Chingaari
Film Review

I admit I am not too well versed in Kalpana Lajmi’s cinema, and haven’t watched any of her films barring the refreshingly honest Ek Pal. My association with her is restricted to Lata Mangeshkar’s extremely eloquent ‘Dil Hoom Hoom Kare’ from Rudaali. Hence, I approached Chingaari with an open mind, and to say it left me cold is a major understatement. 

Chingaari is one of those B-and-C-grade films masquerading as an art film. It is a puerile and pathetic piece of cinema that has neither the content nor flow to captivate audiences. It seems Lajmi’s intention was to shock and sensationalise the audience without any care for aesthetics or form. 

The story is set in a typical North Indian village, Rangpur which has a designated red light area called Lal Batti (how unimaginative!). The gullible villagers are firmly held in tight clutches of the evil head-priest Bhuvan Panda (Mithun Chakraborty), who abuses his authority for own selfish motives. He keeps them involved in meaningless religious mumbo-jumbos instigating fear in their heart to retain his superiority over them. He uses illogical rites like making a naked virgin girl sit on his lap, while he places himself over a corpse, in order to exorcise the dead man’s evil spirit! Even though he berates prostitutes, resorting to physical and verbal abuse even if they so much as touch the Goddess’ idol inadvertently, still he has no qualms in spending the nights at their place – practicing wild, kinky and sadist sex! 

One such prostitute is Basanti (Sushmita Sen), who lives with her daughter Titli, and ekes out her living in that deplorable condition. 

In this murky environment enters the fresh, educated and young postman Chandan Mishra (Anuj Sawhney). Like any villager postman, he not only delivers letters, but reads them out and writes for them, and in a sense he becomes a confidante, friend and mentor to them. An unstated, muted and sublime love develops between Chadan and Basanti, cemented by his affection for the latter’s fatherless daughter! He also instigates revolt against Bhuvan Panda. 

No doubt the love story between the postman and the prostitute (incidentally, the film’s original title as well) is good, and could have been a classy saga of romance, sacrifice and valor. Unfortunately, Lajmi seems to have seen too many Neha Dhupia flicks of late, hence it ends up being a loud, crass and disgusting melodrama. 

The narrative moves in jerks and fits, and the screenplay is shoddy. There is no continuum in the movement, and several unwanted scenes are repetitive or too lengthy for comfort; the running time is also inordinately long; looks as if the editor just did not know his job. Sequences where the prostitutes are interacting are gross. Sushmita’s introduction scene where she instigates two colleagues fighting over a customer and urges them to use words like ‘randi’ and ‘chinaal’ is horrible. 

The dialogues are crappy, peppered liberally with obscenities and profanities and are written only to evoke shock value. The climax is hilarious - Sushmita goes to the village temple with her hair flying wild, drums beating and picks up a trishul and kills Bhuvan Panda – it’s straight from those forgettable mid-eighties dacoit/revenge dramas that had infested Bollywood that time! 

Production value is shoddy and camera work is tacky. The music (by Adesh Srivastava) is nothing to write home (or anywhere) about. 

Sushmita Sen gives a relatively good performance, though she appears too urban to pass off as a rustic prostitute convincingly. Anuj Sawhney is adequate. But Mithun Chakraborty is too tired and haggard! Ila Arun, as the red light area’s head-madame, is ok. 

The film does nothing to sensitize against the prostitute’s plight; nor does it help to lay spotlight on interior India’s woeful condition. In the end, it’s not even good cinema. This chingaari fizzles out without lighting any fire. I hope Lajmi drops the ‘neice of Guru Dutt’ tag for the time being till she returns with a more meaningful and involving film! 

Overall: Avoid

Side Notes 

While on prostitutes, I read the following somewhere: during the shoot of Kalyug abroad, Deepal Shaw was mistaken for a whore by another one from the tribe there! Despite liking Shaw in that film, my overall impression of her is that – to put it very bluntly – she looks like a slut! Her music videos are largely responsible for giving that image. In the write-up that I read, Shaw narrated this incident with obvious glee. I don’t know about her, but if I were in her place, I would have taken serious offence and not publicize this fact and, more importantly, do some serious introspection! 

Secondly, who is that goddamn singer who has screeched ‘Aa darr ke marr’ from Darna Zaroori Hai! It’s the most irritating, grating and awful voice I have heard in recent times. If the brief given to her was to sound sexy and scary at the same time, she has got it widely wrong! Why does Ram Gopal Verma waste money and time in recording songs which no one is going to buy? Stardust (April 2006) carries a piece on Verma’s deteriorating position in the industry. Though Stardust in itself is a gossip magazine, but still some facts are true and cannot be ignored – his films (except Sarkar) have all flopped, his proteges are deserting him and his financers are distancing themselves. 

Hope Darna Zaroori Hai bails him out. I liked the first part (Darna Marna Hai) and am eagerly awaiting the release of the second one now!

Malaamal Weekly
Movie Review

Two things for which director Priyadarshan deserves standing ovation – a) he makes a film entirely around a village, that too a comedy and over that a very entertaining one b)he rejects standard ‘hero-heroine’ concept and allows so-called ‘character artistes’ to hold stage. In this, spotlight is on Paresh Rawal, Om Puri and Asrani, and all three assure that they do not loosen the film’s tight grip ever! For the ‘glamour’ part there is Riteish (this boy excels in such frothy roles!) and Reemma (seen earlier in a bland appearance in Hum Ho Gaye Aapke). But both are mere cogs in the wheel, wherein the steering is decisively with Rawal, Puri and Asrani! 

The story is pretty straightforward – a village that hasn’t seen much happiness, suddenly finds a Rs 1 crore-lottery winner amongst them, albeit a dead one! As claimants to money clamor in, so do the guffaws pile up, with some occasional sentimental moments, but overall pretty hilarious. 

The movie begins with some idyllic rustic shots replete with a ‘boatman’type background song. But once the characters are introduced (in Naseeruddin Shah’s booming baritone),it settles to a cozy humdrum – much like the village life – a bit of camaraderie, a bit of competition; a sliver of happiness, a slice of sorrow; and, a pinch of optimism, a dose of fatalism! 

Performances are A-class: it’s tough to decide who is better – Rawal or Puri; both are there in all scenes, and both make a formidable acting pair. To this, there is Asrani added. And of course, not to forget Rajpal Yadav, who is clearly in his full elements under the baton of his regular director! Arbaaz Khan in a brief appearance is good. But, Sudha Chandran (as the vile spinster ‘thakurain’) seems to have walked in from any of her K-serials- even the hideously loud make-up is the same!Riteish Deshmukh gets a small role, but I would still lay my bets on him as someone to watch out for. Reemaa (in back-less cholis) is adequate. 

Two more things for which Priyadarshan needs special attention – a full-on outlandish but nonetheless outstanding climax, much like his previous films Hungama and Hulchul. Not to be missed – Rajpal Yadav’s cycle ride in it – if that hasn’t have you falling off your chair laughing, then you seriously need medical help! 

Next is, Priyadarshan’s filming of rural ‘item songs’. Though the tune doesn’t live upto Hulchul’s ‘Lutgayi lut gayi Lanka Raavan Ki’, still the picturisation is similar – complete with jalebis getting fried and puris puffing up while a dusky lady in the most tantalizing ghagra-choli does her act!

Uttank Vohra’s music is barely there – only two songs within the film, and one during the end-credits. Needlessly to say, songs are not missed. 

The dialogues are delightful.

The negatives? Not many really, except that some might find the ‘glamour’ too lacking, and a pace a bit slow in today’s jet-age. But I enjoyed that. It’s tiring to see only the upside-city-life-slickness all time!  Perhaps, a defter editing could have made it pacier and slicker. But, then I guess Priyadarshan wanted it to be a langrous one that can be enjoyed on a lazy dull Sunday. In that respect, I think he is bang on target! 

Overall – Enjoyable!

Update – I leave for my holiday tomorrow; the heavens have not fallen as yet. Keeping my fingers crossed for the final lap. Will keep checking the blog for comments. And yes, am working on typing a post in Hindi – a new facet to Random Expressions. Till the time it comes on, in case you do not have Unicode-Hindi fonts installed, why don’t you download them from this good site? It’s a small 300Kb file and will not take long even with the most archaic connections! 

Happy Holi To All!

Teesri Aankh
Film Review

Years back Dharmendra acted in a film with same name. It had a ludicrous song that went ‘Superman superman’ with him and Zeenat Aman flying all across the screen, wearing capes et al; had the original Superman seen the number he would have hurtled back to Krypton that very instant in embarrassment. For good measure, that film also had a Lata-Kishore duet ‘O Babu humne toh pyaar kiya hai’. Now it’s the turn of his son to act in Teesri Aankh. But wait! Sunny Deol claims he is not the ‘hero’ of the film. Indeed, he is billed as ‘Guest Appearance’. Yet, he is the only person who is present in nearly every reel! Quite an ‘extended’ guest appearance, must say! 

Now, what to say about a film in which the hero has so categorically disassociated himself from? More than the film per se, Teesri Aankh is a perfect case study of how the mighty fall. A few years back Sunny Deol-Amisha Patel starrer would have been a hot property at the box-office – after all, Gadar-Ek Prem Katha was a bumper hit! Director Harry Baweja himself has had a pretty good innings – Dilwale, Diljale and Imtihaan were quite popular. And admittedly, Qayamat was a slick thriller. 

This film is yet another take on the pornography industry. However, it falls way short from Kalyug, despite having more recognizable faces. 

The story – Sapna (Neha Dhupia) is engaged to ACP Arjun Singh (Sunny Deol) and has her own amibitions. She aims to be a beauty queen and packs off to London for the same. However, hidden cameras in her make-up room capture her nude photographs. The perpretator is Sudama Panday (Mukesh Tiwari). His own aides Dinesh and Dinesh are keen to oust him from the porn empire. They make a deal with Sapna to bring back all proofs against Sudama in return for her compromising CD’s and negatives. She does so, but Dinesh and Dinesh change stance and murder her. A speech-impaired production assistant Amu (Amisha Patel) witnesses the murder, who was inadvertently locked in the same studio where the crime takes place. Meanwhile, Arjun Singh has reached London in search of his girlfriend, and to end the racket. Desperatly running for her life, Amu meets Arjun Singh and together they go about finishing off the villains! 

Oh yes, just in case you are wondering that if Sunny is in ‘guest’ appearance, who is the hero? Well, there is Ashish Choudhary playing a flirtatious film director, fiancée of Amu’s sister (Aarti Chhabria). That he has nothing to do with the main plot perhaps did not cross either the director or Sunny’s mind when they were putting up the ‘guest appearance’ billing for the latter! 

In between, the film is littered with references to some real life incidents like the Pune-landlord-case. And yeah yeah, Sunny gets to roar and howl a long speech on women, dignity, honor and Bharat Mata! 

There is nothing that can uphold the film. The director simply meanders away the story in jumps and jerks, fitting in flashbacks and songs at his whims and fancies without caring for flow or continuity. The latter aspect is particularly lacking – just see the way Ashish Choudhary’s stubble appears and vanishes within a span of few seconds! However, credit to Baweja for a very edge-of-the-seat studio sequence after Neha’s murder (when Amisha is on the run and the murderers are following her). Sadly, this is just a fraction of the film. In the rest, there are endless and mindless action sequences – where we have Sunny Deol pushing back a van with one single kick! Well, he has stopped a full train (Gadar), so a van is perhaps peanuts for him! 

About the title - as far as I understand, it implies 'the hidden camera' (as the extended title tells us); but if I am not too mistaken, 'The Third Eye' is always referred to in context with Lord Shiva and has positive connotations. Seriously, I refuse to believe it is used for voyeuristic purposes! Baweja seems to have got his mythology all wrong.

Last week, before airing Taxi 9211, the cinema hall was playing some atrocious numbers with corny lyrics that went – ‘Kudiyan nu parr lag gaye, mundaya nu darr lag gaye’ and ‘Assi tere gal karni, gal karni hai daddy naal’! How would I have known that they would be from this film! And all of them simply come on without context or utility. I was a bit surprised to hear Asha Bhonsle in this third-grade venture in the item number ‘Sharaabiyon’. 

The worst song placement is Jazzy B’s number – it comes bang in the middle of a chase sequence. Probably, it was at Amisha’s insistence, since being a speech impaired girl she could have had no other regular number, and in this song  - please don’t jump from your seats – Jazzy B imagines that Amisha is singing with him!!!!! 

Sunny Deol looks old with a prominently visible paunch and puffed eyes. Plus, that hideous wig (or hair weaving) hardly helps. His performance is tired. 

It’s a bit too much to expect from Neha Dhupia to act. But, sadly she doesn’t even get to do what she is best at – yeah, despite the theme, there is absolutely no skin show! In one scene, when Mukesh Tiwari shows her ‘her pictures’, the camera concentrates on Neha’s shocked expression instead of playing voyeur. It might be a unique experiment. But please, Baweja Saab, you really didn’t believe Neha’s contorted face would be audience’s interest, did you?

Ashish Choudhary, Aarti Chhabria and Ayub Khan hardly have any roles to speak of. So, it remains for the petite Amisha Patel to hold the balance show precariously. She manages quite well. And looks fresher than what she did in some of her recent flicks! 

Oh yes, I have to mention this - I saw this film in the theater! In the entire hall there were barely fifteen viewers - even though Nepali cinema hall crowd is not the exact barometer for a film's success, still it speaks volumes about its box-office fate!

Overall: Ha Ha Ha Ho Ho Ho!


Discovery of the Month

I dont mean to sound mean - but whatever is Poonam Dhillon doing with a 'official website'- isnt it a bit too late in the day for her, especially also taking into account the fact that she was never really 'the numero uno' even in her heydays? Perhaps now Anita Raaj can also do the same :-|

Taxi No 9211
Film Review

A day in the lives of Mr. Wood and Mr. Grumpy (with Ms. Hefty thrown in) is what sums up this short but fairly interesting film. Milan Luthria moves several notches upwards from Deewar and Chori Chori, but does not still encompass the flourish exhibited in his debut Kachhe Dhaage.  In principle Taxi 9211 is much like that film- two men from extreme strata of society meet, and their destines intertwine making them realize about some harsh realities of life. 

The story is quite nice, and I won’t reveal it here leaving the viewers to discover it – that’s the fun of watching the film. 

As a film, it is not a spectacular work – neither ostentiously esoteric nor overtly compelling. Much of the film is left back in the theaters like the thrown away pop-corn packet. There is nothing urging enough to go back to stand in ticket queues to have another look. Yet, there is nothing wrong with the film while it unspools its content on screen. In fact, time passes pretty fast in theater. 

Milan Luthria is competent in building up tension – especially the chase/run sequences. The thrill is evident in majority scenes. Plus, keeping the length close to two hours was his major USP – he makes it beefy enough cutting out loose fat. Also, the script works hard on the two protagonists – character delianation, in, what is primarily an action film, is strong, yet subtle and seething. 

Performances are good – and Sonali Kulkarni, playing a typical Maharashtrian housewife, is the best, followed very closely by Nana Patekar. Scenes between the two are the most interesting ones. Though Patekar retains his grumpiness, yet he manages to put in such subtle facial expressions that only a seasoned actor can portray. A small example – do watch the scene carefully when John is pushing him to drive the taxi faster. Just a small twitch on the face conveys Patekar’s fear of fast speed excellently! 

John Abraham and Sameera Reddy are quite ok. But what in good heavens has Reddy done to herself – she looked stocky and overweight! 

There is a small surprise packet in the end. After Sameera’s ‘heavy’ presence, this surprise comes as a breeze of fresh air.

Production is extremely slick; dialogues are pithy; music fits into the narrative (though that scream in background score jars the ears); and cinematography is A-class - shot entirely in Mumbai, it gives a remarkable collage of the city. Sanjay Dutt’s voice-over in the intial scenes gels well. 

Overall: Good Timepass

Rang De Basanti
Movie Review

This review was written the same day I saw the film, which was on 4^th February. But seeing the overwhelmingly positive reactions for the film didn’t have heart to publish it. Till the time I told Anubha about its existence. She reprimanded me for not putting it up and reminded me that on my blog I had complete right to write whatever I felt. True, perhaps I have been playing to the gallery quite a lot, and taking ‘the popular’ tag a bit too seriously than warranted. Thanks Anubha for the reality check! 

Blame it on the huge expectation – but fact is I found Rang De Basanti just about ok, a different film, but just about that. Somehow it couldn’t involve me into its narration. There were too many incoherent details which left me cold – some were minor quibbles regarding Delhi’s depiction: why the hell did Sonia (Soha Ali) take Sue via Red Fort if they were going to University from DelhiAirport?  There is a much shorter and convenient route! And then, that was clearly not anywhere close to DelhiUniversity for sure! It was IndiaHabitatCenter passed off as DU! 

Even though Rakeysh Mehra struggles to deploy a conventional story telling format, he is unable to fully discard the now-standard jump-cuts and fast-track editing styles; at few crucial points these neo-modern techniques crop up horrifyingly. The post-interval lathi charge scene is one prime example. Instead of gripping the audience in a tight-fist and knocking a solid punch, he shows a collage alternating between slow-motion and hazy movements with a dull song in the background. The entire sequence’s steam, whose build-up begins with Ajay Rathod’s death, dissipates away like a pressure cooker rudely taken off the burner! 

The transformation of youth doesn’t come around neatly. I kept thinking of Ashutosh Gowarikar’s Swades, and how he had handled Mohan Bhargav’s transition smoothly! Here, it is erratic and abrupt. Also, in Swades the awakening is not linked to personal tragedy, making it more sublime. Here it seems more like those eighties personal vendetta film wearing a neo-modern cloak! 

The story is interesting – but the climax is very shoddy: it takes away the entire thrust of the film’s message. Here, I am not talking about the defence minister’s too-easy-to-be-true murder, which can be accorded to the director’s creative license. But it’s the death of all protagonists which I could not digest. Does the maker want to tell the youth that if they have to do something for the country they will necessarily be killed? And does it really make the nation rise in protest? Except for a few shots of some students talking to NDTV, which sounded like a storm in a teacup and extremely unconvincing, the film-maker remains stunningly silent on their action’s impact. To me, their sacrifice looked futile. Plus, where did the Commandos come from? And why? 

Agreed that Rakeysh Mehra wanted to draw a parallel to Bhagat Singh et al, but shouldn’t the climax have moved away to show the difference of the eras and of the youth, then and now! I feel an intelligent comparison need not be hundred percent overlapping – though the rising could be compared but the end needed much brain which was definitely not put to use. A mature writer draws parallel, brings them to a crossroad, but from there takes it to a separate and higher denouement.  And this is where the film fails, and the reason why it couldn’t touch me at all. 

Another fact which irked me was Sue’s character – did Mehra really have to use a foreigner to awaken youth-conscience and youth conscious? Is this some surreptitious handshake with old British ideology that ‘it is always white man’s burden’ to take care of Indians? Sorry, Mehra - an upright Indian NGO worker could have made the point more clear and driven home the fact more scathingly – and if Mehra feels that such people don’t exist, sorry he needs to open his wider! 

On the plus side – the film gives ample space to every character though it could have incorporated a bit on Soha Ali and Sharman Joshi’s background/home as well. 

Performance-wise the film is a topper – Soha Ali is a huge revelation especially after her wooden acting in Dil Maange More. She slips into her character’s skin effortlessly. Sharman Joshi, Kunal Kapoor and Atul Kulkarni live their part with aplomb. Siddharth, who gets maximum footage amongst the supporting cast, is a delight to watch, especially his voice modulation was impeccable (not sure if he has done the dubbing himself!). Alice Patten, with her cute night-class Hindi, is sweet and understated. Madhavan shines in his guest appearance. 

But the mother of all performances is given by veteran Waheeda Rahman in her brief but strong role as Ajay’s mother. In one scene, after her son’s death, she is shown walking towards the door – her back is towards the camera, yet her entire body language, the minor tremor, the slight limp as she walks shows a seasoned actor at work! It’s a one small shot, where she is not even facing the camera – yet, she literally walks away with all accolades! 

There are some smaller but solid parts – Om Puri, Kirron Kher and Anupam Kher who do their bit fabulously. 

AR Rahman’s music is good in parts, though his background score was lacking – the odd sound during Jallianwala Bagh sequence was probably meant to stir hearts, but it shook the ears more! Lata Mangeshkar’s Lukka Chhupi Bahut Hui brings a lump, and that entire sequence is very well handled (though a personal grouse will remain for editing a bulk of Lataji’s portion). Of the other songs, Mohe mohe tu rang de basanti, Paathshaala and Tu bin bataye are ok. In ‘Mohe mohe’ Mehra picks up a few leaves from Yash Chopra’s films and shows flowing mustard fields and pulsating Punjab in satiated sway – given a choice, I’d prefer the tranquil pace of ‘Aisa des hai mera’ from Veer Zaara! 

I understand the film is doing very well, and I have only read praise for it – perhaps, I am getting old to enjoy these ‘youthful’ films, but once again I would leave by mentioning Swades – the patriotism, the inner journey presented in that film was far superior to RDB’s graffiti-like  cocktail! 

Overall: Above average

Also check out: Saba's brilliant review of the same film

Zinda
Film Review

From Mukesh’s soul-stirring (and melodious) Zinda hoon iss tarah to Shibani Kashyap’s guttural scream (and off key) Zinda hoon main, Hindi film music has come a long way; and so have its noir heroes. From Raj Kapoor’s humorously dark but essentially tracing roots in light, bumbling tramp to Sanjay Gupta’s nether-conceptualised Armani- wearing sinister baddies is another journey that Bollywood has taken. 

I would have given Zinda a complete miss had it not been the only film playing in nearly all top Kathmandu cinema-halls. Family, the other release, and my own choice, has not made its way here yet. To give Gupta his due credit, Zinda is perhaps his most cohesive and steadfast narrative to date. I wouldn’t go overboard as some critics have done in lauding about ‘realism’ because that is still truly not fully present here, though I can understand where they come from. But yes, there is a sense of starkness and throat-grabbing urgency that is, if not appealing, but certainly very attention-focussing. 

Another relief is that the film has nothing to do with mafia, dons, cons or heists - a marked change in Gupta's subject choice! The tale hangs around an ordinary citizen, which also makes it forceful giving just that tantalising realistic tickle - what if it happens to normal people like you and I?

The story (picked up from whichever English/Far East DVD) is pretty enticing. Balajeet Roy (Sanjay Dutt) has everything going for him – a plush job in top software Bangkok company, a loving wife and a caring friend. One day it all collapses. He is taken captive. For 14-years he spends his life in a solitary cell, fed on fried wantons with just a television for company.  Yet, his captor will not allow him to die or go insane – and releases him after 14 years for a purpose. Roy traces his captor, but more than that he needs to find out why he was chosen for this exemplary punishment. 

The film’s strength is its pace – not jerky, yet not lacking. Gupta and his co-scriptwriter weave in all essential details beautifully in dialogues, something that I have always found interesting in Barjatya or Yash Chopra films. Of course, he has his eye on the ‘interior’ market (though such films don’t work there) which makes him spell out somethings that could have been best left unsaid. Just for an example – when Sanjay Dutt claims his first tormentor, the supplier of wantons, the death was amply conveyed; yet, Gupta gives a long pan shot of the gruesome dead body – not required. The impact is severely lost! 

Certain details in their gory stomach-throwing details might not find viewership acquiescence; but they do provide a taut vicarious thrill, and I guess that’s what Gupta aimed for. A word of caution – avoid taking in your pop-corn pre-interval! 

Shot in nearly black-and-white hues, the film’s cinematography is first-rate. The background score elevates the sequences several notches. And Sanjay Dutt, though not really appearing an emaciapated victim fed on just fried wantons for fourteen years, gives a superb performance. 

However, where Gupta falters horrendously are the solitary confinement sequences. Those were the film’s soul. But somehow the tension and morbidity of living alone just doesn’t come across, and the audience is uninvolved. That entire portion needed more padding up. Plus, a bit of realism when Dutt finally walks out to freedom would have made the film wholesome. I don’t think any one who has been fourteen years in captivity will walk the walk Dutt does! If length was a problem, Gupta could have cut out the gore! 

I wouldn’t say the climax is a let down, because the tension of knowing ‘the why’ is so strong by then that any motive would have felt short of the build-up. But yes, perhaps a better justification there could have helped. 

John Abraham is a wrong choice. The menace is too-contrived to hold weight. His habit of pursing his lips after every sentence is irritating – as if he is having a sore chin after a close-shave there. Lara Dutt provides glamour, and quite adequately. Celina Jeitly is as wooden as ever in her two-minute appearance. Mahesh Manjrekar is thankfully considerably reigned in. 

The music is all used in typical Hollywood fashion; the theme song by Strings has been on air for sometime. Again, like in Ek Khiladi Ek Haseena, I will desist making any further comments on it. 

Though he does not give up making his heroes walk that Marlboro-advertisement inspired swagger, to sum up, I would rate Zinda as a big leap forward by Sanjay Gupta from his previous disasters. This one surely has more meat, and can be easily watched. The biggest compliment: it does not bore! Also, the running time is pretty narrow, and that helps too. 

Overall: Worth a view once.

Ek Khiladi Ek Haseena
Review 

Ex-rediff staffer and writer Suparn Verma makes his directorial debut. His roster of writings includes Chhal and Karam, definitely not the ‘feel-good’ films. In addition, he also has the dubious claim of scripting the insipid Janasheen. Had I known this background, I would have avoided EKEH at an arm’s length. Anyways, I had the (mis)chance to watch this ‘thriller’ first day (third show) in a nearly empty theater (if this was the state on first day, only a miracle can save this film; and that miracle will not be ‘word-of-mouth’ publicity for sure!). 

The film opens on similar lines as Musafir – a conman inadvertently cheats a don’s henchman; and the don gives him a few days to return his money – so what’s the common DVD source for both? Thereafter, the film takes on a path full of turns, leaving at times the audience baffled as whom to believe. In that essence, the film works. Plus, the cons are better written and executed than Bunty aur Bubli. But the end-twist is so contrived, it just does not hold water – especially in light of some events shown previously. 

Suparn uses all clichés of the post-modern noir genre (Sanjay Gupta-style); quick cuts; stylish look; rhythmic songs; black humor and dark characters that have no respect for law. 

Koena Mitra cannot act. Period. I have yet to come across a face this wooden. The only emotion I noticed was a look of immense smugness (of having crossed the sides) when three item girls (Rakhi Sawant, Mummait Khan and one more) come on to do ‘Ankhiyan na maar bairi’. For all hype revolving this song featuring not one but three item girls, only the song’s ‘mukhda’ is used. 

Fardeen, like the film, is good in patches. But as ever, the delight is Kay Kay – his trademark in the film ‘hey-lo’ will be a hit! I cannot understand Suparn’s obsession to re-create Janasheen’s character Saba Ali Karim into Jahangir Khan and then have an utterly obnoxious Feroze Khan to play the part as well –yet again!!! Thankfully, his part is minor and the irritation is reigned in to a large level! The other supporting cast (Mukul Dev, Gulshan Grover, Sharad Kapoor and Rohit Roy) are adequate.

Pritam’s music is energetic; I don’t understand it, so I will refrain to comment. But pray, what made him lift Top Gun’s theme for the opening sequence?

On my part, I prefer the old Raj Kapoor and Yash Chopra style of story narration. In modern context, only Sanjay Leela Bhansali is following that tradition to the T. Perhaps I should watch the languid but delightfully narrated Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam DVD to counter the jerkiness left by EKEH.

Overall: So-so; strictly for this genre’s afficiondos; please do not take your kids along! 

Kyunki
Film Review 

You would have known ‘impulse buying’; we all indulge in it at some stage or the other. But have you heard of ‘impulse movie watching’? If no, then I take credit for creating this new marketing mantra. (Err, hope you do not think me to be mentally as imbalanced as the film’s hero). 

I had gone for a meeting; it was near Jai Nepal cinema. On impulse, I walked into the theater to watch Kyunki. Ever since its release, I wanted to view it. At home every one vetoed the idea. No one wanted to see a depressing film during Diwali. (I guess that has been the film’s biggest folly. People flocked to see the utterly soporific Shaadi No One, but avoided this one). And by now it is too late to salvage its fate. The hall was fifty percent empty when I saw the movie today. 

Kyunki disturbed me – especially it’s ending. It came as a shocker. If I am prepared for tragic ends, I can enjoy the film in entirety better (as was the case with Tere Naam). In this one I was not, so I was left groping with the sheer magnitude of emotional disintegration in the film’s denouement. Worse, the director kept the flow cleverly hidden; it seemed to be moving towards a happy end, when it suddenly sverved its path. 

Another point – a tragic finale like QSQT has a sense of finality. There is no more life there. Hence the story ends, and it is easy to swallow. But in both Tere Naam and Kyunki, life does not end. There is a trailing residue, which makes you think about the remaining character(s). It rankles and this leaves me dismally distressed. 

My main reason for watching Kyunki was – hold your breath –Salman Khan. I like him quite a lot - there I have said it, phew! Now lynch me if you want to, but I stand by my view. Single-handedly Salman has built a distinct genre away from Chopra-Johar’s fluff or RGV-Sanjay Gupta grittiness or sex-flicks (three major distinctions these days). He has not worked with any major directors (even Priyadarshan is not really up there like a Yash Chopra in Bollywood power schemes); neither do they have top-notch commercial music directors (Well, Himesh came up due to his films). His are purely ‘Salman Khan’ films – and barring an odd Dil Ne Jise Apna Kaha (which should have ended with Priety’s death) or Garv here and there, they have been largely good; perhaps not great cinema, but certainly enjoyable and worth money spent watching them. 

And then I like Priyadarshan – I had even enjoyed his DoliSajake Rakhna, apart from his regular acclaimed works like Virasat and Hungama. So, I had an inclination that Priyadarshan-Salman Khan combination cannot go very wrong. And I was correct. 

Another vital point in enjoying a film is the ‘viewing’ itself, and there I will give myself credit. Generally, a complete submission to the director’s lead is necessary. The film can make you think, or stir emotions  or both with its visuals, but one should not ‘think’ in terms of what will happen next and try to outsmart the director. In that sense, Bollywood has a perfect viewer (and if imitation is the best form of flattery, then an imitator as well – wait till you read my next story ;)) 

Now coming to the movie per se – it definitely has flaws and loopholes (especially, medical fraternity might be concerned about the ‘treatments’ depicted, plus lots of artificiality strewn in). But its positive moments are more replesendent than the blackness of the horrible ones. A large bulk is devoted to mental asylum scenes, especially in the first half. They are entertaining, and largely light-hearted. One which I liked is that Salman sees Om Puri for the first time, he imagines him in a ‘rock-star’ get up. This makes way for a logical ‘disco’ style imagined song a few minutes later. Others like his ‘medicine swallow act’ and other outsmart the doctors evoke natural smile. 

There are some subtle delianations in the bunch of mentally challenged characters, not stated but clearly visible – the ‘god-fearing’ pundit and his remark ‘yahan bhagwaan kahan hai’ is one; the ‘affluent gang’ syndrome and pompousness and self importance associated with it is another. Of course, the package has some corny ones as well – naming them as Abdul, Michael and Pundit was a lame attempt at depicting secularism; and one joke as old as the hills needed to be chopped off at the writing stage itself! 

Some motifs, like the patient no ‘36’ echo through out the film. I also liked the way Dr Tanvi first ‘sees’ Anand (not eating his medicine, and then doing tomfoolery at the exercise pad); it came out very naturally, without any shenanigans. 

The script is interesting. A casually thrown in point, reverberates at some other point, making you re-think on that aspect again. The ‘vegetable’ comatose patient is the best example I can offer, as also the ‘fly’ motif.  Also, the entire flashback portion with Rimii Sen is cleverly done –especially her playful fibs, which also leads to her death (a take off on the childhood story about the shepherd who cried ‘wolf’ more than necessarily; when the wolf actually arrives, no one takes him seriously). 

In character delianation also Priyadarshan uses subtlety. Dr Tanvi’s emotional vulnerability looks odd, but gets justified due to the climax. Even Dr Khurana’s strictness is assigned an emotionally valid reason, also making you think whether it was sort of irony to have him run a mental asylum! Every character introduced (down to the security guard) is used somewhere, and not dropped off or forgotten mid-way – which reminds me to point out that the ‘confrontation-between-Dr Khurana-and-security-guard’ piece was the most pathetic scene in the entire film. Was Priyadarshan off that day?

I feel the film required more tautness. It should have been a pithy two hour fare, retaining the top ten tender/smiling moments of first half, and the best tragic/dramatic content of the second.  This I sensed from the fact that by the time flashback ended, I was waiting for the interval to come up. A viewer should not wait for that, which is why I say that more editing was required. 

The film is a remake of a Malyalam film, if I am not terribly wrong. But it has light shades of the old Khamoshi (especially Dr Tanvi’s emotional attachment to patients’ portion – but that’s about it I guess because here she falls completely in love with Anand, which some found jerky, but it’s ok and quite expected- again, my point they could have reduced first half to make for this part longer). How much of One Flew Over Cuckoo’s Nest is present, I cannot say as I haven’t seen that classic. 

Of performances, it is Salman’s show all the way. And he delivers. His ‘mad’ act is innocent, tender, child-like and endearing. His normal self is charming. In the ‘demand-for-music-in-the-ward’ scene (otherwise, quite a loud and a stretched one), he does some heavy-duty speed-faster-than-train dialogue delivery. Barring a fleeting shot, he retains his clothes (which makes his third film in a row this way – time to change clichés, I guess!). 

What has Jackie Shroff done to his self? He looked very old and haggard, and the beard-get up did not help either. But he has given a straight-from-the-heart performance: no great shakes, but more than adequate! Rimii looks lovely and fits the part, though her Bengali accent showed up quite badly. 

Now, here’s about my pet peeve: Kareena. Priyadarshan is a smart person. In both films (Hulchul and Kyunki), he has given her parts that are largely ‘reactive’ – hence she does not have to work too hard, and is ok. There was one scene where she could have risen from average to great (when she learns about Salman’s impending departure from the asylum) – unfortunately, on the day of the shoot she brought the entire pigsty with her, and offers viewers the biggest chunk of ham ever! Otherwise, looks-wise she looks ravishing, and sarees really suit her, and so does ‘anger’! 

For a film that is emotional in content, the sound design was fantabulous. I really noticed sounds, music, echoes and thumps in their full stereophonic splendor. Generally with this theme, it’s quite flat. 

The colors are bright. Cinematography is first-class. Locales are eye-candy and soothing – both in India and abroad. 

Himesh Reshammaiya’s music – as Subhash K Jha put it in Filmfare – is ‘positively familiar’; and I will highlight the word ‘positively’. I don’t care much for his modern sounds or beats (as in Aashiq Banaya Aapne), but his traditional stuff is really hummable. He is doing what even Nadeem Shravan have forgotten to do – nice simple tunes with good simple orchestra. Though Kyunki’s music is below Tere Naam overall, yet it stands tall amongst today’s ‘techno-heave-ho’ stuff!

To a sum up, it might not be the best movie this year, but in my honest opinion it did not deserve to be discarded so thoughtlessly as it has been!

Overall: Watchable

Paheli – A Peurile Puzzle

After all debate and controversy and excitement, generated at Ashish’s blog for Paheli vs Black post, I finally managed to see the film- and as the end credits rolled on, my only reaction was – wish the film was as half as promising and interesting as that debate. 

Now, the positives of the film have been well documented – I will not dwell on them, but just sum them up: it is bright, colorful, captures Rajasthan in its saturated glory; is embellished with fine performances by Rani and SRK (strictly in this order); has some wonderful music; and there is an ambience that is not overtly lovable but subtly charming. 

My problem with the film lies in its intrinsic story – and, the treatment. This post might look a string of rhetoric questions, but no other film has pissed me off as much as this one in recent times, especially coupled with the fact it is our Oscar entry. 

The first fact I found odd was Lachchi’s character. Apart from that one lovely dialogue writer’s delight of a line – Aaj tak mujhse kisi ne  meri marzi nahi poochhi – she does not really come across a ‘suppressed interior Indian girl’. On the contrary, she looks very bindaas. Come on, which girl laughs so much at her journey to ‘sasural’? Even in a city, in arranged marriages, I have seen my sisters, and cousins, ‘sahmi hui’ during the entire process – and here, Rani was supposed to be from this village, in a far off era! And the way she talks to her husband on wedding night further dispenses any doubts of her being ‘repressed’! 

The second aspect was Lachhi’s ‘duvidha’ – from the moment ghost SRK steps in, the director leaves no doubt whom she is going to choose! And was that really a ‘duvidha’? Her hand grasps the ghost a bit too quickly, doesn’t it? I sound bad – but to me it looked Lachhi was desperate enough to cling to any man that could have walked into her bedroom –whether he looked like her husband or not! 

The third factor is the climax – the ghost boast that he took over the real man’s body. Wow! If he could do that, why didn’t he do that in the first place and saved us all the trouble? Agreed, initially he just wanted to swap places, agreed he didn’t want to lie to Rani – but when he has done all that, what the hell was he waiting for to take over the real man’s body? Perhaps Amitabh Bachhan’s dates! 

The fourth point is not related to the film per se, but the reviewers, story narrators and all friends – everyone had told me that the real husband is some sort of ‘miserly creep who leaves his wife out of his own will’. He might be a wimp (in terms of not standing upto his father), but overall he is not this all-black villain.  The film gives so many scenes showing how much he misses his wife, and how he even changes himself to the extent of liking ‘berries’! 

The fifth aspect is the stuffing – I couldn’t understand the sub-text of Juhi Chawla and Suniel Shetty's characters, if there was one. Neither does the ‘humanisation’ of the ghost come across very strongly – there are just snatches and snippets where you see him reacting to ‘human relations’ but the director leaves it midway and simply walks off to choreograph yet another song! 

In actuality, come to think of it, the riddle never existed - not from Lachhi’s point of view, which half the film wants us to convince is the ‘point-of-view’ of the story. She chooses in ‘secrecy’ without the world knowing, and she is blissfully kept out of the entire climax! What difference does it make what she chooses especially, in the end she gets the entity she loves that whole world is convinced about as 'a real man' ? In the end, she gets to keep the ghost, but then again no one knows about it. You can’t have women’s liberation within four walls. So, the entire talk of women’s emancipation is a cart-load of camel crap! 

To top it, don’t miss that Rani is left ‘unconsummated’ in true Hindi film tradition for ‘the real hero’ to walk in and claim the ‘pure’ lady! 

To my mind a bigger riddle would have been the following two options : a) had ghost SRK not revealed his true self and in the end Rani had two choose between a lying but sincere-in-love ghost and a truthful but-not-sincere-in-love real husband b) had Rani been involved in the ‘selection criteria’ in the climax – choosing between a husband she was married off to, and the love she actually opts for – I think this was the original crux, which got lost in all those Tanishq designed artwork! 

As it stands now, Paheli is a hop-scotch palette of confusing colors that might appeal the aesthetic senses but essentially leaves the intellect or emotions absolutely - to put it for want of any other word - black!

Salaam Namaste
Movie Review

Are cooks/chefs the season’s flavor? I watched two movies within a span of 24 hours involving the profession. Also, both were set out of India. But that’s where the similarity ends. And that’s where the Yash Raj banner takes over. 

Ever since Aditya Chopra has taken the reins of Yash Raj Films in his hands there are some basic ingredients that have become a norm – the film will be slick, suave and sophisticated. It will be modern in look and thought. It will have lots of ‘special appearances’ from known industry friends. And, it will have music that will be peppy but essentially forgettable. Salaam Namaste is the latest addition (the next is going to be Uday-Tanisha starrer Neal’n’Nikki – in true Yashraj style, the teaser trailor of the next one was shown prior to the screening; same way, SN was introduced during Bunty aur Bubli). 

Coming to the film, by now everyone who has the remotest access to any media form, would know it is about Nick (aka Nikhil Arora) – an architect-turned chef, and Ambar – an RJ-studying-to-be-a-surgeon (though in the film we get only one shot of her in the hospital- how the hell does she pass her exams?). Both stay in Australia, are independent and don’t believe in marriages. They decide to live-in together – though separate rooms, she insists. He agrees. But, when fire-n-oil meet there is combustion, and before long Ambar realizes she is pregnant. The problem begins – she is ready for marriage, he is not. Differences crop up. 

So? Well, so…nothing – as a story there is nothing much to it. As characterization also there is nothing new – Nick is an extension of Hum Tum’s Karan Kapoor. And Ambar is a spicier version of Rhea Prakash – modern yet traditional. 

But what keeps the film well oiled is the screenplay and dialogues. There is a rich semi-comic, semi-emotional mat woven – in bright colors, but held together in a complete whole through rich designs. The intermingling of thoughts, emotions and locus standii of the characters is intricate and well balanced – especially the lead pair’s premise on marriages vs live in/love are offset strategically against the milieu of another couple – Arshad Warsi and Tania Zaetti. This is done unobtrusively – eg when Nick argues against marriage saying there should be freedom (especially to call it a day when love ends), Warsi gets a call from his wife giving him an ultimatum to throw out his dog when their baby arrives. 

Debutant director Sidharth Raj Anand (grandson of Inder Raj Anand, writer of blockbusters like Ek Duuje Ke Liye, Safar and Sangam; son of Bittu Anand, producer and nephew of Tinnu Anand, actor and director - Shehanshah) handles the subject very well. He had assisted Kunal Kohli in Hum Tum – the influence stays. As the director himself confessed – ‘It’s the same world as in Hum Tum but the characters and conflicts are different’. The characters introduction style, however, is borrowed from Nikhil Advani (Kal Ho Na Ho). The best part is he achieves cohesion that Shaad Ali could not with Bunty aur Bubli. 

Performance wise Preity and Saif merely extend what seems now their own personal self. And Arshad Warsi is in his ever-dependable slot. Jugal Hansraj (as Ambar’s best friend) is a useless character, probably added on to fill in screenplay-space. Abhishek Bachchan in a brief appearance is hilarious. Jaaved Jaafri is someone you will love to despise – and that is what the director intended, as the voice-over tells us. His English language bloopers are ribtickling – sentence construction that go – ‘so you going to lives here’ and ‘where the husbands is’ – if you have read Ashish’s C-log Bhai-post, you will know what I mean! 

Vishal Shekhar’s soundtrack is…well, ‘sounds’ tracked together. Seriously, in no way can I call it ‘music’. The song ‘What’s goin’ on’ is a speed-breaker. Thankfully, Siddharth has kept only four songs in the entire film and the title song is quite foot-tapping. Small mercies! 

So, what’s my take on the film? It’s romantic, it’s comedy, it’s a good romantic comedy and I didn’t get bored in the film. But then, I like such films – full of color, rich people, living in wowiee apartments, driving strange-but-cute-cars, people who are best in their profession, wear trendy clothes, everyday is sunny and where life is a playful breeze…wish real life was like this also! 

Overall: Do See It.

Ramji Londonwale
Movie Review

Just when I had thought breezy, straight- off- the- cuff and from- the- heart entertainers were passé, comes Ramji Londonwale. The film is so simple in design that it woos you with its disarming innocent charm, much like the simpleton protagonist. 

Ramji is a chef par brilliance. To pay off his sister’s dowry, he agrees to go to London as a chef of a rich scion. However, on his arrival, he learns the rich man is dead, and as is wont, muggers take away his money and papers. He is helped by Guru (Harsh Chhaya), an Indian who runs a restaurant there. But the cops are now after him for not having requisite work permits. Guru’s wily lawyer (Raj Zutshi) suggests a false marriage to his own fiancée, an Indian origin British citizen Sameera to work around the work permit issue. The story then charts the travails of this mismatch ‘marriage’ and Ramji’s stay in London. 

Even though the story moves ahead taking undue help of clichéd and some contrived situations, in entirety it works. Primarily, the director (Sanjay Daima) doesn’t even for a moment suggest he is going to do something different. Also, he mercifully shuns any shenanigans or any thing remotely ‘designer’ or ‘modern’. There are no item numbers popping up, no unusual angles, no overt gloss, no caps/chains/pets/large families and no in-the-face patriotism – but that doesn’t mean the film is sans glamour. It’s a cheery and light-hearted film. Director Sanjay Daima has worked under Ashutosh Gowarikar's tutelage, the influence is clear. Sanjay also co-wrote the screenplay of bumper hit Lagaan 

Films are dreams. In this, the director builds a rosy one. True, there are problems, and obstacles, but for sure the audience knows that everything is going to fine. The race to win the immigration officers’ trust, and ensuing engaging camaraderie between the foreign bred heroine and the rustic hero make you gleefully rub hands and smile.  And the sensitive moments are placed as unobtrusively like a blooming bouquet in an elegant drawing room. 

The big success – the audience is involved with Ramji’s journey! 

The script is pretty taut, and ensures that points brought up are well handled in the forthcoming scenes – especially, Ramji’s dream to meet his idol (no, I am not telling – that is a ‘very special appearance’ in the end). 

The initial Bihar sequences are equally interesting, though the fun begins when Ramji reaches London. Some scenes – like his tying his suitcase with a chain and lock in the aircraft or the one where they playact to fool the lawyer on phone – bring heart-warming smiles. 

In essence, the film is like a seventies Rajshri production. 

On the negative side certain key sequences do not work – eg Ramji’s relationship with Guru’s challenged child is forced and half-baked. Similarly, there are a couple of instances where things happen too suddenly – his meeting Avni, the lawyer’s first wife, and his bumping into Guru are points that could have been taken care of at the script level. Also, in all such movies the rusticity sometimes gets overbearing – and Ramji Londonwale is no exception. 

Of the performances, it is entirely Madhavan’s show – right from the first scene to the last. And he carries it with full aplomb. It is a pity he is not getting better offers in Hindi cinema – he surely deserves to!  New heroine Samita Bangargi resembles Tina Munim in some angles and is an asset to the film. However, both Harsh Chhaya and Raj Zutsi are over-the-top and ham mercilessly. 

Vishal Bharadwaj’s music is a let-down though Sukhwinder’s ‘Dil London London Ho Gaya’ will stay with you for some time. Raghubir Yadav is not present in the film, but is there as playback singer in the opening sequence song – ‘Ramji ke paas hai sabka masala’

In all, the film is engrossing, endearing and entertaining. To me, it was really a breath of fresh air – something similar which I felt while watching Socha Na Tha earlier this year, but this one is a few notches above it… all I can say is that film dekhte, dil London London ho gaya…

Overall – Enjoyable.

No Entry
Film Review

Hilarious and laugh riot and satisfying– my reaction after seeing the film; it’s a total masti … err, or rather not, since the film is not a Masti revisited; there is enough difference between the two movies. 

Anees Bazmi, who has written many David Dhawan comedies, has styled and directed the film exactly as his senior would – pack the gags one after the other in a roller coaster ride leaving no space for the audience to think; and of course, there is ‘no entry’ for the brain here as well!  In this, he has also kept all double entendres and risqué dialogues at bay. 

The plot revolves around Kishen (Anil Kapoor), Prem (Salman Khan) and Sunny (Fardeen Khan). Kishen and Prem are friends while Sunny is an employee-cum-sort-of-younger-brother of Kishen. The latter has a nagging wife Kajal (Lara Dutta). In order to spice up his friend’s life Prem fixes up Kishen with a bar dance girl Bobby (Bipasha Basu); but on the fateful day, Kajal catches them. In order to prove his innocence Kishen calls Bobby as Sunny’s wife. What follows is a jumble and tumble of confusions and mix-ups (since Sunny is slated to be married to Sanjana, played by Celina Jaitley). 

Even with the frothy ambit, the script is not entirely faultless; there are handful sag-points but that is being a bit overtly finicky and extraordinarily critical. On the whole it runs on its own inertia-induced energetic strength, especially the post-interval portions. It slacks a bit just before the mid-way, but Bazmee manages to pull it up quickly. Also, it is sufficiently packed with incidents and anecdotes that tickle the funny bone.

Bazmee’s direction is fantastically ferocious – no edge given to logic, but no stones unturned to excite and express amusement. The entire hall was giggling and guffawing, and one could see that everyone was genuinely enjoying the on-screen escapades. 

The film has taken quite long in making; but it seems they were shooting it till the last minute - a mention of Mumbai July 26 rains also finds a mention in it.

The performances are first class – Anil Kapoor delights as the harried and harrased but wanting to have-fun husband. Since the story basically revolves around him, he gets the maximum footage (no small surprise, since it is his brother’s production); as does Lara Dutta, who plays his wife. Lara who was the temptress in Masti, switches places and is on the other end now. Since nothing great was expected of her, she does pretty well. Esha Deol, as Salman’s caring wife, has a small role; and so does Celina. Both are adequate. Salman Khan is the same – of the heroes, his is the tiniest role, and for a large chunk of movie he is missing. The surprise and delight is Fardeen Khan – as a man caught in all wrong situations he plays the role with right amount of perplexity and embarrassment; his facial expressions are flexible and malleable! Bipasha plays the seductress with oomph and glitter – a role that suits her to the T. 

From the minor parts, Boman Irani is sort of wasted, though whenever he is on screen it crackles. Dinesh Hingoo is fine.

The film’s production values are top class. It is shot in bright colors – giving the effect of a sunny picnic by the beach. Shot in exotic South African and mesmerizing Mauritian landscapes, the palette is colorful without being garish. Anu Mallik’s music is a sore point, and probably the director realized as much – most songs are shot and retained in parts only.  

Of course, the ‘intellectuals’ and ‘sensible’ people are advised to stay away from the film. But, if you want to let your hair loose and have three hours of solid time pass, No Entry is exactly what the doctor ordered. 

Overall : Must see.

Mangal Pandey-The Rising
Film Review

Sometimes a small point in a film irritates the most. In Mangal Pandey, his love interest Heera visits him in jail with a ‘sindoor’; an utterly contrived, clichéd and convulated scene follows. Two things that hurt are a) this type of overtly Bollywood-ish scene is totally misplaced in a bio-pic, however commercialized be its intent; b) she comes after he gets a day’s life extra (since the original hangman ran away refusing to pull the lever to Pandey’s death) – did Heera know in advance that he would get a breather? Or was it an afterthought on her part? Either way, it does not say much about her character, which is as wishy-washy and fluidy as the impeccable river shown in the film! More importantly, placing this scene at that juncture shows the scriptwriter’s folly. And that is the reason why I brought up this scene right at the review’s beginning – the film fails miserably at script and direction level – and the scene nails down this fact perfectly. 

It is tough to make a bio-pic, especially about a character whose historical rootings are meager. It is tougher to make it a 100-crore commercially sustainable entertainer. It is toughest to review such a film, as the character and the film are firmly intertwined, and blasting it off would mean ripping apart both the character and the film-makers’ noble intentions. 

In this the latter cannot be doubted at all. Whatever the British-school induced writers say, to me Mangal Pandey is a hero, and a legend. Period! And that a top-grade front-running team of Ketan Mehta and Aamir Khan have chosen to bring him alive to the present generation is a laudable effort. I salute that. After reading many comments at Rediff’s site, I realized that the film has actually made many youngsters aware of that horrific phase in our country’s history. Plus, the film works in weaving in some other nerve-shattering but true details about the ill-workings of East India Company (prime example – forced poppy cultivation) – perhaps the so-called educated libertines who are ready to kiss the Britisher’s ass at the punch of their laptop keyboards will take notice! 

Having said that, let us take a look at the film per se. Though comparisons are odious, one cannot but think of The Legend of Bhagat Singh while viewing this one – especially since Mehta has used the same technique of starting off with the gallows scene, as in Santoshi’s film, and then moving backward in time to the hero’s past. However, unlike Santoshi, Mehta does not go too much in the past, which I felt was another big flaw. In any case, Mehta was adding his own details to Pandey’s life, why couldn’t he have brought about something about Pandey’s childhood or family, however mundane it would have been! Santoshi sustained his film by putting together a buildup that spiraled upwards to its logical denouement; Mehta stuffs the core with unwanted and unwarranted sequences pumped in haphazardly. 

Questions regarding his birth, his parents, his education or how he came to join the ‘gora’ army remain answered. But what we get is dollops of skin show (why was Rani hell-bent on showing her cleavage in every shot!), an item number, a useless love making scene, a Holi song and an expendable love track; so much so, that in a large chunk of the film, the viewer nearly forgets he has come to see a legend’s life. All that the viewer gets is a routine dosti-bani-dushmani story with each friend’s love interests thrown in for good measure – which unfortunately, and very disturbingly, reminded me of Kranti – for that movie was nothing but normal lost-and-found story  set in a British Raj era!

Emotinally, the film does not connect. By the time Pandey’s self-introspection comes about (‘In the land we are all untouchables’ he claims in the film’s best dialogue), the film has already lost its audience. It is too late; and alas, too little. In fact, the portion of his rebellion is so feeble and poorly written it does not seem to be the crux of the film, or the hero’s life! It does not even properly rouse the patriotic fervor. In the end, can I convincingly say I know Mangal Pandey better, even if it is Mehta’s version? No! 

Of the performances, Aamir gives a commendable, calculated and credible performance (considering he had nothing to fall back on historically), though his get-up, however studied and labored seems out-of-context; as Ashish also pointed out, he gets mannerisms correct. Toby Stephens and his accented Hindi are pretty bearable. 

Rani Mukherjee hardly has a role to speak of, and for her it would have been just your average day’s job! Her pink-mujra dress can win the Year’s Worst Costume hands down, if there is ever such an award instituted. Her character however is shallow – the fire in her at the auction scene gives way to her ‘ada’ in the mujra a bit too readily; similarly, her snigger towards the wounded soldier melts too quickly to her approving shiver equally fast! Amisha Patel has lesser to do, and is fine. Any film revolving Britishers, generally finds Tom Alter occupying a key position – he is a good actor, why didn’t Mehta utilize his potential? Of the others, I have to mention Mona Ambegaonkar and her breast feeding scene! Heavens, reality is fine, but that was a bit too much to handle. Plus, in the same shot a British lady is heaving and hopping on her bed, apparently due to the heat, but looked more in passion – and did Mehta have to retain that lewd remark her fan-puller makes! It seemed to have come straight out of some nineties David Dhawan film. 

AR Rahman’s music is awful. Plus the songs just jump in without context or purpose, making them all the more unbearable. 

The cinematography is first rate, and the battle/army scenes are well shot, especially the one at Afghanistan (though it was shot at Tajikstan, I believe). The dialogues are just average. Structurally, the second half is more interesting than the first one, which is both a plus and a minus in itself; if Mehta had paid attention, the first half could have been pacier, even with the redundant love-track. In the last half, the film moves at a crisp pace, and keeps the audience fully glued. Must mention that the script has a few strong points – especially the casual way it introduces the ‘cartridge controversy’, since it would have a huge impact later on. Also, it has a lot of facts strewn in relevantly. Using a narrator to fill gaps was a good point (and Om Puri’s baritone is an asset), but using it to translate Britisher’s dialogues was forced (Or, is it there only in the Indian version; I believe the film has two versions – the one I saw was clearly for Hindi audiences; it had subtitles in English as well, and the translations I noticed were not very fine). 

In all, one can sum it up as thus – Mangal Pandey, the hero is great, but Mangal Pandey, the film is not. Perhaps, it would require another filmmaker to etch his contributions in a better manner. Also, I hope its failure does not deter others to venture into historicals; for there are many other Heros who need to be revived from history’s footnotes – example, Jhansi’s Queen (who also finds a small mention in this film, and is played by yesteryear actor Varsha Usgaonkar in a blink-you-miss screen appearance). 

Overall – Worth a view once only for the character the film portrays! 

VIRUDHH

Movie Review

Virudhh is as different from Saaransh as cheese-capsicum pizza from tomato-mushroom one – the base is same, the toppings are individual. Virudhh has enough taste to sustain on its own. Importantly, after his forays into unpalatable kitsch, it marks a comeback for director Mahesh Manjrekar. 

The story revolves around an elderly couple – Vidyadhar Patwardhan (Amitabh Bachchan) and his domineering ex-principal wife (Sharmila Tagore). Their cozy life is shattered when their only son (John Abraham) is murdered in a freak incident and labeled a drug-dealer. Picking up the shards of his broken life, Patwardhan fights back to regain his dead son’s lost honor.

The film’s highlight is its finely etched first half. It is warm, appealing and picked up from everyday life – morning walks, debate over medicines, laughter club, pesky neighbors, weekly calls to their son – all bind together in a very cohesive whole which brings a genuine smile to viewers. This part is much more real and endearing than Baghban’s designer-scapes. When the son returns with a foreigner-wife (Anusha), another round of sweet and soothing family banter ensues. By the time the first half ends, one almost wants to admonish the writers not to introduce any tragedy into Patwardhan’s life. Let’s just go along, see a slice of their life, and come out feeling tickled and tingled. 

Alas, tragedy does strike. Unfortunately, it strikes not only to the Patwardhans, but also to the script. From thereon, the film simply spirals down into an overtly dramatic abyss as clichéd thoughts about police/system/law are piled one upon the other in a haphazard fashion. The climax is so contrived it makes you cringe and wonder whether this part of the movie actually belongs to the first one! 

The direction is even; full credit to Manjrekar that he has kept all loudness at bay – in narration, character and scenario. Even the main villain (Amitabh Dayal) comes across as your everyday-neighborhood-rash man, and not as a comic-strip caricature. The first half, as I mentioned, is Manjrekar’s trump card. Barring a couple of artificialities, overall this portion keeps the audience glued, despite no story movement. Editing is in sync with the mood – there are no sharp cuts and every scene ends langrously. Dialogues are small, witty and replete with familial charisma. 

Amitabh Bachchan and Sharmila Tagore rarely teamed together in their younger days (Faraar and Desh Premee are two films I recall). Their on-screen chemistry is engaging. Sharmila Tagore is a seasoned actor; she displays all quirks of a stern but basically loving wife with élan. About Amitabh Bachchan, whatever I say will be biased – yet, one has to point out that his performance is excellent. In his heydays, he was called a ‘one-man industry’. In his second innings, he is solely responsible for throwing focus on the elderly – in the wake of which he has revived his ex-leading ladies’ careers as well.  Prior to AB’s return, films on the aged were a stray Saaransh or Avtaar. Today he is again ‘one man industry’ wherein roles are specifically written with characters beyond their youth. 

Anusha Dandekar is billed with an ‘introducing’ title; if I am not mistaken, she has made an appearance on-screen in a song - ‘Loot gaye’ -  from a Rahul Bose film. As the foreigner daughter-in-law making efforts to speak in broken Hindi she is more than adequate – but did she have to sport that hideous streaked hair-do? For a change, John Abraham is also bearable; but then, both are just means to move forward the story which inevitably arches back to their parents. 

Amongst the supporting cast, Sanjay Dutt in a ‘dynamic appearance’ is anything but that; nevertheless, he is good in whatever limited scope the role offers him. Viju Khote as the wily politician is hard to digest; Amitabh Dayal (last seen in Kagaar) is pass-muster. Sachin Khadekar, as the cop who is caught between his own morality and the system’s harsh requirement, is excellent. Also, his is a well-written role from the entire supporting cast bunch. 

Virudhh has enough moments to make good viewing; and despite all its negativities, it does succeed in bringing a tender smile– through tears and joy. 

Overall : A Good View.