u/Thandavarayan

Good day

Am looking to study some movies where the director has successfully made the location or setting a crucial part of the story

Not pretty landscapes or romantic Kashmir stuff, but there the liberation is actually a character

Some i know of

Kaun - a claustrophobic and excellent thriller with Urmila and Manoj Bajpayee set in just one house

Guna - the caves where the couple take refuge plays a key part

Two movies with Fahadh Fasil set in just one house. He's a serial killer in one, and a trapped landslide victim in another

Yaadein (the Sunil Dutt one) - Just one character the entire movie. A man all alone in his house, thinking the worst thoughts

Any others you can recommend please? Thanks in advance

As a long time fan of quality horror movies, I've always felt that they are the highest test of a director's mettle and ability

I'm not talking about lazy and shitty jump scare and gore movies. Genuine Hollywood classics like Halloween, The Thing, Jaws and Black Christmas had hardly any gore or jump scares. They relied on the full toolkit of the director's skills to be successful. Unsettling slow burn thrill, little gore, great use of BGM to elevate the tension, fantastic camerawork, tactful pauses and use of silence, use of minor characters and side actors

As someone who has become immensely frustrated with the decline of Mani Ratnam as a director, I've always maintained he should try the horror genre to re-invigorate himself. And to just have some fun in the process

The same applies to other top directors who have burnt out and become stale as well

For some reason, top directors have shied away from horror in India. There's some stigma against it. Which is weird,.because we are a very superstitious country and have a great tradition of supernatural folklore

Thoughts on this? I would have loved to see a Satyajit Ray or Anurag Kashyap horror. The only people who have attempted it are Ram Gopal Varma, and briefly, Bharathi Raja

Good day

Was just curious about career progression paths and options for serving officers in the forces

As we know, the pyramid of promotion opportunities for officers gets narrower and narrower past the rank of say Major or Lt Col. Not everyone is going to become a Colonel. Not every Colonel is going to become a Brigadier and so on

Motivated officers who don't get a promotion take retirement and pursue their opportunities in the private sector

But what happens to those who don't retire? Do they get the option to stay in current grade permanently and indefinitely until mandatory retirement at 60? Or do the forces terminate their services at some point and bid them goodbye?

In the US and other countries, they have an "Up or Out" system whereby if you don't get promoted for a while, the army can send you away. This is done to maintain the age profile of the forces, and to prevent 60yo colonels from filling up all the posts and preventing young and worthy officers from advancing

Do we follow the same system here?

Thanks in advance

Good day. Am only asking this out of curiosity, as my medical knowledge is quite limited. So is my knowledge of military medical nuances

Why do so many militaries have a dedicated Dental Corps or Command, when a general Medical Corps already exists?

Am asking this from the Indian context, where the Dental and Medical Corps are independent bodies. The US also has a separate Dental Command which is subordinate to the Medical Command

I'm sure they have very good technical or administrative reasons for doing so, was just curious what those reasons are

They are headed by high ranking general officers, with a plethora of staff and senior officers. Would there not be a lot of duplication of staff between the two bodies? Heavy overheads. A Lt General is the dental head in India, for example

I realise dentistry and the rest of medicine are very distinct fields. They even have a different college degree system. However private hospitals seem to do just fine having both fields under one common administration. Is there anything peculiar to military needs that necessitate the formation of a separate body for dentistry?

Thanks in advance

Good day

Am only asking this out of curiosity. Am quite clueless about the field of medicine, or the nuances of it in military needs.

Why does the Army have a dedicated Dental Corps when a separate Medical Corps already exists?

I'm sure they have very good administrative or technical reasons, just wanted to know what those are.

In hospitals, generally the dentistry department comes under the admin purview of the general hospital administration. Is there anything specific to military dental needs, that there needs to be a separate dental wing with all the duplication of management staff that the Medical Corps already has?

Thanks in advance