Film Review: Just Married

It seems a whole lot of Bollywood directors discovered Love Actually recently. The funda of having multiple parallel love-stories, capturing various shades and emotions, is literally beaten to death in last couple of months.

No "action" for Fardeen
No action for audience

In the race of duplicating ideas, its the laggards who lose worst. Thats why after Salaam-e-Ishq & Honeymoon Travels, its just impossible to digest Just Married.

And that's just first of the many MANY problems with the movie! The pace of the movie is another. The movie just drags and drones, without any point in sight. The story has loopholes of the size of India Gate where from Siddhu can pass with his tractor! I don't think there are still homes in uber-urban Delhi where US-return Marketing Heads would agree to marry some girl without even talking to her. And someone please tell me what actually was the issue in the film? Why was Isha Deol screaming - "Kya sex hi sab kuch hai aapke liye?" Because Fardeen touched his shoulder or because the cockroach touch her legs (eh.. talking to Fardeen or Cockroach)? Oh, and there were other couples too. Mostly artificial and boring. Faces from the TV serials, bringing the typical rude onslaught of emotions from the small screen. Waaaay over the top! See, the issue with the movie is - there is no story!!

Which is saddening, given the fact that it the debut movie of Meghna Gulzar, daughter of famous poet & lyricist Sampooran Singh aka Gulzar. Coming to that, the music of the film was another flop show. Only one song - "Gudgudee" - is worth noting.

Now the acting, Fardeen Khan gave yet another Man-Behind-The-Iron-Mask performance. He definitely beat Isha Deol in Look-I'm-So-Expressionless contest, but by a very narrow margin. I can imagine both set of celebarents (new term coined by me - celeb+parents!) scratching their heads (Firoz very delicately) about where to fit in their wards. Action didn't work, neither did emotion. No chance in romance and too young for bhabhi-bhaiya roles. Well, tough luck. But please move over and spare the poor audience.

And if you've read till here, you must be rewarded with my own PJ. The mention of cockroach brought it forth in my memory. So,

Q. What did the nephew roach call his uncle?
A. Kaka-roach! :-P

A movie a day: The way to live

I've vowed to watch one movie a (working) day till the day I leave Bangalore (That day is fixed BTW, I'm flying out on 4th June. So, now my days are numbered.. har har har). This week, I've watched four movies till now and I'm set to watch another this night. I don't think I can add more to the tally during weekend as we are planning to visit Ooty during the three day weekend. Anyway, I'm putting up my comments about the movies I watched this week. Check out - Water, Grave of the Fireflies, Pyaare Mohan and Memoirs of a Geisha. Warning: Spoilers ahead.

---

Water: Water for me is a movie of what-ifs and could-have-beens. As her reputation goes, Mira Nair Deepa Mehta has taken up a strong script and made a thought-provoking film out of it.

Lisa and John: The Weakest Links?

The story, set in late 1930s, is clearly the best part of the film. The film starts with excerpts from Laws of Manu, according to which a widow must lead a life devoid of all worldly pleasures. The film makes a good case against the treatment of widows in the traditional hindu society of 1930s. The hypocritical dysfunctional society, where the dominant males used to interpret the scriptures according to their likes. In one scene, an old decadent Seth says,"Brahmin kisi ke bhi saath so sakta hai. Is mein bhala us aurat ka hi hai." (A Brahmin can sleep with anyone he likes. Its better for that woman too.) The film covers many such iniquities prevalent in the society that time. Of course, many still are, and that makes the film relevent in today's times too.

Now some shortcomings of the movie, had Mira Nair Mehta gave the casting a more serious thought, it could have been a masterpiece. Acting is probably weakest part of otherwise a very good film. Seema Biswas is one seasoned actress and its very difficult to find any fault in her work, but other than her, their are not many strong performances to carry the film. Lisa Ray has shed some weight after "Bollywood-Hollywood" and is looking absolutely ravishing, but she just can't act! John Abraham tries, but even after that he can't create the charm Saif Ali Khan created in Parineeta. John simply could not convince me as a nationalist in the turbulent 30s. Perhaps his image was a hinderence, but I'm not sure if he was the best choice for the role. The hindi dialogs too are banal at times. With such a strong script, equally sharp dialogs could have added much more. Not the mention the poor delivery by Lisa Ray!

The film has many heart-touching scenes. When the old Bua, pining for sweets but not getting any, lets out the final breath after Chuiya gets her a laddu. Or when the Pundit, stuck between the pity for Seema Biswas & the religious diktat, asks her if she feels close to moksha (salvation) and she says if moksha means vairagya (insularism), then not. Another one, when Biswas and John are mourning Ray's death and Biswas asks him why are they (widows) forced to live there (ashram), to which John replies,"Ek bistar bach jata hai, khane wala ek munh kam ho jata hai.. aur koi kaaran nahi hai." (It saves an extra bed, reduces the number of eaters .. there is no other reason.)

The irony with the movie is, it tells a story with which not many among the multiplex crowd would be able to relate. And this movie is not going to be released outside the multiplexes, if at all it arrives in India. I guess, its an insulting movie to our great Indian culture, hah!

Get a DVD. Watch the movie.

Rating: 3/5

---

"The best film you would never want to watch again."

Grave of the Fireflies (Hotaru no haka): Some user has described this movie at IMDB as "the best war movie you would never want to watch again." I don't think anything more profound can be said about the movie. As the tradition of Hollywood war movies go, they are more concerned with the heroics and the win. What about the price which has to be paid, by both winning and the losing sides? This film captures the plight of two small children, Seita & Setsuko, stuck in the second World War Japan. Their father is already fighting for the navy & they lose their mother to an air-raid. To survive in the war torn Japan, with rationed food and scarcity & fear spread all over, is one challange the children fail to tackle. Despite every possible effort by the brother, he could not save the little sister. For Japanese people, their pride means a lot, but in those miserable times, the brother had to steal food for both of them. It's never enough for them anyway. He even risks his life by running to the city under bombing, to steal whatever food or valuables he can find in the deserted houses.

The story is as simple and as heartbreaking as any real life story can be. This film is based on the novel with the same name by Akiyuki Nosaka. Nosaka lost his younger sister during the war to malnutrition and blamed himself for her death. I had reservations about the movie since it's an anime movie. But that doesn't holds the movie back in any way. The emotions and the predicament of the characters, be it the siblings or their grumpy aunt or the hopeless farmers, come out very well.

Another good thing about the movie is that it doesn't take any side and doesn't point fingers to anyone. It doesn't say that those kids are suffering because of Americans. It doesn't waste time in establishing good & bad sides and heros & villians. I'd keep this along all time best war movies, along with "Life is Beautiful".

Rating: 3.5/5

---

Pyaare-Mohan: Avoid.

---

Too alien a story for me.

Memoirs of a Geisha: My understanding of the Japanese culture of early last century is very limited. Samurais are perhaps the only funda I know. Hence, Geisha.. was an eye-opener of sorts. The movie is based on a novel which covers the life on a small girl, who grows up to be a hugely popular Giesha, in the pre-war Japan.

The movie is well made and definitely worth watching. But I could not relate well with the Giesha concept. They are escorts, trained in music, dance and the art of conversation. They aren't prostitutes, still they'd auction their virginity. It gets a bit confusing.

The story is good. It starts with a father selling his two daughters, for medication of his ailing wife. The two sisters are seperated at the okiya and follow their destinies to become Gieshas. Chiyo, the younger one fails to join her sister in their plan to run away. Now she is doomed to live as a slave. That is until an celebrated Giesha, Mameha, takes her under her wings to train and make her the most celebrated Giesha. Chiyo turns into Sayuri, a bundle of mystery & charm, and enticing the rich & successful in Japanese society. But in the deepest part of her heart, she desires to be with no one but the Chairman. She has been in love with the chairman since she was 9 and accidently bumped in to him and he bought her an ice-cream.

This angle about a precocious girl in love with a man, thrice her age and the chairman loving her back, is a bit too much to digest for me. The chairman asked Mameha to take Chiyo under her and train her to be a Geisha, so that he can be with her .. uggh!

The presentation and the execution of the movie are brilliant, though. The acting is flawless and utmost care has been taken to get the era presented rightly. Just that I couldn't relate much with the story.

Rating: 3/5

---

V For Vendetta

Remember, remember the fifth of November,
gunpowder, treason and plot,
I see no reason why gunpowder treason
should ever be forgot.

This Guy Fawkes rhyme plays a part of central importance in this superb film.

Wachowski brothers are back and back with a bang. "V For Vendetta" is their first film after the Matrix trilogy & the movie justifies the wait totally. The idea is borrowed from the 80's Alan Moore comic book. This would make it my all time best comic book adaptations, long with the Spiderman series.

Not really unlike the Matrix trilogy, the film is set in another time-line, in a dystopian future United Kingdom, ruled by a facist government. The government maintains control of the country through food shortages, government-controlled media, secret police, a planned economy, and concentration camps for racial, political, and sexual minorities. The protagonist of the movie, "V", is the result of one such concentration camp. V is a self-proclaimed freedom-fighter, a terrorist for some. Incomparably charismatic and ferociously skilled in the art of combat and deception, V urges his fellow citizens to rise up against tyranny and oppression. Just like Guy Fawkes' failed plan, he blows up the parliament building in the end, a symbol of the facist government.

The storyline is fairly complex and subtle. Thankfully, they haven't tried to dilute it for the audience. The dialogues are more delightful! V is portrayed as a man of fine tastes & immaculate language. Some memorables quotes -

Evey Hammond: Who--who are you?
V: Who? Who is but the form following the function of what... and what I am is a man in a mask.
Evey Hammond: I can see that.
V: Of course you can. I'm not questioning your powers of observation, I'm merely remarking on the paradox of asking a masked man who he is.

---

V: Would you like to dance?
Evey Hammond: It's the eve of your revolution and you want to dance?
V: A revolution without dancing, is a revolution not worth having!

---

V: Voilà! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran, cast vicariously as both victim and villain by the vicissitudes of Fate.This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is it vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished, as the once vital voice of the verisimilitude now venerates what they once vilified. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified, and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin van-guarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition. The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose vis-à-vis an introduction, and so it is my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V.

Rang De Basanti: Movie Review

"Rang De Basanti" is a thorough entertainer, no two ways about that. But words like "The best three hours of the Indian Cinema", "An Inspiring Film", "A Generation Awakes" etc. are stretching it a bit too far. The acting, screen play, technique, camera work and all are simply superb. But I don't have many superlatives for the 'solution' given in the film. The first half is very engrossing! Rakyesh Mehra has read the pulse of the youth very well and the characters are sketched very realistically. I'm sure we all have met people like them and can relate very well to their anger against the corrupt system. Many of us crib incessantly about the hopeless state of India and how nothing can be done, knowing that its we who has to do something. That's why we can connect so well to the directionless, indifferent, devil-may-care youth portrayed in the film. But when film descend from a broad perspective to particularities, the script falters. The parallels drawn between the two stories, one in 1920s and one contemporary, seems a bit far-fetched. I'm not ready to accept that the impulsive decision to bump off a mean minister can be kept in the same league as the movement carried on by revolutionaries like Azad, Bhagat Singh, Dutt etc. The problem is - the buck is passed in the end of the movie. "Join Police, IAS, Politics"; may be they should watch Shool, Gangaa Jal, Sarfarosh etc.

To give the due credit to the film, it has atleast got the questions right if not the answers. Still, I won't call it inspiring. Let's forget about the big picture for a while, the movie depicts 5 young people, incised by one personal tragedy and further pissed off by the apathy shown by the authority. Solution, they picked up guns and bumped off a minister. Remember "Ghayal"? or countless movies by Dharamendra where Sadashiv Amrapurkar was the corrupt minister invariently? RDB is a notch above them for sure, but not for the script! Moreover, the young "guns" were not even showed to be sure about the whole thing, still they convicted the minister following their instincts and guillotined him. Pick any "terrorist" organisation and at the root of its birth would be an atrocity. There is no dearth of examples - LTTE, ULFA, Kashmir. Our terrorists are martyrs for some. The point is, its not easy to justify violence! Even in the era of Bhagat Singh, they had a hard time making it clear to the nation (and to Gandhi ji) that they weren't just enthused by the hatred towards Brits.

About the broader picture, the blogosphere is literally painted "basanti". I've read recurrently that this films "made them think". Think about what? The hopelessness spread over the sarkari machinery? Didn't they already think about it when they were asked to bribe a traffic wala? The target audiance - college going, 20 somethings - more or less arrive at the conclusion that its either "do-it-yourself" or "STFU", by this time. At the best, this film would present the questions again to them, wrapped up with out-of-this-world presentation.

As I said earlier, the movie is a thorough entertainer; not to be missed! Perhaps my expectations were a bit too high with the movie; still the first halfl kept up with it. Just don't go in expecting enlightenment and stuff.

(Written for InFiCA.)

Update: Check out the reviews done by Chandrahas & Uma. Whatever I wanted to say, they've said it better.

Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics

Take a look at this insanely cool website - Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics. They've vowed to bring out all the basic flaws pertaining to Physics in the Hollywood Movies. If only they knew about Bollywood and Rajnikant & Mithun da. Their introduction says -

Since its start-up in 1997, "Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics" has received hundreds of thousands of visitors including NASA scientists, high school and university physics teachers and at least one published science fiction writer. We have received many helpful suggestions and constantly consider them as we improve our site.

"Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics" has been reviewed or listed in Physics Today Magazine, The News Letter of the American Physical Society, The New York Times, and The Hollywood Reporter, as well as numerous other publications. It has been listed on Fark and Slashdot and been featured on the Osgood Files and NPR as well as many other radio stations.

Now, how cool is that?! They've devised their own rating system for the movies -

In the name of physics decency, to protect the minds of children everywhere, so that they may grow up in a world where they know the difference between speed and velocity, we have taken the responsibility to rate movies for their portrayal of excessively bad physics. The system is as follows:

* GP = Good physics in general
* PGP = Pretty good physics (just enough flaws to be fun)
* PGP-13 = Children under 13 might be tricked into thinking the physics were pretty good; parental guidance is suggested
* RP = Retch
* XP = Obviously physics from an unknown universe
* NR = Unrated. When a movie is obviously a parody, fantasy, cartoon or is clearly based on a comic book it can't be rated but may still have some interesting physics worth discussing.

Towards the end of their main page is the list of reviewed movies. Apparently, King Kong failed to impress them thoroughly (I am no great fan either). They've given King Kong a rating of PGP-13. Their review says -

As for the death scene, at an estimated weight of over 16 tons it's unlikely that King Kong could leap in the air, smack an aircraft, and land back atop the Empire State Building as depicted without doing major structural damage both to the ape and the building. The gigantic ape was repeatedly raked with .30 cal machine guns fired from biplanes. Given the size of the beast , he would most likely have died slowly from blood loss, yet little blood was shown. When he fell, Kong's gravity to air resistance force ratio would be about 3 times that of a human sky diver. A human jumper would hit the sidewalk at a terminal velocity of around 120 mph (193kph). Kong's terminal velocity would be about 3 times higher but he would never reach it. Even without air resistance the maximum velocity of a fall from the top of the Empire State Building would only be 193 mph (311 kph). Kong would hit the sidewalk with the explosive power of between 10 and 27 lbs of TNT. Ape parts and blood would be splattered all over.

What fun!

Zinda: Movie Review

Cinema is an art but not a pure art. Its a highly commercial venture involving huge sums & everyone is in there to make profits. Hence, I don't scoff at movies "inspired" by some Hollywood success or by any film from elsewhere. It increases the chances to get a hit, or atleast so it seems. In the end, the movie should be entertaining to make money. Thus, it get very important to adapt the story & screenplay to suit the likes of Indian audiences.

I'm told Zinda is a frame-by-frame copy of a Korean film which goes by the name Oldboy. No one would've heard about the Korean movie, so no problems there. Infact the extreme dull-n-dark cinematography & Kill Bill style fight sequences were never seen before in a Bollywood film. The story & presentation are different too. But being different and being good are two very different things. That's what Zinda is, it's different but not good. Not even average!

The first half of the film is intriguing. The viewers are left amidst a mystery when Bala (Sanjay Dutt) is kidnapped from his home in Bangkok and without any explanation or reasons is kept captive for fourteen years. An old television, a cryptic painting and fried wantons are his companions for fourteen years. And one day, he is let out of the hole, without any notice or clue. He is determined to find the person behind his 14 year long exile. He meets an over-the-top taxi driver, Jenny Singh (Lara Dutta), and his school time buddy, Joy (Mahesh Manjarekar). Eventually, he reaches the man behind all this - Rohit Chopra (John Abraham), a multi millionaire and Bala's junior from his school. You'll have to watch the movie to get the logic of the movie after this point!

The second half of the movie is a big let down after the "almost good" first half. The screenplay doesn't have the fire to carry the film for the duration of two hours. It simply gives in to the cliches prevalent in Bollywood since eternity. The reason why Bala was kept in that hole for such a long time doesn't get down smoothly. Sanjay Dutt has done decent justice to his character Bala. He does the roles with more action + style and less dialogues with great success. However, his hairdo is plainly irritating! You keep on guessing which bird made it it's nest. John Abraham looks too immature to play a 35 year old millionaire, doesn't go well with his image. Lara Dutta's character is a total misfit in the dark story! The chemistry between her & Bala is missing and thus the scenes involving them both are big drags. Mahesh Manjarekar isn't given much screen time, but even in his limited time on the screen he doesn't miss any chance to irritate. I think he overrates himself very highly as an actor! The songs are good and fit well into the screenplay. The locations (Bangkok) are great. The dialogues are minimal and effective.

Overall, the movie starts very promisingly. The silver wrapper wears off around the interval and the second half totally puts you off! Don't waste your money on this.

(Review done for InfiCA. )

Main, Meri Biwi aur Woh - Movie Review.

Bollywood has a very limited perspective about India. Their stereotyped India consists of Punjabi families living in a big posh city (Mumbai) and never hesistating from breaking into see-my-armpits dancing routine at each and every joyous moment. Recently, they've moved out of Mumbai, out of India for that matter, and started to focus on NRIs. What about the rural India? and the small towns lost on the maps? What about the rustic cities in the hindi heartland? No sir, that doesn't translate well on to box office success! OK, we'll give you some imaginary Fursatganjs filled with idiotic "ganwaars". OK, show 2-3 tempo and cycle-rickshaw and voila! that's India for you!

Chandan Arora doesn't believe in that and has a point to prove. His last film, "Main Madhuri Dixit Banana Chahti Hoon", focussed on a small town girl and her dreams of making it big in Bollywood. His latest offering, "Main, Meri Biwi aur Woh", has the same flavour of middle class India living in "theth" hindi heartland of UP. Believable characters & realistic, yet fancy storyline and Rajpal Yadav have become the trademark for Arora's movies.

The story is based in the town of Lucknow. Mithilesh (Rajpal Yadav) is a librarian at the Lucknow university. He is forced into meeting a girl since he is well into the marriagable age. At first he was very hesitant, but when she finally meets Veena (Rituparna Sengupta) he falls for her immediately. Low on self-confidence, he doesn't feel that he deserves someone like Veena but to the surprize of many, Veena too falls for his simplicity. Mithilesh is very happy after marrying Veena, but somehow he can't do away with his insecurities. Just when he was getting a bit secure about his taller-than-him wife, Veena's college time friend, Aakash (Kay Kay), arrives in their neighbourhood. This pushes Mithilesh further into depression and insecurities. Watch the movie to see how he deals with all this and sorts it all out!

Rajpal Yadav won an award for his performance in "Main Madhuri.." and he has only improved on his performance in this movie. The movie belongs totally to Rajpal Yadav and he has played his role superbly. His character, Mithilesh, is a very lovable person, loaded with his insecurities and anxieties. Yadav has depicted the various moods and stages of Mithilesh's life very meticulously and right to the dot. Rituparna Sengupta & Kay Kay both have done very good work.

But the clear winner is the script. I'm sure everyone can relate to the script and the characters & incidents. The script contains some real rib-tickling moments and has ample space for emotions too. I was most happy to finally watch a movie which deals with the India which is not already sterotyped by Bollywood, which is still attached to the reality, which features real life people in real life situations. Its a simple and straight forward story but then simple things are the best in life!

(Review done for InfiCA. Yup, they need better web design :-) I'm sure they're gonna look into it pretty soon. Cut 'em some slack fellas!)

Shikhar - Movie Review

(Review done for InFiCA)

Seems like the latest fad in Bollywood is making "meaningful", yet mainstream, cinema. Director John M. Matthan's latest movie - Shikhar - tries to pass on a meaningful message to the audience, but fails miserably due to a weak screenplay & some mediocre performances. The underlying message is not new, it tries to present the perennial clash between capitalist & socialist ideologies. However, the story treads on rather hard to believe incidents & turns.

Gaurav Gupta (Ajay Devgan), better known as GG, is a shrewd builder who has seen meteoric rise in very less time. He doesn't mind getting the job done by hook or by crook. He has his eyes set on the Songarh area for his dream project - Golden Gate City, which will be a self-sustained city with all the modern facilities & luxuries. The only problem is a small aashram - Rishi Van - which is mentored by Guruji. Guruji himself owns a big garment firm but has abdicated it in pursuit of his dream - to turn the desolate hills of Son Garh into rich forest by planning trees and thus making the lives of natives better. Guruji's son, Jaydev (Shahid Kapoor), is a young fresh-from-school boy given the responsibilities to hold the reins of the corporate empire by his father. In order to get his work done, GG lures Jaydev into a partnership & feigns friendship with him. GG doesn't stop short of even using his girlfriend, Natasha (Bipasha Basu), to seduce Jay. How Jay deals with the contrasting values of his father & GG and the inevitable clash between the two, is the story of Shikhar.

Film's first half is relatively engrossing. The characters of GG and Jaidev are established in details. In the second half, movie gets derailed from the track. The climax of the movie fails to impress and looks somewhat ludicrous (If the CM don't see the plants, the lease will be cancelled - so burn the plants and the chief justice giving an arrest order on the spot!). Ajay Devgan appears once again as a cunning & shrewd 30-something. He could've done better with a little less styling & a bit simpler clothing. He has put honest efforts to play his part, but the script looked to let him down, especially in the second half where the spotlight shifts to Shahid Kapoor & Devgan's role loses the flow & smoothness. Shahid Kapoor looks highly inspired from Mohan Bhargava of Swades, down to the cotton check shirts! Its not without any reason that people take him as a SRK clone. His acting is the biggest drawback of the movie. Neither does he look mature enough, nor does his wooden acting skills make it any better. The ladies of the movie - Bipasha & Amrita Rao - are mere fillers & of no significance to the plot. Bipasha is restricted to his "Eye candy + 1 fight + 1 item number" routine. Amrita Rao plays a simple girl with strong values and blah blah blah for the thousandth time. Her character gets really annoying just after the interval. Her character could've been scrapped to save some time & to save audience from some serious torture. Tough luck for her, most irrelevant & irritating dialogues are given to her character, "Tum anaath nahi ho na", "Tum bigad gaye ho Jai"..etc. Javed Sheikh, who plays Guruji, is average. That role could be as well played by Aloknath, Anupam Kher, Kulbhushan Kharbanda or any other character artist. Then we have a apparently highly inspired from Paris fashion designer, who keeps on saying "Voila" anytime & every time at every single slightest opportunity. You feel like hanging him from the Eiffel Tower shoving the Eiffel tower up his @ss! He isn't the only unnecessary & tangential character in the movie. There is one shuddh-hindi-bhashi MA,LLB dude (Sushant Singh wasted in such a pathetic role) & Farha as workers at the Rishi Van.

The music of the movie isn't good enough to keep the viewers interested. No other song than the hit song - "Fitna Dil" - can be called good and most of them appear to be put in at irrelevant places in the movie.

Though Shikhar is a movie made with the right ideas in the heart & brings forth a relevant issue of our times, the slow and shady script makes Shikhar a below average affair. This is the second movie by Mathan after Sarfarosh which came out six years ago. Shikhar doesn't stand any chances against the chance less blockbuster, Sarfarosh.

My rating: 2/5

Home Delivery: Movie Review

(Recently I joined the Indian Film-viewers' Critics Association (InFiCA) as a critic. They have established a systematic method to rate and review the Bollywood movies. The following review is my first contribution to the website. They are looking out for more guys who would be interested to review movies for them. Please take time to read more about it on the website.)

Confused actors & misguided script,
Ends up getting viewers flipped,
Put in some trust,
Avoid you must,
Movie like this better be skipped.

The expectations from Sujoy Ghosh were very high after his last movie - Jhankaar Beats. While his latest offering - Home Delivery - is *not* a beaten-to-death theme movie, just like Jhankaar Beats, it lacks the punch that JB had. The movie tries a tad too hard to look different and "cool" that it loses the its focus on the script. If the most essential part - script - is missing, its very difficult, if not impossible, to come up with an entertaining movie.

The story revolves around Vivek (Viieeviek ?!) Oberoi - Sunny - who is a "Gyaan Guru", an agony uncle who gives "gyaan" on love, relationships and almost everything under the sun and still finds time to work on a script for Karan Johar. However, he himself has serious commitment issues. By sheer stroke of luck, he bumps into his teenhood fantasy, Mahima Choudhary - Maya - and his lust for Maya leads him to a breakup with his steady girlfriend, Ayesha Takia - Jenny/Naani. Well, almost. It took an annoyingly imbecile Pizza delivery man, Boman Irani - Michael, to get Sunny back on the track.

The main problem with the story is that its very hard to relate with it. Especially the character of Sunny, other than some of the scenes, the character is so full of gas that after some time it gets very irritating. Its a complex character and both the writer and Vivek were not able to define it well. In the second half, the script gets really haywire. I'm still at loss to grasp how the incidents on that day changed Sunny OR what was the significance of the serial killer in the movie OR how come the "besura" neighbour got the contract! Sujoy has managed to put in some interesting moments in the movie but they are hardly good enough to salvage the movie.

The acting part was disappointing too. Vivek Oberoi is totally over the top in his attempt to portray the lecher gyaan-guru. Other than his efforts in Masti & Company to some extent, he has been far from impressive in all his films. Probably, its time for him to think a little harder about his career. Ayesha Takia has a relatively small role, which she has done fairly well. Mahima Chaudhary as the sex-siren Maya looks repulsively bawdy, which is perhaps the effect the director wanted! Other than the cleavage show, Mahima's role is quite limited. The two annoying neighbours were supposed to provide additional dose of comedy, but they end up stretching the movie unnecessarily. Biggest waste of the movie is Boman Irani. With an actor of his calibre & talent in your cast, it becomes utmost important to give him a decent role to deliver. His character - Michael - is really annoying. You need not be irritating to be an imbecile - Forrest Gump was too an idiot, but he wasn't irritating!

The music part doesn't have much to talk about other than the "Cuckoo-Cuckoo" song, which I feel was picturized superbly as a spoof on South-Indian movie songs. Extra care is taken to polish the look of the movie with neat sets & well-suited costumes for the actors. But all the embellishments look hollow as the movie doesn't have a good base to start with.

In the end, I think Sujoy should be given due credit to try and make a different movie than regular masala Bollywood stuff. Not to deny the fact - Home Delivery might be different from rest of the Bollywood movies but its not worthy just like most of them.

My rating: 2/5

Yeh Bandar to Pyar ka Bandar hai

Remaking classics is always a gamble. While the film-makers get an already proven script and can build on that using the latest technology, it's likely that the audience is much more "educated" now. Godzilla dealt with this by moulding the story to match the likings of the contemporary audience. The result - a fast paced entertaining movie. No Oscar material though, entertaining nonetheless. The makers of King Kong has dealt with the classic a bit more sacrosanctly. Times of India has rated it 4.5/5, so naturally my expectations from the movie were really high. The movie couldn't live up to my expectations.

The problem with the film is - its too long in the beginning. Once the hero - Kong the Gorilla - makes his entry, the movie gets paced, rather hurried, but before that there is too much of a buildup. It made the movie a good three hour long affair! They could very well have saved some time.

Some of the scenes are superbly crafted, but for an audience fed up on Jurassic Parks & Godzillas and much better informed about Dinosaurs & all than those from 1933 - the story goes a little overboard at times. The scene involving creepers gets a bit too gross and could've been handled better. Infact, the entire notion of the Skull Island stands on pretty flimsy grounds. But then, its a classic from 1933 and I can imagine how this stuff would've thrilled the moviegoers of that time (just like Jurassic Park thrilled me when I was 12 years old).

The makers must be complimented for superb work done with graphics & sets. They have taken all the pains to recreate the street scene & the Skull Island and of course the mighty ape. All the actors fit perfectly into their roles. Most of the screen time is claimed by Watts, who is looking beautiful as ever (Infact she is looking more-n-more like Nicole Kidman with every movie). The emotive scenes are handled very carefully, specially the way Kong reacts after the fight with Dinosaurs. The end, which is of course tragic, connects well with the viewers.

In the end, I'd say don't miss this movie for you'll miss the surreal world created by Peter Jackson, but don't go expecting a Sci-Fi. Its a fantasy thriller and thrill it will!

My rating - 3/5

Helen : The woman who could not care

Friday Poora Filmi Hai

Last week I was on a book buying spree. Fortunately, I stumbled upon First Proof. Its a compilation of writings of various upcoming Indian authors. Jerry Pinto has contributed perhaps the most interesting piece in the book - The woman who could not care. It talks about Helen and early days of bollywood in general. I enjoyed reading it thoroughly and I recommend it very strongly. Following are some of my favorite parts from the essay.

The nation state was not very old when Helen began her first rehearsals. The memsahibs were not yet a distant memory to be retrieved by Raj enthusiasts and professional nostalgists. They had left only a short while previously. And while they were not precisely white goddesses to whom all Indian men aspired, there was that old colonial hangover of the woman who you could not touch because she belonged to the ruling class.
...
If the heroine was the ethereally unavailable Hindu woman, objects of male lust would also need to be devised.
...
For a nation not old enough to ogle its own women, Helen must have seemed the ideal vamp. What better way of exacting revenge for all those years of frustration than to cast the available white women as objects of lust?
...
It would be very many years before a Hindu vamp would be accepted in the form of Bindu in the late 1960s. Until then outsiders to the Hindu mainstream would be called in to be lusted after, either as Anglo-Indians, Christians, Jews and one or two Muslims.
...
It is also interesting to note that in Helen's breakthrough number, the lyrics emphasize her alienness. 'Mera naam Chin-Chin-Choo', she tell us in Howrah Bridge, and later in the song informs us, ' Babuji mein Cheen se aayi/Cheeni jaisa dil laayi/Singapore ka yowvan mera/Shanghai ki angdaai'. Thus everything in her physicality has been imported from elsewhere.

I understand Pinto is writing a book on Helen. What amazing read that would be! It never caught my attention, but now it looks so obvious - the vamp was always necessarily a westernized lady! Even if it was a Hindu lady, like Bindu, she would be dressed in western outfits (figure hugging stretching pants and glittery tops, etc.).

But Pinto seemingly missed a different kind of vamps altogether, namely the witch in the family or the evil mother-in-law/daughter-in-law. The mere sight of Lalita Pawar must have frozen the blood of many newly wed ladies in those times. And then there were evil sister-in-laws. Although, family dramas picked up bit late in early 80's, I believe such characters were present even in earlier movies. I can't recall the names, but I have watched some black-n-white movies with such characters. Perhaps Pinto's idea of a vamp is a bit particular. The vamps in family dramas were not meant to be the "objects of lust" for sure.

Pinto's essay brought back to me one observation - early hindi movies had a very clear demarcation about the role of the characters. They will be either pitch black or rin white. The hero will be the ideal of every viewer in every possible aspect - be it academics, be it sports, be it music or even high speed car race. The villian will be a pucca son-of-devil, without even a trace of humanity in him. He'll have no regard for relations or sentiments. Thankfully, movies have gone much more sensible nowadays.

Winds of Change.

Friday Poora Filmi Hai

Salaam Namaste, the latest offering of the Yash Raj Films, is path breaking in more than one senses. Though I personally didn't like it much, the script must be acknowledged for daring to treat a sensitive topic with a distinct freshness. The issue of unwed mothers is not new to Bollywood or India, but the treatment in the movie is different. Everyone from Kunti in Mahabharat to Sharmila Tagore in Aaradhana had to abandon the child conceived out of wedlock. Not in Salaam Namaste. Amber (PJ: They should've named her HumpHer ;-)) decides to have the baby. Even this isn't pathbreaking -- Kya Kehna, interestingly, with the same cast, had almost the same setup. Saif chickened out of the relationship when he learnt that Zinta is pregnent and she decided to have the baby anyway. There, her father forced her to leave the home and severed all ties with her. Cut to 2005, no family rona-dhona, just a girl with a strong decision. But the pathbreaking character in the movie is the one played by Saif - Nick. He decides he doesn't want the baby and thus is ready to give up the relationship altogether. Last time when he did that to Zinta in Kya Kehna, he became a qualified villian. To make the character soot black from gray, they even gave him some lines like - "Jaane kiska paap mere sir daal rahi ho, etc". Not in 2005! Here we are cool with the metrosexual Nick getting out of the relationship since he doesn't want the unnecessary burden, but his chick wants it. If we roll back to Prem Chopra times; then he, and other pitch black characters, were mainly responsible for getting side heroines pregnent and abandoning them. It wasn't unimaginable to get the girl killed to mitaofy sab saboot. If this unfortunate thing had to happen with the leading lady, the hero had to die after making all the promises to marry her (Aaradhana, Humraaz). A whole lot of water has flown down the bridge since then (and of course, various preventive methods are available now ;-)).

Horror Films in Bollywood.

Friday Poora Filmi Hai

A well made horror movie can induce fear in the bravest of hearts and poorly made horror movies can tickle the funny bones. So, it's a win-win situation watching a horror movie. I personally like them very much since childhood. Hollywood has been making some excellent horror movies since the days of Hitchcock, but the situation wasn't very jolly in Bollywood until RGV company made some plausible attempts at the toughest of all cinematic genres. Films like Bhoot, Darna Mana Hai, Vaastu Shastra, Kaal, etc. are the flag bearers of Indian horror movies.

Perhaps horror movies have started getting hit very recently, this doesn't mean horror movies are new to Bollywood. Way back in 1979, Sanjeev Kumar in an well fitting mane and blood curdling howls, appeared in Jaani Dushman. The surprisingly multistarred cast gave the film enough mileage to do decent business. But even this success couldn't lure cinema makers into investing into horror movies. Still, the genre was established and small producers were making decent profit from low-budget, 3rd grade horror movies. It seems, while urban areas and big centers were going ga-ga over mushy romance & dog-blood-sucking Dharamandra action, small centers were enticed by the icchadaari naags, gory looking walking corpses & ghost infested havelis.

When I was in college, Zee Cinema used to air a hindi horror movie every Thursday evening. We never used to miss the laugh riot! The story used to be more or less same. All of them used to have an old, abandoned haveli or some khazana or pyaasi aatma. Inadvertently, our hero and his hip looking girlfriend will land into the ground zero along with few just-to-die-after-two-reels friends. However deserted the haveli might be, a chaukidaar, enshrouded in a blanket (even in summers, anyway, it's always night in the bhoot-land), with a lantern will be there. And the shower will be working, so that our chick can bathe and the crowd can vasoolofy some money. The presence of one tantric baba is essential. When all the good-for-nothing friends are spent and the aatma now endangers the life of the leading couple, it's baba's responsibility to put the silver trishool through the bhoot's breast.

Even some of the actors were regulars, Puneet Issar always played to fighter friend, only to be killed by the aatma after putting up a fighting show. Archana Puran Singh played the bathing beauty - the damned shower always started to throw blood after a while! Most of them ended up to be plain cheap sleaze show, to satisfy the front benchers. The acting standards used to be really ludicrous and the make up and all was plain pathetic. These movies certainly had the virtue of being cheap, so to extract cost should have been very easy. Ramsey brothers made a fortune out of howling creatures and booties under shower (They later went ahead to make Zee Horror Show! That was just class apart! :))!

So, Ramu must be giving a new identity to horror movies in India, but the forget about all the horror films made in 80s and 90s would be to ignore a treasure. Zee Cinema shows some of them even today, but at very late hours. Watch them if you can, just can't miss the laugh riot.

Mangal Pandey : Movie Review.

Last night we went to watch "Mangal Pandey - The Rising". It was a weekday evening, but still I had expected more crowd than what was present there. The cinema hall was barely half filled. After such a lukewarm sight in the first week, it's tough to digest the tall claims made by Aamir. He actually told them - "Just for the record, can you believe that the entire business done by ‘Lagaan’ in it’s full run has been done by ‘The Rising’ in just one week?!". What record Amir, the most obvious lie? Anyway, if you've already spoke to people who watched the movie, it might be a repetition but I must advice you to skip this one. Or perhaps wait till next 26th Jan - some channel ought to show this one. Or rush to the VCD wallah and rent "chintu candy" wali VCD.

Very few words were written over the saga of the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857. Moreover, most of the written records were maintained by the East Indian Company. So, basically the character of Mangal Pandey comes more from folklore than from history. The film adds more of bollywood masala and one raunchy "mujra" item song to the folklore and the outcome isn't very entertaining.

The movie got me confused about the orientiation of Pandey ji. He is shown to be very close with sympathetic English officer, Gordon. But what was shown in the movie looked a lot more than just-good-friends. Imagine two burly & bare wrestlers flexing their muscles in the dirty ring and one of them asks other - "Kal kyun nahi aaye? (Why didn't you come yesterday?)". In another scene, when Housten & fellow officers were beating the hell out of Pandey ji, Gordon comes and save him. After this he removes the locks of hair from Pandey ji's face and asks - "Tum kaise ho? (How are you?)". The insinuations were present everywhere. Gordon comes to the Sepoys' barracks and tell Pandey - "Mujhe tumse akele mein kuch baat karni hai. (I want to talk to you alone)". Pandey says talk in front of my people but then some eye-signals are exchanged and Pandey leaves the barracks with Gordon. Perhaps the makers got aware of this and hence, were forced to include Rani Mukherjee & Amisha Patel. Both of them are totally wasted. Rani has one mujra in the movie but if it could've gone to the another "mujra" girl in the movie, it would've added more "value" to the movie. Amisha Patel's role was totally unnecessary. Don't know how did she persuade the makers to include her in the movie.

Didn't you hate the Hindi-then-English narration in the previous paragraph? If that annoyed you, you'll probably tear your hair in the movie. Whenever Englishmen are shown talking in English, they are given the time to finish their dialogues and then Om Puri's voice repeats each and every thing said, translating every single word. No wonder movie got a "bit" lengthy.

Rediff published some very interesting excerpts from the book "Mangal Pandey: Brave Martyr or Accidental Hero?" by Rudrangshu Mukherjee. It states that the main reason behind the rebellion was the fat on the new cartridges and on the day when Mangal Pandey revolted, he was allegedly intoxicated with Bhaang. It was an isolated event but after almost a month of the hanging, mutiny broke out in various barracks in the planes of Ganga. The movies, presumably in the pursuit to color Pandey as first nationalist freedom fighter, moves far from this possibility. It's hard to imagine that Pandey, just a Sepoy, would fight for Azadi. He was from common peasent folks, who were accustomed to be ruled by royals in the past & company during those days. Moreover, concept of a unified India must have been very far fetched at that time. Till about few decades ago, the subcontinent was divided between numerous small states and they all got unified under company-raj. If not for the cartridges, Pandey could have been serving company loyally and got retired with pension.

Even if we overlook the gliches in history part of it and treat the movie as totally fictional, it's simply not entertaining! I don't know what took them four years to complete this movie? They should've given the job to Subhash Ghai. He would've made the movie in half the time on Kisna's sets! "The Rising" was only slightly better than Kisna and Kisna was a big pain in neck!

Final verdict: Hype is phoney, it's not worth your money!

UPDATE: Now that we are at the topic, I want to discuss this posting, here. From the post

Mangal Pandey gave up his life to protect his beliefs for the religion he belonged to. So did other soldiers who mutinied at that time. Viewed in the context of the present, people's religious sensitivities seem to have sadly undergone a sea-change. Even staunch religious organisations which pretend to protect their religion and breathe fire and fume at the slightest provocation, do nothing to stop such actions against their beliefs. And the people themselves - whether staunch Hindu or Jain - out of ignorance or indifference, seem to have little concern.

I am infact very *happy* for this change. I'm not very religious myself, but I don't think religion is all about the icons and rituals. Read the entire post, it's another way to look at it.

Glamourizing the Gutter

This weekend we went to see "D". Thought we went on only the second day of the movie, most of the crowd at the Innovative Multiplex was still drew in by "Bunty and Babli". This post isn't a review for the movie, that should take another post I guess. This post is about the image bollywood is presenting of the underworld. I'm not criticizing the movie here, the movie was "entertaining" but I'm not sure if I would say it was "meaningful". Basically, I'm real sick and tired of all these gangster movies; glamourizing the deeds of sick minds like Dawood Ibrahim & Chhota Rajan.

Firstly, these movies try to portray the gangsters like real bravehearts. "Is line mein experience nahi, daring ka zaroorat hai" -- uggh! How to define braveness? Where is the courage in shooting unarmed people, hiding bombs in markets/buses/cinema halls to kill innocent masses, bullying businessmen to pay hafta?! Beats me big time! In my opinion, gangsters are plain sick people, who don't have enough balls to sweat their way up. Now, the circumstances are highlighted following which the boy-next-door got transformed into real lead-pumping, chest-thumping, dance-bar-regular don. There is this silly notion that "Koi apni marzi se is line mein nahi aata". Bullshit! It's their criminal psyche and lust for easy money that drives people into underworld. Almost all of these movies start with a boy with a humble background (and an ugly stubble). Some event or the other pushes the boy to take the road less traveled leading to the dark alleys of the underworld. Once inside the game, he starts to ride up the ladder because of his work-ethics (??!) & hard work (??!) and of course, daring. Now, don't we all just love this lower middle class rags to riches story, but I seriously don't think this is the case in reality. Most of the bigshots in the underworld started as small pickpockets or hafta-vasooli goons. Everyday thousands of souls land in Mumbai with a dream to make a decent living; if all of them get recruited by the underworld, just like the movie-wallas love to believe, the city will literally go to the dogs!

Next, the movie-wallas are totally in love with the Robin Hood image of our friendly don next door. If Raghu helps his old neighbour (because the don used to steal his hens), it must be taken as bigheartedness on his part. What about all the families which got shattered because of their shootouts, bomb blasts, cold-blooded murdering, etc.? Moreover, some dons, like Arun Gawli, like to patronize particular localities, which helps them later to nurture their main-bhi-politician dream. In "D", taking up the underworld is portrayed as just another career choice for Deshu. Just as natural as anyone taking up medicine or engineering. Verbatim from the movie -- "Normal log gangsters ke baare mein jyada jaanta nahi. Hum log bhi apna kaam karte hain. Koi doctor banta hai, koi engineer; Main gangster hai." Whaaaadd? Is this the real world of Ram Gopal Varma? If some people, typically from the lower middle class, like to color their hands red to sate their itch for power & money, is it to be taken as another career option?!

I don't want to enter in another effects-on-young-minds debate, my main crib is about the obvious attempt to glorify the gore. Why can't Bollywood come up with a film about middle class dreams of India; about a message boy on trading floor rising up to be big name in the equity market; about an engineer from humble backgrounds making worldwide splash in software scene; about a sporting talent making big against all the odds? More importantly, would these movies make big bucks just like the gangster movies do? Is this the verdict given by the audience? Oh My God!! What kind of society is this!?!

Waqt: The Race Against Time

(AK: This kurta is quite cool!

PC: That is mine!!)

It is a movie to kill time for those who like it better dead. It should be called Waqt: The Waste of Time. But on second thoughts, it provides so much to laugh about, it's hardly any waste of time. Entire movie is filled with outdated cliches. The story is utterly illogical. I would love to kiss hands of the dialogue writers, of course after detaching them from their torsos. Some examples (after which you'll feel the same):

(Hero-heroine cuddling, supposedly in Jodhpur)
Priyanka Chopra: Kaata!
Akshay Kumar: Kaata?! Maine to kahin nahi kaata.
Priyanka Chopra: Woh kaata nahi, ghadi ka kaanta! Time dekho, time.
(arrrrrrrrrgh)

The costume designers of the movie are surely one of their kinds. They have finally found asexual clothing for Akshay Kumar (just see what's he wearing in the picture above). No one after Sallu bhai's sarong in Ek Garam Chai... has dared to wear such clothes! He is either seen wearing such confused sexuality clothes or atrociously loud colors (imagine blood red shirt with blood red pants!!).

Between such a torture, one tends to find some solace in the songs. In this movie, though the songs provide much needed break from whatever gibberish the movie is, they are torture of totally different kind! I can eat alphabet soup and shit better lyrics and the dog outside our apartment howls in better tune.

In absence of a good story the onus to carry the movie falls on the stars. They've disappointed immensely; the movie has failed. AB is supposedly dying due to lung cancer in the movie, one just wonders what's taking up so much time. I guess the thought crossed many minds to just strangle him and kill, rather than waiting for the end of the movie! Akshay Kumar's role can raise hopes in apes to catch up with us humans, apes who fell behind in evolutionary race that is. The comedians are just plain stupid and evoke laughs on them rather than on the jokes! Priyanka Chopra has done her bit fine; danced in four songs, shed some tears, shouted sometimes, that's it.

Just before the interval, AB shouts, "Ab kyun ruke ho, Chale Jao!". Some wise people took the cue and were not seen after the intermission. In the second half, there were some dialogues about leaving with just 35/- rupees :-

AB : Main apne gaanv se jab chala tha tab mere jeb mein sirf Rs.35/- they. Ab tum bhi is ghar se chale jao aur kuch ban ke dikhao.
Akshay Kumar : Aajkal 35 rupaiye mein kya hota hai Dadda!
(Please give us those 35/- and we'll leave!)

The climax is most cliched of them all. At some talent hunt contest where Akki dada is contesting, dying Bachhan and pregnant Chopra come. All the misunderstanding between Father-Son is cleared and now grandpa-to-be is all desperate to see his pota (They've not even spared a thought about the possibility of a poti!). Entire cinema hall was rolling on the floor laughing when both Bachhan & Chopra are carried in stretchers! Pota finally arrives and Bachhan dies only after naming him after himself (how much more obvious can it get?!). All in all, the movie is another attempt straight from the gut, but I guess it just came out of the wrong end .

Zeher!

We went for the movie on Saturday. It was that sort of movie which supports the time dilation funda; at the interval, it was barely a minute above an hour since the movie started, and we felt as if it has been aeons! Kabra was sleeping in the second half in his meditation pose; Jha was restless, tossing around in his seat; Sheikh and me had given up on commenting. Yes, it was that bad!

Lets leave the acting aside; the script, the dialogues were all very ludicrous! For better understanding, go through the following ones:

Bozo Hero: Kal raat humare beech mein jo bhi hua, theek nahi tha.
(Aaj raat theek se kar lena!)
********
Mrs.Bozo: Ab mujhe pata chala ki tumhe mujhse ek baccha nahi, ek chaukidaar chahiye.

********
Cop Shetty: Raj, case banao ki Anna aur uska husband apni maut ka natak karke kuch to fraud kar rahe the.
(April fool perhaps, too bad they were killed for that!)

Now about the acting, the hero, Mr.Bozo didn't get much chance to display his talents. He should be best suited for the roles like dressed as a tree in the background. Udita Goswami looked very uncomfortable in clothings and was ready to shed them at the slightest of hints. May be it had something to do with the shooting in Goa; all humid and hot, who wants to stay dressed! Shamita Shetty looked confused; she wasn't the one selected for the skin show, but she looked more than keen on it. The leading couple was supposed to be working for Goa Police, but they are never showed in their Khakis, Goa factor again perhaps.

If you're die hard fan of Udita (without clothes) don't miss the movie; the story et al are there to ruin the striptease, but thats all part of parcel in Bollywood!

Clive Owen: latest Jimmy B?

Rumours had it that Clive Owen (King Aurthor fame; Nominated for Oscar this year for Best supporting actor for movie Closer) is finalized to play James Bond in forthcoming bond movie, Casino Royale, to be released in November 2006. In a recent interview Owen has indeed calmed all the rumours. He is certainly a very fine actor with a profound British demeanour, but somehow I didn't find the Bond qualities in him. Something you can't put your finger on, didn't feel Bond-ish about him. I'm glad (and sorry for Clive) that the Bond hunt is still on.

What if Bollywood had a similar concept (if not Bond, may be a Vyomkesh Bakshi :)? May be we would've held an SMS contest to select Bond (Indian Bond .. hope Sony TV is listening!). Infact we've already had a pathetic Akshay Kumar movie named Mr.Bond. It was quite a preposterous imitation of Bond movies. Come to think of it, there is absolutely no comparison between Hollywood superheros and Desi ones. We can't have a Spiderman as we don't have such skyscrapers to grant the liberty of swinging by them. Batman is feasible, but we won't find a Gotham City here or villians like Two-face, Joker, Penguin, etc. Superman is okay, but he might crash into one of the MIGs our pilots keep on tossing away on nearly daily basis! Bond will be labelled a laundiyabaaz by our beloved moral police straight away.

But lets give all due credits to Bollywood. It has had decent number of superheros! Hemant Birje appeared in & as Tarzan opposite delicious Kimi Katkar. It was a complex character, a mix of Tarzan and Rambo with occasional undertones of Frankenstein's Monster (it grunted too at times!). Who can forget the award winning performance by Jitendra in the leading role of wonderful Hatimtai opposite lovely Sangeeta Bijlani? Dharamendra enticed audiances by his breath-taking performance in Jugnu as Jugnu. Apna Sallu Bhai sizzled the silver screen as Suryavanshi, in an exotic blonde wig. Bollywood certainly has the will if not the way! But its obvious to note that none of the above, except perhaps Jugnu, was a explicit super-hero (who wears underwear over his stretched pants!). I'm not sure about Dharam-paaji's underwear in Jugnu, but he certainly wore a mask there.

Though we are left behind in the race of superheros but our simple boy-next-door hero can do many super heroic acts (Rajnikant & Mithun da leading the way!). But lets not stop this from building over own chaddi-over-pants super-hero. We can borrow some heros from kids' comics. Super Commando Dhruv, Nagaraj, Parmanu, etc all wore underpants over pants while Sabu, Angaara, Bhokal, etc. didn't mind kicking ass in only chaddis. Hopefully, Bollywood will soon venture in this direction too. That day I'll kiss the silver screen!

The Grays of Greats

This discussion was originated in a particular intense review session of movie The Aviator, with Jha. I told Jha that I was particularly impressed by the fact that Hollywood doesn't hesitate to show the grey sides of their central characters. Lately a lot of biographic movies were produced in Hollywood and none portrayed the characters in pure white or total black colors. Talking of Aviator, Howard Hughes is presented as an daring adventurer with acute business sense and a great knack for innovation, but at the same time it doesn't shy away from presenting the tender spots of his personality. He is depicted as someone having commitment issues and a bit too perfectionalist (I would've said a womanizer too, but thats perhaps a quality in West :).

Coming closer to home, our own Bollywood doesn't believe in such daring truths at all. Can you imagine any movie on Gandhi showing the ego clash between Gandhi and Bose; the ego problems eventually lead to expulsion of Bose from Congress (so much for democracy in Congress!). Or perhaps showing the dirty tricks Shivaji played with Afzal Khan. No sir, we Indians can't take any thing against our heroes, be it lie or even truth. Remember Sachin's Ferrari, most of us will have it stored in our memory as perhaps a dirty trick played on Tendulkar! Try criticizing any of his innings here and I can bet you'll be rewarded with all sorts of abuses (I've immense repect for his capabilities, but not *all* of his innings are great!). Trying calling AB Vajpayee a meek PM, at a sizable gathering, and you'll be called names like politically blind, bewakoof, etc. We Indians are always ready to explain and make excuses, however lame, to cover the defects of our idols.

I somehow couldn't agree with Jha when he said that there are few great personalities who are perfect, in every sense. No one can be perfect and its high time to accept this trivial fact. Sadly, Indian public tries to find Maryadapurushottam Ram (even he forced Seeta for Agni-Pareeksha!) in their heroes leaving no space for Valmikis and Ashokas.

Currently Reading: The Remains of The Days - Kazuo Ishiguro
Listening to: Because the night belongs to lovers - Jay Wayne

Film Review: Socha Na Tha

I never thought I'll like Socha Na Tha! Don't get me wrong, I'm all for romantic comedies, but still no one expect a Deol to make good romantic movie (Barsaat still haunts me; Betaab was good though). Now, if I had such "confidence" in the movie, why did I go for it at all? Because that's what I do (and make my roomies do. Sorry Jha!).

But, there's always a but, in the end as I came out of the theater, not only was I satisfied with the movie, I was very much impressed by the movie! The real super star of the movie is its script. The writers have done their reality checks regularly and hence the movie is very close to real day to day life (barring the castles of houses they live in the movie, but hey, its a bollywood movie!). The script is not fresh from the oven, but its not stale too. It certainly has its moments. The comic timing of Abhay Deol is good and screen play is quite crisp. Ayesha Takia looks charming and Junior Deol is not bad either. He'll have to work on his dialogue delivery though.

On a whole, it's a good paisa vasool movie and I recommend it highly for a fun-minded movie-goer.

Currently Reading: Deception Point - Dan Brown
Listening to: Disco Station (Hathkadi) - Sweet Honey Mix