My 'Film' Mania!

The Ghajini mania beckons…

2008-10-24T00:10:00.000-07:00

Swim against the tide, and you are true winner…said Aamir Khan in Ghulam, ten years ago. The line sums up the master’s stint in films, as an actor, producer, and as a director.

Now in 2008, that he is back to being the superstar again, with Ghajini; things could only get better. And going by the first look of Ghajini, which I was privileged to get a glimpse of, before the world is ensnared by it, there’s just one word I have to say…AWESOME!

From being the sensitive director with TZP, the man who does it all is out here to takeover the Indian Masala with this one. Talk of the elements of a commercial film, and Ghajini looks like a seven course treat for the cine-lovers to savour, to devour, to relish and to cherish…here’s one film, no one can miss!

Redemption Revisited!

2008-10-01T05:11:00.000-07:00

What makes director Sanjay Gadhvi’s Kidnap really special is the way it treats the very notion of redemption. The revenge saga isn’t an unused theme in Bollywood so far, and neither is the rest of the paraphernalia in Kidnap an outcome of an outstandingly innovative thought process. But what really works for the film is the treatment of the story, apart from the dialogues, and most importantly, the way in which the message of the film is delivered.

The pace is just perfect, and it is indeed gratifying to see Gadhvi go beyond just glorifying hot bodies and celebrating the human triumph on the technological front. There is more meat in the story this time, and there is an agenda, a revenge, which at least justifies the life threatening and mind deafening pains which the characters take to make the film engrossing and entertaining, unlike his previous offerings, where all this and more, is a mere matter of tashan.

An interesting element of the film is that it actually makes its characters experience the thrill and the corresponding shrill which they are suppose to portray. Regardless of the impractical execution of the tasks, what I really liked in the writing is the attack on the thought process of an individual. To witness a crime, to hold someone responsible for it, and to make the person experience the act of crime are completely different phenomena, and this is where Kidnap transcends the boundaries of an average thriller, and goes beyond, on the story level.

And about the execution, rather the unfolding of the plot, there couldn’t have been somebody more suited for the role than Imran Khan. Just to say that he is superb would be an understatement. What makes up for the loopholes in the film is the bravura performance of Imran Khan. If Jaane Tu… was his arrival, Kidnap is his conquer; his victory all the way.

Whether Minissha Lamba’s career switched gears post Bachna… was quite debatable. But with Kidnap, she sure is speeding up to the top gear, and her songs in the film are a testimony to the same. This film doesn’t offer her too much in terms of histrionics, but she plays the part of a Sanjay Gadhvi heroine to the T. Her mass appeal will surely take a meteoric rise after this one. As for Mr. Dutt, it is generally a pleasure to have him on screen, be it as the sinister gangster, or as the adorable Munnabhai, and Kidnap is no different for him, and his fans.

In terms of story telling, Sanjay Gadhvi has done a good job this time around, mainly because he has a story. Of course there are flaws and lose ends, and then there are the cinematic liberties which keep coming every now and then, but most of them are strictly for the visual pleasures of the viewers, and the rest of them, though significant look tiny when compared to the larger issue which the film tackles, and the message it delivers. The film definitely is worth a watch, and the dark hours in the theatres, with a dark story are sure to brighten up the box-office windows.

Desperately Delirious

2008-08-24T23:15:00.000-07:00

That is exactly how director RGV’s state of mind would have been, when he must have embarked upon this self proclaimed saga on voodoo, Phoonk which as it turns out almost every time in today’s scenario is nothing but a mere marketing brouhaha.

Set in an unpleasantly eerie house, which has some weird looking props all over (which typically parents with young kids would get rid of, but the couple here couldn’t care less) this is the tale of a non-believer. By virtue of being the sole bread earner of the family, he commands the relevant respect in the house, and everyone just bows down to the master’s ‘belief’, albeit reluctantly. He suffers a professional mess, and as destiny would have it, his rivals cast a spell on his kid, and how in the process of setting her free, he becomes a believer (sadly even his God comes out of thin air, just like the plot of the film) is what the story of the film is.

Unlike Bhoot, where RGV brought out the supernatural into the urban setup, where a layman in urban India could relate to it, here he goes the Ramsay way. Thankfully, he doesn’t (and hopefully couldn’t) go that bad, which is why one can sit in a multiplex and at least watch the flick. But for Christ’s sake(oops the mention of that word is blasphemous in this context), this is a house with kids, and in no way does the art director make an effort to make it look like one. Why in the name of God does the house have these wicked looking animals, a grim painting, depicting more somber hues to the already dim house, and why, why, why does it not have sufficient lighting? My problem with the film is that just to evoke the scary emotions in the audiences the entire setup is made out to be too ‘ghost-friendly’.

Also, when the camera tries out desperately to drive shivers down your spine, you wonder whether this is the same RGV, who managed to catch you off guard, every single time in Bhoot. What annoyed me the most is that he tried too hard to repeat the magic in every single frame of this film as well, but after all that, and after enduring the torturous traumatic ride called Phoonk, one still knows that all these were mere attempts!

On the positive side, the movie did enlighten me on the modus operandi of ‘black-magic’, it showed me how a lemon can be used, and what significance do the bone and the skull have and some more such stuff. And since I honestly didn’t care about all these, it was good (?) value addition! Also, Ashwini Kalsekar puts in a good performance, then be it as the wicked witch or the wounded tigress, she is highly competent, and given her previous track record, one can definitely say that she is versatile.

On the whole, Phoonk is a drab drama with dreary moments, which perhaps should be endured once, to get to know the psyche of someone who is desperate to get delirious and try and evoke the same emotion in his audiences, but fails miserably!

Yash ‘Raj’ is back…

2008-08-18T04:55:00.000-07:00

Thirteen years ago, Aditya Chopra did it for SRK, four years back; Kunal Kohli did it for Saif, and now with Bachna… Siddharth Anand attempts to do it for Ranbir. By and large, YRF has been ruling the rooster with a quintessential chocolate boy hero and their fairy-tale like romances…while SRK is yet to recover from the blue-eyed boy mania of DDLJ and Saif would perhaps never be more adorable than he was in Hum Tum, the romance factory has projected yet another strong contender to carry the ‘Raj’ tag in Yash Raj further…

An unconventional yet formulaic story, this one literally pays homage to the YRF biggies of the yesteryears, then be it the all time classic DDLJ, or the director’s maiden venture Salaam Namaste, or then Hum Tum for that matter. What’s interesting is that several other moments from the film are an amalgamation of a lot of movies which are far from romance, but the context has been changed beautifully in the film, the prime case in point being The Devil wears Prada.

Casting wise, each of the women are so apt for their parts, and they actually build Ranbir’s Raj very well, then be it Minisha’s immature impishness, or Bipasha’s sizzling sultriness or Deepika’s enigmatic effervescence. The only big flaw in the narrative is Minisha’s character Mahi, which is scarred far too much by a tiny incident. Add to that, for the justification of the stereotype and also to raise the issue of good packaging versus good content, the writer’s have made Kunal Kapoor the ideal man, every woman would pine for. And Minisha’s cold behaviour towards him, borrows from Rani Mukherjee in KANK (though the adultery is absent out here) which is definitely a problem, and a strict no no. But unlike KANK, the Raj here, takes charge of the situation and hence the film doesn’t meander hither-thither. Ultimately all’s well that ends well.

Otherwise, the film is pretty perfect for a mainstream commercial Bollywood Masala film. The Deepika track may seem like a hasty execution, but then that can be ignored; coz with more meat into it and more build-ups for their finale, the detractors would have cribbed about the length. All in all, it is a perfect entertainer with dollops of romance and a dash of emotions and humour. And to add to the starry performances, there’s good music (Vishal-Shekhar in full form with able support by lyricist Anvita Dutt Guptan), excellent visuals (Cinematographer Sunil Patel does his career’s best job) and fresh choreography (Ahmed Khan adds to the charm).

But the two real stars of the film are director Siddharth Anand and the face of the film, Ranbir Kapoor. While the former takes giant strides on celluloid as compared to his previous films, the latter actually gets his due this time. In terms of effort and hard work, Ranbir is as earnest and honest as he was in Saawariya, and this time the story doesn’t let him down, so there seems to be a winner. Besides all this Bachna… is special for me, coz Yash ‘Raj’ is back!

Anarchy Rules!

2008-06-09T00:59:00.000-07:00

A sequel to a powerful drama, and a film that marks the first ever collective on screen appearances of the people who are together touted to be the who’s who of Bollywood, Sarkar Raj, sure had it all that it takes to be the biggest ruler at the box-office. But alas, thanks to the anarchy in the plot, and the kingdom does fall flat.

Basically I didn’t think it was a bad film, but the biggest tragedy with Sarkar Raj is that I have to put it across this way. It should have been a good film, and that was the bare minimal that one would expect out of it. Amongst the several flaws, I think the very start of the film could’ve been much better, had Abhishek made a simple effort to analyse the project before he gave it his everything. Anyway the film bares a lot of unwanted stuff, so a scene or two which justified as to why Sarkar Junior gave in everything for this project could have made the narrative smoother. It is about being subtle and all is fine, but this scene works like a missing link in the entire plot, which in turn makes the character of Shankar completely half-baked, which in turn does contradict the original Sarkar. This is where the film loses its grip, as far as the plot is concerned.

The series of murders and the inclusion of characters which follow, do add to the dramatic twists in the film. And as much as I did like the background score, the frequency and the pitch of the score did make me feel like it was a soap on one of the channels. The constant usage of the sound does dilute the effect and most importantly the subtlety of RGV’s cinema (Aag excluded!).

The plot is interesting, though the execution isn’t as inspiring. From the writing perspective, I believe that Shankar’s character has been taken to a level, where he tries to be God. If attitude is what we are talking of, Abhishek’s screen presence bears resemblance with Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s state of mind when he made Saawariya. And thus, his character turns out to be arrogant and over-confident, rather than a balanced benevolent one, which is what Sarkar was in the prequel. Shankar’s demise and the original Sarkar’s obvious resurgence into the power chair only justify the half-hearted effort that has gone into the character of Shankar, which is the primary flaw in the entire plot.

Amongst others, Senior B is his own self, which is why he can’t be bad. But considering the fact that he is the ultimate one in the industry, his performance isn’t that great. Ash on the other hand has done a great job. Be it her body language, or her expressions, I liked her, barring the ‘ek chai laana’ bit in the climax where I thought she looked like she was possessed by the ghost of Shankar. Abhishek lets down after the fab performance in the prequel. The camera work is good in pieces, but the bizarre angles in certain places, make the film look like a distant cousin of flicks like Jhoom Barabar… and Tashan.

If one were to analyse the plot, it does follow a standard format, wherein the sequel perfectly fits into the grid established by the prequel. One man rules, another one supports him totally, a third man is vying for the throne and the then the murders happen for several vested interests, and then there is a new found heir to the uncrowned kingdom, as the king has grown old. Barring the difference that the heir is replaced by an heiress, the template of the film is the same. A whole lot of razzmatazz, and a bunch of interesting characters, which pop up from nowhere and still strive to reach a level, which their half-baked description and characterization don’t let them achieve; it is the anarchy in the writer’s mind which prevent the flick from being coherent in terms of the story that it tells.

Back to Bollywood!

2008-05-13T04:57:00.000-07:00

In an era of corporate Bollywood, movies also look mechanical many a times. Neither do they have the appeal which the Hollywood ones do, for all the reasons, nor do they have the inherent Bollywood charm these days. Thus, a film like Bhoothnath becomes special, as irrespective of all the new age Bollywood paraphernalia attached to it, the film is a celebration of the Bollywood spirit, in every way. It has a range of emotions, corresponding to the masalas of Hindi cinema, it has the twists in the tale (some forced, but some not), it has entertainment, it has stars and it has a message.

While the music may very obviously be considered as the weak link of the film, and could have been better, it is still less taxing while one watches it in the film, as opposed to a standalone hearing. But then there is humour, there is star power, there is a little bit of adventure, not in the treatment, but at a more fundamental conceptual level, and then there are dollops of emotions. As far as the star cast is concerned, this is perhaps one of the best ones in recent times, and not just as stars, but more in terms of the suitable actors. Senior B justifies in everyway why scripts should be written for him even today, and even if they aren’t how he can work wonders with them. Aman Siddiqui, the kid is adorable on screen and fantastic as a performer. As a personal observation, unlike a lot of screen kids of today (barring Darsheel of course) his over smartness on screen isn’t annoying and apart from him, the director should be given full credit for the same, and a lot of other things, but more about it later. As for King Khan, it is just a great experience to watch him on screen, yet again. While his character doesn’t really need anyone special, he makes the character special. Apart from his other special appearances, this one is more special coz of his co-star Juhi Chawla. The chemistry is just fantastic and not a single ‘family’ scene in the film lets one feel that the trio belong to different families in real life. As for Juhi’s performance, after Aaja Nachle and recently U Me aur Hum, this is the third film which makes you feel the real dearth of beautiful, elegant and graceful females who are performers as well in today’s cinema. She is superb, as the wife, as the mother, even as the endorser of Kurkure, and is a sheer delight to watch on screen.

Director Vivek Sharma has almost managed to tell a simple story simply. There is most definitely the unwanted Baghban angle to it. But then, almost every successful film has made such, sometimes wanted and most of the times unwanted appearances in the future films made by the director or the production house. The Baghban track of course does tarnish the feel of the film which is fabulous before it happens, but the rest of the film nice enough to ignore this aspect. The underlying message of taking the positive from anything, even a ghost and the concept of letting go in order to achieve Mukti are beautifully brought out in the film and that is the victory of the director.

Overall a nice family film for the holiday season I am not too sure whether the sequel in the making would again be a good film like Bhoothnath or end up being yet another product like most of the films of today. But Bhoothnath the film has a character and individuality; irrespective of the brand placements, it doesn’t look like a string of advertisements, and finally is a nice film, regardless of the bad Baghban enforcement in the plot.

Style…really??

2008-04-25T23:41:00.000-07:00

This is it. Seriously I don’t think even all their cinematic mementoes of the yesteryears put together can collectively act as compensation for the audience woes on account of witnessing something that can only be described as the nadir of contemporary Hindi cinema, or for that matter cinema in general, and it is none other than the latest offering of India’s biggest production house, Yash Raj Films, the touted magnum opus, the multi-starrer, hype heavy, Tashan.

Watching any film with the YRF tag embossed on it, is sacrosanct to me, and hence when I watch something as crappy, as ludicrous and as pathetic as this, it isn’t exactly what YRF means to me. I agree that with the changing needs of the business of cinema, one does need to focus on business opportunities which have been hitherto untried. But Tashan is neither a cinematic jewel, nor is it a sound business proposition. I mean, till when would we only assemble the best on screen talent in the industry, give them pathetically shady roles, and expect to make a sizzling dish? We all know that Akshay rocks at comic roles, Saif is the quintessential epitome of the urban, English speaking lad of modern India, Anil Kapoor is amazing even in the most hideous of roles, and Kareena is irresistibly sexy, and yeah they all can act well. This is stuff we all know. Then why the bloody f*** are we tormented by the makers to sit through this excuse for a film? Did they have surplus reel to shoot a film, and couldn’t find a better way of using it?

The film deals with a couple of issues – there is the small town-metro clash, where the English language is the separating bridge, then there is the revenge story, there is a childhood love story, there is a theft story, and yeah, there’s loads and loads and more loads of style, glamour and gloss. But is this really what we define as style? Perhaps the film is a bold statement on the intellect of idiots like me, who earn money and waste it on a film like this, or maybe it is made with reference to a scenario where style means no substance. Everything about it is bad, then be it the incorrect timings for the song situations, or the lyrics of the song Dil dance maare or the irritating English Hindi dialogues, which become inaudible and lose their charm (?) as Anil delivers it, to mention just a few. And yeah, then there are the special effects. The car flying sequence at the very outset of the film, speaks volumes about what lies in store for the audiences is to sit and cry in distress.

Though on the positive side, Dil haara and Chhaliya have good videos and make an interesting viewing as they also amount for a decent hearing. But that’s it. While the stunts attempt to be a rendezvous between the Rajnikanth movies and the cinema of the 1970s, with the Hollywood inspired technology, and a distinct Bhojpuri twang to appeal to the masses, neither do they look hilarious as some of their original inspirations, nor do they have the appeal which Farah Khan managed well with Main Hoon Na, where irrational takes over the rational but at least the basic sanity is in place. And yeah, the three lead kids are invincible too. Even a bomb-blast can’t harm them, in anyway. While we expect to see tiny particles and body atoms of the lethal triumvirate after the powerful bomb blast, all we get to see is how well they’ve managed even their clothes; even Kareena’s hair still looks as gorgeous as ever after the blast. Even video games have better entertainment value and are less taxing on the thinking portions of the brain.

Vaibhavi Merchant has tried some interesting steps for Dil haara, and Ayananka Bose has used some interesting camera angles for the entire film, but his eerie obsession for the bizarre camera angles, which started off with Jhoom Barabar Jhoom is still very much there and the weird hangover of the former stays with this one. In terms of the script, Tashan is so bad that the very fact that it got made is perhaps as ridiculous if not more than the idea of the script of Dhoom: 2 getting a booker prize for literary excellence, and in terms of the execution, honestly it looks like this film is being made to make Shaad Ali feel less guilty for making Jhoom Barabar Jhoom, which in comparison seems like a cinematic masterpiece by the way.

All in all, Tashan is special for one reason, since it has set the benchmark for Indian cinema at an all time low, and for all aspiring crappy films of the future, this one should hopefully not be defeated in the near future, for the sake of the paying public!

Dead man Alive!

2008-04-03T01:48:00.000-07:00

No I don’t disagree that Race is a good entertainer, okay its reasonably okay, perhaps a lil’ better than just okay, it is a decent one time watch. While it may come across as an edge of the seat kinda whodunit right till the end, I have one different dimension to add to the film.

For starters, Race isn’t much of an innovatively creative enterprise, nor are its makers at their creative entrepreneurial best. If there is one department in which they have excelled with Race, then it is getting the marketing blitzkrieg right. There they sure have hit the bull’s eye with a skill and an efficiency which very few people do these days. Story wise, the film has nothing new to offer, if one does do a review of the duo’s past ventures. The basic plot begins with a slight tweak in the way Humraaz began, with Akshaye Khanna (my usual favorite), being so miserably repetitive that in some scenes one might think whether they’ve actually re-shot the scenes, or have appended the leftovers from the previous venture to the screenplay of Race. Further twists keep happening, with oodles of sex, oops, oomph thrown in which the onlookers can ogle at, and then shades of so many Abbas Mustan thrillers keep making a guest appearance one after the other, and then finally comes a point when the film becomes a repeat of Ajnabee. So shockingly similar is Saif’s reappearance in the climax to Bipasha’s in Ajnabee, that one doesn’t need to figure out where the duo does their research for their ‘fresh’ films.

But what the film has, and where it strikes gold, is the ensemble star cast, and the amazingly ‘frequent’ twists which keep happening in the plot. Towards the end, the paths of the film’s script are so serpentine that even the most uninterested viewer wouldn’t want to miss them. This is where Race proves that though Abbas Mustan have traversed their oft repeated paths, they know their paths like nobody else. They live in a world of grey and all their characters always are grey. Its just that Race’s grey isn’t perhaps as demanding on the grey cells as is the case with Abbas Mustan generally. Of course, if one does hold 36 China Town and Naqaab, as a benchmark, then Race is a classic! Another hallmark of the film is the car race before the climax. Regardless of how they’ve done it or from where they’ve copied it, it is a visual treat and an exciting cinematic moment indeed!

Almost everybody is decent enough as performers, with Saif obviously being the pick of the lot, and Akshaye though a bit disappointing by his standards is competent nonetheless. While I guess Anil Kapoor must be in a dire need of roles to do such a crappy role, none of the women have much to do than flaunt their bodies, which they do very well, but none in the lot is worth a special mention (considering this is all that they do in all their films), apart from Sameera who should probably just stop doing films.

Technically Race is good, and everything from the background music to the camera work is picture perfect. While music composer Pritam needs to be reminded of his own body of work for him to realize what he has done with the music of this film, the title track and Atif bhai’s song make for an okay album overall, with the rest being the fast forward variety, visually and otherwise. Other departments are fine, apart from the dialogue writers who have just done a pathetic job. While several moments just get the punch coz of Saif and Akshaye, the same dialogues would have made fools out of other actors. And as for lines like mera ganna chus lo, which Anil Kapoor says to Sameera, I don’t even want to comment. I just have one request for Mr. Kapoor, Sir I am a hardcore fan of yours, and respect you more than anything else, please in the name of god, don’t make me regret watching you on screen!

On the whole, a nice weekend popcorn attraction, Race is a decent entertainer, which has its commercial success written as a subtitle, I somehow wonder whether it would have the repeat value which some of the previous Abbas Mustan flicks do have!

History revisited!

2007-12-27T23:03:00.000-08:00

Director Sudhir Mishra’s Khoya Khoya Chand takes you into that era of Hindi cinema, where cacophony wasn’t the hallmark of music, but melody was; where progression of thought wasn’t a mere departure of the heroine’s clothes from her body and where film making wasn’t only about grandeur and opulence. Before one begins to dissect his labour of love, one must applaud him and his team for the kind of effort that they have put into the filming of the era gone by.

After a first viewing in the theatre when I watched this saga of emotions on my notebook, I realized how anachronistic the subject, the treatment and the period of the film are in today’s times. For a film which takes you back into the annals of history, KKC does do justice to its own self on the level of being a film, but somewhere falls short in doing justice to the golden era of Indian cinema. There isn’t really a problem with the film in that sense, though the issue is that there are too many issues which the film tackles, not only in terms of situations, but also in terms of characters and people. There is an angry writer in the film, whose internal violence is modeled on Guru Dutt’s character in the legendary Pyaasa, while the leading lady is modeled on several legends from that era, as her character journeys through being Waheeda Rehman, Madhubala, Nargis, Nadira; to finally ending up like Meena Kumari.

Come to think about it, KKC has a lot of meat in terms of the story. But the irony remains that the promotion of the film didn’t cater to the audiences who could have enjoyed the flavours of sensationalism in the film, while the gossip mongers of today’s cinema, would either not know about the realities in these reel characters, or simply couldn’t care less about the same. Also, though the actors Shiney and Soha, along with the rest do a good job with the film, they aren’t crowd pullers, which again becomes a problem for a film like this, which has fairly elaborate production values.

Speaking about the plusses, everybody in the technical department has contributed their bit to capture the authenticities of the era; then be it the hairdos, the costumes, the music or the sets, even the camera angles for that matter. Even the most uninterested viewer can perhaps not miss the classic recreation of a frame from Pyaasa when Shiney walks out of Soha’s film set. To be honest, everybody from the acting crew has also done a competent job, then be it the two lead players (Shiney steals the show completely in my opinion), or the rest with Vinay Pathak, Rajit Kapoor, Saurabh Shukla or in an extremely brief role Sushmita Mukherjee. Music director Shantanu Moitra and lyricist Swanand Kirkire have done a fab job with the songs, and one would associate this one more with their maiden Parineeta, rather than the extremely forgettable Laaga Chunari Mein Daag. And with every passing song, my adulation for both Sonu Nigam and Shreya Ghoshal is on the rise.

On the flipside lies the pace of the film. Also, the story becomes too dark at several places, and for a viewer who doesn’t have any background of the film world of the 50s, it becomes a bit taxing. Though I have myself liked the film, I think these viewers can be granted their ennui, as the film does unfold on its own terms, without understanding the tolerance levels of the modern day audiences. That’s where it becomes anachronistic.

What fascinated me the most about the film; are the gender dynamics of the lead couple. While it had shades of Guru Dutt - Waheeda Rehman, and even Raj Kapoor – Nargis; the struggle to achieve individual and collective professional goals, while nurturing a love for each other on the personal level reminded me Hrishikesh Mukherjee’s Abhimaan, though the drama here never scales those heights. But in a time zone where perhaps a Salaam Namaste was one of the good examples of such gender dynamics, as the highly anticipated Fanaa proved to be a mere marketing miracle, while in most others the fairer sex is still relegated only to glamour, KKC has a certain freshness to itself, which is interesting.

Though the graph of the two characters, individually and together swings away form normality, the director has kept a close control on them. There are several moments in the film, where one realizes the power of the story teller. Some of the noteworthy scenes would be the one where the two break the window panes, which becomes metaphoric of the ice-breaking between the two, while in another she catches him in bed with another woman, and finally in the scene where the helpless lover in Soha, just can’t get over her lover, as her desperation takes her right into his bed, and then the reality brings her out of it. These are some of the scenes which have been worked on very well by every member of the crew.

On the whole, KKC does on one level pay tribute to the legacy of Hindi cinema, and on another it builds a story, which is interesting. While the purists would certainly have their issues with the narrative, for me the writer has done a fairly good job in constructing a fairly coherent character of the leading lady, out of several legends, while the hero is largely modeled on Guru Dutt, both on screen and off screen.

Stereotypically Atypical

2007-12-23T19:05:00.000-08:00

First time director Aamir Khan’s maiden venture, Taare Zameen Par is a classic case of how a director’s Midas touch can transform an oft repeated and stereotypically predictable story into a nugget of gold.

As far as the story of the film is concerned, in terms of the narrative and writing style, right from the placements and the stances of the various characters, to the finale of the film in the art exhibition there is nothing that you can’t guess before it happens; then be it the impish pranks of the main protagonist and the traumas of the dyslexic kid, or his father’s expectations from him, or his elder brother who is an epitome of virtue to the extent of being destiny’s prodigy, or his professors, who seem to have done their own schooling under all the legendary villains of Hindi cinema, or his weeping mother, who is an embodiment of the traditional Indian housewife, whose life revolves around the household chores, but is helpless and hapless to the point of being hopeless, when her husband is in charge of the situation, or be it the bizarre looking messiah played by Aamir himself, who breathes fresh air into the kid’s suffocated life, or the final breakdown of the kid’s stoned father who doesn’t know how to thank the Guru, who is the contemporary counterpart of the legends in the Indian mythology.

But what one can’t discount over here, is the amazing style of presentation, which lets the predictable story unfold on its own terms. This is precisely where the film gets atypical, and thereby, irrespective of the stereotypical plot, it rises far above it. The film does have shades several films, and as much as Aamir may dislike it, even Black. But the style of presentation has an incredible amount of freshness; at least as far as Hindi cinema is concerned. Right at the outset, when the kid picks out two tiny fishes from the mucky water, to the animated calculation of 3 into 9, to the teacher reading the hidden messages in the kid’s art and pleading for his benefit, to the finale where the kid goes and hugs the teacher, as a token of gratification, respect and love the film belongs to the director and he has done a fab job with it. Actor Darsheel Safary walks through his role with aplomb, and even Aamir the star is dwarfed by his histrionics. He is just perfect for the role, and he does full justice to the writer’s efforts as far as the enactment of the sketched character is concerned. The rest of the artistes also fit in their roles and do a good job.

The actor Aamir Khan is sort of veiled under the star Aamir Khan, and in several places this becomes very apparent. From his demeanor to his wardrobe, to the star-like entry which he takes, to his subject as a teacher at school, and his role further on, he gives the film that fairy tale touch while he plays Santa to the young child. However, as a director, he has handled several scenes so well, then be it the outdoor art class where Ishaan makes a boat and thereafter shies away when he is subjected to glory, or the scene when the teacher tells the father about how concerned he is and the father’s walkout when he can’t face the son, and so many more to mention. The film belongs to him, and this is in fact one of those films which make you realise the director’s power. In his task, he is ably supported by cinematographer Setu; music guys Shankar Ehsaan Loy; writer Amol Gupte; and lyricist Prasoon Joshi, along with Master Darsheel Safary. These guys are the pillars of the film and each one has done a good job, though in my opinion it is the writer who could have done a tad better job, by maybe including certain scenes with the mother-child, or showing her in a stronger light. But nonetheless, the film is special for the thought that it triggers, which should be looked at as the focal point while one is viewing the film.

I am someone who refuses to enforce logic and spoil the film. But some of the scenes in this film could have still been done in a better way. Considering it is a Hindi film, we can discount the fact that the kid ran away from the school and no one saw him, he attended one period and then submitted a sick leave for his absence for the day, walked out of the hostel at midnight etc. But what I couldn’t take was the way all the professors behaved. Sensitivity was made the hallmark of only one teacher, which is played by Aamir. Unfortunately, not one teacher felt like showing some amount of concern, forget compassion and figure out the child’s disease, or even treat him like a normal child. And if this is how a child who comes through the reference of the school’s trustee is treated, God alone save the fate of the children across the schools in the country. The film makes a bold statement on the Indian education system over here, and builds another stereotype. Somewhere the script looks a bit doctored in this context, to perhaps do justice to Aamir the star, also, not to forget the random change in the behaviour of all the teachers at the art competition at the end, which also in a way is a tribute to his star power.

But harping on those points in a film like this wouldn’t be right, because the cause and the effect of the film are far above such discussions. Aamir should be lauded for his efforts and execution, and true Aamir fans should also either ignore his comments on Black or overlook the similarities with it.

Rhythm DIVA-ine

2007-12-02T22:03:00.000-08:00

For someone who is consuming a staple diet of the current Bollywood content regularly, the experience of watching the Diva again, after watching the existing players felt more like how a street urchin surviving on bland, stale, and nutrition devoid ration would feel after eating a succulent seven course meal.

Yes the Queen is back to where she belongs, and it is just a sheer delight to watch her sizzle on the screen again. The first viewing of Aaja Nachle for me was only to somehow register the fact that SHE is back. Coupled with the controversies enforced onto it and the several issues that the film tackles, it does take a couple more to actually let the fabric of the film engulf the viewer into its magic.

What makes Aaja Nachle special; apart form the hype, the comeback, the banner etc. is the fact that it is an Indian film where all the males take a backseat. After watching the film thrice and enjoying it equally across all the viewings (with three completely different audience sets), I somehow feel that most of the criticisms that came its way are remnants of the Indian patriarchy at the box-office, which still continue to haunt and daunt the commercial prospects of a mainstream woman oriented flick. Agreed that Aaja Nachle isn’t the greatest Indian film ever made, across any department; and perhaps Madhuri could have had a more solid role which conformed far better with the norms of a classically approved Indian woman; but what cannot be neglected is the fact that it has content which is different at least for Indian cinema, and all the departments of the film have given their best shot to put up a concrete and coherent product which in itself would be enjoyable eye-candy if one doesn’t enforce logic into it. I mean it is a Hindi film for all you care, let it be!

Jaideep Sahni has created interesting characters, and right from Raghubir Yadav and Vinay Pathak, to Sushmita Mukherjee and Ranvir Shorey to the Laila-Majnu, Kunal and Konkona everyone is first rate. I particularly loved Konkona, Ranvir, Vinay and Sushmita. Everybody else is also competent. You hate Irfan Khan, and that’s his victory as an actor. Another surprise is Akshaye Khanna, who has proved yet again that consistency is the hallmark of success. His dialogues have been well penned and he delivers them with gusto. Apart from his scenes with Madhuri, he is amazing in the scene at the golf course.

For all my previous issues with Vaibhavi Merchant repeating her steps, I’d just say that Indian choreography today has someone who is worthy of carrying the legacy of Saroj Khan, and can also bring a Shiamak Davar twist (particularly Yeh Ishq Ishq…) The music would definitely take time to linger on after the movie, but is indeed soothing at times, and foot tapping at others. Visually, Show me your Jalwa has immense freshness, while the title track is classic Madhuri revisited with a little bit of Shakira thrown in, in the second interlude. As for the drama in the climax, well I believe writer Piyush Mishra, and the entire crew should be specially lauded for rewriting India’s most repeated love story with such freshness. These twenty minutes is where Aaja Nachle is completely hatke from the usual Masala, and the claps, seetis and cheering sounds from the audiences prove that though Indian critics mayn’t have matured, the audience certainly has.

From the writing perspective, I felt that the scene where Madhuri asks the politician to make Ajanta a political issue was trivial initially. However going by the sentimental outbursts of the political parties which have been plastered across media vehicles, I’d say that the writer had a vision. Kudos to that, and the inanity of Indian politicians! Also, the scene right after the interval, between Ranvir and Madhuri, and the one after it where she explains the basic plot of Laila Majnu, have been well written.

And finally a few words about the screen Goddess. Yes it is true that one can’t take the eyes off her. She is pure magic, and the grace, the rhythm in her, especially in her dance, regardless of the genre to which it belongs, is simply divine, even today. Another area where she shows the same versatility is her voice. The way the sound waves change their tone and frequency as per the mood of the scene, becomes very apparent largely because every reigning queen of today sounds the same throughout the film. Particularly noteworthy scenes are her early morning scene with Konkona, the speech after the title track and all her scenes with Akshaye Khanna. The level of detailing of the preparation is evident in the subtlest of nuances, right from the way she pronounces ‘dance’ before the American dream happens for her, and the US returned twang to it subsequently.

The best part about her character is that she is neither hampered by overconfidence, nor is she plagued by the ‘virtue’ of over-modesty. She is just someone who is aware of what she is. This is evident when she retorts back to a compliment for her dance, and says ‘I know!’ Designer Manish Malhotra has perhaps designed one of her best ever on-screen wardrobes for the film, and in each garment she looks astounding!

All in all, barring a few ‘logical’ flaws, the movie’s USP is its freshness, then be it the script, or the treatment, or just the fact that SHE is back!

Can’t stop smiling…

2007-11-27T04:28:00.000-08:00

It hasn’t been too long after Farah Khan’s love-story with Bollywood OSO has shown a mesmerized SRK getting swayed by his lady love, who happens to be the heart-throb of millions. So genuine was his crave for the ‘Star’ that his act of getting carried away and overwhelmed actually brought tears of joy into my eyes, and I was happily wiping them off as the film progressed.

It has been a couple of weeks after that and I see myself in a position where SRK was in that scene, coming face to face with someone, who has not only been my most absolute favourite ever, but has been an icon of sorts. A lot of things have been mentioned several times about ‘Star Power’, and ‘Idol Worship’ in a country like India, where fans go ballistic over their icons, their Stars, their demigods. Something similar struck me yesterday as I just opened my eyes wider and wider to actually tell myself that no, this ain’t any dream, and that I am actually, actually seeing Madhuri Dixit.

I think I now know what experiencing Star Power at the receiver’s end feels like. The aura, the magnetism, the charm which her personality exuded, was something that can’t be put into words. So much so, that for a usually verbose me, who just needs a reason to talk, I couldn’t even open my mouth and say a ‘Hi’, as the Star walked past me, and I felt like there ain’t any earth beneath me, as I was actually flying high in the sky, far into the galaxy that I have been so close to a Star, radiant as ever.

I always take such Star-praise articles with a pinch of salt, and though in case of Madhuri I always made an exception, I always thought that the 400watt smile and all were but creative exaggerations of lucky journos who’ve basked in the Star’s radiance. But on a brilliantly lit bright set, when I watched the diva walk in a dazzling pink dress, I realised what each of those epithets ever mentioned with regards to her smile, mean; and for a second I felt that I was being unfair the film columnists. As for her dance, well it is one thing to hear about it, another one to witness it on screen, and an entirely different experience to experience it live. No words can perhaps do justice to this divine occurrence.

And it is since then, that I just can’t stop smiling…

Second Innings!

2007-11-19T04:15:00.000-08:00

No I hadn’t liked Saawariya much after the first viewing experience. Maybe the Diwali euphoria, and the wrong positioning of the film, added to the herd mentality which I experienced, considering everyone else in the theatre disliked it. But a closer view of the film does sort of indicate why the film was worth the second effort in absolute solitude.

For starters, I don’t think that there was monotony in the visual department of the film. It did have its own theme, and thereby all the frames were confined to a basic colour palette, but then there was variation in form and colour, something that is hitherto undone in mainstream commercial Hindi cinema. Saawariya mayn’t necessarily be the greatest film of contemporary Hindi cinema, but it certainly isn’t as bad as it is made out to be. Agreed that there are flaws, in the screenplay and also in the way some of the beautiful songs have been mercilessly murdered, either by way of chopping out the stanzas, or by not being up to the classic Sanjay Leela Bhansali mark.

For a culture industry, which has been plagued by stereotype and ‘inspiration’; Saawariya at least had something different to offer. Of course nothing about it was earth shatteringly different and amazingly original, but nonetheless, there was an effort, which shouldn’t be discarded completely!

Unilateral Competition

2007-11-13T01:13:00.001-08:00

The cat is finally out of the bag, and it is a clean sweep for King Khan, as OSO has emerged as the clear winner in the highly anticipated and even more highly hyped Diwali clash of the titans. After watching both the biggies, and being someone who was dying to watch Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s Saawariya, I have but a few questions for Sanjay and a few thank-yous for Farah Khan.

To begin with, Saawariya seemed like a string of meaningless beautiful pictures. Several reviews have been written for the film, and the general sentiment is unanimous about the film being a big disappointment (BIGGEST for me, considering I expect the best from a Bhansali film). What amused me the most with Saawariya as a film, is that why did it need so many sub-plots?

In a desperate attempt to catapult Ranbir as the new age Raj Kapoor, the track from the legend’s Anari has been recreated with the Zohra Sehgal story and her loneliness, while the Devdas hangover still haunts the plot of Saawariya, which gets respite through Rani Mukherjee, who should ideally stop expecting words of praise for performances like these, come on Rani, this is the least that we expect of you, please try and go beyond it. Also, not to forget the fact that the Russian theatre in the original story makes way for Mugal-E-Azam, as Salman and Sonam romance amidst the crowds, and take full advantage of the fact that her grandmother is blind. While Salman’s character is extremely brief, to say the least, the under-development of his character leads to Sonam’s character being desperate and opportunistic, and this completely tarnishes the innocence which the character of Nastenka (Sonam’s counterpart in the original Russian story) has. Not to forget the fact that Salman has a meatier role in the promos, and hence his fans get out completely disappointed.

Technically brilliant though, the biggest roadblock in Saawariya’s march to success is the fact that it was promoted as one musical joy ride for the festive season. The product and promotion are so unrelated, that it is actually like devising the campaign for a wedding gown, and selling the funeral robes instead. The consumer will definitely feel cheated. However, what one can’t discount is the fact that Ranbir can make it big in the days to come, and it is his innocence and modesty which will take him places, while Sonam will have to struggle far more than this, to achieve a fraction of the legacy with which she entered the industry.

In my opinion, it the sad taste that Saawariya leaves in your mouth after the final reel has ended in the festive mood, which makes you relish the Masala of Farah Khan’s Om Shanti Om the most. Needless to add that the film has its own merits, and has perhaps got much more than what it takes to set the box-office by fire, OSO fills in the void which Saawariya creates and this is where it stands to benefit from the competitive hype. Even as a standalone release, OSO has the blockbuster tag emblazoned on it, which no Saawariya could have taken anyway. It is a kick-ass movie from the first frame to the last, and as one of my acquaintances rightly put it, it mayn’t be an unmissable, brilliant film, but if and when you do watch the film, you are sure to think that this is perhaps the best way to celebrate Diwali. As a brand, OSO delivers whatever it promises, and this is precisely its USP. There are no claims of being an intellectually stimulating, thought provoking film, and brilliant directorial craftsmanship. But the film is like a piping hot dish of chaat, which can be savoured and savoured some more.

What makes OSO an absolute delight to watch, is the passion with which it has been made. Director Farah Khan has poured in her mind, body, heart and soul in the making of the film, and her pure love and sheer dedication for the Hindi film industry comes across in each and every frame of the film, then be it the scenes wherein the actual shooting is shown, or then the eponymous star-struck title song, which will be remembered as one of the most amazing visual delights in the years to come; an absolute ten on ten to the lady, for the honesty and the purity of her product.

Any and every director to be will only look up to her and her undying passion which has enabled her to craft a film, straight out of her heart. Kudos to the effort! What also adds to the merits, is SRK and the rest of his gang, whose performances are histrionic counterparts of Farah’s passion. A no-brainer at times, and a Masala forever, OSO is a carnival of emotions, happiness, joy, fun, sorrow, and most importantly Bollywood, which has perhaps never been so very well-reflected in any of the previous films, which are dished out with an alarming regularity.

And finally, when we now look at the competition, one can easily say that perhaps the hype was the only saving grace for Saawariya, else it would have had a silent birth and a quick demise at the box-office. As for OSO, the general festive mood spoiling taste of Saawariya will only add to its merits and thereby its commercial prospects.

Flashback aka Déjà vu

2007-10-15T02:44:00.000-07:00

The trend has started, from Farah Khan’s maiden Main Hoon Na and the eagerly awaited Om Shanti Om, to Sriram Raghvan’s Johnny Gaddaar, and now Pradeep Sarkar’s Laaga Chunari Mein Daag. It is time for Hindi cinema to yet again relive the classic 1970s, and while its predecessors have done justice to the entertainment offered in the decade gone by, Pradeep Sarkar miserably fails to recreate the cinema of the 1970s, which has seen a diverse range of classics, by legends like Yash Chopra, Hrishikesh Mukherjee, Manmohan Desai, amongst others.

The plusses first! The glamour is on an all time high, the sets look appealing, the camera is very eye-friendly, and the picturisation of the beautiful house on the Ganga ghaat in Varanasi, and the song Hum to aise hain is delightful. Amongst the actors, Konkona is the pick of the lot, and exhibits both the juvenile and the mature sides of her character very well. In terms of spontaneity and camaraderie with the camera, she somewhere fills in the void which is created after Kajol. Even her unpolished yet endearing dance steps are a testimony to the same. Just as it is said for every film of hers, she is an actor to watch out for. Kunal Kapoor is adorable and has the spunk which is required for the role. It is in fact only the Kunal-Konkona track which has something new to offer as far as the film goes.

Amongst the other performers, I guess it is high time both Rani and Jaya Bachchan stop playing the quintessential bechari, and the archetypal suffering mother respectively. They are both good in their roles, as performers. However, in the myriad range of emotions that they exhibit, none looks fresh and new on their faces. Now should one extol them for the consistency in their performances, for having mastered those expressions by going through them again and again, or criticize them for yet again repeating themselves, remains the million dollar question. Abhishek and Anupam are both there, just there in the film. None of them do any value addition to the plot, and perhaps every action of theirs is so typical, that they merely run through their parts mechanically, then be it Anupam craving for a son, or Abhishek donning on the mask of a modern day Ram, as he accepts his Ahilya, who here is stained, not stoned.

Musically this is one of the less ear-friendly movies of the year, and ironically it still does hold on to the Yash Raj tag. Not to forget the fact that the same director-lyrics writer-music director trio gave us the unforgettable Parineeta. And for heaven’s sake what was that mujra doing in the film anyway? At a time for Indian cinema, where directors are making conscious efforts to keep the audiences inside the theatre, this film has this number picturised on Hema Malini, which assures that the audience stays at bay. How one wishes that the director would have tried to do something similar with Hemaji, the way he did with Rekhaji in his debut film.

From the sewing machine, to the visuals of Bombay for the struggling woman, to her chanting the Hanuman Chalisa, when her prince charming meets her, to her sister realizing about her true identity; there is nothing in this movie which hasn’t been on Indian silver-screen since time immemorial. Such films only consolidate the belief that Indian films bear and breed stereotypes. Speaking strictly in a post Parineeta context, director Pradeep Sarkar has lost it this time, and in a big way. Not only is his film dated, but is also extremely slow and boring in several portions. The length can be trimmed down drastically, and it better be.

In one of the scenes, Rani refuses the first monetary acknowledgement of her bodily services, and in the immediate next scene, a typically well-groomed up market, and stereotypically ‘feminine’ looking woman, advises her about not letting her spirit die etc. and then immediately trains her to be the high-class, high-priced, super niche and exclusive escort. If only individual scenes would have fetched and Oscar, this one should have been India’s official entry. Honestly, this is one of the CLASSIC scenes I have ever come across on Indian silver-screen. And another nugget is Rani’s gorgeously revealing, or shall I say transparent black saree, in which her sister gets hold of her true identity. In my opinion, even if Rani would have worn an outfit with the print ‘I am call-girl’ written all over it, it would have probably been far more subtle than this one. A rare gem by designer Sabyasachi, this outfit should also go down the annals of history as one more of the classic offerings of Laaga Chunari Mein Daag.

All in all, a film whose graph swings from average mostly, to a good on certain specific occasions (The Konkona-Kunal track), to bad mostly, Laaga Chunari Mein Daag is more like a stain on director Pradeep Sarkar’s credibility.

Where’s the Marketing?

2007-10-08T05:24:00.000-07:00

What happens when an exquisite diamond pendant is gift-wrapped in a 50 Paise plastic bag? Similarly, though the bad packaging doesn’t directly hamper the contents of a good film, it certainly curtails its reach, visibility and appeal drastically. This is precisely the problem with Johnny Gaddaar.

A director who knows his job (Sriram Raghvan of Ek Haseena Thi fame), a fresh leading actor who has the makings of a star (Neil Mukesh), an interesting, intriguing, and riveting plot with good performances and attention-grabbing dialogues, a big banner which pumps in the iron of its financial muscle every now and then (Adlabs), and good overall technical and creative content (the entire Cast and Crew) added with the fact that the BO was awaiting a biggie, as the only existing money-makers were already months old at the ticket window. Add to it, Johnny Gaddaar also had a strong word-of-mouth. But alas, if only it were marketed well!

I won’t say that the film is a classic by any standards, but it is indeed a good film, especially the kinds which one would want to sit through, enjoy and move ahead. It isn’t the kinds which one would watch over and over again, forever; but it is certainly something which one would thoroughly enjoy while one is in the theatre. It is crisp, it is fresh, the treatment is nice, it has no unnecessary Masala, and though you know the suspense right at the outset, you won’t want that coffee/pi break.

So what is the problem out here? Speaking strictly in terms of Logical Reasoning, Johnny Gaddaar would be the dual for Jhoom Barabar Jhoom. If JBJ proved, and further reiterated the point that kick-ass marketing can’t sell mediocre content, JG reinforces the belief that a good film with bad marketing is indeed an effort in vain, and its dismal performance at the ticket-window is a testimony to the fact that such films end up as disasters. Ideally Johnny Gaddaar would have been a decently successful film, with a little bit of promotion. The dark promos, their absence on several occasions, the insipid visuals and creatives, and the overall marketing which probably was there ONLY coz it is mandatory to have it, collectively acted as tiny little holes, which effectively worked towards the sinking fate of the film.

It is ironic that Bollywood generally laments over the abysmal performance of several films annually, and every Tom, Dick and Harry criticizes their directors. But here I guess it is high time that the marketers of the film fraternity, especially in the corporate era of Bollywood realise the crucial importance of the films’ promotion, so that no film suffers the way Johnny Gaddaar has.

What is interesting to note is that for every Salaam-E-Ishq (hideously made, lavishly marketed) there is a Dhokha (well made, badly promoted); and for every Jhoom Barabar Jhoom, there is a Johnny Gaddaar!

Musically yours…

2007-09-23T23:28:00.000-07:00

Too much is riding on Saawariya, and thus the music of the film has a huge task to accomplish, to be the very first favourite element of the film. Given that background, and the fact that Sanjay Leela Bhansali is making a musical after five years, does definitely add to the expectations.

And when the opening guitar of the title track plays, Saawariya as an album hits you exactly the way the first rains hit you on a sultry summer afternoon. From the very first beat, till the very end this song holds instant appeal, and stays with you. For all the Indian Idol and the likes, this song may soon be the next one to be rendered very often by the participants. It has been ages since Kishore Kumar’s yodeling made its exit from our songs, but this song brings back the era, as newcomer Shail sings with aplomb. The most alluring element of the song is the fact by the time the listener is completely smitten by it; it ends, and creates the longing for it. A complete winner, and a show stealer the album couldn’t have begun on a better note, and rightly so.

The album that follows is a mix of varied musical styles, and though one can’t really decipher all the resemblances, the entire album, in some way or the other gives a sense of pleasant déjà vu, while several melodies of the yesteryears meld and fuse and then blend into the music of Saawariya, though this time the resemblances are only pleasant and not plagiaristic.

Yoon Shabnami is another track with an instant but long lasting appeal. The highlight of the song is the first interlude, when the fast violin, fuses into the sitar, and then suddenly when the qawwali begins. The transition is beautiful, and Shail’s voice, is again soothing. Richa Sharma proves her prowess as a singer in Daras bina. While this isn’t exactly the song for the ears attuned to the melodies (?) of Himesh and the likes, it is one of the musically richest songs of the album. With the alaaps, and the musical notes which will remind one of Devdas and the master’s attention to detail, and visual resplendence, this song is sure going to be a visual treat, and the connoisseurs of art will throng the theatres again and again for the same. Amongst the choreographers listed, if Shiamak Davar choreographs this one, it will be an unusual fusion version of modern art. Jaan-e-Jaan, with its undercurrent of pain, will take time to grow, but will definitely be remembered for long, in the years to come. The song to me brings back the memories of Do pal from Veer Zaara, and is painfully soothing.

One wonders, as one wanders through the musical web of Saawariya whether the album will have any commercial viability and then there is Alka Yagnik crooning Chhabeela which by the sound of it seems like the courtesan’s song, while she is catcalling to her lover. A few seconds with the O-o-o-o, and one will figure out that this is Rani’s song in the film. I think this song should be out soon, for all commercial purposes, and the video does seem promising. Also, the description of the guy in the song, suits Salman more, from whatever of his look has been revealed. So basically it seems like a crowd puller.

The reprised version of the title track, which marks the end of an unforgettable musical compilation, is again a feel good number, though I personally prefer the original. This one may actually be the song which plays with the visuals which are out on TV currently (in the hotel while he tries to woo her), while the original version may play when the hero is prancing his way to glory in the white towel.

Amongst the other songs, Shreya Ghoshal’s Sawar Gayi has striking resemblances with Silsila yeh chahat ka from Devdas, right from the opening sounds of the clouds, to the general sentiment that echoes in both the songs. The lyrics fall more on the cute side for this one, and Sameer has brought out the girl’s sentiments beautifully. This one will again take time to grow. Her other song, Thode Badmaash again falls on the cute side, and resembles Bairi Piya from Devdas. Composed by Bhansali himself, this is another of the short songs in the film, which end very soon, and make you long for more. These two songs pretty much create an aura of innocence to the romance, as it grows, just like it does, in the first half of Devdas.

I have been a tad disappointed by Kunal Ganjawala, and both his songs, Masha-Allah and Pari, will perhaps take the longest time to grow on me. Also, the tune for the former seems a little forced and fitted into the composition, but I am more than sure that the visual counterparts of the song will fill in for the punch in the songs, which seem to be lacking, at least in the first couple of hearings.

Shaan’s Jab se tere naina is yet another gem in the album. One thing special about this song, and a couple of other numbers is the feel of devotion which one gets as the songs play, then be it the alaaps, or the renditions of Allah, which bring in pleasant memories of the Muslim socials which haven’t been made for a while now. I don’t know if this is the correct way of putting it but these songs; seem to be soaked in the Bhakti ras and this is precisely what separates the songs, and the romance of Saawariya from the run of the mill songs which are replete with the metaphors of beauty and love, but somehow look half-baked in comparison. Saawariya seems to take love on a divine platform, and this is exactly the area where it will score, especially when pitted against a commercial potboiler like Om Shanti Om.

Debutant music director Monty does complete justice to both his ancestral connections with Laxmikant Pyarelal and to his maiden work, Devdas (he composed the background music for the same, and also for Black). But the surprise packet of the album is definitely lyricist Sameer, who has proved that he can do justice art, when given the chance. The guest lyricists, Nusrat Badr and Sandeep Nath also keep pace with Sameer, with one song each.

And finally a word on the genius of Sanjay Leela Bhansali, who makes me take my adoration, admiration and adulation for him on a completely different level, every time he creates something. Musically he has done full justice to the fact that his previous film was song less, and now one just waits with bated breath, as the symphony of Saawariya gets painted on the screen and the hues and shades of the colours fill in as the visual complements for the melodies.

From its variety to its freshness, Saawariya probably has everything that takes to make a great album. On a candid note, after Devdas (2002) and Veer Zaara (2004) this is one complete album, and thanks to the financial backing and the marketing muscle that will be put into place to promote the album and the film, the audiences who have been enslaved by mediocre content, will be subjected to what can be rightly defined as good quality content.

There goes the black!

2007-09-14T01:29:00.000-07:00

Inspiring and interesting it is to know that the BMC is taking special measures to curtail the piracy, which has been sucking substantial amount of revenues from the Indian film industry’s kitty. Annually, Bollywood is losing out on roughly Rs. 1500 crores, thanks to piracy, is what the reports say. The interesting bit however remains that the ones who are targeted are the pirates on the streets.

The two minute passage from the signal into the Andheri station is more like a walk into the lanes of entertainment, which aren’t confined to the realm of Bollywood, as one gets everything from Hollywood movies, to video games to everything. Go to Bandra, the scene is the same. A small shack on the bridge next to Mahalakshmi station is no different, albeit in its size. A little walk onto the Dr. D.N. Road in South Bombay, and the variety is even better, though the number of stalls is more, and the number of goods per store is lesser. Amongst the ones which I have seen, the one at Andheri is like the wholesale market.

But this isn’t the limit and extent to which the rampant piracy is confined. Google in the details for MP3 downloads, and you get all the latest music labels (The cyber criminals are waiting for the music release of Om Shanti Om and Saawariya). I have friends abroad who download Hindi movies for free and watch them. Most of us, silent perpetrators of this crime can actually afford to buy the music, to watch the films in the theatres, but we don’t. The web-space somehow seems to be out of the ambit of the MPDA (Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act), or maybe nothing about it hasn’t been proposed as of now, or pardon my ignorance, maybe I am unaware of it. In that sense, the web piracy becomes the convenient hidden pathway to the glamourous world, much like the secret pathway to Hogsmeade which Mr. Harry Potter discovers.

Now check this out, a citation from the Times of India today: (An excerpt from an interview with the cop in charge of the Bombay piracy racket)
Q: Who will the action be targeted at under MPDA?
A: Everybody will be booked under this act, from those who manufacture pirated versions to those who circulate it in markets and sell it on footpaths and in shops. At present, the accused are all booked under the Copyright Act and there is no specific section for manufacturers or sellers.

It is indeed great to know, and more so in the interest of the crime, that the buyers are not included under the section. Long live the piracy brigade. So as I had mentioned previously on one of the posts, about black marketing, even this regime to curb piracy is like an ethnic cleansing of the weaker stratum of society.

Can we do something about it? Can the film industry as a whole do something about it? Can’t they have differential ticket prices depending upon the films’ worth, though the exhibition expenses for all the movies is the same? I won’t mind buying a ticket worth Rs. 250 for Madhuri’s upcoming Aaja Nachle, but a suburban multiplex screening Aag at similar price, oh forget it! Why can’t they have cheaper rates for cheaper films, and it is not like the experienced intelligentsia of the industry can’t estimate the films worth beforehand. If Aag were to be screened at a multiplex for say Rs. 50, I’d watch it. If the film looks like it belongs to the 1970s, it may bloody well be priced accordingly.

Let us make the black market legal, or if I may put let every film be sold like a product, and be priced at a price it sells. Then a Neal N Nikki even by Yash Raj shouldn’t be sold like a Chak De! In fact, it is like an insult to Shah Rukh, his star value and his brand worth! (I agree that my previous quote about Aag is contradictory to this one, but then that was an exception!)

So we can actually think about it. So many of the film industry people, are individually, financially better off than most of the junior level employees of the piracy market put together. So why target them at the beginning? Why isn’t some action being taken at the higher level? If the reporters can furnish data about the extent and worth of the market, why can’t the cops curb it at the upper level? Are these raids on the make-shift CD shacks a mere trick to show the aam junta that the cops are aware of the scene, or is it just a tool to report measures in progress to knock down the goons who have been pillaging the industry of its worth?

I distinctly remember this news bit, about a huge shipment of pirated VCDs and DVDs of David Dhawan’s Biwi No. 1 being confiscated, and the proud producer Mr. Vashu Bhagnani hogging the limelight and promoting his film. This film released on 28th May, 1999, amidst the euphoria of the cricket world cup, and still managed to be the biggest box-office grosser of the year. A pirated CD, hiring for about four hours would cost about Rs. 50 to 100 then, with a refundable deposit, of around Rs. 200. Today I can buy a pirated CD for about Rs. 30.

From then and now, the film industry is getting more and more organized, the exhibition of movies is getting better with the multiplex revolution, the ticket prices have soared sky high, the revenues have increased manifold, the marketing budgets have become an essential cost and with in-film placements the makers are fast making the marketing department a profit centre, the proliferation of the news channels have provided more avenues to disseminate information about such illegal pirates, the film prints are getting encrypted, digital cinema is booming, FICCI is conducting an annual survey on the industry and is showing the industry’s worth increasing, and further increasing. But, with regards to this problem, we are still there…we are stuck with the sab chalta hai attitude.

A website informs me that the marketing budget for Saawariya is estimated to be Rs. 20 crores. I genuinely wonder what the film will do to spend this amount; perhaps buy one hour slots on all important channels, daily; buy every hoarding in Bombay; and God knows what. From my little knowledge of the industry, a film like Hum Tum can be made in about Rs. 8-10 crores, including the foreign locales, decent stars, good crew, and production values which make the film look like it is at the cusp of being realistic and lavish. So then where on earth will Rs. 20 crores be spent, on marketing only becomes the million dollar question! If I may suggest, even if 10% of the marketing costs is used, as an experiment to screen the movie at subsidized rates, piracy can be dealt with, and a savvy audience member, especially the one who yearns for quality cinema, will then prefer watching a Saawariya for less, before he watches the year’s most awaited release Om Shanti Om, at an extra premium cost, since the two release on the same day of Diwali on November 9th!

With the corporatisation of the industry, maybe the makers can take over provision of high quality entertainment at subsidized rates, as yet another Corporate Social Responsibility endeavour, as this will help them serve and entertain the society on several levels!

Secular Weapon

2007-09-05T00:55:00.000-07:00

It is a commonplace phenomenon in Bollywood that a good film goes unnoticed, and I believe that is what is happening with Pooja Bhatt’s Dhokha. A well made, thought provoking film, the two biggest flaws with Dhokha, however are that, it is very badly marketed, and the fact that the title and the legacy of the Bhatt brand, together make it sound like yet another sleaze flick. The film is anything but that, and if one were to segregate all the Bhatt offerings, this one would fall under the category where Zakhm belongs.

A taut and crisp screenplay with well penned dialogues, are the strengths of the film. Nowhere in the proceeding of the film, does any scene look unwanted, and neither does any song. In that sense the film does boast of good editing. Also, the songs, apart from being soothing add to the story, and this is one film where the songs aren’t meant to be for a trip to the loo or for a bite at the snack counter.

Director Pooja Bhatt, with the strong and able support of her writer, Shagufta Rafique, emerges triumphant in portraying the true face of terror. The notion of terror and its modus operandi are truly secular in the film, as both the sides of both the communities are showcased and the film doesn’t take any moral stance on either of them. Terrorism remains a notion in the film, and it takes the face of certain individuals, who work for it and some others who fight against it, though the stress of the portrayal does lie on the Islamic community.

Another highlight of the film is its focus on the act of incrimination by the police, which converts an innocent into a convict. It is the story of Sara, who after being tortured by a uniformed goon, who uses his own body as a weapon to harm and hurt a woman’s integrity, takes to her own body, not only as a defense mechanism to fight her internal conflicts, under the misguided influence of a fundamentalist but also as an offence mechanism, and becomes a suicide bomber. However, one major flaw with the narrative and the film, is that her internal turmoil and the journey which she takes while she lets go of her morality to embrace mortality haven’t been shown, and therefore the viewer can’t be in a position to judge the right and wrong of Sara’s deed and the circumstances under which she took the lethal decision.

The plot of the film does become slightly predictable when Zaid, Sara’s husband and the hero of the film decides to stop another suicide bomber, but the smooth progress of the events and a gripping climax, with well handled emotions make sure that the film’s graph proceeds only in the upward direction. The final comment by Anupam Kher on what true Jihad is actually about comes as a perfect end for a powerful story which the film boasts of, and triggers a thought even in the most indifferent viewer. Dhokha isn’t a film which you can watch over popcorn and then forget everything about the film, as you leave the theatre.

Director Pooja Bhatt handles the film well, and the interest in the film is maintained till the climax. She balances the message and the entertainment perfectly, and in several scenes does remind the viewer of some of her father’s films, including Saaransh (the scene where Anupam Kher claims his son’s body) and Zakhm (the backdrop of the communal tension, and the scene where a Hindu rejects Zaid’s blood for his ailing daughter). The politician like styling given to Zaid’s friend, when he decides that Zaid is a culprit also makes a statement. The film has many such subtle underlying messages, if one were to sit and watch it carefully. Barring a couple of flaws in the plot, and the underplayed treatment to an important issue (Sara’s ghastly internal journey) she has definitely done a good job. Another person who needs to be lauded is writer Shagufta Rafique, for her style of unfolding the plot, and the dialogues. Editor Deven Murudeshwar has managed a crisp film, which is quite a rarity these days. Even the other technical departments are handled well.

Muzamil Ibrahim makes a confident debut and enacts the part well. Tulip Joshi could have been given a meatier role, but she is fair to whatever she gets. Other actors also do their part well, and Gulshan Grover and Anupam Kher are in form. The music fits in with the plot, and is soothing and pleasant.

Dhokha is a topical film, which will make you think. Unfortunately there is no hype surrounding it, and this is perhaps the worst marketed film from the Bhatt camp. A better marketing effort and a more appropriate title (which would have been devoid of the sleazy metaphoric connotations) would have ensured better prospects at the box office for the film.

It isn’t often that a film like this is made, and it is indeed sad that it goes unnoticed. Dhokha might not be a brilliant movie, but the earnest effort and execution should at least be acknowledged!

Child’s Play!

2007-08-30T23:10:00.000-07:00

No that isn’t the title coz the film deals with a baby, but because Sajid Khan’s inanity, immaturity, and impish aspiration of direction is so frivolous, below the belt and over the top that it looks like a caricatured construction of a cartoon film; which in its pristine form isn’t quite as much a child’s play as is the dilapidated adaptation of a Hollywood flick with touches of Nanha Farishta thrown in, coupled with the horny fantasies of an overgrown, underdeveloped adult! So basically, Heyy Babyy emerges from the kinky fantasy of a teenager, especially in the Indian context, where sex is always discussed in whispers, behind the closed walls, and thereby the eroticism often turns out to be mere and pure sleaze.

Vidya Balan, who is hell bent to prove with every successive film that Parineeta was a fluke plays the pretty looking, dim witted, ultra rich hot chick, who can make decisions like loving a man and bedding him in a span of two-three days, and one song, whose picturisation doesn’t even justify the blooming, budding romantic connection, which leads to immediate bedroom drama. And our super-macho stud boy (sans my dislike for the film, all these words definitely suit Akshay Kumar perfectly) gets it right (or perhaps wrong) at the first (and perhaps only) attempt and the baby in the Heyy Babyy comes into being! Talk of being stereotypical Mr. Khan, and there you are.

The baby being accidentally delivered at their (yeah Akshay has two more Casanova male friends too, who definitely look like extras besides him) doorstep, their initial lackadaisical attitude towards it, the dramatic twist in the plot and their sudden affection and wannabie labours at fatherhood (pun unintended), and then the further dramatic separation of the toddler from her three daddies, and a typically sappy saga of union towards the end, pretty much make up for the flow of events in this bizarre enterprise, which is dished out in the name of cinema. And then there are these sidey characters in itsy bitsy roles who enact the roles which the milestones do on a highway ride.

In an attempt to squeeze in everything, (sex, sleaze, oomph, innuendos, drama, emotions, music, comedy etc.) the captain of the ship ends up weaving a fabric which has lose ends at the edges, and as the film progresses, the tear keeps wearing off and finally the audience is left with a bunch of lose threads, which are the figments of the remains of what is called Heyy Babyy. He surely needs to learn some bits on making films from shows like Ikke pe Ikka, Kehne mein kya harz hai and the likes. Ideally how I wish that he doesn’t make a second attempt at trying.

Barring the put on attitude, Vidya Balan could do with some actual style and attitude, especially to carry off the prints which she wears in the film. (Nice work Manish, but alas!) She also needs someone to guide her through the process of role selection. Fardeen wouldn’t have had a better chance for a flagging career, but only if he would have cared as much for his own career the way I do as I write this. His bloated face makes him look ideal for both a drug re-hab ad, and a 'before' creative for a VLCC ad. Riteish takes over the glamourised role of the side-kick which was epitomized by Rajendra Nath, in the Shammi Kapoor films, and there’s mere glamour to him, which by the way doesn’t come naturally to him. Also his loud outcry of Jai Maharashtra is the most disgusting attempt at being funny that I have ever witnessed (I am ignoring the piss in the bottle scene from Aamir Khan's Mela, and the likes), and I hope this remains the permanent nadir for Hindi cinema. Boman Irani is a delight in whatever little he gets, and needless to say, he is wasted.

Shankar Ehsaan Loy aren’t quite in form and this one is perhaps there most forgettable track post Rudraksh (the same silly Sanjay Dutt starrer which featured Negar Khan in the song Ishq Khudai). I like the camera work, because the locations are beautiful but that’s it. Some dialogues are really funny and others are bad, real bad. The flow of the narrative is predictable, and tributes to classics from yesteryears, namely Chupke Chupke look like frantic tries at taking potshots at the film.

If there is something that keeps you on your seat irrespective of the director’s persistent and painstaking pursuit to drive you out, it is Akshay. He rocks! Though the glycerin tears get that sheen on his face which is usually found on the bare bodies of such hunks, one doesn’t really mind it, as he ushers you through the grotesque and freaky frames, out into a world where inanity doesn’t meet insanity. Amongst the other positives, the title track is well shot, and strictly refrains from being cheap, though it could have gone that way; and in an eighty second long role, SRK just proves why he is SRK, the King Khan!

All in all, a horny, insensitive, insensible, and senseless film targeted at the masses desperate (pun intended) for entertainment, one sits and contemplates as to why does Indian comedy always have to be slapstick or sleazy to be funny. Why can’t a film like a Chupke Chupke or a Khubsoorat (we so miss you Hrishida) or for that matter even an Andaz Apna Apna be made today? Are we supposed to find respite only in a Munnabhai?

And going by the success of the film at the BO, be prepared for many more such babies to come your way, till the time their makers grow up!

The Whitening Black

2007-08-16T04:38:00.000-07:00

New age business methods, computerized database management, more accountability and in effect rightful ownership of the earnings to the deserving. Come to think about it, the multiplex revolution in cinema today, has caused an ethnic cleansing of sorts in the Indian context, where again the blacks are suffering, the black here being the Black marketers.

Gone are the days, when the indicator of a movie’s worth at the box-office was its worth in the Black Market. From Amir’s endearing Munna in Rangeela to the claim to fame and thereby financial success of the black marketers at Minerva (A theatre in Mumbai, which witnessed glory at its best in 1975, when the cult film of Hindi cinema played there) at the time of release of Sholay, the relationship of the black guy (with a typical 10 ka 20, 10 ka 20 going on in the background) and Hindi cinema has been sort of inseparable, interesting and intriguing.

At the drought prone Indian box-office this year, it was a rare and pleasant sight to watch the black guys making merry across theatres in Mumbai yesterday. As the country basked in the glory of its independence, I took a small walk around these theatres (Chitra - Dadar, Apsara – Lamington Rd, Regal – Colaba) which played Chak De! India; and more jubilant than the victorious damsels in the movie, were the 10 ka 20 guys outside these theatres. ‘Make hay while the sun shines’ and they followed it to the T.

Almost everyone I know laments about the fact that Metro is now Metro Adlabs. Amongst other things, actual black, and not the white packaged black was missing at Metro. But when I had a brief chat with one of the escorts at Regal last year, he gave me his perspective on the same. I had visited the theatre exactly one day before the release of Fanaa when the multiplex v/s producers issue was raised openly for the first time. While I sat amidst the 8 or 10 occupants of the giant sized stall at Regal, to witness the final screening of Vikram Bhatt’s Ankahee I constantly kept wondering about how the expenses curve and revenues curve of the theatre kept acting like an estranged couple.

Cut two and I was at the Sunset Drive-In in Ahmedabad, on November 24th 2006. The date definitely holds a great significance at the Indian box-office, as currently India’s highest grosser at the BO, Dhoom-2 released on this day. Swarmed by thousands and thousands (and going by the size of the Drive In, I am not exaggerating on the numbers) of people from a cinema crazy nation, whose stampede on the unpaved flooring created a dusty, hazy ambience; the theatre must’ve had relived its glory from the bygone era, while I stood there ticket less, waiting for my black buddy to give me my boarding pass.

Today we talk about box-office records, every now and then. The first week collections decide it all, they say. If I may put in some statistics, K3G broke the record for the opening week’s collections in 2001 after a really long time, while Veer Zaara made K3G history in 2004, to become history at the hands of Mangal Pandey in 2005, which itself was defeated by Rang De Basanti in Jan 06, followed by Fanaa in May 06, then by Krrish in Jun 06, KANK in Aug 06 and finally and currently unparalleled by Dhoom-2 in Nov 06. So there goes.

While the film’s run at the BO is shortened, its worth is increasing and it cashes in on the initial hype. At the end of the day, when I see multiplexes charging rates which are even higher than the premium charged by the black guys of Indian cinema, I think about luxury, comfort and convenience. But in the whole scheme of things, the fabric of the society is changing, and the black business is getting legalized in a way (Of course the amenities that come at the cost the multiplexes charge at generally worth it. But a multiplex as shady as Citypride in Pune charging 140 for Chak De! is plain simple legal black, and nothing else. A Gaiety in Bandra offers far better seating and experience at lesser rates.)

So I again say, that Hindi cinema’s tryst with the black guys is never ending. it is just that when the white collared gentlemen from the corporatised multiplexes take on the black act, it is unjustified at times, and rightly justified most of the times; but it is certainly not half as entertaining as Munna in Rangeela.

As India stands poised for the modern socio-politico-economic era, I sit and brood. That I will join the bandwagon, and that I follow the statistics mentioned in the FICCI reports which fail to include the enthralling, interesting side of the black business is obvious but being on the cusp of the haves and have nots of India I take a minute and think whether there will be a day when some sort of a Bollywood museum will be built, and I walk with my grand children and show the statue of a skinny, stubble clad man, dressed in multi-coloured rags and say, this is how the black guy looked.

Indian Masala

2007-08-12T22:08:00.000-07:00

Well, that is precisely what Chak De! India should be called. It is a film soaked in rich Indian emotions, marinated with the varied flavours of the local cuisines with a dash of patriotism, adequately blended to synthesize the symphony, and rightly spiced and garnished with that one thing which is indispensable for any Indian film; its Star value.

The one person who needs to be lauded at the outset is story, screenplay, dialogues and lyrics writer Jaideep Sahni. If Bunty aur Babli and Khosla ka Ghosla proved his prowess as a writer and reiterated the fact that he has a good understanding of the variety in the multiple cultures of India (Khosla ka Ghosla was Delhi specific though) Chak De! India gives him an opportunity to weave a fabric from the different threads of India. The sheer sense of aesthetics with which he picks an eclectic mix of these threads and weaves them into the Indian tri-colour is superb. He is brilliant, period!

With a script as well penned as that of Chak De, the task for the director is eased out on one level and on another level it becomes an uphill task to achieve the zenith which the director has already attained. Director Shimit Amin plays the dual role tactfully. While he takes the easy route effortlessly; his voyage on the uphill task of execution shows the traces of dexterous craftsman.

Cameraman Sudeep Chatterjee has done yet another fabulous job. The way he maneuvers on the sports-field is just amazing and I don’t think any words of praise come close to the camerawork. Even in the other technical departments, the film is competent.

The bunch of young girls brings in freshness, innocence and naivety, all at the same time. It is of course their rawness as performers and the slightly unpolished look, which they impart to the characters, that make the film real and believable and this is precisely where Chak De! scores. Be it Balbir’s boisterousness or Bindiya’s arrogance, Komal’s innocently jealous expressions or Preeti’s oomph well balanced with a woman’s struggle, Soimui’s muted silence or Vidya’s post-nuptial act of juggling between the house and the career; every character has been well etched and well fleshed by the writer and well enacted by the performers.

And then the film has its moments, then be it the fight at McDonald’s, or the scene on the stadium before the finals, be it Shah Rukh’s stern stance or Bindiya’s defiance, be it the coach’s public humiliation or his acquittal; or the scene where Shah Rukh talks about the joy of seeing an Englishman hoisting the Indian flag; everything is just perfect. The symbolic use of cricket to fight the gender war, through Preeti’s fiancée is noteworthy, and it just showcases the extent to which patriarchy is rooted in the Indian soil. Even in a modern, educated, liberated, progressive, gender neutral India, it is all about the men, it is all about cricket.

In the 60th year of India’s independence, Chak De! liberates her national sport from the clutches of anonymity. On that level, this film conveys a lot about the modern day patriotism, to a nation which is currently enslaved by glamour, glitz and the razzmatazz of the western legacy.

And finally, as I write about my demigod, I am again into tears, exactly the way I was when I saw him on the screen. Watching Shah Rukh on screen is always a delight and with Chak De! he takes this delight on a celestial platform. The smouldering pain in his solemn eyes, effectively brings out the suffering of a convicted innocent. His dedication, his zeal, his arrogance, his honesty, his commitment, his piety and his renunciation of all the glamour that follows his success and thereby his exoneration; take his character to the level of a spiritual person, which in a way does remind me of Dev Anand in Guide. As Shah Rukh walks back into his ancestral house as Kabir Khan, all I can offer as a devotee are my tears of joy!

Medical Rebirth

2007-08-10T02:11:00.000-07:00

In an era of artificial cosmetic surgeries, which attempt to recreate and rejuvenate the beauty of the bygone era, legendary director B. R. Chopra joins the bandwagon with his classic Naya Daur.

To be very honest, the coloured offering doesn’t really impress the way it should have, and rather than being the rediscovered classic it ends up being a mere medical rebirth. The surgery enables it to embody all the superficial embellishments (the colour, the visuals and the jazz) but somehow the life is absent.

And if I am not wrong, even the editing of the film has been tampered with. Otherwise, why on earth would Dilip Kumar promise his friend to first decide on who gets the girl and then sing Maang ke saath tumhara with her; or why would the workers be laid off in the first place owing to the mechanization of the factory and then later they’d celebrate the inauguration of the machine in the factory? Naya Daur wouldn’t have been the classic with this haphazard editing, and if the editing has been altered, then the makers have no moral right to promote it with the same name. It is high time we acknowledge the editor’s contribution to a film and as audiences understand that a film with an edited flow isn’t the same film.

Amongst the positives of the film, well I am glad that in my lifetime I got to experience the magic which the name Dilip Kumar creates on the silver-screen. Legends are legends after all. The more you say about them, the less it is. Vyjanthimala has been a childhood favourite. But for someone who has experienced her acting prowess in Sangam, this role isn’t too much value addition. As for the music, instead of praising it, I’d just say that it is composed by O. P. Nayyar Saab. That should exemplify its extraordinary quality and timelessness.

For us yuppies who are used to splurge in the multiplexes over candy-floss cinema, Naya Daur is a refreshing change, for its honesty, its earnestness, its modesty, its humbleness, the progression in thought, and director B. R. Chopra deserves all the laurels for the same. Though the background music reaches way ahead of even the foreground and jars the beauty and innocence of the visuals, just like K serials; the colour treatment of the film isn’t exactly as bad as it was with Mugal-E-Azam.

Amongst other classics which are being remade, or revived today, Naya Daur has a special place reserved for itself, because India herself is going through a Naya Daur presently. Where is the era of globalization taking India today, will the result of this sudden inflow of the western moolah cause another conflict in the Indian interests, just like the narrative of Naya Daur and most importantly are we as a country poised to face the repercussions if any with the heroic zest and superhumanly zeal which Dilip Kumar’s character in the film is blessed with, become the resounding and lingering questions which one is arrested with after an otherwise enjoyable joyride in the theatre!

Individualistic Individualism

2007-08-03T23:50:00.000-07:00

I don’t really know where I should begin my review for Gandhi – My Father as the movie is replete with moments which are like rare gems for a film connoisseur. However, the beauty of the film lies in the fact that it is politically correct, and thus the director succeeds in staying away from silly controversies, coz basically the film’s merits are enough for its worth and thus it doesn’t need to rely on such antics for its success. At the same time, another amazing aspect of the film is that it is pulls out the Mahatma robes from the father of the nation, and thus showcases him as another human being. So even the Gandhi detesters can enjoy certain other moments of the film, because it doesn’t sermonize or re-instill the Gandhinian virtues and it doesn’t talk about his journey into priestly fiefdom through the route of freedom.

From Ramesh Sippy’s Shakti and Karan Johar’s K3G, to more recently in Apne many films have showcased some sort of an idealistic tussle between a father and his son. Gandhi – My Father does precisely the same, but here the battle isn’t for money or other worldly possessions or the son’s love interest; but it is between the identity of the father and the son’s emotions; the way he perceives his father.

In the very first scene, we see Harilal being brought into the hospital where the ward-boy enlightens him with the fact that Gandhi is the father of the entire nation, and asks him for his father’s name. The loss of his father in the Mahatma’s cloak is very subtly brought out over here. Similarly, the movie ends on a painfully beautiful note when a strange hotel owner weeps in front of Harilal and informs him about the nation’s father’s death, while his eyes exhibit both the loss of his father and a sort of shame and guilt of not being the part of the proceedings for his own father’s demise. Harilal’s anonymous existence amongst the masses thereafter and the stampede which he undergoes indicates both his retribution and his repentance.

Certain scenes delicately underplay an anti-Gandhi sentiment, without any intentions of being anti-Gandhi. These are the scenes which show how the Mahatma and the benevolent of the community tends to rise above the emotions of an ordinary human being, which even include the basic concerns of a father and thereby his son’s silent, non-violent revolt to the same. However, even while he refutes against his father’s virtues, Harilal doesn’t adhere to violent means. All his violent outbursts are completely internalized and he burns from within. Notable amongst these scenes are Gandhi’s recommendations of other wannabie Barristers as eligible candidates for the scholarship, his denial for Harilal’s wedding, further Gulab’s departure to India, without Harilal’s consent and even other minor things like constant insistence on every decision which Harilal takes, to the extent that he even suggests the books Hari should read, and finally getting him back to the Phoenix settlement when he decides to run away with a fake name, Pranlal Mehta.

The scene immediately after that, when the father and son speak as a father and the son, probably for the first time in the film, is very well taken. Further on, the scene where Harilal’s smouldered suffering breaks out publicly as he shouts on the streets and yells that he is the useless son of the great man, doesn’t only make you cry, for several reasons; a son’s sufferings, the denunciation of a father’s existence and Akshaye Khanna’s excellent performance; but leaves you with an eerie thought of how should a father of Gandhi’s stature be with his average and ordinary son.

While these scenes may be seen in the anti-Gandhi light, the film doesn’t take any moral stand pro or against Gandhi, as it showcases the character of Gandhi, as just another human being, just an individual. Darshan Zariwala’s portrayal of the father who wants his son back and his efforts to get him, forgiving him as a son, but formally dissociating him from the brand Gandhi, raising Harilal’s children with the Gandhinian values, but suggestion to sack his fraud son is simply superb. From the body language, to his smile, to the make-up every moment which he spends on the screen reminds me of the picture of the Mahatma which I saw in the history book in school.

The emotional high-points of the enterprise are the scenes where Harilal offers an orange to Kasturba and indirectly insists that she doesn’t share the same with Bapu, the one where Ba meets Abdullah (Harilal’s name after he accepts Islam) and the one where she asks her re-converted son to leave after he meets her in an inebriated state. Shefali Shah’s act as Ba, mayn’t be the most lengthy performance of the film, but the dilemma of the mother thrown between the love for her son and her husband’s and her own ideals, is brought out very subtly and beautifully by her. On several silent occasions, her eyes speak, and amongst other things, her make-up is simply superb.

Bhumika Chawla as Gulab isn’t the most potent performer of the lot, but the innocence and strength in her performance is noteworthy, especially when she breaks the news of her departure to Harilal, the point where she tells her husband about him being wrong, and when she tells Bapu that she’d stay with her parents in Rajkot. Nonetheless she doesn’t let the lack of a meaty role hamper her histrionics.

Amongst the technicians, cameraman David Macdonald steals the show. The use of the distinct colours for the frames, which capture both the essence of the Gujarati culture; then be it the wedding rituals, the Harilal Gandhi house in old Ahmedabad, the step well at Adalaj, the street play in the lanes of old Ahmedabad (which I presume is Bhavai); and the anglicized colonies of South Africa; mixed with black and white footage of the Indian freedom struggle (some actual and some very well matched with the dated prints) gives the film the brilliant look which it rightly deserves. Amongst the other contributors to the film’s authentic look is art director Nitin Desai. Given the plethora of varied movies which he has done, from 1942: A Love Story and Hum Dil de Chuke Sanam to Lagaan and Devdas; Gandhi – My Father belongs to the same league and adds another feather to his already bedecked cap.

Piyush Kanojia’s music captures the Gujarati flavour of the film, and the folk songs fit in very well with the film. For once, a period film thrives on its authenticity even in this department and doesn’t resort to musical means to monetize more share of the viewer’s wallet. The costumes also add to the look.
I don’t recollect the name of the dialogue writer, but he/she along with the screenplay writer has managed to capture chunks of history spread over several decades in a taut 2.5 hours. Kudos to the effort!

Anil Kapoor should be specially lauded for his efforts. The film bears a rich look and the producer has made sure that every frame looks worth every penny that has been spent on it. The film is definitely remarkable and AK should be congratulated for providing the financial muscle for an enterprise which would have been rendered worthless without it.

Director Feroz Abbas Khan confidently debuts in the league of the great story tellers of Hindi cinema. Every frame has some significance to the main plot of the story and the execution of the plot is superb. Also, the film has abundant cinematic metaphors, which have been deftly incorporated by the skilled craftsman, like the scene where Harilal bows down and touches Bapu’s feet, being shot against the rising sun, or the scene in Harilal’s house where his children run around in a circle with the wooden horse oscillating in the centre.

The plot operates on several levels and he has handled all of them skillfully. The scenes where rivals of the Mahatma take extra special efforts, and the probable knight of Gandhi’s kingdom is pawned by the opponents, subtly hint at the sort of politics and the burden that comes along with the tag of being born to a successful father. The director has also used silence very effectively in the background score, and amongst other noteworthy aspects of the film is the climax of the film, which ends on a spookily silent note, and the muted visuals where the end credits roll in just can’t leave you unperturbed. Let us suffice it to say that there is a new ray of hope for Hindi cinema, as a neophyte emanates the potential of an expert director.

And finally, if there is one person to whom the film belongs, it is Akshaye Khanna. That I am a big fan of his, would definitely make me write extra epithets to praise him, but the fact of the matter is that he is so superb and effortless in the film, that whatever anyone says can’t come anywhere at par with his extraordinary performance. From the child-like demeanour in the court room scene, where he sort of blindly adheres to his father’s principles and flashes a smile just because he is being the Chhota Gandhi, to his breakdown in the lanes of Ahmedabad where he proclaims to be Gandhi’s worthless son, to the scene where he gets drunk and misbehaves with the cop, to his lonely tone when he asks the prostitute whether she’d spend some time and chat with him; he conveys the complex emotions with ease and comfort, without being dramatic or going overboard. The Devdas like end of spirited man couldn’t have been portrayed any better. Akshaye is brilliant, period!

The film is a must watch, not only because it shows a human and personal side of history and the man who wrote and re-wrote history, but also because it has subliminal messages for child rearing especially in case of successful fathers, and it shows the repercussions of abandonment of an individual’s individuality.

The Indo-American Bhel

2007-07-23T03:33:00.000-07:00

That is precisely what David Dhawan’s Partner is, an American recipe, cooked and served with dollops of Indian spices, a cocktail Bhel to be precise which needs to be served fresh, and consumed immediately, as it can’t be preserved/savoured for a long time.

For the modern Indian masses, used to the Caramel Popcorn and Cafeterias in the Multiplexes, Partner is a typical David Dhawan Masala which has an overdose of every spice. In an attempt to cater to the global tastes, our films are becoming more and more bland so to say. For our taste buds which now titillate to a mild Macaroni and Cheese, Govinda here functions like the excess chilly powder, which has been missing in the recent flicks. I am not saying that it is worth consuming, as the only thing that I was reminded of when I saw Govinda, was the squelch/muting circuit which I once studied for some assignment. It is evident that he is loud, unbearable and once the movie ends, absolutely forgettable. The film just reinforces the fact that a Govinda today is perhaps as anachronistic, as vodka would be in the era of the Ramayana.

Lara adds the sizzle to the recipe, and that’s about it. Katrina functions like the chopped tomatoes and coriander, which make the Bhel, look delicious. She garnishes the dish. Nothing notable about the technical details of the film, as the camera, sets everything is pretty, but plain simple ordinary. The kids have been misused, and after seeing this flick, I wondered if this is the same Ali Haji, who I loved in Ta Ra Rum Pum. Amongst others, it is wonderful to see Aarti Chhabria play the sidekick as she is tailor made only for such roles. Finally, I have neither energy, nor words to waste on Rajpal Yadav, his aides and the plots revolving around them. Their scenes do bring in some humour though.

The songs are enjoyable and should be served fresh, before they cool down, coz neither are they melodious, nor are they well written. They can thus just be the flavours of the season, typical David Dhawan style. In the final song, David Dhawan miserably fails to live his dream of doing something in typical Karan Johar style. Some things are better done, only by some people.

The inanity of the plot and the ridiculous job which the writers have done, reaches its pinnacle, when an absolute loser in life, played by Govinda insists on being an alumnus of one of India’s best and globally acknowledged Institute of Management, the IIM-A. How on earth did they even think of giving Govinda those lines, and how didn’t he think twice before mouthing those becomes the question of the millennium, coz the best that he can look is an overgrown dimwit who has a clean heart. I am particularly irked about this one, so won’t get into more details.

So is there no taste that lingers after eating this Bhel? Certainly not I must say, as the leading hunk of the film emerges as the saviour. Not only does Salman look great in the movie, but the strength with which he carries the film on his shoulders till the end, just shows that there is more to those muscles, which are displayed in every second frame. Also the idea of using the cartoons at the beginning to camouflage his age is very good. Barring his insecurities as a Star, which are expressed by way of spoofs on Shah Rukh and Amir, everything about Salman is just right in this film and if at 42 one can look this way, there nothing more that I can say…I’d rather hit the gym and pump some iron!

It is a Make Believe World

2007-07-16T07:39:00.000-07:00

An Abbas Mustan movie, irrespective of its oft-repeated formula and predictable twists always generates some sort of a buzz, and though the director duo have been dishing out the same cuisine for all these years, their over-spicy and over used recipes, somehow aren’t that run of the mill. I won’t say that their newest offering is a masterpiece by any standards, but they have tried something different when they mask a new truth as they unmask the old one, with every successive frame in their film Naqaab.

There isn’t much to add about the technical details of the film, as it could have been far better. But it is high time we stop criticizing every second film on this premise, as one can notice that there is always scope for improvement. A particularly noteworthy aspect is the camera work, which has used the colours well, to convey both the real and the recorded world. Dialogues etc. are strictly mediocre, and so are many of the scenes. What makes the narrative style even worse, is the fact that the suspense revealing points in the movie are perhaps written out of compulsion and without any extra special effort from the writer’s side.

Amongst the performers, Bobby touches the nadir of his career. This observation however is taking into consideration the fact that I haven’t witnessed him in Shaka Laka Boom Boom. Akshaye Khanna is a delight, just because he is there, as usual. But neither does the script impart any value addition to his Star status, and nor is he bothered to make the movie a better one. He is busy doing the fake romancing a woman and actually falling in love with her and scheming for the victory of his love, and seeking vindication after being victimized bit; with sheer lack of interest and absolute insipid intentions. The new chick on the block is high on the oomph quotient. The religious display of her well toned anatomy is indeed a pleasure to watch, and very honestly this is perhaps the most aesthetic skin show that I have seen of late, including the wishy-washy works of the masters of such aesthetics Yash Raj, in their latest offerings. Kudos to the makers and the debutante for successfully walking the tight rope. In some scenes however, her bimbo act makes Amisha Patel look intelligent. Let us leave it at that.

Apart from being uninspiring and unwanted, the music doesn’t do much value addition to the proceedings of the film. And if the music is about one on five, let us suffice it by saying that it seems like a masterpiece when compared with the lyrics. The irony here remains that it is a Record company which produced this film. They sure have some Tips for the other film makers in this regard.

The worst thing about the movie is its release time, with Harry Potter casting his spell at the Indian box-office, and the successive weeks awaiting biggies like Partner and Cash.

Overall a decent fare, with good skin show, and major flaws here and there, the climax of Naqaab is sure to give the viewer a bad déjà vu of the Abhishek Bachchan flick Bluffmaster.

Brand HR

2007-07-09T05:27:00.000-07:00

Branded Entertainment is the buzz word today, and more than being the ‘in thing’ it has fast acquired the highly unwanted status of being the ‘in your face thing’. With the able aid of a zillion touch-points, which in turn do translate into being competing media, a suave marketer chooses the perfect Media Mix, primarily to avoid this inter-media competition and mainly to use these multiple touch-points conveniently to his advantage, and build his Brand. The same is the case with the man in question, the newest brand in Bollywood, Brand HR, aka Himesh Reshammiya.

He rocked an entertainment deprived mass of people with his Hit music, which sans his own voice does actually sound nice. This by the way is a personal observation, and in no way reflects on either the man’s talent or his popularity. This isn’t a critique on his nasal crooning, but is an attempt to acknowledge the conscious efforts which the man has put behind his own branding, and the flick Aap Ka Surroor (grant me the spelling mistakes if any, as I haven’t acclimatized myself to Himesh’s lexicon) is the latest marketing tool from his Pandora’s Box.

Needless to say it is an inane offering and the silliness of the screenplay, is perhaps sillier than the lose script of Jhoom Barabar Jhoom. But nonetheless what needs to be acknowledged here is the fact that the man has carved his niche. From S.D. Burman and his son, the great Panchamda, to Shankar Jaikishen and the latest Shankar Ehsaan Loy; Bollywood has had several great music directors, but how many of them can we identify merely with a glimpse? Any typical tanga song will only make one think of the legendary O.P.Nayyar, but how many of us associate him with his hat, the way we associate Himesh with the cap? So what is it that makes HR special?

If we consider HR The Brand, well he has a signature packaging (The Cap etc.) and a signature jingle tune (The nasal twang which makes every HR song sound the same); a never ending stock of media at his display (largely due to the excellent hammering technique implemented by T-Series) and most importantly a well arranged Target Group (Not to forget their effective use, even in the film. Otherwise why on earth would one take auto rickshaws to Germany?)

Gone are the days of a pan India blockbuster, they say, as the Metros are getting fragmented into two divergent groups; one which is following the age old Hollywood inspired and nowadays marching towards Hollywood, multiplex and urban cinema and the other which detests Hindi cinema altogether and takes refuge in the audience group for Hollywood movies. While Indian cinema’s quest to be akin to the global sentiments on silver screen has not only alienated several moviegoers from it, but has actually created an entertainment void for that sector in several centers, which got the cash registers ringing all these years. And though every second hero today can’t become Shahrukh Khan, each one of the top-line actors is in his own way is aiming to be there, do that and be the next Hero of the global masses, than just focus on the few Indians, who made their ancestors the stars that they were. Thus, there is a need and also a want so to say in the market, for such entertainment, which caters to the sensibilities of the money spending aam janta in India, especially the not so shining, non-metro India.

And if you ask me, HR the brand delivers. His antics, his emotions, the twists in the plot; the role is made considering all the attributes which the TG members would want to see in their Brand, their Hero, their HR.

In the history of Bollywood, even Amitabh Bachchan never played Amitabh Bachchan and neither has Dilip Kumar or even for that matter Shahrukh Khan have played their own respective selves on screen. But here Himesh plays Himesh, and however silly it may sound, but even his lady love calls him HR while exchanging the love messages. Now that is what I call creating a brand identity. The brand already has a loyal set of buyers, who have got hooked on to the gung ho (supposedly) quality of the brand’s music. In the film, the hero, a rather superhero very cleverly named HR exhibits all the traits of an honest and successful man. With the stress on realistic grey characters, this is a rarity of late. HR doesn’t ditch the music company which helped him, when he was nothing; just like Raj in DDLJ, he gets the girl back to her father, and marries her only with his consent; and the list of his virtues is endless.

More than deliberating on whether it is great cinema or not (Anyone can, in half a viewing say that it is definitely not, but that opinion is again personal, and yours truly doesn’t really feature in the TG of Brand HR.) one must definitely congratulate the makers for their excellent business sense, as they have minted money out of a lucrative TG. From Radio, to TV Shows, to Music Videos, to Songs, to now finally the silver screen, HR the brand has arrived, and in a big way. Now whether we acknowledge his greatness or not, his TG is definitely going berserk over him.

There was a time, when a Dilip Kumar and a Raj Kapoor appealed to everyone. Then there was a time when an Amitabh Bachchan moistened the eyes of the masses, and was also liked by the classes. But with HR, the divide in the opinions of the people is obvious. While India is genuinely on the brink of a new beginning, the fragmentation in the audience tastes and preferences is definitely giving the marketers a better chance to create more brands.

Now how far do these niche brands like HR, or for that matter even Rakhi Sawant last remains the most pertinent question of the day. Is being different the only basic key to successful branding in Bollywood today, considering it is always blamed for being extremely stereotypical and monotonous and how far does this ‘being different’ route help in creating brands with sustainable competitive advantage are the issues in question.

What happens to these brands in the future will definitely be an interesting thing to track, but the entertainment space is definitely diversifying, if not in a good way, at least it is, and the monotony in these new found ‘different identities’ is surely on its way.

Apne Paraaye ho gaye...

2007-07-03T03:00:00.000-07:00

I told myself that I won’t, I won’t, I won’t; but here I am scribbling down a few sentiments about Anil Sharma’s Apne. That the film is disappointing and devastating is a well known phenomenon by now. That it borrows heavily from K3G and then takes the Jo Jeeta route isn’t a hidden secret either. But what remains an intriguing mystery is the fact that Director Anil Sharma hasn’t moved away from the narrative style which was boring and outdated even in the late 1980s.

What has changed with Apne then? The family structure, the patriarchy, the style of presentation, even the camera angles and important scenes in the film will give the viewer an eerie sense of a bad déjà vu, as they shall recollect the insipid and lack luster offerings that were being dished out in the name of Family Dramas, ages ago in the 1970s and 80s. As a loyalist of Hindi Cinema, I felt extremely disgusted when Sunny Deol wiped off the Sindoor from Shilpa’s forehead. Borrowed heavily from the archaic era of patriarchy, this scene does really make even the Saas Bahu sagas on television look progressive. What in the name of God did the director and the screenplay writer think of while penning it down and then executing it, and whether the latest global martyr of India, Ms. Shetty was blackmailed into doing it, or was she on sedatives while doing it and whether she would take this issue up after the ruckus over racism subsides, as her personal cause; shall definitely qualify as the upcoming issues for the Content Development Dept. of the mushrooming NEWS channels on the Indian media front.

Dharamji is adorable at times and annoying at others. Bobby tries hard, but is handicapped by a lame character and perhaps he suffers from the syndrome of being the writer’s step child. Let us not get into the details of the female characters, because it is seriously a pleasure to watch Shilpa Shetty actually do something on screen, rather than making a mountain out a molehill on several occasions and being the Poster Girl for modern India’s struggle to be a part of the egalitarian global fraternity. Also, as a young man smitten by the Katrina bug, I seriously felt cheated, because the film didn’t even show enough frames of the ethereal beauty. I was very well aware that the male dominated plot of the film wasn’t conducive to showcase the beauty, but then at least a few frames of the woman, could have made a few male fans go berserk in their seats. I must say the movie is worse marketed, if the general sentiment is that it is badly made.

Kirron Kher is her typical loud self and the film certainly cashes in on that. Also, it would be unfair at this point to acknowledge the fact that the woman manages amazing chemistry with the stars of the yesteryears like nobody else today can. And thus she is most welcome as the new age mother of Hindi cinema today. With Devdas, Hum Tum, Veer Zaara, Rang De Basanti, Main Hoon Na, KANK and several others already into her kitty, she has proved it yet again that she is the best possible candidate for that category currently. And yes, irrespective of her monotonous look in most of the films, she is entertaining and also her presence is reassuring. Amongst others, Victor Banerjee completely loses out on the class, which I believe he had acquired with the repertoire of his movies previously. And yes, I refuse to waste words on Divya Dutta, who just had to be there. Honestly, the woman who did so well as the maid in Veer Zaara has been wasted in the movie. Her role could have been very well enacted by any chick on the K block of Indian television.

And finally, my most favourite actor in the first half, and most hated one in the second one, Mr. Sunny Deol. As the silent elder brother, doting husband and ideal Ramayana archetype of a son who doesn’t back answer his father, come what may, I genuinely liked him. I did manage to catch the senti Sunny on Koffee with Karan, and thus the character seemed to be inspired from the real Sunny. Those portions are interesting in their entirety and Oscar winning when compared to the insipid bouts of forced action which pretty much make up the penultimate portions of the supposed saga of sentiments. What on earth made the makers drill action into the plot? The answer is simple, it is one of those antics which film makers try to woo the janta. But these sequences here are like adding dollops of chilly powder into a bowl of Kheer, to make it tastier. The result in the film is just as catastrophic, as it is with the recipe.

Technically, this film is perhaps India’s first film without an editor. And no I am not saying it coz it actually lacks the editor, but mainly because the film looks unedited, and the editor’s work is so effortlessly done, that one can sense that he/she didn’t take any efforts at all. It is a pleasure to have Kabir Lal back after a hiatus and some of the frames do remind me of his previous work in Taal and Kaho Na Pyaar Hai amongst others. However, apart from the fact that Kabir Lal is back, there isn’t anything extraordinary about the cinematography of Apne.

The sets by Sanjay Dhabade are passable, but the big house is beautiful, and apart from being a treat to the eyes, it also looks real and inhabitable. For a film which features the Deols, the lesser said about the choreography and the dancers, the better. As for the costume designers, well more than half of Bobby’s outfits look as if they have mud sprayed over them, and Katrina’s clothes make her look more like a botoxed bimbette rather than a medical professional. They do manage to give her some silly glasses, to add to the IQ level of her look, which is something that the designer certainly lacks. But lets us not get there. Shilpa Shetty looks prettier than all the mannequins in the world, and one wishes that she permanently settles down for some such job. I am sure she’ll rake in a lot of moolah considering the recent boom in the retail business.

Monty’s background music is better than Himesh’s musical track. A comparison of the two will show, why irrespective of Himesh being the flavour of the season; Monty is doing the music for Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s upcoming Saanwariya. However Monty has copied some of his own work from Devdas in certain portions of the film. And finally, I don’t know who amongst the music in-charges did it, but the perpetual usage of the title song, for every second time the family members have a hugging session, is not only annoying, but also displeasing to the ear.

The coming together of the three Deols should ideally have been dealt with more maturity and business sense, rather than going overboard with the emotions initially, and going beyond going overboard with Sunny’s action. Give him a break Mr. Director; he can deliver beyond flexed muscles, and smashing the daylights out of a zillion people. Kindly give him the opportunity to do so. For all you know, he may just not be in the Gadar mode, and still give a hit. Why bloody stick to forced formula, and spoil the creative enterprise?

So that’s all about Apne I guess. In stead of delivering, the film tends to be desolate of emotions and the viewer in the end is deprived of entertainment. Thus Apne is a very bad proposition from the ROI perspective, and one would rather save his Apne Paise, than watch Apne.

Simi brewed better Conversations...

2007-06-25T00:41:00.000-07:00

The most ultimate Diva, the reigning Queen of a legacy lost, a living legend in her own right, the Goddess herself graced the Koffee Expert’s chat room last night, and a very keen viewer like yours truly tuned in to watch the magic.

Contrary to the expectations, the concoction didn’t brew that well, largely due to Karan’s nepotism. Rather than being a show that spoke about Madhuri and her career, the show turned out to be a felicitation of Karan’s personal friends. For starters, why in the name of God, did Rani appear on the show, and if her presence wasn’t enough, why did she have to sign the Koffee mug? The idea seemed a little irksome. And had the last segment been about showing her frenzy amongst the current breed of actors, they could have very well brought in someone who has at least worked with the Goddess!

If I were to draw a comparison between the show and the cover story of Filmfare last month, I can say that the latter was much better. Karan could have easily made a Director’s Special, with the directors who are keen on working with her, just the way the article asked them about the remakes they’d want to see Madhuri in. From Rakesh Roshan and Sanjay Leela Bhansali, to Subhash Ghai and Yash Chopra, an exhaustive range of Madhuri fans could have been covered. Also, in the ‘Actors’ Speak’ segment, Salman, Jackie, and so many other Madhuri co-stars were conspicuous by their absence.

There was no reference to her glorious past, and the directors then, and neither was her struggle period or her family life today covered that well. One would have guessed anyway that the straightforward Madhuri and a spice seeking Karan aren’t a good brand fit. On the other hand, her Rendezvous with Simi was far better, more personal and devoid of Simi’s favourites, coz it was more about Madhuri, than about any Simi Camp.

The lady as usual conveniently shied away from all the controversies, and was herself. Though her attire did make her look like one of those typical Manish Malhotra styled women, she did look a tad different than the good old Madhuri, and the show sure made the ardent Madhuri buff in me a little indignant, but as long as she’s there, on TV, in the NEWS, for a short appearance, a tiny little cameo, and of course in a full length movie, who is complaining…coz even if she doesn’t do the movies and doesn’t stay in the NEWS, she still rules, in our hearts, forever and ever!

More the hype, Less the delivery?

2007-06-21T02:26:00.000-07:00

And the saga continues…

Consistency is the hallmark of talent they say. But this year there is tremendously low consistency as far performance is concerned, from the directors in Bollywood.

Picture this, a maverick director, who is the only Indian director, apart from Satyajeet Ray to get an Oscar, for his Diploma film, or something like that, one of the leading production houses to back his creative efforts, and a mammoth Starcast. The result would be thunderous as everyone would have expected. But then, moving away from his remarkable style of cinema, Vidhu Vinod Chopra failed to deliver with Eklavya.

Neither did the Indian box-office laud his efforts, and as far as the critics go, well let us not get there. Mr. Chopra however kept harping on the rave reviews which his film got from the critics, worldwide. Sadly the Indian audiences didn’t feel like turning back, after they had already turned their back towards the film.

Ironic as it may sound, but Parinda didn’t have half as much the hype which Eklavya did, neither did 1942, A Love Story. The films worked well, and boy the audiences loved them. Is it the hype which kills the content in the movies, one may ask, and as a religious follower of Hindi cinema, I’d say after so many years of watching and enjoying the movies, I still don’t know. What is interesting is the fact that the directors change, but the saga continues.

Every Indian generation grows up on a romantic movie. The first young Indian romance in my opinion is Bobby. My father was in his twenties then, and I am sure he must have been smitten by the Bobby bug too. The trend then started, and every five or ten years, there used to be a love story on which an entire generation would grow up. Love Story came somewhere in the early eighties, and then there were two films, which I can’t ever forget, Maine Pyar Kiya and Qayamat Se Qayamat Tak. Almost everyone in my generation learned all the words for Pyar and Ishq, through the ballads in these films.

The reason for the background was that I wanted a flowery introduction for another director, who became my favourite, and then again disappointed. After MPK, he made Hum Aapke Hain Koun, but somehow the Sooraj Barjatya magic failed to impress that much, after the blockbusters. And it is painful to know that Mansoor Khan, who not only made a thunderous debut with QSQT, but also gave my generation their most favourite Love Song of all times, Pehla Nasha, from Jo Jeeta Wohi Sikander, has gone absconding from tinsel-town after a not so memorable Josh in 2000.

The question becomes pertinent in the current context, because several directors, who’ve carried the burden of the budget of a few millions, and also the burden of the hopes of millions of movie buffs like me, have disappointed this year. If Eklavya wasn’t enough disappointment, the list which follows, is endless.

Come January, and I went and watched Salaam-E-Ishq. Not that I had too many hopes from Nikhil Advani, because the labour of his love, Kal Ho Naa Ho was far too inspired by the head honcho of the production house, which produced it. And very honestly, it wasn’t close to the emotional richness of a Karan Johar film. But then, it was an interesting film, and I certainly expected more than a plain simple disaster from him, which is precisely what Salaam-E-Ishq was. And the cheap and sleazy humour of the desperate couple only killed the fun, if there was any.

Before I move on with the disappointments this year, I just want to remind Mr. Subhash Ghai, that as a fan of some of his good movies, which include Khal-Nayak and Ram Lakhan, I am still willing to forget Yaadein and Kisna, if he decides to make something, which is at least of the Pardes quality. But I would be sad if the next generation asks me who Subhash Ghai is.

On the contrary, some new kids on the block are delivering well. This year, the sheer enjoyment which most of the audiences have had is with first time film makers like Sagar Ballary and R. Balki, who made Bheja Fry and Cheeni Kum respectively. It just took one Shootout at Lokhandwala, for everybody to forget that Apoorva Lakhia debuted with a highly forgettable Mumbai se aaya mera dost. Everyone worships the rising son in Bollywood they say, and thus one won’t be surprised that the first timers deliver well. Though personally I didn’t enjoy Cheeni Kum much, I liked it for its freshness. I liked it for the layers of hidden meanings, in every little frame. Reema Kagti definitely took the cake this year, with her debut, Honeymoon Travels Pvt. Ltd., which was both intelligent and enjoyable.

But what went wrong with Shaad Ali Sehgal, who most definitely got a dream debut with Saathiya, and proved his mettle yet again, with Bunty aur Babli. Forget him, nobody apart from Bobby and Lara were in full form with Jhoom Barabar Jhoom. From the crew members, they were the only ones who needed a hit very badly. So is it the need for success which makes them work hard, and is it the actual success that makes them not deliver? With the current reviews against JBJ, Shaad Ali would again have to work his way up. It is ironic that the dream merchants work hard for success, and then become complacent, to again work harder to re-achieve their success.

I shall not mention about Siddharth Anand, because I personally loved Ta Ra Rum Pum, though I can see the flaws in the film. For someone who debuted with a progressive and shocking (for some) Salaam Namaste, resorting to the stereotypes in TRRP wasn’t a cakewalk. It was rather a ropewalk, and according to some he may have slipped, but I shan’t comment, as I actually loved the saga of emotions. The film did have a message, in a beautifully packaged format.

The examples are plenty, and the lack of delivery from the big names is something that is bothering everyone, from the audiences who seek entertainment, to the distributors who seek monetary pleasure. With KANK and Umrao Jaan last year, and Salaam-E-Ishq, Eklavya, Nishabd, JBJ and TRPP this year, the ratio of disappointing biggies is alarming. Again, Nishabd is a film I personally enjoyed.

From Kaagaz ke Phool and Mera Naam Joker to The Burning Train and Razia-Sultan to Rajkumar and Trimutri, to the list of the disappointments this year, Bollywood has time and again seen several ventures which haven’t lived up to the expectations.

In case of Kaagaz ke Phool, I strongly believe that it was the misfortune of the box-office to not having capitalized on one of the rarest gems of Hindi cinema. In case of Mera Naam Joker, it was part disappointment and part misfortune. But it is high time that the Indian film-makers stop disappointing and then commenting that the film is ahead of its times. With some of the disappointments this year, I am sure the directors can’t even think about the excuse. So either they start thinking of newer excuses, or stop making disappointing films.

The onus now lies on Sanjay Leela Bhansali, who currently has only his own name to bank on for the upcoming Saanwariya. Being one of his devotees, I’d pray that he doesn’t disappoint with this one. One also has hopes from Ashutosh Gowarikar on Jodha Akbar, Pradeep Sarkar on Laga Chunari mein Daag, and to some extent from Farah Khan on Om Shanti Om. Personally I expect passion, intensity and entertainment respectively from these three creative enterprises in the making. A lot also rides on Shimit Amin’s Chak De India, but that is one film which I shall write about in greater detail, some other time.

With the new kids working wonders, I’d also pray for Anil Mehta and his magnum opus, Aaja Nachle which releases on November 30th. Being blessed with the Goddess herself, for his debut film, I just pray that he blesses Madhuri back with a hit, something which she’s always delivered, and more importantly deserved.

The Drive-In and The Multiplexes...the cinema structures, and their connections with the society of their existence!

2007-06-20T11:34:00.000-07:00

In my opinion, both the types of cineplexes are a representation of the idea of westernisation and modernity of their era. Both fundamentally cater to the same idea of providing entertainment to the family audiences, but differ in their facilities, due to the period in which they started operations.

The structure of the drive in is very horizontal as compared to that of any multiplex, which is a tall building. Here again if we compare them on the basis of the rates which they charge, we can interpret the fact that the multiplexes look more exclusive, as opposed to the drive ins, which become more accommodative. These structures can be compared to the hierarchical structures in an organisation. The more vertical a structure, more is the hierarchy, and more the number of levels, more is the level of exclusivity. This very exclusivity is the basic positioning statement which the multiplexes use as a marketing gimmick.

Another aspect in the design, which highlights the same factor, is the openness in it. The open space in the design of a drive in is directly related to the openness with which the audiences are welcomed into the complex. The Sunset Drive In charges rupees thirty per person, while the rates in the multiplex vary anywhere between rupees ninety and one hundred and sixty, depending upon the show timings, and the movies playing.

The rates obviously convey that the drive in is more affordable to the common man, and is much cheaper. Also, the fact that the theatre charges the same amount of money no matter which movie is playing, indicates that there is a fundamental equality in every aspect of the functioning of this complex. Of course, there is much more marketing involved in the multiplex business, and every one involved in the business has their own share in the pie, of this additional revenue. So a simple way of considering these theatres can be the fact that one basically provides general entertainment, while the other does deliver the same on a much more exclusive platter. Again we come across the same distinction of exclusivity v/s accommodation.

Another very important design aspect here is the presence and absence of the escalators. These escalators signify a level of modernisation, luxury and a situation in the world today, where the advent of technology has led to further evolution of human beings and their needs. Another thing here which can be seen from the design of the escalators is that the multiplexes represent that stage of human evolution, which has emerged supreme by enslaving technology on one level and being enslaved by it on another. The presence of several other technology enabled media initiatives in the multiplexes, then be it televisions or the new media based touch points all indicate absolute pervasion of technological and marketing led influence on human life. Just like all other design aspects of the multiplexes, again here the usage of every possible touch point and the escalators in particular as marketing avenues can be seen. These elements of the design of the multiplexes, basically testify the fact that these complexes are a metaphor of the consumerist society. Every element in their design, every possible position is there, not just for entertainment, but has some business purpose to it, then be it the floor branding or the branded pop-corn tubs.

In this aspect, the drive in does look anachronistic for this modern era of marketing, with their laid back style of functioning. But they do have their own business aspects, which can be related to the time when they were functional as the icons of modernisation of their era. Today with the multiplex boom on, and accountability in the business gaining prominence, the computerized ticketing has enabled the movie-makers to lose out less on the revenues to black marketing, and under reporting. But these practices are still happening at the drive in, though, even the black rates there are way cheaper than the cheapest fares at the multiplexes. I purchased the tickets of the highly awaited movie Dhoom 2, on the release of its day, at double the original price for rupees sixty at Sunset while Fun Republic was charging a minimum of rupees of one hundred and forty for the movie.

In the previous era, the worth of a movie at the box-office was decided on the rate which the black marketers are able to command. Even today the stories of the black marketers at the Minerva theatre in Mumbai buying cars by selling tickets of the blockbuster Sholay in black, are always mentioned as a part of the stories which speak about the greatness of the movie at the box office. Till recently, we have also had on screen characters which have been from this profession, and Bollywood has used them in an endearing sort of way, like Munna in Rangeela.

Today, a Dhoom 2 manages to break all records in almost every circuit in the opening weekend itself, but the black marketers aren’t mentioned in the picture. However, another way of looking at the same thing is the fact that the original rates are so high, that they can’t be hiked further. In lieu of the Fanaa controversy, one can in a way interpret that with the corporatisation of the films on its way, may be on some level the black marketing has been legalized in the business, and the these modern day exhibition platforms are an integral part of the business, and also represent all its virtues. Also the exclusive premiere shows with extra premium rates, again represent the changes in the marketing methods of movies, and it is also related to the dissemination of media.

Be it the changing mindset of the audiences or the legalization of the black marketing or simply a changing representation of the spending patterns of the society, the multiplexes represent the virtues of the current society, one may label it consumerist, materialistic or simply a bunch of people who are willing to pay for their needs. But like all other aspects, even in this case, the multiplexes target a segment of society, as they cater to and represent a portion of the entire mass. They can’t represent an entire nation, at least in the current context, which a drive in probably can. There is exclusive car parking for the rich, while the ones who do not have the cars can sit in the auditorium and enjoy the same movie. Here we can see that they represent a sort of an equality in the society, where the individual differences of the people aren’t ignored, but aren’t used as a discriminating factor either. Be it the car owners, or the front benchers in the open air auditorium, both are in a way placed at the same level, similar to the horizontal design of the structure.

Today when customisation is the in thing in any marketing driven activity, one can see that the drive ins offer self-customisation as opposed to the multiplexes which offer mass-customisation. One has the choice whether to choose the car, the open air theatre, the lawn, or the auditorium, of which besides the car, all others are charged equally in the drive in, while the multiplexes offer two classes, and individual prices, but the customisation can be seen in the offerings of the movies. One can catch a Dhoom 2 at both the places but Page 3 won’t feature in the play-list of the drive in.

The logistics in the design and thereby the restricted show timings, and thereby the lesser number of shows in the drive in as opposed to that in the multiplexes, speaks volumes about the mass-customisation. Metaphorically it is a comment on the individualistic nature of the society.

Also, another comparison here would be with respect to the flexibility v/s the rigidity in the style of functioning. One can justify here that the rates charged are in proportion to the facilities offered to the customers. Again other issues like hygiene etc. can be brought into the discussion, which basically convey the convenience offered to the payers. All these eventually do give the same conclusion about the consumer being the king, and the face of the society changing as a whole.

Another aspect of the customisation is the fact that the design of the drive in, with the skyline in the background does have different effects on different movies, which isn’t the case in the same closed setting and more private viewing experience of the multiplexes. An instance which I would like to narrate in this context is while I was watching the movie Omkara at the Sunset. During one of the romantic songs between the main couple in the film, which was set in the open farms, a bird flew across the screen, which did enhance the whole feel of the same song. Had the same bird flown during the climax, it would have definitely diverted my attention from the screen, and not to any positive effect. For the lack of softer words, I’d say that the drive in can either enhance or kill the experience of viewing of a film.

A movie which the Sunset ruined for me was Dhoom 2, because of its laidback style of functioning. For starters, the huge mass of people and the free flowing dust due to the open air experience had already set the mood for the film. The lack of dust in the multiplexes is a metaphor for an advanced life, and advancement in the technology, which is again a key feature of the new age civilization. Then of course, the movie began precisely forty five minutes after the scheduled time (which was 10:45 pm already) to accommodate the crowds before the show, and had an interval which took forever (as usual). In the end, I did hate the film as a whole. A partial second viewing in an enclosed cineplex made me realise that the film wasn’t that bad. This was my first ever experience of watching such a big movie with so much crowd. It was conducted as a part of this study, as I wanted to study the different semiotics on the release day of big film across cinema halls. I contrasted it with the release of Don which I experienced at Wideangle.

One of the striking differences here was the monopoly which the big film commands in the minds of the people. Owing to the multiplex phenomenon, not every one in the theatre is out to watch the same movie, and so the hype and feel did get reduced to an extent. Also, the fact that another biggie Jaan-E-Mann released with Don diluted the equity to an extent. Here we can say that in the drive in the individuality of the movie is restored to a greater extent. But at the same time, a contention here would probably be related to the kind of audience members which the theatres cater to. As mentioned earlier, drive in would screen mass movies, and usually, in my opinion these are films, which are capable of selling well only by using the traditional media, without the excessive hype built by the additional media, which is more of a feature of the multiplexes. So it operates in a circle, for both the places.

Another interesting aspect of the theatres is the situation of the lavatories. At Sunset, there are two of them, one set right on the two corners of the screen and one near the staircases. The ambience in both is dark, dingy and fragrant. As opposed to these, the ones in the multiplexes are slightly cleaner, and brightly lit. The point I want to mention here is that an advanced civilization is basically about caring more for the fundamental amenities in life, which is precisely the case. Since it has been a tradition in India, all positive things in life can be attributed again to the western influence on our culture. Even the position of the lavatories, right next to the screen, gives them a lot of attention, and one can not, not notice them. However, in the multiplexes, one can figure out mere symbols and directions in the main lobby, while the actual rooms situated in the corner. The rationale here could probably interpreted as a more individualistic approach, especially towards the private things in life, in the modern social life, and the placement of the rest-rooms is one of the many examples that one can trace as similarities in the actual beliefs in human life, and their reflection in the constructions. May be an overdrawn observation in this context was the difference in the physical distances between the male and female lavatories in the two structures. Somehow the proximity of the positioning of the two in the multiplexes can be linked to the openness in the equations and dynamics of the genders.

Another observation was that, I hardly notice any representation of the female population in the open air seating of the drive in. Usually the front benches are dominated by the male population. But today, it isn’t a rare sight to find the females sitting right in the first row, and going crazy over a hot hunk like Salman Khan in Salaam-E-Ishq in Fun Republic, as I noticed, and they have no issues in openly expressing it the way the male audience members do it for may be a dance number by Madhuri Dixit. This open sexual assertiveness would probably not happen in a setting like Sunset. In this respect I guess the traditional structures have yet to be liberated from the clutches of patriarchy. I distinctly remember two of my colleagues actually planning to lift a standee which was promoting the film Dhoom 2 only because they thought Hrithik Roshan looked hot in it, form Fun Republic. These women would squirm in their seats if they would be asked to sit and watch the same film in the front benches of Sunset. Here, the exclusivity factor of the multiplexes can be interpreted as the reason for more freedom and assertiveness, to the gender which was termed to be the weaker one till recently. I personally have no issues on this matter, and have been to both the theatres pretty often, but wouldn’t want to go the Sunset with my female friends. May be this is one of the biases which I have as an individual, but the changing dynamics of society are more suited in the changed set-up itself in my opinion, and thus the multiplexes become more conducive in this context.

Another aspect of the changing population dynamics of Ahmedabad is evident from the language of communication. Be it the show timings or the announcements, or the advertisements, Sunset has all its communications in the vernacular languages, largely Gujarati and in some places, in Hindi. The exclusive usage of English along with these two in the multiplexes indicates the trend towards the cosmopolitanisation of the city, and also the acceptance of English in a big way as a common communication platform. At some other multiplexes in other cities which I have observed, then be it PVR in Delhi or E Square and Inox in Pune, the only language of communication is strictly English for the messages, even of the films aren’t. This speaks about the fact that Ahmedabad is gradually journeying towards a more cosmopolitan state. The presence of institutions like MICA, which are an integral part of the knowledge city within the city of Ahmedabad are fuelling the growth of such a culture.

The location of both the multiplexes which I have conducted my observations is on the SG Highway, which in itself represents the post modern consumption in the city. the surroundings have malls mushrooming all over, and is fast becoming an entertainment gateway into the city, while the surroundings of Sunset have residential buildings. Thus, the location of the multiplexes is a sort of a statement on the lifestyle of the city which is changing.

In its journey from Relief road, to Ashram road, to CG road; to finally SG road as its main lifeline, the city has undergone a metamorphosis and the constant influx of the newer entertainment avenues stands testimony to this fact. At the same time, one can observe that the city is losing out on its individual existence. I can shop at the same store called Lifestyle even in Mumbai, but the presence of Dhalgadwaar is very unique to Ahmedabad itself. Similarly, Sunset is the only functional drive in Asia, as opposed to the hundreds of multiplexes, which are now found at every corner, in every city; and with the advent of digital cinema, would soon percolate in the rural areas as well.

This evolutionary change in the cinema viewing habits in the city of Ahmedabad is similar to the evolution of the new age human race, where every person is like a clone to everybody else, because of the same habits, similar creative and intellectual pursuits, or even hobbies for that matter. This doesn’t come as a surprise, especially at a time when all the biotechnologists are trying their best to successfully create clinical human clones. The situation and prominence that the multiplexes have in the modern day life is merely like a drop in the ocean, but is definitely an integral part of the ocean.

Legends, Raj Kapoor and Guru Dutt - The similarities and differences in their cinema...

2007-06-20T11:29:00.000-07:00

From the very fact that they are two of the most prolific directors that Indian cinema has ever experienced, to the extent of personalisation that went into their classic works of art, to their famous styles of song picturisations; to the epitomisation of on screen romance that each one them achieved through their respective screen goddesses Waheeda Rehman and Nargis; Guru Dutt and Raj Kapoor are very similar on one level, but at the same time owing to Raj Kapoor’s film-lineage, the longevity of his career; Guru Dutt’s shift to only serious cinema after Pyaasa and renunciation from the title of a director after the debacle of Kaagaz ke Phool they are two directors who are completely different from each other, in terms of work style and approach towards the same.

On one level, one can easily spot similarities between them because of the social comments that they made with their films, but at the same time one can spot the differences that Guru Dutt was more of a private person who made films about a selected few characters, while Raj Kapoor brought most of these issues directly on a public platform.

The crowd became an essential element in Raj Kapoor’s films while most of the times Guru Dutt would make the depictions in private. However there have been exceptions to both the rules like the climax in Pyaasa where Guru Dutt displayed his exasperation publicly, while in Sangam Raj Kapoor didn’t involve any person but the three concerned people to execute the solution.

Also, amongst the various social issues that they talked about, Raj Kapoor talked about poverty, misery and suffering due to hunger; while Guru Dutt spoke about higher needs like need for recognition, need for being loved etc. Thus, Raj Kapoor’s films were addressed more directly to the masses entirely while Guru Dutt’s films were relatively meant for individual sufferers.

Screen goddesses:

Every director has always had his muse, who has been an inspiration for his work, and has always done full justice to his imagination. This is another common thread between these two legends. Their actresses achieved the status of screen goddesses and these directors had an important role to play in the same. From giving them strong roles of substance to presenting them as ethereal beauties, these dream merchants have done full justice to their screen goddesses. One can’t think of Raj Kapoor’s films, without remembering Nargis and similarly, one can’t think of Guru Dutt’s film without Waheeda Rehman.

It is said that these beauties were in some way the motivation and inspiration for their film makers and the way these two directors built their female characters in their films, especially the ones essayed by these women stands testimony to the belief.

The irony however remains that none of the best on screen characters portrayed by these two women were projected by their favourite directors. Nargis gave her best performance with Mehboob Khan in Mother India, while Waheeda Rehman gave her best with Vijay Anand in Guide. And at the same time these directors didn’t really build their most complete female characters with their muses. Raj Kapoor gave the strongest female character he ever made to Vyajanthimala in Sangam, while Guru Dutt’s strongest character went to Meena Kumari in Sahib Bibi aur Ghulam.

However, the discussion on Raj Kapoor and Guru Dutt would always remain incomplete, without the mention of Nargis and Waheeda Rehman respectively.
Nargis:

Nargis is regarded as one of the most talented and beautiful actresses in Indian cinema. She has essayed several roles with effortless charm and mesmerised the audiences all these years. Nargis has been one of the most inseparable elements of the Raj Kapoor brand of cinema. She has always played the perfect woman in each of his films. From the innocent girl from the hills in Barsaat to the idealistic school teacher in Shree 420, to the righteous lawyer in Awara she has essayed innumerable characters.

One thing that has always been common to all her characters in Raj Kapoor’s films is the immense amount of love that she showers on him. This unconditional love for her lover makes her the extraordinary woman who is willing to take any amount of pains just for him. At the same time, Nargis played a woman who has a mind of her own and shall always follow it. She will get her lover to do the right thing if he is going o the wrong track.

What made Nargis and Raj Kapoor immortal was the effortless chemistry that they exuded on screen, which elevated the romance to a level that wasn’t achieved before on Indian silver screen. In the song Dum bhar jo udhar moonh phere form Awara their chemistry as the lovers who have met after several years is a visual delight to watch. At the same time, the maturity in their romance in Pyaar hua iqraar hua from Shree 420 is worth mentioning in this regard.

Nargis always came across as Raj Kapoor’s strength through all her characters. She was the one who motivated him to give up on the amoral ways of life and lead a simple life in Shree 420 and she was the one who moved mountains to give him justice in Awara. An interesting observation in this regard would be that this element of their on screen relationship wasn’t explored much by other directors who worked with them, and their films for other banners were light hearted entertainers like Chori Chori.

Waheeda Rehman:

Regarded as one of the most simple and beautiful faces of Indian cinema, Waheeda Rehman achieved super success with her on screen association with Guru Dutt. Unlike Raj Kapoor, Guru Dutt didn’t always present Waheeda Rehman as the ideal woman who is an epitome of virtues. However, amongst the various characters that she portrayed, she always came across as someone who would shower tremendous love on his character, then be it the prostitute in Pyaasa or the starlet in Kaagaz ke Phool.

In Chaudhvin ka Chand, which tells the story of love and sacrifice amongst friendship, and is set in the Muslim society of Lucknow, she plays a rather submissive character, which loves her husband unconditionally and takes each and every word of his very seriously, as a part of her duty to her husband. She plays the role of a woman who will go to any extent only to make her husband happy. Waheeda Rehman brings out the innocence of this character very subtly, in many ways symbolises the Indian woman of the 1960s.

Though she essays the second lead in Sahib Bibi aur Ghulam Guru Dutt gives her a character that somehow was absent for a long period in his otherwise intense films. Though her character does go through the sufferings she plays a lighter character in the film. These kinds of characters were seen less often in Guru Dutt’s films, especially after he started making intense films with Pyaasa.

In Pyaasa, she plays the character of Gulabo the prostitute with the heart of gold and comes very close to the character of Chandramukhi from Devdas. In Kaagaz ke Phool she plays the character of Shanti, which is similar in a way to Paro from Devdas. In my opinion, Paro and Chandramukhi almost summarise the entire gamut of emotions that a woman has towards a man when she is in love. Through these two characters, Guru Dutt gave her two of the most endearing roles of her career, and in totality presented her as a complete woman, of strength, substance and virtue.

The women:

Women played an integral part in every film made by both these legend. From the idealistic school teacher in Shree 420, to the prostitute with a heart of gold in Pyaasa, from the righteous lawyer in Awara to the starlet in Kaagaz ke Phool, from the woman trapped between love and duty in Sangam to the woman devoted to her husband in Sahib Bibi aur Ghulam both these legends have given Hindi cinema some of its strongest female characters, who have eventually defined the very norms of a typical heroine and several characters, even today are modelled on these character archetypes.

This section takes a look at some of these great characters: -

Radha – Sangam

This character played by Vyajanthimala essays the journey of a woman who marries someone whom she doesn’t love but after the marriage plays the role of an ideal Indian wife, who is devoted to her husband. It is the story of the woman torn apart between duty and love, and makes the right decision in every situation.

In some way, Radha epitomises the journey of an ideal Indian woman. She dislikes the same person initially, whom she eventually gets married to, as she is madly in love with his best friend. But when she actually gets married to him, she confesses to his photo that she shall now devote herself totally to him, as it is her duty as a woman. Though it may sound patriarchal, she represents the struggle of woman and is true to her duty, and the cultural values imbibed in her. The Indian woman is always defined by her devotion to her husband on the silver screen, and Radha is no different.

In the climax she speaks for the first time when she as a woman questions her lover and her husband whether she would ever get an opportunity to decide for herself. In a way this struggle of Radha again signifies the struggle of a woman in a patriarchal society , where she has to struggle even for her identity.

Chhoti Bahu – Sahib Bibi aur Ghulam

This character played by Meena Kumari represents the anguish of a woman, who has been almost abandoned by her husband. Her husband feels ashamed to spend the nights with her, and this is precisely the reason for her suffering. This story is set in a period where the woman is almost like a slave to her husband, and his word is the final one for her.

Within the framework of this stereotype, Chhoti Bahu is different, as she is willing to go to any extent, just to get some attention form her husband, so much so that even compares herself to a prostitute, and takes to alcohol only to be with her husband. Traditionally the patriarchal society has seen the woman either as a wife or as a mother, and the character of Chhoti Bahu becomes unique because she is treated as neither, and is conditioned to think that these are the only dimensions of a woman’s personality. This character isn’t even named in the film, and is just referred to as Chhoti Bahu, even by her own husband.

Thus, the pain, anguish and misery that this character suffers in the film, is in a way uncommon for most of the other leading ladies on Bollywood, and that is perhaps the reason why this remains as one of the finest characters portrayed on Indian silver screen, apart form Meena Kumari’s outstanding performance.

Vidya – Shree 420

Shree 420 represents the irony in the society where the poor have their values as their assets and have to compromise on them to achieve success in life. In such a situation, when her lover gets carried away by the glamour and glitz of the city of Bombay, Vidya holds on to her values.

She represents the strength of an Indian woman, who has the ability to face difficulties and yet not complain, to not compromise on her ideals no matter what the circumstances force her to do. Vidya represents the strength for her lover, and epitomises the values that are innate to the Indian culture.

As the name suggests, Vidya means wisdom, and in the film the other female character played by Nadira is called Maya, which means money. Thus, metaphorically the hero Raj has to choose between either the riches or his values. Vidya depicts courage and intelligence; she is the ideal Indian woman, who is the strength, the driving force for the success and courage of her husband. If one were to compare between the characters portrayed on Indian silver screen and decide on the character closest to the definition of an ideal Indian woman, Vidya would most definitely be the right choice.

Gulabo – Pyaasa

Devdas is definitely India’s most regarded novel when it comes to the film makers. From K. L. Saigal to Sanjay Leela Bhansali, many have made their own interpretations of the classic and several others have interpreted the basic plot in many ways. One of the best indirect interpretations of the classic was by Guru Dutt in Pyaasa and as in the original novel; the character that takes the maximum love from the audience was none other than the prostitute, who became Gulabo in Pyaasa.

Gulabo’s love for Vijay is again unconditional and so is her devotion for him. She represents his strength and becomes the reason for his existence eventually. Guru Dutt didn’t just romanticise the idea of the prostitute with a heart of gold in Pyaasa symbolically showed the significance that Waheeda Rehman had in his life through this film. The climax scene in the film, when Vijay and Gulabo hold hands and walk towards the horizon wasn’t shown very often in Hindi cinema.

From being his admirer, to his lover, to someone who would go to any extent for him; Gulabo in some way represents the ideal woman which every man would probably dream of. One of the unique elements of this film was that no where did Vijay look upon Gulabo as a social stigma. This was one unique Guru Dutt touch, which he brought to the Devdas-Chandramukhi romance.

Maya – Shree 420

Maya in Shree 420 represents the ideals of a bad woman. She would be defined as the ideal vamp of Indian cinema. She counters every virtue that Vidya represents. She uses the men in her life, believes only in the superficial life, is amoral and as a symbolic representation she smokes too.

The use of cigarettes and alcohol eventually became some of the defining traits of a bad woman or the vamp. Raj Kapoor through his films not only built the ideal woman but also the non-ideal one too. The juxtaposition of Maya and Vidya brings out all the essential elements of a vamp that are typical to a Hindi film.

Shanti – Kaagaz ke Phool

Here again Guru Dutt tries to touch upon Devdas but this time the story shifts to Paro and Devdas. Suresh Sinha, the character played by Guru Dutt is that of a successful film director who is sick and tired of the fake and feigned behaviour of the people around him. At this very moment he comes across Shanti, who brings in the innocence, which would be characteristic of Paro. Circumstantially, the two have to separate and Suresh can’t handle this.

Shanti comes across as one of the weakest female characters in a Guru Dutt film. She is forced by circumstances to leave her love and betray him. She does go through tremendous repentance but the damage is already done. The journey of Shanti is very similar to the journey of Waheeda Rehman herself in the life of Guru Dutt.

The songs:

Guru Dutt and Raj Kapoor both have always used songs very effectively in their films. They had a great ear for music and music was never forced in their films, it was always an integral part of the script, something that added to the script, and enhanced the performances of the actors rather than portraying them as mere item numbers. Thus, be it the one room wonder of Na jaao saiyyan from Sahib Bibi aur Ghulam or the lavish dream sequence of Awara Guru Dutt and Raj Kapoor have always given the audience superb songs laced with excellent music and extraordinary visuals.

Both these legends are known for their brilliant song picturisations.

In this respect their works are similar for their quality and at the same time they are very different depending upon the mood of the situation and the background of the characters. This section is just an attempt to compare some of the wonders, which are similar on one level and different on the other.

Pyar hua iqraar hua – Shree 420

Essentially speaking, Raj Kapoor represented the common man on screen, who had simple dreams in life, and was almost similar to them in terms of his mannerisms and spending power. This was the reason why he connected so well with the masses.

An example of classic Raj Kapoor style was the picturisation of this song, in which two lovers very innocently paint the world of their dreams. The song doesn’t have elaborate sets or choreography, but conveys the message beautifully. Even the lyrics are simple where in the lovers just imagine their future together.

The greatness of Raj Kapoor lies in bringing the utopian world alive on screen, that too in a shanty by lane outside a simple tea stall amidst the rains. This song is probably one of the most complete songs ever witnessed by Indian cinema where the lovers actually resemble people who do not need anything else, if they do have each other. Besides the chemistry of the leading couple, adds tremendous value to the song.

Waqt ne kiya – Kaagaz ke Phool

If Pyar hua iqraar hua is the best representation of Raj Kapoor and Nargis’s on screen romance, then Waqt ne kiya represents the same for Guru Dutt and Waheeda Rehman.

The situation of the song is such that the lovers can no longer be together and thus the lyrics convey that since they can’t be with each other, they are no longer the same individuals that they used to be. One of the most memorable elements of this song is the frame where there is a bright white light right in between the two lovers and the souls of the lovers unite under the divine light.

Again there wasn’t any choreography in the song, the camera only focussed on the faces of the two lovers, who have to separate due to circumstances, just like Paro and Devdas. The use of symbolism was so powerful in this song that the lovers didn’t even have to hold hands to convey that they long for each other. This is probably the reason why even today the romance of this era is regarded as complete and dignified.

Na jaao saiyyan – Sahib Bibi aur Ghulam

Today many songs are picturised lavishly on huge sets and yet they don’t generate a great impact. To all such film makers, this song would probably be the most ultimate learning experience.

The entire song is picturised around a bed, where the wife is trying to entice her husband and prevent him form visiting the other woman. She is going through too much suffering because she is not getting what she deserves. Again there is no choreography or elaborate lighting to enhance the superficial impact.

It is only through her expressions that Meena Kumari conveys her sufferings and the viewer is left absolutely spellbound. She plays the role of a wife who has her world centered around her husband, and doesn’t care about her. The entire song adds a lot to the character that she plays and instead of being a hindrance to the narrative, just conveys her anguish. In the end, the husband not only walks out on his wife but also criticises her for being crazy, which further adds to the suffering of the character.

Buddha mil gaya – Sangam

This song has a situation similar to the one mentioned in the above song, the only difference being that here the woman has a husband who otherwise dotes on her, and has given her full freedom. Thus, the entire mood of the song changes from somber to funny.

The choreography used here is simple and just adds to the fun element of the song, and eventually the husband falls prey to the enticing pranks played by his wife. Again the lyrics used are also pretty simple and aren’t very heavy in the poetic department. This is one of the songs where Raj Kapoor has used the props very effectively to add to the visual aspect of the song and also to suit the mood of the situation.

Chaudhvin ka Chand - Chaudhvin ka Chand

This is another song that simply conveys the conjugal bliss of a couple. The song has no choreography in the literal sense of the word. The entire song is picturised with the husband admiring his astonishingly beautiful wife, and singing praises of her incomparable beauty.

The use of metaphors in the lyrics and complementary picturisations make this song a visual delight. Throughout the video, the woman doesn’t speak a single word and just expresses through her eyes, in fact on some occasions, she doesn’t even open them.

Such was the brilliance of the genius of Guru Dutt that every thing was left to the viewer’s imagination, which added to the viewer’s level of involvement and thus even today his work is treated with reverence.

Ghar aaya mera pardesi – Awara

This song would probably define an entire genre of song picturisations in Indian cinema, the dream sequence. In the film, Raj plays a vagabond who is now scared about his future. In this song, he imagines his childhood sweetheart Rita calling him.

This song was mounted on a giant canvas that would probably unparallel to date in the history of Indian cinema, yet the expressions, simple emotional moments weren’t neglected in the whole glamour.

Dum bhar jo udhar moonh phere – Awara

This is a simple duet when the lover meets after years. What makes this song really unique is the chemistry between the lead couple. It talks of a very Indian concept, where the girl is embarrassed to express her love in the presence of anybody else, so much so that she is requesting the moon to look in the other direction while she expressed her feelings, and then the lover joins her.

Jaane woh kaise – Pyaasa

This song will definitely be one of the best indoor songs ever picturised and is definitely a genius by the genius. The song tells the story of a poet who has lost his love. In the party that the song is picturised, he finds himself extremely alien and begins the song, which conveys his pain. The lyrics convey are extremely poignant especially when he says that he has always received thorns, when he longed for roses.

The camera movement is again superb, and the frame at the start, where the camera gradually zooms in on Guru Dutt, coupled with the silent building up of the song adds to the effect. Even the camera movement is in sync with the lyrics and the mood of the song. The repentance which is seen on the face of Meena, the character played by Mala Sinha, who is the one who has betrayed her lover is another highlight of the film.

Dost dost na raha – Sangam

This song would be regarded as the most ironic song ever picturised on Indian silver screen, where in the lover accuses his wife and his best friend for betraying him. Ideally, he is the person who has been responsible for the separation of the two lovers and yet he is the one who is complaining.

The amount of restraint expressed by Rajendra Kumar and Vjyanthimala, who play the sacrificial lovers in the film, and the pain expressed by Raj Kapoor, who is oblivious to their feelings adds to the effect of the song. As in case of Jaane woh kaise the camera movements enhance the video tremendously, and a simple setting in a single room doesn’t hamper the brilliance of the video, and the genius of the director.

A social capitalist...Gurubhai and his Bombay!

2007-06-20T11:27:00.000-07:00

The role of Bollywood in branding Bombay as the business destination has been pivotal. Several films have talked about aspiring businessmen making successful debuts and survivals in the big bad business world ob Bombay.

What makes the recent Guru special here is the striking resemblance of the plot with the lustrous and prolific commercial escapade of one of India’s biggest businessmen of all time, Mr. Dhirubhai Ambani. Though officially the certificate does read that the film is a work of fiction and no resemblances to the original story have been promoted, this film becomes important for this study as it is one of those films which brand the realities of Bombay.

The film also makes some subtle comments on the evolution of the business families in the city and its changing face with them. The main protagonist Gurukant Desai (referred to as Guru, henceforth) played by Abhishek Bachchan is a villager, who is a visionary and thus gives up on a high paying job in Turkey and decided to start up his own business and hence comes to the magical world of Bombay. The movie is set in the 1950s, a period when India was just basking in the recent glory of independence, however the traces of the Victorian influence were still intact, especially in cities like Bombay which were amongst the commercial capitals of the British Empire. Here one can trace the history of Bombay and speak about its importance as a trade centre due to the presence of the sea. The first business which Guru starts in the film is that of imported cloth. These business opportunities definitely gave Bombay and thereby the Bombayites to get in touch with the outside world much earlier than the other Indians. Thus a global approach and modern outlook became integral elements of the brand attributes of the city. And the mob of people flows towards prosperity. Thus, Bombay acquired its status as a mercantile destination.

History stands testimony to the fact that trade is supreme over all other cultures and thus the trade community acquires its own culture which is an eclectic mix of various cultural elements of different civilizations. This justifies the multi-cultural evolution of Bombay. The cosmopolitan set-up added further to the modern face of Bombay. These processes occurred simultaneously and in circles which certainly had their rub off on each other. Thus we can observe that there were several factors which contributed to the branding of Bombay, and the film essentially touches upon almost all of them. Also, the prevalent cinema of the 1950s showed the urban hero and a modern lifestyle as elements of Bombay. The focus here may have been on projecting a modern India to the rest of the country, probably just to highlight the accomplishments of the nation and celebrate its new found independence. Some of the early films of the 1950s in this respect were far more modern than the contemporary films which are set-up in a very modern format but still talk of archaic cultural values. Even the romantic scenes in the films like Awara show a much more modern approach that the characters had not only towards love, but towards life as a whole. And the fact that these films were set in Bombay, makes it the face of modern India. The social life and night club culture showcased either directly through songs in films like Aar-Paar, Awara and Shree 420 or the background setting of a high-society clubs in films like Asli Naqli add to the modern charm of Bombay.

These modern traits were certainly a British legacy and the films appropriately showcase the same. So much is the difference in the cultural values of the village India and this modern Bombay that the villager feels alienated, and if he doesn’t feel the same, the residents of the modern world make sure he does through whichever means that they can. This is one aspect which has been showcased in the film Guru. The upper authorities don’t really appreciate the progress of a villager in their established business kingdom, and thus try and get rid of him in every possible way, either through entry barriers for him or a legal takeover. These realities of the business world aren’t very specific just Bombay, but Bollywood has embedded them in their Bombay based biz-flicks since time immemorial.

Though Guru doesn’t intentionally make any links with any actual business tycoon, the very fact that it is set in the Bombay of the 1950s and discusses the issues of the politics of the trade world speaks volumes about the city’s business. Thus, though the resemblances with the business czar might have been co-incidental but in effect contribution to Bombay’s are certainly much more than just a co-incidence and also their impact is strong.

Certain key sequences at the start of the film rightfully establish Bombay as a modern and slightly alien city especially for the villagers, or strangers for that matter. Even the metaphors used to convey modernity versus traditions convey much more than their mere direct meanings. For instance Guru’s interaction with president of the trade union happens at the golf course, when the latter asks the former to play a shot of golf to and immediately get his work done. Guru, who is unaware of this present culture merely lifts the ball and places it in the hole. This scene indicates the seclusion of the richness and western influences with a few and exclusion of the rest. The use of golf as a sport in this scene is not only due to actual practice of the game in the city at that time, but also the fact that this game depicts the Victorian influence in very different way, than what a cricket shot could have. The sport speaks of a modernity which can be used as a distinguishing and discriminating factor, especially in a situation like this. Probably a Bombayite’s attitude of indifference towards the stranger stems form here.

Most of the members amongst the opponents of Guru aren’t directly named, but it is evident form their accent and mannerisms that they represent the Parsi community in the city, which was amongst the first business communities in the city. In one of his dialogues in the film, Guru mentions that the existing rich don’t want the new rich to be a part of them. This sentence marks an era of change in the rulers of Bombay from the Parsis to the Gujaratis. An interesting observation here is that the Parsi community doesn’t have its origins in India, and thereby its influence and contribution to the modernity of the city is greater than the one which could have been achieved from any other ethnic group of Indian origin. Guru doesn’t really talk directly about the branding of Bombay, but these subtle nuances in its picturisation can be used as tools to justify the appropriate branding of the city in the minds of the millions of viewers.

Another fascinating character in the film is the one played by Mithun Chakraborty, Nanaji. Nanaji represents the modern Bengali thought process and virtues. He runs a newspaper, not for commercial purposes, but actually speaks of journalism of courage. He represents the leftist philosophy and speaks of equality for all. His ethnic orientation also contributes largely to Bombay’s cosmopolitan existence. The film showcases the Parsis, the Gujaratis, the Marathis, the Hindi speakers and now the Bengalis, all as residents of Bombay in the 1950s, and thus adds to Bombay’s image of mini-India. The Bengali lineage is also associated with the first Victorian capital of Calcutta (now Kolkata). Calcutta in one sense is very important while conducting the study in the depiction of Bombay, not only because it was a preceded Bombay in most of its modern day brand virtues, but somehow lost out on that modern charm eventually; but also because of the fact that inherent communist philosophy of Calcutta is a complete contrast to the capitalist commercial approach of Bombay. The truth that several dream merchants of the Bombay film fraternity have their roots in the Bengali philosophy adds another dimension to the comparative study of the two cities. Also, in terms of the frequency of on-screen depiction of any city from India on the silver screen, Calcutta would rank at number two right after Bombay.

Nanaji represents a culture which originated as an outbreak against the British-Raj but has all those elements of that culture which can be termed as virtues. Just as Bombay today stands as a representative of all the positive effects which the British-Raj has had on India, Nanaji symbolises a society which is educated and which thinks. It is a fraternity which dissects and analyses every thing before believing it and intellectually assesses every aspect of it. His presence in the city of Bombay just conveys that the city had achieved this level of progression of thought, even in that period. Here we can see the origin of another form of an aspirational value for Bombay, this time not by the worshippers of goddess Lakshmi, but the devotees of goddess Saraswati, the intelligent, thinking clan.

By far we have observed that Guru depicts Bombay as a modern city, not just in its economic outlook and social life, but also in terms of its thought process. Another element of Bombay which the film speaks volumes about is the practice of business ethics. Although the film doesn’t really highlight too much about this, it subtly hints at the underhand means used by white-collared businessmen to achieve success and in effect get rid of their sins, by exercising corporate social responsibility. In one of the scenes, Shyam (the character of an honest journalist, played by R. Madhavan) mentions how Guru (and there by his obsession for power and money) is a disease which has spread in the society. He is amongst one of those who would fleece the government of its land, and then construct a beautiful park on a tiny portion of it, to beautifully hide his notorious acts. But at the same time, a poor taxi driver who is a stakeholder in Guru’s company tells him that it is because of Guru and the benefits that he made form his company that the could marry off three of his daughters. This irony in the characterization of Guru can be interpreted as a tweaked version of communism, where in Guru does pass down the benefits to all his stakeholders, and in a way does try and implement the Sanskrit philosophy of Bahujan Hitaay, Bahujan Sukhay; but the only twist in the tale here is that his intentions aren’t completely altruistic. We do see that he has made several compromises so that his business can flourish, and he is not apologetic about it. In one of his very first days in Bombay, Guru while chatting with Nanaji indicates that he hasn’t learnt how to lie, as he is just new to Bombay. This line brands Bombay as a place, where one needs dissociate him from the truth to succeed as it is clear that Guru is here to be successful and is also willing to learn the rules of Bombay. Eventually when we see Guru as a shrewd businessman, we can only assume the truth in the assumption made by him at the outset.

Ironically, in the climax scene he does give an analogy of Mahatma Gandhi, who has taught the Indians the power of truth and to fight against the laws and change them to achieve progress. He says that he is battling it out for the greater cause which is the vision of a modern India, which doesn’t belong to the third world, and does deserve to be amongst the best in the world. The very fact that Bombay is shown as the epicenter of his operations while envisioning a modern India, conveys a lot of Bombay’s role in the economic progress of the nation.

Guru thus represents the changing phases in the life of Bombay, the business world of Bombay, and the cultural variations across the communities in Bombay. In an era where plush exotic locations have become the in thing for the dream merchants of Bollywood, and all other cities are trying to ape Bombay in every possible way, Guru represents Bombay in the real sense.

A metaphoric odyssey...The journey of Devdas!

2007-06-20T11:24:00.000-07:00

The journey of Devdas

The three principle characters have been modelled on the classic love tale of Radha-Krishna and the devotion of Meera. There are direct as well as metaphorical references to the same. In the song, Morey Piya while Devdas and Paro make love, the background score speaks about the Raas Leela between Radha and Krishna. Also, the very presence of an idol of Lord Krishna in that room in Chandramukhi’s kotha where Devdas lives, metaphorically establishes her as the Meera of the story. Her devotion for Devdas and the unconditional and largely unrequited love which she showers upon him are both representations of the unconditional faith which a million devotees place in the Gods who may or may not bless them.

In one of the dialogues, Chandramukhi mentions the distinctions between the three most commonly used words for Love in the Hindi language, viz. Pyaar, Ishq and Mohabbat. Pyaar atma ki parchhayee hai (Love is the shadow of the soul). This to me is the character of Paro, whose life is dedicated to Devdas and thus she becomes a reflection of his soul. Ishq eeshwar ki ibaadat hai (Love is to worship God). This is Chandramukhi, who venerates Devdas to the extent of worshipping him. Mohabbat zindagi ka maqsad hai (Love is the purpose of life). This is Devdas, the lover, the lovelorn, whose aim in life was love, who devoted his life for love, who died for his love.

The opening scene of the film is a fully blossomed Gulmohar tree as everybody in the scene is extremely ecstatic about the fact that Devdas is going to return after ten years form London. The tree here indicates the blossom which his presence will bring to the family. When his grandmother asks him if he did get the imported watch she asked for, he replies that he hasn’t got that but has brought good times. And the current situation in the Mukherjee household is indicative of the fact that he has come as a messenger of good times.

The preparations for his welcome are on in full swing, but there is one person who is extremely unhappy about everything, though she pretends to be happy about it. This is Devdas’s sister-in-law, Kumud who probably is simply jealous about the attention which Devdas gets, which her husband doesn’t or is probably weary of losing out on the property to Devdas. The direct references to both the probabilities are shown in the proceeding scenes. It is an Indian tradition to have the Aarti to ward off all the evils, with the pious flame, the blessings and all other auspicious symbols. It is here when Devdas’s mother insists on being the first one to see him while he gets down to meet his childhood sweetheart, Paro. The dialogue here by Kumud is Ab to Paro ki nazar lagegi uspar. (Literally – Paro will see him first. Metaphorically – She will cast her spell on him, with her evil intentions.) Immediately after everybody’s exit, she blows off the Diya. This is supposed to be an extremely inauspicious thing to do, especially when someone is to enter the house. Metaphorically the audiences are convinced that this is the signal of the evil, and that everything won’t remain as hunky dory as it seems.

Parallel to this, when Devdas and Paro meet, one can see red footprints of Paro, as her feet are soaked in the red water. This is the Indian tradition when the bride enters her new house with such footprints. Indirectly the director conveys here that she is the bride to be for Devdas, and her love, her husband to be has arrived. Without revealing much about the actual relationship, these red footprints just establish the extent of the relationship between the lovers. While hiding form her lover, Paro is being teased by a bee. Devdas enters and she collapses with embarrassment. In his playful stint of teasing her, he mentions about the growth in her, and her maturity. There she says Agar saagar saamne ho to jharne ko nadi banane mein kya der lagti? (With the ocean right in front, it doesn’t take much time for the stream to turn into a river.) Here she not only mentions the significance he holds in her life, in terms about being a source of inspiration for her growth, but also corroborates the fact that the ultimate destination of her life is to be one with him, just the way a river finds her ultimate destination by getting assimilated into an ocean. On another note, Devdas can actually be looked at as the ocean of love, Paro being one of the rivers culminating into him, while another river Chandramukhi, flowing somewhere is on her way to be there. In the end when she refuses to show her face, Devdas just catches hole of the bee and says Tumhein koi aur chhue yeh mujhe achha nahi lagta. (I don’t like it when somebody else touches you.) The bee here is an implied reference to the fact that he can’t tolerate anyone else being there in her life, and is a direct manifestation of the possessiveness in the love of this man. It is somehow difficult to decipher whether Devdas loves Paro more than what she loves him. But this stint of possessiveness, firmly establishes the classic masculine love, which can be manifested in this fashion. There is a tinge of violence in his tone, his expressions and the manner in which he catches hold of the bee, as if he were to squash it to death for troubling Paro.

The tiff with Kumud is on, and so is the romance with Paro. In one of the instances while he is making fun of Kumud, Devdas and his grandmother mention that a Neem leaf though soaked in honey is still bitter. Again without speaking much about her directly, this one sentence summarises the character of the lady and explains that irrespective of the layers of added sweetness the core bitterness always remains. Immediately after this, he pays to visit to Paro to give her the symbolic Kangan, which is the family’s traditional set of bangles which are given to the bride to be, as a welcome gesture. The dialogue there by Paro is Agar chudiyaan utarna nahi jaante to kangan kya khaak pehnaoge? The metaphor for taking off the bangles is with reference to the act of love making, and kangan pehnana is indicative of the nuptial signals that come as a consequence in the Indian tradition.

Life is just a bed of roses for the lovers, when reality strikes, and Devdas’s mother publicly humiliates Paro’s mother for getting the marriage proposal. In one of the dialogues, she speaks about the bones which come along with the fish they eat, and the tact that they know which lets them enjoy the fish sans the troubles which the bones would cause. Paro and her family are referred to as the bones in this sequence, basically the unwanted portion.

In the proceeding scene when Paro visits Devdas secretly, the guard in his house asks her about who she is. Her answer is Main. The simple use of me in place of her name in this sequence indicates two things. One, she is trying to hide from the Paro within her on one level, whose family has been insulted by Devdas’s family, but she still loves him unconditionally. In fact one of her friends does question her about the same in the previous conversation. The other meaning of Main here is the fact that her identity at that moment isn’t Paro, it isn’t the daughter of Neelkanth and Sumitra Chakravarty, it isn’t the love of Devdas, but it is just that of a human being, a soul, a person. This can be interpreted as a way of running away from all bondages, or simply a soul search, a journey of self-discovery, because her most nurtured dream, her cherished love, her existing life at this point is on the rocks.

While giving Devdas her reasons for being there at 2 am in the night, she says Nadi saagar se milne kyun jaati hai, Surajmukhi hameshaa Suraj ki taraf hi kyun dekhta hai. Again the reference to the ocean has the meanings which have been discussed already. When she calls him the sun and herself the sunflower, one figures out that her existence is totally dependent on him, he is the source of light, the source of life for her. The discussion doesn’t lead to any decision and she is forced to leave, again insulted this time by Devdas’s father, who calls her a prostitute. She runs away from the scene, insulted, humiliated, while her shawl falls down. She had covered herself with this shawl while visiting him. The fall of this shawl can be compared to the shedding of the layer of the skin in the snakes, when the new skin appears. Similarly now a new chapter in her life is about to begin. Also, the shawl had been used as a covering to protect, to shield the pride of her family. In the Indian belief system, the women represent the pride of the family (Ghar ki izzat) and any harm to them, any insult to them is the easiest way to insult the family. Many of the traditional symbols used to emblazon the married woman, viz. Sindoor, Mangal-Sutra etc. are indicative of the fact that this woman belongs to a family and there is someone to take care of her, protect her and destroy every evil that rises against her. This patriarchal depiction of women has been used in this sequence. On her return, Paro’s mother slanders her for going there with the pride of the family, and returning without it. This pride in the form of the shawl becomes the symbolic representation of their love and separation for Devdas, and he treasures it in his box of memories.

After all the drama, the lovers finally separate as Devdas concedes to his family’s wishes. He is extremely upset, unhappy and dejected when one of his friends takes him to a brothel where he usually goes to get rid of his sorrows. This is where Devdas first meets Chandramukhi and hates her like completely. Throughout his life, he has never seen a woman like this. He can’t define her neither as a mother, nor a sister, nor a wife, nor a friend, and thus according to him, since she is none of the above, she is a prostitute. Here the definition of a woman’s existence solely from the perspective of her relationships with the various men in her life is a metaphor for the prevalent patriarchy in the society. His hatred has two effects on her. On some level she is challenged to make him like her, and on another level, she is intrigued by and attracted towards this man, who is probably the first one who has looked beyond her anatomy and mentioned about the woman within her, the human instinct within her. He has in some way triggered a thought in her, which may be the first milestone in her journey of self-discovery. It doesn’t take much for him to say, and she is swept off her feet and is in love with this man, who has nothing but a cold shoulder and bitter words to give her as a reciprocation of her love.

The moment Chandramukhi enters the scene, a mirror breaks. It is believed in the Indian tradition that the breakage of glass is auspicious. Devdas’s entry into her life probably signifies that, which is conveyed through the broken mirror. Also, if we consider Chandramukhi herself as a mirror, Devdas can’t see his reflection in it, and thus the initial dynamics of their relationship are immediately conveyed through the breaking mirror. The next reference in this scene is to the ritual of putting kaajal again as a protection to ward off all the evil eyes. Similar to the previous mention of the same phrase, the pun here is on nazar lagna and dekhna.

After his interaction with Chandramukhi, Devdas is reminded of Paro and thus returns, but at a wrong time. It is now her wedding night. After a verbal tiff with Paro, the hapless lover hits his love with a pearl necklace right on her forehead. The mark according to him is a symbol of their love. This daag signifies several things, which will be discussed in greater detail later.

The defeated lover is on a journey of self destruction. In the course of his journey he comes in touch again with Chandramukhi.

Devdas

An angry, petulant, slightly immature and crazy lover, Devdas has defined the archetype of the Indian lover on Indian celluloid. In his adaptation of the classic novel, Bhansali altered the personality of the character to suit the times, and the personality of Shah Rukh Khan. A barrister from London, Devdas here represents the western charm which probably everyone else around aspires for. His demeanour, his words all are indicative of the same. In one of his interactions with Paro, he calls her ganwaar which simply indicates the level of refinement which he has achieved because of his stay and education in London.

His anger is an important element of their relationship. In the same scene, when Paro plays a prank on him; which he doesn’t approve of he throws the plate away. This plate throwing act is basically used to establish his anger, his immaturity and his way of treating problems. He can be looked at as someone who doesn’t solve the problems but throws them away. Life has bigger problems in store for him, but with them, before he could throw them away, life throws him into a series of situations, where he is rendered helpless and ultimately defeated. Another place where his arrogance surfaces very strongly is when he throws money at Chandramukhi for taking her of him while he was sick.

On Paro’s wedding night, she speaks up against him probably for the first time. When the metaphoric references to his angry behaviour of disapproval ultimately end, he hits her with the necklace. The mark eventually does become a metaphor for their love.

Paro

Parvati, fondly referred to as Paro throughout the story, is a strong woman, whose identity on some level is defined with the identity of her love, her lover, her life, Devdas. On her wedding night her mother mentions that from now on everyone would refer to her as Parvati, and not Paro. The change in name is a metaphor for the change in her identity, which now would be devoid of Devdas.

When Devdas officially decides to end their relationship and sends her letter to that effect, she burns it. The visual of this fire coincides with the announcement that her in laws to be have arrived, and so the fire in the scene can also be interpreted as the holy fire in the Yagna. This fire however is symbolic of Paro, her inner self, her love for Devdas, the fire which actually fuelled the Diya she lit for him ten years ago. Paro is more like the flame in her own Diya, which when teased can actually be the turbulent, violent fire and burn everything that touches it. The letter by Devdas is just a symbol of a several other things which have burnt in the fire, the fire within Paro.

Paro is married to a man much older to her, who can’t get over his first wife and thus there is celibacy in their married relationship. This is perhaps to indicate the purity of her love for Devdas, which still resides in her heart, her soul. Somewhere she is like the Diya, which is being fuelled by the oil, but though the flame gets its light from this source it can’t directly touch it.

The Diya

Diya jalakar intezaar karo to jaanewala jaldi aata hai, is Paro’s belief and thus she ignites a Diya when Devdas leaves for London. This Diya is a metaphor for her love which she has nurtured thoroughly over the years. The flame has witnessed every moment which she has spent in his memory, every moment in her life, her joys, her pain, her anguish. It is a symbol of Devdas for her, as she doesn’t refer to it as an inanimate light, but calls it Devdas, she shares her emotions with it, and she speaks with it. The brightness of the flame is a reflection of Paro’s emotional power, and her love for Devdas, it is a metaphor of her inner flame, her strength, her dedication, her love. When her mother-in-law once attempts to extinguish it, the child woman in Paro just through her expressions conveys how much the Diya means to her, and that she would go to any extent to protect its flame, her refutation here is again a proof of her love.

The Daag

The second symbol of the eternal love between Devdas and Paro is the mark on her face which he has given her as a parting gift. This mark is a symbol of Devdas’s existence within Paro. Again like the Diya, this is another symbol of her love, which she nurtures forever, the way she puts it has now made her more beautiful, it has made her complete. Apart from the intangible manifestation of Devdas in her life, which is the Diya, this Daag is a more palpable symbol of Devdas’s existence in her life, her body, her soul, her self. In the post marriage catharsis between the lovers, she asks him to touch her and make a promise. At that moment even he touches this very mark, as even he is aware of his symbolic existence within her through this mark.

Chandramukhi

Log to Devdasi bhi kehte hain humein says Chandramukhi when Paro visits her. This dialogue largely summarises her character. Devdasi can be interpreted in several ways and Chandramukhi is all of these interpretations that one can make. She is like Devdas in a way, she is like his shadow, so Devdasi; she is like a dasi to Devdas, who would do anything for Devdas, so Devdasi; just like the actual Devdasis who serve the temple she serves for her temple of love, Devdas, so Devdasi; and also the fact that the prostitutes are termed as Devdasis, so owing to her profession, she is a Devdasi.

The literal translation of Chandramukhi can also be looked at as someone whose face resembles the moon, or someone who always faces the moon. In either case, her name signifies a person who is dependent on the moon. Apart from this attribute of her beauty, Chandramukhi is actually the moon in Devdas’s life. Just like the moon gets the energy from the sun and shines bright, Chandramukhi derives her light, her energy, her inspiration, her love from Devdas. Paro on the other hand can be like the sun for Devdas, the source of his light, his life. Thus, the life of Devdas is incomplete without either of them. Devdas in effect becomes the earth, which revolves around the sun, while the moon revolves around it. As for the second meaning of someone who faces the moon constantly, Devdas is now Chandramukhi’s moon, and she looks up to him, looks at him, can’t live without him.

Bhansali wished to showcase Chandramukhi as a queen, because according to him she is someone with a heart of gold, and thus her surroundings should also exhibit the grandeur which she possesses within herself. Chandramukhi enters the scene in the story as an angel, who helps the wounded lover heal his wounds for some time, and is willing to offer everything that she has in order to help him out and make him feel better. Thus, in her first appearance she is wearing pure white, which metaphorically conveys her piousness, the purity of her soul and the angelic role which she is supposed to play in the story.

Chandramukhi may come across as a weak woman, who is offering herself completely to someone who is least bothered to even take notice of her existence, which comes to her, hates her, calls her a paper flower which can only attract the bee for the nectar which it doesn’t have and in effect keep it thirsty, unfulfilled, and unsatisfied. The lack of nectar but apparent existence of the same in this context means the love which doesn’t come easily to a prostitute, who is supposed to only trade love, and not fall in love. But she is a strong woman who speaks her mind. When one of her clients makes a pass at her (Kalibabu saying Nath aap pehen lena, utaar hum denge meaning he would bejewel her with ornaments so that he can take them off while making love to her) she through her expressions signals him to stay within the limits. The ghungroo offered to her by Kalibabu are an indication of the fact that he wants her to dance to his tunes, but she refuses.

When Paro visits Chandramukhi, she is wearing a saffron coloured outfit, which is usually worn by sages. The colour of the outfit in this scene is symbolic of Chandramukhi’s renunciation from the profession and the beginning of a journey of true love. In this scene when Paro sees an idol of Lord Krishna in Devdas’s room it is corroborated that Chandramukhi is the Meera of the story. As a token of appreciation of her love for Devdas, and in a gesture of legitimizing the relationship between the two Paro grants her consent and passes over one of the bangles from the set which was given to her by Devdas. She is now happy that there is someone to take care of Dev and that he isn’t alone. The bangle here becomes a symbol for the person, who is loved by both of them. At this point in time, Chandramukhi’s social status becomes inconsequential, and Paro looks at her as just another human being, and this emotion is verbally summarised by Chandramukhi when she is humiliated publicly. As another gesture of legitimizing the relationship and giving Chandramukhi the requisite social status for the same, Paro invites her for the Durga-Pooja at her place. This invitation is a metaphor for the new friendship, the consent which she has given to the relationship and an occasion to celebrate the joy of loving the same man. When Chandramukhi is reluctant to stay over for the function, Paro convinces her by saying that if they celebrate together, may be their happiness will reach Devdas.

The bangle which was a symbol for Devdas becomes a reference to Paro when he sees it, and then asks Chandramukhi on her views about Paro. Knowing Devdas’s love for her and after meeting her, she defines her as a human form of love itself. He now defines Chandramukhi as a Ghazal, a Thumri, a tear, a candle. She is like the candle, which burns herself to give light to others, she is like the tear, which rolls down and liberates one from the clutches of the pent up emotions, she is like an emotional dumping ground for a tortured soul like Devdas, she is like the Thumri, which marks the beginning of celebration, she is like the Ghazal, soothing and beautiful.

After this dialogue, Devdas finally admits that the two women are like his two eyes and eventually admits his love for Chandramukhi. The epitome of tolerance now breaks down completely. Her long nurtured love has finally been acknowledged, and the two collapse into each other’s arms. The camera pans out now as the image of the lovers gets blurred and the screen is dominated by a fountain. The flow of the fountain is figurative of the love which is flowing at the moment. It is also symbolic of the celebration which Chandramukhi would feel and the happiness would Devdas would. The colour of Chandramukhi’s outfit in this scene is a bright red which gives her the status of his bride and also legally indicates the possibility of the two making love at that moment. In a similar situation before, when the two are about to experience physical intimacy, Dharamdas, interrupts the two, and Chandramukhi comes out again wrapped in a red garment, which she uses then to cover herself.

From being the paper flower to probably another tributary of love to Devdas, Chandramukhi’s selflessness and the devotion of her love helps her liberate the love from the clutches of her profession and ultimately reach the divine.

Silsila yeh Chahat ka

For ten years Paro has nourished the Diya not just with fuel, but with her devotion, her dedication, and her love; and now Devdas is coming back, so the ecstatic Paro is celebrating her boundary less joy. This Diya has spiritual powers and unlike the normal Diyas which would definitely not be able to sustain the forces of nature like wind and rains, this one keep burning right through them, as it has the divine power of love behind it, which will guard it against all evils.

As the opening line says, Paro hasn’t let the series of love end at all, irrespective of the actual absence of that love in her life. She has grown with the Diya and so have her emotions. In one of the lines, she expresses that she was burning in the pains of separation with the flame in his absence. But now she is on the brink of extreme joy and eagerness to see her lover actually, she is overwhelmed and is thus dancing her way to happiness, to completeness, as the one who will fulfill her dreams, her desires, her existence her soul is on his way. From residing in her heart for so long, he is now actually going to meet her.

The very fact that she can dance with the Diya in the rains without causing any harm to the flame, indicates the divine intervention in their love, which is pure and spiritual. Again the traces of the Radha Krishna love story are firmly established in this song. In the end of the song, she takes the Diya to the temple and spreads Sindoor all over the place. The colour red here marks the beginning of the nuptial thoughts in her mind, and by spreading the vermillion all over she is conveying it to the Gods.

Maar Daala

Right at the beginning of the song, Chandramukhi takes off her red dupatta, as Devdas enters the Mehfil. The colour of her garment now is coordinated with the lyrics and is green in colour. The previous red was a signal for the lecherous Kalibabu to stay away, while the green is welcome signal for Devdas. The colour is auspicious in the Hindu belief system. The rawness and the freshness of this colour is a metaphor for the whiff of fresh air which Devdas has brought in her life. On another level, it is a depiction of Kalibabu going green with envy over Devdas.

The words Maar Daala express the extent of joy that she has experienced because of his presence, she could die with happiness. Also they mark the death of Devdas, the soul in him, who is vanquished in the battle of life and lost Paro and now consumes his first shot of the deathly liquid. The agent of his death, the liquor now takes refuge in his body and slowly poisons his system to finally leave him at the mercy of death.

In the verse, Chandramukhi mentions how she has embraced the thorns but it is the flowers which have harmed her. This is truth of her life, owing to her profession, she has always been exposed to the ugly side of life, and she has been the purgatory for other’s frustrations and sorrows. She has indeed embraced the thorns. As she says, she has never had a relationship with the stars or the moon, which are metaphors for the beautiful things in life and their dearth in her own life. Thus the sudden extreme joy has overwhelmed her so much, that she feels she will die with the happiness.

Dola re

A festive occasion, a celebration of joy, of happiness, of love, true love by two women for the same man, one who couldn’t be with him and another who can’t, but still both of them love him and thus the love becomes spiritual in nature and thereby this song aptly comes on the occasion of Durga-Pooja, where the joy of their celebration and in effect their prayers directly reach God.

The new found friendship between the two women is definitely an instance of soul-bonding as the women in their lives are so different socially and emotionally, but they have one commonality, their true and pure almost divine love in the same man, Devdas. He lives within them and in a way they are both representations of his soul. They do make hints at his existence within themselves by talking about how he lives in their jewelry, their Sindoor, their mind, their body, their soul.

The women are dressed almost identically to signify that though they are as similar as chalk and cheese, they are in some way identical to each other as far as Devdas is concerned. In one of the following scenes, Devdas refers to the two of them as his two eyes, which further establishes the similarity. The song is shot in hues of red, with hundreds of dancers. Red here stands for celebration, joy, ecstasy, and of course the Sindoor. The saris of these women are white in colour which signifies the purity and sacredness of the unconditional love, while the frames filled with hundreds of dancers metaphorically indicate that the whole world at that moment has joined them in the celebration.

In the second verse, Chandramukhi refers to Paro as the flower of Devdas’s arms while she calls herself the floor which his foot touches. This metaphor once again establishes the basic Radha-Krishna-Meera framework of their triangular relationship, which is devoid of any sort of malice or jealousy, as it is founded on pure love. Chandramukhi is aware that no matter what she can never take that place in Devdas’s heart which Paro has. In fact it is this unconditional love for Paro which Devdas has makes Chandramukhi realise the extent to which a man can love a woman. Owing to her profession she has never really experienced such love and thus she is smitten by his charm, his love, his devotion and dedication. In effect she ends up devoting her life to him. Paro on the other hand is aware that though she wants to she can’t be with Devdas, and wants the cement the loneliness in his life. In Chandramukhi she finds respite, her pure love assures Paro that Devdas won’t be a loner of she is around. In the songs she directly orders Chandramukhi to never leave Devdas alone and marry him. The Sindoor in this line becomes a metaphor for Chandramukhi’s social acceptance, and also the acceptance of the relationship between the two.

The beauty of the love in this song is its purity, devoid of any other value or judgment based parameters. Paro’s marital status or Chandramukhi’s socially unacceptable profession, neither are treated as a hindrance to their ability to completely love the same man. Thus, there is no competition, no jealousy but only pure love.

Hameshaa Tumko Chaha

The Daag, Paro’s wedding night, Devdas’s repentance, and the celebrations laced with the morbid emotions of separation, with a ray of hope of life beyond each other, which was never imagined by either of the two lovers form the basic metaphors of this song. Just after the main verse, the music sounds like a hundred people yelling in unison. This is traditional feature of the weddings, but the use of this sound in this context is also to mark the commotion in the minds of the lovers who don’t intend to live without each other.

The song begins immediately after Devdas gives her the Daag, on her forehead and she is bleeding. It is her wedding night, and while the background score at this point is used as a substitute for the holy mantras Devdas spreads the blood on her forehead as if he were applying the pious Sindoor which is the classic Indian symbol of the union of the couple, in the eyes of society and in spirit. Further on this mark stays right in place of the Sindoor to indicate that though Paro is now married to someone else, in spirit she is one with Devdas, and this mark is the symbol of that husband of hers.

The couple together undergo the Aarti prior to the wedding. In a way this is to signify that Paro’s mother has given her consent to this spiritual union between the lovers. During the second verse, he offers her the second bangle of the pair, now as a wedding gift. The bangle here plays its usual role in a married woman’s life, but the marriage here is in spirit, though the bangle is real, for the world to see.

The end of a journey

Through the Diya, the Daag, the bangle, the Gulmohar tree and the two devoted women, the director is showing the journey of Devdas, the journey of a soul which had almost died when it was separated form Paro, but the tiny amount of life which existed within the soul was nurtured by the true love of Chandramukhi and nourished by his own emotions and love for Paro. This end is now the end of the physical manifestation of that soul, a thirsty soul, who could never get his love and could never ever love back the other soul in the same way, as she showered immense love on him.

Devdas himself summarises his life in two lines when he says, Apne hisse ki zindagi to hum jee chuke, ab bas dhadkanon ka lihaaz karte hain; Kya kahein in duniya walon ko, jo aakhri saans par bhi aitraaz karte hain. His life is in someway hanging lose. He doesn’t have a fixed destination, a fixed purpose, his life is an endless journey, in which everyone enters exactly the way passengers enter a train and leave it while it still continues its journey, the never-ending journey. Thus the train in the climax sequence stands as metaphor for this journey of his life.

After he consumes the alcohol, the frame shows the train driver adding coal to the fire which drives the train. Again the coal here is the alcohol which is being added to Devdas’s body which burns it further just like the flames in the engine, but gives it the drive to march ahead in the journey to death. In the next scene one sees a glass swinging in two directions, but it reaches neither. This glass is Devdas, and the two directions are Paro and Chandramukhi, who can only witness Devdas waving towards them, but he finally takes neither path but remains hanging in between, stranded, helpless and defeated. These two metaphors have been directly taken from Bimal Roy’s 1950s classic Devdas.

Finally when Devdas is convinced that his journey is going to end, he is reminded of his promise to Paro that he would visit her once before he dies. He has also promised Chandramukhi that he wants to meet himself before he loses himself. The first self here is Paro while the second self is Devdas himself, his physical existence. When she requests him to accompany him on this journey he disagrees and says, Main tumhari aankhon mein apni zindagi bujhte hue nahi dekh sakta. The verb bujhna in this dialogue again refers to the Diya which is Paro’s symbolic construction of Devdas in her loneliness, as her companion.

While he is on his final journey to meet his first self, Paro’s wound starts bleeding. This metaphorically conveys to Paro that her love, her other self, her soul is in some danger. In the middle of the night he is lying right outside her house, on the death bed, but waiting to catch one last glimpse of her, so that his soul is liberated from the prison defined as the body in worldly terms. He murmurs her name to himself, and though she isn’t around she gets a feeling that someone is talking to her. The entire narrative form here on is a talk between the two souls, where the spiritual, the divine plays the communication medium.

In the morning Pooja, when Paro offers flowers to the Gods, the Gulmohar tree under which Devdas is laying drops its flowers at his feet. She isn’t aware of Devdas’s presence outside her house but has a spooky feeling from within about his wellness. Since she can’t ensure anything about the actual Devdas, she goes to her symbolic construction of Devdas, and feeds it with the oil. The food for the Diya again becomes metaphoric here as we see the helpful villagers simultaneously pouring water in the mouth of the dying Devdas. Devdas and the Diya are the same right now; both are struggling for their existence. The oil and water both work as life saving tools in this scene.

When Paro yells at her maid servant to immediately run and call her son Mahendra, who knows the exact details of the stranger outside, the curtain in her hand falls and the entire frame is filled with the redness of the curtain. From being the colour of joy and Sindoor at several places in the narrative, red here becomes the colour of danger and comes as a warning signal. In the immediate next frame the camera swings in a slightly haphazard manner within the vertical space. The movement here is to signify the commotion which is going on Paro’s mind at that moment whether it is her love dying outside her door, and the series of co-incidences which are giving her all the bizarre signals.

When she finally comes to know about the actual identity of the dying stranger, she runs like a mad woman. For the first time in the entire narrative, the Diya is shown in the storm now, with its flame struggling to survive against the deadly winds. Even Devdas is surviving for the last glimpse of its beloved. Paro is also running like a destructive storm now which is on in her mind, which is destroying every obstacle in its way. The restlessness in her mind and the extent of her frenzy is exhibited by the breakage of a chandelier which comes in her way while she is running.

Her family members try and stop her, but she isn’t the one to oblige. When they force her, there is bowl filled with a red liquid, which is like a solution made out of Sindoor, but resembles blood. In her madness, the container topples and her feet are soaked in the liquid, while the marks also spread on her white garment. The colour of her sari indicates the edge in her life. It is a white which is this context can be interpreted as the colour for widows in the Indian context, laced with red which is the colour of the Suhaagan, and Paro is now somewhere in between as her love lies on the death bed. Also her footprints here resemble her footprints when she meets her love for the first time. There she willingly refuses to show him her face, and here circumstances play the same role. Irrespective of her mad efforts at running she ends up defeated as the doors close between the two lovers. The door here is the symbol of society which doesn’t believe in the spiritual union of the lovers, and believes only in the mundane nuptial relationship. Devdas manages to get a last glimpse of his love though and his soul is freed from the skeletal prison. His spirit exhales for the last time, as he utters Paro’s name, and the winds blow the Diya off, whose journey was bound to end with Devdas’s. The visual now is the shedding of the flowers by the Gulmohar tree. From the full-bloom right at the beginning which were symbolic to the happy times in his life, to this condition, the tree totally represents the journey of Devdas.

A different Good-Bye!

2007-06-20T11:21:00.000-07:00

Karan Johar and his kind of cinema is a personal favourite for me. So it usually becomes a little difficult for me to objectively analyse his work. Add to it, the reviews that I read before watching his latest, Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna were really encouraging, and legends like Amitabh Bachchan declared it in press that this is Karan’s finest work to date. Thus, analysing KANK and more importantly giving an unbiased critique became a tough task for me. This is just an attempt to analyse the film and be as objective as possible about it.

I would like to start my critique by saying that irrespective of the flaws in the film, I really loved it, but would not hesitate to add that it could have been a better film. Also, I have a little bit of a contention in calling it Karan’s best.

The topic of infidelity has been tackled several times on Indian silver screen. But what separates KANK is the treatment. Right from the characterisations of the betrayed spouses to the climax of the film, the film does traverse a path that hasn’t been tackled by Indian cinema before.

A major flaw in this film is its music, which is definitely uninspiring as compared to Karan’s usual musical genius. However, the excellent picturisation in some way compensates for the shortcomings. The use of colours in the song ‘Tum hi dekho na’ is a beautifully used metaphor for the importance of love in the life of two people who otherwise had a colourless life.

Even the ‘Rock N Roll’ song, which belongs to the typical ‘Shava Shava’, ‘Maahi Ve’, ‘Bole Chudiyaan’ variety and is a mandate for every Karan Johar film, has a different treatment than the usual style, and is refreshing to watch. ‘Mitwa’ has a style of picturisation that is pretty unusual for a KJ film, and brings out the hesitation, affection and innocence of the budding lovers beautifully.

The beauty of KANK is that the director has so much control over the medium, that he actually makes you love and hate the characters of Dev and Maya (played by Shah Rukh and Rani respectively) as per his wish. So when you see ‘Mitwa’, you feel the innocence, but at the same time, when you see the two in the interludes of ‘Where’s the tonight’ (which is the typical club variety, ‘You are my Soniya’, ‘It’s the time to Disco’ type (even the set is almost similar to ‘You are my Soniya’)) you do feel absolute contempt for them. The fact that a die hard Shah Rukh fan like me, who usually loves his work unconditionally, ended up hating his character in those portions, speaks volumes about the skillful execution, and the actor’s brilliant performance.

The final song which is the title song, and suits the situation perfectly, reminds me of Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s style of song picturisation. The lyrics, the setting every thing match the mood of the situation (in typical KJ style though).

There are however some innate flaws in the movie. A lot of them can be attributed to the very nature of Indian cinema, which aims to target every single audience member, and ends up being a mixed matched saga of romance, drama, emotions etc. For starters, the use of humour should have been minimal, owing to the theme and mood of the film. Besides, Shah Rukh’s frustrations with his own life are understood but there seems to be no significant correlation of the same with his temperamental and rude behaviour with his own son. Unfortunately, for me at least, neither does the film convey that Shah Rukh feels guilty about having an affair, for his son, nor does it come across that he really cares too much about his son. With this background, Shah Rukh’s apologising to his sleeping son while leaving the house, and even Preity’s referring to Shah Rukh being the happiest when his son is born, looks half baked and contradictory. In fact the very existence of the kid in the plot is not utilised properly, neither for taking the drama further, or giving the film a realistic perspective, nor does the kid have that meaty a role to add to the usual ‘cute’ bit which is a characteristic of Johar’s cinema.

Another handicap that the film suffers from is the fact that the typical family entertainer tackles a bold subject, in his very on style and doesn’t really give the genre its due. Considering the fact that film talks about extra marital affairs, at least the passionate scenes should have been more intense and in sync with the mood of the film. In today’s era of sleazy steamy cinema, one would expect Johar to portray this aspect of the film with his own aesthetic sensibilities but not do injustice to the topic, which is something he precisely does.

A basic objection that I have with the character of Maya is that she is unhappy because she doesn’t intend to be happy at all. She gets in her apprehensions in every single aspect of her life and for no reason complicates things for her own self. Also, the single reason mentioned for her unhappiness in the film is her inability to conceive a child. But this somehow seems like a far fetched reason for an extra marital affair, as she would be deprived of this very joy even in that relationship. Besides, in most of the scenes, she comes across as someone who wants to end the marriage anyway, even before giving it a serious thought. Thus, in my opinion, her character and thus the basic premise of her involvement in the affair fall flat. Also, the reasons for start of the passion between the two should have been explained properly. Neither do these lovers look as passionate as the ones in Silsila, nor do they come across as the sufferers in the relationship. Also, I can still understand to an extent that Shah Rukh is frustrated with his failures, coupled with his wife’s super success and so ends up in the affair, but what on earth is Rani’s problem with her marriage. In fact her husband looks anything but a kid, which is precisely the reason why she dumps him, and ends up with a man who actually needs to grow up.

Amitabh’s character adds to the funny moments in the film, and does deliver entertainment. But somehow, the presence of an elderly person in an Indian family, who is a philanderer, in some way dilutes the sanctity that one would associate with the institution of marriage. This may not have much significance for a Hollywood flick, but the flirtatious scenes between Amitabh (Maya’s father-in-law) and Dev’s mother, in my opinion won’t really cater much to the Indian ideas of marriage and the virtues associated with it. So much so, that the severity of the infidelity at some point becomes really trivial, and one tends to think that this bunch of characters might just start having affairs with every other person of the opposite sex, and keep doing so in a round robin fashion. Here I by no means intend to make any comment on the morality of either of the characters, but in my view, this destroys the seriousness of the basic subject.

Lastly, Abhishek and Preity have such perfect characters, that one just wonders, whether the film should have been about an affair between these two, who are actually stuck with the losers, whom they love unconditionally. In fact it is really unfair that their characters are built only through the narrations their respective spouses share about them. However, their actual portrayal on the screen, is pretty different from these narrations, and thus not only does the viewer end up getting confused with the allegations done against them but also wonders if the script should have been more balanced and neutral. Rani’s character is not written well and that shall account for a major flaw in the film.

Why does the film still deliver?

The film basically thrives on the memorable moments, which I guess are the hallmarks of a film, which usually is weak in the scripting department. The scene immediately after the song ‘Rock N Roll’ takes Amitabh’s character to a completely different level. But the very reason why one would identify with the character and still love Amitabh for his performance and leave aside the flaws in his character is because it is Amitabh doing the act. The sheer star power that he exudes just destroys every ounce of negativity that one would develop towards his character, and suddenly he becomes the all knowing, caring, understanding, yet cool dad, form the philandering old man.

Same applies for the scene, where Shah Rukh suddenly asks his son to quit football, and starts playing with him. Suddenly from the irritating, frustrated young guy, he becomes the super caring and lovable daddy dearest, only because he is Shah Rukh, India’s reigning superstar.

Another important scene would be the ballet scene. This is one place where Shah Rukh and Rani’s passion for each other does come across, through the jealousy. Even the scene that follows takes the spark ignited by the previous one to a further level.

Preity Zinta looks ravishing in the film and in my opinion dominates the viewer’s attention irrespective of a smaller role. Abhishek has his own charm, and delivers a great performance. Also his scenes with his father are an absolute delight to watch. It won’t be an overstatement to say that after Rekha, if there is some one who rocks the screen with Amitabh, it is definitely Abhishek.

Rani is stuck with the weakest character in the film, and has a tough time, because even the length of the role is pretty big. She does look pretty and emote her part well, but can’t do much because of the weak character. Kirron Kher (the most obvious choice for the role) suits her part quite well, but the film would have definitely benefited more, had some other actress enacted the role.

The music, though not as great as Karan’s usual stuff, is good, and suits the mood and the situation perfectly. However the excellent song picturisations add to the visual delight. Anil Mehta gives the film a beautiful look, and every frame look perfect. Also, different camera angles used in ‘Mitwa’ give it a cool feel. Farah Khan does a decent job with the choreography. Another department where the film scores, is the dialogues department deftly handled, by Karan’s regular Niranjan Iyengar.

I must admit that this is the first KJ film, where I didn’t really notice every outfit and every element of the set. Thus, it is his victory as a story teller, because he does keep the viewer intrigued with the actual narrative. A comparative study with his previous films does show that he is slightly moving into territories, which are beyond his traditional strengths. Two scenes that are really worth mentioning are the ones where Preity slaps Shah Rukh and the one where Abhishek breaks down after Rani confesses. Both scenes are high on drama and KJ does absolute justice to each of the characters involved. The best part about the film is the climax, which does portray the maturity of Preity and Abhishek’s characters. Some might insist that the climax glorifies bigamy, but in my opinion the film is progressive in this regard, as the betrayed spouses have moved on with their life, and thus don’t look at their ex-spouses with vindication and let bygones be bygones. This in a way advocates the philosophy of ‘Live for the moment’ which was advocated by Karan in his previous flick, Kal Ho Naa Ho.

Making and Marketing content with Universal Appeal!

2007-06-20T11:19:00.000-07:00

Popular Indian Cinema or Bollywood as it is fondly referred to as, has always received flak for not having a clear demarcation within the various genres of cinema. The key reason for this is that the mainstream commercial movies have to appeal to the entire mass of audiences and thus to cater to the needs of such a culturally diverse audience the Indianised Masala genre came into being which had an element of every other genre.

However, with the recent fragmentation in the audience groups and opening up of the international market this indigenous genre is losing out on its charm. In an era where low budget sleaze flicks like Murder are made as smart business propositions, or bold and experimental films are dominating the audience preferences under the tag of ‘Multiplex Cinema’, and most of the films are targetted exclusively at the youth, it becomes a tough task for a film maker to actually make a film which holds universal appeal and can also do justice to cinema as a medium, with its rich content.

A classic case in point for the description above would be that of the 2003 blockbuster Munnabhai MBBS.

Defining the TG

To put it simply the TG of Munnabhai MBBS would include anyone, belonging to any SEC and is above the age of six (assuming that below this age the individual won’t have any understanding of cinema).

Having such a wide TG makes the task a little more difficult for the film maker as he has to make sure that doesn’t play with the aesthetic sensibilities of any member from the group. There by, some basic ground rules can be laid down which have been followed in Munnabhai MBBS.

For starters, the film doesn’t have anything which would be offensive to any member from any ethnic group. Even while preaching, neither does the film adhere to any particular religious sentiment, nor does it make any comments on any other. Also, more importantly neither do the aspects used for youth appeal appear as over the top for the elders, nor do the ones catering to the emotions of the elderly audience members appear as boring to the young.

Instead, the film harps on simple emotions which can connect with everyone at some point in time in their lifetime. It speaks of simple desires and emotions associated with them, which are experienced by everyone. Thus, the film does have some standard elements of the formula. It shows a differential relation which the main protagonist Murali Prasad Sharma AKA Munnabhai shares with his both his parents. There is a caring mother and a strict father, and then there is an ideal son, who may be a local goon, but wants to hide his dark side form his parents, and thus pretends to be a medical professional.

And then of course there is a character which is a classic mix of many important supporting characters of the Indian mythology. The main reason to draw a parallel with the Indian mythology is to stress on the point that the film holds a universal appeal, as do the epics of Ramayana and Mahabharata. This character is that of Circuit, who is an ideal mix of Lakshman, Hanuman and Lord Krishna; Hanuman because he religiously follows the orders of his master, Krishna because he has the ability to give the right advice and Lakshman because of the brotherly affection and love.

Like the mythology or any other masala flick, the movie does have a villain, who isn’t the enemy of the country but is principally opposed to the hero, and is thus the villain. In fact, in many situations it is the situation which plays the villain and thus makes the film more appealing to everyone, as they can very well connect with the same.

Munnabhai MBBS walks a tight rope between typical elements of a formula film and differentiating elements of a new age film. Thus, the film does have a typical romantic angle to it, but it subsides to the backdrop to flesh out the main plot more effectively. What makes Munnabhai MBBS more endearing for such a wide TG is the fact that everyone can relate to the film on some level.

Marketing the content

Movie marketing is considered as a big thing today, and right from in film placements and mega launches to using new media and innovative usages of traditional media almost every film tries its best to promote itself. Munnabhai MBBS however remains an aberration to the rules of new age marketing.

Apart form the traditional route of using mass media, the film didn’t follow much of the new age marketing techniques for its promotion. Due to the lack of the hype surrounding the film, the initial collections weren’t really promising. However, the medium which was responsible for most of the success achieved by this film is the most traditional i.e. word of mouth (WOM).

Munnabhai MBBS picked up gradually after an encouraging WOM across age-groups and SECs. The movie can be interpreted as a product, where in the product content was the strongest element in the marketing mix, and thus, the WOM worked most effectively.

Marketing Potential – The legacy continued

Munnabhai MBBS achieved cult status at the box-office, and reversed some rules in the history of Bollywood. Traditionally, the south Indian film industry has played the role of the content provider to Bollywood; however Munnabhai MBBS become one film which was eventually remade down south. And now a remake of the blockbuster is scheduled even in Hollywood, which may just be the first of its kind in world cinema.

Building further on the existing plot of the original film, the makers made Lage Raho Munnabhai which again harped on all the emotional fronts of its prequel and added a message to it. This film however differed than the former primarily in its marketing. Though the impact of the WOM was strong even in this case, this film followed all the new age formulae of movie marketing and innovative usage of the various media to its advantage, then be it the cross promotions with Reliance India Mobile and Alpenlibe, or the seamless brand integration with World-Space Satellite radio and Indian Oil.

What has basically worked in favour of both these films is the universal appeal. Munna and Circuit can profess the traditional values and thus the elder members of the TG would treat it like an adage, and at the same time, they are cool enough for the younger members to not feel alienated. This is the right definition of a universal film in this millennium.

Not exactly a Jhoom, but certainly not a Doom!

2007-06-20T11:09:00.000-07:00

Park your brains back home and then go in, I told myself, as I entered the theatre, laden with the popcorn packets, to watch the latest offering by my favourite production house YRF, Jhoom Barabar Jhoom. It was a matter of a several minutes, and the first half ended. What the “F” am I doing here, and what the hell is being dished out in the name of brainless candy-floss entertainment, I asked myself as I eavesdropped on the bathroom chats of my fellow theatre mates in the interval, and then during my second round at the popcorn counter. Speaking in a strict Bollywood parlance, the ‘genre’ of everyone’s sentiments was the same, as the common feeling of frustration and deprivation from entertainment was all encompassing and all pervasive. Though half heartedly, I somehow made it to my seat after the interval, which seemed like the only interesting element in the movie, sans the three songs which played in the first half, but more about them later.

Here I was gasping about the inanity of the goings on in the first half, as the story unfolded, and in one of the scenes, the second leads in the movie played surprisingly, but ably well by Bobby and Lara disappeared, and the smoke which came out of the extinguished candle whose flame died out with them, metaphorically indicated the actual absence and imaginary presence of their characters in the plot. Suddenly, the Superman story and the ticket to Hollywood, started making sense, on some level, as they were mere figments of romaticised imaginations of the lead couple in the film, played by Abhishek and Preity. I won’t say that the film suddenly rose to the level of being India’s next bet at the Oscar gamble, but from a one on five, the first half for me escalated to at least double its magnitude, and the “F” which I used, now seemed more like the F for fun, a slightly different fun, but fun.

Traditionally the Critics of Indian cinema, have always taken pride in belittling the movies dished out by the Indian dream merchants. More caustic the tone of the review, better was the reputation of the Critic, as critic equal to criticize was the Mantra. Also, Bollywood has been typically criticized to be formula centric, and monotonously repetitive. And of course, at the same time, any different attempt is greeted with the most unpleasant welcome signals. The film in concern, and some of its reviews which I read, are a testimony to this stereotypical attitude.

Before I begin my analysis of JBJ, I’d like congratulate the makers, for at least making an effort of creating something, which can be differentiated from the typical run of the mill films, which stick to the formula. On one level, JBJ is a slap on the face for all those, who think that Bollywood can only make movies within the frame of the formula. Thus, the commercial prospects of JBJ would definitely be instrumental in deciding the fate of ‘different formats’ and ‘narrative styles’ in Bollywood in the future. Being an ardent Bollywood buff, I have seen several movies, but JBJ, with its narrative style, which is heavy on the music, and can qualify as one of the forerunner of the ‘musical’ genre in today’s cinema, is something which I haven’t seen often. It may not be the best creative enterprise of all times, but the tone and texture of the film, didn’t give me the feeling of déjà vu, though the storyline was totally conducive for the same. This is what I liked about the film.

The comedy of errors in the second half, and the musical conclusions, comfortably console the confused cinemagoer, who keeps wondering whether the captain of the ship was a toddler, all through the first half. With a series of dramatically funny events in the second half, one can be assured that the director is actually an expert craftsman and is in fact successful in giving the viewer that impression in the first half, and the inanity and insanity in that half is well planned and deftly executed.

And here is a little bit on what works with JBJ, and what doesn’t. Firstly, it is a newly concocted cocktail, from several old wines, which isn’t just served in a new bottle, but has rather metamorphosed the style of consumption of the liquid. Every song here has some role in the script of the film, and right from the props in the video, to the arrangements of the instruments in them, to the choreography, everything contributes to the story. The best case in point would be the duet between Bobby and Preity, Kiss of Love, which is not only set in the court room, but also brings the romance of the lovers, straight into the witness box. As for the style of picturisation, any resemblances to the musical sequences in the Oscar winning ‘Chicago’ are most welcome.

Amongst the performers, I think the film is a classic case of perfect casting, and thus each of the four lead players look perfect for the part. While Preity does do the snobbish Asian, who wants to dissociate from her roots and be a part of the British, with perfection, Abhishek shines as the Indian who is absolutely adorable for his crassness, while he keeps harping on his non-existent ‘class’. But that’s about it, as the story doesn’t give them much scope beyond their usual charm and chutzpah. The surprise packet of the film is definitely Lara, who is absolutely heavy on the oomph, in an unaesthetic way, but for a change proves that she is much more than a mere bust manifesting cosmetic beauty. While her French accent in the first half is adorable and annoying at the same time, in the second half she takes to the role like the fish take to water. And yes, in my opinion the best performance of the lot is by Bobby, who manages to play the super cool, super rich and uber confident urban lad with as much élan, as he manages to deliver the gawkiness of the typical mama’s boy, whose hair look perfect for the ‘before’ use of a shampoo Ad.

The USP of the film is definitely its music, and one won’t like the film at all, if they don’t like the music. A few real heroes of this film include lyricist Gulzar, cameraman Ayananka Bose, choreographer Vaibhavi Merchant, the production designer, whose name I just forgot, and above all, the triumvirate of Shankar Mahadevan, Ehsaan Noorani and Loy Mendonca. Ms. Merchant however could have come up with much better work, considering the plot would have been a choreographer’s delight, and of course a dream role. The dance steps, though likeable, lack the freshness that they deserved, especially for a musical. The camera pans beautifully, and covers a myriad range of cinematic frames with style, but some of the transitions in between the frames, especially in the song Ticket to Hollywood, seem to be heavily inspired by the slide transition effects of a Microsoft Power Point Presentation. But, irrespective of all its flaws, the film stands tall because of its music, and the song picturisations.

If the title track sets the mood, right at the beginning; and Ticket to Hollywood and Kiss of Love bring an interesting and ear friendly twist in the narratives of the imaginary and half-baked love stories, which seem soulless and devoid of flavour in the initial run; then Bol na Halke Halke is sheer magic with the camera, and the visual treat is also a linguistic treat by the master writer Gulzar, who mentions about bartering dreams between lovers; and the remaining versions of the title track, clearly proclaim that the film is a musical carnival, which has been ably choreographed and beautifully shot, on a colourful canvas. The rainbow coloured songs, are also accompanied by their symphonic counterparts, as one can carefully witness everything from a Sarangi to a Mandolin, which meld and fuse the musical notes to create compositions which at times pamper the eardrums, and at times tamper them with their heavy noise, while they pamper the feet, which unknowingly start tapping, as one gets into the groove.

As for the minuses, the film does have a fair share of the same. Firstly, it relies heavily on the Yash Raj brand name, and doesn’t conform to the brand attributes of a typical Yash Raj film. The religious skin show by Lara is neither titillating, nor eye pleasing. And the normalization of sex in the Indian mindset hasn’t been done very well. Of all the kisses in the film, the one between Bobby and Lara seems genuine, because it is the only one which honestly accepts the desperation, which is the very reason for its inclusion. The other two, try and hide this desperation under the guise of a more matured sexual depiction, and thereby not only look forced, but also unappealing. I am sure one would then be reminded of the YRF track record, which had beautifully incorporated one such sequence in one of its previous offerings, Salaam Namaste. The India-Pakistan connections sometimes make sense, and the parallels between the Mosque and Gurudwara have been brought out beautifully. However constant references to the countries seem forced and unwanted. Also, the enunciation of the Muslim customs, by someone who takes pride in being called British, seems a little over the top. In the climax however, the Indian having a Pakistani girl-friend seems more like a personal statement which the director tries to make, which is perhaps devoid of both communalism, and secularism. The sudden abrupt sojourn into the annals of Indian history and its monuments in the song Bol na Halke Halke, in a way defy logic completely, or perhaps I am incapable of deciphering the same in it. As a standalone, the song definitely does look pretty though.

The repetition of the initial scenes, with added details in the climax, is an interesting way of closing the film. While Shaad Ali had used similar antics in his debut film Saathiya, their freshness is still intact. It is at this point that one realizes that ‘film’ as a medium is largely consumed on a subconscious level and the conscious watches it, while the bridge between the two is absconding. I had myself observed the Superman comic, the Topaz ring in the little finger and a few more key points, but had failed to connect them, with their similar looking counterparts, in the main plot of the film. JBJ thus plays on the subconscious, and makes no efforts to let the viewer get out of his super-sedated state, as he savours the symphony. In that sense, it becomes an ideal definition of entertainment in today’s times, where one can just sit back, and relax while watching the film. In case of JBJ however, mere sitting back won’t help, and thus one has to dance with the film, to relax.

Also, the usage of the songs from the yesteryears as a background score is a stale idea, but the choice of songs, and the typical mannerisms of the characters, indicate that the film is basically a tribute to Bollywood. Even the dance competition, which sports all the memorable costumes of Indian cinema, from songs in Teesri Manzil to Jewel Thief, indicate the personal touch which the director has given the film. Needless to say, his tremendous observation and passion for Hindi cinema, distinctly comes across in these sequences. On a conclusive note, the inclusion of the song form Sholay may seem corny to the cynics, but for a typical Bollywood potboiler, it would definitely be the cutest moment in the film.

All said and done, Director Shaad Ali Sehgal must be lauded for making an exciting concoction, which could have been more enticing, with better handling and lesser hype, but is nonetheless an inventive and inebriated intoxication, which spans between the range of being insipid and interesting.