It seems to be a trend now days to resurrect the dead. After the movie Woh Lamhe came the article on Parveen Babi in the magazine Society followed by yet another article in Stardust, a magazine on Bollywood gossip, which drew similarities between the erstwhile tragic heroine and Sushmita Sen.

The article in the magazine was offensive in its content for it suggested that, like Parveen Babi, not only does Sushmita Sen have a bad taste in men (who use her like a stepping stone to further their careers), but also that she suffers from 'emotional' paranoia which is a ludicrous comparison since Parveen Babi suffered from Schizophrenia:

Somewhere during the course of this began Sushmita's paranoia that someone around her would not allow this to happen (Manav Menon's divorce). And so, in a fit of unpredictability she sacked her entire staff, including her loyal associate, Neelam, who she had treated like a sister all along... The fear that those close to her would rip her off of her emotional and financial assets apparently made her insecure……

I still remember my only meeting with Parveen Babi when she stepped into the 'Stardust' office and told me how the CIA and KGB were out to get her and Lady Diana; and the latter had been a victim and it was upto us to save her. It was just then that the cold drinks came in and Babi insisted that her’s be opened in front of her, as it might have been poisoned!

There is a big difference between sacking your entourage, which may have been sponging off your finances and being totally loco as Parveen had become.

Unlike Stardust which doesn't make bones about being a salacious, offensive gossip magazine, Society, on the other hand did a more tasteful article on Parveen Babi. We were given a glimpse of her life in Junagadh, a small town in Gujrat.

Manjari Bhatnagar did a compassionate article based on her interview with Parveen Babi's nephew Shamsher. According to Shamsher Parveen was a wild yet compassionate woman taken for a ride by the men in her life

He spoke about Bhatt's new film, Who Lamhe, that's supposed to be on the filmmaker's relationship with Parveen.

It is a rubbish representation of her life. Mahesh Bhatt should not have done this to her. When he was involved with her, he was a nobody; no one knew him. He has fed off her and should not have given a wrong portrayal of her life. Parveen’s mom used to say that Mahesh Batt and Ved Sharma have eaten a lot of her money. She also told us often that Parveen had purchased houses for them and Danny Dengzongpa. These people ruined her…..

The author of the article then wondered about the scenes in the movie Woh Lamhe where the heroine's mom asks her daughter why the Rs Two lakh had a few notes less. Wasn't the yesteryear's actress' mother shown as a stingy and money crazy woman? Shamsher argues that had money been more dear to Parveen's mom, she would never have been devastated by the sudden and mysterious disappearance of her daughter.

For a long time she did not know that her daughter was in the US. She thought Parveen was in Pune at the Osho Ashram. She got to know about the disappearance about seven months later… When the newspaper carried reports of a girl’s body and said Parveen had died, her mom almost died. But then, we got to know through a common friend that she had seen her in America. That was a reprieve for her.

The article provides insider details about her declining health due to diabetes and mental problems and yet tried to show a woman with a heart of gold battling the world within her mind and that around her.

The movie Woh Lamhe was criticized by Vinod Pande as well who preferred Arth. Here is what he said in his interview about Woh Lamhe in Society:

I am not very happy at the way Mahesh Bhatt has potrayed her in Woh Lamhe…It's an exploitative exercise and a form of self flattery. Parveen was not a hollow or pulverized woman. There was a lot of substance to her…

Vinod Pande's scathing comment reflected the crux of the movie where Mahesh Bhatt seemed to 'justify' his actions by showing that the director tried to save his heroine from herself but even in his loss she lived in his heart. What baloney! The dialogues in the movie were trite; the actors tried their best to neutralize their accents when they spoke in English but the vernacular twangs took away the emotional effects of the highly charged scenes and had me smirking instead of being in puddles of tears.

The production quality of the movie was good. The outfits barely held together and the muck applied on the heroine’s face would have any bride to be squirm in horror.

The likes of Parveen Babi, Rekha and Zeenat Amaan were daring women who thumbed their noses at the prevailing social conventions by taking up roles that were in direct contrast to the 'sati savitri' roles women played during the 70's.

It was a time when feminism was its peak, when women were shedding their inhibitions, testing their limits, spreading their wings and willing to live lives shunned by society. In the long run they paid dearly for their lifestyles while their male counterparts seemed to have made successful names for themselves even in their declining years.

Such is the dichotomy of life in Bollywood where heroines are easily replaceable, forgotten and resurrected only to squeeze some extra bucks.

It, therefore, comes as no surprise that Sushmita has been painted black for not playing to their tunes. There have been numerous labels pinned on her by those holding the 'moralistic poison pen' while excusing the men in her life by calling her promiscuous man eater, home breaker etc.

The latest label of comparing her to Parveen holds true only to the extent that, like Parveen, she has the right to hate Bollywood since it is a place where one has to constantly watch one's back, where back stabbing, double standards and exploitation is the accepted norm.