Review : Tashan

Posted on July 30, 2008 by amodini

Rating : Above average (3.8/5)
Genre : Suspense
Year : 2008
Running time : 2 hours 40 minutes
Director : Akshay Kumar, Saif Ali Khan, Kareena Kapoor, Anil Kapoor
Kid rating : PG

An old, red Mercedes screaming down a desert road. It veers here and there, and finally goes over a cliff. Underwater the camera zooms onto Saif, still seated in the car, and surreally, still underwater he opens his mouth and begins to talk . . .

I went to see this film with absolutely no hopes. (Yup – I still went). After being trashed by everyone I read, really how could one ? Hope, I mean. Still, there are times when one is pleasantly surprised. Not like in “Oh, what a fantastic film”; more like it really wasn’t that bad.

First off, Anil Kapoor turns me off. Plus the deal with the “Phormula” and the “Ishyle” and the whole “let’s do the attitude” thing – pretty juvenile, yeah ? But, inspite of that, “Tashan” is fairly well-stylized, and I don’t mean stylized like Dhoom2, where there are these wanna-be cool actors flashing their abs. Tashan actually has characters who seem to be genuinely off their rockers. Like Akshay Kumar’s small-time goon Bacchhan Pandey, who uses his powers of persuasion to land roles in the local Ram-lila as the 10-headed Ravana. Truly, there’s nothing quite as campy as a 10-headed, jean-clad Ravana on a scooter.

The other 2 main characters are Pooja and Jimmy. Kareena is Pooja, in a superficially Omkaara-ish role. Saif as Jimmy appears as a regular old call-center employee-cum-English teacher, who falls for Miss Pooja, as sweet and innocent as she appears to be. However, and we get pretty James Hadley Chase-ish at this point, the sweet ingénue has money troubles – dear old Dad passed away and left her with a whopping debt of 1.5 crores. Thus she must serve the reprehensible gangster Bhaiyyaji (Anil Kapoor), who makes her cry and wring her hands.

Of course our young Don Juan a.k.a Jimmy, who’s deeply smitten by now, will have none of it. Therefore together they plan to steal some of Bhaiyaji’s money, but when they do, Jimmy is in a soup, because sweet, innocent Pooja has apparently decamped with the loot. Bhaiyyaji is by now, baying for Jimmy’s blood. Enter Bachchan Pandey, from Kanpur – just another devotee of Bhaiyyaji’s. Pandey promises to recover the moolah, and together with Jimmy, who has, in his faultless English, managed to convince them of his innocence, sets off to find the money and the moll . . .

I must say this for Tashan’s characters – they aren’t lacking in the brain department. They might be violent, gaudy, and excessively campy, but stupid they are not. And they are relatively believable, in that they run true to character – throughout the film. The premise of the film is simple, if a little sketchy : lots of money and four people who want it.

Kareena is super-skinny in the film, permitting herself to be wrapped in a bikini, and extremely short shorts. She does look good, even if underweight, and her skin is stretched so tight minus the flab that one remains worried that an over-enthusiastic jhatka-matka might pop a now visible rib. Kareena is maturing as an actress. In Tashan she is in fine form, demure and sweet as Pooja, and appropriately rabid in the later half of the film. Saif plays himself, i.e.; a “cool” desi babu with just the right angrezi inflection to his accent. He’s traipsing along on the road of life, until ofcourse he meets the woman of his dreams. And Akshay, as I’ve said before is superbly campy; the epitome of the ambitious gangster bhaiya.

I must say this (and do you hear the awe in my voice ?) this is the desi version of “Pulp Fiction”. It’s one twist after another, with characters so singularly unalike, that when they get together, you’re waiting for the fireworks to explode. The film’s story unfolds in a narrative fashion, parts of it are related by Jimmy and parts by Bachhan. And when I say related, I mean that they actually tell the audience the story in little asides – a very interesting and effective technique to draw in the audience.

Here’s the downer though folks – the film is great until we get to the end of the film. Then, and let me not be too harsh here, the director loses his senses, and the film morphs into a typical C grade thriller. It’s predictable, and very much been-there-done-that. When all I needed to finish up this otherwise good film, was a twist in the tale, and some clean, cool, and slick editing, I got lots of noise, violence and an excessive amount of melodramatic (and might I say stupid ?) dialogue. Quite horrendous, because by now I had my hopes up.

Still, I recommend watching this film. Watch it for the cast and the characters, and the way the film builds around them. Watch it for the genuine moments of zaniness, as in when Bhaiyyaji, quite in awe of Jimmy’s English, remarks “Man ij haraami, but his Engleesh . . .”. And watch it for the well-choreographed, if outlandish, dance numbers.

All in all, an entertaining and engrossing watch.

Posted in 2008, bollywood, thriller, watchable | 3 Comments

Review : Indian Jones and the kingdom of the crytal skull

Posted on May 28, 2008 by amodini

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (Single Disc)And since I’m being so lax about writing a Hindi film review (apologies, apologies – I will get back on track. Not my fault really :-), have you seen the crap they’re churning out these days ?) I will point you to my review of Indy’s latest adventure. Not that THAT film is not crap, it’s just of a lesser degree.

Which gets me thinking – should I fuse my desi and non-desi movie reviews into this blog ? Hmmm . . .

Posted in 2008, english, hollywood, watchable | Comments Off on Review : Indian Jones and the kingdom of the crytal skull

Review : Race

Posted on March 21, 2008 by amodini

Rating : Poor (2.2/5)
Genre : Thriller/Suspense
Year : 2008
Running time : 2 hours 34 minutes
Director : Abbas, Mastan
Cast : Saif ali Khan, Akshaye Khanna, Anil Kapoor, Bipasha Basu, Katrina Kaif, Sameera Reddy
Kid rating : PG13

RACE : THIS RACE AIN’T GOING NOWHERE !

If you’ve watched Abbas-Mustan’s previous directorial ventures, you know that they aren’t exactly the pride and joy of Bollywood as far as direction goes. So I didn’t rush to the theater with great expectations, and I must say that the film turned out pretty much as I thought it would. Thus it had zero character development, almost no logic, desultory conversation and some very unfunny lines passed of as humor.

The way this film has been hyped, it looked like Dhoom3 and then some. Yes, it’s got quite a few car chases, hip-swinging songs, bomb blasts, but it doesn’t quite get there. It’s actually better than Dhoom2 story-wise, and by that I mean that it HAS a story, as compared to D2’s almost non-existent one. However the story is ultra-complicated, lots of twists and turns, lot’s of two-faced characters, betrayals and turn-coats. You can’t tell a friend from a foe, which you’d think would herald a good thriller, but Abbas-Mastan’s inept handling makes short shrift of that notion.

The whole deal is the story of two brothers, the elder Ranveer (Saif) doting on the younger Rajiv (Akshaye). However two-faced Rajiv has a massive chip on his shoulder – Papa never liked him as much, and hence he hates Ranveer’s guts, but will not say so. Instead he plots secretly to bring about Ranveer’s death and get his grubby hands on his $100 million insurance policy. Assisting him in this quest is model Sonia (Bipasha) who’s risen from an orphanage, to dreams of big money. Both Ranveer and Rajiv are sweet on Sonia. In love with Ranveer is his secretary Sophia (Katrina), but he has eyes only for Sonia. Thrown into this mix are another pair – Inspector RD (Robert D’Souza) and his dumb secretary Mini (Sameera), doing the Karamchand-Kitty act.

So, essentially there are 5 main characters; the 6th – Sameera’s in inconsequential, and extremely annoying. All the 6 characters are paper-thin, not a shred of believability is left after Abbas-Mastan are done with their work. I consider Saif, Akshaye and Anil reasonably able actors, but given their haphazardly put together roles and their inane dialogues, it’s not surprising that they perform well under par. Akshaye is the best (and that’s a relative term) of the lot, but then Akshaye always does petulance well.

The women are perpetually made-up, wear skimpy clothing, and bland smiles. Katrina is quite the sexy secretary, with no life of her own; be it an after work party at the club, or her boss arriving at the airport, she’s always there. Bipasha as the glamorous Sonia comes across as highly sexed up; she’s always wearing heavy makeup, dressed up for meals like she was lunching with the Queen, and essentially just oozing oomph, be it night or day. Sameera Reddy who’s not as physically fit as the other two ladies plays dumb (and she can speak all right). Accompanying her Inspector boss to take notes, she scribbles busily on her pad, attired in backless mini-dresses, with midriff baring necklines. Apparently Abbas-Mastan have hit upon the magic formula for filmi success – thrills, chills and the female body in very little clothing; story, screenplay and sense be damned.

Neither Katrina or Bipasha, as gorgeous as they are, can act to save their lives. Katrina actually appears to believe that smiling IS acting, which is probably why she does it a lot. Smiling that is. Bipasha is a known quantity, and uses her handy one-glassy-expression-for-all-emotions technique. Sameera who can act, is given the weak role that requires none.

The characters such as they are, lead fairly absurd, one-dimensional lives. They appear to have a few traits we know about, and the audience is expected to subsist on this diet of very hard-to-believe, hollowed out, slapdash set of characters. Screenplay is extremely poor, and direction while average needs to push the pace a little. It ain’t no thriller if it takes forever.

The film starts off in South Africa, at the Durban Cup, where horse stud farm owner Ranveer is losing his races, and his money. We are treated to a brief intro to the characters of the film via a voice-over by Anil Kapoor (he as Inspector RD actually comes in only post-intermission), and his narration goes on for quite a while. Now whenever a director has to employ a narrator to actually tell us about the characters and their traits, instead of showing us by letting them speak and emote, it’s a sign that he doesn’t know what he’s doing. Very true in this case, because Abbas-Mastan haven’t a clue.

The first half of the film is actually B-O-R-I-N-G. The characters appeared silly, shallow and mentally challenged. The dialogues were incredibly inane, and cheesy. Besides the nice cars, and nicer women there wasn’t much going on here. The interval came on a promising note, with the arrival of Inspector RD and assistant Mini, and you think Anil Kapoor’s going to rev things up ! But, no, Inspector RD appears to be an ape in human clothing, chomping on fruits, and lusting for Mini. Mini, of course is lacking in the brain department, and thus she becomes the butt of many not-so-funny jokes. If Sameera Reddy attempting to display an emotion were not enough for you, there’s Johnny Lever. Lever appears to be in full form, rolling his eyes, and comparing women to cell-phones. Oh joy !

The film has very good music, set to entirely inappropriate and weirdly placed songs. Lush dance numbers, complete with gyrating extras, spring up at the drop of a hat. Sophia and Ranveer go on a business trip, and manage to squeeze out a song while there. Ranveer tells Sophia that she’s a good friend, when she’s fishing for a compliment, and she breaks out into song asking him to “Kiss me, kiss me, kiss me”.

One does not speak of Abbas-Mastan and quality in the same breath, but one must note that the story has huge, gaping holes. I do not talk of ordinary holes, as in the mortal film-viewer’s wonderment at getting from Point A to Point Z, without traversing through Points B through Y; I talk of gaping holes into which a continent the size of Asia could submerge and disappear wholly from view. And then there are the smaller mishaps – like Ranveer talking of Dispirin to cure hang-overs, and call me picky, but why in South Africa are they using Dispirin, and not a local brand of medicine ? But then this is Bollywood folks – we are good on locales, and poor on details.

This was not an entirely un-redeemable plot. In the hands of a more able director, with enough emphasis on quality, characterization, and details this could have been a good film. Saddled with Abbas-Mastan’s myopia and desire to churn out a worthy successor to , this film fails massively. If you liked Dhoom2, you’ll probably find an adequate entertainer. However, if like me, you thought that D2 was the pits, best keep away from this disaster.

Technorati tag :

Posted in 2008, bollywood, rating-PG13, thriller | 8 Comments

Review : Laaga chunari mein daag

Posted on March 18, 2008 by amodini

Rating : Below average (2.75/5)
Genre : Drama
Year : 2007
Running time : 2 hours 20 minutes
Director : Pradeep Sarkar
Cast : Anupam Kher, Rani Mukherjee, Konkona Sen Sharma, Abhishek Bacchhan, Jaya Bachhan, Kunal Kapoor
Kid rating : G

LAAGA CHUNARI MEIN DAAG : Ghisa-pita melodrama !

This was a film I’d rather looked forward to in 2007, after viewing the trailers, and the zesty clip of “Hum to aise hai bhaiyya”. However the bad reviews came in and I never got around to seeing it. Now that I have, I’ll tell you that this is an unremarkable film, so much so that I’m reviewing this a couple of months after seeing it. This film belongs in the 80s in spirit, and while it does glimmer with the sheen of tasteful wardrobe changes, and heavy, well-designed, artificial jewelery, it’s just decade old stuff packaged nicely.

Technically, and by that I mean – direction and screenplay, this is a decent film. What mires it down bigtime are the clichés. There is the old, ailing, impractical father (Kher), hanging onto his huge haveli (which is mired in a court-case) and decrepit views on family honor and the role of women. There is also the melancholy mother (Jaya Bachhan), her brow furrowed by financial worry, and the perceived burden of two unmarried daughters. The daughters themselves – Badki (Mukherjee) and Chutki (Konkona) are spirited enough, and striving to be “worthy” daughters.

Of course Ma’s sewing isn’t going to fill the family coffers. So with mouths to feed and a haveli to maintain and fight for, and Dad frothing at the mouth about not having a son, the elder daughter decides to go to Bombay to find work. However in desperation and with penury looming, she becomes a prostitute. Filthy lucre is in, poverty out. But hai, that honor !

This film has good intentions and a social message of sorts. The re-integration of so-called “fallen” women is what it deals with. But instead of liberally dosing the script with common sense, this film is a clear case of S.O.S – Stupidity On Screen. The characters are colored in with bold strokes of black and white – there are no greys here. And unfortunately all the “good” people are either blind or stupid (probably the latter). The director seems to want it all – the peppy rythms of a well-choreographed dance number and the innocence of a rural belle set upon by mean, hungry, corporate wolves !

Rani does well enough in this pathetic, I-can-see-it-coming role. Konkona, the fine actress that she is, gives it her all. Dependable Kher is good too. As for Jaya Bachhan, she does a “Nirupa Roy”, but Ms. Roy was so much better. Mrs. Bachhan appears to be getting crochety with age; even her smiling countenance appears a grimace. I’m now so over sobbing, selfless, helpless filmi Moms.

There is no saving grace in this film, folks. Kunal Kapoor comes close, but no cigar. Abhishek is OK; a dance number featuring the four young ‘uns is the highlight of the film. The film grinds on about the clichéd, impoverished family hanging on to the last vestiges of honor, of maintaining a façade of respectability, and punishing it’s women. Haven’t we seen it all before ? It’s basically the stuff you loathed in the 80s come to bite you in the 2000s. It fits like a square peg in a round hole.

Curiosity killed the cat. What I know now is that predictability killed the film.

Posted in 2007, 2008, bollywood, drama, rating-G, watchable | 3 Comments

New ratings for kid-safe viewing

Posted on March 10, 2008 by amodini

I have decided to add a rating system for kids, to film reviews, from now on. My rating system, based on the MPAA rating system is described below. Obviously there are differences between Bollywood and Hollywood films, in the kind of violence/sexuality shown on screen. Thus while I may not anticipate nudity in a desi film, am just as averse to my kids being subjected to viewing sexual innuendoes/double entendres.

Please note that this is a rating system from one parent to another. I do not profess to being an expert on rating films, or professionally qualified to provide them. All ratings here are judged using common sense, and presented here so that you can decide for yourself which films are suitable for your children.

Reviews will also now be tagged by “kid-safeness”. Please look for the Labels on the left site of the browser window for my “kid-safe” labels : .

Rating “G” (for general audiences – suitable for all ages) :

A G-rated motion picture contains nothing in theme, language, nudity, sex, violence or other matters that, in my view, would offend parents whose younger children view the motion picture. The G rating is not a “certificate of approval,” nor does it signify a “children’s” motion picture. Some snippets of language may go beyond polite conversation but they are common everyday expressions. No stronger words are present in G-rated motion pictures. Depictions of violence are minimal. No nudity, sex scenes, suggestive bedroom scenes, or drug use are present in the motion picture.

In desi cinema, some hip-swinging, bosom-heaving and sexism is built-in. Also to be found in most films are allusions to “honor”, respectability, rules for “good” women and songs featuring some sexual molestation, i.e.; eve-teasing – good old desi patriarchy at work. A G-rated film will probably containg these built-in elements.

Example of a G-rated film : Laaga Chunari mein daag

Rating “PG” (Parental guidance suggested – some material may not be suitable for children)

A PG-rated motion picture should be investigated by parents before they let their younger children attend. The PG rating indicates, in my view, that parents may consider some material unsuitable for their children, and parents should make that decision.

The more mature themes in some PG-rated motion pictures may call for parental guidance. There may be some profanity, some depictions of violence or skimpy attire. But these elements are not deemed so intense as to require that parents be strongly cautioned beyond the suggestion of parental guidance. These films will probably contain some sexual innuendo, double entendres.

Example of a PG-rated film : Partner

Rating “PG-13” (parents cautioned, some material inappropriate for kids under 13) :

A PG-13 rating is a sterner warning to parents to determine whether their children under age 13 should view the motion picture, as some material might not be suited for them. A PG-13 motion picture may go beyond the PG rating in theme, violence, nudity, sensuality, language, adult activities or other elements, but does not reach the “A” category. There may be depictions of violence in a PG-13 movie, but generally not both realistic and extreme or persistent violence.

Note that for desi films, a PG-13 rating will also mean that the film contains excessive profanity, violence, sexual innuendo, or scenes depicting sexual objectification.

Example of a PG-13 film : Page 3

Rating “A” (unsuitable for children)

This rating means that I consider this film, patently too adult for children 17 and under. This kind of a film probably contains adult themes, adult activity, hard language, intense or persistent violence, sexually-oriented nudity, drug abuse or other elements.

Posted in 2008, bollywood, how-what-why, ratings | 1 Comment

Review : Superstar

Posted on March 1, 2008 by amodini

Rating : Above average (3.75/5)
Genre : Drama
Year : 2008
Director : Rohit Jugraj
Cast : Kunal Khemu, Tulip Joshi, Darshan Jariwalla, Aushima Sawhney, Sharat Saxena, Reema Lagoo, Vrajesh Hirjee, Anjan Srivastav, Zafar Karachiwala

SUPERSTAR : DOPPELGANGER DRAMA

I am not a fan of Kunal Khemu because I totally hated his first film “Kalyug” and thought the second “Traffic Signal” not worth much. However cast as the protagonist in “SuperStar” Khemu finally delivers. It’s not that I blame him for his previous disasters (he was a pretty decent actor even then), but there was something about his earlier ventures which just didn’t click. Happily for us, this one does.

Kunal Mehra (Khemu) is your average struggling actor, finding for now, only 3 second snatches of screen-time, lost amid other extras. His Dad (Sharat Saxena) wants him to get a “regular” job, egged on by the next-door nosy neighbor (Anjan Srivastav). Supported by his mom (Reema Lagoo) and friends, Kunal struggles on. It looks like his persistence has paid off, when one fine day his photograph makes the headlines in every newspaper, and he is touted as the next young superstar, to star in an upcoming film by producer Saxena. However Kunal doesn’t remember getting the photo taken, and has never met the producer!

The truth about the look-alike in the newspapers brings with it disappointment for Kunal, his dream of making it big in Bollywood smashed to smithereens. However fate has other plans . . .

This is a double-role plot (”Mithya” had one too), but isn’t formulaic. What adds to the film are it’s genuinely comic moments – the film pokes fun at Bollywoodian clichés, like the time Kunal’s character refers to his doppelganger as not a “Kumbh-ke-mele” types (for the uninitiated, the 80’s films often had identical twins separated in the Kumbh mela). It’s a breezy watch and it flows. Rohit Jugraj, who’s past projects include ”James”, manages to tell the story with minimum fuss. The film is well directed and nicely paced. The characters are developed believably, except for the half-baked angle of the investigating journalist (Karachiwala). Yes, there are some logical loopholes, if you want to be really nit-picky, but the film is such a pleasant watch, that really, it doesn’t matter.

Khemu must essay two different characters – one strong and determined and struggling, and the other cocky, brash and arrogant. He does well on both, and even manages to squeeze in a little vulnerability in the characters, earning him extra brownie points. He shows a vast improvement from “Traffic Signal”, and exudes a new confidence and bonhomie in this film. Tulip Joshi as love interest Mausam does nicely, although she has fattened up since “Mere yaar ki shaadi”. And Aushima Sawhney as the hard-edged film actress suits her role. Darshan Jariwalla as crafty film producer Saxena is good too. Lagoo and Saxena as the parents manage some of the more poignant scenes in the film really, really well – had me tearing up !

This film has excellent music. From the catchy “Mann tu talbat” to the beautiful “Aankhon se khwab rooth kar” to the funky “Don’t I love or do I love you ?” they all just add to the film.

This is one of the better films, considering that it has no “big” star. And if you all want is an engrossing drama with some innovation and a “hatke” story, this is it.

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

Review : Jodhaa Akbar

Posted on February 18, 2008 by amodini

Note : The edited version of this review appears at Planet Bollywood, here.

Rating : Above average (3.85/5)
Genre : Drama
Year : 2008
Running time : 3 hours 35 minutes
Director : Ashutosh Gowariker
Cast : Hrithik Roshan, Aishwarya Rai, Kulbhushan Kharbanda, Sonu Singh, Poonam Sinha, Ila Arun, Suhasini Mulay

JODHAA AKBAR : ENTERTAINING !

Jodha Akbar made history of sorts, here in my city, in the US, by being the first ever Hindi film to be screened in a mainstream American theatre. Generally Hindi movies are shown in “desi” theatres, which are dollar theatres pretty much, with run-down sound systems. I guess the economics of desi cinema makes it unprofitable to be shown in mainstream theatres, but blockbusters like this one could now be setting a precedent. The morning show I went to wasn’t exactly a full house, but people packed more than half the seats by the intermission (which came 2 hours later).

Gowariker is known for his epic films, generally long-lengthed and sprawling (Swades , Lagaan), and this one is no different. “Jodhaa Akbar” comes in at under 4 hours, which is an awfully long time, even if beautifully picturised. At first glance, this can seem an overwhelming subject, but it is developed as a love-story, so Gowariker picks and chooses his scenes to fortify that aspect of the story. Essentially then, this film is a romance, with nods to historical perspective, and political climate.

Rajput princess Jodhaa, the daughter of Raja Bharmal, is married off to Mughal Emperor Akbar in a political alliance. A devout Hindu, Jodhaa, negotiates with Akbar to keep her religion and her beliefs, in her new Islamic home, but cannot be anything but aghast and outraged, at becoming the wife of the enemy (so to speak). Thus, she apprises her new husband of her state of mind, and he in turn refuses to consummate the marriage until he has won her heart.

Besides focusing on the romance, the film also develops Akbar’s character and details his formative years, from his tutelage under Bairam Khan to his coming of age, as a just and kind king. Make no mistake, this film is an epic. Its grandeur and scale make it a movie to be seen on the big screen.

The lead pair are not the most accomplished actors, but it is to a great extent because of them, that the film is what it is. In real life he could probably bore you senseless, but in JA, Hrithik is regal and aristocratic as Akbar, and handles intense and light-hearted scenes equally well. Aishwarya can only be described as luminous in this film. Swathed in yards of material and decorative jewelry by the ton, she uses her eyes to great effect. She doesn’t have many dialogues in the film, but manages to convey her feelings quite well. And is it just me, or did her face seem rounder (and fuller) in this film ?

This film could very well have been a boring historical, documentar-ish in style, had the director not chosen his scenes and imbued them with anecdotal references. Take for example the scene where Jodha’s mother mischievously informs her new son-in-law that he must find his wife among the many veiled women in the room – then only does he have conjugal rights ! We are also privy to household tensions within the Emperor’s harem and while these add interest and develop Akbar’s character, the director maintains a fine balance in not overdoing this, and turning it into a saas-bahu drama.

Gowariker is also fully aware of the striking couple the lead pair make – he virile and handsome and she, a glittering, delicate beauty ! He uses this to his advantage in certain scenes portraying Akbar’s valor, and his rippling muscles as Hrithik does a bare-chested sword routine (with the camera lovingly lingering on his muscular torso), while Aishwarya (and I) watch mesmerized. When I, fresh from the trauma of “Dhoom 2”, first heard of the film’s cast, I’d been pretty skeptical of Hrithik and Aishwarya as Akbar and Jodhaa respectively. However, the grace with which both of the actors have portrayed their characters, have dispelled any doubts on this.

JA also features a decent cast. Sonu Singh appeared impressive as Sujamal, and Kulbhushan Kharbanda quite dignified and ponderous as Raja Bharmal. Ila Arun portrayed the scheming Maham Anga effectively, while Poonam Sinha as Akbar’s mother appeared a little stilted. Jodhaa’s mother’s role is well done by accomplished actress Suhasini Mulay. Bairam Khan’s character was a parody (a penchant for lopping of heads), all popping eyes and bulging veins – and the only one that I felt was jarringly bad (where thou, O understated killer ?).

This film is further strengthened by Rahman’s music, the finest example of which is the qawwali based “Khwaja, mere khwaja”. Although all the songs are appropriate, melodious and beautifully picturised, I especially liked “In lamhon ke daaman mein” , a romantic number which seemed a fitting ode to sublime love.

Like most filmmakers it appears that Gowariker too is in love with his footage. Luckily for us, the footage is engrossing, for the most part. Still, it must be said that there is flab, and JA could have been edited to shorten the length by atleast half an hour. Another flaw in this film, and in many Hindi films, is that it fails to rouse passion in the fight/war scenes. Why must armies facing each other appear obligatory ? Why must hand-to-hand combats appear to be re-incarnations of the average dhishum-dhishum of yester-year ? Technology has advanced and it wouldn’t hurt to have a cutting-edge fight scene in a 40-crore epic (a la “Crouching Tiger”).

The subject of this film is a large and exhaustive one. However Gowariker keeps the film focused and stops it from meandering. Amitabh Bachhan’s voice provides intermittent narration, but the film is mostly held together by an adept screenplay and deft direction. Most of the dialogues are “simple” Urdu and Hindi, and are apt, although I did wince a couple of times at Jodhaa’s “Shahenshah-ji”.

Attention to detail and quality pays off in this stupendous period drama. This film was such a pleasing watch, that I wish such quality historicals had existed when I’d been gnashing my teeth in history class at school. Romances (concocted or not) featuring well-muscled, handsome Emperors might have been just the motivation to become a history “star” instead of just squeaking by !

Posted in 2008, bollywood, drama, family-friendly, historical, rating-G, recommended | 7 Comments

Review : Mithya

Posted on February 15, 2008 by amodini

Note : The edited version of this review appears at Planet Bollywood, here.

Rating : Very good (4/5)
Genre : Suspense /Comedy / Romance
Year : 2008
Running time : 1 hour 40 minutes
Director : Rajat Kapoor
Cast : Ranvir Shourey, Naseeruddin shah, Neha Dhupia, Saurabh Shukla, Vinay Pathak, Brijender Kala, Irawati Harshe, Harsh Chaya

MITHYA : ENGROSSING COMIC THRILLER !

It’s one of my wildest dreams come true. A dream that one day film directors would revolt against standard-issue masala, boy-meets-girl formulas, and decide to carve out their own niches. What gladdens my heart furthermore, is the fact, that not only are film-makers moving away from the ordinary, they are actually pushing the envelope to give us interesting, intelligent cinema. The fact that a film like “Mithya” is made and executed with finesse, and an outstanding cast is proof enough.

Rajat Kapoor returns to the Director’s chair after Mixed Doubles (2006) and Raghu Romeo (2003), with another “different” story. This time he ropes in the usual suspects Ranvir and Vinay, and other stalwarts like Naseeruddin shah and Saurabh Shukla. Mithya means “falsehood” – as in our hero Vinod Kumar (Shourie) being forced to live a falsehood. I hate to give away too much here, because the story is one to be relished – the less you know the better. Still, for all the folks who want at least the bare bones, let it be known that the film is about VK, as he is known , a small-time, struggling actor, who inadvertently gets caught between inter-gang rivalries, due to, shall we say , a quirk of nature.

Shukla and Kapoor have written this film. And, really, while I’m chuckling at the new twist they’ve given the “double role” formula, I’m all agog with curiosity as the film progresses. The story is quite, quite unpredictable, as it veers this way and that. Shourie has the meatiest role as our hero, VK, a good-hearted fella, practicing his dialogue and his expression, even when all his role calls out for is him playing dead. He does his 2-bit roles in films, kow-tows to directors and producers in the hope for bigger breaks, and nurses his whisky (with it’s free glass) on the beach. This is where trouble comes calling.

Naseer plays Gawde, a mobster who hopes to knock off the big Don – Rajendra Sahay. In cahoots with him is his rotund partner (Saurabh Shukla), a desi Danny DeVito of sorts ; appears harmless (is given to bouts of mirth) but is actually pretty lethal. Gawde’s girlfriend, starlet Sonam (Dhupia) is roped into Gawde’s plan, and Ram (Vinay Pathak) and Shyam (Brijendra Kala) are Gawde’s men who do the actual dirty work. Harsh Chhaya and Iravati Harshe, two names who’ve transitioned from the small-screen to the big rather well, round off this astounding cast.

This is a thriller, but does contain more than it’s fair share of comic moments. There is romance too, although subtle. It’s all pretty realistically done, of course, the helplessness and anguish of the protagonist there for all to see. “Mithya”’s characters appear to be real people; they live their sordid everyday lives, scheming to be better, have more , grasping at straws. Mithya subjects it’s hero to massive emotional upheaval; not only is he unceremoniously yanked out of his humdrum everyday life, at a mobster’s behest, but his world goes all topsy-turvy when he forms attachments which cannot ever come to fruition. Thus not only is VK, angry, scared and hateful, he is also adored, loved and loves in return. One genuinely feels for the guy.

Ranvir Shourie plays his role beautifully – I was moved to tears at the scene where he returns to Iravati, to implore her to take him back. Dhupia comes in strong as Sonam, and Naseer and Shukla do justice to their characters, as expected. Kala and Pathak have smaller roles but are very good.

The film’s USP is it’s story and screenplay, of course. The music (songs and background score) I don’t remember – so little impact did it have. Still, I have no complaints; in fact I am delighted with the film. This one is a definite must-see.

Posted in 2008, bollywood, drama, outstanding, recommended, thriller | 4 Comments

Review : Bhool Bhulaiya

Posted on February 11, 2008 by amodini

Rating : Average (3.0/5)
Genre : Comedy / Drama
Year : 2007
Running time : 2 hours 35 minutes
Director : Priyadarshan
Cast : Shiney Ahuja, Akshay Kumar, Vidya Balan, Amisha Patel, Rajpal Yadav, Paresh Rawal

BHOOL BHULAIYA : SUPERSTITION’S THE NAME OF THE GAME !

Do you like mumbo-jumbo ? Or films which deal with mumbo-jumbo ? Can you survive the occasional trip into the surreal, complete with tantrik, jhadoos and ghost-evicting ceremony without rolling your eyes too much ? I’m sort of sitting on the fence on this one, because it’s not a bad-bad film, although in parts it does make me want to roll my eyes, and lay down from lack of air, because I’m laughing so hard AT the film. (That’s almost poetry, you know ?)

Well, anyway, this film takes me back to the Himmatwala era. That, or the Southie films which deal with feudal lords in small villages. You know the kinds of villages which make technology and the WWW seem like a dream. Where people live cocooned in small, sheltered worlds, of hakims, and priests, and jadoo-tona, and religious rites and superstition. They have heard of America all right. In fact they even have a freshly America returned Raja of sorts (Ahuja) who comes with newly-wed wifey Avni (Vidya Balan). He comes to make his home here, in his haveli, which is rumored to be awash in spirits. And not the drinking kinds either.

His uncle, family etc. try to dissuade him, but modern-minded as he is, and pooh-poohing superstition, Raja Saheb plus clan move in. Apparently the ghostly residents don’t like this too much, because accidents start happening. And Rajaji has no recourse other than to summon trusted friend and Doctor (of spirituality ?) (Akshay) to solve problems. Can he ?

OK, now must say, that although this film has the “ghostly” theme, it being directed by Priyadarshan, can not avoid overt attempts at slap-stick. Thus Rajpal Yadav, in knee-high dhoti, red face and scampering gait, presents himself as object of ridicule. Also Akshay Kumar, and Paresh Rawal jar the comic nerve, adequately. However, the comic and the surreal do not mix very well (yes, desi comedy is surreal but that’s not what I meant), leaving one to sort of take the film not too seriously.

In the second half the film gets into the thick of it, mumbo-jumbo wise, ghungroos, dancing nymphettes and all. Lots of red herrings are thrown about, and what with the silly slapstick-ing, and the double entendres, and the dhoti-jokes, I wasn’t expecting the film to go all serious on us. But it does. Serious somber note, and tears etc. From Shiney. While Vidya and Amisha shriek it out. Patchy screenplay this one. And lots of logical holes. Acting wise, Balan stands out. Ms.Patel is allright. Rajpal, poor guy, is talent wasted.

Technically and direction-wise the film is decent enough, and that gets it an average rating. However trying to make every film a rollicking old comedy, ruins a film with potential. Thus, while the audience might want Akshay mouthing (absurdly) comic lines, masquerading as a crazy doctor, and singing item numbers (with what appear to be African women in short shorts, quite a far cry from Rajaji’s feudal fiefdom), the director should provide it only if the script warrants it. Which it does not in this case. I imagine if this were an out and out bhootiya film, with scary effects to the max, it might have been a better watch.

I used to think of Priyadarshan films as quality. However, with his descent into comedy, the standard seems to be dropping. “Hera pheri” was OK, BB is several sub-terrains lower.

Posted in 2007, bollywood, comedy | Comments Off on Review : Bhool Bhulaiya

Review : My name is Anthony Gonsalves

Posted on January 29, 2008 by amodini

Note : The edited version of this review appears at Planet Bollywood, here.

Rating : Poor (2.5/5)
Genre : All-in-one
Year : 2008
Director : E.Niwas
Cast : Nikhil Dwivedi, Amrita Rao, Mithun, Pawan Malhotra, Mukesh Tiwari, Jawed Sheikh, Anupam Kher, Dayashankar Pandey, Lillette Dubey, D. Santosh

MY NAME IS ANTHONY GONSALVES (MNIAG) : DAMP SQUIB !

I am an unabashed fan of E.Niwas’s work. Hence the impatience to see “MNIAG”. This time however, the director of films like “Shool” and “Love ki liye kuch be karega” doesn’t come through. If I am kind, (and I am in a kind mood today) I’d call it a C grade movie. Chiefly because of it’s lackluster screen-play, lackadaisical gait, and lame hero. The film suffers from predictability. There are no surprises here; the film toddles on, on it’s predictable path.

The film’s story is a throwback to the 80s. Remember the kindly character of Father Braganza, so plentiful in films of that decade? We have one in this film too. Played by Mithun, this kind priest not only listens to confessions, but is also well-versed in the martial arts, something we are privy to only towards the end of the film (else we might have actually been entertained).

As I said, the 80s rule. Thus we have more characters of Goan lineage; there is the hero himself of course, an orphan taken in by mobster Sikander (Malhotra), and Anthony’s friend Mike, a petty thief. Anthony works as a waiter, but dreams of becoming a hero. His big break comes when he auditions for, and gets the hero’s role in a film directed by an up-and-coming director (Dubey), and falls in love with the assistant director (Amrita). His career poised for take-off Anthony witnesses Sikander and his friends disposing off a corpse, and is plagued by guilt to do the right thing and report the murder. . .

MNIAG follows the well-worn path; this is a jaded, jaded story, and the sheen has worn off from overuse. Twenty years back I might have been satisfied with a film where the “good” and “bad” camps were well-defined and there weren’t any shades of grey. However, today, with directors pushing the envelope, borrowing from the past is a big no-no. Our sensibilities have changed, and subtlety, especially in the crime genre, is the name of the game.

And hard as it may be to believe, this is not the biggest flaw in the film. That, is it’s indecisiveness. The film starts off with our introduction to Anthony and the cast of characters around him, his guardian Sikander, Sikander’s pals (Tiwari, Pandey) and boss (Kher), Anthony’s friend Mike, his lady-love (Amrita), and the good priest Father Briganza, who’s taught Anthony everything he knows about morality. The introduction goes on mighty long, and just as I’m wondering if this is some one’s idea of a sob-story, the film changes tracks to traipse into romance-land.

Intermittently we also get a peek into Sikander’s world, with the undercurrents of jealousy and spite. I was beginning to get hopeful, because Kher’s character, Murtuza showed promise, and I was wondering if this might turn into a hard-hitting mafia-movie after all. Alas, it didn’t. Thus romance and venality take a back-seat and we are treated to a full-blown case of the “awakening of the conscience”. The director would have us believe that Anthony is a babe-in-the-woods type of guy. Unfortunately, knowing that Anthony is an orphan, a child of the streets, we don’t believe him. Thus, Anthony being all aghast-like at Sikander’s line of work, comes off as lot of hot air. His mouthing off about doing the right thing also serves to rob him off the one redeeming quality that we thought he had – loyalty.

If you’ve managed to stomach all that (yes, this is a L-O-N-G film) you get to the climax. An old-fashioned climax this one, the bad guy has the good guy all tied up, and is awaiting Anthony’s arrival to do the bloody deed. The director goes and spoils it all for us of course, by turning this into some king of jolly romp through the woods, because Anthony turns up with Mike and Father Braganza, and calls in reinforcements – loads of children. Non-violence (like the 80s) rules, because without guns, and without a drop of innocent blood being shed, the criminals are routed.

Need I say more? Well, I will. Not only does this film have a shaky script, it also has stilted dialogues, and bad characterization. The characters, such as they are, offer up no redeeming qualities. The hero is a flighty young man, who appears to have goals; however we never actually get to “see” or “feel” what he thinks; all we are left to surmise with are his superficial actions. The film fails to develop a sense of seriousness, and doesn’t come across as a full-time gag either. It totters between the two, to disastrous effect.

Apparently everyone who wants to, is getting a shot at stardom these days; much like in political circles, there is no minimum criteria. Thus we have Dwivedi, who doesn’t have the looks, and can’t act to save his life. My sympathies are with Amrita Rao, at being paired opposite Dwivedi. The girl deserves better. And for being given a role which has absolutely no impact (she might be used to that though). Jawed Sheikh who plays the policeman out to nail Sikander, comes across believably, but it’s a wasted effort, for his character has not much influence. Real actors like Kher and Malhotra are wasted in roles which play second fiddle to an unimaginative story-line. The music is ho-hum, save one song.

I think I see the director’s intention behind this film – to pour into this one film equally balanced elements of Bollywoodian entertainment. Unfortunately, none of these genres are handled well, or contribute to the film as a whole. MNIAG is very much like the first two houses that the Three Little Pigs built. All one has to do, is to huff and to puff, and it all falls down.

Posted in bollywood, rating-G | 2 Comments