An amazingly stylish film, which makes it hard to comment about. So much hardwork and thought has gone into everything, that it would be brash to be critical when one is still in the learning stages of the craft.
So, instead I want to get into what could have made the film better, more from the script point of view.
1. Not start with Amy's haunting memory of her mother. Instead, made her more on the edge by starting with her sinister drawings, her teacher finds it, is horrified, and her dad is called. Or start with her turn up for the wedding in her mother's clothes. Her father yells at her. Conversation overhead by KC. He walks over to her and they talk.
Cut to his smoking up and she looking on, fascinated. Tries it and in that dope haze describes her mother to him. Then, in silence, sees her mother enter the tub of water by herself. And she gasps back to reality.
--- the main point I want to make is that the fact that her mother tried to kill Amy must be saved for the very last ---
2. The finding her driver tied up by KC and co, stretched things. Instead have the note left on the windshield. She reads it, turns and has water thrown on her. They speed away, throwing a gang of students in array. The students curse them. Amy is impressed and feels an instant connect with their 'outsider' behaviour.
3. Not show Tanya's modeling shot at all. It takes away from her non-glamourous life. Her bulimia should have been repeated one more time.
4. The holi day - Tanya shouldn't have started with 'Hollywood, how many men have you slept with'. Instead, have Amy feel a little left out till she does the spin of the bottle.
The KC speech of the whole trust thing had to go.
And definitely shown her try cocain for the first time. Maybe right after she's had a disturbing recollection of her mother. Or better still when she has cocain she realises she can 'see' her mother better. The memory becomes more real.
5. Inspector Mathur's marriage track served no purpose. The only benefit being the divorce filing scene, which in any case is not how it happens. Not anymore, anyway.
Actually here I must stop because after this the story committed suicide with the running-over episode. After watching the film, you realise that the crux was film was the gang executing a crazy plan, then finding themselves on the run, and then turning against each other.
I didn't get why everyone else except KC felt involved in the accident in the first place. It wasn't their fault. Why would a girl like Tanya or a geek like Zubin say yes to the kidnapping plan? The initial mess they get into is so severe that nothing else kept up with it after that. The knocking down of Tanya and KC's death went into crazy land. Which is why, I think, the attempted rape and subsequent murder of the rapist seem to was written - the group need to be involved in one BIG goof up TOGETHER.
So if the initial mess was that in a cocaine-induced fervor they take the car away from KC as a joke and crash it up, you have a situation where everyone is involved. If it was Amy's idea to be take the car away, it makes sense that she say the kidnap her as a way to get the money. And here you have the advantage of keeping it light initially. So Somo's flashback in a flashback, the burkha's, Amy's sizzling sexuality can all be explored. And there's be no need to switch genres so strangely.
Continuing:
6. KC's jealously rages were silly. Breaking a bottle against a man's face because he speaks to his girl and then to treat her like he doesn't actually give a fuck are so, so weird.
7. If the running over had happened while they were on a run, nothing like it.
8. Amy's manipulation just didn't come across. It was important for us to see her talent in having people around her little finger because in the end we need to fear her as much as we feel sorry for her.
Well, so much for now. Have a ton of other things to write... so maybe I'll return and edit this later.
Showing posts with label hindi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hindi. Show all posts
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Ten things I love and hate about KAMINEY!
Late in the night.. just jotting down points before I forget them :)
Things that worked for me:
1. The story.
2. One of the opening scenes of Charlie running along side railway tracks. You think he is running away from someone only to realise he's the one chasing.
3. Charlie's lisp/ Guddu's stammer.
4. Mikhail and Bhope's scene. The fake diskum-tish.
5. Priyanka Chopra
6. The cinematography/ visuals.
7. The editing.
8. Guddu's breaking down near the petrol bunk when he realises Sweety lied to him about her stammer.
9. The bargaining towards the end inside Bhope's lair
10. When Charlie and his gang realise they are driving the Anti-Nacrotics gaddi.
What didn't work for me:
1. Guddu's AIDS song.
2. The hotel scene: Felt very strained.. very over-edited. Shouldn't have been that hard to establish that the Tasiba gang were busting a drug deal a few doors down from Francis.
3. Charlie's dream sequences.. could have been less film studio props and more real.
4. The obvious symbolism of Charlie landing up with blinders when Guddu and him fight over their father's death.
5. The brother rivalry was very contrived.
6. The slackening of pace when Charlie lets Guddu take the guitar. They've even placed a song here!
7. Unnecessary distractions: Bhope taking the next compartment... wasting about a minute establishing this, when it makes no difference.
8. Charlie taking the bullet in the end and it not being clear that he has in fact taken the diamonds.
9. The last few shots of the movie.. showing Charlie with the white hatted woman.. so un-required.
10. Tasiba keeping Charlie alive till the end. Made no sense. He should have been killed the minute he lets out where the 'guitar' is. Similarly Bhope's men should not have allowed Guddu to wander off so happily. Inconsistencies.
VERDICT:
On the entertainment scale: 7/10
Rating: ***1/2
Things that worked for me:
1. The story.
2. One of the opening scenes of Charlie running along side railway tracks. You think he is running away from someone only to realise he's the one chasing.
3. Charlie's lisp/ Guddu's stammer.
4. Mikhail and Bhope's scene. The fake diskum-tish.
5. Priyanka Chopra
6. The cinematography/ visuals.
7. The editing.
8. Guddu's breaking down near the petrol bunk when he realises Sweety lied to him about her stammer.
9. The bargaining towards the end inside Bhope's lair
10. When Charlie and his gang realise they are driving the Anti-Nacrotics gaddi.
What didn't work for me:
1. Guddu's AIDS song.
2. The hotel scene: Felt very strained.. very over-edited. Shouldn't have been that hard to establish that the Tasiba gang were busting a drug deal a few doors down from Francis.
3. Charlie's dream sequences.. could have been less film studio props and more real.
4. The obvious symbolism of Charlie landing up with blinders when Guddu and him fight over their father's death.
5. The brother rivalry was very contrived.
6. The slackening of pace when Charlie lets Guddu take the guitar. They've even placed a song here!
7. Unnecessary distractions: Bhope taking the next compartment... wasting about a minute establishing this, when it makes no difference.
8. Charlie taking the bullet in the end and it not being clear that he has in fact taken the diamonds.
9. The last few shots of the movie.. showing Charlie with the white hatted woman.. so un-required.
10. Tasiba keeping Charlie alive till the end. Made no sense. He should have been killed the minute he lets out where the 'guitar' is. Similarly Bhope's men should not have allowed Guddu to wander off so happily. Inconsistencies.
VERDICT:
On the entertainment scale: 7/10
Rating: ***1/2
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Delhi 6
Let’s start with the story/plot first. Abhishek and his grandmom return to Delhi from US. Grandmom, Waheeda Rehman, has come here to die, and even begins shopping for her funeral. The neighbourhood they live in appears to have Hindu-Muslim unity stamped all over it. Example: a Muslim jelaabi seller is a Hanuman bhakt, Abhishek is the product of an cross-religion marriage, Rishi Kapoor, a Muslim, is a close family friend and so on.
The town is a far cry from a space-launching India. Untouchability is still practiced. Waheeda, faint from a stroke is being taken to the hospital in a cycle-richshaw. Just as Abhishek gets into a heated argument with a crowd gathered around a pregnant cow, we see Rehman limping for a darshan of the cow herself. Meanwhile a man dressed as the Kaala Bandhar wreaks havoc in the neighbourhood. Rumours, mostly exaggerated or wholly untrue, surround this creature. In no time (jusht two hours) suspicion of the Kaala Bandar’s identity divides the Hindus and Muslims. Politicians and police join in and the focus now shifts to a masjith, which some claim was built on a mandir.
The storyline evokes images of a quintessential, Indian small town, seeped in old-world charm. If the director also sought to add vignettes of neighbourly camaraderie, illogicalness of superstition and the ignorance about fashion and technology in his Delhi 6, the film had to be light footed, part-whimsical, part-satirical. And we have those moments too - when two warring brothers finally look at each other in the eye and a brick falls on the old radio making it finally sing in years. Or when the older brother advocates his younger brother’s water strategy to ‘short-circuit’ the Kaala Bandhar, or when two children walk with a lit cigarette down the street, feeling very grown up. There are several postcard scenes and their depiction is bang on right.
But then Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra also wanted a message delivered. And not subtely either. When Abhishek is pushed down the stairs of a mandir, he picks himself up (so much like his papa’s 80s films), and, with two feet clearance around him, delivers a speech on the mad fakir’s mirror. No, don’t ask.
The climax is again a tug-of-war between Bollywood old school (like the scene described above) and Mehra’s attempt at a tragic-comic situation (which, according to me, should have been the chosen style). The movie constantly shuffles between the two, blocking the possibility of either working.
The editing was just bad. So was the camera work. Would it have killed them to have two cameras? There’s just so much twirling-bluring-why-is-she-laughing-now one can take. And god, the songs were placed so randomly. And the actors lip-synched! (Told you, old-school). Even RDB spared us effort of trying to believe that Shreya Goswami’s rich voice could come out of Sonam or that every now and then we all do a cool gansta’ walk down busy streets, rapping.
Finally, the message. It doesn’t work for many reasons - overstatement, everything ending so pat, Abhiskeh’s rendezvous with his Dad in Heaven (I swear I could see myself in pigtails and uniform chanting ‘Our Father in heaven, holy-beed-ai-name’!)
Something tells me Mehra took a long vacation post production, because way too many things are messed up in this department. I’ve mentioned sound and editing already, haven’t I?
Performance wise, Abhishek was just ok. Waheeda Rehman is was the best.
Anyway, the film wasn’t anything of what I had expected. Disappointing, in a word.
**Update: It all makes lots of sense now. The editor was none other than his wife Bharati. "I've now left Dilli 6 to her. She's now trying to make sense of my nonsense," chortles Rakeysh. I told you he wasnt around, ha!
The town is a far cry from a space-launching India. Untouchability is still practiced. Waheeda, faint from a stroke is being taken to the hospital in a cycle-richshaw. Just as Abhishek gets into a heated argument with a crowd gathered around a pregnant cow, we see Rehman limping for a darshan of the cow herself. Meanwhile a man dressed as the Kaala Bandhar wreaks havoc in the neighbourhood. Rumours, mostly exaggerated or wholly untrue, surround this creature. In no time (jusht two hours) suspicion of the Kaala Bandar’s identity divides the Hindus and Muslims. Politicians and police join in and the focus now shifts to a masjith, which some claim was built on a mandir.
The storyline evokes images of a quintessential, Indian small town, seeped in old-world charm. If the director also sought to add vignettes of neighbourly camaraderie, illogicalness of superstition and the ignorance about fashion and technology in his Delhi 6, the film had to be light footed, part-whimsical, part-satirical. And we have those moments too - when two warring brothers finally look at each other in the eye and a brick falls on the old radio making it finally sing in years. Or when the older brother advocates his younger brother’s water strategy to ‘short-circuit’ the Kaala Bandhar, or when two children walk with a lit cigarette down the street, feeling very grown up. There are several postcard scenes and their depiction is bang on right.
But then Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra also wanted a message delivered. And not subtely either. When Abhishek is pushed down the stairs of a mandir, he picks himself up (so much like his papa’s 80s films), and, with two feet clearance around him, delivers a speech on the mad fakir’s mirror. No, don’t ask.
The climax is again a tug-of-war between Bollywood old school (like the scene described above) and Mehra’s attempt at a tragic-comic situation (which, according to me, should have been the chosen style). The movie constantly shuffles between the two, blocking the possibility of either working.
The editing was just bad. So was the camera work. Would it have killed them to have two cameras? There’s just so much twirling-bluring-why-is-she-laughing-now one can take. And god, the songs were placed so randomly. And the actors lip-synched! (Told you, old-school). Even RDB spared us effort of trying to believe that Shreya Goswami’s rich voice could come out of Sonam or that every now and then we all do a cool gansta’ walk down busy streets, rapping.
Finally, the message. It doesn’t work for many reasons - overstatement, everything ending so pat, Abhiskeh’s rendezvous with his Dad in Heaven (I swear I could see myself in pigtails and uniform chanting ‘Our Father in heaven, holy-beed-ai-name’!)
Something tells me Mehra took a long vacation post production, because way too many things are messed up in this department. I’ve mentioned sound and editing already, haven’t I?
Performance wise, Abhishek was just ok. Waheeda Rehman is was the best.
Anyway, the film wasn’t anything of what I had expected. Disappointing, in a word.
**Update: It all makes lots of sense now. The editor was none other than his wife Bharati. "I've now left Dilli 6 to her. She's now trying to make sense of my nonsense," chortles Rakeysh. I told you he wasnt around, ha!
Saturday, November 1, 2008
The worst Fashion statement ever!
Fashion (A)
Cast: Priyanka Chopra, Kangana Ranaut, Arbaaz Khan, Samir Soni
Direction: Madhur Bhandarkar
After Page 3’s success, Madhur Bhandarkar has comfortably settled into his self-created niche: as the obliging voyeuristic camera for the middle-class. He is banking the masses obsession with the lives of the rich and the famous and its (masses) desperate need to be consoled that it’s own unglamorous lifestyle is somehow morally superior to the lives of the uber fashionable and that women smoking and homosexuality are deviant habits and of only the very wealthy.
So in compliance to age-old stereotypes, we have a small-town girl shake her head apologetically when offered cigarettes or wine, only to grab at both when she gets successful. And finally, since the good always wins and the good girl never smokes or drinks, she is back to mouthing her polite ‘no’s’ in the end.
The story is about models trying to make it in the glitzy world of fashion. While one model, who enjoys the coveted position of being the ‘face’ of a popular fashion magazine, is on her way down, the other struggling model is catwalking her way up. Priyanka and Kangana, who play the two parts, look stunning with enviable wardrobes. But Priyanka does not appear young enough and Kangana needs some serious work on her diction. Despite the heavy borrowing from true incidents, neither of their stories pull any heart strings. Except for that much-hyped wardrobe malfunction sequence. Well-taken shot indeed. In only Madhur could have stuck to editing like that. Also, I loved the matter-of-fact (as matter-of-fact as Hindi drama allows you) way Priyanka aborts her baby.
What made no sense was the new model-actress (Mugdha Godse) to marry her gay-friend. Made no sense at all.
It’s hard to ignore the depiction of all designers as gay men and all models as straight women (except for one male model, on whom there isn’t enough focus to right the imbalance). Equally surprising, given the importance clothes have in the industry, is that there is scarce a reference to brands or labels. The glaring problem seems to be Madhur picking on an industry he knows little about and most unlikely, respects. About homosexuality, there was absolutely no sensitivity involved. Everytime one gay hit on another or spoke about his boyfriend, it only invited guffaws from the audience, like it was obviously designed to.
Why, oh why, this obsession with cigarettes and drug abuse and promiscuity? Aren't there other problems in the industry or (given his preoccupation) with models? Like anorexia, long hours, the age-limit, etc, etc? So one-track his mind seems to have been, che!
Music by Salim-Sulaiman adds the required chutzpah to the models as they briskly twirl under the arch-lights. Quite like the sound track, whenever I found myself listening to it. The few instances when transitions in character and plot are dealt with quickly are great (like Priyanka getting physical with Arbaaz or her in the auto after she sleeps with a stranger). The emphasis here is on ‘few’. At nearly 3-hours, the movie is just way too long.
The whole 20 minutes after she returns to Chandigarh are terribly done. ONE YEAR??? One year she doesn't do anything except to stare listlessly into space? Pulllease!
It is with some amusement that one watches Madhur do a cameo and then have a model call his cinema “realistic”. Truuuph! Wise of him to then, post-production, publicly state that Fashion is actually not about the fashion industry. Bang on, dude. And next time don't even claim to have done research. It insults your intelligence.
Cast: Priyanka Chopra, Kangana Ranaut, Arbaaz Khan, Samir Soni
Direction: Madhur Bhandarkar
After Page 3’s success, Madhur Bhandarkar has comfortably settled into his self-created niche: as the obliging voyeuristic camera for the middle-class. He is banking the masses obsession with the lives of the rich and the famous and its (masses) desperate need to be consoled that it’s own unglamorous lifestyle is somehow morally superior to the lives of the uber fashionable and that women smoking and homosexuality are deviant habits and of only the very wealthy.
So in compliance to age-old stereotypes, we have a small-town girl shake her head apologetically when offered cigarettes or wine, only to grab at both when she gets successful. And finally, since the good always wins and the good girl never smokes or drinks, she is back to mouthing her polite ‘no’s’ in the end.
The story is about models trying to make it in the glitzy world of fashion. While one model, who enjoys the coveted position of being the ‘face’ of a popular fashion magazine, is on her way down, the other struggling model is catwalking her way up. Priyanka and Kangana, who play the two parts, look stunning with enviable wardrobes. But Priyanka does not appear young enough and Kangana needs some serious work on her diction. Despite the heavy borrowing from true incidents, neither of their stories pull any heart strings. Except for that much-hyped wardrobe malfunction sequence. Well-taken shot indeed. In only Madhur could have stuck to editing like that. Also, I loved the matter-of-fact (as matter-of-fact as Hindi drama allows you) way Priyanka aborts her baby.
What made no sense was the new model-actress (Mugdha Godse) to marry her gay-friend. Made no sense at all.
It’s hard to ignore the depiction of all designers as gay men and all models as straight women (except for one male model, on whom there isn’t enough focus to right the imbalance). Equally surprising, given the importance clothes have in the industry, is that there is scarce a reference to brands or labels. The glaring problem seems to be Madhur picking on an industry he knows little about and most unlikely, respects. About homosexuality, there was absolutely no sensitivity involved. Everytime one gay hit on another or spoke about his boyfriend, it only invited guffaws from the audience, like it was obviously designed to.
Why, oh why, this obsession with cigarettes and drug abuse and promiscuity? Aren't there other problems in the industry or (given his preoccupation) with models? Like anorexia, long hours, the age-limit, etc, etc? So one-track his mind seems to have been, che!
Music by Salim-Sulaiman adds the required chutzpah to the models as they briskly twirl under the arch-lights. Quite like the sound track, whenever I found myself listening to it. The few instances when transitions in character and plot are dealt with quickly are great (like Priyanka getting physical with Arbaaz or her in the auto after she sleeps with a stranger). The emphasis here is on ‘few’. At nearly 3-hours, the movie is just way too long.
The whole 20 minutes after she returns to Chandigarh are terribly done. ONE YEAR??? One year she doesn't do anything except to stare listlessly into space? Pulllease!
It is with some amusement that one watches Madhur do a cameo and then have a model call his cinema “realistic”. Truuuph! Wise of him to then, post-production, publicly state that Fashion is actually not about the fashion industry. Bang on, dude. And next time don't even claim to have done research. It insults your intelligence.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
On the rocks
Rock on!
Hindi (U)
Cast: Farhan Aktar, Arjun Rampal, Purab Kohli, Shahana Goswami
Direction: Abhishek Kapoor
Here's the gist of it: Four friends, part of a college band, reunite ten-years later to have a second go at a rock competition.
Aditya (Farhan Aktar) is the lead singer and lyricist of the group, while Joe (Arjun Rampal) is the lead guitarist. KD (Purab) plays the drums, while the clearly-not-made-for-acting Luke plays Rob, the keyboardist.
All goes fine until ego clashes break the group up. A decade later Aditya’s wife attempts to reunite the band with the hope of shaking him out of his depression, but Joe’s wife (played with amazing conviction by Shahana Goswami) refuses to let it happen. Of course its obvious how movie will end. And somewhere, from the 90th minute perhaps, the movie really beings to drag. Too many sub-plots are stretched (directorial masturbation if you ask me!) - like Jenny (Joe’s wife) visiting him in his apartment. Yea, we get the contrast of lifestyle between the two, but you got to accept that there is only so much 200 minutes can take. Oh, and Aditya’s reasons for breaking up with his girlfriend is just too stupid. His friend thinks he’s hogging the limelight so he break-ups with his girlfriend? Huh?
The team has worked hard to keep the college rock scene as real as possible, though they could have gone with a less adolescent name for the band than Magik (what were they thinking?!?). Anyhow, Remo’s choreography ensures that the actors look like rockers on stage. Strangely though, the crowd in Pichle Saat Dinon Mein sing amazingly well when the mic is turned to them. Also, when did college crowds so enthusiastically cheer a band? Last I remember from my days, every band was religious boo-ed until they proved their mettle. I think it would have great if they had recorded a real crowd trying to sing with them.
Music by Shankar Ehsaan Loy is good, no doubt. But it sure isn't going to appeal to die-hard rock fans. It’s way too mainstream for that. Plenty of electric riffs don’t make rock, guys. But that said, the music by itself (I mean without thinking of it as the product of true-blood rockers) is foot-tap worthy. Loved Farhan’s crooning Tum ho to, though Javed Akhtar’s lyrics just don’t seem ‘rock’ enough. It great, however, that all the guys sing their own songs.
Arjun Rampal greatly suits the aging hippy-biker look he wears in the movie. In fact all (minus Luke - who looks positively blind in his shades) do phull justice to their roles. Must mention: Purab’s go at the drums in the end is pretty good.
Farhan of course looks the best - on stage and off. He combines coolness and intensity so well, he’s sure to be Bollywood’s next teen heart throb.
I doubt this movie is going to produce/ encourage any sort of a rock culture. Nor is it any ‘coming of age’ kind movie, like they claim it to be. It has no depth for that. What it might is produce a million wannabes who’ll abuse rock motifs for that rebel look.
Rating: 3 stars.
Hindi (U)
Cast: Farhan Aktar, Arjun Rampal, Purab Kohli, Shahana Goswami
Direction: Abhishek Kapoor
Here's the gist of it: Four friends, part of a college band, reunite ten-years later to have a second go at a rock competition.
Aditya (Farhan Aktar) is the lead singer and lyricist of the group, while Joe (Arjun Rampal) is the lead guitarist. KD (Purab) plays the drums, while the clearly-not-made-for-acting Luke plays Rob, the keyboardist.
All goes fine until ego clashes break the group up. A decade later Aditya’s wife attempts to reunite the band with the hope of shaking him out of his depression, but Joe’s wife (played with amazing conviction by Shahana Goswami) refuses to let it happen. Of course its obvious how movie will end. And somewhere, from the 90th minute perhaps, the movie really beings to drag. Too many sub-plots are stretched (directorial masturbation if you ask me!) - like Jenny (Joe’s wife) visiting him in his apartment. Yea, we get the contrast of lifestyle between the two, but you got to accept that there is only so much 200 minutes can take. Oh, and Aditya’s reasons for breaking up with his girlfriend is just too stupid. His friend thinks he’s hogging the limelight so he break-ups with his girlfriend? Huh?
The team has worked hard to keep the college rock scene as real as possible, though they could have gone with a less adolescent name for the band than Magik (what were they thinking?!?). Anyhow, Remo’s choreography ensures that the actors look like rockers on stage. Strangely though, the crowd in Pichle Saat Dinon Mein sing amazingly well when the mic is turned to them. Also, when did college crowds so enthusiastically cheer a band? Last I remember from my days, every band was religious boo-ed until they proved their mettle. I think it would have great if they had recorded a real crowd trying to sing with them.
Music by Shankar Ehsaan Loy is good, no doubt. But it sure isn't going to appeal to die-hard rock fans. It’s way too mainstream for that. Plenty of electric riffs don’t make rock, guys. But that said, the music by itself (I mean without thinking of it as the product of true-blood rockers) is foot-tap worthy. Loved Farhan’s crooning Tum ho to, though Javed Akhtar’s lyrics just don’t seem ‘rock’ enough. It great, however, that all the guys sing their own songs.
Arjun Rampal greatly suits the aging hippy-biker look he wears in the movie. In fact all (minus Luke - who looks positively blind in his shades) do phull justice to their roles. Must mention: Purab’s go at the drums in the end is pretty good.
Farhan of course looks the best - on stage and off. He combines coolness and intensity so well, he’s sure to be Bollywood’s next teen heart throb.
I doubt this movie is going to produce/ encourage any sort of a rock culture. Nor is it any ‘coming of age’ kind movie, like they claim it to be. It has no depth for that. What it might is produce a million wannabes who’ll abuse rock motifs for that rebel look.
Rating: 3 stars.
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Mumbai Meri Jaan
Cast: K K Menon, Paresh Rawal, Soha Ali Khan, Irrfan Khan, R Madhavan
Direction: Nishikant Kamat
There is no running away from terror these days. Nor can there be any from the paranoia and prejudices it leaves in its wake. Mumbai Meri Jaan, is less about the bomb than it is about what it leaves in its aftermath - fear, loss and reinforcement of dangerous stereotyping. It’s a story about survivors.
The story follows seven days in five Mumbaikars' lives - one a TV journalist (Soha) of a sensationalist news channel, a tea vendor (Irrfan) living outside the peripheral vision of the upwardly mobile, Nikhil (R Madhavan) a corporate with a social conscience, a small-time businessman Suresh (K K Menon) biased against Muslims and a seasoned constable Tukaram Patil (Paresh Rawal) who mentors a frustrated rookie on how to survive in the police force.
The movie examines Mumbai after the bomb rips open the comforting lid of normalcy, to expose Mumbai’s good, bad and resilent.
Madhavan’s portrayal of a man, who lectures a street vendor over the use of plastic but who lies immobile in the actual hour for action, shows us how easily one’s principles can crumble in the event of reality hitting too close home.
While trading sensitivity for sensationalism is taken by some reporters as their birthright, Soha finds out what that might feel like, when the voyeuristic camera is turned on her.
However, Soha’s discovery of her fiancee’s body did not really hit home. I blame the screenplay here. There was no need to create a great visual (Soha’s face in the crack of the door) at the expense of the horror of the revelation.
Suresh (Menon), who is yet to land himself a profitable contract, spends time with his friends at a coffee shop, passing judgement on the world around him. In his obsession with stalking a particular Muslim boy, Suresh finds himself in the unenviable position of lying at the mercy of those with enough power to abuse it.
His change of heart after a conversation with Patil might seem rather fairy-tale-ish but when you think about it - it is his blind terror of police brutality and subsequent disbelief at being let off that sows the seeds of change. I doubt he was actually listening to Paresh Rawal’s monologue, perhaps thinking it as some twisted prelude to his getting beaten up.
What I enjoyed most was the morning after, when he wakes up to his father’s non-stop sermons on good-versus-evil wars - the subtle brainwashing we all have encountered in our houses. Well done!
Irrfan’s Thomas is all our collective discrimination coming back to haunt us. Yes, it is a consumerist world and so the bourgeoisie gets to enjoy several privileges it takes for granted. But its non-inclusiveness leaves Thomas stung and hate-filled.
Whether intended or otherwise, it’s in Tukaram Patil that one sees the true face of Mumbai. He has seen enough of the ‘system’ not to expect any fairness from it, but still never fails to recognise goodness when he sees it. His cynicism laces with humour belies his deep disappointment at his own choices.
His idealistic partner’s horror at how life moves on (people having a good time on the night of the bomb blast) was a superb scripting product.
The movie might have been India’s Crash if it had balance the prejudices of one community with some counter-stereotype. The director’s over-enthusiastic painting of minorities as victims of misunderstandings rings of hyperbole in the absence of that balance, not because it isn’t true.
Kudos to K K for reining in the director’s over-zealous attempts. He gives in a restrained performance without falling bait to the drama of the screenplay. That’s harder than it seems, btw.
A movie cannot be classified without judging its end. If it ends positively, especially unrealistically so, it is intended to be moralistic, preachy, with a set solution to the problem it wishes to address.
If it ends on a ‘so that's-that’ note, it is intended to be an unbiased portrayal of reality, without passing any judgement.
MMJ had me confused for it did not clearly fall into either category immediately. Sure, KK figuring out his follies is wrapping a heavy problem hastily. But that was inevitable; this is cinema after all. Which director wouldn't exploit the medium to present a ‘what-if-this-happened’ scenario?
So it was on Nikhil’s plans to leave to the US and on Soha’s TV appearance about her fiancee’s death that I had placed my money. Cinema allows you to play with situations, not reactions. That must be real. If Nihkil left to the US and Soha made the appearance as per her editor’s script, then the movie would be closer-to-reality stuff.
Else it would belong to the and-they-lived-happily-ever-after genre.
Now MMJ doesn’t explicitly show Nikhil change his mind about US, but it is implied (he figures he wouldn’t be much safer in US after 9/11). And Soha is unable to go through with the interview as she keeps breaking down. Still, her footage of trying to speak in front of the camera is used by the channel in a manner most vulgar (a la Aaj-Tak), by drumming up a deeply personal issue.
So perhaps MMJ does have a ‘positive ending’. But it is hard to hold this against Nishikant.
If I had to rate it, I’d give it 4 stars.
Good stuff.
Direction: Nishikant Kamat
There is no running away from terror these days. Nor can there be any from the paranoia and prejudices it leaves in its wake. Mumbai Meri Jaan, is less about the bomb than it is about what it leaves in its aftermath - fear, loss and reinforcement of dangerous stereotyping. It’s a story about survivors.
The story follows seven days in five Mumbaikars' lives - one a TV journalist (Soha) of a sensationalist news channel, a tea vendor (Irrfan) living outside the peripheral vision of the upwardly mobile, Nikhil (R Madhavan) a corporate with a social conscience, a small-time businessman Suresh (K K Menon) biased against Muslims and a seasoned constable Tukaram Patil (Paresh Rawal) who mentors a frustrated rookie on how to survive in the police force.
The movie examines Mumbai after the bomb rips open the comforting lid of normalcy, to expose Mumbai’s good, bad and resilent.
Madhavan’s portrayal of a man, who lectures a street vendor over the use of plastic but who lies immobile in the actual hour for action, shows us how easily one’s principles can crumble in the event of reality hitting too close home.
While trading sensitivity for sensationalism is taken by some reporters as their birthright, Soha finds out what that might feel like, when the voyeuristic camera is turned on her.
However, Soha’s discovery of her fiancee’s body did not really hit home. I blame the screenplay here. There was no need to create a great visual (Soha’s face in the crack of the door) at the expense of the horror of the revelation.
Suresh (Menon), who is yet to land himself a profitable contract, spends time with his friends at a coffee shop, passing judgement on the world around him. In his obsession with stalking a particular Muslim boy, Suresh finds himself in the unenviable position of lying at the mercy of those with enough power to abuse it.
His change of heart after a conversation with Patil might seem rather fairy-tale-ish but when you think about it - it is his blind terror of police brutality and subsequent disbelief at being let off that sows the seeds of change. I doubt he was actually listening to Paresh Rawal’s monologue, perhaps thinking it as some twisted prelude to his getting beaten up.
What I enjoyed most was the morning after, when he wakes up to his father’s non-stop sermons on good-versus-evil wars - the subtle brainwashing we all have encountered in our houses. Well done!
Irrfan’s Thomas is all our collective discrimination coming back to haunt us. Yes, it is a consumerist world and so the bourgeoisie gets to enjoy several privileges it takes for granted. But its non-inclusiveness leaves Thomas stung and hate-filled.
Whether intended or otherwise, it’s in Tukaram Patil that one sees the true face of Mumbai. He has seen enough of the ‘system’ not to expect any fairness from it, but still never fails to recognise goodness when he sees it. His cynicism laces with humour belies his deep disappointment at his own choices.
His idealistic partner’s horror at how life moves on (people having a good time on the night of the bomb blast) was a superb scripting product.
The movie might have been India’s Crash if it had balance the prejudices of one community with some counter-stereotype. The director’s over-enthusiastic painting of minorities as victims of misunderstandings rings of hyperbole in the absence of that balance, not because it isn’t true.
Kudos to K K for reining in the director’s over-zealous attempts. He gives in a restrained performance without falling bait to the drama of the screenplay. That’s harder than it seems, btw.
A movie cannot be classified without judging its end. If it ends positively, especially unrealistically so, it is intended to be moralistic, preachy, with a set solution to the problem it wishes to address.
If it ends on a ‘so that's-that’ note, it is intended to be an unbiased portrayal of reality, without passing any judgement.
MMJ had me confused for it did not clearly fall into either category immediately. Sure, KK figuring out his follies is wrapping a heavy problem hastily. But that was inevitable; this is cinema after all. Which director wouldn't exploit the medium to present a ‘what-if-this-happened’ scenario?
So it was on Nikhil’s plans to leave to the US and on Soha’s TV appearance about her fiancee’s death that I had placed my money. Cinema allows you to play with situations, not reactions. That must be real. If Nihkil left to the US and Soha made the appearance as per her editor’s script, then the movie would be closer-to-reality stuff.
Else it would belong to the and-they-lived-happily-ever-after genre.
Now MMJ doesn’t explicitly show Nikhil change his mind about US, but it is implied (he figures he wouldn’t be much safer in US after 9/11). And Soha is unable to go through with the interview as she keeps breaking down. Still, her footage of trying to speak in front of the camera is used by the channel in a manner most vulgar (a la Aaj-Tak), by drumming up a deeply personal issue.
So perhaps MMJ does have a ‘positive ending’. But it is hard to hold this against Nishikant.
If I had to rate it, I’d give it 4 stars.
Good stuff.
Friday, April 18, 2008
Shaurya
Hindi
Duration: 2.5hrs
Cast: Rahul Bose, Javed Jaffery, KK Menon, Minissha Lamba
The thought I went, shaking my head, away with was: WHY THE RIP? WHY DID THEY HAVE TO LIFT THE ENTIRE STORYLINE FROM Few Good Men? If the idea was to show religious bigotry in the army, a million others ways could have been devised, surely?
Anyway lift Samar Khan does (once again.. the first time being Kuch Meta Ho Gaye) but not completely.
Rahul Bose plays the very urbanised suave, Siddhanth, given the task of defending Captain Javed Khan. The stiff, with a rod-up-his- Javed is accused of killing his senior point blank. Javed Jaffery plays the play-by-the-book Akash aka AK prosecution. The two go way back, and much time is spent in establishing this. Sigh.
The first half of the movie is sure to tickle the multiplex audience, but post interval the movie falls flat. Samar is clearly not comfortable with directing high drama court scenes (except for the climax which had to be in the court). In fact there is this shot of Rahul walking down a corridor, black coolers and all, with various voice overs suggesting court scenes (Objection! I'd like to call on witness... so on so forth). That is the way Samar shows you that the court case is, in fact, progressing. It seems he rather spend the time going over 'relevant' scenes of Seema Biwas (defendant's mom) wiping photo frames blank-faced and Sid getting AK and his babe married off. WTF only.
KK is deliciously wicked. As Brigadier Pratap he is convincingly cool-blooded. His power house performance is probably what saves the day.
Javed Jaffery puts life into the chemistry between him and Rahul. His is a restrained performance that scores full points on my scale. But adds little to the movie over all.
Minisha is perfect for the part Samar casted her for. Roll eyes, and screech when required. Her is a role that could have been chopped off, but can it still be Bollywood without a love angle?
Rahul Bose, who never scores high on my scale, comes off better this time. Though his trademark eye-bulging still gets on my nerves :( His whole transformation as the man who is initially disinterested in the case and then gets involved very deep is not at all convincing. All that Samar does to show the change is get him to jog with sweat pouring down his well-chiseled body and.. you guessed it... VOICE OVERS! Stop taking shortcuts Samar! Make us feel the change with the character ok? Atleast TRY!
Over all.. ** and a 1/2 out of 5. With a cast like what he had, who could he go so wrong? Disappointing.
Duration: 2.5hrs
Cast: Rahul Bose, Javed Jaffery, KK Menon, Minissha Lamba
The thought I went, shaking my head, away with was: WHY THE RIP? WHY DID THEY HAVE TO LIFT THE ENTIRE STORYLINE FROM Few Good Men? If the idea was to show religious bigotry in the army, a million others ways could have been devised, surely?
Anyway lift Samar Khan does (once again.. the first time being Kuch Meta Ho Gaye) but not completely.
Rahul Bose plays the very urbanised suave, Siddhanth, given the task of defending Captain Javed Khan. The stiff, with a rod-up-his- Javed is accused of killing his senior point blank. Javed Jaffery plays the play-by-the-book Akash aka AK prosecution. The two go way back, and much time is spent in establishing this. Sigh.
The first half of the movie is sure to tickle the multiplex audience, but post interval the movie falls flat. Samar is clearly not comfortable with directing high drama court scenes (except for the climax which had to be in the court). In fact there is this shot of Rahul walking down a corridor, black coolers and all, with various voice overs suggesting court scenes (Objection! I'd like to call on witness... so on so forth). That is the way Samar shows you that the court case is, in fact, progressing. It seems he rather spend the time going over 'relevant' scenes of Seema Biwas (defendant's mom) wiping photo frames blank-faced and Sid getting AK and his babe married off. WTF only.
KK is deliciously wicked. As Brigadier Pratap he is convincingly cool-blooded. His power house performance is probably what saves the day.
Javed Jaffery puts life into the chemistry between him and Rahul. His is a restrained performance that scores full points on my scale. But adds little to the movie over all.
Minisha is perfect for the part Samar casted her for. Roll eyes, and screech when required. Her is a role that could have been chopped off, but can it still be Bollywood without a love angle?
Rahul Bose, who never scores high on my scale, comes off better this time. Though his trademark eye-bulging still gets on my nerves :( His whole transformation as the man who is initially disinterested in the case and then gets involved very deep is not at all convincing. All that Samar does to show the change is get him to jog with sweat pouring down his well-chiseled body and.. you guessed it... VOICE OVERS! Stop taking shortcuts Samar! Make us feel the change with the character ok? Atleast TRY!
Over all.. ** and a 1/2 out of 5. With a cast like what he had, who could he go so wrong? Disappointing.
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Jingoism, racism and patriotism. Where are the lines?
Just saw Dhan Dhana Dhan Goal. Nothing in the trailers interested me, so normally I wouldnt have been in the movie theater to start with. But a friend had a spare ticket and I had the time, so I thought why not.
And till about an hour into the movie, I was really wondering why. The movie goes at neck breaking speed for the first 20 mins. You are first introduced to the Southall United football team. The very next scene the bad guys (the unconvincing cold-gori-bitch) threaten to take away the club's ground if they dont come up with some money to renew the lease. At this point you already know how the story will go. The team will win the trophy and the ground will remain theirs. Fine it might have been important to establish the goodintentionedheart and not-because-I-just-want-to-win-the-blasted-cup guys. But did Arshad Warsi (Shaan, the captain of the team in the movie) have to pepper his lines with stuff like 'you (British) were in our country for hundred years and we got you outta there without lifting a finger. you think we'll just like that give you our land?' Very unwanted and from what I could see didn't really cut with the audience either. The very next scene the club owner dies and just like that Shaan, who is almost a son, promises to win the trophy. Continuing in the blink-and-miss progress of story, Shaan finds them a coach in Tony Singh (Boman Irani), who most predictably has left the sport and has an alcoholic problem (never revisited again in the story). Despite all the traumatic past, all it takes is one super corny line from Shaan to convince Tony to coach their team and he does.
What pained me at almost every point in the movie is the potential of what the director could have achieved. He had a story of how an underdog asian team make it to the top of the local heap. You look at that and think gosh, he could have actually shown pakistanis and indians in the same team. He could have touched upon cross-culture marriages or maybe people struggling to make a living out of sport. Oh he could have done sooo much! But on all counts Vivek Agnihotri fails. Even the racism he supposedly portrays make ALL Britishers look evil and mean. It was so one-sided that at the end of it every time the Indians said 'yeh gore log' (these white people) it sounded racist. Indeed, I think it was. It is so sad that in this day and age a director has to resort to making Indians look like victims to score some box office points. I immediately thought of Bend it like Beckham (a story of an Indian girl play football in the UK). It did have racism in it, but it was done so well. It showed both kind of British - the racists and the non-racists. That balance is so important to a movie. I couldnt help wondering what Shaan's wife (who is white in the movie) might have said to all his 'gora log' slandering.
The most disappointing aspect was that the entire team was Indian, not Asian (though they keep talking of it as an Asian team). Infact, to Vivek Asian seems to mean North Indian wonly. And almost completely punjabi.
The jingoistic tone continues with every turn in the movie and begins to get on your nerves. There is one scene when John asks his dad, what I wish had been answered, "If you are so fond of India, why are you still here? If you wanted me to be Indian, why give birth to me here and make me a British Citizen? Why confuse me?” The question though asked is met with silence. Pity, I wish the writer/direct had an answer, because it would have helped convince me that the characters were not hypocrites and parasites living off a country they speak ill about.
Also the constant weeping and crying that makes no sense. And the billo song was so begging to be edited.. it just jarred your senses.
The second half is a lot more tolerable, though the weeping quotient increases. John Abraham (Sunny - the snotty but gifted striker)'s oh so-cocky smiles gets a tad repetitive. But since it make him look extremely hot, (see pic) so you do actually forgive the excess. He does look like he knows how to play, which cannot be said of Arshad Warsi or Raj Zutshi (Monty Singh). Btw, the overdose of 'Singh' in this movie is killing!
The climax is good but predictable. Every shot had me excited, till the point they start to streeeeeetch it. John runs towards the ball in sloooow motion. There is pain on his face. The ball is kicked. You see it spinning sloooowly. Arshad's mouth is working sloooowly. John is still looking pained. A little girl in the stand is looking horrified. Boman is freaking out.. in slow motion. The ball is still spining. John is still running. Oh god get on with it, you want to shout. Of course the damn thing is going in for a goal. Is this supposed to be a suspense? Am I supposed to wonder if John is or is not going to save the day? Of course he will. And for super noble reasons too. And almost die in the attempt (yes in bollywood, even sports fields are death mines).
The movie has it nice moments. But Vivek kills it in no time. Like the visit to Manchester United. No football fan I am, but the scene impressed me. Right up till Boman starts hamming in the locker room about champions. God if he was hamming imagine the rest. Also the points in the fillum where it looked like some real football was being played were good.
Would I recommend the movie to anyone? Nope. I spent 230 on the ticket (I still cant believe it, when did movie watching get so expensive in Bangalore?) and 150 on travel and 160 on food. Thats Rs 560 (or two tees, or one one fab india kurta, or two cocktails, or whichever way you want to see it) down the bloody drain!
Rating: ** and a tiny bit more
And till about an hour into the movie, I was really wondering why. The movie goes at neck breaking speed for the first 20 mins. You are first introduced to the Southall United football team. The very next scene the bad guys (the unconvincing cold-gori-bitch) threaten to take away the club's ground if they dont come up with some money to renew the lease. At this point you already know how the story will go. The team will win the trophy and the ground will remain theirs. Fine it might have been important to establish the goodintentionedheart and not-because-I-just-want-to-win-the-blasted-cup guys. But did Arshad Warsi (Shaan, the captain of the team in the movie) have to pepper his lines with stuff like 'you (British) were in our country for hundred years and we got you outta there without lifting a finger. you think we'll just like that give you our land?' Very unwanted and from what I could see didn't really cut with the audience either. The very next scene the club owner dies and just like that Shaan, who is almost a son, promises to win the trophy. Continuing in the blink-and-miss progress of story, Shaan finds them a coach in Tony Singh (Boman Irani), who most predictably has left the sport and has an alcoholic problem (never revisited again in the story). Despite all the traumatic past, all it takes is one super corny line from Shaan to convince Tony to coach their team and he does.
What pained me at almost every point in the movie is the potential of what the director could have achieved. He had a story of how an underdog asian team make it to the top of the local heap. You look at that and think gosh, he could have actually shown pakistanis and indians in the same team. He could have touched upon cross-culture marriages or maybe people struggling to make a living out of sport. Oh he could have done sooo much! But on all counts Vivek Agnihotri fails. Even the racism he supposedly portrays make ALL Britishers look evil and mean. It was so one-sided that at the end of it every time the Indians said 'yeh gore log' (these white people) it sounded racist. Indeed, I think it was. It is so sad that in this day and age a director has to resort to making Indians look like victims to score some box office points. I immediately thought of Bend it like Beckham (a story of an Indian girl play football in the UK). It did have racism in it, but it was done so well. It showed both kind of British - the racists and the non-racists. That balance is so important to a movie. I couldnt help wondering what Shaan's wife (who is white in the movie) might have said to all his 'gora log' slandering.
The most disappointing aspect was that the entire team was Indian, not Asian (though they keep talking of it as an Asian team). Infact, to Vivek Asian seems to mean North Indian wonly. And almost completely punjabi.
The jingoistic tone continues with every turn in the movie and begins to get on your nerves. There is one scene when John asks his dad, what I wish had been answered, "If you are so fond of India, why are you still here? If you wanted me to be Indian, why give birth to me here and make me a British Citizen? Why confuse me?” The question though asked is met with silence. Pity, I wish the writer/direct had an answer, because it would have helped convince me that the characters were not hypocrites and parasites living off a country they speak ill about.
Also the constant weeping and crying that makes no sense. And the billo song was so begging to be edited.. it just jarred your senses.
The second half is a lot more tolerable, though the weeping quotient increases. John Abraham (Sunny - the snotty but gifted striker)'s oh so-cocky smiles gets a tad repetitive. But since it make him look extremely hot, (see pic) so you do actually forgive the excess. He does look like he knows how to play, which cannot be said of Arshad Warsi or Raj Zutshi (Monty Singh). Btw, the overdose of 'Singh' in this movie is killing!The climax is good but predictable. Every shot had me excited, till the point they start to streeeeeetch it. John runs towards the ball in sloooow motion. There is pain on his face. The ball is kicked. You see it spinning sloooowly. Arshad's mouth is working sloooowly. John is still looking pained. A little girl in the stand is looking horrified. Boman is freaking out.. in slow motion. The ball is still spining. John is still running. Oh god get on with it, you want to shout. Of course the damn thing is going in for a goal. Is this supposed to be a suspense? Am I supposed to wonder if John is or is not going to save the day? Of course he will. And for super noble reasons too. And almost die in the attempt (yes in bollywood, even sports fields are death mines).
The movie has it nice moments. But Vivek kills it in no time. Like the visit to Manchester United. No football fan I am, but the scene impressed me. Right up till Boman starts hamming in the locker room about champions. God if he was hamming imagine the rest. Also the points in the fillum where it looked like some real football was being played were good.
Would I recommend the movie to anyone? Nope. I spent 230 on the ticket (I still cant believe it, when did movie watching get so expensive in Bangalore?) and 150 on travel and 160 on food. Thats Rs 560 (or two tees, or one one fab india kurta, or two cocktails, or whichever way you want to see it) down the bloody drain!
Rating: ** and a tiny bit more
Friday, November 2, 2007
Ommi bhai and Doolly's prem kahani
O M K A R A
A movie that just blew my mind, with its cinematography, performances, screenplay and the brilliant direction. Vishal Bharadwaj deserves every award he has won for this movie.
The movie opens with Langda Tyyagi (Safi Ali Khan) breaking up a baraat and informing the groom that his bride to be, Dolly (Kareena Kapoor) has eloped with Omkara (Ajay Devgan), Tyyagi’s boss and head of the ‘gang’. It’s impossible to describe the genius-ness in these shots - rural Uttar Pradesh, with its pathos filled dusty landscape, the colourful wedding decorations and Raju (the loser Dolly is supposed to marry) falling off a moped when he tries desperately to get help.
The story, based on Othello, has stayed true to the original, much like Vishal's previous Bard-tribute, Maqbool. As the plot unfolds the first wisp of doubt settles in Omkar's head when Dolly's angry father mutters "Jo ladki apne baap ko tugh sakti hai, woh kisi aur ki kya hogi" (roughly translates as - the daughter who wasnt faithful to her own father, can never be faithful to anyone.)
All goes fine for a while. Dolly and Omkara pick a date for the wedding and in the meantime live together. Omkara and his gang of henchmen enjoy good fortunes after they help the local politician (Naseerundin Shah) get elected. Omkara then appoints Kesu (Vivek Oberio) as his successor or 'bahubali'.. a post that Tyyagi had been eyeing for himself. Upset, he then seeks to get his revenge by cleverly manipulating Raju and dropping deciteful insinuations to Ommi that Dolly is having an affair with Kesu. There are several artistically captured moments in the movie, like this one, where Langda Tyyagi admits that he thinks the two are having an affair. The train's headlight, the rain and Tyyagi lying wounded with Omkara standing above him almost makes you hear that last nail getting hammered into the coffin.
The plot is something we all know, but the screenplay grips you nevertheless. The usage of the Kamarbandh, an ornament that is tied around the waist, are just some of the brilliant adaptations Vishal has done. Right up to the end (and no matter how many times I see it) the build up to the climax, the tension apparent on Ajay's and Kareena's face during the wedding, is rivetting. The sense of doom palpable. The final scene with Kareena rocking on the jula over Ajay Devgan's dead body is a piece of genius. I have used the word again I see :)
The performance of each and every one in the cast is stellar. I of course love Ajay's performance (how can you not?). Kareena and Oberoi (who would have ever casted them as Biharis??) have done justice to their roles, convincing in their semi-urbanness. Even Bipasha Basu's character of Billo had meat! Konkana Sen is the only role that felt incomplete in some way. Like there was more to her character of Indu (Ommibhai's adopted sister) than shown. Perhaps her character evolved in scenes that were later edited? But the absolute mind blowing, oscar worthy even, performance belongs to Saif Ali Khan. When and where did he get to be so brilliant? When you think of his earlier movies, Dillagi remember? and see how far he has come with Dil Chahata Hai, Being Cyrus and Omkara, you really want to stand up and applaud this man.
Music is aptly set. I loved Sathi Re and was surprised to discover that Vishal had lent his voice to it. The lyrics of Jag Ja (Jag ja re gudiya, misri ki pudiya, meethe lage do naina) are so authentic that it sounds like some old North Indian lullabay. I found it hard to believe that Gulzar had actually penned them. Of course everyone knows Beedi Sarailay and Namak. But the rest of the music is equally powerful.
The movie won plenty of awards. It seems like anyone who was anything in the movie got an award from someone. And why not? When you see the movie you'll know why.
Rating: the full monty ***** and one more * !
The offical site
A movie that just blew my mind, with its cinematography, performances, screenplay and the brilliant direction. Vishal Bharadwaj deserves every award he has won for this movie.
The movie opens with Langda Tyyagi (Safi Ali Khan) breaking up a baraat and informing the groom that his bride to be, Dolly (Kareena Kapoor) has eloped with Omkara (Ajay Devgan), Tyyagi’s boss and head of the ‘gang’. It’s impossible to describe the genius-ness in these shots - rural Uttar Pradesh, with its pathos filled dusty landscape, the colourful wedding decorations and Raju (the loser Dolly is supposed to marry) falling off a moped when he tries desperately to get help.
The story, based on Othello, has stayed true to the original, much like Vishal's previous Bard-tribute, Maqbool. As the plot unfolds the first wisp of doubt settles in Omkar's head when Dolly's angry father mutters "Jo ladki apne baap ko tugh sakti hai, woh kisi aur ki kya hogi" (roughly translates as - the daughter who wasnt faithful to her own father, can never be faithful to anyone.)
All goes fine for a while. Dolly and Omkara pick a date for the wedding and in the meantime live together. Omkara and his gang of henchmen enjoy good fortunes after they help the local politician (Naseerundin Shah) get elected. Omkara then appoints Kesu (Vivek Oberio) as his successor or 'bahubali'.. a post that Tyyagi had been eyeing for himself. Upset, he then seeks to get his revenge by cleverly manipulating Raju and dropping deciteful insinuations to Ommi that Dolly is having an affair with Kesu. There are several artistically captured moments in the movie, like this one, where Langda Tyyagi admits that he thinks the two are having an affair. The train's headlight, the rain and Tyyagi lying wounded with Omkara standing above him almost makes you hear that last nail getting hammered into the coffin.
The plot is something we all know, but the screenplay grips you nevertheless. The usage of the Kamarbandh, an ornament that is tied around the waist, are just some of the brilliant adaptations Vishal has done. Right up to the end (and no matter how many times I see it) the build up to the climax, the tension apparent on Ajay's and Kareena's face during the wedding, is rivetting. The sense of doom palpable. The final scene with Kareena rocking on the jula over Ajay Devgan's dead body is a piece of genius. I have used the word again I see :)
The performance of each and every one in the cast is stellar. I of course love Ajay's performance (how can you not?). Kareena and Oberoi (who would have ever casted them as Biharis??) have done justice to their roles, convincing in their semi-urbanness. Even Bipasha Basu's character of Billo had meat! Konkana Sen is the only role that felt incomplete in some way. Like there was more to her character of Indu (Ommibhai's adopted sister) than shown. Perhaps her character evolved in scenes that were later edited? But the absolute mind blowing, oscar worthy even, performance belongs to Saif Ali Khan. When and where did he get to be so brilliant? When you think of his earlier movies, Dillagi remember? and see how far he has come with Dil Chahata Hai, Being Cyrus and Omkara, you really want to stand up and applaud this man.
Music is aptly set. I loved Sathi Re and was surprised to discover that Vishal had lent his voice to it. The lyrics of Jag Ja (Jag ja re gudiya, misri ki pudiya, meethe lage do naina) are so authentic that it sounds like some old North Indian lullabay. I found it hard to believe that Gulzar had actually penned them. Of course everyone knows Beedi Sarailay and Namak. But the rest of the music is equally powerful.
The movie won plenty of awards. It seems like anyone who was anything in the movie got an award from someone. And why not? When you see the movie you'll know why.
Rating: the full monty ***** and one more * !
The offical site
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Manorama 6 feet under
Aint the title intriguing?
Navdeep Singh has done well by his first movie, which he helped write as well. No spoilers ahead this time, so read on bravely.
The setting of this movie, in a sleepy town in Rajasthan is brilliantly portrayed. The characters are so real and believable - Abhay Deol, Gul Panag, Vinay Pathak - neat performances. The supporting cast has been selected pretty well. They lend to the movie and its mood. The scene where the two henchmen hired to beat up Abhay start quarrelling amongst themselves as to who has to break his finger was hilarious and yet so frightening.
I think the only critique I have is that the pace completely slacked from about 30 mins into the movie, right up to the end. Now you might wonder at that - at why a movie that’s slow paced, a cardinal sin for a thriller, be even mention-worthy. Well that according to me is because of the directorial style. Hats off to Navdeep. I think if he hadnt been the co-writter of the movie as well, if he hadnt felt the need to portray a 100 small, inconsequential scenes, he might have understood the editor's pleas to cut-cut-cut. And the movie would have been a better hit at the box office.
Soundtrack wise I think they’ve done well. The music (the times that I did pay attention to it) blended well with the scene and put you right in rural Rajasthan. The climax was a bit disappointing, in the sense, the plot was fine. But the element of drama, of revealing the all-important game plan in a sudden flourish, was missing. Sigh. So many things working and all it required was a little slicker editing. Are you listening Navdeep? Next time, hear the editor out, ok?
Rating: *** 1/2
A harsh review
And of course Wikipedia
Navdeep Singh has done well by his first movie, which he helped write as well. No spoilers ahead this time, so read on bravely.
The setting of this movie, in a sleepy town in Rajasthan is brilliantly portrayed. The characters are so real and believable - Abhay Deol, Gul Panag, Vinay Pathak - neat performances. The supporting cast has been selected pretty well. They lend to the movie and its mood. The scene where the two henchmen hired to beat up Abhay start quarrelling amongst themselves as to who has to break his finger was hilarious and yet so frightening.
I think the only critique I have is that the pace completely slacked from about 30 mins into the movie, right up to the end. Now you might wonder at that - at why a movie that’s slow paced, a cardinal sin for a thriller, be even mention-worthy. Well that according to me is because of the directorial style. Hats off to Navdeep. I think if he hadnt been the co-writter of the movie as well, if he hadnt felt the need to portray a 100 small, inconsequential scenes, he might have understood the editor's pleas to cut-cut-cut. And the movie would have been a better hit at the box office.
Soundtrack wise I think they’ve done well. The music (the times that I did pay attention to it) blended well with the scene and put you right in rural Rajasthan. The climax was a bit disappointing, in the sense, the plot was fine. But the element of drama, of revealing the all-important game plan in a sudden flourish, was missing. Sigh. So many things working and all it required was a little slicker editing. Are you listening Navdeep? Next time, hear the editor out, ok?
Rating: *** 1/2
A harsh review
And of course Wikipedia
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)