Review : Hulla

Posted on November 12, 2008 by amodini

hullaRating : Above average (3.8/5)
Genre : Drama /Comedy
Year : 2008
Running time : 1 hours 50 minutes
Director : Jaideep Verma
Cast : Sushant Singh, Rajat Kapoor, Vrajesh Hirjee, Kartikadevi Rane, Mandeep Mazumdaar, Chandrachood Karnik,
Kid rating : PG

HULLA : SIMPLE PLOT AND SUBTLE HUMOR = GOOD FILM


Although Hindi cinema has come a long way from the usual boy-meets-girl routine, there are still few films made on small subjects. Hulla is one such film, quite a pioneer really, and it’s subject ? Noise. The noise at night. To put it precisely, the noise of the night watchman whistling. The entire film revolves around this noise, this “hulla” which keeps our hero awake and un-rested at night, and the effect this has on his life.

Sushant Singh plays Raj Puri, your average yuppie, married to pretty lady Abha (Kartika), both working and recently having bought a new flat in a housing society. Raj is a stock-broker, and busy and stressed out during the day. However when he returns tired to his apartment in the evening he finds no rest, because of the watchman’s whistles. This whistling apparently doesn’t bother anyone else in the building. Initially Raj tries peaceful methods like bribing the watchman (Chandrachur Karnik) to get him to not whistle as often, or to whistle far away his flat. However the watchman is answerable to the building society’s secretary Janardhan (Rajat Kapoor), who along with other occupants of the building thinks that Raj is making a mountain out of a molehill.

Raj finally gets desperate for some peace, and gets aggressive, calling in the police, much to his wife’s embarrassment. He gets irritable, paranoid and does badly at work. His comfortably happy life is now going to pieces . . .

I like the film conceptually – the idea is quite novel for a Hindi film, especially when desi audiences seem to only want films with pelvis-crunching item numbers. Anything remotely requiring brain-power and people can’t get their “entertainment”. This film comes in the “Bheja Fry” genre, if you can call “Bheja Fry” a genre – the kind of film which is based upon human quirks and fetishes and the effects those quirks and fetishes have on the rest of us mere mortals.

Jaideep Verma directs this film with a reasonably firm hand. In a film which is based on a very small happening, getting the details right is of the essence. Verma works hard to give us the 360 degree view – we get little insights into the character’s lives. We see Raj and Abha and their problems, Raj’s prejudiced in-laws and his demanding boss. And we also see Janardhan and his carping wife in their one-room apartment, and his ailing business. We are also introduced to the pitiful figure of the watchman, a stooped old man, with bad knees and failing eyesight, kow-towing to Janardhan for fear of losing his one source of income. Everyone, it seems, has their own compulsions, and you can’t help sympathizing with them.

The cast of characters in this film is impressive. Sushant Singh is an actor who’s shown his mettle before (Sehar), and while in this film he departs from his usual “villain” roles to play a tragic-comic character, he does quite well, save for a few over-done scenes. Rajat Kapoor is another very fine actor, and he too plays something other than his usual, suave self – Janardhan, a middle-class, un-gentrified, grey-haired babu. Kartika Rane as Abha is quite effective, as is Vrajesh Hirjee playing Raj’s colleague and confidant at work. And the actress who played Janardhan’s wife (I think it was Mazumdar) was magnificent.

The film is not without it’s problems however – it drags and gets repetitive. I wish that it had more scenes to give Raj’s character depth, and moved at a faster pace. But that said, it’s still a nicely nuanced piece of work, a decent film with a simple plot and subtle humor. Well worth a watch.

For the parents, this is an almost kid-safe film, except for one intimate, love-making scene, which earns it a PG rating.

Posted in 2008, bollywood, drama, family-friendly, humor, rating-PG, recommended | 1 Comment

Review : Fashion

Posted on November 10, 2008 by amodini

fashion
Rating : Above average (3.8/5)
Genre : Drama
Year : 2008
Running time : 2 hours 40 minutes
Director : Madhur Bhandarkar
Cast : Priyanka Chopra, Raj Babbar, Mugdha Godse, Kangana Ranaut, Harsh Chhaya, Samir Soni, Kitu Gidwani, Arbaaz Khan, Ashwin Mushran, Chitrashi Rawat, Arjun Bawa
Kid rating : PG-13

FASHION : CLICHED BUT INERESTING

This film is quite a surprise, in that it features Priyanka Chopra, in a meaty, acting-oriented role. So far Priyanka has acted in films which pretty much ask 2 things of her : look pretty, and look dumb (i.e.; leave the thinking to the macho hero). She has THAT act down pat, so I was much surprised to see that she did quite well in this film too.

Fashion is your regular Bhandarkar expose, this time of the fashion world, the models, and the lifestyle of the ramp-walking glitterati. It chronicles the ambition of small-town girl Meghana Mathur. Not that Chandigarh is a small-town really, but apparently it’s value system is. So Meghana faces the standard opposition from the parents, or rather her father (Raj Babbar) when she wants to become a model. Her mother, played by Kiran Joneja is shown as being more supportive.

Anyway, Meghana refuses to listen to dear old Dad and hotfoots it to Mumbai, where the parental connections have ensured her a residence with some family friends. Meghana is ambitious and holds onto her dream with tenacity. Along the way she makes friends (a struggling male model) and enemies (super-model Shonali played by Kangana). Success comes, but at a price, and when Meghana realises that she’s hit rock-bottom and burnt her bridges there is almost no one left to turn to . . .

Priyanka is the poster-girl for glamor, so it is quite fitting that she play the lead. Kangana Ranaut, very model-like too, appears as model Shonali, who’s too entrenched in her drug-prone habits, to ever reclain the top spot in the modelling world again. She does good, as she always seems to in such manic-depressive roles. Mugdha Godse who plays Janet Sequiera, Meghana’s street-smart, model friend who didn’t quite make it, plays her part quite realistically. After many years, we see Kitu Gidwani in a short role as smart, sleek Anisha – the owner of a fashion agency. And there is also Arbaz Khan, the king of the fashion of the world, who takes Meghana under his wing.

Everyone is quite gay in this film, and I mean that literally. From Rohit, the assistant designer who helps Meghana take her first baby steps in the world of fashion, to Rahul Arora, the big-time fashion designer who concocts a marriage of convenience to keep nosy society at bay, the men of the fashion industry are quite queer (straight men have no creativity, huh ?). The women are hard-nosed, it’s a dog-eat-dog world, you’re up one day and down the next. The film is peppered with cliches – there are the drugs, the easy lapses of morality, and the air-kissing. Even so Bhandarkar manages to tell the story well, and without overtly trying to shock or sensationalize – something which a less talented director might easily have done.

This is a good film – it’s not spectacular. Any by that I mean that while it does keep you interested in the happenings of the film, you don’t feel very much for the main protagonist, Meghana. And that is partly due to the fact that Meghana’s character does not have adequate depth – yes, she is believable enough in her fresh-from-Punjab bangs, and her salwar-kameezed portfolio, but could have been better sketched. A finer actresss might have gone the extra mile, but Priyanka, although doing a commendable job, has as yet to hone her skills.

Please note that the subject matter is on the sad (if not depressive) side, and does not lend itself to being the Friday night entertainer. If you’re in a sombre mood, and ready for a thoughtful watch, this will probably interest you.

Films like this : If you liked this film you will also probably like
– Page 3
– Traffic Signal

Posted in 2008, bollywood, drama, rating-PG13, recommended | 1 Comment

Review : Ugly aur pagli

Posted on October 24, 2008 by amodini

Rating : Poor(2/5)
Genre : Romantic Comedy
Year : 2008
Running time : 2 hrs
Director : Sachin Khot
Cast : Mallika Sherawat, Ranvir Shourey, Bharati Achrekar, Zeenat Aman, Payal Rohtagi

UGLY AUR PAGLI : VERY, VERY UGLY !

This film is surreal. And not in a good way. I accept that in this world, people behave in different ways, have different modes of reasoning/thinking and at times actions can be unfathomable – i.e.; is this person really nutty, or am I just not getting the drift ? Which is all fine and good – to each his/her own. However, if you actually are planning to make a movie featuring the above unfathomable actions, I have one word for you – don’t.

Watching this film, I had to ponder about whether it had, you know, like a deeper meaning. After 2 hours, I thought not. It tried to make believe that love is preceeded by pain – physical pain that is, which includes lots of slapping (by an almost stranger). Also that people who ill-treat you, really, really love you, you know, somewhere deep down underneath (although it’s so dark in there, who can really tell ?).

Pseudo-arty-sharty film, anyone ?

Touted as a kooky, romantic comedy in the teasers, U and P isn’t really one. It does have the whole twisted-love-in-anguish thing going on though. Kabir (Shourie) is an engineering student, who hasn’t passed his engineering exams in many years, but still struggles on. He meets beautiful Kuhu (Mallika), who’s then in a pretty sozzled state. No matter, the knight in shining armor promptly rescues her. Again and again. And all he ever gets in return in bad attitude. And so it goes . . . for a very long time indeed.

The film revolved around this theme of the doormat Kabir being trod upon by insensitive Kuhu again and again, until it was very hard to take. Sure, there are sad stories, but I didn’t sign up for one, looking at the trailer.

I can see what this film was trying to do, ie; develop into a delicate, ethereal vision of a film which would have us all wiping away tears of gentle understanding, and oohing and aahing at the subtle intricacies of love. Maybe “My Sassy Girl”, the Korean movie upon which U & P is based, is such a film (I haven’t seen it). U and P definitely isn’t. So what’s missing ? Here’s a list :

1. Romance : You thought romance was some delicate flower blooming in a hitherto untouched human heart ? Poor sod, you ! It’s not. As per this director, it’s someone trying to make a guy wear a woman’s shoes (literally) and having him drive a seat-less bicycle .

2. Chemistry between the lead pair : Mallika and Shorey come together like chalk and cheese. Leave alone as a romantic couple these two should not even be cast in the same film.

3. Comedy : Nyet, nada !

4. Character development : Mallika’s character Kuhu was one-dimensional. Yes, the character was obnoxious and over-bearing. Yes, we do have a reason given to explain away her abusive ways, but minus all the supporting infrastructure, this role falls flat. Another film, Everybody says I’m fine had the heroine exhibiting similarly surreal behavior, but she had a pretty believable reason. Shorey is a fine actor, so I’ve got to blame it on the screenplay for botching up the job so bad.

And here’s something which almost made the above list : the screenplay. There is indeed a screenplay – ie; there is dialogue and action. However it misses out on major ingredients like redeeming qualities in protagonists, and developing points of interest. A romance hinges around two likeable characters, and the ability to get the audience so interested in them, that they are rooting on the two bcoming a twosome. Kuhu and Kabir are pretty unlikeable, Kuhu is downright nasty, whereas Kabir is too door-matty for his own good. One hopes that Kabir gets as far as possible from Kuhu as possible, not the other way around. In other words, I care 2 hoots about these people – therefore blissful love ? Not happening, atleast in this movie.

And the songs were something else – loud and outlandish, with very few contextual moorings. If you think of the film as this fragile, blooming bud (which it was not – I can’t seem to get away from the floral analogy), the songs were the nasty little boy who stomped all over it. What gives ?

One tries to not be too mean while dissing a film, but folks, here’s fair warning – this is a ghastly, ghastly film. Keep away.

Posted in 2008, bollywood, drama, rating-PG, romance | 1 Comment

Review : Ramchand Pakistani

Posted on October 14, 2008 by amodini

Rating : Above Average (3.8/5)
Genre : Drama
Year : 2008
Running time : 1 hour 45 minutes
Director : Mehreen Jabbar
Cast : Nandita Das, Syed Fazal Hussein, Rashid Faroqi, Maria Wasti
Kid rating : PG 13

RAMCHAND PAKISTANI : HEART-WRENCHING DRAMA !

Ramchand Pakistani is about a lost little boy. The boy is a Dalit Hindu, of a tribe in the Thar desert of Pakistan. Ramchand, for that’s his name, is angry at his mother Champa (Das), and in a fit of pique, such as the very young have, walks away from his village Bhimra, and across the India-Pakistan border. There he, and his father Shankar (Rashid Farooqui), who comes after him, are captured by the Indian border patrol and jailed. Their fellow detainees are mostly people who like them, have walked unwittingly across the border (what is it but large white rocks placed at regular distances ?) and have remained incarcerated for many years, some losing their minds and others losing hope. Amid despair, red tape and the bureaucracy of two nations almost at war, Ramchand and his father remain hopeful . . .

It is a simple story, detailing lives lived in waiting. While Ramchand and his father wait to be released, Champa waits for her son and husband to return home. They are all innocent people, swallowed and chewed up by the monster of suspicion. They are helpless, and at the mercy of the state. The state is personified by well-meaning, if straight-jacketed male prison wardens, and one female warden, who is made responsible for Ramchand’s education. She sort-of mothers the hapless child, although will not touch him because of his caste. Ramchand weathers his time in jail, among adults (he is the only child) mopping floors, learning to read, and somewhat indulged by fellow prisoners.

Syed Fazal Hussain plays the 7 year old Ramchand, with an innocence and naivete that strums the heartstrings. He is a mischievous little child who won’t go to the rudimentary village school, sasses his mother, and demands the full cup of chai that his father receives. Hussein puts in a finely nuanced performance, and pretty much carries the film. His mother’s role, essayed beautifully by Nandita Das, is of a rural woman, who waits for years for the return of her husband and son. Distraught as she is, she refuses to give up hope, even when everyone else (including her husband’s brother) does. Das, clad in colorful clothes and arm-lengths of bangles, masterfully underplays her character.

Farooqi is Shankar, a poor farmer, living in poverty. He is also the father caught in a no-win situation, watching his life wasting away amid the narrow confines of a prison cell. He is anguished, sorrowful, and at times angry, at the drone-like officials, who won’t let them return home, and at his son, who started it all. Maria Wasti, who looks a little like Sameera Reddy, plays the prison warden, and does well.

Mehreen Jabbar does an adequate job of direction. The storyline is fairly straight-forward, and emotion is built up by delving into details of village life, prison life, and the travails of both. Whereas the lonely Champa cleans, cooks, and works in the fields and refuses to move from the village when other villagers move in search of work, Ramchand pines for his mother, and cannot understand why the prison guards won’t let him go home. He also learns many new things in the prison. There is some education, yes, but there is also a worldliness, an introduction to urban life (such as it is within the confines of the jail).

This is not a fast-paced film, and the characters are built up carefully. We feel for the protagonists because they are the common man, poor and desperate, wanting only to be free, but kept captive for crimes they haven’t committed. It is the case of the little man against the bloated, bureaucratic state, a state which keeps innocent people hostage because of mere suspicion.

The characters are also very “human”, in the sense that they have their own little quirks. The female prison warden, is partial to Sridevi films, which she lets Ramchand watch, and he then, just stepping into adolescence, develops a crush on her (the warden). Ramchand’s mother, Champa, alone, although living with her brother-in-law’s family, develops feelings for a local merchant. Her hopes, however, are thwarted by class and caste barriers. She is never allowed to forget her presumed-dead husband, as depicted in a scene where she buys herself new clothes, but is reprimanded by her brother-in-law, “for dressing up like it was Diwali”.

The film does not take sides, it is not preachy – it simply tells a tale, and let’s you judge. There are no rants about one country being better than the other, and there is no pointing of fingers, or shifting of blame, which lets us, the viewers focus on the human story it tells. It’s a poignant tale, and a moving film (I wept buckets).

Ramchand Pakistani is not your average Friday-night entertainer – it is infact a sad film, the way films are when they speak of anguish and suffering. It is based on a true story, and while it is only Ramchand and his father that we care about in this film, it is well worth noting that there are many such “prisoners” rotting away their lives in the jails of India and Pakistan. For getting out the message on them, and their pitiful condition, this film is to be commended.

Posted in 2008, bollywood, drama, rating-PG13, recommended | 4 Comments

Review : Amu

Posted on October 9, 2008 by amodini
Rating : Average (3.4/5)
Genre : Drama
Year : 2005
Running time : 2 hrs and 22 minutes
Director : Shonali Bose
Cast : Konkona Sen Sharma, Brinda Karat, Subhasini Ali, Ankur Khanna

AMU : IMPORTANT SUBJECT BUT FILM FALTERS

I’m watching Amu in 2008, while it was actually made in 2005, and released for the festival circuit in 2007, because the DVD version was made available only recently. The film was controversial because it pointed fingers at the government’s role in the anti-Sikh riots of 1984. It’s been 24 years since, and almost no justice has been meted out.

It is to be noted that the director Shonali Bose, a UCLa film graduate, and niece of Ms. Karat, also wrote and produced this film, and even helped distribute it. Ms. Bose who was 19 when the carnage took place later volunteered in relief camps, where she heard harrowing tales of torture and killings. Understandably making the film was hard, because the government took umbrage and wanted to censor it.

Amu’s main focus is the 1984 riot, and the subject is indirectly introduced through the story of American UCLA graduate Kaju Roy who is in India vacationing with her very Bengali “bhadralok” family. Amu has been told that she is adopted and her biologiacal family was wiped out due to malaria. However, in India, she finds that that story (of her bilogical family) is shaky and learns of the 1984 anti-Sikh riots which orphaned many kids. She was adopted close to that time.

Investigating further with the help of Kabir, a bourgeoisie son of a rich, well-connected father, and pressing for clarification from her mother, Amu finally discovers the terrible truth.

I was a kid when these riots happened, in a city far removed from Delhi, so my memories of the anti-Sikh atrocities are dim. However, it is very clear that this is an important film, with an important tale to tell. The Indian nation seems to forget it’s mistakes and thus they reoccur; recall Godhra.

Konkona Sen Sharma plays Kaju very effectively, curious, naive, and trying to find her “roots”. Brinda Karat plays her adoptive mother Keya, and besides the fact that she is not a very good actress, she is also off-putting because she is an active Communist politician, notably most recently involved in the Communist Left pulling support from the Indian government on it’s decision to go ahead with the US nuclear deal. The third major character is Kabir, played by lanky Ankur Khanna, and he does fairly well. Also the scenes between Amu’s grandmother and cousin are executed very realistically.

Apart from the subject matter, this was not an exceptional film. The director does not hold the reins very tightly, and the screenplay isn’t very polished. It is a coherent film – that is we do get a sense of Amu’s terrible history, but it does lack dramatic impact. While Amu plods along in a fairly regular fashion, it fails to incite passion or feeling, on the protagonist’s behalf. The film does not feature intense, personal moments, and while Amu is facing a harsh truth, she is safe and sound and now priviliged. Thus my sympathy was more for the people who suffered through this and haven’t gotten justice yet, rather than Amu herself.

The 1984 riots were indeed gruesome, and it seems terrible to want “personal” moments to feel for a film (why can we not be automatically passionately outraged by the mere mention of such atrocities ?), but it is what it is. A mediocre film with a very important message.

Posted in 2008, bollywood, drama, rating-PG, social issues, watchable | 2 Comments

Review : Rock On

Posted on October 8, 2008 by amodini
Rock On Movie Review

Rating : ⭐️⭐️⭐️ 1/2
Genre : Drama
Year : 2008
Running time : 2 hours 15 minutes
Director : Abhishek Kapoor
Cast : Farhan Akhtar, Arjun Rampal, Luke Kenny, Purab Kohli, Prachi Desai, Sahana Goswami
Kid rating : PG



Ever since “Dil Chahta hai” hit screens, I’ve thought of Farhan Akhtar as a very talented guy. His Lakshya was very good too, so I’d expected “Rock on” to show just the same high level of quality. Unfortunately it doesn’t live up it’s promise; it’s not bad yeah, but it’s not that great either.

“Rock on” is also about friendship, it’s weakening and strengthening, about the changes in life and about growing up. Four friends rocking together in college hope to get a record label to sign them up, but break up as differences arise – that’s the basic premise.

It could have given DCH some competiition had it had more substance. Not so much meat, you know ? As it was, it seemd to be rather thinly stretched over a few scattered events. Plus it failed in the “oomph” department. I mean I like Farhan and all, but he is not an Aamir or a Hrithik. The only star among those 4 was Rampal, and he didn’t shine brightly enough (he doesn’t ever but that’s another story). It’s probably wearing all those hats that did it – Farhan is an excellent director, he sings fairly well, but acting ? Probably not for him. Not that he doesn’t act well, but would you rather watch Farhan as a rocker or Hrithik ?

Now DCH and Lakshya, both did an excellent job of characterization; all those people in those movies felt real, and spoke like actual people. “Rock on” tried hard, I think, in this aspect, but the characters were a bit stilted. Take Aditya’s (Farhan’s) wife Sakshi (played by Prachi Desai) – pretty one-dimensional, smiling, sweet, not a nasty bone to her, hmm ? Or Debbie, Joe’s (Rampal) wife, who’s more real – she quit her fashion designing dreams for Joe, appears very narrowly shrewish. She unrealistically buckles down when Joe puts his music above all else, I’d pretty much expected her to leave him at that point, but she in a very filmi way, shoulders the burden and let’s him play music.

The film’s protagnists have problems, yes – like the rest of us. However they also have an overarching goal. What is not very easy to connect to is the need for them to fulfill that goal – that need for them to play music. We know it’s a missing part of their lives, but it lacks feeling, that deep-down gut-wrenching, visceral laying-out of emotion that can transport a film from being a regular old film on music and friendship to being extraordinary.

I must say though that I quite liked the sound-track. The 2 slow numbers, “Phir dekhiye” and “Yeh tumhari meri baatein” are beautiful ballads, while “Tum ho to” is almost there. “Socha hai” was interesting as is “Pichle saat dinon mein”. However music alone does not a movie make, so although this film is watchable, I’m not exactly recommending it.

Technorati tag :

Posted in 2008, All Netflix, bollywood, drama, Hindi movies on Netflix, rating-PG, recommended | 6 Comments

Review : Welcome to Sajjanpur

Posted on October 7, 2008 by amodini

Rating : Good (4/5)
Genre : Drama
Year : 2008
Running time : 2 hrs and 41 minutes
Director : Shyam Benegal
Cast : Shreyas Talpade, Amrita Rao, Ila Arun, Divya Dutta, Ravi Jhankal, Rajeshwari Sachdev, Yashpal Sharma, Kunal Kapoor, Lalit Tiwari, Ravi Kishen, Daya Shankar Pandey
Kid-rating : PG-13 (some violence/one could-be-uncomfortable love scene)

WELCOME TO SAJJANPUR (WTS) : AND WHAT AN INTERESTING PLACE IT IS !

Possibly the pleasantest (and best ?) movie of the year, WTS is a breath of fresh air. Yes, it does feel like you’re in a time warp, but a time-warp where film-making is still a nuanced art. Good enough for me.

Benegal’s reputation precedes him. The last film of his which I saw was “Hari-bhari” – a very well-told tale of female empowerment. That was quality just as WTS is. Both films place their characters in rural settings, and both deal with societal ills. And while it may seem that the storyline is not clear-cut, it is because the story comprises of many little stories, held together by a common thread.

In WTS, that common thread is the narrator, Mahadev (Shreyas Talpade). Mahadev is the village letter-writer/reader, being one of the very few literate people in the village. His flair for writing and poetry earn him business from various people in the village, from the voluble Mausi (Ila Arun) worried about the matrimonial prospects of her Manglik daughter (Divya Dutta in a boisterous speak-your-mind role) to the love-struck compounder (Ravi Kisshen). Through his interactions with his patrons, and their letters (which we, the audience, are privy to), we come to see the warp and weft of village life, its overt everyday life and troubles, as well as the hidden menace of power and politics.

Benegal’s films are graced by good actors and WTS is no exception. Talpade is fantastic. As Mahadev, he is the basic everyman, wanting to do what is good and right, but almost helpless against the powers that be. He is at once honest and cheeky, innocent and unscrupulous, glib and lost-for-words. A very fine performance indeed.

Amrita Rao, all sari-clad, and spouting village-speak is a far-cry from her city-girl-wet-rag avatar. It does suit her better though just as her role in Vivah (as terrible as that film was) suited her. She plays the role of Kamla, Mahadev’s childhood crush, and with her husband away in the city, Mahadev has hopes again. Ravi Jhankal plays MunniBai a eunuch who wants to be Sarpanch in opposition to the other contender, the wife of reigning village goonda (Yashpal Sharma). Jhankal’s plea for justice as the much-harassed common man, moved me to tears.

Ila Arun is another rarely seen actor. She is quite comical as the weeping, worried Mausi, attempting to ward off Manglik evil from her daughter’s person, by getting her daughter married to a “Shanichari” (born on Shanichar/Saturday) dog. Talk about sly humor – reminded me of this!

Rajit Kapoor has a small, small role as the Collector – really, where are fine actors like him nowadays? And Kunal Kapoor plays Kamla’s husband. All other actors, even if I don’t mention them here were very good.

WTS is an earthy film; it runs on logic and human nature. The villain here is life itself. And we, poor, mortal fools are buffeted this way and that, until we find a way to make peace with our circumstances. WTS has no glitz/glamour, no shiny, happy people, no helicopters, no car-chases, and no oomph-y songs. There are songs, but they fall in the pleasantly rustic category.

What I especially like about the film is that it is very forward-looking. Yes, all (or most films) have heroes doing good, and upholding truth and morality, but few films have the courage to not give in to social mores or hide behind tradition. I haven’t seen enough Benegal films to decide if this is true of all of them, but it is certainly true for both “Hari-bhari” and “WTS”.

WTS it is very approachable, it’s not esoteric or arty, and you don’t need to possess a high IQ to understand it. It is very easy to relate to, interesting and has many facets – comedy, tragedy, pathos, farce and irony (and a scene which steps from innocent love to the mildly erotic). You sympathize with, feel for and laugh at its characters. And while the setting might be different that the one you’re used to, it leaves you entranced nonetheless.

A charming film.

I like. I like very much.

Posted in 2008, bollywood, drama, rating-G, recommended, social issues | 4 Comments

Review : Bachna ae haseeno

Posted on August 21, 2008 by amodini

Rating : Above average (3.5/5)
Genre : Romance
Year : 2008
Running time : 2 hours 35 minutes
Director : Siddharth Raj Anand
Cast : Ranbir Kapoor, Bipasha Basu, Deepika Padukone, Minisha Lamba, Puneet Isaar, Hiten Paintal
Kid rating : PG-13

BACHNA AE HASEENO : THE BEAUTY AND THE BADMAASH !

Ranbir Kapoor plays – (any guesses ? This being a Yash Raj film and all ) – Raj, Raj Sharma that is, a cad of the first order. A rich, spoilt Casanova, this pretty boy is thoughtless, immature and selfish, using and discarding women at will. Having gone trough two semi-serious (for him) relationships, he is embroiled in a third, where he actually falls in love with Gayatri (Deepika). However, remember the old adage – “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” ? . . .

The film takes us episodic fashion, through Raj’s journey of love. The first entanglement is with the innocent Mahi (Minissha), who heavily influenced by “Diwale dulhaniya le jayenge” (talk about self-promotion !) is starry-eyed with dreams of meeting HER Raj via Euro-rail. The second is with small-town-girl-turned-model Radhika (Bipasha) , with the affair blooming into a live-in relationship. The third and final one is with taxi-driver-cum-B-school-student Gayatri.

At the point of intermission, the film has taken us to the locales of Switzerland and Australia and Bombay, with Raj in love with Gayatri. The prospect of watching a stupid hero get his just deserts spurred me through the interval. However this is a YRF film, and while it tries to tread the fine line between reality and masala, it errs bigtime on the side of masala. Thus Raj is the sexist boy-around-town who’s out to have his fun. We all fall for his boyish charm, and that puppy-eyed innocence, all of which bely his self-serving actions. Bollywood’s double standard allows us to easily forgive his earlier wrongs, while the same qualities in a heroine might have turned her into an ostracized, evil bitch.

Ranbir himself helps to carry forward the illusion. Easy on the eyes, and packing a wallop in the attitude, one doesn’t quite believe his depiction of a cad. Even in the scenes where he’s asking for forgiveness, his attitude is that of someone who already believes he has it. Maybe it’s because he’s Rishi Kapoor’s son, or the knowledge that this is a YR film, but the contrition factor is lacking.

Another thing that jars pretty sorely is the need to cast leading men in the role of saviors of women. Yes, they might be cads of the Grade-A variety, but apparently they can still do world good. There are three very beautiful women in the film, and it’s a pity that their characters are not well-delineated. Mahi, a Sardarni out on a Euro-jaunt with family, is already affianced to a community boy, and once jilted in love, freezes up waiting for a do-gooder to come rescue her from her frigid existence. Radhika, a strong woman, who once spurned, resolves to rise up in the world and does, carries the scars of her first love, waiting for Prince Charming to come around (if he so wishes) and heal her. Both women air-borne on the clouds of love, come crashing down to earth amid a sea of insecurities and self-doubt, once Prince Charming has exited. And Gayatri, the eminently sane one, also pulls out her womanly wiles when she feels like it, with dialogues like “I am a woman. I have the right to change my mind.”. Oh, please ! Where’s a woman with a spine when you need one ?

The film is told semi-narratively, narrated in little asides by Raj. And while I do like this idea of the character talking to the audience, it has to be a character you don’t abhor. Raj doesn’t fit, because really while he’s bemoaning a man’s fallibility to a woman’s tears, you aren’t actually commiserating with him; you long to take a good whack at his head.

Acting wise everybody does good. Even Bipasha Basu. Minisha Lamba brings to her role the naivete of Ms. Goody Two Shoes, while Deepika exudes an understated confidence as Gayatri, a woman who (almost) knows her own mind. And then there is Ranbir, who you cannot help liking inspite of his character’s faults.

While this film is free of cheap innuendo, it does have the patriarchy in full form; i.e.; lots of dialogues about hot chicks in skimpy clothes, and the “boys will be boys” attitude. There are also quite a few liplocks between the leading pairs. Remember the time when the hero-heroine used to be eclipsed by rose bushes while they did the, ahem, dirty ? Well, it ain’t that time anymore. Fine, really – but do bear in mind if you’re considering taking the kids.

While the direction is good (as expected), the songs catchy and the picturisation exquisite, this film fails to move. As a romantic film, this fails to deliver that warm, fuzzy feeling that has you swooning on your way out of the theatre. The director forgets that for a romance to be appreciated, you must like the love-struck duo. That isn’t happening here, chiefly because you can’t feel for the main protagonist Raj. The hero is painted in such strong negative undertones, that even his repentance can’s make him whole again – remember Humpty-Dumpty ?

In quality, this is a typical Yash Raj film ; it’s glossy and slick and ups the glam quotient. It’s characters are “cool”, happy people full of attitude, and their penchant for singing clad in bright colors, under sunny, blue skies in exotic locales is well-known. Thus while it’s definitely a film to watch, it is one because of the packaging – the songs, the locales, the cinematography, and the allure of it’s leading actors. Characterization, depth and feeling are quite another matter.

Posted in 2008, bollywood, rating-PG13, romance, watchable | 3 Comments

Review : Jaane tu ya jaane na

Posted on August 18, 2008 by amodini

Rating : Good (4/5)
Genre : Romance
Year : 2008
Running time : 2 hours 35 minutes
Director : Abbas Tyrewala
Cast : Imran Khan, Genelia D’Souza, Ratna PAthak Shah, Nirav Mehta, Naseeruddin Shah, Jayant Kripalani, Anuradha Patel, Karan Makhija, Alishka Varde, Manjari Phadnis, Prateik Babbar, Sugandha Garg, Ayaz Khan Kid rating : PG

JAANE TU YA JAANE NA : LOVE, ROMANCE AND ALL THAT GOOD STUFF !

This one I’ll always remember. My first desi film seen in one go – you heard that right, no interval, no break, no nothing – it went on and on. To it’s credit though, at no point did I actually feel the need for one. Walking in for the late night show at the local AMC, we thought we’d have our pick of seats. We were mistaken though; the theatre was almost full, and had we come even a few minutes later, we would have been forced to take seats in the first three rows. Do remember that sitting in rows 1-3, forces one to swivel one’s neck from side to side in an attempt to follow characters across the screen, and results, more often that not, in a crick in the neck that won’t go away. I, of course speak from experience.

As excited as I am over Hindi films being screened at regular mainstream theatres with state-of-the-art sound systems, instead of the older dollar-theatre style, run-down theatres, I still had a hard time finding listings for this film over the phone. The recorded message had the announcer getting in a tizzy over the desi name, pronouncing it with a Spanish twist. Thus the “Jaane tu ya jaane na” actually became “Yaan tu na janna”, with such little resemblance to the original, that it was a while and several listens later that we actually figured that the announcer was actually referring to this film.

Anyway, back to regular programming a.k.a. the review. This film is not unalike any other desi romantic flick that you may have seen, i.e.; girl meets boy , or as in this case has known him for very long. They are in love, apparently, but just don’t know it. Same old, same old , yeah ? So, whither the difference, eh ? you ask. In the treatment, folks, it’s all in the treatment. JTYJN is a film that’ll have you humming under bright blue skies, sliding down stair-rail banisters, and feeding the squirrels in the park, knowing in your heart of hearts that all is well, love is in the air, and there really don’t exist any villains which can threaten this utopia.

Or something like that.

Jai Singh Rathore (Imran Khan) is the only child of single parent and activist Savitri Rathore (Ratna Pathak Shah). Genelia is spoilt little rich girl Aditi Mahant. She is also a very good friend of Jai’s. When post-college marriage is suggested, both spurn the thought as ridiculous and instead decide to find each other the perfect soul-mate. Do they succeed ?

This film is very young at heart – it stars young, college-age actors, and the action revolves around them. While Aditi and Jai go by the nick-names ‘Meow’ and ‘Rats’ respectively, their friends are ‘Jiggy’, ‘Bombs’ and ‘Rotlu’. Casting is effective since everyone plays their role to the hilt, and we don’t have aged actors playing college-going kids.

Imran Khan who looks quite a bit like Jugal Hansraj does well in his debut doing the soft, vulnerable thing quite well, although he may not be suited for anything but the “cholcolate” hero roles. Genelia is a younger, and more cosmo version of Sonali Kulkarni, and is good too, although may need to tone down the wide-eyed, super-innocent look a bit; no one believes that all the time. Also a special mention goes out to Prateik Babbar who plays Aditi’s awkward, aloof brother, Amit, to great effect. The sister-brother spats are a treat to watch !

This is love story folks, so I’m not holding my breath in anticipation while watching the film; the end is foretold. However, this is a fun, fluffy film, and the director does manage to add in little quirky, interesting bits like Jai’s dead father (Naseeruddin Shah), resplendent in his Thakur-ian dress, speaking through his portrait. There also the mad-cap, long-lost Rathore-ian cousins who come to Jai’s aid in the nick of time, and the fulfillment of the becoming-a-man prophecy.

This film is good entertainer with a healthy mix of the believable and the flighty. It’s also clean, and fairly palatable for kids. Add to that a large helping of romance, some good music (“Kabhi kabhi Aditi”, “Pappu can’t dance”), and you have the perfect Friday night flick. Thus the prescription : Ingest whole and savor !

Posted in 2008, All Netflix, bollywood, Hindi movies on Netflix, rating-PG, recommended | Comments Off on Review : Jaane tu ya jaane na

Review : Singh is kinng

Posted on August 9, 2008 by amodini

Rating : The Worst (0/5)
Genre : Comedy / Drama
Year : 2008
Running time : 2 hours 15 minutes
Director : Anees Bazmee
Cast : Akshay Kumar, Katrina Kaif, Ranvir Shourie, Neha Dhupia, Om Puri, Javed Jaffrey, Sonu Sood, Manoj Pahwa
Kid rating : PG

SINGH IS KING : DUMBED-DOWN MASALA !

Ever have a child tell you a story ? My son makes his up on the fly – oh, you know, Mom and then, and then, . . . the cow jumps over the moon . . . And he says this with the enthusiasm of a confident story-teller, who knows that his concoction will be well-received. It is indeed.

“Singh is King’s” scriptwriter reminds me of my son. There are similarities, in that the scriptwriter’s seem like they are making up the story on the fly. Like you know what would be fun now – after we get the rustic Sardar out of the hinterlands of the Punjab, let’s get him to get replace an Australian Don, and then just for kicks, let’s get him into a jet-ski and crash into a helicopter, and then, . . . let’s put in a totally unrealistic song in Egypt, when these folks are actually in Australia ! However there are key differences here – I am not THEIR mother, and I’m paying to hear/see this story ! Besides, my son tells much better stories.

You will thus gather that I’m not enthused about “Singh is Kinng”. Yes, yes, Akshay is fantastic, he throws himself into his character energetically and gives it his best shot. And Katrina is stunning (so what if she can’t act ?), but even they, this impossibly gorgeous pair, can’t save this film. There are many reasons to hate this film as I hate it, and I promise to list them all here.

Firstly the film is boring. It’s silly, not funny, and there is a distinction, my friends ! Situations which have been used for ages to inspire laughter are used here again. Take for example the hen-chasing scene which has Akshay attempting to catch an errant hen so that it can be eaten. I must have seen similar situations is countless Bachhan-esque films, and by now it’s gotten jaded.

SIK has characters you couldn’t care about if you tried. And it has events which occur randomly, and which amount to nothing. Twists and turns in this film are like candy, you think the audience might be getting a little bored right about now ? – just slip them one. It’s like we are all antsy children with short attention spans.

Oh, and the story, the backbone of the film – what shall I tell you about it ? It does, as I have mentioned before, meander down very unexpected and outlandish paths. It shows a total lack of coherence and logic; a goal-less kind of film, where anything goes.

Happy Singh (Akshay) is a happy-go-lucky do-gooder who ends up doing more harm than good. In a ruse to get him out of the village, the villagers hatch a plan to send him to Australia to reform and bring back an erstwhile son of the village Lucky Singh (Sonu Sood), who has turned into a gangster (The King) in the land down under. Thus Happy Singh sets off with good friend Rangeela (Om Puri) in tow to reform “The King”.

En route, in Egypt, Happy meets the woman of his dreams Sonia (Katrina). On reaching Australia, through an awkward turn of events, the real gangster – The King is hurt, and Happy Singh becomes “The King” in his place. He has also by this time, met a motherly types (Kirron Kher) and her daughter, who turns out to be none other than Sonia ! However Sonia has richie-rich boyfriend Puneet (Ranvir Shourie) in tow this time, and Happy, bound by his duty and good-heartedness to Sonia’s Mom, must do the needful to get Sonia and Puneet married.

And all this while running the King’s gang, handling petty rivalries between gang members and lunacy and chaos in general. Does Happy manage to do good and get the girl ?

OK, so what works ? Akshay Kumar. He totally rocks. He totally rocks in this absolutely dumb movie too. There are quite a few songs in the film, out of which “Jee karda”, “Bas ek king”, and “Teri ore” are catchy and well picturised.

I must say that I went in to see this film, with not very high expectations. It’s directed by Anees Bazmee, which tells me something. However reviews I read prior to viewing the film led me to believe that this film would be a breezy, if brainless ride. I have to say with much regret that it is not, because even discounting the other stuff – the illogical, the senseless, and the crappy, it’s not breezy – it’s boring. SIK is not just bad, its walk-out-midway bad, and if it were not for my kids (super-huge Akshay fans) I would’ve done just that.

Technorati tag :

Posted in 2008, bollywood, comedy, ecstatically stupid | 5 Comments