Redefining Bollywood? Not at all.

The NY Times needs a crash course on what comprises a Bollywood film. Seriously. The following from this link of a story titled 'Out of the Boardroom for a Bollywood Turn':

To promote the start of Virgin Mobile’s new cellphone service in India, Mr. Branson acted in a 20-minute Bollywood movie that was broadcast live from Mumbai last Sunday on Channel V in India.

So all of a sudden, Richard Branson is a "Bollywood star" after appearing in a 20-minute stint for Channel V to promote Virgin Mobile? No. There is something inherently wrong with that definition of a "Bollywood movie". Hey, maybe now the actors should get filmography credits for their commercials too!

For the record, the actress in that 20-minute gig was Neha Dhupia. But I still disagree with the use of the word Bollywood in this context. Get the facts right, O ye the people of NY Times. The ability to redefine Bollywood movies does not lie with thee.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Yeah seriously, I wish people checked the content of their writings before publishing in a newspaper as prestigious as the NY Times. Sure, it was edited and all, but the term Bollywood is obviously used in a misleading sense here. Shame.