Did Anand Gandhi plagiarise (1/3)”Ship Of Theseus” from short film “Bereft Of Colours”?

Posted: July 31, 2013 by moifightclub in plagiarism, short film
Tags: ,

UPDATE – Since there was some confusion about what we really wanted to say in the post, well, i just changed the header and made it clear. That’s how we talk in Versova. (Earlier it had the header “Bereft Of Colours is weirdly similar to 1/3 Ship Of Theseus”)

We came across this short film called “Bereft Of Colours” and it looks suspiciously similar to one of the three stories of Ship Of Theseus. At least on the concept level. Have a look and let us know what you think. Do post your views in the comments section.

We are not exactly sure when the film was made. If anyone knows more about it, please do inform us in the comments section.

  1. Satish Tamta says:


    This link says the movie was nominated for an award in 2008. Definitely older than that then.

    • Golgotai says:


      This is going to be a big revelation for all of you, but Anand ‘Inspired’ Gandhi has old habit of not giving credit to the real story writer.

      1) Anand Gandhi’s first short film ‘right here right now’ is a plagiarized version of a Gujarati short story. The core idea of chain reaction of mood is lifted from the that story. It was a one pager story high-lighting the chain reaction of mood from people to people.

      2) Now lets come to his 2nd film ‘Continuum’. Here also, one of the stories is lifted from an old gujrati folk story. The story where a small girl wants to buy a doll for some shells and pebbles that she got from the seashores is a straight lift.

      Anand Gandhi is a Gujarati guy so please don’t ask me ‘are you really making that analogy?’ Anand gandhi please step up and at least admit that you were inspired, if you don’t call it plagiarism. You didn’t give the credit to the original stories then so i want to see what arguments and heavy words you come up with now!

  2. gaurav raturi says:

    Hello Ppl

    This film is made by Akram Hassan a student of filmmaking from London in 2008…and now a full fledged filmmaker in Mumbai.. The Film was a diploma film at the institute.. It was screened in India first time at Filmbooth First Cut an entity to premier short films- Check this http://www.filmbooth.in/firstcut_july12.html
    Also Akram can be reached here >> https://www.facebook.com/akram.hassan.7

    There is also an argument/fb comments of which i was a part of with friends of Akram .. similar to this article which is questioning originality and how ideas can be picked up easily in todays age >> check the comment scroll here of the SOT page .. and how questioning the indie filmmakers or the directors who have been appreciated by everyone is so difficult .. again a tru example of how anything becoming massy takes the cult status..

    Ping me for more dope..
    Urs truly
    Gaurav Raturi

  3. blanknoiz says:

    Well, don’t if this is accurate but it’s IMDB description says 2007 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2087698/

  4. Tanvir says:

    BOC was made in 2006 at London Film Academy directed by Akram Hassan.He is presently in Mumbai and has worked with Aamir Khan Productions too as an assistant Director on Delly Belly.It was a diploma film made with student actors and won couple of awardstoo


  5. Aditya Mattoo says:

    I see what you are pointing at, Its just that I hope nobody says it out loud, for #SoT was picture perfect till now!

  6. rahulandrd says:

    ab to SoT pakka oscars ke liye jayegi-

  7. Kumar Gautam says:

    May be, may be not…but let’s not take away the credit from the makers of SOT. It’s far better, complete, believable, unique & detailed

  8. Gappu SIngh says:

    Imagine if all 3 stories are proved to be copied, Ship of Theseus name will look SO apt. 3 original stories replaced by 3 copied stories – iz it the same film? now thatz what u call a genius! (i hope none iz copied and gandhi bro haz a valid albi)

  9. Blacksheep says:

    why is nobody tagging AG or SOT on the tweets and pages. saying that SOT’s journey has loopholes will get the same reaction like when you say you hate Modi’s statement has loopholes. everyone is baah baah-ing the chant of development. realyy waiting to hear what gandhi ji has to say.

  10. Anonymous says:

    I am DEPRESSED…………….:(………….

  11. i cant believe this is happening, i am going to slit my throat tonight….. i always thought that the director was the first in recent times in India to have a unique, original voice. We just jumped the gun-anyways now when i look back the film was no different from many pop philosophy books we read to warm our souls…examples of this are trash literature like the monk who sold his ferrari,chicken soup for the soul , and who moved my cheese. we want justice anand gandhi…also ill probably be dead in the next few hours – have left a suicide note behind which has the link to the other two shorts that this film has copied from. i dont have the heart to post those. bye bye cruel world!

    • klinx says:

      Are you serious, shit of the ass? No really, shit of the ass! I thought someone as cool as you, would know better than reading the monk who sold his ferrari.. but chicken soup for the soul? Who moved my cheese, shit of the ass???? I thought someone as dismissive as you never need self-help, shit of the ass. That you knew your shit. But you know what is the worst, shit of the ass? that your utter self-loathing would be worth something if you had anything interesting to say. And about the other two shorts, bring them on ya, you were never faint-hearted. Or was that you being cool again, shit of the ass?

      • my name is shit of the ass of course i fucking need to read self help books….
        also how could shit of the ass have anything interesting to say????after all i am just a rouge particle of shit that gets mysteriously attached to bum hair.Am sure klink you crapped and felt that odd tug of hair..well thats me…so am more irritating than interesting ….about the other two short i will only post it after you fuck your grandma.

  12. Saurabh says:

    the story has similar lines but the concept was different in SOT it was equipped with positiveness and better screenplay. The direction is different and obviously i ve seen so many movies where the Blind one is different before Eye operations.. why the Fuss

  13. PrecociousLikeU says:

    Finally convinced that this site is run by precocious teenagers (i take it back, not even precocious).

    Here’s why:

    1. In several interviews, the makers of the film have mentioned clearly that Evgen Bavcar, his life and work was the starting point for them, (DoP Pankaj Kumar was inspired by his photography, and hence now shares the story credit in the film for this idea)

    2. At a recent Q & A in Bangalore (where I was fortunately present), the director spoke about all his references for the story – they were Daniel Kisch, Ben Underwood, Evgen Bavcar, the ideas on echolocation from Richard Dawkins’ The Blind Watchmaker, the LA Blind Photographers’ collective the work of the neuroscientists Oliver Sacks and V S Ramachandran in the field of the colour blind and neuroaesthetics, respectively.

    3. There are a million short fiction pieces (films and stories) on blind artists (and other visually impaired talent) out there, including feature length films like Broken Embraces (about a blind writer) and Janela da Alma (a brilliant docu about blind artists). That does not mean that the story of a blind photographer is plagiarised! It’s, in fact, the most original treatment to the subject ever produced!

    4. Watch this, as a tiny glimpse of the kind of prep these guys do – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2Y-MkSpWwU

    • moifightclub says:

      @PrecociousLikeU – we are surely kids. and i like how you can read our age from a post. Woah! As if it’s a crime to post a film and say it’s suspiciously similar to one story.

      • Saurabh says:

        in tat case every love story , most of the war movies are copy to one which was made first..
        comeon ideas come from other’s work. Plagiarism is copying not getting inspired. look at the treatment and screenplay SOT is definitely not a copy of this. There can be chances that SOT director might not even know about this.. becoz in creative minds might get same ideas.. try to read some fiction on it…

      • zen says:

        And maybe instead of reacting (badly) to PrecociousLikeU you could actually try to have dialogue with him? He has obviously done more research on this than you guys have before putting the original post.
        And if you don’t want to have a dialogue on the subject that what is the point of the topic? Maybe it probably has something to do with you guys praising the movie too much and now wanting to cut the director down a notch.
        And for the people calling out Gandhi for an answer: honestly he owes you nothing. Ticket khareedi matlab hum say ka baap ka hamaal ban gaya? See the above short and compare it to the film, thats your answer right there.

        • zen the thing is one just wants an answer because the storyline is the same, their is no denying that-yes the above film is shit-but if you give me a one line synopsis of both film’s its probably the same…also an answer is required because the film is being discussed promoted everywhere on social media-we as an audience and people of the internet have become part of the machinery to promote,talk and spread the word about this film and have succeeded in doing so. also as bruce lee says mistakes are always forgivable, if one has the courage to admit it.

          • abeyaar says:

            a single line synopsis is not an apt justification for a film to be plagiarised from the other. That way most of the films made will be similar to one another. Also AG gave all possible answers in his rant. Agree with the post though. They are just hinting at a possibility and shouldnt be crucified for the same.

        • moifightclub says:

          Well, Zen, the post was put up to have dialogue on the same, not only with AG but everyone else. THAT’s WHY THIS BLOG EXISTS! This isn’t any fucking website that runs on someone’s money or someone is making money out of it. But then all i get is smart alec answers saying do you know this and that and how much life and soul he has put in it. And what’s with “something to do with you guys praising the movie too much and now wanting to cut the director down a notch”? WOAH! Why? Is this the first time you are visiting this blog? when have you seen us doing that?

          • Anurag Kashyap says:

            the way the post is clearly insinuates plagiarism and accuses. i wish that the comment you had put down much after accompanied the post. this is what i was trying to tell you yesterday. when you just put a link without really saying anything more, you are accusing and not having a dialogue. dialogue is being had by others in comments section.

        • Gappu SIngh says:

          @zen: Naam hai zen aur soch itni nano. lulz. dunt think post sez gandhi ji copied. it sez this short luks similar. and reporter asking qs sequence be the major issue.

          @precocious: thanks for throwing in ‘blind watchmaker’ there & effectively kill ur own argument. what in flying spaghetti hakunamatata’s name blind watchmaker gottaa do wid 1st story? Juz dat it haz the word ‘blind’ in it. dawkin book is about evolution n chaos n randomness resulting in something awesome. but i agree this blog run by non-precocious loquacious indigenous teens. in fact if u hit dem with a danda on head then unconscious teens too.

          • @Precocious … I really feel like copying the original post again in this comment and making the post in uppercase so that you could read it again … where / which line / which word accuses Anand Gandhi of lifting ? When has the post writer accused Anand Gandhi of plagiarism ? The heading is “weirdly similar” … I feel Naagin and Jaani Dushman Ek anokhi Kahani are also weirdly similar … so what the f !!! What are you getting so upset about ? This post was for comments by people to discuss if they also thought the concepts were similar … Your post which had very valid points on why you think that the films are not similar at all and SoT being not inspired by this film … completely loses it by going personal against the blog writers !!! There are 2 sides to this debate and lets focus on that rather than who has a personal axe to grind against whom !!!

            • Ramen says:

              “When has the post writer accused Anand Gandhi of plagiarism”… I think it is a pretty naive assumption… the post doesn’t mention that word but surely that is what is being insinuated… otherwise why would he put up the post in the first place…

              • Zen says:

                The Cycle is this: First we proclaim a filmmaker as the new hope, then after a few films we pull him down. Rinse, repeat.
                Only goes to show how the internet speeds everything up, it just takes a few weeks after the release before we have had enough of them.🙂
                And calling the guy a theif and then expecting him to respond with a rational argument- Wah!
                As per me, I still think PrecociousLikeU has made enought points to stand against this argument. I just wish more people engaged with it or had done some due dilligence before the post was put up. Woudn’t this post be an actual work of journalism, if it had gotten the director’s response before being put up?

              • @Ramen … i dont know the blog writer and hence cannot speak on behalf of that person explaining why he / she put up the post … but the way i see it … is that there exists a short film which is similar to one portion of SoT … and presumably the short film is older … so there exists a possibility of plagiarism/inspiration/option c … its upto people in the forum to debate on the same … the filmmaker is also welcome to state his point of view … and instead of debating on whether there exists similarity , we have accusations on the hidden agenda of the blog !!! either way … how does it matter ?

                • Ramen says:

                  @prasun now you are talking about something completely different… I have never questioned the validity of this post but reacting to what you said in the previous comment on behalf of the blog writer…

      • AayaReAaya says:

        No crime at all. You call forth a discussion on the film by posting some reckless headline/hashtags, the film maker replies in a manner that he deems best. Both parties hurt each other but the film maker seems to making an effort to argue his case. Instead of taking up the cudgels, you then retort to the “free speech” discourse. We are all waiting to hear what you have to say to the clarification issued by the director. Are you going to respond at all? Or have you finished your job here?

        The film maker is absolutely justified in going hammer and tongs after your article. You are questioning his artistic integrity and you shouldn’t be surprised to receive a strongly worded reply, even an emotional one. Don’t fool yourself and your readers here by going all doe-eyed and saying “But I was only raising a harmless question…”. No you were not and you should probably just owe up to that. You felt that the short film was credible enough to warrant a post. It’s fine. All of us have disagreements but running back to mummy isn’t a solution. Make a point and defend it. Don’t just shoot and scoot.

  14. tinad says:

    Sot makers said that its not about the money and they said invent and innovate, but there is this immense corruption underlying SOT. Sot feels really corrupt as a film, borrowing ideas from here and there and copy pasting it. Even if the film makes money at the box office or wins any award. The seed of the idea is stolen, as this was the first story and it should have started from here. All this classic talk is a passe and this film too shall pass like one of the others. Its is surely not a first and by far from the best. At best, Anand Gandhi is the Shiv Khera of Indian cinema who knows a little bit about connecting many stories, cross pollination which can easily be thought of as creativity for the ones who haven’t read enough but cross pollination is worst that plagiarism as it hides the truth and gives an illusion of the same. This film doesn’t tell you anything at all, neither gives you a new structure. Whoever thinks this is not copied should do some serious introspection. The seed is a very important part and that is what brings about respect, but here it is stolen. All the filmmakers talk about feeling depressed after watching this film is because they are yearning to say something and failing and trying. But Sot cross pollinates so well that it gives a new dimension to blasphemy and borrowed ideas and celebrates that in the wrong most way. You might not realize it now while the hype is ripe but will know that this is only clever and nothing here is original.

  15. nijith raju john says:

    Val kilmer movie, ‘the vision’ points out the facts of eyesight restores. another pathetic film, ‘Naina’ starring Urmila Matondkar also begins with the issues of eyesight. but still, the concept of this short give a similar feel to SOT. Would love you hear from Mr. Gandhi on this!!

  16. copytom says:

    The amusing thing is why is Mr.Gandhi not saying anything as I guess he has lot to say…Just saw the tweets too but journos trying to shut it out coz they are fans of SOT.When are people going to understand that its not a personal attack !!!!!! Feeling Precocious too..haha

  17. this is old and make everyone peace out a little bit http://www.swiss-miss.com/2009/01/nothing-is-original.html
    also would really appreciate if Anand Gandhi spoke out and clarified stuff for all of us, P.S i didnt manage killing myself last night-the stupid nailcutters file never managed piercing through my jugular vein – might post the other two short film which are also lifted concept wise . Thanks please speak up AG

  18. speak up Anand Gandhi here is something for you https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZOywn1qArI

  19. copytom says:

    “Optimism is a strategy for making a better future. Because unless you believe that the future can be better, it’s unlikely you will step up and take responsibility for making it so. If you assume that there’s no hope, you guarantee that there will be no hope. If you assume that there is an instinct for freedom, there are opportunities to change things, there’s a chance you may contribute to making a better world. The choice is yours.”
    Noam Chomsky

    SOTA is a funny guy !!

  20. nijith raju john says:

    lets not jump to conclusions just yet. Let’s first find out what Anand Gandhi has to say.

  21. Prashant P says:

    i would like to agree with Godard – “Its not where you take things from, its where you take them to”. the idea of inherent irony of a ‘blind visual artist’ doesn’t seem so novel that any maker/thinker can patent it. Since there are real life examples of such artists, one can assume that such a concept is part of a collective knowledge. Also the irony of getting eye-sight back but losing the vision is also a very easily deducible idea. That’s a very obvious conflict to come to mind and i suppose it doesn’t require rocket science.
    Also, most importantly Gandhi’s film is nowhere close to this manipulative short. His film never exploits the irony, in fact it is not about this irony at all. Gandhi’s engages in a more sophisticated and complex dialogue. The exploration is about free will or lack of it. About to what extent can an artist control his art.
    Hence there is nothing that undermines the merit of SoT in any way.

  22. Vigilante says:

    Gappu SIngh – naam hai gappu per aap ho pappu

    • Gappu SIngh says:

      @Vigilante: 1stofall – thanx for taking care of capital i in name. gotta love ppl wid a sence of nuance. 2ndofall – thanx for being vague & calling urself vigilante – yulian assange type.

      @PrashantP: godard quote iz nyc. n lyk all nyc quotes most probably taken out of context. but agree sot iz 500 mile ahead of the short. treatment, subtext, layers, sublayers..everythin’z way superior. juzz dat itz <3-breakin' to see the core idea iz same2same.

  23. Vivek says:

    I really find the ‘soon to disown’ Ship of Theseus crowd really immature. Its like, “Haan, mujhe pataa thaa original nahi ho sakta”. Its such a defeatist attitude. Agreed that this film has some similarity to the one in Gandhi’s film, but does that make it a copy? I am no expert so, I would refrain from commenting on that. I am actually glad that you guys put this up. It shows that there is a space for contradicting or differing views. I really find that everyone just wants it in plain black and white. Bhaiyya, Grey bhi hota hai. Khud ke girebaan mein jhaank ke dekh lo.
    Whatever! Ship of Theseus’ was a really well made movie. It did leave a lot of questions unanswered for me, but hey that’s just an opinion. I loved the idea and its treatment. And the acting, it was just superb. It wasn’t a masterpiece, but I am glad that people with a different perspective on how films should be made are getting a voice in our country. Sadly, we only recognize this phenomenon when it happens in Hind/Hinglish movies. I guess our diversity makes us a little narrow minded at times. Now there’s a contradiction.

    • dude this is no bloody phenomenon its just that the director has an important surname and everyone wants to put on blinkers.
      i would wait for the director to speak before accusing evryone of being narrow minded twats.

  24. RainGal says:

    I think its an attempt by this lousy film’s makers to get a bit of limelight by ridding on the back of the success of SOT. They should learn a little about film-making and make better films themselves than take credit off other’s good work. The first story is inspired by the life and work of noted photographer ‘Evgen Bavcar’. The angle of the blind photographer struggling with her work after her cornea transplant seems the only obvious take to build the story & the element of irony. I doubt if any from the team of SOT ever saw the film before.

  25. copytom says:

    It is very interesting to see people deciding among themselves only that poor SOT guys have not even seen the film whereas the student film made way back in 2006 has the same concept and weirdly similar scenes like the one with the journalist with same pauses by the protagonist have everything to do with plagiarism..the blind fold..list of similarities is too long to share.there is no doubt about the superior production design,performances etc but then why not consider the budget s and other constraints.

    Bereft of colours is not a great film as Ship of theseus is no original piece of work.Irony is If we replace every part of this ship by all the pseudo intellectual talk copy pasted from various books and metaphors directly picked up few foreign film,one of which is a famous mexican flick, the only thing which would remain is a director’s personal trip !!

    The problem with today’s breed is that they want to be considered intellectual and intelligent which sadly is not everyone’s cup of tea, so in the whole ambition of sounding smart, they become groupies for people whom they think have made some philosophical masterpiece.Only if few of the above commentators read even a bit of philosophy and concepts like Existentialism etc, they would get to know that what they have been fed and programmed into believing is nothing more than drawing room talk !!

  26. felinei says:

    ROFL haha how lame to compare two totally different films. i wont comment on the quality of the student film as its not my purpose but its bad acting n a bit pretentious.
    Here not even the concepts are similar or the way of presenting them. I really cant believe if this is the iq of comparing two things we are in for a lot of pseudo plagiarism claims done by the jealous n insecure people who would tmrw come n say that james joyce fuckin copied homers odyssey and made ulysses. retardation of the highest kind. what if tmrw someone makes a movie on an intellectual couple fighting over objectivity or someone makes on a monk with self doubt or something like that….will people say its inspired or copied from SOT?

  27. copytom says:

    no offence to the great fellini but its not at all a contest between two films but a discussion on a story/concept which is similar to an extent where few scenes are even same..treatment is diff agreed but noone can deny the similarities..If you are denying the FACT that the concepts are similar then there is no point of discussion with a person with such narrow vision.

    there is no BOC vs SOT going on but an open discussion on how is it possible for these two shorts to be soooooo similar?????? why is a dialogue on the issue being diverted to other things which have nothing to do with it ?? Is it a deliberate attempt to divert the attention..smells of a hidden agenda…Wish only if Mr.Gandhi could clarify…

    • copytom says:

      Shit of The ass : You are one funny guy/girl :):)

      The irony of the situation is SOT is presented by Kiran Rao aka AKP whereas on IMDB it says Akram Hassan being part of Aamir Khan Productions…

      • it would have been fun if Akram Hassan is proved to be Aamir khans surrogate child.
        funny?? but am not trying to be funny dude-i was involved in self flagellation that didn’t amount to death when this post came out-because i really loved the film. And all this shit about good camera work,performance and quality of production and blah blah does not hold any weight against what i saw here in this video

        • copytom says:

          I think we need to explore this angle a bit more:) Lets ask either Aamir or may be Kiran Rao may have some answers…:)

    • copytom says:

      Oh ! Finally we have Mr.Gandhi speaking up..but wait did he upload it 2 days back??????? hmmmmmmmm…….

  28. also apart from having an influential surname…. Gandhiji is ME MAHARASHTRA….. does anyone have any idea of the property he owns here????no context-just asking,you guys can make your own connections :)- seem like all the migrants are in awe of him and no one is calling a spade a spade .

    • Chhatrapal says:

      So what? How does it matter if he owns property or not? 1000 of people who are rich and can never become filmmaker. That’s why it is an art. And btw he had a producer. And there lots of Gandhi’s who have no connection with Gandhi Family? And what the fuck migrant thing? How are you different from Raj Thakare? This guy is fucking pathetic … well i didn’t like the SOT and definitely not the short … well there are similarities … and fucking discuss that only… don’t be fucking be a racist …. guys like you made Raj and Bal Thakare!

    • @Rohwit says:

      Congrats! You have been successfully nominated for the most tasteless comment ever made on moifightclub. Now please break your computer/abacus (whatever you use) and behave.

  29. johneybarbie says:

    BOC vs SOT discussions have been the best read of the year! ROFL..

  30. Vasant Nath says:

    Puh-leez! So what if there’s thematic correspondence between this and SOT’s blind photographer section? Anand Gandhi and co did what all good, creative storytellers do – they took a theme that interested them and they took full ownership of it within their own context and took the debate further. Much further. Their whole treatment of it is far more advanced and mature than this short. A much larger and sustained thought process went into their story, which didn’t just stop simplistically at the point where the short does, but went a lot further in relating the theme to not just a fully baked emotional journey of a character but also to the larger thematic context of two other complex stories.

    There is credit to be given to Ship Of Theseus when seen from any angle. It’s going to take much more than a short with a similar theme to undermine it.

  31. Susan says:

    I think that Precociouslikeu is Gandhi himself as giving such detailed as well as all over the place explanation and uploading the manipulative video.

  32. really is this what he has to say “Firstly, an accusation of this kind is highly disappointing, not because of its pettiness but because of its complete incapability in gathering relevant information. It’s complacent, vacuous and sensationalist and a representation of the state of faux film enthusiasm masquerading as commentary in, well, Versova.”
    dude this blog promoted your film, your short films ect and is probably responsible from many people in small towns having any inkling about the film- now your dealing with the Internet which has replaced expertise with amateurs, fanboys, and obscurantists. That is a price one pays.

    also Chhatrapal wheres your sense of humour?? and i was not being racist i was putting AG in a good light by saying that he is a local boy who has benefits in this city with a very influential surname unlike most of us migrants who are not even settled here and in a constant state of flux.

    • AayaReAaya says:

      1) “dude this blog promoted your film, your short films ect and is probably responsible from many people in small towns having any inkling about the film”
      Yes the blog promoted the film. Why? Because the film was deemed interesting and subsequently worthy. Also, the blog promoted the film because the blog needs the ship of theseus and other such films. The blog discusses Indian cinema and SOT, I’m guessing, falls bang in the heart of that discussion. THE BLOG DID NO FAVOURS TO ANYBODY, i hope. I don’t think the film maker owes anybody anything here. He may choose to be grateful but that’s not obligatory. “Many people in small towns” will know of SOT because of the blog and vice versa.

      2) “now your dealing with the Internet which has replaced expertise with amateurs, fanboys, and obscurantists. That is a price one pays.”
      Very good point. 5 marks.

      3) “and i was not being racist i was putting AG in a good light by saying that he is a local boy who has benefits in this city with a very influential surname unlike most of us migrants who are not even settled here and in a constant state of flux.”
      Are yeh kya keh diya. Local boy, influential surname, migrants, constant state of flux. Minus 5 for each.

  33. also AG
    Jules: English, motherfucker, do you speak it? (Pulp Fiction)

  34. copytom says:

    Could not help laughing at what Anand gandhi has said in Mid Day..Its the same bullshit which he did in his movie and how he promoted it… Big words from a short film director whose being out there is a fluke and nothing else..He needs to stop justifying his blatant disregard for others for the exploration of truth & be thankful for the platform he received for his less than average film !!

    • copytom says:

      If you replace Anand G’s awe inspiring big intellectual sounding words from this reply, All you get is empty space screaming ” I don’t know the fuck I am talking about…..Please bring me my oxford dictionary..plzzzzzz…oh..am gasping for breath..where are my Epistemology books ..??”

  35. raman says:

    this is probably how the director is feeling after his article about the good folks at well versova https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bh6c2gspPKw#at=35

  36. Rohitash says:

    i think only few scenes are copied, rest Anand gave it fresh look, everybody takes small pieces from good places so not a big deal, #SOT is one of the best movie…

  37. Mitesh Shah says:

    Here is Anand Gandhi’s reply, a short post on his blog:


    A detailed one follows.

  38. By the way … what happened to the Cavite vs Aamir discussion few years back ?

  39. TC says:

    You are doing good guys. Also taking a lot of flak. But still sticking to the bare facts. Thnaks.

  40. sana says:

    Great going guys.Do not stop !! As the real Gandhi said Silence becomes cowardice when occasion demands speaking out the whole truth and acting accordingly.

  41. John Galt says:

    Did I hear Anurag Basu chuckle somewhere?

  42. felinei says:

    this website blog is becomin the tehelka or india tv of indie cinema….atleast they dont accuse n senstationalise under fake ids

  43. Golgotai says:


    This is going to be a big revelation for all of you, but Anand ‘Inspired’ Gandhi has old habit of not giving credit to the real story writer.

    1) Anand Gandhi’s first short film ‘right here right now’ is a plagiarized version of a Gujarati short story. The core idea of chain reaction of mood is lifted from the that story. It was a one pager story high-lighting the chain reaction of mood from people to people.

    2) Now lets come to his 2nd film ‘Continuum’. Here also, one of the stories is lifted from an old gujrati folk story. The story where a small girl wants to buy a doll for some shells and pebbles that she got from the seashores is a straight lift.

    Anand Gandhi is a Gujarati guy so please don’t ask me ‘are you really making that analogy?’ Anand gandhi please step up and at least admit that you were inspired, if you don’t call it plagiarism. You didn’t give the credit to the original stories then so i want to see what arguments and heavy words you come up with now!

    • copytom says:

      hahaahhahaha…I knew it ..He is “chor chor super chor” & this title is inspired from the latest film to give due credit evn though chor in india is such a common word…lmao

  44. felinei says:

    1.right here right now is the philosophy of casuality explored in a lot of movies like gliding doors n kieslowskis blind chance and even a lot of philosphers have embraced as well as discarded it. Majority of science fiction especially of asimov is based on the cause effect chain and the mathematical calculation of putting probability to it to calculate the future. You wont be surprised to find cause n effect reasoning in ancient cultures or being a part of lot of folk songs, poems, stories , etc.
    so is there really a need to lift it from anywhere? any kid who looks at his frustrated father coming from office would understand what caused it n what kind of bad mood it will cause in the house.

    2.The small girl exchanging shells for dolls is barter trade.You dont need to lift a premise of barter trade from anywhere. its the most common childhood game that you n i must have indulged in. from exchanging trump cards, to stamp collections, rare coins, wwe posters, etc. Its only as adults that money takes over the naivety of barter trade.Again i dont think so its so uncommon n rare for it to have a need to go n lift or steal it from somewhere.

    Please dont act so dumb n use your brains unless its something as extraordinary like science fiction stories most of what is used in movies does exist in literature, philosophy. only narrative structure is given to it and human beings unique brains cant always give the same structure to an idea unless you intend to do it willfully. So please stop this plagiarism blabbering.

  45. Golgotai says:

    @felinei : so Anand comments as Anand Gandhi also and as felinei also.

    1) right here right now’s sequences are the EXACT depiction of the one pager story!! the only aspect of the story was how anger and happiness transfers from one person to another in chain, with each incidence being not more than few lines long.

    2) let me give you the synopsis of the one pager gujarati story and you will understand what i’m talking. Gujarati story : A shopkeeper is arguing with a customer and refuses to give certain item for price other than the retail price. The shopkeeper also has a servant who notices this. A small boy enters the shop, he selects gives some pebbles and shells for a toy. The servant is about to refuse. Shopkeeper intervenes, counts the shells and returns him few and gives the doll to him. Once he leaves, servant asks why did you give him the toy for few shells? they’re worth nothing. The shopkeeper replies – we know that but he doesn’t. When he will grow up, may be he will remember this incidence and he will not refuse a small boy who might come to his shops to buy a toy in exchange of shells.

    I’m not arguing Anand’s expertise. He has made a brilliant film. In fact his all three films were very good. But the guy should admit where he did he take the idea from!

  46. ah says:

    the film maker speak i.e Akram Hassan (ON FACEBOOK)
    Watched Ship of Theseus last night…It was amusing especially when I had almost forgotten about the elementary short which I made with a bunch of young film students in London in 2006, when film stock was still in existence and I was given 2 cans of 16mm stock, a basement, few student actors, classmates as crew. But then it was 7 yrs back & we all have since evolved..
    Well…there are similarities between SOT’s 1st story on the blind photographer & Bereft of Colours..More or less the core concept, character’s journey though a different ending & few scenes as well. But I don’t want to comment on the consonance that Bereft of Colours inspired Ship of Theseus. Rather I would leave it to the maker’s integrity….

    • copytom says:

      So what he wants to say is Anand gandhi did pick up the idea and copied scenes from his student film but he is too high & smoked up to give a shit…lol🙂

  47. copytom says:


  48. moifightclub says:

    Some 79 comments! WOAH! you guys are surely smoking some good stuff. Please carry on.

    i just have 2 doubts. if anyone can answer, would be great.

    1)”It’s complacent, vacuous and sensationalist and a representation of the state of faux film enthusiasm masquerading as commentary in, well, Versova.”

    Agree. All might be true. I humbly accept. And one is completely entitled to one’s opinion too. Plus, one understands that it’s easy to blabber pop-philosophy arguments on-screen, and it’s difficult to even articulate a proper response off-screen without giving a counter arguement. All that is good.

    What i fail to understand is that even after having such an opinion about this blog, WHY THE FUCK WOULD I REGULARLY GET EMAILS FROM HIS OFFICE TO WRITE ABOUT THE LATEST TRAILER, CHARACTER POSTER, SONGS? Or tweets asking to RT about show timings and screens? Was he promoting some kind of duality there? if i dont like someone, i would never fucking ask that person for help. What ethics and work culture is that? His film surely deserves better place than this sensationalist one. Or was it all good till we were in awe. The moment we pointed out something we could not digest, we got a brand new label.

    Hey kids in that factory or whatever is the office called, STOP FUCKING BOTHERING ME WITH YOUR MAILS and TWEETS and SUCH REQUESTS. Let me enjoy my sensationalism.

    2) And that’s not all. When we put a post by 4 authors praising the film, the filmmaker posts a comment saying (https://moifightclub.wordpress.com/2013/07/19/why-you-must-watch-ship-of-theseus-4-writers-on-1-film-with-3-stories/) – “Thank you Varun, Mihir, Svetlana and Sumit for this generous piece. This is what I had hoped will happen with the film – peer participation. I am as curious, as you are, to see where we go from here.”

    After the post with short film was put which accuses him of plagiarism (yes, using it now. In the earlier post it was just a tag. plus it happens consciously, sub-consciously), Mister filmmaker responds with this tweet (https://twitter.com/recyclewala/status/363295965681160192) – “Thank you @mihirfadnavis. You and everyone else have been very kind. But I am sorry to say I disagree with your praise and accusation alike.”

    All good, sir. But again is this duality really being part of some marketing core idea that i am unable to get. Wish one had the guts to tells us all that when we were praising the film. At least we would know what we were talking about. Again, all good till we were in awe.

    Or is it about getting whatever you can from anyone who is endorsing it – corporate giant, presenter, filmmaker promoting it – you hate all of them, you hate their films, you hate their thoughts, you have bitched about them for years, you have made fun of them and their work for years, but when they come to serve your purpose, everything is suddenly so good. Again, what kind of ethics or work culture is this? as a friend pointed out it’s some kind of monk-ey business. or maybe turning a blind eye. either way smart move.

    • Smit says:

      Easy on the God Complex dude. You are contradicting yourself constantly. First of all decide whether you liked the film or thought of it as pop philosophy (as youve been saying since yesterdy).. secondly whats with you and getting personal? Why not exercise some self-restraint in boisterously disclosing details of personal encounters. Its like if someone was to say “arey yaar yeh pfc-waale ki sab andar ki baat mujhe paata hai.. kya self-contradicting cheezein bolta hai, kidhar hangout karta hai, doesnt have the balls to own up to his own shit..” you know what i mean. Just because someone has put up their work in the public domain, does not mean you have the free hand to licentious sordidness. Because believe it or not, that is precisely the definition of yellow journalism.

      • moifightclub says:

        Smit – i still like the film. This is getting nasty for the sake of it. a “sensationalist” place will always do that. oh am i suddenly personal? Anyway, you can spare this god and go to your own.

      • copytom says:

        I am guessing you didn’t read the personal analysis of the blog owners on twitter by Anurag K…

    • AayaReAaya says:

      1) “Plus, one understands that it’s easy to blabber pop-philosophy arguments on-screen, and it’s difficult to even articulate a proper response off-screen without giving a counter arguement.”

      Really? So now you are making snide comments about how “easy” it was for the director to write a film like this? Really? That’s your definition of an articulate response?

      2) “if i dont like someone, i would never fucking ask that person for help. What ethics and work culture is that?”

      Really? Have you never ever done that? You have NEVER asked somebody you hate for help?

      3) “Or is it about getting whatever you can from anyone who is endorsing it – corporate giant, presenter, filmmaker promoting it – you hate all of them, you hate their films, you hate their thoughts, you have bitched about them for years, you have made fun of them and their work for years, but when they come to serve your purpose, everything is suddenly so good. Again, what kind of ethics or work culture is this? as a friend pointed out it’s some kind of monk-ey business. or maybe turning a blind eye. either way smart move.”
      This attack is blind and venomous. Really. Why would you say such things to anybody, forget a filmmaker who has put his work out.

      • moifightclub says:

        1. Hell yeah
        2. Are you fucking kidding me? i wont even see his face. am not that opportunist.
        3. work culture and ethics is blind and venomous? well, to quote someone – The words I used were neither an insult, nor an attack. They were honest opinion (that can be disagreed with).

        • AayaReAaya says:

          So it now seems that just because somebody has made a film, you are now going to launch into an investigation into his/her work culture and ethics. Of course, you have no real reference because you don’t really know the film maker from what I can see. And then you initiate a public trial by pitchforking him against accusations of plagiarism.

          Who made you God here?

    • Kaankhajoora says:

      Hi, I think AG formed his opinion post this blog, which is fair enough. Can you please share those ‘endorse-us’ emails that you received from this ‘factory’. Aap sensation faila rahe ho, hum sensation maang rahe hain. Demand&supply sperm *anu malik in VD hand gesture*

    • IgnorantKidCritic says:

      Kitna rote ho yaar tum. Teen saal se to main dekh raha hun ki bas kursi par baithe sab pe ungli uthate rehte ho, aur koi palat ke ungli utha de to apne aapko victim bana lete ho, uske liye ‘respect’ kho dete ho.

      Kabhi kursi se utho to, kuch kaam karo to, koi first hand experience lo to kaam karne ka..kab tak QWERTY ki luxury lete rahoge? Tumhare saath waale tum se aage nikalne lag gaye, aur tum abhi bhi is blog/twitter ke baadshah bane baithe ho. ‘funfunfun’ hi karte rahoge ya kuch substance ka bhi karoge? Poori industry ko sudharne ka bojh kyu le rakha hai kandhon pe? Aur tum to sudhar bhi nahi rahe, name-calling karte rehte ho bas. “Hamko achi picturein bana ke do, hamein achchi picturein chahiye, sirf hamare liye picturein banao, hamari haan mein haan milao na, aao gole mein baithte hain, sab ek dusre ki lulli hilao na”

      Kuch to likho yar, tum mein talent hai, kam se kam Sanjay Gupta se to achchi picture bana loge tum. Aur ye blog kill mat kar dena, kisi achche writer ko de do jo kuch quality like, kuch analysis kare, koi nahi insight de filmon pe. Yun na ke bas jo film achchi lage use chadhata rahe, aur jo buri use girata.

      Baaki aap mahan ho.

  49. copytom says:

    WOAH !!! Finally you guys spoke infact Akram spoke too..guess everyone got really annoyed with the whole pretentious attitude of Gandhi..

  50. vip says:

    I know of the Gujarati short story from where Right here Right now is lifted, completely lifted. idhar udhar se copy karna bandh karo, even if you copy don’t call yourself original. you copy the lesser known stuff which is so pseudo as the guys whom you copied from never get credit, there is no other difference between you and Sanjay gupta.

  51. Ken Jones says:

    Keep up the good work Cilemasnob. You are the REAL Tyler Durden

  52. anon says:

    Thats why we are recyclewala films. we recycle ideas.

  53. swapnil says:

    I feel like alok nath from hum saath saath hai torn,between my favoritest blog and one of the most exciting filmmaker i have seen in recent times! I’ve seen SOT 4 Times! And i personally think cinematically SOT AND BOC are different journeys of,as many have pointed, similar conflict! So there’s no questn of Anand Gandhi’s vision being derivative frm BOC ONLY! BUT i think the blog DID raise a very rationally composed post which just pointed out the similarity in premise about the two films without ever questioning AGs integrity! So the public slandering was uncalled for! But this post have become,so venomous that it hurts! SULAH KARAA LO YAARAA!!

  54. Locomotive says:

    MY Q? Is .. Y didnt u bring up this Argument When .”Barfi” was released ..

  55. I hate when a discussion on WORK (Read : SOT & BOC) starts progressing towards mud slinging by the personalities involved. Is it really that hard to put restraint on thoughts and primarily WORDS by either of you (AG & @cilemasnob)… Humility and sticking to the thought which started this would have worked better.


    Among SOT and BOC, SOT treated the premise in a better way (my opinion) and has more layers.
    For a creative person the premise ” A blind artist making herself blind again after treatment just for the sake of her art (rather herself: She is what her work is)” is quite exciting and can arise in anyone’s mind. (Or as i read , there are such artists and they are worthy enough to get a movie made or story written on them by getting Inspired form such Human Beings)

    But i think the bone of contention here is “The Interview Sequence” .I guess that’s where @MFC’s “WEIRDLY SIMILAR ” thought comes from.
    Valid point.

    So the discussion should have been around ” This Bone of Contention”.

    A decent reply on the same by AG would have sufficed.
    But now the REPLY is the “Bone of Contention” and i feel every cinema lover is hating it.

    Also why there is no mention of 2 Other stories (which proves AG’s good work) (or are people searching the internet for similar short movies and will respond when they come up with it ?

    This accusation is not at all to you @cilemasnob). May be some attention or mention seeker will do it, some day…

    To sum up 2 questions
    1. Regarding– “The Interview Sequence”
    What other plot should the writer have written when he wanted her Blind Character to say “Why is it amazing to be not limited …… ?”
    To me talking to a journalist is a natural plot.

    2. Why did AG @recyclewala responded in such manner which is totally unworthy of him as a filmmaker an a human being ?

  56. Maine 24 saal gutkha chabaya hai says:

    Few days back you were looking for somebody to do an anti-SoT review desperately (in versova ) for your site no remember? you had also approached one of the reviewers who’s done a positive review on this blog..no? SHE/he replied saying ki mujhe to film bahut acchi lagi why write a negative one no? and then you got a certain person to do it and when the comments received did not really solve your purpose of getting the X amount of drama.. then you found this one to attack( without of course any research, matlab jiski short film thi usse tak you dint have a word) and assuming it would be the ‘it’ moment for your blog and your own personal popularity and ego boost. Now that it dint kind of do that well… with AG response and other readers making sense out of the whole episode. you have come back to your final resorts.. This is me…i am the bad guy..i expose ALL.. the biggies the smallies the indies.. therefore anything said against you becomes your self styled glorified veil. your about me update on twitter and now changing the title of this write-up says it all..

    Sure Gandhi could have replied in a better way but dikkat ye hai ki you deserved this reply very very much. because if your idea of unbiased writing on ur blog is to find ‘anybody’ and do a negative review so that there is all this drama (Funfunfun?) and when that didnt click well ( the anti-SoT review was pathetic.. if u read the comments section below..any sensible reader would know why..even the writer of the article had nothing to add later after his piece was questioned.. exactly what i felt).. then try and do it with this short film ( mind you, with no bg research at all) “Sir jhuka ke kehta hun Mr. khuda” jaake AG ke interviews hi padh leta toh tujhe samajh aata insaan ki soch kya hai.. without making a fool out of yourself, this place, and everything else just to get a name in HISTORY. Tere moonh se pehla word “Attention” nikla hoga.. Mujhe dekho, mujhe dekho!!

    The bigger problem is not with your post and Ag’s reply. Its how it gets blown out and upsets everybody and leaves a bad taste. specially for those who have no intentions like yours or the filmmaker’s. Now read the comments on this post.. you yourself did not anticipate those harsh responses.. that AG has done it before.. they are all the same.. his shorts were plagiarised.. his films are so.. and you know it..there is a huge problem in generalising that man’s whole life onto this story you broke.. and you have done exactly the same with it for others.. . It will do no harm to you.. you’ll wear your mask of the bad guy and more people will follow you.. those virtual pandits will dho their bhadas here.. Dont you feel that two people CAN think of the same things.. Collective conscious bhi kuch cheez hoti hai mere bhai.

    You are as upset as AG is about you. Its just that you have the veil on you.. the bad guy one remember which is i am must say very annoying.

    For any filmmaker it really hurts to read or hear people forming strong opinion about his/her art work when it is generated exactly the way it happened in this case.

    You will not apologise ofcourse, you will counter argue counter argue counter argue.. since its now more about you and not the blog.. its easier to defend yourself you see. But you’ll definitely not be able to get back those audiences for AG who had loved his film and have now become anti-him in some way. Or atleast now he will be brought into random conversations at coffee shops about plagiarism.. ‘Abey us Anand Gandhi ki film copied hai.. to hum kyun nahin kar sakte/hum to kar hi sakte hain/apna to banta hi hai. AG is just an example.. Anurag Basu also can never be the same for a lot of us since the barfi controversy. But he explained his stand.. AG has said his point too. And we know what both meant in the end. But who will care?

    Anand’s blog where he has given the explanation has almost 0 comments and look what your blog has got… 98 comments.. That’s all my point is. Now nobody will care really for AG’s response but SoT is ‘too’ a plagiarised/ copied/ student film se uthayi hui film will ring the bell everywhere in no time.. is it fair for the filmmaker? or his team?

    I honestly hope it doesnt do so.

    But seriously it was not at all worth it. feeling so so sad.

    P.S.- The day you’ll create something that is purely yours, you’ll understand how pissed off it feels when anyone that points a finger with plagiarized n shit.

    • moifightclub says:

      @Maine 24 saal gutkha chabaya hai – let me clarify things for you one by one. And as per your versova friends, they are surely feeding you wrong info.

      Anyway – First i wrote this post – how the film is one of the best desi indies – https://moifightclub.wordpress.com/2012/10/26/mumbai-film-festival-2012-stories-they-told/

      Then i wrote how it’s coming of age for desi indies, SoT and Miss Lovely – https://moifightclub.wordpress.com/2012/12/17/2012-rewind-coming-of-age-for-desi-indies-miss-lovely-and-ship-of-theseus/

      And after that i wrote many posts with trailers, synopsis, new trailers, demand the film blah blah blah, search here https://moifightclub.wordpress.com/?s=ship+of+theseus

      And when the film was about to release, i mailed my “usual suspects” friends to write a post on the film. i coaxed them, forced them, danced on their head. Your versova friends didn’t tell you that? And thats how this post happened – https://moifightclub.wordpress.com/2013/07/19/why-you-must-watch-ship-of-theseus-4-writers-on-1-film-with-3-stories/

      you can ask any of the writers of this post to clarify things. Of course you ignore all that and come to one “negative” post. Good.

      And after that when the film was getting great reviews, i asked my friends if anyone has a contrary opinion on the film. It’s called “contrary” view. How myopic it is to brand any criticism as “negative”. That’s the way bollywood defines it anyway. And if you are not new to the blog, you will realise i/we always value contrary views – either on Talaash, Lootera, Raanjhanaa or many other films, and its either way, not only to look for bad reviews. And no, i wasn’t looking for “desperately”. Again some of my friends who contribute here can endorse my view.

      And then came the posr by Aditya Sudarshan https://moifightclub.wordpress.com/2013/07/21/the-spiritual-life-raft-of-the-ship-of-theseus/ And Aditya can tell you if i had asked me to write it or not. Or maybe you can ask your “versova” friend to find out. But if i get an interesting post, i will surely put it. That can be positive, negative, ugly, fuck ugly – whatever you may want to see.

      for the rest of your accusation – ahahahaah i can’t explain how you run a site or blog or what’s called news or editorial. each to his own.

      All i knew was there’s a dignified way to respond and if he had done that it would have never become so big. there was a similar controversy regarding a short film and LSD. Dibakar didn’t give a fuck, nothing happened. Strange that you are worried so much. JUST IGNORE US MATE. It’s that SIMPLE. You FILMMAKER deserves better things and better place. Not this stupid sensationalist blog.

      • smit says:

        Just asking, are you aware of the irony in this situation? Anyone who is questioning you gets the response “get out of my blog.” A display of the very hubris you seem to be valiantly typing against.
        And about changing the heading of the blog, for the sake of some perverted versova patriotism, unfortunately proves Gandhi right about you. tch tch, no?
        And @Maine 24 saal gutkha chabaya hai: That is some of the best writing I have come across on this blog, simply because it has more integrity than their entire history put together.

      • AayaReAaya says:

        “First I wrote this, then I wrote that, then I danced on my friend’s head and got them to write that, then I asked for some more writing, then more” – why are you saying all this? Nobody is saying that you don’t have the right to criticize. Even if you hated the film and hadn’t promoted it vehemently, you still have the right to criticize it. You are just not taking it any forward from there. You are abusing and defending and dancing and editing your article when all you need to do is debate the merit of your article.

        2) “All i knew was there’s a dignified way to respond and if he had done that it would have never become so big. there was a similar controversy regarding a short film and LSD. Dibakar didn’t give a fuck, nothing happened. Strange that you are worried so much. JUST IGNORE US MATE. It’s that SIMPLE. You FILMMAKER deserves better things and better place. Not this stupid sensationalist blog.”
        Stop dragging the Dibakars and Motwanes into this. Treat them with some dignity. This kind of name dropping is unattractive and pesky. Stop dragging random people into this debate to please your own perversity.

    • Shweta Nath says:

      Sab ko pata hain copy hain toh hain, clear hain, par acchi copy hain. Short films ka bhi pata chal gaya. Ab khatam karo.

  57. Blacksheep says:

    this has become much more ugly than it should have. i think everyone should calm the fuck down and make peace.-i don’t think either of the parties are wrong, but one cannot decide where this discourse is going to go. as someone rightly said the bone of contention was the interview scene and we still haven’t heard a reasonable argument about it. sab chootiye ban gaye hain suddenly. everyone is looking more diminished rather than shining further after this debate. after all the truth needs to set free- speaking of philosophical dilemmas it is interesting to realize that anand gandhi is probably going through one right now about a collective conscious about unreasonable viewers, and perhaps moi also has to do some introspection. though it is fun to see a whacky cinematic community that is finally active- and is engaging so deeply- that says enough about the stature of the film and the power of the blog-🙂 now i appeal for peace from everyone.

  58. AJD says:

    stature of the film? really?

    • Blacksheep says:

      jee haan.. its not everyday these days that a film is running continuously in the theater for 3 weeks. whether anyone likes it or not the economics of it are big for a ‘meaningful,arthouse’ film.
      this entire “debate” rant means that a business of indie cinema is fiery and flourishing on its way to becoming the giant it needs to be.

      • Blacksheep says:

        and the economics are big obviously because it has found a mass connect. which is arousing emotions and people care enough to engage about it so much. this is a platform and a good one at that and it should develop more. and everyone should get bigger from this and not look at each other in a small and petty way….

      • pz says:

        Actually running of the film depends on how you market it and btw Its running to 20-25 % occupancy as I watched it last weekend only. Interestingly it has aroused two extreme emotions in terms of either loving it or completely flushing it as an insipid piece talking about long discussed mortality issues and forcing a centipede down our throats.

        • Blacksheep says:

          despite that- the fact that now indie films are getting these packaged marketing deals is just a beginning for many things to come. Ship of is one of piece of the puzzle- and a hyped kickstart of an opportunity- see the only way this indie system will work is if everyone helps each other ride on each others success- it will triplicate- and thats what we desperately need as a community- a fiery and fair circle of cinema lovers.

  59. pz says:

    I can feel that Gandhi Fan club is going in an overdrive to induce guilt onto the blog writer and force him to bog down. Its not a personal fight or the fight between the directors. People need to understand that we have a serious issue of a director whose work got a global platform having dubious past of lifting scripts passing them off as his own then why is it not possible for him to do the same in case of this film of his??? Why does this film become any different?? Is it our tendency to endorse anything and everything which got some recognition abroad to feel that we have finally arrived???

    • Blacksheep says:

      to be honest it is a tendency- and mentality, and for good reasons sometimes. we’re still a fraction of what an art house industry should be like in developed nations. conceptual art has never been acceptable on a massy level but thats changing. filmmakers like gandhi and bloggers like cilema are creating the change and gaining momentum. cilema should be proud of breaking a good story just as gandhi should be proud of his good film. both are immense achievements in changing times like ours. these achievements are being dumbed down by pettiness into the rubble of banality. make peace is what i am saying. we are a community, an extended family and should behave like one now. enough with the drama already.

      • pz says:

        Are you saying that in the spirit of brotherhood we should not question people who have suddenly become beacons of hope for so called intelligent cinema lovers?? There is so much disconnect between the film & the director which shows how shallow the man is in terms of understanding & responsibility.He is a public figure now and thats all what he is, not god who goes around saying weird things.over that the other interesting part is jumping in of anurag to defense who should not start judging people just coz they do not share the same point of view.

        • i agree with you. but their money is already on the line and their assess and their credibility as filmmakers too. i think we should ease of each other, because everyone is trying to survive. and although it is noble to be revolutionary it may not be practical sometimes! everything has to be done one step at a time and this debate has been a huge step because it raises many questions! why should it come down to a bad taste in the mouth for everyone! as it is this discourse has taken so many dimensions- we’re all using fake names and having a blast being irreverant, bitchy, philosophical, comic, idiotic, sublime and basically human- so yes, like i said the purpose of this truth, and the fact that two films can exist with the same plot, and that originality is but a unique construction of what is already there is a good thing to realise and understand as a concept in social studies! people have mentioned a collective conscious already, i am just reiterating it because kinship needs to be practiced..we’re all faceless beings communicating with each other after all, only through our thoughts and ideas- not our personalities- so yes, that needs to be given precedence in this case, for the sake of our personal growth and collective growth- and free and fair discourse and promotion of art and individuality.

          • pz says:

            So one should gather that its coming in bad taste in the mouth for the filmmaker & his fan club & affecting the monetary gains of the film so we should get practical for their pockets? No one is obliged to communicate through their personalities in terms of real names but thoughts and ideas are the ones who make up a personality.in fact, i think people have grown and still growing in terms of understanding the psychology of the audience,filmmaker and his followers.

            • Blacksheep says:

              keep the larger picture in mind. 70mm. growth will be endless.

              • pz says:

                You mean forget Morality as it doesnt sell .. Lets join hands for the greater good of no-good directors and producers feeding us mediocre cinema.

                • Blacksheep says:

                  do you suggest we take him to court then? or what? the filmmaker of BOC himself doesn’t give a rats ass. i don’t see why we have to continue. if you don’t like AG, don’t watch his films. simple. if someone doesn’t like this blog, don’t read it ! its the best that we can do with what we have!

                  • pz says:

                    Yes,why not.Someone should be taken to court because we need to take a strong stand against plagiarism, otherwise everyone from anurag basu to anand gandhi to anurag kashyap would keep feeding us with other people’s work passing them as theirs and getting applauded for it.

                    Akram hassan has said in his status on fb that he found similarities between the two films but would like to leave it to the maker’s integrity.This hardly sounds like not giving a rat’s ass.It means that he thinks that anand gandhi has made a prentious film & he doesnt want to deal with somebody so shallow like him. His response has made everyone so happy that he is not saying anything so lets forget it.how convenient !

                    Great,Again lets start saying things out of context that people are expressing their opinions not coz they feel cheated but because they dont like gandhi.grow up !

  60. jplusk says:

    “1/3” kahi kuch dino me “3/3” na ho jaaye

  61. Varun Oberoi says:

    What were we originally discussing:

    1. One part of SOT (and not the full movie) is plagiarised/inspired?

    2. Is Anand Gandhi a plagiarist?

    I think it was 1. But soon people got emotional and started arguing on 2.

    Please keep ur eye on the ball and not on the sledging.

    My advice to the warring parties:

    Anand Gandhi – u r a public figure now and shud b ready for both kinds of criticism. And dont fall in love wth ur work so much that u begin to take criticism personally. People are criticising ur work, not u.

    CilemaSnob: as t moderator of this forum, u hav to keep people’s emotions in check and make sure t discussion remains relevant. Frankly, people are interested in neither AG nor u. Nor even versova. They are here to read abt t film. So please take this discussion back to t film. Only u can do it and no one else.

    Friends of AG: dont get personal. Its okay if the movie is eerily similar to a student film. And a movie forum has t right to raise this as an issue.

    Friends of MFC: dont get personal. Even Akram doesnt hav so much issue with t storyline as u hav with it. Calm down please.

    So please can everyone gulp down their egos and hav a decent conversation? Its making everyone look bad. Everyone here is right. So no point in trying to prove the other wrong.

  62. Sagar says:

    I remember this Snobu had quit once earlier this year, resigned from blogging and how everybody insisted him to return. Well, I guess he was/is right. He did so much for SOT, I mean thousands of us knew about it because of Mofight’s sensationalist enthusiasm, and would have never becomes a fan of it because of the recco. Now everyone is pointing fingers at him, AG toh AG… AK bhi. Frustration is justified. Anyone with little dignity would quit blogging man it’s just so cringeworthy.

  63. Turncoat Anurag says:

    Thanks for this post Versova guy ! I am glad you changed the title and stayed back to engage in the discussion after the UGLY name calling from Anurag Singh Kashyap on twitter. This is what i expected and not the threat to shut the blog, as you did during VM episode.

    Clearly something in the post touched a nerve for the RECYCLEWALA director, else i see no reason for starting personal attacks from his end. It is a good film, and if he was convinced himself that he had not plagiarized, he would differed with your POV, by explaining his POV just as VM did.

  64. copytom says:

    Did I miss something here?? suddenly everyone is talking abt peace…lol…Gandhi ji ke bhakt ban gye hain sab …ROFL ! Gandhi finally managed to subdue Hassan and send him to pakistan??? I must say, History repeats itself !!!!!!!!

  65. moifightclub says:

    Bhaiyoon aur behenoo, is this going to go on like this? Now i feel that we all really have so much rage inside us we might need a real fight club to take it out. Putting my final words. Hope it ends here. or should i lock the comments section? you guys aren’t bored?

    It was as simple as i saw the film twice, found a short film which looked similar to one of the stories. Put a post, it could be completely coincidence, conscious or sub-conscious plagiarism – everything is possible. I raised my doubts, then i read that instead of clarifying about the film, AG has said something about me and this blog and he has all the rights to say so (because he might have got pissed off), then of course i got pissed off, got nasty changed the heading, made the accusation direct.

    And this is not the first time that i am seeing him react like this for questioning his film. And so i have no intention to patch up with him or anything like that, i have never liked the person, have always appreciated his films.

    • pori says:

      @ moifightclub

      I saw the film yesterday and am shocked too see this. Constantly while watching i was thinking it that it looked so borrowed. so now I understand everyone appreciates new films and filmmakers, Anand somehow managed to show the film to Kiran and that was pure luck and the main thing. it got wider distribution. Before that it was just another average festival film. I really feel that it is this blog which made the film go up on Twitter. As all of us have noticed, the film doesn’t do anything new. It is just a feel good film.

      There were not many people in the hall as they are making out to be. BA pass is doing good business everywhere, earning more money than any film made recently with the inde spirit, but it is not showing that impatience and bombarding people with pressure to like and tweet and self proclaiming revolution.

      I saw BMB (which is a badly made film) and people clapped after the film, doesn’t make it a great film. It is no doubt that it is inspired, as the story line is precisely same. Exactly Precisely the same. No one can deny it. And it is a dense idea, loosing vision by gaining vision, and that interview scene – and there is more to it if you look closely, it does not look co- incidental. i don’t intend to see the shorts as the post/comments suggest they are also borrowed ideas. The inflated balloon of borrowed ideas has burst.

  66. […] full of themselves but do love the movies for all their attitude) put up a post in which they pointed out similarities between one of the stories in SoT and a short film by Akram Hassan, Gandhi went a little […]

  67. […] full of themselves but do love the movies for all their attitude) put up a post in which they pointed out similarities between one of the stories in SoT and a short film by Akram Hassan, Gandhi went a little […]

  68. […] full of themselves but do love the movies for all their attitude) put up a post in which they pointed out similarities between one of the stories in SoT and a short film by Akram Hassan, Gandhi went a little […]

  69. Nowhere else to put this …

    Yesterday morning , my son came running to me … Papa … Aami Bangla te Badtameez dil sunechi (Papa … i just heard Badtameez dil in bengali) … he had heard Anjan Dutt’s Ranjana Aami aar ashbona … the best part is he is not even 5 years old … how the hell did he come to a conclusion ? Plagiarism / Blatant copying can be caught by some one that small !!!

  70. su says:

    “Hassan’s only comment has been a Facebook post where he’s written that rather than say anything, he’s going to “leave it to the maker’s integrity”-

    Mr. Hassan but does anyone understand that word “integrity” in this god forsaken world!!!

  71. copytom says:


    IBNLIVE picked up the story too but has little intelligent to say about the issue…

  72. blindplagiarism says:

    concept of a blind artist photographer …now thats not imagination….there are real life examples…but the blind man/woman (i stress on the woman protagonist) regaining eye sight and losing vision….are there real life examples of it ????….. moreover if the short film has the artist being interviewed just before her cornea transplant operation ..and then a close up of her’s where in the short film she remains silent to the question …whereas in ship of theseus she replies i am waiting to start my journey as a photographer ( or real photographer, i have forgotten) …now are there real life examples of such a scene????…and my final argument is from what i have reading above is that the director did a lot research before making this part of the film and quoting a comment above…
    “1. In several interviews, the makers of the film have mentioned clearly that Evgen Bavcar, his life and work was the starting point for them, (DoP Pankaj Kumar was inspired by his photography, and hence now shares the story credit in the film for this idea)
    .At a recent Q & A in Bangalore (where I was fortunately present), the director spoke about all his references for the story – they were Daniel Kisch, Ben Underwood, Evgen Bavcar, the ideas on echolocation from Richard Dawkins’ The Blind Watchmaker, the LA Blind Photographers’ collective the work of the neuroscientists Oliver Sacks and V S Ramachandran in the field of the colour blind and neuroaesthetics, respectively.””

    my question is if so much of references were taken by the makers and so much of research done how come they missed out bumping into this short film….

  73. copytom says:


    Just saw this….Is it a war happening or what or just a publicity stunt for Ship of Theseus ??? The way empty theatres seats were losing money for UTV, I think this whole thing is paid…The way Akram Hassan is quiet, Its never ever happened in India that people don’t take mileage out of the whole thing…has he been paid too???

  74. “It’s not where you take things from — it’s where you take them to.”
    ― Jean-Luc Godard

    मुझे यह नहीं समझ आता कि हम यहाँ लोग “ओरिजनल आइडिया” को लेकर आबशेस्ड क्यों है ? गोदार्द का ऊपर दिया गया कोट तो बहुत फेमस है ही. जो हमारे अंग्रेजी दा मित्रों के काम आएगा.

    मैं यह तो यह सोचता हूँ कि अगर आप लोग तुलसीदास के जमाने में होते और उनकी रामचरित मानस की समीक्षा कर रहे होते उन्हें फांसी ही दे देते. तुलसीदास ने तो कई पराने दोहों-चौपाइयों को हूबहू अनुवाद किया है. आप लोगों को हिन्दी सुनने की आदत तो है लेकिऩ शायद पढ़ने की आदत नहीं इसलिए ज्यादा उदारहरण नहीं दे रहा हूँ.

    मैं यह भी जानना चाहता हूँ कि अगर मैँ भी ठीक इसी कहानी पर एक फिल्म बनाना चाहूँ तो क्या इसलिए न बनाऊँ कि किसी हसन या गाँधी ने पहले से उसे बना दिया है !

    जो लोग एडवर्टिजमेंट या बॉक्स ऑफिस धन्धे में हैं वो ऐसा कहें तो समझ आता है लेकिन जो लोग सिनेमा को आर्ट समझते हैं उन्हें सोकाल्ड ओरिजनल आइडिया को लेकर इस कदर पागल क्यों होना चाहिए !

    सिनेमा का आइडिया किसी रेस में मिलने वाली ट्राफी है जिसमें अकरम फर्स्ट आ गया तो अब आनन्द सेकेण्ड ही आ सकता है….

    मैं तो कहता हूँ कि एक ही आइडिया या कहानी पर पचास लोगों को फिल्म बनाने दो…ताकि पता चले कि उन पचासों में से कौन सिनेमा मीडियम को बेहतर समझता है.

    अगर दुनिया कई हज़ार साल से पात्रों और जगह का नाम बदल-बदल कर लगभग एक सी प्रेम कहानियां लिख सकती है तो आंखे खो चुकी कलाकार लड़की पे आठ-दस फिल्में भी बन जाएँ तो क्या गुनाह है…..

    शिप ऑफ थीसियस मुझे सिर्फ अच्छी फ़िल्म लगी थी. अच्छी से ज्यादा कुछ नहीं. हिन्दी के एंटरटेनमेंट प्रोडक्ट (100 करोड़ मार्का वाली फ़िल्मों के लिए सुधीर मिश्रा के शब्द) से तुलना करके इसे महान सिनेमा साबित करने की कोशिशें तो बचकानी ही हैं.

    पहले मैं यह नहीं समझ पाया था कि इस ब्लॉग के कई लेखकों इस फ़िल्म के इतने दीवाने क्यों है और अब मैं यह भी नहीं समझ पा रहा हूँ यही ब्लॉग सो काल्ड 1/3 copied को लेकर इस तरह बावला क्यों है …

    इस ब्लॉग को मैं पढ़ता रहा हूँ. मुझे लगता है कि सिनेमा के जानकार लोग इस पर लिखते रहे हैं. बर्फी के मामले में भी यह मुद्दा उठा था और शायद पहले भी उठा हो…तो क्या यह बेहतर नहीं है कि फाइट क्लब एक बार इसी पर डिबेट चला ले कि ओरिजनल आइडिया क्या होता है या सिनेमा के लिए ओरिजनल आइडिया के क्या मायने है ? चूँकि साहित्य में ऐसी बहसें हो चुकी हैं तो उन बहसों को इस बहस के लिए आसानी से रिफरेंस प्वाइंट बनाया जा सकता है.

  75. Jeet balraj says:

    Ahhhh. Spent an hour reading all the comments. This situation is a perfect case study for ‘Baat ka Batangad’. A genuine question was raised and Anand Gandhi chose to retaliate in a downright personal remark. Reddit jaise platform pe mat chale jana Anand bhaiya, phat jaegi aapki sawaal padh ke!

  76. Tapan says:

    AHA !!! Finally I found from where all the stories are INSPIRED from in Ship of theseus…

    3. BROKER: 21 GRAMS

    If anyone needs any clarification on the above,can ask me and I will explain in detail..

    Ab to yeh film pacca hi SOT ho gyi…🙂

    • Golgotai says:

      Blind photographer is fine… How Gandhi and 21 Grams??

      • Tapan says:

        golgotai- The monk in the film had same dress,get up & way of walking as Mahatma gandhi.Mahatma gandhi was against medicines and didnot even let his wife have them.he did dandi marches,walked everywhere.also he had an episode of talking to a journalist who followed him everywhere like the young lawyer disciple.also he lost weight when he fasted but didnot let people help him too much just like the monk.these all things are available online.anyone can check.

        waise if anand gandhi was so hateful of animal torture,why did he show it and how did he film it???? torture….AND look at his picture on blog..bechaari billi ko kaise pakda hai iss aadamkhor ne…

  77. rajat sharma says:

    wtf did i just see? this is getting out of hand


  78. Smita says:

    For me Ship of Theseus was a particularly good cinematic experience and even though I am a student of screenplay writing, I believe that cinema is not just Story. Good cinema takes the story beyond the ‘what happens next’ moment which the director has been able to do.

  79. Cinebeta says:

    After seeing both the films I feel Bereft of Colours represents the core idea of Ship of Theseus far more than Ship of Theseus itself. The opening slate reads The ship of Theseus is a paradox that raises the question of whether an object which has had all its components replaced remains fundamentally the same object. Akram Hassan’s short film extensively explores the girls ineffectiveness after the transplant, which is not the case with SoT which focused mostly on her talents before the transplant.

    Also in case Gandhi got in some way inspired by the short film he should have gone all the way. The blind artists talent was wholesome and independent. She used touch and feel to put her art on canvas. Whereas the blind photographer had all kinds of technical gadgets and puppy boyfriend to help her, not to forget that clicking a picture without seeing is a matter of chance. True talent lied with the painter. Telling her story would be more organic.

    The second story again adamantly explains the philosophies of man refraining from replacement. But your core idea is a persons journey after the transplant. All it had were those big bookish words and Gandhi type resolve which the character conveniently gave up on and asked for a liver and his story ended.

    Only the third story stuck to the core idea.

  80. Bhavya says:

    Anand Gandhi has often been accused of plagiarism. In his recent interview to a magazine he has cleared some air out.

  81. […] Vacuous Versova – The film filmmaker made Versova world famous on FB and Twitter. It started here, and made headlines […]

  82. […] buzz. However, the relationship between Gandhi and his e-champions soured a little when the blog F.I.G.H.T.C.L.U.B. posted a link to a student film that had plot similarities with one of the three stories in Ship of […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s