Tuesday, February 05, 2013

After Vishwaroopam, Maniratnam’s Kadal faces the heat

kadal

by R. Dinakaran

Emboldened by the Tamil Nadu Government’s caving in before Islamic fundamentalists, Christian fundamental organisations have now called for a ban on Maniratnam’s Kadal.

According to reports, several Christian organisations, including the Indian Christian Democratic Party (Christhuva Jananayaga Katchi), have said the film had objectionable scenes referring to Christianity and depicted Christians in bad light. They have reportedly met the Chennai City Police Commissioner.

They have warned that the protests would be intensified if “necessary action” (translated into deleting scenes) is not taken.

It remains to be seen if the Jayalalithaa Government uses the same “not enough police” argument to ban Kadal.

But Maniratnam is likely to be happy about the controversy. The movie has been ripped apart by critics and is doing badly. A round of controversy can only do good for the film.

Update: According to The Hindu, Mr Christumurthy, the founder of the party, the references to Jesus Christ implied that Satan had won.

He also said references to the blood of Jesus Christ were unacceptable and wanted the scene in which Christ’s photo is thrown down and smashed to be deleted.

According to The New Indian Express, the group met Police Commissioner S. George and pointed out six scenes that were “offensive to Christians”.

The group said if these scenes were not removed and the film allowed to continue in theatres, they would call on Christians across the State and create a mas stir — which could threaten the law and order situation.

Prominent Church and Christian leaders, however have remained silent and have not supported this claim.

Christudoss has asked that cases be registered against Maniratnam and the Censor Board.

Twitter: @dinakaran

Carbon for Android out, at last

by R. Dinakaran

After a huge delay after the announcement, Carbon, a Twitter client for Android, has finally been launched.

carbon

The description in the Google Play page for the app says:

Carbon experience for Android Smartphones. No Tablet support yet.

Simple, Dark, and a dash of elegance for your Twitter day-to-day pleasure.

Carbon is a Twitter client, but unlike other Twitter clients. All of your Twitter content on one screen. A screen that doesn’t get you drilling down to many other screens to reach to what you want. Timelines, Lists, Favourites, Searches, Trends, Profiles, all there.

- Tilt Timeline to Refresh
- Power Scroll: Scroll/Swipe up or down using Two fingers to jump to top or bottom of Timelines
- Tap+Hold on Tweets to make everything clickable right on the Timeline
- QuickTimeline, home screen quick Timeline for Lists, Searches, Trends, etc…
- Rich Timelines with full inline images and videos
- Rich and HD style for User Profiles
- Rich and fun Conversation View
- Threaded Direct Messages
- Background updates with quick actions for Jelly Bean, per account
- Username Autocomplete
- Filters for Hashtags, Users, and Keywords

Between the time Carbon was announced and it was finally launched, another Twitter client, Falcon, has taken Android users by storm. It remains to be seen whether Carbon will be able to outdo or at least match Falcon.

Twitter: @dinakaran

Did Tamil Nadu’s Advocate General go overboard to please Amma?

by R. Dinakaran

 

Mr Soli Sorabjee in The New Indian Express ‘There are limits to an advocate’s licence too’, says:

“(Another) disquieting feature is the Advocate General Navaneetha Krishnan’s statement in the course of his oral arguments before the court that the “certification process is a scam”. Advocate Sankarasubbu appearing for the groups supporting the ban stated that “the board members are purchasable commodities”. These statements, unless they are based on cogent material placed before the court, are grossly defamatory and reprehensible.

navaneethakrishnan

Navaneethakrishnan

"There are limits to an advocate’s licence pleading his case before the court even though the advocate may be the advocate general of the state, in which case there is a greater obligation to refrain from making unsubstantiated allegations against a statutory body headed by a distinguished chairperson. Mr Advocate General, please remember, noblesse oblige.”

Twitter: @dinakaran