Snubs and Surprises

Our Emmy pool ballot is in tatters. Tonight's Emmy awards defied predictions by serving up a flurry of big surprises. Sure, some favorites managed to eke out a win, but others got flat-out robbed while unheralded newcomers swooped in to snag first-time statuettes. Check out our list of the night's biggest snubs and surprises.
We would've bet the farm on Carell finally winning Outstanding Lead Actor in a Comedy for his emotional final season on NBC's "The Office." But he remained a bridesmaid while "The Big Bang Theory's" Jim Parsons claimed his second straight Emmy win. Carell's "Office" run officially comes to an end with six Emmy nominations and no wins.
Snub: Jon Hamm
With three-time winner Bryan Cranston ("Breaking Bad") out of the running, the stage seemed set for Hamm to win his first Emmy for Outstanding Lead Actor in a Drama for his riveting turn as ad man Don Draper on AMC's "Mad Men." His show grabbed its fourth straight award for Outstanding Drama Series, but Hamm once again came up short, this time to "Friday Night Lights" star Kyle Chandler. Take heart, Jon: You couldn't have lost to a more worthy opponent.
Snub: "Glee"
Guess Emmy voters aren't feeling quite so "Glee"-ful these days. After garnering a slew of Emmy nominations for its first season, "Glee" returned with an uneven Season 2 that was less well-received and came up empty-handed on Emmy night. "Glee" star Jane Lynch was stuck playing host while "Modern Family's" Julie Bowen took home the Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Comedy award she won last year. First, New Directions loses at Nationals, and now this?
Surprise: Melissa McCarthy
One actress left the Emmys feeling like Miss America: "Mike & Molly" star McCarthy scored a stunning win for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Comedy, beating out favorites like "Nurse Jackie's" Edie Falco and "Parks and Recreation's" Amy Poehler. Thanks to a pre-planned bit with her fellow nominees, McCarthy ended up receiving a pageant-style tiara and bouquet of roses along with her statuette. She exclaimed, "This is my first and best pageant ever!" Now this is one crowning we can get behind.

Remo Pens Song

Goa musician Remo Fernandes has penned an anthem for Anna Hazare's campaign against corruption, saying it is his 'tiny contribution' to the movement.
The well-known Bollywood singer and music director said on his YouTube channel: 'This free song is a tiny contribution to Anna Hazare's 'India Against Corruption' movement. Share it, spread it as much as you like.'
The song, also titled 'India Against Corruption', was uploaded Friday.
Remo's song touches every aspect of the activist's struggle against corruption and begins with a satiric, rhyming invocation to the motherland, 'India shining, my motherland... India Shining, in Switzerland', in a not so oblique reference to the reports about the billions of dollars hoarded away by the Indian elite in Swiss banks.
Invoking people to back Hazare, the song, which has been written by Remo along with Shyam Banerjee, has also credited another famous pop group, Microwave Papadums, for lending additional voices.
Remo, who has virtually launched a volley of comments in Hazare's support on his official Facebook page, says in his song that 'if you are not against corruption, then you are corrupt yourself'.
'I am an Anna supporter. Pure and simple. If you don't agree with him, stay away from this page,' Remo says on his page.
Meanwhile, Remo's fans cheered his initiative.
'Remo, you always have been one of the forerunner of many social causes. May your inspiration n likeness filter down so a few (wish for many) may follow in ur inspired footsteps (sic),' posted Ivan Souza from Dubai.
'Great song!!! We should use this song as the theme song for the latest crusade,' said John D'Costa, owner of a production house in Goa.
Remo has also made political statements earlier with an album titled 'Politicians don't know to Rock n Roll', which was released in 1992 by Magnasound. The hit album had several tracks critical of the establishment, in light of the communal violence prevalent at the time.

Soundtrack Music

Film: 'Soundtrack'; Music Directors: Midival Punditz, Karsh Kale, Kailash Kher, Laxmikant Kudalkar, Pyarelal, Ankur Tewari and Papon; Lyricists: Dhruv Jagasia, Anushka Manchanda, Kailash Kher, Majrooh Sultanpuri, Ankur Tewari, Papon and Anand Bakshi; Singers: Anushka Manchanda, Kailash Kher, Suraj Jagan, Ankur Tewari and Papon; Rating: **
When a movie is called 'Soundtrack', the least you expect from it is to have a strong musical backing. Fulfilling this to some extent is this album that has more than one composer and also marks the entry of electronic music specialists Midival Punditz and Karsh Kale in Bollywood.
The songs in this album are of various genres, including some retro hits that have been nicely transformed into contemporary numbers.
The music of the film starts with 'Atomizer', which is Midival Punditz' and Karsh Kale's original composition and was selected for the official FIFA World Cup 2010 video game. Later, they had featured it in their album 'Hello Hello'. The song is high on electronic beats and low on lyrics - good for parties and lounges.
Then comes in Papon with 'Banao', a track that has a raw feel, owing to its acoustic instrumentation. It is spiritually inclined but the composition of the song is more apt for a love ballad. So, the devotional song fails to impress.
Next is 'Ek manzil' with Vishal Vaid behind the mike. The Sufi rock composition brings forward east meeting west amalgamation. It begins on a solid note but fails to hold the interest till the end, though it is backed by strong orchestration.
Then comes another Sufi rock 'Fakira' crooned by Vishal Vaid. It seems more of a situational track. Although the music is still impressive to an extent, the song, overall, is mediocre. But it might gain importance with visuals.
Up next is an inspirational song 'Main chala' in Kailash Kher's voice. The fast-paced song has a strong musical backing and the punch in Kailash's voice gives it an edge. The intense song creates drama and slowly grows on the listener. Overall, it is an impressive number that should go well with ardent Indi-pop listeners.
'Naina lagey' is undoubtedly the best song of the album that has been skilfully voiced by Papon. This semi-classical track is soul-stirring and takes romance to a different level altogether. It is appealing and soothing to the ears, which makes this a slow-paced harmoniously delightful track.
Next is a re-arranged version of the song 'Ruk jaana nahin', which was originally sung by Kishore Kumar in the 1974 film 'Imtihan'. The new version has been rendered by Suraj Jagan in his silken voice. Although old is gold, yet this version is not too bad, since it retains the qualities of the original track.
Then comes another old rehashed Bollywood song 'Yeh Jeevan hai', which had appeared in 1972 film 'Piya Ka Ghar'. The song is more contemporary as Malini Awasthi has given her own singing style to the song.
Then there are two instrumental tracks, which are equally impressive. One is called 'Symphony of the streets' and the other is titled 'Soundtrack theme song'.
Finally the album ends with the song 'What the F' that might look like another controversial song in the making owing to its title. However, there is nothing controversial about the song that is sung by Anushka Manchanda. Although it tries hard to impress with its quirky lyrics, experimental singing and composition, yet it doesn't appeal much.

Bromance in Bollywood

Forget romance, 'bromance' is the buzzword at the box office. Films like 'Zindagi Na Milegi Dobara', 'Delhi Belly' and 'Pyaar Ka Punchnama' are bringing alive boy bonding on the big screen, albeit with a realistic twist.
'It's nothing new, just fresh,' says film critic Anupama Chopra.
'Bromance doesn't get better than Jai-Veeru in 'Sholay'! That was the great Indian bromance! So the concept is not new. It's been there...it's just that stories are not as overblown and over-the-top as they used to be,' she added and rightly so!
Zoya Akhtar's hit 'Zindagi Na...' narrates the story of three friends who head for a three-week bachelor party and discover their strengths, weaknesses and conquer their fears on their way.
Aamir Khan Productions' 'Delhi Belly', a money spinner despite having an A-certificate, turned out to be a cult project with abuses and mischief galore - in tune with India's growing, notorious, urban youths.
There was also the hilarious 'Pyaar Ka Punchnama', about three friends-cum-flatmates, and their lives after they get bitten by the love bug.
'Films on bromance are closer to reality now, without dialogues like 'Main tere liye apni jaan bhi de sakta hun!',' Anupama, wife of filmmaker Vidhu Vinod Chopra, who gave a hit bromance with '3 Idiots', told IANS.
Earlier films like 'Chashme Buddoor', 'Satte Pe Satta', 'Amar Akbar Anthony' and 'Bombay Boys' had also touched upon boy bonding.
But the Hindi film industry saw a more contemporary take on the trend with Farhan Akhtar's 'Dil Chahta Hai' about three friends from diverse backgrounds, the bullying between them, their romances, their victories, their defeats - and their never ending support to each other.
It was followed by films like 'Jhankaar Beats', 'Rang De Basanti', 'Masti', 'Dhamaal', 'Dhol', 'Badmaash Company', 'Dostana', 'Rock On!!', 'Golmaal' series, 'Heyy Babyy' and 'Dil Toh Bachcha Hai Ji'.
Director Luv Ranjan, who tickled the viewers' funny bone with 'Pyaar Ka Punchnama', explains why the audience embraces bromances.
'After an age, people get burdened with a lot of responsibilities and these fun moments get lost on the way. So these films give them a reminder or an experience of the life that they perhaps wanted to have, or perhaps the life they miss,' Ranjan told IANS.
In Bollywood, bromances have usually had staple features - it's a gang of guys, there's confrontation and then a patch-up or there's a nagging girl, love is in the backdrop and friendship takes centrestage. Sometimes, the friends take a road trip and their experience helps audiences relive their past.
But a lot has changed in terms of the treatment, says Ranjan.
'It's very important to make films realistically. Films work when they are a true reflection of society. It's not as though men never used to abuse each other in their friends circle 40 years ago. But it was just a more closed and covered up society back then. That has changed.
'People are now open about using expletives in public, hugging and flirting in public...and so some of it is coming on the big screen, and people are loving it! That curtain of hiding the true, crazy bonding has been removed,' added Ranjan.
According to actor-comedian Vir Das, that's what worked best for his movie 'Delhi Belly'.
'Boy bonding is a formula which seems to be working a lot. In 'Delhi Belly', the characters were more real. Normally you see friends who are super rich, having fun and having the time of their life...but in 'Delhi Belly', there were three underdogs, very real people, who were together because of certain conditions. There were no ultra cool gangs, no ultra cool friends, just characters who looked real and used real language. That's the way it should be done,' said Vir.

Katrina Kaif’s Bollywood Journey

From being an outsider in the country, who didn't know a word of Hindi to becoming the top actress of Bollywood, Katrina Kaif has sure come a long way.
Her first film was a disaster but Katrina never shied away from it and, instead, chose to rebuild her career in the Hindi film industry. She charted her way to box-office success meticulously and is, today, the most adored actress in the country.
On the eve of her 27th birthday, we take a look at her journey in Bollywood.
Born to British-Indian parents, Katrina started her career with modeling in London and also walked the ramp during the London Fashion Week. During her modeling career, she crossed paths with Kaizad Gustad, who went on to cast her in the box-office dud 'Boom'. The film which introduced Katrina Kaif to the industry also starred veteran Amitabh Bachchan, Gulshan Grover alongside top models Padmalakshmi and Madhu Sapre.
Undeterred by the pathetic debut that she had, Katrina moved baggage to Mumbai and joined the league of successful Indian models. After sticking around the city as a model for quite a while, Katrina landed a role in Ram Gopal Verma's film 'Sarkar' which brought her to people's notice.
Her first out-and-out commercial film was 'Maine Pyar Kyun Kiya' which also starred her then boyfriend, Salman Khan. It is widely known that Katrina got a second chance in Bollywood only because of the influence of Salman Khan in the industry.
A new dawn began in Katrina's career after her performance in 'Namastey London'. Her portrayal of a British-Indian girl caught in a cultural crisis drew in a lot of praise and pushed her to a higher level in the industry.
Katrina went on to act in 'Partner', which was the unofficial remake of Will Smith starrer 'Hitch', 'Welcome' and 'Race' which made filmmakers to see her as a worthy of being cast in commercial films.
There was no looking back after the resounding box-office success of 'Singh Is King' and the great critical reception bagged by 'New York'. Katrina Kaif became the new hot property of Bollywood and also a major crowd-puller in movies. Katrina finally proved that she had her feet soundly planted in the industry and did not need any Godfather or a 'filmy family' to succeed.
She acted opposite Ranbir Kapoor in the films 'Ajab Prem Ki Gazab Kahani' and 'Rajneeti' (her most successful film so far) after which followed the rumors surrounding her budding relationship with him.
News of her split with beau Salman Khan followed immediately, to which both, very subtly, agreed. Today both of them share a cordial relationship and are even acting together in Kabir Khan's directorial 'Ek Tha Tiger'.
Her item number 'Sheila Ki Jawani' was a major chartbuster in 2010 and even beat the hugely popular 'Munni Badnaam' in terms of popularity.
She was selected to be the Indian face of the iconic doll, Barbie. What is considered to be a huge honor by everyone and Katrina Kaif herself, it was a testimony of Katrina's huge popularity in the country.

Understanding the Catholic Meaning of The Passion of the Christ

The main action in The Passion of the Christ consists of a man being horrifically beaten, mutilated, tortured, impaled, and finally executed. The film is grueling to watch — so much so that some critics have called it offensive, even sadistic, claiming that it fetishizes violence. Pointing to similar cruelties in Gibson's earlier films, such as the brutal execution of William Wallace in Braveheart, critics allege that the film reflects an unhealthy fascination with gore and brutality on Gibson's part.

Other critics, including some Christians, have gone still further, charging not only Gibson but certain forms of Christian piety with a morbid obsession with blood and death. For example, writing before the film's release in 2003, then-Evangelical writer Michael Coren commented:

It's certainly a relief to see an attempt at the grotesque reality of violent death rather than the diluted depictions of some film portrayals. But, again, with all due respect to Catholicism, there has in the past and to an extent still is a virtual blood cult within it. The medieval church was obsessed with gore, and even today in southern Europe we see quite repugnant fetishes with sacred blood, holy blood, miracle-giving blood. If it's European medievalism we're seeing rather than death-dry, God-drenched ancient Judea, we could be in trouble. (National Post, August 21, 2003)

There is something almost refreshing about encountering an objector so candid about his cultural and religious prejudices (though Coren, who was raised Catholic and since writing those words has returned to the Catholic Church, may not be the most representative example).

Although countless non-Catholic Christians have responded with great enthusiasm to The Passion of the Christ, much (not all) of the anti-Passion backlash is rooted in prejudice against a form of piety that is foreign to the objectors. Coren's expression of anti-Catholic, anti-European, anti-medieval bias and corresponding Evangelical fastidiousness speaks candidly for many who may not be so candid themselves.

But it doesn't stop with backlash within the believing world. Nor is Gibson's film the first work of Christian art to be accused of excessive morbidity. Similar charges could be found against such devotional exercises as the way of the cross (or stations of the cross) and the sorrowful mysteries of the rosary, which involve prolonged contemplation of the specifics of Christ's suffering and death. Even the observance of Good Friday, or the display of a simple crucifix, has been viewed with suspicion and hostility by some both inside and outside the faith.

In its most extreme form, the charge of morbidity has been laid at the feet of the Christian faith itself. Christianity's harshest critics denounce it as "a religion of death." Clearly, at some point objections of this sort must be regarded as a case in point of what the scriptures call the "scandal" of the cross. It is the cross itself, the very suffering and dying of God made man, and the way Christians respond to this event in their faith and devotion, that is behind much (though again not all) of the religious and anti-religious controversy over the brutality of this particular film.

None of this is to say that there are no valid criticisms or concerns worth raising in connection with The Passion. There are, for example in connection with some unfortunate decisions in the portrayal of Jesus' Jewish opponents — though even these have been exaggerated and distorted.

But clearly some of the accusations thrown at the film might as well be directed against Christian belief and practice as well. "Watching it is an act of self-flagellation," fumes one film critic. Well, what if it is? Mortification of the flesh has a long and venerable history in Christian spirituality.
Divine Mercy in The Passion

How can critics, even some Christians, look at The Passion of the Christ and see only senseless brutality rather than redemptive meaning? In part, it may be because some of them literally don't know what they're looking at.

Take a scene that is one of the film's most inspired yet least observed moments, the centurion piercing the dead Christ's side with a lance, releasing a flow of blood and water. In other depictions, the blood and water are often shown trickling or oozing down his side. Gibson, though, depicts a spray of blood and water gushing from Christ's side and showering down on the startled centurion.

To some viewers, this shot may have looked like no more than a burst of gratuitous gore, just another moment of maximized violence drama from a violence-obsessed director. That the image was not Gibson's invention — it comes from one of his inspirational sources, the visionary writings of Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich — may not much mend matters, since many critics of Gibson's film are as suspicious of traditional Catholic piety and of Anne Catherine Emmerich in particular as of Gibson, and in any case may still be unable to see spiritual meaning in what seems a gratuitously gory image.

To understand the real meaning of the image, it is useful to compare it with a well-known image in Catholic devotional iconography, the well-known Divine Mercy image, based on the visions of St. Faustina Helena Kowalska, which depicts Christ with rays of red and white light emanating from his side. Here is the explanation of the red and white rays from Faustina's own account of Christ's words in the vision:

The two rays denote Blood and Water. The pale ray stands for the Water which makes souls righteous. The red ray stands for the Blood which is the life of souls. These two rays issued forth from the depths of My tender mercy when My agonized Heart was opened by a lance on the Cross… Happy is the one who will dwell in their shelter, for the just hand of God shall not lay hold of him.

Gibson's point in depicting the Roman soldier (who is identified with the chastened centurion traditionally called Longinus who declared Jesus to be Son of God and whose subsequent conversion is the subject of the film The Robe) showered in the blood and water from Christ's side is the same as St. Faustina's in saying "Happy is the one who will dwell in the shelter" of the red and white rays that represent that same blood and water.

The point here is not that one necessarily has to be familiar with Catholic devotional art in order to grasp the heart of the meaning of The Passion of the Christ. Viewers who have appreciated the film include non-Catholics, non-Christians, non-religious viewers, even agnostics and atheists.

However, critics who condemn the film without recognizing its basis in Western sacred art and spiritual tradition are condemning what they don't understand. Criticisms about the film's general lack of well-developed characterizations and exaggerated stereotypes, for example, miss the point as much as those that object to the violence.

Gibson's archetypal characterizations, from the senselessly brutal laughter of the almost orc-like centurions to the implacable hostility of the Jewish elders, are in the same tradition as the archetypal and grotesque figures in the sometimes graphically violent sacred art of, for example, Matthias Grünewald, Hieronymus Bosch, and Pieter Bruegel the Elder. (The PBS documentary The Face [Jesus in Art], partly narrated by Gibson, includes a segment on the historic portrayal of Christ's sufferings that may prove enlightening to critics who missed the intervening 2000 years between the gospel accounts and The Passion of the Christ.)

To complain about the lack of character development and the violent imagery in The Passion is to miss the reality that nuanced characterization is not always the point in all styles of art — indeed, in some styles it can be a distraction — and that blood and gore in art was not invented by Hollywood action movies.
The Passion in perspective

To understand the brutality of Gibson's Passion within the film's own redemptive context, one must begin a full hour before the first blow at the pillar falls, in the opening scene in the garden of Gethsemane.

As imagined here, Jesus' agony in the garden harkens back to two earlier events in salvation history: the temptation in the wilderness, and the garden of Eden. The agony in the garden and the temptation in the wilderness are the two ordeals at either end of Christ's public ministry in which he was ministered to by angels, but Gibson's film, like other recent dramatizations (e.g., The Miracle Maker), omits the angels, instead depicting Satan returning to tempt Jesus, testing him on the eve of his passion just as he did at the outset of his public ministry.

This opening image of Satan there in the garden, tempting Jesus, the second Adam, recalls another scene from the opening chapters of the scriptures, the temptation of the first Adam in another garden, Eden. Gibson even uses a literal serpent, strengthening the Genesis 3 resonance — and also, perhaps, alluding to what is probably the only other film to use a literal serpent in depicting Christ being tempted, namely, The Last Temptation of Christ.

It may seem strange to think of the traditionalist Gibson alluding to Scorsese's notoriously controversial film, the last major Jesus film before The Passion of the Christ. However, The Passion does seem to be consciously aware of the earlier film. (Jeffrey Overstreet of ChristianityToday.com, among others, has noted that the soundtrack is overtly reminiscent of Last Temptation's Peter Gabriel score.)

If Gibson did consciously re-use the serpent image, it wasn't as an homage to Scorsese's film, but as a rebuttal of it. The most striking thing about the two serpent scenes is how they highlight two utterly antithetical ideas of what it meant for Jesus to be tempted. In sharp contrast to Last Temptation, where the confrontation between Jesus and the serpent is inconclusive, The Passion brings the temptation to a decisive end with Jesus quite literally putting his foot down in an unmistakable allusion of Genesis 3:15, a verse sometimes called the "protoevangelion" or "first Gospel": "I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he will crush your head, and you shall strike at his heel."
Establishing redemptive meaning

The temptation scene also serves to establish the meaning, the purpose and goal, of everything that follows. Ironically, just as the temptations in the wilderness implicitly bear witness to Christ's divinity ("If you are the Son of God…"), so here it's the tempter's insinuations that indicate the nature of Jesus' mission: "Do you think you can bear the weight of the world's sins? They aren't worth this. The burden is too great. No man can bear it."

These establishing lines, delivered in the opening scene, provide key context for the rest of the film. First, Jesus means to take upon himself the weight or burden of our sins. Second, this will prove to be a hideous ordeal. Third, he accepts this ordeal out of love for us — that is, he rejects the tempter's suggestion that mankind is "not worth this"; to him, manifestly, we are. This is the context in which every subsequent blow, every laceration, every fall of the hammer must be seen.

Another early scene recalls the scandalous and offensive aspects of Jesus' public ministry, providing necessary context for his persecution by the Jewish leaders. In the nighttime trial before the Sanhedrin or Jewish council, witnesses come forward to testify against him, essentially offering a synopsis of all that was controversial in Jesus' preaching and life: his claims to be able to forgive sins; his baffling words about rebuilding the temple after three days; the accusation that he performed exorcisms by diabolical means; his shocking teaching about the necessity of eating his flesh and drinking his blood; and of course his claim to be both the Messiah and the Son of God, leading the high priest Caiaphas to accuse him of blasphemy.
"Enmity between you and the woman"

The significance of Genesis 3:15 for The Passion of the Christ doesn't end with the opening scene. It can also be seen, less strikingly but more pervasively, in the film's approach to Mary the mother of Jesus.

In traditional Christian exegesis, "the woman" and her "seed" have been interpreted as ultimately referring to Mary and Jesus; and the "enmity" established by God between the woman and the serpent has been understood to signify a total opposition of wills. Mary's "enmity" with Satan, Catholic dogma teaches, is uncompromised by any stain of sin, and is rooted in God's grace to her in her Immaculate Conception.

This complete opposition of Mary and Satan is evoked in an imaginative and poetic way in The Passion of the Christ in a number of scenes. One such moment occurs as Jesus carries his cross through the midst of the crowd, with Mary anxiously following him on one side and the tempter on the other side, mirroring and thus opposing her. Another takes place during the scourging at the pillar, as Satan manifests himself in a vision that amounts to a hideous parody of images of the Madonna and child.

For Gibson, Mary and Satan are antithetical, opposed images, reflecting the total opposition of wills, the "enmity" that exists between the Immaculate Conception and the enemy of mankind.
Catholic meaning, Protestant viewers

These Marian themes, along with the Divine Mercy allusion in the piercing of Christ's side, are just two aspects of a strongly Catholic spirituality that pervades the film. In this connection, one of the most interesting aspects of the film's reception is how eagerly it has been embraced by non-Catholic Christians who in many cases might otherwise be disposed to respond to such Catholic ideas and sensibilities with suspicion or hostility.

Not that The Passion of the Christ is an anti-Protestant tract. Far from it. The film focuses to a great extent on what unites Christians, not what divides us. Its central theme — the belief that the Son of God for our salvation suffered and was crucified, died and was buried, and rose from the dead — is shared by Catholic and non-Catholic Christians. Protestant believers witnessing the film will in large measure see their own faith reflected in it, and will rightly regard the film as an affirmation of their own beliefs.

This in itself has notable ecumenical significance. While many Protestants recognize Catholics as fellow Christians and the Catholic Church as a Christian church, many others, particularly toward the Fundamentalist end of the spectrum, continue to take a dim view of Catholics and Catholicism. Phrases like "an apostate church," "a blend of Christianity and paganism," and "Babylon mystery religion" are common in these circles. One can almost hear them asking, "Can anything good come out of Catholicism?"

Yet Gibson's and star Jim Caviezel's Catholic beliefs are so well known that in embracing The Passion of the Christ as a profoundly Christian film, non-Catholics will have a hard time not embracing its director and star, and other Catholics with them, as brethren in Christ. Gibson's traditionalist tendencies only sharpen the conflict, since it underscores that the Gospel isn't something recently discovered by progressive Catholics since Vatican II, but is precisely traditional Catholic belief.

But the Catholic significance of The Passion of the Christ for the Evangelical community goes beyond mere identification of the Gospel with the Catholic tradition. As non-Catholics watch the film, they will begin to sense, permeating the gospel of grace they know and love, a sensibility at work that may at first seem strange to them.
Tradition and eucharistic imagery

The film's structure, following the Dolorous Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ by Venerable Sr. Anne Catherine Emmerich, one of the screenplay's sources, combines two popular traditional Catholic devotions: the 14 stations of the cross and the five sorrowful mysteries of the rosary. Every mystery and every station is there, in order — including one event drawn entirely from tradition, St. Veronica wiping the Lord's face.

The film highlights Catholic eucharistic sensibilities by presenting the Last Supper, not chronologically before the Garden of Gethsemane, but in flashback intercut with the Crucifixion itself. This juxtaposition of the Crucifixion and the Last Supper reflects the Catholic dogma that the Mass, along with the cross, is a true sacrifice, and the sacrifice of the altar and of the cross are one.

Another key scene with eucharistic overtones occurs after the scourging at the pillar, as the two Marys, Jesus' mother and the Magdalene, get down on their knees and begin mopping his spilled blood off the flagstones. This image is bound to leave more than a few Protestants scratching their heads. Only in light of the Catholic sensibility regarding the precious blood of Christ in the Eucharist does it begin to make sense.
More Marian themes

For many non-Catholics, Mary is such a contentious subject that the very mention of her name elicits knee-jerk defensiveness: "Mary was just an ordinary sinful woman like anyone else; God used her in a special way, but she's no different from you or me."

Besides the Marian themes mentioned above, The Passion's overall approach to Mary helps to reach beyond this defensiveness, inviting the viewer to a positive, sympathetic contemplation of Mary's unique relationship with Jesus and with his disciples. When a scene of Mary's anguish at her Son staggering under the cross gives way to a flashback of Jesus falling as a toddler and Mary rushing to his side, many will grasp on an emotional level something they may resist putting into words: that while Jesus alone made atonement for our sins, of all his followers Mary was in a unique way united with him in his sufferings as her mother's heart was pierced by a sword.

There's also the way the film presents Jesus' last words to his mother and the beloved disciple from the cross — "Woman, behold your son… Son, behold… your mother" — with that meaningful pause before the last two words. Add to this the way Peter early on refers to Mary as "Mother," and it's clear that The Passion holds up Mary as a mother figure to all Jesus' disciples.
A call to conversion

The Passion of the Christ has been widely hailed by non-Catholic Christians as an evangelistic tool. In light of the film's Catholic themes, there might be said to be a sense in which Evangelicals and Fundamentalists themselves are also among those being evangelized.

To the extent that the film is a call to conversion, though, it is a call to everyone, Catholic and non-Catholic, believer and nonbeliever. To those who believe, Catholic or otherwise, The Passion of the Christ invites us to a deeper commitment to our Lord Jesus Christ, and a deeper participation in the paschal mystery of his passion, death, and resurrection.

Gossiping Is Good For Us

A psychologist has revealed that gossiping is actually good for us.
Gossip helps us distinguish friend from foe, therefore protecting us from harm.
"We use gossip as a way of bonding," the Daily Mail quoted psychologist Dr Linda Papadopoulos as saying.
Related stories: Best cities for higher education | Spot the pervert in your office
"Who we like, who we don't like - it's a form of "you and me together," she added.
"In fact, the best way to get people to bond is to get them to decide who they dislike. It's like having a secret - you both know you're doing something bad, so you have a connection. It's a form of sisterhood," she explained.

Higher Education In India

Education is becoming dearer on the home grounds; cost of higher education is likely to increase every three years. A 10% hike in the fees every three years is on cards as the chancellors of state and central universities recommend this as a measure to meet the financial needs of the universities.
In the national council meeting organized by the University Grants Commission (UGC) and the ministry of Human resource development. Vice Chancellors were of an opinion that the universities at the central and state level are required to revise the fee structure once in three years. Recommendations given at the conference are yet to be approved by the ministry of HRD in case of central universities and state government in case of state universities respectively.
A similar recommendation was given to raise the fees in the IIT's and it was rejected by HRD minister Kapil Sibal. On the education reforms they were of the opinion to introduce semester system across all universities with credit based system.
With respect to retaining quality faculty in the universities, incentive based programs ought to be introduced particularly in the state and in the remote areas. In order to prevent the concept of brain drain, universities are encouraged to have tie ups with foreign universities, student exchange programmes etc.
Just two weeks back we witnessed the news about private engineering colleges in Karnataka asking to hike up the fees for the engineering courses. Added to that, this comes in as another surprise to the students though the plans are not materialized however it comes as a shock to the student community.
Higher education is an important stage in every student's life. It is a phase where the student focuses and adds quality to one self. The quality of educations offered by the universities is a question for debate. With the stake holders of the higher education concerned about the quality of education against the backdrop of declining funds it is the need of the hour to look at options having the socio economic scenario in mind? With the increase in fees for higher education, would the policy makers guarantee quality education?
With these recommendations there are two questions that arises in the minds of common man, with the rising cost of living in our country, if higher education becomes dearer will it be accessible for all the sections of the society?? Would the levels of people who want to pursue higher education drop thus creating a bigger problem?

New content control rules

Netizens Sore Control Rules
In the age of internet-fuelled information explosion, the government's new rule allowing telecom companies and blogging sites, among others, to remove 'objectionable' content from the web without informing users is a violation of the right to freedom of speech, say netizens and cyber law experts. The Information Technology (Due Diligence Observed by Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules, 2011, say that intermediaries - which include telecommunication companies, internet service providers (ISP), blogging sites, search engines, as well as cyber cafes - can remove 'objectionable' content without notifying the user. The Ministry of Communications and Information Technology announced the rules last month. Pavan Duggal, cyber law expert and Supreme Court advocate, said: 'It (the new rules) is in direct violation to the freedom of speech, which is a fundamental right and mentioned in article 19 of the constitution.' 'The new rules say that intermediaries should remove such kind of objectionable items within 36 hours without informing the users. They have the right to remove any post on a blog or site, work with the user to correct the post or disable access to their services altogether,' Duggal told IANS. According to InternetWorldStat.com, India stands fourth in the world in internet surfing with 8.5 percent of the country's population using the internet. Nishant Shah, director (research) of the Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore, said the government should recognise blogging as the right of the people and that the new rule is 'against the fundamental right of freedom of speech'. Pushkar Raj, general secretary of the People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), plans to knock the door of the Supreme Court in a week's time on the issue. 'The biggest problem of this rule is that it gives a lot of power to lower-ranking police officials without any kind of supervision. In this era of information flow, it is very hard to define the term 'intermediaries',' Raj told IANS. The rules also say that the intermediaries will preserve such kind of information and maintain records for at least 90 days for investigation purposes. Taha Sahil, a management student in Amity University, said the internet was the only weapon to spread the truth and these rules would curb that. 'It's like snatching away our freedom of speech. We all know that the media is biased and blogs and other web portals are the only unbiased source through which people can write and spread the truth. Moreover, this rule does not give any opportunity to the user to defend his work or even appeal,' Sahil said. The new IT rule specifies that the intermediaries should not display, upload, modify or publish any information that is 'harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, blasphemous, defamatory, pornographic, libellous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, disparaging, racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable, relating to money laundering or gambling'. Bloggers say the new rule is too tedious and will discourage them from blogging. Shivam Vij, a Delhi-based journalist and blogger, said: 'This rule is so vast that it causes confusion and annoyance. Who defines that the content is objectionable and how?' The new rule also gives the government easier access to content from the intermediaries. The intermediaries will be required to provide information to authorised government agencies for investigation and cyber security. Ghulam Muhammed, a Mumbai-based blogger, is one of the net users who partly agreed with the reasons behind the government's initiative. 'The government's control on internet is in essence a draconian measure. But on the good side, it will control things like the spread of pornography,' Muhammad said. Internet service providers argue that the rules are transparent enough and it was high time such legislation was put in place as people had suffered in the past because of malicious content being posted against them. 'There are sets of words defined and most of them are illegal under the law, though there are a few loose words which need to be taken care of,' said Subho Ray, president, Internet and Mobile Association of India. 'If the user has a problem with his content being removed, he can move court and if the court agrees to his appeal his content can be put back again,' he added.