(Response to my friends, when my daughter was 2 months old.)
Darling daughter knows no birthdays.
Many more months before she says,
a very happy birthday father.
Till then will not celebrate rather.
So, have no plans as such.
For wishing me, thank you much.
Thought I will give some info about this movie, as it is shot near Bhopal in a village called Bhadwai. Well, there is nothing to boast about that village. It is a regular village, lost in time and memory of a billion Indians. Much like any Indian village. However, what is interesting is that it brings out raw bundelkhand (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundelkhand) on the big screen.
Here is an article in outlook - http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?266468
I always wanted people living in cities to visit villages. To see life in dusty, out of power and wood burning houses. Ever thought what is going on in the brown tile covered house, while passing on a highway. Where does a narrow (mud) road off a state highway take you. Just to visit a village out of curiosity.
Although, it makes me think that people won’t go to villages to see the backward, slow (halted) pace of life. They will go for a better reason – in search of innocence. That is while it lasts.
There are a lot of similarities between Holmes, Poirot, and Foyle, but what is more interesting are the differences. Since similarities are obvious, I won’t write about them, but having said that I couldn’t stop thinking about similarities. So, for the sake of satiating my itch, here you go. All of them lived in Britain, though Poirot was a Belgian. They had an immaculate sense of dressing, were terse in expression, and stoic. Seems like these are much needed qualities of a detective.
 |  |  |
Similarities aside, I associate these detectives to different stages of my life. Started out with Holmes, moved to Poirot and currently engrossed in Foyle. How I still remember as a kid when I first read a Holmes adventure. I think it was ‘The speckled band’. Reading it at night was frightening, but at the same time couldn’t wait to get my hands on more stories. And by the time I was done reading Sherlock Holmes I felt that he was the best detective out there, but then came along Poirot. It was in early nineties, when ‘Dordarshan’ (Indian public TV channel) telecasted Poirot series. At that time I couldn’t pick up a lot of heavy English accent, but it caught my imagination. (It seems like I was a sucker for detective series from early on.) And it wasn’t until I read Poirot’s adventures I realized that I am about to leave Holmes behind. The reason for fascination seemed to be that I had seen the guy on TV before and the plots were more intricate. I stuck to it for a while, as I had a lot to read, including Miss Marple (I find her to be more Foyle like than Poirot). Then there was a lull, which broke recently with an opportunity to watch Poirot in action again and start on a new one, Foyle.
From start Foyle was different in terms of format, and the story - which had layers. Unlike one-dimensional adventures of Holmes and Poirot. I want to digress here briefly – recently when I saw the Poirot series after so many years I found the opening music to be haunting. Whenever I hear it, it fills me with memories of bygone days. (Back) I watched both Poirot and Foyle, but soon lost interest in Poirot. Although there is no book on Foyle - which I would have liked to read – the format of the series told a lot about him. In age he was oldest among the three, and I think Poirot would be in between the two (Well, they lived in different times). For Foyle, being a detective was a job and not a hobby, though all of them made a living out of their work. But the most striking difference was the character portrayed on screen. Foyle is in no hurry to nab the criminal, he takes his time to figure out the reasons. Not only that, the reasons are simple and convincing to the point that it seems less fictional. The stories are intricate, with more than one thing going on. Added to that the backdrop is of World War II, where (mostly powerful) people try to get away with war as an alibi, but Foyle is steadfast in his belief, that justice at home is as important as the fight in battlefield.
The approach to solving a case is yet another important differences. Holmes is overtly (sometimes comic) deductive and animated, and most of the time ends with laying a bait and waiting for the criminal to strike again. Whereas, Poirot is more about judging the character (psychology) and inquisitions. Always ending in a dramatic grand finale, where he puts on a performance to show his brilliance. Compared to Homes and Poirot, Foyle seems like a workhorse, digging his way through people and circumstances, and relying on character judgment and interviews (rather with much more persuasion). Foyle on time to time relies on his assistant, Milner, who is actually of help compared to Watson and Hastings (both have a lot of similarities).
Poirot’s intellectual pride beams, since as a Belgian he made it on his own in a foreign country with his sharp wits. Whereas, Holmes doesn’t seem to care what others think, and Foyle is too humble to even mention it. For the first pair solving a case is a personal challenge, to see it as a contest between them and the criminal. Whereas, for Foyle it is a moral issue and a duty, and that brings a lot of dilemmas in the story. This also gives him a common touch, than being a genius. And that might be because as we know it, he has a family, but we don’t know that about Holmes and Poirot. As if it seems they have something to hide from their past. Moreover, strangely enough we don’t know much about the women in their lives. Somehow all of them seem to be indifferent (but not dislike) to the opposite sex, with exceptions of very few passing moments. Understandably, Foyle is beyond that age and frankly, I won’t care if he falls for an old lady; while, for a rotund Poirot a charming lady will be hard to come by. That leaves Holmes as a suitable bachelor, with a promising romantic plot with a twist.
By now it is obvious that I have a recently acquired liking for Foyle, which makes me wonder about two things. One, what if I had come across them in the reverse order, and two, is someone going to better Foyle. I think I know the answer to the second one and it is positive. And I am waiting for it.
(Here in this blog, I am in no way suggesting any hierarchy of these characters. I don’t have any predisposition for the reader with different preferences, nor am I passing a judgment.)
Picture source: Google Image Search.
