has also given breaks to several talented film directors—Ayan Mukerji, Shashank Khaitan. He has also given break to several stars and star kids. He has created shows for television and OTT. He even changed the scale of award shows by being an anchor. He has done a lot of great things," he added. Crediting Anurag Kashyap for reviving the independent cinema, Vivek said, 'Before him, it was Shyam Benegal, Govind Nihalani and Prakash Jha. But they too turned into commercial directors. But Anurag has fought a war and he has given break to several small-town boys and girls. He has instilled confidence in people whose war was with English. Today, they believe even they are capable of doing something in life. Several talented people have come from Anurag—both filmmakers, and actors." 'Despite all these achievements, I personally believe he has not exploited his full potential. Maybe due to his own complexities, he is yet to exploit his full potential. He took a flight, up and quick, and then there was no conclusion to that. He couldn't take his own success to a logical conclusion," he added. The filmmaker then spoke about Sandeep Reddy Vanga and called the Kabir Singh and Animal director his alter ego. 'Sandeep Reddy Vanga is more like my alter ego in the industry. Just like me he speaks fearlessly," Vivek shared. He also defended Vanga's vision and storytelling and added, 'People question Sandeep Reddy Vanga for toxic masculinity, but what is really happening in the society? Isn't it the truth? Does your society respect women? It is just his storytelling. He is showing the world to the people from his point of view." STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The Tashkent Files helmer later drew comparisons of his films with Shekhar Kapur's Bandit Queen and said, 'Many asked me 'Why did you not show the film from the other point of view?' How can I do that? Why will I show the film from a terrorist's point of view? And how will I even make an attempt at it when I don't even know how they see the world? Even Shekhar Kapur was questioned when he made Bandit Queen from Phoolan Devi's perspective. But, over a period of time, people realised that Bandit Queen was right. After Pahalgam attack, people realised Kashmir Files was right. I am not claiming that I believe in Vanga. I am just saying he has the right to tell stories from his point of view. People who are abusing him, are also using their right. But, at the end of the day, he is laughing looking at his bank." STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
25-07-2025
- Politics
- Business Standard
Udaipur Files: SC asks HC to hear pleas against govt nod for film's release
The Supreme Court on Friday directed the Delhi High Court to hear on July 28 the pleas challenging the Centre's nod to release "Udaipur Files - Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder". A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi said the filmmakers appeal against the high court order staying the film's release was infructuous for they had accepted the July 21 Centre nod for the film's release subject to six cuts in its scenes and modifications in the disclaimer. Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind president Maulana Arshad Madani and Mohd Javed, who is an accused in the Kanhaiya Lal murder case, was ordered to move the high court against the Centre's decision. During a brief hearing, advocate Syed Rizwan appearing for film producers, said the contention of Madani and Javed that a particular community was targeted in the film and the threat to social fabric of the country, was "nothing but figment of their imagination". "Nothing happened when Kashmir Files was released, Kerala Story was released. The social fabric of the country was not affected when the Pahalgam attack took place, when the Pulawama terror attack took place. Our country's social fabric is much stronger," he said. The bench found Rizwan's arguments "thought provoking" and said it will be dealing with them in appropriate cases or when the petitioners challenge the high court order after it has examined the matter. Sibal said during "Kerala story" and "Kashmir Files" cases the court had not seen the movies but in this case he had watched the movie and could tell that one particular community was targeted. Senior advocate Gaurav Bhatia, appearing for filmmakers, said the balance (of convenience) was in his favour with the Centre now clearing the movie after the CBFC certification and the producers accepting the decision. Recording Bhatia's submission, the top court held the plea before it had become infructuous. The top court further noted Sibal's submission that Madani filed a writ petition in the apex court under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the order dated July 21 passed by the Centre. "Since, in the connected matter, we have relegated the writ petitioner to approach the high court as he has already filed a writ high court is requested to take up the said writ petition for hearing on July 28," the bench said. The top court clarified not expressing any opinion on merits and said the high court was at liberty to pass appropriate orders. The high court on July 10 stayed the film's release on a Madani's plea, invoking powers of the Central Government under Section 6 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952, till the representation is decided by the Central Government, for which the high court granted one week time. The filmmakers claimed to have received a Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) certificate with the board suggesting 55 cuts and the film was due to be released on July 11. Udaipur-based tailor Kanhaiya Lal was murdered in June 2022 allegedly by Mohammad Riyaz and Mohammad Ghous. The assailants later released a video claiming that the murder was in reaction to the tailor allegedly sharing a social media post in support of former BJP member Nupur Sharma following her controversial comments on Prophet Mohammed. The case was probed by the NIA and the accused were booked under the stringent Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, besides provisions under IPC. The trial is pending before the special NIA court in Jaipur. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
India Today
25-07-2025
- Politics
- India Today
Why waste our time: Supreme Court refuses to pause Udaipur Files release
The Supreme Court on Friday refused to extend its earlier stay on the release of the film Udaipur Files: Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder and directed those objecting to it to approach the Delhi High Court to challenge the Centre's revisional order, which had allowed the movie to be screened with six edits."First go to High Court and pursue and then come here. Now other side says he [movie producer] is satisfied with central government order and he does not want to pursue the case here. So you go to High Court now. Why waste our time," the Court scheduled for release on July 11, 2025, 'Udaipur Files' faced many delays due to censorship and legal troubles. The movie is based on Kanhaiya Lal, a tailor from Udaipur who was murdered by Mohammad Riyaz and Mohammad Ghous for allegedly sharing a post supporting former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma's controversial on-air remarks on Prophet Muhammad in 2022.A division bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi asked the counsel representing those opposing the movie's release — Kapil Sibal, appearing for Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind president Maulana Arshad Madani, and Menaka Guruswamy, appearing for one of the accused in the murder case — to approach the Delhi High Court if they sought relief from the Information and Broadcasting Ministry's committee, which reviewed the movie and suggested minor edits and changes to it, was set up by the Information Ministry after an order of the Delhi High Court."We had moved a writ thought that matter would also come before it has not come we seek permission to withdraw and go before the High Court," Sibal told the top bench refused to intervene in the movie's release even after the counsel for the petitioners argued, "Please issue a stay on the release until the High Court takes up the matter?""Whatever arguments you have to make, go to High Court,' the top court the other hand, counsel representing the filmmakers said that the "social fabric of the country was not harmed even after Kashmir Files or Kerala Story or even Pahalgam or 26/11 attacks," adding, "They are making a mountain out of a molehill.""Do they have any evidence that any social fabric was affected, or any incident happened after Kerala Story or Kashmir Files?," he response, Sibal pointed out that all the films mentioned by the filmmakers are a different case all together "for the simple reason that this movie has been seen while others were not seen.""Therefore I am challenging the content which could not be done in those cases," Sibal Supreme Court, however, declined to go into the merits of the objections, also refusing to address the argument made by the filmmaker about the "effect" of the film. advertisement"These arguments are provoking dialogue.. we have no doubt that in appropriate proceedings these questions may need to be answered. But that's not here.." observed the bench.- Ends
