FILM

Film was really great

Film was really great and i think the best film in bollywood industry
film producers work very hard in this film i love to see your site.

//www.swordsswords.com/Last-Samuraii.aspx

Dear Mr.Bahmani Your

Dear Mr.Bahmani Your remarks to Mr.Arzan

my friend,

my long lost relative,

my cultural and historically connected brother, or as you suggest, Baradar (another Persian word you will probably deny is Persian), and I'll add Baradar Jan cuz I know you know enough Persian to know that means "Dear Brother" in Indian,

Were touching indeed.

I am an indian and i do feel the same about Iranian people .

Long live India long live Iran.

Get a clue please mr. 42!

Dear Anonymous42,

Maybe it's just me, but where in this article, is there anything but praise for everyone and everything involved in this movie? and Where exactly did the author call people from India " Black people", and if so, is black supposed to be derogatory? Tell that to majority of us "Eyeranians" who are voting for Barak Obama in droves?!Are we reading same article by Mr. Bahmani??Maybe you reading something else, check your computer & cancel whatever server you subscribe to, I think your screen is fuzzy & you need help, pronto!

Chill people!

Hello Mr. Bruce,

This movie sounds lovely,I will definitely go see it. Why u getting so steamy with this Arzan person? Chill out bro, she's just giving her opinion.. i disagree with her also, i mean art is aesthetic not meant to be historical fact, look at movie "300", it sucked historically, but artistically it was amazing to watch..why can't we all just get along? Peace and best wishes to all. Sara

Missing the point

HI,

One more off topic response from you and I'm removing all of your comments. Sort of an homage to Persian rule over India.

The point is to showcase a wonderful film and establish a connection between us and India. That is it! This is not a debate on historical accuracy, but cultural outreach and contact. Something I am now pretty sure you either don't want or don't get. Apparently Bollywood is only for you, and we lowly Persians are not worthy of it. Which I can totally understand as well. I don't like it and I will not tolerate it, but I do understand your arrogance. India indeed has much to be proud of. Too bad it also has people like you who turn pride into intolerance and a historical lecture series on repainting your history in your slightly obvious xenophobic light.

India and Iran, like it or not, as much as it might grate on you and your Persian name to admit, are connected historically. Have been for a long time. Longer than you will thankfully live. The Parsis in India, Zoroastrianiasm, and again, the Persian influenced Mughal court that RULED INDIA during the period depicted in this film, are all examples of our close historical and cultural ties.

Did you even acknowledge the common words we share?

Turks? I pointed out the Persian connection. You seem to want to erase it by your obviously tainted and selective responses.

And finally, in all of the diatribe in your own choice, selective recollection of the historical record you seem to want to establish;

my friend,

my long lost relative,

my cultural and historically connected brother, or as you suggest, Baradar (another Persian word you will probably deny is Persian), and I'll add Baradar Jan cuz I know you know enough Persian to know that means "Dear Brother" in Indian,

Did you even bother to see the movie?

Because that was really my whole point.

Now go and push your luck just once more. No, really, try me.

heh !

>> Hi Arzan, (has anyone ever told you your name in Persian means "Cheap"?)

Might I add that it's you who's resorting to cheap ad hominem remarks, perhaps because of a paucity of documented facts backing up your "research". FYI, my name's NOT in Farsi, but (Kashmiri version of) the name of a legendary hero from the Mahabharata epic.

>> Thanks for your obviously well researched responses. Silly me, here I was thinking I was actually writing a positive review of your country's films,

And I thoroughly appreciate your efforts and thank you for it. However, where I differ from you is, what I perceive, your attempt to mix Persian culture with the history of my country. Sorry to burst your bubble, but we aren't showcasing any "Persian culture" and DON'T appreciate such remarks.

>> I beg to differ with your attempt to leave Persia out of the equation. According to MY research Persian was the official language of the court,

I never left Persia out of the equation, but unlike you (perhaps taken in by some sort of a patriotic fervour) I treat its role in Indian history objectively.

If you read pt. 4 in my rebuttal, I've said that Farsi was the language of the Mughal court (much like French was the language of the English court till the 17th century CE). Doesn't exactly make the French influence English history, does it ?

>> and I am sorry but you cannot suggest Turko-Mongol and omit Persia from it. That makes no sense because you can't get from Turkey to Mongolia without passing through Persia.

The above statement tells me how much you know about history and geography. My dear friend, if you'd take care to re-read the rebuttal, you'd realise my use of the word Turkic (rather than Turkish). Turkic is used primarily to denote the Central Asian Turks (Khazakhs, Kyrgyz, Uighur, Turkmen, etc) and Turkish denotes their trans-Caspian counterparts in Turkey and Azerbaijan (and Azeri-speaking areas in NW Iran, like Tabriz).

It was the FORMER group, i.e. Turkic (inhabiting the region between the Mongolian heartlands and south Asia) that invaded India, NOT the latter. In fact, the present day region of Turkey was invaded by the Turks at almost the same time as the early Mughal invasions.

So, your understanding that Turks came from Turkey is entirely mistaken ! In fact, most Turks still live in Central Asia and Chinese Turkestan, than Turkey.

>> And distasteful as it might be to admit, Persia was actually a significant player in India. So the influence of Persia was no doubt present during the period this film depicts.

Give me a break, brother or you Iranians say, beradar or as we Indians say, bhratar :)

Piqued Arzan

Hi Arzan, (has anyone ever told you your name in Persian means "Cheap"?)

Thanks for your obviously well researched responses. Silly me, here I was thinking I was actually writing a positive review of your country's films, especially this one which I thought had a unique message of peace and tolerance. But apparently you can't tolerate this and just have to beg to differ.

I beg to differ with your attempt to leave Persia out of the equation. According to MY research Persian was the official language of the court, and I am sorry but you cannot suggest Turko-Mongol and omit Persia from it. That makes no sense because you can't get from Turkey to Mongolia without passing through Persia. And distasteful as it might be to admit, Persia was actually a significant player in India. So the influence of Persia was no doubt present during the period this film depicts.

And that is what I thought would bring us closer together. Of course the Mongolian invasion owned both our asses during this period, but in reality we became closer as a result of these 2 amazing people in this film, who chose tolerance over secularization. A message I thought was highly appropriate during this very turbulent time.

Sorry the details I got off Wikipedia don't match yours, but I wasn't really going for historic accuracy, but rather artistic message, which as much as might piss of an obvious academician such as you, is actually the more important (and relevant) point.

Often Life influences Art, but every now and then Art and beautiful Art at that, should be given the chance to influence Life.

Now, go and see this beautiful film by your esteemed countrymen, and then see if you can come back and lecture me on historic detail, and your frustration with my simplification of it.

Don't forget the wife!

Did you by any chance remember to thank your wife for taking you to this wonderful movie?

come off it !

While I laud the effort by Mr. Bahmani to review the movie; I, being an Indian and a student of south-Asian history, am rather piqued by this odd tendency among some Iranians to misappropriate the histories of other countries.

I suggest the author of this review to get some of his facts right:

1. The Mughals were Turko-Mongol (Timurid and Tsagadai/Chagatai) in origin and there was nothing Persian about their ethnic extraction. However, as they belonged to the same group of Turkic warlords who, before puncturing the Indian defences, took hold of Iran, had quite a few Persian noblemen in their service.

Furthermore, as the author perhaps realises, Iran (as indeed the Turkic lands) had been thoroughly converted to Eslam by the time Moghals came on the scene. Therefore, the early Mughal warlords (notably Zahir-ad-din Babar and his son Nasir-ad-din Humayoon) depended on Persian moslems, rather than, Indians who largely refused to serve under the foreign domination.

On account of their attitude towards the staunchly non-Moslem Indians, their rule in India was extremely unstable and marked by frequent clashes with local kings and warlords, notably the warlike Rajpoots from Rajasthan.

2. However, Humayoon's son, Jalal-ad-din Akbar was in many ways different and a thoroughly secular king. That's why Indians, of all faiths, remember him very fondly. He was in many ways influenced by the Vedic religion, especially the Vedic rites of Sun worship [as the Sun plays a very important role in the Indo-Aryan tradition]. Hence, the rising Sun on his flags.

3. This story is a, partly true and partly legendary, account of his affair with and marriage to a beautiful Rajpoot princess, who subsequently became the queen of India and her son (born in a truly multicultural Indian setting) became the next Mughal emperor.

4. It was due to the large number of imported Persian moslem nobles in the early Mughal court that made Persian the language of the Mughal court. Though, Mughals themselves spoke Turkic and their subjects Hindi/Urdu. However, with Akbar the Indianisation process had started and by the end of his rule, Urdu had started replacing Persian as the language of the nobility.

I love Indian movies!

Thank you so much for introducing this movie to us.I love their movies,but hard to get them in my end of the world.It seems that you have seen it in a movie theater.We have an East indian shop close to us ,I will ask the lady as how to find it.
Regards,
Tahirih

Lion, Sword and Sun

Hello-I am happy that you liked the movie-You may want to know that correct reference to the north Indian language you are calling Indian is Hindi
or Hindustani- It is a mistake to call it Indian, since it would be like stating Irani is the language for the Iranian people-
Also, Parsi is not a word in English which defines the language either. Parsi is a reference to Zoroastrian people who live in India.
The root of our language (Persian and Hindi) is from Sanskrit thus to say Hindi has a lot of Parsi word is not correct either- In addition the author should not be surprised by learning that lots of the words in the movie sounded familiar and was understood by him-It is due to the fact that for many years Persian was also used in courts of Mughul dynasty of India who ruled a vast area of India.

FYI/Rolling Stone magazine seeks India success (bbc)

//news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7280870.stm

Food for thought ...

First Bollywood School to Open in London (bbc)

Great Article Bruce,

Take a look below in reference to this film's success:

//news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7280910.stm

 The UK's first Bollywood acting school will open in London in September.

I just googled this movie

I just googled this movie and can't find it anywhere. I'd love to see it.

Persian words

The majority of Indian words are Parsi rooted. When I listen to an Indian music, I can almost understand the words

Another great version of the story

The film was indeed beautiful. And in an odd turn of synchronicity, the New Yorker recently published an equally beautiful if very different story covering the same material, by our very own beloved Salman Rushdie. It's online at:
//www.newyorker.com/fiction/features/2008/02/...