Connect with us

Pakistan

Nawaz Sharif’s return and incumbent government

Written

on

London, the capital of the United Kingdom, has always remained the centre of attraction for Pakistani politicians.

Imran Yaqub Khan Profile Imran Yaqub Khan

Whether it was Nawaz Sharif, Benazir Bhutto (late) or General Pervez Musharraf remained power, Pakistani politicians especially opposition leaders used to stay in London for one reason or the other. Benazir Bhutto spent most of her time in exile in London. Likewise Nawaz Sharif and family departed for Saudi Arabia and then Britain after 1999 military quo.

Nawaz Sharif was sent to jail in the light of a court’s decision soon after the PTI government was formed in 2018. Upon being ill in the jail Nawaz was shifted to the Lahore’s Services Hospital. The statements both from the government and PML-N leaders sent an alert that the former prime minister’s life was in danger if he was not airlifted to outside Pakistan. A dedicated team of doctors and Punjab Health Minister Dr Yasmin Rasihd kept briefing media about the health condition of Nawaz on regular basis.

In November 2019, Nawaz was finally airlifted to London by younger brother Mian Shehbaz Sharif and Dr Adnan (Nawaz’s doctor) with the approval of Prime Minister Imran Khan. Shehbaz signed the guarantee papers that Nawaz would return to Pakistan after his treatment.

A new pandora box of allegations engulfed Pakistani politics soon after the departure of Nawaz. The government though failed to stop Nawaz from going abroad for treatment, but the sitting ministers began their political commentaries to “target illness” of Nawaz. PM Imran Khan was also seen declaring Nawaz a “liar and absconder” in his public meetings and media talks. Nawaz was alleged to have flown abroad with fictitious medical reports.

If Nawaz Sharif flew abroad while befooling the government of Sardar Usman Buzdar, the health minister and the entire government and health machinery, the prime minister should be held responsible for it. The government then vowed to bring the former prime minister and court absconder Nawaz Sharif back to the country. The letters written to the British government by the prime minister’s office for the purpose also proved a futile exercise.

Then another news came from London recently that the application of extension in visa of Nawaz had been rejected. Though his (Nawaz) visa was still declared legal, Nawaz moved an appeal against the decision of the British Home Office. According to British legal experts, the decision about the appeal could take up to two-year time. Nawaz Sharif will have an option to move to the London High Court if his appeal is rejected even by the Immigration Tribunal.

According to law and immigration experts, Nawaz is not bound to travel back home even after the refusal of his visa extension. The legal matters take even years to decide. The news of visa extension refusal has created a stir in the political circles of the country and it appears the government ministers and advisers have got another opportunity to grill Nawaz Sharif.

Federal Minister Fawad Ch commented that Nawaz had obtained visa while lying as he is not ill. He advised the PML-N stalwart to get temporary visa from the Pakistani embassy and face legal cases on his return. Nawaz’s free movement in London reflects “he is perfectly alright”. “Nawaz could face punishment even in the UK if he makes lies to get extension in his visa.”

According to state minister Farrukh Habib, Nawaz Sharif is now an absconder with the expired passport. He should come forward and face cases against him. “It’s shame on a former prime minister who is absconder. He should come back and face imprisonment.”

On the other hand, PML-N President Mian Shehbaz Sharif has said the ongoing politics on three-time premier of Pakistan is a senseless and inhuman attitude. An appeal has been filed keeping in view the legal requirements and that Nawaz could stay in London till the decision. It was the government’s decision to shift Nawaz to London as his treatment was not possible in Pakistan. He will return to Pakistan on his doctors’ advice.

If everyone recall, the same hue and cry was raised when Nawaz’s passport was cancelled by the federal government, but the matter died down as there is no agreement between Pakistan and the UK regarding exchange of prisoners. A joint draft was prepared for mutual exchange of prisoners later, but no consensus reached on its implementation.

Then premier Imran Khan had announced that he would demand the return of Nawaz Sharif to Pakistan during his visit to the UK and meeting with his counterpart. But no official invitation has been received so far by the PM’s office.

The politics of a politician is always in danger when he or she starts following the moves of opponents instead of own strategy. But Nawaz Sharif knows the situation very well. He understands well that his return is like a trump card that he would play on his own conditions rather his opponents’. The most suitable time for his (Nawaz) return is when atmosphere for elections will be ripe in Pakistan. Nawaz could achieve maximum political gains in the same time period and could settle matters with the establishment in a better way!  

Continue Reading

Regional

Back to Black is the worst of bad musical biopics

Thanks to this new movie about Amy Winehouse, the bar for movies about musicians remains in hell.

Published by Web Desk

Published

on

Since the first stills of actress Marisa Abela sporting winged eyeliner and a matted beehive emerged online, the new Amy Winehouse biopic Back to Black has been met with mockery, if not total dread, from fans of the late British singer.

It wasn’t just that Abela bears little resemblance to Winehouse, dressed in what looks like a last-minute Halloween costume. Given the amount of shoddy musical biopics that are being released ad nauseam, it seemed like an inadequate medium to explore the musician, who died of alcohol poisoning at 27 in 2011. Since its initial release in the UK, several critics have already affirmed these hesitations.

Making a biopic is always a delicate art form. By nature, these films are primed to be over-dissected and picked apart for historical inaccuracies, flawed impressions, and limited perspectives. In the case of Back to Black, though, the depiction of Winehouse rings both false and strikingly convenient for the people who were involved in her life.

As Jason P. Frank and Rebecca Alter write in Vulture, the film spends too much time “trying to reclaim her as wholesome,” against the tabloids’ vilifying coverage. More significantly though, it fails to address the ways the UK’s sexist media and the people around her contributed to her demise. As a result, director Sam Taylor-Johnson and screenwriter Matt Greenhalgh end up placing most of the responsibility for Winehouse’s downfall on her fragile shoulders.

Needless to say, any attempt to dramatize Amy Winehouse’s life was going to generate polarizing opinions. But Back to Black, along with a recent slew of biopics, makes one curious as to what extent viewers must suspend their expectations and fan knowledge to enjoy a film based on true events.

Biopics can never fully encapsulate a person’s life. But Back to Black is an attempt to erase history.

Actress Marisa Abela singing as Amy Winehouse in the 2024 musical biopic “Back to Black.”
Marisa Abela singing as Amy Winehouse in the 2024 film “Back to Black.”
Courtesy of Focus Features

Winehouse’s career — hampered by addiction and bulimia — is hardly the stuff of a crowd-pleasing popcorn movie. Her story never stood a chance within the confines of the genre. Biopics, particularly from major studios, have to shrink a person’s life into a palatable enough story that will attract the largest audience and generate the most money possible. Even with its R rating and a melodramatic flair, Back to Black is shockingly sanitized, neglecting to capture just how ugly and violent her experience actually was.

In Back to Black, Winehouse is strangely isolated from the media blitz that surrounded her life. Beginning with her early songwriting days as a teen, the script remains focused on the intimate familial and romantic dynamics that would make the biggest impact on her as an artist — specifically, her relationships with her grandmother Cynthia (Lesley Manville), her father Mitch (Eddie Marsan), and, most of all, her ex-husband Blake Fielder-Civil, who would serve as the muse for her hit album, Back to Black.

Somehow, her most notable musical collaborators, Mark Ronson and Salaam Remi, are merely footnotes in this story. The movie isn’t really interested in Winehouse’s creative process or inspiration either, aside from name-dropping some of her favorite soul artists.

Even at the height of her visibility, Winehouse spends almost all of the movie in London, specifically Camden Town, visiting loved ones, performing for small crowds in pubs, and stumbling drunkenly through the street. Aside from a notably disastrous performance at the Glastonbury Festival, you wouldn’t know that Winehouse performed shows and made public appearances outside of the UK and had many friends, including other British celebrities and musicians.

Needless to say, zooming out and portraying Winehouse as a public person would require addressing the intrusive, predatory treatment she faced from the media. At the height of her insobriety — which spawned multiple drunken live performances, arrests, and paparazzi photos of her looking bloodied and disheveled or openly doing drugs — she became not just a punchline, but practically a meal ticket for journalists and paparazzi. Tabloids mocked her body without any consideration of what appeared to be an eating disorder. Meanwhile, other outlets and comedians counted down her remaining days alive. Even after her death, she continued to be a punchline. Controversially, actor Neil Patrick Harris hosted a Halloween party a few months after her death with a meat platter labeled with her name and resembling a rotting corpse.

In Back to Black, though, moments of Winehouse being chased by paparazzi or publicly mocked are fleeting, or else noticeably absent from the storyline. Audio of comedian George Lopez announcing her Grammy nominations in 2008 is played in the film but cuts out before he makes a joke about her addiction struggles to the audience’s chuckles. Additionally, her rare encounters with the paparazzi in the film don’t totally represent what an invasive presence they were in her life, particularly as she began to publicly spiral.

In fact, the most devastating interaction she has with the press is at the end of the film when a paparazzo provokes the recently sober singer by asking about Fielder-Civil’s newborn child with his new girlfriend. The movie is rather ham-fisted in conveying Winehouse’s unfulfilled desires to be a mother, as if it’s a compelling sign of virtue for the troubled singer. That said, she immediately becomes heartbroken at the mere mention of her ex’s offspring — so much so that the film frames the moment as the cause of her relapse, prompting her death.

The men in Winehouse’s life are strangely given a pass.

Another problem comes along in the film with the inaccurate portrayal of the men who had the biggest impact on Winehouse’s life — her father, Mitch, and her ex-husband, Fielder-Civil. After more than a decade of tasteless interviews and attempts to profit off Winehouse’s memory, it’s hard to view either of these men in a favorable light. Still, the movie positions them as collateral damage in Winehouse’s path of destruction. As Back to Black tells it, these men were simply trying to oblige her irrational needs, not purposely enable them.

Not only do these characterizations feel funky to anyone who’s familiar with their public antics — for example, Fielder-Civil has been accused of selling details of his and Winehouse’s love story to the tabloids — their soft depictions, in comparison to hers, feel like an extension of the same sexism she experienced in the press.

For instance, Winehouse’s relationship with Fielder-Civil in the film lacks some much-needed nuance regarding the troubling amount of power he held over her life. While Fielder-Civil has a large presence in the film, his contribution to her ruin — he admitted that he introduced her to heroin, crack cocaine, and self-harming — and the ways he seemed to prey on her weakness are glaringly understated. For the most part, he’s framed as an earnest and charming bad boy who dabbles in hard substances, which Winehouse just happened to fall into alongside him. Furthermore, as Little White Lies writer Rogan Graham notes, it’s questionable that Taylor-Johnson “goes out of her way to depict Amy’s first time trying hard drugs as an occasion when she’s alone.”

Back to Black doesn’t have much to say about the role of her father in Winehouse’s downfall either. Despite Mitch walking out on her family as a child, Amy shared a strong bond with her father, which she commemorated with a “Daddy’s Girl” tattoo on her left arm. In the film, he’s portrayed as the biggest advocate of her singing career, protective against the other men in her life and excessively doting. While he may have been these things at certain points in her life, the 2015 documentary Amy illustrates a more complicated portrait of their relationship.

In the Oscar-winning film, directed by Asif Kapadia, Winehouse’s friends recount her father rebuffing their pleas to send Winehouse to rehab. (This moment isn’t portrayed with much reflection in Back to Black, rather just an anecdote leading up to her hit single “Rehab.”) Amy also revisits the time Mitch bombarded his daughter with a camera crew while in St. Lucia, where she fled from the public eye after getting sober in 2008. The footage was for a 2010 Channel 4 documentary called My Daughter Amy, where he, in part, expressed his own frustrations and regrets in dealing with his daughter’s addiction. After the film aired, Winehouse tweeted that the documentary was “embarrassing.”

Considering that Winehouse’s family didn’t authorize or have any say in Back to Black, according to Taylor-Johnson — although, they have endorsed it — it’s even more shameful that the film spares him from any sort of skepticism regarding the way he maneuvered in his daughter’s life. Instead, perfunctory scenes of Mitch inquiring about her weight and rushing her to a rehab facility (after he initially said no) feel like concerted PR.

Will musical biopics ever make us happy?

With all of its missteps and murky intentions, Back to Black might just be the tipping point in a prevalent conversation about the function of musical biopics and what we should demand from them.

As early as 1946, when Cary Grant played legendary composer Cole Porter in Night and Day, musical biopics have been a huge profit generator for both the film and music industries. Following the Oscar-winning and box-office-breaking success of the 2018 Queen biopic Bohemian Rhapsody, Hollywood — and musical artists looking to hike up their streaming numbers — have co-signed a sudden stream of lackluster or, in the case of Back to Black, utterly egregious biopics. In the past five years alone, movies offering conservative portrayals of Bob Marley, Elton John, Judy Garland, Whitney Houston, and Aretha Franklin have left much to be desired. As with comic-book movies as of late, it’s hard to engage with these films as much more than cash grabs coming down Hollywood’s IP conveyor belt.

This barrage of big-studio biopics is emblematic of a formula that’s proven to be commercially successful and easy to replicate. The expected melodramatic flourishes and rousing moments that make up these movies have become so obvious that they’ve inspired a subgenre of biopic parodies, like This Is Spinal Tap, Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story, and Pop Star: Never Stop Never Stopping.

When the projects transcend their conventions, they’re often the experimental work of arthouse directors, like Todd Haynes, who telegraphed Karen Capenter’s anorexia with Barbie dolls in The Karen Carpenter Story: Superstar and portrayed Bob Dylan with multiple actors in I’m Not There. (There’s also his equally good fake rock biopic, Velvet Goldmine.) Other times, they’re elevated by dynamic performances, like Jessica Chastain and Michael Shannon playing Tammy Wynette and George Jones in Showtime miniseries George and Tammy. In general, though, there’s a seemingly impossible problem in having actors embody musical giants — like Winehouse — who we connect to because of their unique talent, personalities, and overall flair, which simply can’t be replicated.

In a post-Me Too Hollywood, there did feel like a more obvious lane for a Winehouse biopic to occupy that would’ve at least made it feel more truthful. Many recent biographical projects outside of the musical subgenre have served the specific purpose of redeeming women from harmful public narratives and providing empathy for their experiences in the limelight. One could argue that the Marilyn Monroe biopic Blonde was a (very poor) attempt to make audiences sympathize with an actress whose life was ridden with turmoil — although, the lurid fabrications in the film complicate this. The Pablo Larrain film Spencer, a similarly experimental take on Princess Diana, shed light on her eating disorder and feelings of imprisonment as a member of the royal family. Another arthouse film, Sofia Coppola’s Priscilla, offers a more meditative counterpiece to Baz Luhrmann’s technicolored extravaganza Elvis, which neglected to address the King of Rock ‘n’ Roll’s abusive treatment of his then-wife, Priscilla Presley.

At this point, maybe it would’ve been reductive if Back to Black was mostly about Winehouse’s victimization. Amy already does a decent job of laying that out. Plus, these cultural reappraisals have become formulaic in their own way. However, illuminating the patriarchal forces that helped derail her life would at least provide some context for her fragility, rather than positioning her as an inevitable trainwreck destined to happen.

One could easily imagine a more compelling film interested in exploring the way Winehouse’s bulimia and the insecurity she dealt with affected her life and relationships. Instead, Back to Black adds up to nothing more than Daily Mail headlines.

Continue Reading

Pakistan

Naqvi Saudi ambassador discuss issues of mutual interest

The two leaders also discussed the visit of the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Muhammad bin Salman, to Pakistan

Published by Noor Fatima

Published

on

Islamabad: Federal Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi Saturday arrived at the Embassy of Saudi Arabia, where the Saudi Ambassador Nawaf bin Saeed Ahmed Al-Maliki, welcomed him.

On this occasion, Federal Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi met with the Ambassador of Saudi Arabia, Nawaf bin Saeed Ahmed Al-Maliki and discussed matters of mutual interest, Pak-Saudi relations and increasing cooperation in various fields.

The Ambassador of Saudi Arabia assured full support for the improvement of Islamabad Police while Federal Minister Naqvi thanked the Ambassador of Saudi Arabia for arranging accommodation for Frontier Corps (FC) officers.

In the meeting between the two leaders, the visit of the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Muhammad bin Salman, to Pakistan was also discussed, while the travel documents for the Muslims of Burma were also discussed.

Speaking on this occasion, Mohsin Naqvi stated that the historical brotherly friendship of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan is turning into beneficial economic relations. The recent visit of Saudi Arabian investors to Pakistan was very successful, the people of Pakistan are looking forward to the visit of Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia.

The Federal Minister of Interior added that the nation has paved the way for the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Muhammad bin Salman. His visit to Pakistan will prove to be a game changer in the relations between the two countries. Saudi Arabia supported Pakistan in every difficult situation. Currently, the relations between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are reaching new heights.

On this occasion, Saudi Ambassador Nawaf bin Saeed stated that they will provide all possible support to develop Islamabad police on modern lines. Saudi Arabia attaches great importance to its relations with Pakistan.

Continue Reading

Pakistan

PM forms Economic Advisory Council

According to the notification, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif will head the EAC

Published by Noor Fatima

Published

on

Islamabad: Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif Saturday formed the Economic Advisory Council (EAC).

Finance Division has issued notification of Economic Advisory Council.

According to the notification, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif will head the Economic Advisory Council, the Economic Advisory Council includes Jahangir Tareen, Saqib Shirazi and Shahzad Saleem.

According to the notification issued, Musadik Zulqarnain, Dr. Ijaz Nabi, Asif Peer, Ziad Bashir and Salman Ahmed are also part of the advisory council.

Economic Advisory Council is a non-constitutional and independent body formed to economically advice to Government of Pakistan, specifically the Prime Minister.

Continue Reading

Trending