Horror shows and movies

Hi Kools,

Found it on good ol' youtube, here is the link.
It is broken into 14 parts, and unfortunately, the poster did not put all of them in the correct order.

Did you really feel that what Dr. Shreeram Lagu did was arrogant??
It was after all his property and he did offer to help the guy adjust.
Even though, my family comes from a farming background, I guess I could not relate with that.
I mean, getting attached to something that was not mine to begin with!!
Maybe it is because, we actually owned our land (bhatkar) as opposed to being workers only (munkar).

I would more likely equate the villager dude's reaction to "Teri Biwi, Mere bachee" kind of situation.
The land was not his and he knew it, but he wanted some sort of ownership rights for his work.
I think he was paid well (or at least fairly) by the owner.
In either event, I really think the village dude over reacted (just a tinee weeny little)

Enjoy the movie.



PS: you seem to remember the older movies (from the era that I liked) better than I.
There was a movie with Rishi Kappor and Amjad Khan - set in the desert or something.
They were brothers - lost in childhood (you know the old setting with the family "Nishani")
I could swear there was a "Sona" in the movie name, but I cant find it

Levaz wrote:

Hi Kools,

Found it on good ol' youtube, here is the link.
It is broken into 14 parts, and unfortunately, the poster did not put all of them in the correct order.

Did you really feel that what Dr. Shreeram Lagu did was arrogant??
It was after all his property and he did offer to help the guy adjust.
Even though, my family comes from a farming background, I guess I could not relate with that.
I mean, getting attached to something that was not mine to begin with!!
Maybe it is because, we actually owned our land (bhatkar) as opposed to being workers only (munkar).

I would more likely equate the villager dude's reaction to "Teri Biwi, Mere bachee" kind of situation.
The land was not his and he knew it, but he wanted some sort of ownership rights for his work.
I think he was paid well (or at least fairly) by the owner.
In either event, I really think the village dude over reacted (just a tinee weeny little)

Enjoy the movie.



PS: you seem to remember the older movies (from the era that I liked) better than I.
There was a movie with Rishi Kappor and Amjad Khan - set in the desert or something.
They were brothers - lost in childhood (you know the old setting with the family "Nishani")
I could swear there was a "Sona" in the movie name, but I cant find it

ok i checked put this movi

sriram logoo's haracter was very honorable and made several efforts to accomodate the loser farmer.

the guy was just too obsessed. laburers are very practical about their tenancy status and understand that their srvices might no longer beneeded.

he talked about haq based on his service., dude got paid for that service and there was no haq he could claim. h should have got a loan frm bank and purchased it if he wanted haq.

we get cheated by rlatives on property we ACTUALLY own - we do not go around doing blackmagic and possessing people. I have no sympaty for the worker and I think the older son Nandish is aequal lam0ebrain and should have been disowned by his father for speaking to him in a such a disrepectful fashion when he learnt about the deal. if the worker went off the deep end the father was not responsiblefor that. he acted like any businessman and did it in good faith.

when I saw the movie I was EXTREMELY EXTREMELY angry at the over dramatic worker and lamebrain son of Sriram Lagoo - jab apne hi dushman ban toh dushmano ki kya zarorat .

Hope wrote:

ok i checked put this movi
sriram logoo's character was very honorable and made several efforts to accomodate the loser farmer.
the guy was just too obsessed. laburers are very practical about their tenancy status and understand that their services might no longer be needed.
he talked about haq based on his service., dude got paid for that service and there was no haq he could claim. h should have got a loan frm bank and purchased it if he wanted haq.
we get cheated by rlatives on property we ACTUALLY own - we do not go around doing blackmagic and possessing people. I have no sympaty for the worker and I think the older son Nandish is aequal lamebrain and should have been disowned by his father for speaking to him in a such a disrepectful fashion when he learnt about the deal. if the worker went off the deep end the father was not responsiblefor that. he acted like any businessman and did it in good faith.
when I saw the movie I was EXTREMELY EXTREMELY angry at the over dramatic worker and lamebrain son of Sriram Lagoo - jab apne hi dushman ban toh dushmano ki kya zarorat .

Ok, hope, it is exactly your kind of attitude towards the poor guy that probably lead him to react the way he did.
May be, now, I sympathize with him a little as opposed to not at all before reading your comments.

As for the older boy, I see that he did behave rudely with his father, however, I believe his reasons for that reaction was because his father did not believe in tantric solutions.
He did get obsessed, after the sisters cure. I saw no reason for him to go to the village and indulge in black magic of his own.
I hope he did get possessed by the villager dude's spirit, now that I think about it. (That is evil of me. I guess!!)

;P

Ok, hope, it is exactly your kind of attitude towards the poor guy that probably lead him to react the way he did.
May be, now, I sympathize with him a little as opposed to not at all before reading your comments.

As for the older boy, I see that he did behave rudely with his father, however, I believe his reasons for that reaction was because his father did not believe in tantric solutions.
He did get obsessed, after the sisters cure. I saw no reason for him to go to the village and indulge in black magic of his own.
I hope he did get possessed by the villager dude's spirit, now that I think about it. (That is evil of me. I guess!!)

;P


OK, LEVAZ was it? - First of all the Sriram lagoo character did not have my hard ass attitude. he was a decent businessman. so my attitude could not have lead him to react the way that he did. your sympathies are misplaced my friend. they should lie with me for watching that movie


what ever his concerns for his sister - it was uncalled for him to lay the blame for the mess on his father. his father was honorable accomodating. and as for the tantric solutions many people do nt beleive in black magic and the like does not make them evil or require their children to disrespect them and wasn;t his father right about all the quacks involved in this trantic business like the Amrish puri character??

he was an even bigger idiot to go to the village - cause the possesion of the farmer's wife for his own desire for a seance and then kill the possessed woman to get back at the spirit. Only lame brain people kill the messenger

Hope wrote:

OK, LEVAZ was it? - First of all the Sriram lagoo character did not have my hard ass attitude. he was a decent businessman. so my attitude could not have lead him to react the way that he did. your sympathies are misplaced my friend. they should lie with me for watching that movie
what ever his concerns for his sister - it was uncalled for him to lay the blame for the mess on his father. his father was honorable accomodating. and as for the tantric solutions many people do nt beleive in black magic and the like does not make them evil or require their children to disrespect them and wasn;t his father right about all the quacks involved in this trantic business like the Amrish puri character??
he was an even bigger idiot to go to the village - cause the possesion of the farmer's wife for his own desire for a seance and then kill the possessed woman to get back at the spirit. Only lame brain people kill the messenger

There is an old saying in business, success is rarely obtained without stepping on others toes.
I do not feel that the father character was a hard ass; In fact I was directly commenting on your attitude to the situation (not just alluding, but directly pointing to it) -
Therefore, generalizing that attitude as the cause of the poverty stricken masses to over react to perceived injustices with extreme measures.

Unfortunately, I am obliged to agree that the sons' behavior was unjustified, even given the desperate situation regarding his sisters possession.
However, in spite of the village dude's unjustified direction of his utterly unjustified anger at the land owners family, right or wrong, it was the fathers actions that lead to the possession of the child.

I believe that I have already stated, and thereby agreed, that the son too went a bit off the deep end chasing after the ghost of the village dude.

Levaz wrote:

Hope wrote:

OK, LEVAZ was it? - First of all the Sriram lagoo character did not have my hard ass attitude. he was a decent businessman. so my attitude could not have lead him to react the way that he did. your sympathies are misplaced my friend. they should lie with me for watching that movie
what ever his concerns for his sister - it was uncalled for him to lay the blame for the mess on his father. his father was honorable accomodating. and as for the tantric solutions many people do nt beleive in black magic and the like does not make them evil or require their children to disrespect them and wasn;t his father right about all the quacks involved in this trantic business like the Amrish puri character??
he was an even bigger idiot to go to the village - cause the possesion of the farmer's wife for his own desire for a seance and then kill the possessed woman to get back at the spirit. Only lame brain people kill the messenger

There is an old saying in business, success is rarely obtained without stepping on others toes.
I do not feel that the father character was a hard ass; In fact I was directly commenting on your attitude to the situation (not just alluding, but directly pointing to it) -
Therefore, generalizing that attitude as the cause of the poverty stricken masses to over react to perceived injustices with extreme measures.

Unfortunately, I am obliged to agree that the sons' behavior was unjustified, even given the desperate situation regarding his sisters possession.
However, in spite of the village dude's unjustified direction of his utterly unjustified anger at the land owners family, right or wrong, it was the fathers actions that lead to the possession of the child.

I believe that I have already stated, and thereby agreed, that the son too went a bit off the deep end chasing after the ghost of the village dude.

thank you

how did the father's action cause the possession of the child? six degrees of seperation? Phleaseeeeeeeeeeeeee

the farmer overreacted to the situation about his DHARTI MAA and her BALATKAR and his virtual HAQ as a paid labourer to the land and then went and paid some tantric to cast a spell on an innocent girl. he went cuckoo overnight. not by the father's fault but by his own delusions. if he was sane and still felt obliged why did he not go to thevillage panchayat where all the village people go and which does not require high priced lawyers? the village panchayats are very powerful in India. I am sorry I don't buy his sorry excuse for doing black magic on an innocent girl.

in this case every landlord should never hire unpad labourers in India. they should hire literate supervisors and use machines on al parcels of land. less emotional turbulence to deal with don;t you think? then he will cry that the machine stole his job and destroy the machines. yeh bhi galat woh bhi galat. if you decided to sell a flat that your family owned in India should the bai who clean your flat get upset that the maa that she cleant everday was being traded and should she then proceed to do black magic on you?

Hope wrote:

Levaz wrote:

... However, in spite of the village dude's unjustified direction of his utterly unjustified anger at the land owners family, right or wrong, it was the fathers actions that lead to the possession of the child.

how did the father's action cause the possession of the child? six degrees of seperation? Phleaseeeeeeeeeeeeee

the farmer overreacted to the situation about his DHARTI MAA and her BALATKAR and his virtual HAQ as a paid labourer to the land and then went and paid some tantric to cast a spell on an innocent girl. he went cuckoo overnight. not by the father's fault but by his own delusions. if he was sane and still felt obliged why did he not go to thevillage panchayat where all the village people go and which does not require high priced lawyers? the village panchayats are very powerful in India. I am sorry I don't buy his sorry excuse for doing black magic on an innocent girl.

in this case every landlord should never hire unpad labourers in India. they should hire literate supervisors and use machines on al parcels of land. less emotional turbulence to deal with don;t you think? then he will cry that the machine stole his job and destroy the machines. yeh bhi galat woh bhi galat. if you decided to sell a flat that your family owned in India should the bai who clean your flat get upset that the maa that she cleant everday was being traded and should she then proceed to do black magic on you?

I left the pertinent portion of my previous reply so that I do not keep repeating myself.

All I am alluding to is that the tantric involvement to punish the family was a reaction to the sale of the property (unjustified a reaction as it may be)!!
In essence, I do agree with you, just not as harsh in my judgement of the village bumpkin.
I guess our urban equivalent would be the Tree Huggers. Again, as much as I like trees and greenery, I would not chain myself to a tree!!

Levaz wrote:

Hope wrote:

Levaz wrote:

... However, in spite of the village dude's unjustified direction of his utterly unjustified anger at the land owners family, right or wrong, it was the fathers actions that lead to the possession of the child.

how did the father's action cause the possession of the child? six degrees of seperation? Phleaseeeeeeeeeeeeee

the farmer overreacted to the situation about his DHARTI MAA and her BALATKAR and his virtual HAQ as a paid labourer to the land and then went and paid some tantric to cast a spell on an innocent girl. he went cuckoo overnight. not by the father's fault but by his own delusions. if he was sane and still felt obliged why did he not go to thevillage panchayat where all the village people go and which does not require high priced lawyers? the village panchayats are very powerful in India. I am sorry I don't buy his sorry excuse for doing black magic on an innocent girl.

in this case every landlord should never hire unpad labourers in India. they should hire literate supervisors and use machines on al parcels of land. less emotional turbulence to deal with don;t you think? then he will cry that the machine stole his job and destroy the machines. yeh bhi galat woh bhi galat. if you decided to sell a flat that your family owned in India should the bai who clean your flat get upset that the maa that she cleant everday was being traded and should she then proceed to do black magic on you?

I left the pertinent portion of my previous reply so that I do not keep repeating myself.

All I am alluding to is that the tantric involvement to punish the family was a reaction to the sale of the property (unjustified a reaction as it may be)!!
In essence, I do agree with you, just not as harsh in my judgement of the village bumpkin.
I guess our urban equivalent would be the Tree Huggers. Again, as much as I like trees and greenery, I would not chain myself to a tree!!

phew!!! so all that discussion was you agreeing with me

thank you thank you

Hope wrote:

phew!!! so all that discussion was you agreeing with me
thank you thank you

Yes, partially though Your attitude is still a point of contention, ha ha ha.