Change Your Image
CastleToe
Reviews
Gangs of Wasseypur (2012)
Bangs of Kasai-pur (Butcher-land)
Anurag Kashyap stands for the rebel in Indian cinema. He knows it too. Black Friday, Dev.D, Gulaal give him every reason in the world to be proud of his tag. This feeling is clearly reflected in Gangs of Wasseypur, which turns out to be his most ambitious & financed project ever. He works with his long-time friends, Manoj Bajpayee, Tigmanshu Dhulia and others, deciding to make a film which does not fall into the cliché of other commercial films. An epic film that tells the story of violence originating through monopoly of coal mines in North India but later feeds itself off the ego of proud descendants of their brave forefathers.
It is as difficult to loathe this film as it is to hate history lessons taught through audio-visuals. The story takes us in, helping us to absorb the details. It starts in one era, moves to another, shows familiar black & white clips, returns to some other era before finally falling on a linear time-line. Characters, places, eras are introduced either by text or the voice-over by Piyush Mishra who plays the uncle to a revenge-vowing bald Sardar Khan (Bajpayee, excelling himself like never before) who's father Shahid Khan (Jaideep Ahlawat, strong screen presence) was killed off by his employer Ramadhir Singh (Dhulia, another remarkable work). Yes, it is difficult to follow the names but fairly easier to remember the faces. The characters develop beautifully through the plot. I wasn't bored at any point, maybe could have watched the second part too.
Kashyap's screenplay stresses more on the plot than the characters. He makes lovable characters throughout the film but has no mercy on them. For instance, the revenge-vowing lead is unashamed of his libido and sleeps around which his wife (Richa Chadda) eventually comes to terms with, which one would would not usually expect (there are numerous other examples with almost every character which would kill the suspense, if mentioned). But these are heartless gangsters which you would feel no sympathy for if you heard about them on the news. This Godfather-esque play of values which have been used time and again in movies makes you expect more from the film as it moves on. Sadly, it doesn't deliver the expected punch as the characterizations lead to digressions in the plot rather than help it move forward.
Then again, how do we fall in love with a movie knowing that whole genealogical parts can be comfortably replaced by sporadic lines of reminiscence? And what exactly goes wrong in this movie that boasts of a strong ensemble of actors, a terrific earthy music score (Sneha Khanwalkar) and spot-on cinematography (his regular, Rajeev Ravi)? It is not hard to see the bits & pieces of frustration (that oozed in No Smoking (2007)) in the ambitions and grandeur of Gangs... Kashyap was in the past forced to tone down Black Friday (2004) by Censors and has not yet been allowed to release his first film Paanch. Maybe, this time around, he decided that not cutting down at all on the partly mundane details would enhance the epic-quotient of the film. It does not. However, the trailer and characters for GoW-Part 2 are 'definite'ly more interesting.
PS: I'm a die-hard Kashyap fan and it pains me to not be able to fall in love with his movie. But this is certainly, not his best.
7/10
The Dirty Picture (2011)
Choli ke peeche kya hai? (What's behind the blouse?)
Imagine you are making a movie about something really energetic in its own way, for instance, the enormous amount of water that is required to fill a large Sintex tank on top of a building. You may begin by showing how water fills up such a huge tank, the energy of flowing water and so forth. It is however important to note here that it is not the water alone but also the magnanimity of the tank, the height of the building etc. that must get to play an important role. Without an uncompromising projection of how huge the tank is, how it was carried over to the top of a large building and, so on, it will become impossible to feel the enormous presence of the water that fills it.
And that would sum up how The Dirty Picture was executed. The energy of Vidya Balan in the central role was simply enormous. So much so, that the rest of the picture was unable to match up and consequently felt bland and weak in comparison. People often ask, if the writer writes the story, cinematographer films it, actors act and music director scores, what does the director get to do? The director must ensure that the energy of all people involved in the project is channelised in a single stream that gets projected on the screen and must be eventually, felt by the audience.
Director Milan Luthria fails miserably in his job here. A hammy comical Naseeruddin, a controlled Emraan Hashmi and a joke of a Tusshar Kapoor comprise the side characters around the unabashed and shamelessly unapologetic Vidya Balan. Her power over the crowd is merely shown each time by repeated shots of punching movie tickets, crowds of people rushing in and a different dance sequence on the screen. A shabby compromise! The promising biopic is not only slaughtered in its execution by the director but also in its clichéd screenplay (by Rajat Arora who adopts the same dialogue-styles from his previous OUATIM) that allows for an unnecessary narration sequence by Emraan Hashmi and a frequent spew of corny lines and witty (yet, effective) one-liners that end up disrupting the mood of the scene. The audience are however shamelessly satisfied without noticing the loose threads in the story. Like, what happened to the other character who sang with Silk? But who watched it for the story! People cheered when an extra half inch of Silk's bosom became visible or when she has finally got to kiss the medley of different heroes on screen. Special jeers and remarks for Hashmi's kiss. And I was in a multiplex hall.
Cinematography comprised of a sepia-ish hue to depict the 80s period in South India which went very well with the art direction but sadly, it avoided wider angled shots which could have been used to capture scenes involving Silk's audiences or at least to add authenticity to the period drama. This, coupled with the screenplay greatly limited the scope of this movie. The star power that the soft-porn star exhibited was neglected in various scenes. For instance, in the scene where Silk was creating a ruckus outside someone's house, the gathering of the crowd and their cheers were avoided and instead, the focus was on Naseeruddin, Tusshar and other star people involved. Better editing could have spiced up many of such shots.
Music score was mismatched and even slightly boisterous in some places.(I suspect that they must have hired the guy who gives those reaction sounds from Ekta's TV soaps for some of the scenes). Ooh La La was the only fun song. Honeymoon Ki Raat was a mind-boggler! Why was it even there? Sufiana was an unnecessary addition towards the end but they had to have it to show Hashmi kissing Balan.
Acting wise, however, this movie saves its face. Naseeruddin maintained the humour in the first half. Hashmi was consistent throughout. Tusshar was vapid and maintained a stupid look on his face in most of the scenes. Rajesh Sharma is indeed the discovery of the year. After a helpless police officer in No One Killed Jessica, he is unbelievably perfect as the B grade-ish producer. Expectedly, Vidya Balan saves the day by lifting the entire weight of the dirt of this picture and excelling herself as she has done in her past movies. Every performance since her past 3-4 movies has saved her movies from going noticeably awry. I was never a Balan fan from the start. But as of today, all I can say is that no one in Bollywood is in a position to make a picture that can sustain her energy and performance. It's like taking all the water meant to fill the Sintex tank and using it to fill your water bottle. The bottle is enough for you, not for the water.
Producer Ekta Kapoor must have a really weird sense of humour. This movie that holds the vulgar expectations of the audience responsible for the rise and fall of Silk targets the very same from the audience of this film. And apparently she has hit the right spot. Sadly, this is apparently what "Entertainment" in a film is all about! When I walked in for a fourth day's show, many people around me were able to repeat various monologues by rote and in sync with the actors. The Irony!
Dev.D (2009)
Devdas Returns
At the time of going for the movie, I had heard that Sarat Chandra's novel Devdas has been adapted at least 9 times (some say 16 times, figures vary) on the silver screen. It includes the famous renderings by Dilip Kumar and Shah Rukh Khan. But nothing, I mean none of those adaptations prepares you for watching this reckless contemporary take on the same novel. The vision of Abhay Deol brought on screen by Anurag Kashyap (and Vikramaditya Motwane) is nothing short of speechlessly rebellious by nature.
I was an amateur film-goer back then. Dev.D was one of my initial Hindi films in a theatre. In fact, seeing the initial credit of a "Thank You" to Danny Boyle, I even joked to my friend that he had mistakenly bought a ticket to Slumdog Millionaire! Not Funny. But the initial ten minutes of the movie certainly were funny. In their own wicked way, at that. It gave an outrageous background of lust to the lead characters of Devinder Singh Dhillon and Parminder (so much for adapted names!) in stark contrast to their love that forms the soul of the story of Devdas.
Thereafter, the movie moves wildly through the lives of the three lead characters and how they get affected by the gossip of the side characters. The language use was preposterous in places. But limited to the point of enhancing the movie and not degrading it. It was amazing to see the amount of care that Kashyap has paid to the detailing in each scene. I particularly remember three of these scenes. In the first, when Dev.D first meets the pimp Chunni (Dibyendu Bhattacharya), the background flashes a big neon light that spells out RAND (slang for "prostitute" in Hindi). I was shocked as no one else seemed to notice it and I pointed it out to my friend who was amused. We waited and watched and as they started walking, the camera zoomed out and we read the words "GRAND HOTEL". Our respect for Kashyap had increased manyfold. The second scene was similar in nature and displayed the words HIV in the background of a brothel balcony where Chanda was standing. (I didn't manage to catch the remainder of the word but never mind!) The third scene involves a verbal fight between a girl and Dev.D in the bus and the camera zooming to catch the word "Mahilaye" ("Ladies" in Hindi) on the bus with the letter "Ma" scratched out. It now spelt out as "Hilaye" ("Jerk off" in Hindi). It gives the clue to the viewer that a break-up is on the cards. Hillariously Epic!
Such kind of detailing by a filmmaker is rarely observed in Indian cinema. Who, after all, bothers to show anything else apart from the actor's faces and body language at the most? But Kashyap, the rebel that he is, refused to stop with just that. He has used dizzying camera angles and tricks (apparently taught by Danny Boyle) that are usually not employed by Indian filmmakers. The drinking scene during the song "Pardesi" uses a special camera that was imported from Holland by Danny Boyle and can capture an incredulous 40 frames per second in contrast to normal 25fps cameras (not sure about the specs, read about them a long time ago).
The adapted writing also includes three narrators that appear throughout the movie and keep an eye on the characters, some real-life incidents that serve as backdrop for many important scenes (the Delhi school MMS scandal,the BMW hit-and-run case) and also some awesome scenes (the hilarious episode at the bus, the car crash outside the phone booth) that have been adapted from world cinemas as an ode to them. By the way, the first customer of Chanda (Kalki Koechlin) is a cameo by Anurag Kashyap. See if you can spot him!
The brilliance of this movie does not, however, end with the screenplay and direction. The trippy soundtracks featuring 18 tracks by Amit Trivedi (that fetched him a National Award) are a treat to listen to. They still remain my all-time favourite soundtrack album. Sadly, I have never heard any of these underrated songs sung in any stage concert or in any of those mind-dumbing reality shows. The extraordinary cinematography (Kashyap's regular Rajeev Ravi) has been carefully used throughout the movie to enhance the mood of the different scenes. The cutting-edge editing (by Kasyap-experienced ex-wife Aarti Bajaj) in many of the drinking scenes take this movie to the dizzying level you would expect to find yourself if you were as drunk as Devdas.
I still remember to having spent the least amount on a Multiplex movie ticket (Rs.60) but having enjoyed it more than the costlier bigger budget extravaganzas. In fact, the only ever thing that I could complain about this movie, was the way it ended. I really didn't expect the lights to switch on at that point. It kinda leaves you incomplete. But the rest of the movie makes up for it.
Lose your control, Kashyap. Be the rebel forever!
8/10
Dabangg (2010)
Dances with Belts
The hero is a gleefully corrupt cop (a beer-buffed Salman Khan). He dodges bullets and flying glasses, jumps off rooftops, stares at the camera and delivers punchlines. Basically defies most of the rules of good acting. But who in the audience cares? The ones who are not dancing in the theatre halls are whistling in their seats. Points a gun at a bad guy but forgives him when he finds out that his ring-tone is the chart buster from the actor's previous film (Wanted).Now that's a committed (pun, here) dude!
Inspector Chulbul Pandey unabashedly robs criminals with no sense of morality expected of a people's hero. He even calls himself Robinhood Pandey. But not all's wicked in this dusty rural-lands of a remote India. He shares his loot and liquor with fellow policemen. They in turn praise him in front of their wives and threaten music-players at a wedding on his behalf. Sweet! Enter a heroine (a razor sharp Sonakshi Sinha) making Robinhood go weak in his knees. He enquires about her marital status, buys pots from her pottery and even threatens her father leading to unexpected consequences. Meanwhile, he has a turbulent relationship with his step-father and half-brother which aggravates after his mother's death leading to... well, the drama has enough details to keep the audience glued during it's runtime.
The western spaghetti-style music score (Sajid-Wajid-Pandit) lends the peppery edge that makes this movie work. The rustic cinematography (Mahesh Limaye) has been beautifully used to the needed effect. These, compiled with the chop-chop edited (Pranav Dhiwar) action sequences and simple stepped choreography (Raju-Farah) complete the technicalities needed to translate the predictable, yet spoofed screenplay to a whole new Salman-world on the screen.
The hero wears his glares on the back of his collar, gets married before the end of the movie, beats up people he doesn't like and cracks fart-jokes. A brave character design for a lead actor especially by a first-time director (Abhinav Kashyap) but then again, it is Salman Khan we are talking about! No else is cared for. The bad guy (an irritating Sonu Sood) builds his body to keep up with Salman's during the climax fight. The heroine simmers about asking the hero why he is so corrupt which thankfully remains unanswered. Veteran actors like Om Puri, Anupam Kher, Dimple Kapadia, Tinu Anand, Vinod Khanna are shamefully wasted in their minuscule roles. And thus, the weight of the movie lies solely on Salman's expansive shoulders. That's what the audience paid for. That's why the movie was made for.
7/10
Singham (2011)
Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Singham
The bad guy (Prakash Raj blurting Marathi phrases) uses his power for bad deeds. The distressed people have no one to look up to. Just when the whole situation seems totally helpless, the hero (a frowning Ajay Devgn) finishes his bath at sunrise and rises from the water. Apparently no one else could attempt such an Herculean task and so the entire village breaks into festive songs on his return.
The eponymous hero happens to be a policeman-cum-judge who doesn't register cases against the villagers as they all happen to be his relatives. By this time, you realise the narration is pretty linear. The bad guy is bad, the good guy is better & the heroine (Kajal Agarwal) is the best! Yes! She breaks into an impromptu song on a strange island when the hero reciprocates her proposal of love. My friend used that time to take a pee-break. Great!
This is precisely the kind of movies that filled the Indian screens during the 80's and early 90's. Characters had no complex shades. Hero enters the screen with a sole motive to finish the villain's role. Pretty-faced heroines are used as eye-candy. Well, the director (Rohit Shetty) and team had promised the same. So no complaints, please.
Although Singham follows the rule to the 'T', it adds a bit of garnishing to the old recipe. The movie does have many believable moments which make you go "Awww". A side character (a veteran Ashok Saraf) is used to highlight the problems of a policeman and his reasons to stray from the expected path of virtue. The heroine motivates her beau when he feels low and incompetent against the villain's might. She unfailingly stands behind him to hold his gun & shirt while he flexes his biceps and lashes the bad guys with his belt. By the way, was it made of leather or rexin? The answer certainly deserves a place in a sequel.
The Marathi-heavy dialogue delivery packs punches throughout the story while hero delivers the kicks (literally!) to different people. The climax is aptly handled by the over-hamming acting of National Award winning Prakash Raj (Wanted, Kanchivaram) who seems to be the perfect import from the south-side for such movies. He runs through the fake buildings in town (by cinematographer Dudley) with lots of police-vans chasing him. Typical of Rohit Shetty films. He is a true lover of cars. Please watch his movies if you are one. You may learn how to pull villains out of cars that rotate more than a helicopter over your head or give a rose to a girl when you happen to be in such a car (All the Best: Fun Begins - 2009).
Masala films such as this one, often have a great music score to boast of (like the original Tamil Singam and the recent Dabangg). But the music here by the Gogavale brothers is plainly forgettable. All you remember is the title track's roar. Other songs are simply a bore.
6 / 10
Alice in Wonderland (2010)
Go Hide, Runaway Bride
I'll admit something before I start. I never enjoyed Lewis Caroll's classic. As a child I'd read different versions of Alice in Wonderland but they always left me somewhat unimpressed. Maybe it reflected the innocence in the young minds of 1865. Maybe Cartoon Network & the IT boom made us more matured than we ought to have been in our childhood. In any case, when I saw the trailer of Alice's escapades being re-recited by the Tim Burton-Johnny Depp 7th combo, it got just curiouser for me.
I was actually impressed by the way the movie started & unwounded. Writer Linda Woolverton (one of the writers of the classic Lion King) chose to start with an older Alice (a smiling Mia Wasikowska) who gets to revisit Wonderland, which she visited as a child. "Return to Wonderland" - or something similar, would have sounded more apt a title. Thereon, Burton plans a setup at the end of which we see Alice running away into the woods and following the same talking rabbit down the (probably same) hole into Wonderland where the 3-D effects play their real role.
I watched this film for Johnny Depp. I waited for the Tea Party episode which is probably the only scene I loved & enjoyed in this story. In the interim, Alice meets the usual medley of characters who were mostly "transmogrified" Actors, welcoming her back to Wonderland. Animating the real actors' faces for some of the characters, worked very much in favour of creating the right atmosphere. The Red Queen (a hamming Helena Bonham Carter) with a blown up head & Matt Lucas in the twin Tweedle roles were noteworthy. That was it. It went all down-hill after that. Some interesting characters like the puffing caterpillar (Alan Rickman) and the Cheshire Cat (Stephen Fry) light up a few moments. But the story swiftly gets into action mode, focusing on a tale of tiff between the sisters, the Red Queen & the White Queen (a lost Anne Hathway with white hair & black brows) and ending the Wonderland story with a silly action sequence which seemed totally seemed out of place.
Sadly, I wasn't impressed by the Tea Party episode & many other scenes. But Johnny Depp yet again remains one of the few things to watch out for. He's an actor with a gifted versatility which helps him slip effortlessly into any role. The Mad Hatter wouldn't have been half of what it was without Depp, never mind the screen space allotted to him. This, combined with the beautiful imagery with all its tiny detailing by Burton helped fill the void created by the amateurish screenplay which was void of the wit that made Depp-Burton's animated Corpse Bride (2005) & writer Woolverton's Lion King (1994), an enjoyable experience. Thankfully, the 3-D didn't mar the experience of the beautiful images to a noticeable extent and in some places even enhanced the experience. My personal 3-D favourites were the scenes when Alice falls down the hole & the one when the Cheshire Cat appears out of thin air in the forest.
An action sequence to end a kiddie-flick? Come On! I still cant digest it. Maybe Burton lost sight of the child-adult line he wanted to cross-over like Christopher Nolan did with Batman. A messy final product ! But the scenes after Wonderland which completed the 1 Billion $ grossing movie are a face-saving grace and diluted the bad taste that I feared I would have.
6 + 1 / 10
(tempted to keep it at 6 out of 10 but a plus one for Director Burton's visual perception, writer Woolverton's fast paced story & Depp's performance which made it slightly more than a direct-from-book adaptation)
Dhobi Ghat (2010)
My Companion, My Mistress, My Life!
I was desperately tired of watching movies that I didn't like and not being able to criticize them fully because there was nothing better to praise. I agree, there are many reasons for people out there to not like Dhobi Ghat. I can even guess a few of them; no song / dance sequences, misleading title, lack of a spicy plot with twists and turns, no morals and so on. I'm writing this now to tell you about what I liked, rather loved & cherished in this movie. Kinda difficult for me to put into words. But here goes...
Dhobi Ghat had 4 distinct characters; A Painter (Aamir Khan), A Washer-boy (Prateik Babbar), A New-York banker (Monica Dogria) & A lonely Housewife (Kriti Malhotra). And I thoroughly fell in love with each one of them. I could relate myself with the foreign returned banker who was on a sabbatical and in search of love, the painter who shut himself off from the outside world after a (relationship) failure, the immigrant dhobi who aspired to become an actor, the lonely housewife who talked to a camera all day long but could never send the tapes to her loved ones. I could see the pain in their eyes, I could feel the beauty in my heart. There was a character of an old granny who never talked to people, probably representing the resilient spirit of the Mumbai city which remains unmoved but you know is watching you.
The four characters are beautifully intertwined in each other's lives. I read that people had a problem here. People were unable to accept the coincidence that 2 characters in the movie shared the same laundry-boy? I wonder, why? People have no problem when Leonardo can enter into someone's dreams (Inception) or when a million Rajni-robots (Endhiran) haunt a city! You can of course, argue. Those were fiction. This wasn't. But the screenplay here, never got to a point of absurdity or contrivance. The nature of these relationships, in fact formed the soul of the movie.
The Cinematography by first timer Tushar Kanti Ray was brilliantly picturised & can be said to be the real tribute that the movie has given to the city. The acoustics by Gustavo Santaolalla blended so well that I could hardly notice when it started playing in most of the scenes. Monica Dogra and Kriti Malhotra were charming and did a wonderful job for a debut performance. Prateik Babbar was one of the rare things that I liked in the clichéd Jaane Tu ya Jaane Na (apart from the talking poster and the horse-riding brothers). From his eye-brow movements & half grins to his amateurish smile...no-one could have done it better in this film! Seeing him, reminded me of Robert DeNiro in Taxi Driver & Casino. He has a wonderful way ahead of him provided he chooses the right roles. Aamir Khan as the painter did seem miscast at places but did a good job in some of the scenes. The way I see it, this movie could have gone wrong in so many places. But writer-director Kiran Rao never allowed that to happen in the no-break 90 min runtime.
This is just my opinion. I agree that this is not one of those commercial movies that people go with their friends to watch & may not prefer to spend their bucks on. But it was certainly one of those movies which made my mood better because it showed me the beauty that was around us and our failure to acknowledge it. We may have a cozy house in the rains, a mobile to talk, a vehicle to travel but we always find a reason to feel bad; be it a heated argument with the boss, a failed relationship or a place we could never find time to visit. The last scene made me realise it. But if you find the movie distasteful in the start, you are surely not going to be able to feel what I felt in the end.
9 / 10
Crazy Heart (2009)
The Dude Abides
I must admit here that I'm not into music. I don't have a problem with music, it's just that I'm not addicted & can only somewhat tell genres & instruments apart. And after Mickey Rourke got an Oscar nomination last year for The Wrestler, I thought this was just "another" similar film. Maybe that's the reason I avoided this film initially. But when I saw Jeff Bridges get his long-pending Oscar for this & read about all the other awards he got, I was ashamed & managed to catch up with it as soon as I could.
It narrates the story of good ol' country singer Bad Blake (Jeff Bridges) who manages to find inspiration in the evening days of his life after a tempestuous relationship with a young Journalist (Maggie Gyllenhaal). He's had his days of glory & can still compose an impromptu line or two to impress a girl. He's still famous among the old shopkeepers who probably used to hear him on the radio in their shops. But, the younger generation identifies with singer Tommy Sweet (Colin Farrell) who was trained by Bad & even sings songs written by him. Blake remains drunk & broke for most of the time now. It's not easy for such a man to give up his pride. But Blake has to. The phone call scene where he agrees to open for his protégé Tommy shows these struggling layers of pride and need for money. He cant refuse any of the work he gets from his loyal secretary (Paul Herman) and also from Tommy, who gratefully acknowledges him in every show he does.
Maybe this was a cliché but I found many points like the supportive friend (Robert Duvall), the acknowledging protégé, the understanding girlfriend etc. which many a times work against the helpless protagonist but actually help him out here. Also, in such movies, it tends to become boring but the music (Bingham & Burnett) doesn't allow that here. In fact, the best part of this feel-good movie (apart from Bridges) was obviously the music, which I enjoyed even without any idea of music especially Fallin' & Flyin', Hold on You, Somebody Else & (the Oscar winning) The Weary Kind. Jeff made it believable by lending his own peppery voice to many of the songs. The screenplay (by director Scott Cooper) based on a novel by the same name doesn't have a biographical story with a definite start-end. And it is never preachy with underlying morality or traumatic speeches at any point which made it impressive.
A career-defining role for Jeff Bridges, who will be remembered for this as he will be for The Big Lebowski.
As Maggie said in the movie - Is this what you call the "old country charm" ? You can say the same about the movie, I guess.
7 / 10
No One Killed Jessica (2011)
You Don't Mess with Jessica
"Has the price of a drink exceeded the value of a human life?" stutters Sabrina Lal (Vidya Balan) in an interview. I had gone with 3 friends. They commented that Balan dragged the dialogues in that scene. But to me, it couldn't have been done better.
This was certainly one of those movies where you had to take a stand. If you've watched the movie, you are bound to have an opinion on it's various aspects. You don't remain neutral. The last time I felt that, was during Udaan. I disagreed with many parts of Udaan but in the end I liked many parts of it, too. Incidentally, Amitabh Bhattacharya wrote the lyrics & Amit Trivedi composed for both movies. Maybe the music had something to do with creating the right moods in both movies. Udaan was calm outside but had turbulence within. NOKJ had unrest on the outside but had an underlying sense of calmness. Both movies had something to put forth through powerful performances. The movies stand out on their own but this subtle comparison was intriguing for me.
The movie starts of by a minister's son (Mohd. Zeeshan) who shoots Jessica (a charming debut by Myra Karn) in a bar. Thereafter, the struggle for justice is shown in 2 halves of the film through the lives of the 2 lead characters:- the serene sister Sabrina (Vidya Balan) & the no-nonsense journalist Meera (Rani Mukherjee). Sabrina is a next-door-girl who wears a shirt to a disco dance-party & doesn't have a boyfriend at 28. Meera is a journalist who goes to Kargil, leaves a guy half-way in their act when she gets a phone call & calls herself a bitch. Sabrina gives up after the first judgement. The minister goes on a pilgrimage to seek blessings after winning the case. Meera sees potential in the case and takes it up. People send SMS's to show their support. Rang De Basanti inspires a candle march. The system is questioned. The minister must resign. Sabrina stays away...
Basically, all that happens during a scandal. The story remains bland with no twists & turns. However, the dialogues & direction add the needed spice. All of them have been handled capably by Rajkumar Gupta. He has managed to get the best performance out of Rani Mukherjee in a long time. The editing (by Aarti Bajaj who knows her way through such films) was sharp. Cinematography (by the relatively new Anay Goswami) was convincing of the changing periods.
About Vidya Balan; Paa, Ishqiya, NOKJ...she is consistently getting better, irrespective of how the rest of her movie turns out. Do I daresay that she's the Indian Meryl Streep in the making? OK there, I said it!
A wonderful way to start the year, which is considered jinxed for Bollywood releases.
7 + 1 / 10
(plus one for the bold attempt at a movie & the clever imitation of Minister Sheila Dixit, President Abdul Kalam & PM Manmohan Singh)
The Social Network (2010)
The Curious Case of Mark Zuckerberg
Spellbindingly fast paced conversation between a college couple...
At the end of it - "I want you to know, from the bottom of my heart, that ... you're an asshole!"(silenced by the Indian censors) asserts the girlfriend, Jessica Albright (Rooney Mara) and ditches the guy. He's angry & confused but doesn't know how to react. Returns to his hostel room, gets drunk, bitches about her bra size & family name in his blog and finally designs a site, Facemash.com to rate "hotness" of girls from different colleges. The site gets around 22,000 clicks in around 2 hours which crashes his (Harvard) college network & gets him a 6 months academic probation. This hurt & confused Computer-nerd-genius is Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg, outstandingly self-restrained), the youngest billionaire & founder of Facebook.
I'd read that a film was being made based on a book on the Facebook founder but I knew about the director being David Fincher only after it released. I was more than excited for a Fincher film and these initial 10 minutes proved my enthusiasm right. Then on, it kept me right on edge. The story is effectively narrated through the progression of two simultaneous lawsuits: First one by the Winklevoss twins (both played cleverly by Armie Hammer, thanks to digital trickery) on Mark & Eduardo Savarin (Andrew Garfield) & the Second one by Eduardo on Mark. Another highlight of this movie was Justin Timberlake playing celebrity Sean Parker who brought a great impact on the music industry by starting sites such as Napster, Plaxo & also seemingly inspired Mark to grow Facebook. The characters have a definitive nature of their own & the cast of actors comfortably fill their shoes.
Based on the book "The Accidental Billionaires" by Ben Mezrich, the screenplay (Aaron Sorkin) is carefully filled witty & humorous monologues, twists & turns as well as heavy-handed fast paced dialogues which keep the viewer engaged throughout the 2 hour runtime and works on many different layers. This being a movie about the designing of a website, there was a great danger of it going bonkers. Surprisingly, it is filled with computer details which it carefully skims over (just like Syriana, A Beautiful Mind) and saves the layman, the trouble of grasping technical details. As for the ending, it left me satisfied in a way, it winded it's way upto there.
Director Fincher (of Fight Club fame) has a unique kick-ass style of his own (like all great directors) with respect to his narration and the way he brings about the end without compromising on the detailing and story-line. Collaborating with his regular Cinematographer (Jeff Cronenweth) & Editors (Baxter & Wall) seems to have been a good decision as the technical detailing of the film was brilliant. The melodious soundtracks blended into the scenes and completed the "feel" of the movie. I managed to catch up with an interview where Zuckerberg himself gave a nod to the casting, costumes, acting and other details, although he didn't agree to certain cinematic liberties taken. (He said he didn't start Facebook due to a failed relationship but agreed that those were the exact same shirts he used to wear!)
This movie could easily have been the run of the year at the Academy. But against Inception, this one should hopefully end up with more than a few nominations. I hope it at least bags an Oscar for an adapted screenplay (and squeeze in for Best Director too, please!).
9 / 10
(minus one, because my 10/10 belongs to Fincher's Fight Club)
Enthiran (2010)
Even a million copies cant face the real Rajnikanth...Mind It!
"Who is this? Looks like your twin brother!" exclaims the surprised mother of a long haired & bearded Dr. Vaseegaran (Rajnikanth, trying to be ever-fresh). "No. This is my work of several years, a Robot" he explains, returning home after those several years. This humanoid machine introduces itself in terms of it's speed & memory. The mother christens him "Chitti".
He is introduced to the world at a science meeting by Dr.Vasi. Chitti knows all the sciences, languages, dances, music, martial arts and other things worth knowing from around the world. Everything but human feelings which couldn't be programmed even with Artificial Intelligence.
But nothing is impossible when Rajnikanth is the hero. He succeeds in this endeavour too and the rest of the movie is all about the (disastrous) consequences of creating a machine with emotions. A cliché, that is. The only redeeming moments of this film end within the first part. Towards the interval & after it, you somewhat know how the movie will progress and end after 2 hours. So the only things which can compel you to keep your seat warm, remain the editing & CG effects that are (as promised) superior to any other Indian film. This is also touted to be the costliest Indian film to date, at an estimated Rs. 180 crore which supposedly doesn't include Rajnikanth's fees (who is rumoured to take at least Rs. 40-50 crore per movie) as he is said to have refused his fees after the debacle of his previous venture(Kuselan).
The heroine does have a role in taking the story forward. It's said the role was written for Preity Zinta and offered to many other heroines before it finally reached Aishwarya Rai Bachhan (Who's gonna ask her for acting skills?). Film-makers (Indian and worldwide) have successfully realised that Aishwarya Rai has a face which can convince people to part with their hard earned money and watch her smile & dance for 2-3 hours on the big screen. Danny in a stereotyped villain role was certainly not convincing. I missed the presence of Late actor Raghuvan here. R.I.P
This movie dubbed & released worldwide seems to have been received very well by Rajni fans as well as people who are not used to seeing Rajni's movies. Yes, I actually heard of loads of people(personal friends as well as through the net) who don't see Rajni movies but were mighty impressed by his style. The way I see it, there are still millions of fans who expect their heroes (like Rajnikanth, Vijaykanth, Salman Khan) to enter a scene with style & pack some punches into the bad guys. Rajni has grown old & so has the cliché concept. So they used a Rajni-like Robot to justify the action scenes.
Agreed, the movie was an entertainer throughout the approx 150 min runtime. That is, if you promise to not use too much of your brains. You have seen how it started. You have an idea how it must end. What remains to lookout for is how the story winds its course. Some people may disagree with me on this but in my opinion for all the CG effects, Endhiran(the Tamil titled version of Robot for tax-free ticket) had more of a story to tell than even the amateurish Avatar did!
6/10
(plus one for attempting to use more of advanced technology in Indian film-making)
Goodfellas (1990)
A Rat in the "Hill"
An enthusiastic adolescent stares longingly out of his bedroom window at the gangsters hangout, dreaming to be a gangster... Bunks school, works with them and eventually grows up to be one of them. This boy narrating his story is half Irish, half Italian, New York based mobster, Henry Hill(Ray Liotta). He is lashed by his father but he complains to the mob bosses who help him out. His mother looks at him in a suit and shrieks "You look like a gangster!" This scene marks his transformation into a "WiseGuy", one among the Goodfellas. How he grew up surrounded by the mafia and worked and lived off them for 3 decades forms the basis of this film.
Based on the book "Wise Guy" by reporter Nicholas Pileggi (to whom the real Henry Hill reportedly gave his true-life account), whose also penned the screenplay with Director Scorsese, the 146 min movie successfully packs 3 decades of mafia life without compromising on the pace or the details, thanks to the brilliant direction of Martin Scorsese and the editing(Thelma Schoonmaker).
The beauty of this movie was it was full of violence, murder, theft, smuggling, substance abuse, adultery, profanity and other unsocial acts, all of which were spoken of very casually in the same breath with no feeling of remorse or guilt. It delved deep into the subject of the power of Mafia but it never advocated their use or glorified it. Neither was it a typical moral bedtime story that are narrated to children. This is effectively expressed by the gradual change in the character of Hill's wife, Karen Hill(Lorraine Bracco) through her narration. She initially feels as uncomfortable as any outsider would feel with the movie's theme but slowly gets absorbed just as the viewer into the mafia lives and in certain places, even makes you feel a certain sympathy for the lead character and other people but leaves a stranger taste when you realise that all their sufferings are well deserved. They are casual with their criminal acts but deep down, they know they are wrong. And as Roger Ebert said, they know they are guilty, not because they did wrong but know that they want to do the wrong again.
The music & tempo("Rags to Riches", "Pretend you don't see her" and so on) seem hand picked for the occasions, perfectly echoing the mood of the scenes. In addition to this, the screenplay of some scenes(which I heard was mostly improvised by the actors, spot on) stand out for their sense of sheer brutal-ism while some for their humour while some others explaining a subtle point or thought or a transition in character.
The acting cast comprising of Robert DeNiro(Jim Conway), Joe Pesci(Tommy DeVito), Paulie Cicero(Paul Sorvino), Ray Liotta(Henry Hill), Lorraine Bracco(Karen Hill) ...the list goes on....put an earnest performance. We also have some interesting small-time roles played by significant actors - Ed Stacks (Samuel Jackson), old Vinnie(Martin's father, Charles Scorsese), Tommy's mother(Martin's mother, Catherine Scorsese), Diane(Kate Wallach, daughter of legendary Eli Wallach of Good, Bad, Ugly fame) and so on...
I admit to first seeing this movie in bits and parts(as I heard it was one of Scorsese's best) as and when it was telecast on Television and wasn't very impressed but decided to hold my view until later. But when I got a chance to see it from start to end, I was impressed and mesmerized by this piece of art.
The primary goal of movie is to keep a viewer engaged through its runtime and leave the viewer with a feeling of having experienced a story which GoodFellas successfully does.
So, here we have a gangster movie ranking (almost) equivalent to the likes of Godfather.
9 / 10
(minus one, not because the movie was flawed, but as I respect the 10 stars for a once (or twice) in a lifetime movie - and I have chosen Fight Club for now)
Rakhta Charitra 2 (2010)
Ram Gopal Verma ka 2nd Charitra
Message on the first screen: Characters and story are fictitious. No resemblance to reality.
Message on the second screen: Based on a True Story
A "controversial" film??
An eye for an eye and the enemies bleed. Folks are slaughtered & smashed, blood banks are robbed of their capital...Editing and a Splash sound does the job.The (badly) edited first 20 minutes or so are effectively used for Recap of RC-1 ensuring that viewing of the prequel is not a necessary criterion for watching this movie. Starting off on the car journey that began at the end of RC-1, RC-2 marks the Hindi debut of the talented Tamil actor Surya, who must kill Pratap Ravi to complete his revenge. Pratap killed Surya's father who had killed Pratap's father. The Circle of life, moved them all. Pratap is now a respectable political citizen. But success gets you high. People fail to recognise the principles & goals that pushed them to that height. This remarkable change in Pratap's character is well written & portrayed. Pratap wasn't responsible for many of the killings but Surya's quest isn't unreasonable either. The background score pitches... "Paap Punya ki kya paribhasha"(What defines good and evil?) The story has the potential to stand out very well.
But does it? You know the answer as soon as you read the question. The question arises why? Even with actors as Surya(Suryabhan Reddy), Viveik Oberoi(Pratap Ravi), Sudeep(DCP Anand Mohan) and a decent screenplay, the movie is greatly distracted by the editing work. GREATLY! The approx 2 hour runtime could have been brought down by at least half an hour by playing some of the slooowww pre-interval scenes alone, at normal speed. The only relief being that this time around, the role of the cranky old narrator's voice(I heard it was director RGV himself whose voice was modulated!) was cut down, compared to its prequel.
On the editing & camera-work, the least said, the better. It was bad this time. It was an attempt, a different one. Too much use of close-up shots of gangster stubbles and nostril-hairs, 180 or 360 degree turns, shaky handwork during intense scenes, shadow-filming... Some of them were distracting, unlike in the prequel. The camera, as usual, rotates a full 360 degree or is found slanting behind some stairs. In one particular car chase scene, the camera rotates a 180 degrees and the half minute scene is hilariously shown upside down.The loud background score succeeds in charging up the intensity of action sequences. The cinematography was convincing enough.
Viveik Oberoi had a comparatively smaller role but made the most of it. The main focus shifted to Surya Sivakumar, whose full potential lay unused and was marred by many of the slow-dragging scenes attempting to give a depth to his acting. He overcame the language barrier by speaking not more than 3-4 Hindi words(which he himself doesn't fluently follow) at a time. Abhimanyu Singh(Bukka Reddy) who stole the show in the prequel spent the two minutes of his screen space bashing up a screeching guy. Actor Sudeep(DCP Anand Mohan) who understands the power of silence in having a greater impact then contorted facial expressions or long lines of dialogues, stood out with his calm performance.Veteran Shatrugan Sinha(as actor-politician Shivaji Rao, without his trademark toothbrush moustache) suited the character perfectly but as such did not occupy too much time on screen. The focus on the characters of lady actors (Zarina Wahab, Radhika Apte, Priyamani) was more, compared to the prequel.
RGV is a director ready to experiment. He wont make fun of homosexuality in his movies or make his actors lip synch to a song. He's ready to keep trying knowing fully well that the outcome(commercial or critical) is not in anyone's hands. He's an earnest story teller who has yet a lot to learn about what works in a movie and what spoils it. He's an unabashed rebel of the Indian film industry(just like his protégé, Anurag Kashyap, who is way beyond most Indian directors), and that shows in his work.
Never lose faith in the man who made Satya. The best of RGV is yet to come. RC is not that masterpiece but is a commendable stepping stone.
5/10
(minus one for the attempt at editing and camera work, which was terrific at places, but overdone & marred the experience)
Rakhta Charitra (2010)
Ram Gopal Verma ki Charitra
Message on the first screen: Characters and story are fictitious. No resemblance to reality.
Message on the second screen: Based on a True Story.
A "controversial" film??
A man is chased by knifing-gangsters and his blood is splashed across a Gandhi statue.A cranky old voice introduces this bloody story about Anandpur(I heard it was director RGV himself whose voice was modulated!). Possibly RGV was impressed with the voice to such an extent that he chose to irritatingly play around with the narrative voice which spoils any impact you think the movie could have had.
A political rift resulting in the murder of a scheduled caste(*beeped* by Indian censors) leader sets off this revenge saga. The revenge seeking elder son(Sushant Singh) is murdered too, forcing the younger son(Viveik Oberoi as Pratap Ravi) to place himself in Michael Corleone's shoes. An eye for an eye and the enemies bleed. Folks are slaughtered & smashed, blood banks are robbed of their capital...Editing and a Splash sound does the job. Camera rotates a full 360 degree or is found behind a cart wheel or in some bushes near the steps. The voice cranks along...
Pratap succeeds in reaching the top of the hooligan-ladder and warns other hooligans of the state to stop their illicit activities. The movie ends with a trailer of the sequel(which didn't release on the promised date) which promises a tiff between Pratap & Suryabhan Reddy(marking the Hindi debut of Tamil actor Surya).
The loud background score & the lyrics succeed in charging up the intensity of action sequences(A wedding song with a dancing Sukhwinder Singh was not needed, but didn't mar the overall movie-feel). On the editing & camera-work, the least said, the better. It wasn't bad or good. It was an attempt, a different one. Close-up shots of gangster stubbles and nostril-hairs, 360 degree turns, shaky handwork during intense scenes, shadow-filming... How effective, I cannot say. The cinematography was convincing enough.
Acting wise, Viveik Oberoi did a good job of his 2-phased character(the rebel & the politician). But it was Abhimanyu Singh(Bukka Reddy) who stole the show! The perfect Telugu-politicio. I don't remember being more shuddered by any other movies' rape scenes or by the mere commanding presence of a character as when Abhimanyu entered a scene. He has the potential to go a long way providing he chooses to work with the right directors and stories. Another actor to look out for was the blink-and-miss appearance of Sudeep(DCP Anand Mohan, with more screen space in the sequel) who understands the power of silence in having a greater impact then contorted facial expressions or long lines of dialogues. Veteran Shatrugan Sinha(as actor-politician Shivaji Rao, without his trademark toothbrush moustache) suited the character perfectly but fell short on the dialogue delivery in some scenes. The characters of lady actors (Zarina Wahab, Radhika Apte) were not written in depth and had a negligible role in taking the story forward.
RGV is a director ready to experiment. He wont make fun of homosexuality in his movies or make his actors lip synch to a song. He's ready to keep trying knowing fully well that the outcome(commercial or critical) is not in anyone's hands. He's an earnest story teller who has yet a lot to learn about what works in a movie and what spoils it. He's an unabashed rebel of the Indian film industry(just like his protégé, Anurag Kashyap, who is way beyond most Indian directors), and that shows in his work.
Never lose faith in the man who made Satya. The best of RGV is yet to come. RC is not that masterpiece but is a commendable stepping stone.
6/10
Phas Gaye Re Obama (2010)
After the Recession...
A gangster relieving himself...camera moves up...zipper closed in time...Phew! Points a gun at a blindfolded groom but fires his own hand...Bad Luck. Kidnapping business not going good for "Bhai"Sahab(Sanjay Mishra, convincing) and gang(Manu Rishi, Amit Sial and 2 others). Reason...People cant pay up ransom due to Recession!
Entry of NRI Om Shastri(Rajat Kapoor, controlled & in top-form) who has received a Bank notice to clear his $100,000 debt within a month. He returns to India from New Jersey to sell his ancestral property & gets kidnapped. This is where the Movie begins...
Unfortunately, this is the only place where PGRO falls short...the initial pace, clearly a fault of the screenplay rather than direction. The initial scenes were certainly needed to provide for character development but a crisper editing before the interval could have elevated the movie to an altogether different level. It takes around the interval to climb the slope but certainly gives the promised thrill, thereafter. My only fear during the movie was that such an original story should not have a sudden or an over the top or an ending leaving you in bad taste. Thankfully, it did not!
On the acting front, Rajat Kapoor was spot on. The supporting casting was very well done too; Manu Rishi as the small-time gangster(Ani) inspiring his gang with Obama-speeches & Sanjay Mishra as a broke gangster with a dream to become a politician. Neha Dhupia as a man-hating Sculptor-Gangster (Munni with no Zandu balm!) tried to look her part but was overshadowed in her comparatively smaller role. Sadly, Amol "Bhope-Bhau" Gupte (Kaminey) got a smaller screen space, too but did his best. The slightly lower budget cinematography as well lack of songs (except one in the credits) enhanced the narration process. The humour in the writing bounced about from crude(interpretation of "Yes, we can") to good(Receipts for kidnapping ransom, English coaching scene) but didn't distract the storyline.
PGRO is a good example of what a good original script can do in the hands of a capable director(both by Subhash Kapoor) without an A-list star cast and Music/Dance sequences and high budget props.
Me and my friend were planning for Rakta Charitra 2 but landed for this as there were no shows for the former. I was greatly apprehensive of taking the risk of watching a movie I knew nothing about, on first-day-first-show (especially after the outrageously disastrous Raavan...shudder!).
I know this one wont be bothered by the Luv-SOrryyy & Ud-Ud-Bangg crowd. It's not a deep thought provoking or ROFL-hilarious drama either. But for once, I'm glad I took the chance.
Sense & Simplicity
7/10
Khichdi: The Movie (2010)
Marriage for Schmucks
The Movie of Schmucks kicks off as a narration of a series of family incidents at a kids campfire, thus justifying the transition of episodes to a movie. A family of Naive Schmucks in today's world? Satish Shah's Introduction cameo (as a God visiting each house to distribute "Sweets of Intellect") in an engaging scene explains it all. "No one can face God, but even God cant face them" Agreed..Point Noted!
Next, we have Hansa's (Supriya Pathak, "Over-the-Top" Schmuck) father dying(??) & hoping that his son Himanshu's (Producer J.D.Majethia, "Cook" Schmuck) wish be fulfilled. The Death Ceremony involves singing parodies of Bollywood chart busters & no remorse; it is here that the movie stands out, an unconventional death scene for a Hindi film, avoiding the usual set of associated emotions, that would have seemed out of place anyway. Bravo!
The Schmucks set out to find a match for the "Cook" Schmuck which pretty much makes up the rest of the Movie. Eventually, the girl-next-door(Kirti Kulhari, "Adorable" Schmuck) falls for him, marriage is arranged but the movie cant finish so soon. Hero single, not ready to mingle?
The pot-holed screen play(Director Aatish Kapadia) intentionally/ unintentionally manages to draw a subtle line between poking fun & pulling leg. The remorse-less death ceremony, the fact that Punjabis have no masculinity or femininity with respect to their names,legendary love stories incomplete without strife; they pulled the legs of the many mannerisms of society without hurting any sentiments. Gets on your nerves, maybe? But that's an achievement, indeed! Also, a Modern-Day story with a Moustached Lead Hero, side-characters seeking for trouble in a Love Story instead of uniting the Lovers makes for an unusual comic premise. The feat is pulled off with panache. Other Actors, Anang Desai("Sensible" Schmuck), sister-in-law Nimisha Vakharia("Leadership" Schmuck) & Rajeev Mehta("The REAL Schmuck") add to the spice of this brain-no-longer-in-your-knee story. Cinematography(Sanjay Jadhav) was vibrant & colorful. Editing(Hemal Kathari) & Background Score(Raju Singh) had hardly much of a job!
Worth mentioning points here are the lyrics & placing of the song "Bhosale Market" which confirms the fact that the Movie is indeed pulling the leg of the conventional RomComs. The plot which carefully branches into subplots & side-incidents & jokes (PJs all the way!!) doesn't stray off too much(they brought in an overheated Farah Khan for what?) into satire or romance & as such ensures no break in its continuity. Khichdi defines its own genre between satire, romance, drama & slapstick comedy. By far, one of the few movies which kept the audiences in the halls up to the end of the credits(which were worth watching)
The trailer doesn't promise High Expectations...It says "Khichdi, Now on the Big Screen".Now, I was never glued to TV sitcoms, so could I watch Khichdi? The answer is a loud "Yes"
Hansa: Khichdi ?? What is...??
Praful: Khichdi, Hansa....
Kheech->Pull
Khich-Di -> Pulled it
Yeah, Khichdi team, you have pulled it off well!
6 and +1 for "Bhosale Market" song & a different attempt at humour
Overall 7 out of 10
Shutter Island (2010)
"Scorsese"ter Island: A Pleasant change from traditional Scorsese-ism
At 68 years of age, Director Martin does something which old folks usually don't....He re-invents himself with a theme which he has never attempted before...A mix of a Thriller & a Dark-ish Horror with a slight touch of Character Development(which is Scorsese's field) with the result that the audience get to see Shutter Island!
The Movie starts off with ex-soldier & detective Teddy(Di-Caprio) & his partner Chuck(Mark Buffalo), sailing off to an unknown Island, where Criminally Insane Prisoners are treated in a mental hospital situated on an island, reserved entirely for them.
Ben Kingsley, as Dr. Cawley, the in-charge-Psychiatrist, after a long time, finds a worthy character to play and does a good job of it. Mark Buffalo as the partner was convincing. The Editing & Cinematography was convincing of a 1954 year-period & the existence of a Shutter Island! The pulsing SoundTrack during the suspense / intense scenes as well as the supporting cast of other patients & the security officers helped to pull the story forward for the breath-taking & the unpredictable twists during the final forty-five minutes the movie.
Director Scorsese keeps a strong hold on the movie pace, slowing it down at places & then picking up pace as well as taking care of all the small details(which become evidently clear when viewed again), thus keeping you engaged throughout the 2 hour plus runtime.
In the end, even with convincing performances from the cast, it was more of the writer Kalongridis's & Director Scorsese's Baby and may require more than one viewing for a complete & satisfying grasp as it is bound to leave you simply baffled at the end!
Vive' La Scorsese! Continue Forever what you've been doing... \m/