Noticed just how gorgeous Preity Zinta is looking in the promos of Karan Johar's glitzy multi-starrer extravaganza Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna.

No wonder she jokes how it "felt good to be wearing clothes that sometimes cost more than the location".

She may be limited as an actress but her honesty shines through her performances and persona. And that's what makes her endearing.

Going by the publicity and character profile on the KANK website, Preity Zinta doesn't play the conventional heroine in this relationship saga. Her character, Rhea Saran isn't apologetic about being an ambitious career woman. Sometimes, even at the expense of marriage and motherhood.

I have a nagging feeling she'll turn out to be the surprise package here. And Abhishek Bachchan, in all probability, will garner all the sympathy votes. Guess Shah Rukh Khan and Rani Mukerji will have to stick to routine ' vying, sighing, crying, the works. We'll cheer for them anyway, right?

Enough of figuring out now, I'll simply sit and wait for the movie to release on August 21.

Coming back to the subject of this discussion: Ms Zinta. Here's what I love and not so love about the effervescent star.

Her debut: was Mani Ratnam's Dil Se... She rocked in her short role. Remember her cutely drilling SRK, over the topic of virginity, while stuffing in burger and fries? How could you not like her? Hate SRK's character for choosing Manisha Koirala over her. Hmpf!

Her best work: Gucci glasses notwithstanding, Preity was sensitive and wonderful as the reserved but fun Naina Catherine Kapur in Kal Ho Naa Ho.

Her best look: She looks vivacious and fresh in all her movies. But Dil Chahta Hai takes the cake. Soft curls+ pastel make up+chic outfits= an ethereal Preity Zinta.

Her worst acting assignment: You could say Farz and Yeh Raaste Hain Pyaar Ke were a waste of Preity's talent but Armaan really raised the bar. A badly fleshed out role of a paranoid, possessive spoilt brat had the Aquarian screaming unreasonably and unconvincingly on all and sundry. And the horrendous wig she wore made matters only worse.

A look gone wrong: The makers of Dil Chahta Hai went overboard charting a distinct appearance for the actress in Lakshya. Both the Hobbit inspired frizzed hairdo and the short bob failed to work and distracted one's attention from her performance.

Her cutest trademark: Dimples? Chuckle? Chirpiness? I think it's the sense of humor in her disposition. Talk to her, and you'll know what I mean.

She can get away: with bizarrely staged filmi situations with utter conviction, applause even, as seen in the ultra melodramatic stage speech of Kya Kehna.

She makes a cute pair with: Saif Ali Khan. Kya Kehna, Kal Ho Naa Ho and Salaam Namaste are cases in the point. SRK and Aamir Khan come a close second.

One role Preity that would fit like a glove is: Drew Barrymore's role in the 1999 hit romantic comedy, Never Been Kissed. In the film, Barrymore plays Josie Gellar, an undercover journalist posing as a high school student to research for an article. What makes it worse is Josie carries quite some unpleasant memories of high school. Preity has the right blend of vulnerability, exuberance and comic timing to effortlessly essay the part.

One actor Preity should definitely romance on big screen: Abhishek Bachchan. We have already seen how comfortable they are in each other's presence on Koffee with Karan. And even though Bachchan JR played her gynecologist in Salaam Namaste and co-stars in KANK, a romantic pairing is still waiting in the wings.

One director Preity should work under: Hmm, she's already worked with Mani Ratnam, Yash Chopra, Farhan Akhtar, Karan Johar, Vidhu Vinod Chopra and Kundan Shah. How about Sanjay Leela Bhansali? It would be interesting to see how the indulgent filmmaker extracts his brand of exaggerated drama from an actress mostly associated with frothy fare.

Last week saw the return of one of the finest actresses, since the advent of former superstars like Sridevi and Madhuri Dixit, to silver screen. Kajol fans rejoiced her fresh, poised and supremely confident avatar in Fanaa. Whether you like the film or not or it becomes successful or not, Kajol is unarguably wonderful.

At times she steals the show from the perfectionist Aamir Khan with her electrifying presence and looks utterly believable even in inane situations. That's what differentiates a true blue movie star from seasonal sensations.

According to so-called film industry scruples, a married actress spells box office danger. And if she has a kid too, then it's a complete no-no. Despite these ridiculous notions, actresses like Sharmila Tagore, Raakhee, Hema Malini and Dimple Kapadia have made successful comebacks post-marriage.

Bottom line, if you are talented and your audience loves you, they will accept you.

Kajol entered the industry at a time when it was choc blocked with newcomers. Young and eager ladies swamped the silver screen with starry-eyed dreams. Karisma Kapoor, Raveena Tandon, Pooja Bhatt, Urmila Matondkar, Manisha Koirala, Tabu, Ayesha Jhulka and Nagma debuted almost around the same time. But only one of them was to be Queen.

One by one, they all got their share of glory and glamour. Some sustained it longer. Some gave it up for marital bliss. Some got lost in obscurity. Some still create headlines for their personal life dramas. But the one actress who never really got out of public memory was Kajol. She got married at the peak of her career and decided to take an indefinite break.

She wasn't making any controversy. Nor was she dying to stay in public eye. Except for the birth of her baby Nysa or her teensy appearance in buddy Karan Johar's Kal Ho Naa Ho, Kajol wasn't making news. But that didn't stop speculation of a comeback.

It was rumoured that she would return to screen opposite her best co-star Shah Rukh Khan in a film directed by either Aditya Chopra or Karan Johar. Eventually she settled for Kunal Kohli and Aamir Khan with Fanaa.

Even people, who absolutely hated Fanaa, loved Kajol in it. While her co-star Aamir Khan, with his puffy cheeks and sunken eyes, makes a disagreeable close up. The now slimmer Kajol looked prettier and happier than ever with her exuberant, refreshing appeal. So much for actresses losing their appeal after marriage and motherhood.

Currently we have actresses like Aishwarya Rai, Rani Mukerji, Preity Zinta, Kareena Kapoor, Bipasha Basu and Priyanka Chopra vying for the top slot in the rat race. They all charge in crores and enjoy showbiz attention, which is equal if not more than their male counterpart.

But you get to see so much of them on and off screen that I wonder if they'll be missed/welcomed the way Kajol was/is. Now if only Madhuri would sign a movie.

The Cannes Film Festival didn't play a significant role in Indian media coverage until Aishwarya Rai was called on to play judge in 2003.

To think, she had been there the previous year along with filmmaker Sanjay Leela Bhansali and co-star Shah Rukh Khan, to promote their movie Devdas, which enjoyed a special screening at the festival. Back then, no one made a big deal about who wore what.

But as part of the prestigious international jury, which featured the likes of Meg Ryan and Steven Soderbergh, Rai became the cynosure of all eyes as she graced the red carpet in perhaps the decade's most criticised wardrobe. Her choice of outfits became the hot topic of discussion between the average local train gossipers to the la di la tea parties of socialites.

Her designer Neeta Lulla got tremendous flak from her colleagues for her use of loud mustard yellows, flashy fuchsias and shrieking parrot greens.

Like all bad nightmares, this one got over too. And Ash was back in the Cannes limelight the following year as the face of L'Oreal, a reputed French brand of cosmetics. And the year after and this, she kept serenading the red carpet in western gowns designed by international fashion gurus. Except for those who wanted to criticise her clothes for the heck of it, general response to her selection improved with every passing year.

Last year, Nandita Das had the honour of being on the Cannes jury. She stuck to traditional saris and salwaar kameezes. Nice but nothing outstanding. And, of course, there was Mallika Sherawat, in a gold lehenga choli, if you please, that left very little to the imagination. It was Indian apparel at its extreme?too plain or too daring.

Circa 2006. It's Cannes time of the year again! Ash walks in black Armani and blue Cavalli gowns. Lovely! Preity Zinta parades in girly golden balloon frocks or a cute LBD (little black dress).

They looked good, of course. But then again, so did the others. When Ash walked in to attend the premiere of Da Vinci Code with Andie MacDowell and Kerry Washington in tow, there was very little to set her apart. Ditto for Zinta who looked a tad pale in the glittering company of Chopard president Caroline Gruosi-Scheufele.

One thing is for sure, our actresses *fit in* really well with the international crowd. Ideally, it would have been awesome to see them steal the show completely. Knowing how well they carry off Indian wear it doesn't seem improbable either. A touch of silk, elegant chiffon, hues of turquoise or coral, antique work an Indian touch to a western cut, a fusion design. I am sure there are plenty of Indian designers who would do these beauties justice.

Indian attire may look complicated as opposed to the straight cuts and no-hassle dresses of the West. But once accustomed to its intricacy, it is highly fashionable and elegant in terms of its range in fashion, cuts, embroidery and fabric. Believe it or not, the sari is fast being recognised on the international map as well.

I wish these popular faces would showcase the beauty of it on the red carpet as well.

What do you think?

A few months ago, when I was in Hyderabad, a friend showed me a Telugu flick starring Siddharth. Many of us know him as the guy who utters the hit catchphrase 'Saala nautanki' in Rang De Basanti.

Owing to time constraints, I couldn't see the entire movie. Titled Nuvvostanante Nenoddantana, it was a typical potboiler and reminded me a lot of Maine Pyaar Kiya in some ways. There were no subtitles but thanks to my friend's constant translation I could follow what's happening. I also learned dancing sensation Prabhudeva is its director. The thing is the film looked pretty entertaining and had I understood the language or had there been subtitles I would have easily got the jokes and punch lines much better.

When I got back to Mumbai, I headed for my DVD library and asked the person concerned if he had the DVD of Nuvvostanante Nenoddantana. He answered in negative. I asked him if he had Shankar's Boys. He gave me the same reply once again. Then I asked him, if he's got the French movie, Happenstance. He did.

I mean, wow. I had access to all the world cinema I wanted. But I couldn't enjoy the simple pleasures of regional cinema. And the movies I was looking for were not even rare gems, but purely commercial. I am always told how films in the South Indian film industry comprising Tamil, Malayalam, Telugu, and Kannada films are superb in content and technique. The few that I got to see were incredible. Ditto for Marathi movies, they may be low on production value but their artistic temperament speaks volumes. Bengali and Assamese films have their own stories to tell. But instead of nationwide exposure their viewing is restricted to film festivals.

I am sure not all films are art films dealing with poverty and misery. But that's the general misconception and keeps the educated viewer also away from digging more on the same.

If releasing all regional movies on nationwide level is such a losing proposition, (though I don't know that can be assumed even before they have tried promoting it), the least the producers can do is package interesting and informational DVDS.

Even Hindi film DVDs are so lousy in presentation. A whole treasure of classics deserve special editions that could have interviews, commentaries, unseen footage, trivia, deleted scenes.

Bottom line, knowledge of world cinema is incomplete and insufficient unless one knows the diversity of cinema in one's own homeland. So please can we have easy access to VCDs and DVDs of regional films, with subtitles of course.

Summer holidays are good news for movie industries worldwide. More and more people flock to the nearest theatre. Back home, the Hindi film industry is no different. It saves the cream for summer or Diwali holidays.

Before we proceed, here's a question: when was the last time you keenly anticipated a movie to hit the screens?

Let me rack my head. Okay so Swades, Yuva, Sarkar, Bunty Aur Babli, Rang De Basanti and Salaam Namaste were promoted rather interestingly. Swades had awesome posters. Yuva had all the stars. Sarkar had the Bachchans, Ramu and Godfather. Bunty Aur Babli had the Bachchans and Kajrare. Rang De had Aamir Khan and controversies. And Salaam Namaste had the cute pairing of Saif and Preity squabbling for our pleasure. Whether these movies lived up to the expectation or not is a subject for another post.

So who's aiming to be the potential summer blockbuster of this year?

There are two contenders. Fanaa and Krrish. Two biggies boasting of big banners, big stars and big money.

Question is: Am I excited about the aforementioned summer flicks? The answer is a big NO.

I am curious. But not excited. And no, it's not the same thing. If you are hard-core movie buff, you won't get any sleep on Thursday night. You'll want to be inside the theatre first day first show with mammoth expectations and childlike wonderment. Like waiting a whole year to see the next part of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy or be willing to pay an insane amount for a ticket in black as in the case of Rangeela or Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam.

I am not losing any sleep over Fanaa or Krrish. And I am certainly not going to spend a penny more than it's ticket price. (Psst, aren't movie tickets already unjustifiably overpriced?) But I sure don't mind discussing the pros and cons of these two films that will consume a lot of media space for the next few weeks.

Disclaimer: This assessment is strictly based on promos and surrounding hype and doesn't necessarily have to be the absolute truth.

What's Fanaa about? The love story of a blind Kashmiri girl and a tourist guide who *might* meet with a not-so-happily-ever-after. Both Aamir and Kajol are wonderful and versatile actors. Ideally, I would have liked to see them shine in a romantic comedy. Alas, to add to this already intense heat we'll be subjected to a scorching saga of love. I really hope director Kunal Kohli doesn't go to great lengths in justifying the gloomy title of his movie. More than that I hope, my skepticism gets confounded.

Sorry to say, but going by the promos, Krrish looks somewhat cheesy. The get-up sucks. And the story is so Marvel comics! I thought Koi Mil Gaya, even if heavily inspired, was endearing or what we call a classic paisa vasool (later went on to become tax-free) entertainer. Again, here we'll get to see super hero action and wire fu stunts. But then haven't we already seen those in The Matrix and The Underworld? What I feel is going in Krrish's favor is not the high profile, big-budgeted paraphernalia that encapsulates it, but Hrithik Roshan's dynamic screen persona. I'd love to be pleasantly surprised though.

That's my view, what about you guys? Argue or agree, I'd love to hear your point of view.

Despite disastrous reviews, I decided to go watch The Mistress of Spices. Having read the book, I was most eager to find out what went wrong, if indeed it had.

Calamity is more apt to describe this Mistress of Blandness. Superfluously executed with a narrative that is shockingly uninspired. My heart goes out to the author Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni. Her novel was nothing extraordinary but nevertheless engaged as an eastern flavored fairy tale with a simple heart. Filmmaker Paul Mayeda Berges's poor understanding of India and its essence can at best pass off as a commercial for cloves and chilies. But a full length motion picture? No way!

But this is not about the novel, the movie or its maker. Our bone of contention is the Spice Mistress.

Aishwarya Rai is an average actress. She might make you sit up and notice once in two blue moons when depending on the director she'll put in a reasonably earnest effort. Her gorgeousness is invariably more talked about than her merits as an actor. Even as a box office draw, Rai hasn't set any records. Though one must say, she is a terrific dancer. Her body language is grace personified.

So the point is: is Ash better off doing a Kajra re as opposed to pursuing the so-called international stardom?

She is nowhere in the same league as other international actors like Audrey ‘Amelie’ Tautao (France) or Zhang ‘House of Flying Daggers’ Ziyi (China). These actresses are not just talked about for their stunning features. They have displayed talent as well as delivered hits. It's no surprise then, when these beauties bag biggies like The Da Vinci Code and Memoirs of a Geisha.

On the other hand, Aishwarya has bloopers like Bride and Prejudice and The Mistress of the Spices to her discredit. Both movies were highly hoo haaed and prophesized to make Ash the next best thing in the West. While Bride and Prejudice met with a slightly better response, The Mistress of the Spices has been shown a thumbs down by all and sundry.

And it's not just that only the movies were badly made, Aishwarya too failed to impress with her conscious dialogue delivery, schoolgirl giggle and lackluster acting. How and in what is she then an actor of international repute? Does attending Cannes or appearing on publicized TV shows make one an actor? Does aggressive marketing and packaging of an individual amounts to being recognized as a fine actor?

So far Ash has only disappointed. I would rather see her do the regular Hindi films routine and stay true to herself within her limitations and get applauded for it instead of trying to fit into the bigger scheme of things.

Ideally, I would like actors to stick to their roots and build this industry so strong and big that it would be considered international in its own right. Wherein you don't have to go to Hollywood to achieve that status.

Don't we appreciate Chinese, Korean, French and Italian movies for their characteristic brand and thought of filmmaking? Our movies should retain their individuality, and if possible, originality to lure the true lovers of cinema who discount cultural and language barriers and appreciate distinctiveness.