Review : Ek chalis ki last local

Posted on June 27, 2007 by amodini

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

Rating : Above average (3.65/5)
Genre : Comedy / Thriller
Year : 2007
Running time : 2 hours 40 minutes
Director : Sanjay Khanduri
Cast : Abhay Deol, Neha Dhupia, Vinay Apte, Ashok Samarth, Deepak Shirke, Snehal Dabhi

EK CHALIS KI LAST LOCAL (ECKLL) : SLOW START, BUT GREAT PICK-UP

Black humor has few proponents in Bollywood. So when a new director like Sanjay Khanduri comes up with a story-based film, I viewed it with skepticism. When the film got off to a slow start I was sort of expecting it. And when it got really boring, I was sort of expecting that too. And just when I was ready to give up on it, it picked up. ECKLL has got to be the sleeper of the year.

OK, so there’s this yuppie guy Nilesh (Deol), who having had a few after-work beers with colleagues, misses the last local (1:40 am) to Vikhroli. Near the station, he meets a girl Madhu (Dhupia) who’s returning from a marriage function and has also missed her train. Thus, the two get-together (why exactly ? wasn’t able to figure that out) and decide to wait for the train together. Hmm. . . and what better way to while away the time than to wait at a nearby seedy beer bar ? (Now I really have misgivings about the film ).

So they’re at the beer bar, where Nilesh meets old-time friend Pat, and a whole host of other characters/goons, and manages to get embroiled in a murder for which he’s blamed ! Throw in a couple of other sub-plots involving ransom money, corrupt police officers and a gay mafia don and you have ECKLL. Yes, the story won’t win you a Pulitzer, but it’s got enough twists and turns to keep one engrossed. The moment the murder happens, things perk up. And it’s all uphill from there on.

The cast does well enough. Abhay Deol has proved himself before – he was good in his debut film “Socha na tha”, and he performs just as well here too. The little flaws I noticed in his character I’m attributing to the not-so-perfect etching out of his role. Neha Dhupia has improved on her acting skills, and actually looks believable here. Vinay Apte is the understated South Indian goon Ponappa and Ashok Samarth a convincingly corrupt cop.

This is a plot-driven film, a film where a seemingly normal guy gets caught up in a world of, I wouldn’t say abnormal, but stretching-the-norm kind of characters. It’s a very eclectic set ; they have their fetishes and they stick to them. You know – the kind of characters that are so off-the-wall that they fit right in ? Well, they’re in this film. The story wends it’s way around Mumbai’s underbelly – the mafia, and their fights, corruption and prostitution. The mood of the film is dark, there is violence, and lots of expletives being casually thrown about. Still there are situations that make you laugh out loud, and silliness that gives rise to mirth.

Khanduri handles all this very well for a first-timer. The film is a bold, innovative effort. And yes, it might be rough around the edges, maybe all the tees aren’t crossed and the I’s aren’t dotted, and the film doesn’t shine with the sheen of sophistication, but it’s definitely headed in the right direction. It’s helped on it’s way by fairly decent music; “Laree Choote” is a hit, and the almost acapella style arrangement of “Bheegi bheegi si” is catchy.

So yes, although Khanduri could polish his work a bit, this one deserves your time.

Posted in 2007, bollywood, drama, rating-PG13, recommended, thriller | 9 Comments

Review : Cheeni Kum

Posted on June 23, 2007 by amodini

Rating : Good (4.3/5)
Genre : Romance / comedy
Year : 2007
Running time : 2 hours 20 minutes
Director : R. Balakrishnan
Cast : Amitabh Bachchan, Tabu, Paresh Rawal, Zohra Sehgal

CHEENI KUM (CK) : THIS SPARKLY THING CALLED LOVE !

After a long time comes a film which features a romance between adults, instead of the puerile nonsense which passes for it in films like “Hum tum”, “Salaam Namaste” etc. Cheeni Kum has Amitabh as Buddhadev Gupta, a 64 year young chef-owner of a restaurant in London, a restaurant he claims is the best in London for Indian food. He is a perfectionist, who wants a cell-phone free kitchen and an absolute dedication to the art of cooking. His ego receives quite a dent when one day, while lecturing the chefs in his kitchen (as is his habit) he has a dish sent back by a customer, because the Zafrani Biryani (the dish in question) is too sweet. Arrogant Buddha instead of looking into the mistake directs his sarcastic tongue at the customer, a 34 year old Nina Verma (Tabu).

Thus starts a battle of wits, and ego (Nina cooks a perfect Zafrani Biryani and sends it back to Budhha’s restaurant). London with it’s frequest showers and the borrowing of umbrellas, helps heat up this war which has turned into something more. The hitch – the 30 year age gap, which Nina’s 58 year old father (Rawal) is unable to stomach . . .

This is a languorous film, to be savored and enjoyed. Witty repartees fly around and sarcasm and wry humor lace the conversations. The script is maturely written, but what impressed me most was the dazzling dialogue between the lead pair. While not eclectic or even intellectual, their conversation, is sparkly, filled with the dry dregs of humor and whimsy, a conversation between two mature adults, who’ve gotten beyond the me-girl, you-boy stage (you’d think most adults would have, but watch Hindi films and weep). Yes, there is desire – it doesn’t hurt that Amitabh looks as good as he does, or that Tabu is his tall, svelte and enigmatical foil, but it’s mostly about rapport, the meeting of the minds, the recognition that beyond the eventual union of our bodies, there is a definite, fun-filled and dynamic union of our souls. Love doesn’t have a sense of humor in most desi cinema. Pativrata nari, and pelvic thrusts is what we are used to. Cheeni Kum is a welcome and much needed change.

Amitabh is an icon. The only actor to date who’s had films written for him, to suit him, as he ages. The hero has become older with Amitabh. And Aks, Bunty-aur-Babli, Nishabd, Black, and now Cheeni Kum only prove how the film industry has carved out a special niche to accommodate one of it’s greatest and most accomplished sons. That said, I must admit that I thought he overdid it in the first few scenes of CK. Need arrogance be so explicit, so loud-mouthed ? Still he recovers remarkably and churns out an impressive performance as Buddha.

Nina is quite his equal. She parries beautifully on each of Budhha’s verbal thrusts, and he falls for all of her dead-panned traps. After watching this film , I can think of no other actress as perfect for portraying Nina as Tabu. Matching Bachhan with height, grace and talent, Tabu does an outstanding job as the confident yet understated Nina.

Buddha also has a mom in the film. I know, I know – how old must she be ? Zohra Sehgal as the WWF-loving, poor-cook to an accomplished chef mother, fits the part of a crabby-looking, caustic-tongued, young-hearted mom nagging her bachelor son. And Paresh Rawal with his almost caricaturish portrayal of a pseudo-Gandhivadi (speaks of Gandhi but loves his chicken), who’s married to the notion of age-appropriateness, is excellent. He weeps, he threatens, he glowers. And so well that I’m torn between laughing at his childishness, and weeping at his quandary.

Special mention must be made of Swini Khara, the child actress who plays Sexy, Buddha’s cancer-stricken, young neighbor, for doing such a great job. Her character is old beyond her years, yet she speaks guilelessly. Sassy (aren’t they all ?) and pert, and on first name basis with Buddha (she addresses him an “Tu”) some of the more poignant scenes in the film had her in them.

Balakrishnan directs well, and makes sure his characters are well-wrought. His script while taking a controversial topic head-on ( 30 years, he could be her father! Gasp ! INCEST – that towering dragon), also takes makes nice little digs at desi hypocrisy, and the idea that one’s mind must age with one’s body. The film features some very well-shot footage of beautiful Lutyen’s Delhi (Nina and her Dad live in one of the old-world bungalows close-by).The music by Ilayaraja enhances the film’ appeal, and the refrain “Cheeni Kum hai” is totally apt.

Romance is hard to do in film, and few movies succeed. CK is a sure-fire winner. A classy film, it’s hard to say much more than – it’s lovely.

Posted in 2007, bollywood, rating-PG13, recommended | 5 Comments

Review : Shootout at Lokhandwala

Posted on June 20, 2007 by amodini

[amazon_link id=”B0041AY3UI” target=”_blank” container=”” container_class=”” ]Shootout At Lokhandwala (Bollywood Movie / Indian Cinema / Hindi Film Blu ray Disc) [Blu-ray][/amazon_link]Rating : Poor (2.2/5)
Genre : Drama
Year : 2007
Running time : 2 hours
Director : Apoorva Lakhia
Cast : Sanjay Dutt, Sunil Shetty, Tushar Kapoor, Amitabh Bachhan, Vivek Oberoi, Dia Mirza, Abhishek Bachhan, Shabbit Ahluwalia, Amrita Singh, Neha Dhupia

SHOOTOUT AT LOKHANDWALA : BOLLYWOOD STYLE GUN-SLINGING AND The DEATH OF REALISM

I’d heard that the film was based upon the real-life shoot-out incident in Mumbai in 1992, so it was intriguing to see the teaser. It set the stage for something big. Of course I had not accounted for Sanjay Gupta’s taste or Lakhia’s direction, which brings this could-have-been-better film, down to it’s pathetic knees.

Sanjay Dutt, Arbaz Khan and Suni Shetty, non-actors all, portray the valiant threesome in charge of ridding the earth of scoundrels. These are the 3 policemen who are caught in the thick of the shoot-out. Dutt plays ACP Shamsher Khan, the officer-in-charge while Arbaaz as Inspector Javed Sheikh, and Shetty as Kaviraj Patel are his colleagues. Vivek Oberoi plays Maya Dolas, a gangster, stifling as a sub-ordinate to bhai “Dawood Ibrahim”, and desiring to run independent operations. And Tushar Kapoor is Dilip Bua, a gangster of an opposing gang who joins hands with Maya after ensuring his own gang’s demise. Khan, Sheikh and Patel must hunt down Maya and Co. but when the villains take refuge in an apartment in Lokhandwala, ACP Khan must conduct a long-running, daylight battle to nail these goons.

After the shoot-out ACP Khan and his team stand trial, and Bachhan is their lawyer, gruff and dictatorial. The film starts off with an introduction to Khalistani extremism, showing the spread of terrorism down to cities like Mumbai. And while some amount of violence is justified, this movie is just plain trigger-happy ! Lot’s of violence, most of it unnecessary and taking away from the impact of the story. Lakhia in his teaser hints at the real truth, but doesn’t come through on his promise. This film is as tantalizing as a wet rag.

As for the acting, there’s Dutt and his slouchy walk. And we know he can’t act. Same goes for Shetty, minus the slouch. Arbaaz Khan is, and it’s hard to do, actually a worse actor than the previous two. Tusshar Kapoor looks very little like a gangster. Can we ban him from the hindi film industry ? (Hope flickers.) And Vivek Oberoi seen on-screen after a long time, has lost the Midas touch. After fantastic films like Company, Saathiya, and Omkara Oberoi junior curls his lip as Maya. And that’s about all the acting he does.

Dia Mirza plays a reporter who comes out on the scene of the shoot-out and asks all the questions. Too bad she can’t put some energy into it. Amrita Singh as Dolas mother is part psycho, and part passive-aggressive – your pick. The characterization was sorta weird and didn’t even dent the story. Abhishek has a teeny-tiny role as a police officer who’s soon killed by Khalistani terrorists infiltrating Mumbai.

The film purports to be a “different” tale, but it’s more of the stuff we’ve already seen, and it’s worse done. The “bad guys” and mean, menacing, kill people like they’re swatting flies, frequent dance bars. So what’s new ? The policemen are graced by silly nuances, like Javed Sheikh’s diatribe to his son on studying hard, so he can become an engineer and not a police officer like his father, all of which come to nothing. The film in it’s attempt to get at the truth strays far from it. Sanjay Gupta’s style of film-making has always weirded me out, it’s wanna-be-stylish, and in the no man’s land between good and bad. With this one, Gupta land squarely in the it’s-a-stinker category.

Posted in 2007, bollywood, drama, rating-PG13, thriller, watchable | 3 Comments

Review : Life in a metro

Posted on June 15, 2007 by amodini

Rating : Good (4/5)
Genre : Drama
Year : 2007
Running time : 2 hours
Director : Anurag Basu
Cast : Shilpa Shetty, Shiney Ahuja, Kaykay Menon, Konkona Sen Sharma, Dharmendra, Nafisa Ali Sodhi, Sharman Joshi, Irfan Khan, Manoj Pahwa, Kangana Ranaut

LIFE IN A METRO : SMART, SLICK AND SATISFYING

Lately we have had a flurry of Hindi films which attempt to weave together multiple story lines. Metro is another. It’s slickly made, delves just enough into the story lines to get us involved, and etches out the characters superbly. Of course it doesn’t hurt the film any to have an impeccable star cast, or an absolutely gorgeous soundtrack.

The stories are interconnected (like in Crash). Everyone’s a friend, co-worker, relative etc. Shikha (Shilpa) and Ranjeet (Kaykay) are an unhappily married couple with a young daughter. Ranjeet is having an affair with sub-ordinate-at-work Neha (Kangana), while Rahul (Sharman) who’s apartment they are using for their trysts, and who’s also in love with Neha looks on helplessly. Neha rooms together with flat-mate Shruti (Konkona) who’s also Shikha’s younger sister. Shruti, is approaching 30, is still single but actively looking. When she meets Monty (Irfan) via a matrimonial website, he definitely doesn’t fit the profile of the prince she’s looking for.

Shikha visits her old dance teacher Shivani (Nafisa Ali) regularly in an old age home, and there, is witness to the re-blooming of a 40-year old romance between Shivani and her lost love Amol (Dharmendra). Shikha also meets actor Aakash (Shiney) and they develop feelings for each other. Meanwhile Neha attempts suicide after a fight with Ranjeet, in Rahul’s apartment, and Shruti is on the brink of having her prince-on-a-white-steed illusions shatter. And Rahul must decide between the twin dilemmas of love and money.

The surprise package of this film was Shilpa. I was quite taken aback to see that the woman can act. And how! Definitely her finest work to date, Shilpa IS unhappy housewife Shikha to the core. Kaykay and Shiney have proved their mettle again and again, so one expects nothing but the best from them. And they deliver. Kangana Ranaut has a different look as Neha although her character does have shades of the depressive/psychotic (how come she always lands these roles ?) Sharman appears on the big screen again after Rang de basanti and is just as endearing here. Konkona needs no introduction – she’s the best of the lot. Save Irfan Khan who’s just a tad better. Impossible, I know, but he really is that perfect as Monty. Nafisa Ali is as graceful as ever, and as for Dharmendra – oh, the slowly fading charm of an aging Greek God. Their old world romance got me all teary-eyed.

I’d be amiss if I didn’t sing praises of the sound-track too. “In dino” which is busting up the Hindi charts is a slow number, and the crowning glory of the album. “Alvida” and the almost playful “Baatein kuch ankahee si” are 2 other soulful melodies. Sometimes you hear songs before you see the film, and although you didn’t like them at first, you tend to like them better after you’ve seen the film. They grow on you. Metro’s music is not of that kind, it doesn’t need a prop to stand tall. The songs by themselves are such jewels you could hear them independent of visuals, and they’d tug at your heart-strings just as much.

Sometimes when watching the usual filmi fare, you wonder if a director with finesse could tell stories better. Anurag Basu (Gangster) is that director. Metro is not a happy film filled with sparkly, sassy people. It’s essentially melancholy, with undertones of friction and strife. It dwells on relationships which have suffered with time and circumstance, until they are so stretched they might just crumble. Basu handles each layer delicately, spinning the strands together until you have a beautifully finished product. In the end, for some people you weep, some tales are just too amusing, and some you shake your head and mutter “Why ? Oh, why ?”.

After quite a while, a truly satisfying film.

Posted in 2007, bollywood, drama, rating-PG13, recommended | 2 Comments

Review : Bheja Fry

Posted on June 13, 2007 by amodini

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

Rating : Above average (3.8/5)
Genre : Comedy
Year : 2007
Director : Sagar Ballary
Cast : Vinay Pathak, Ranvir Shourie, Rajat Kapoor, Sarika, Milind Soman, Tom Alter, Bhairavi Goswami

BHEJA FRY : FUNNY IN PARTS – GOOD FUN OVERALL

Vinay Pathak and Ranvir Shourie of the “Great Indian comedy Show” fame, appear in this off-the-wall comedy as Income tax officers with penchants for music and cricket. Both are excellent actors and while Vinay holds good as the main character, Ranvir adds his own special quirks in his short screen time. The film’s story is of music industry businessman Thadani (Kapoor) who along with his friends recruit talent to entertain them on their Friday night get-togethers. When Thadani comes across voluble IT clerk Bharat Bhushan (Pathak) who dreams of making it big with his music compositions, he decides to invite him as the “talent”. Of course Bhushan has no idea that he is an object of ridicule.

However as it happens Bhushan lands up at Thadani’s house, when Thadani has hurt his back and his wife (Sarika) has left him over a dis-agreement. In their efforts to bring back the wife, Bhushan proves himself a helpful, but bumbling fool and invites over Thadani’s nymphomaniac ex-girlfriend (Goswami) (and her dog), Thadani’s wife’s ex-lover (Soman) and honest Income Tax officer (Shourie) among others, thus creating the proverbial mountain out of the molehill. Thadani may never be able to get out of this one . . .

While not absolutely engrossing, this is a new genre of comedy for Hindi films, since it actually relies on situations and some intelligence. The characters are decently fleshed out; I especially liked the small touches – Bhushan’s carrying around the photo-album neatly wrapped in a plastic bag, and tied with a string, which he undoes EVERY time. Add to that his slicked back hair and the safari suit, and you had a perfect mascot for desi babu-dom.

Rajat Kapoor is quite an effective actor, but seems to lose his edge here. Shourie’s caricature-ish portrayal of a Muslim IT officer, if intentional, was beautifully done. Sarika is very good as Thadani’s singer wife. Milind Soman looks quite the music director with his overgrown beard, and has improved on his acting skills too. Tom Alter and Bhairavi Goswami have small roles with little impact.

This film is not in the same league as say, a “Khosla ka ghosla” but is a good effort nevertheless. Besides some laugh-out-loud lines, the film has you enjoying the discomfiture of the characters, and amused at the comedy of errors that can unfold from simple mistakes in life. This might be a remake of the French film “The Dinner Game” but it’s a good one. Truly avant-garde for a desi film, this is the kind of cinema I look forward to.

Posted in 2007, bollywood, comedy, watchable | Comments Off on Review : Bheja Fry

Review : Mistress of Spices

Posted on June 1, 2007 by amodini

mos6

Rating : Poor (2.5/5)
Genre : Drama / Romance
Year : 2006
Running time : 1.5 hours
Director : Paul Mayeda Berges
Cast : Aishwarya Rai, Bylan McDermott, Zohra Sehgal, Ayesha Dharker, Nitin Ganatra, Anumpam Kher, Padma Lakshmi

MISTRESS Of SPICES (MOS) : THE MISTRESS HATH NO MAGIC

This film has a high cringe factor.

“Why won’t you talk to me spices?” Uh..er.. who won’t talk to you ? And once realization dawns, cringe big time. “Don’t punish me chillies”. “Why are you warning me chillies ?” . Cringe, cringe, cringe. Almost dissappear into sofa. Chillies glower menacingly (apparently). Threatening music in background. To me the chillies looked much the same whether they were angry or whether they were not. What do angry chillies look like anyway ? Lest it look like I am going off my rocker and having conversations with the spices in my kitchen, I’ll clarify that the above philosophical ramblings are from Ms. Rai’s profound mutterings in MOS. Her character plays Tilo, a Mistress of Spices, indoctrinated by First Mother and sent out into the world to help people.

People apparently need help in San Francisco too, so Tilo is dispatched here, and situated in a charming, Spice Bazaar, where she doles out advice, sympathy, and little packets of cumin, pepper and asafoetida, as required.

mos7

Her magical spice powers can only be used to help others, not herself. And devotion to the Mistress-hood, requires that she never touch another’s skin, or step out of the store. Besides the practical problems of living this presents (and let’s not even go there) it seemed kind of incongruous in a world where Tilo’s Prince Charming appears on a motorbike, and crashes conveniently right at her very door-step.

Tilo is ofcourse drawn to him, but the chillies won’t listen, and keep warning her to not give in to her desires. Like any other normal human being Tilo wants both, her spices and her man. And rightly so. Who would want to give up Dylan McDermott? And how can one give up achaar ? Quite impossible. Anyway, you get the drift. Does Tilo manage to quell the chillies, and their whispering, or must she listen to First Mother and return to where she came from ?

Now, although the book MOS is the least favorite of the Divakaruni books I’ve read, I must say that the film is quite a class apart. And below. One does not easily forget the awfulness of it. I also hated “Like water, for chocolate”. This whole food mixed with mysticism thing I do not get. And add Ms. Rai to the mix, and you can forget believability altogether. The reason I believe is in the medium. One can read about “threatening” spices in a book, and shrug it off, but to actually see a living, breathing Ms. Rai “talk” to the chillies, does things to your brain.

mos4

Plus Ms. Rai’s other natural (dis)abilities – she simpers, she acts coy, she puts on an accent, and the whopper – she can’t act, don’t enhance the film any. Dermott, although he fits the part visually, seems bored and tired and wanting to get out of there. The couple lack chemistry. Zohra Sehgal appears as the First Mother. A bigger misfit for the role I couldn’t have imagined. A “First Mother” I’d thought would have looked calm, composed and angelic. Sehgal is naturally crabby looking, and seems more like a backside-whupping grand-mother than the Grand Dame of Spices. Nitin Ganatra is the cabbie Haroun, and is quite accomplished. So is Ayesha Dharker, who’s Haroun’s neighbor Hameeda. Anupam Kher has a small role as Dadaji, whose visiting the store to get advice on how to keep his grand-daughter (Padma Lakshmi) from straying.

The story unfolds excruciatingly slowly. It’s hard to feel for the characters. The dialogues sound awkward and contrived. The film doesn’t flow, the action never jells, and the romance never sparkles. A truly terrible film.

Posted in bollywood | 4 Comments

Review : Bengali Night

Posted on May 25, 2007 by amodini

[amazon_link id=”B0026B6WVW” target=”_blank” container=”” container_class=”” ]The Bengali Night[/amazon_link]Rating : Below average (2.7/5)
Genre : Drama
Year : 1988
Running time : 2 hours
Director : Nicolas Klotz
Cast : High Grant, Supriya Pathak, Shabana Azmi, Soumitra Chatterjee, John Hurt

THE BENGALI NIGHT : A CHORE TO WATCH

The distinctions between good cinema and bad cinema have never been very clear to me. It’s all very subjective, right ? My cinematic trash might be your Dhoom2, and vice versa. So of course, when I chance upon little know titles, I presume them little known gems and proceed to spend three-ish hours watching a film which is neither engaging nor moving at a fast enough clip.

On further crunching of the filmi grey cells, one decides that there should ideally be 3 categories : good, bad and no-need-to-watch . This film “the Bengali Night” definitely comes in the third category. It’s not a good film – I heartily de-recommend it. If there was a higher message (Amazon reviewers thought so), it slipped by me totally. The only thing this film has going for it (besides of course the amazing Shabana Azmi) , is Hugh Grant or so I thought until I saw the film. Grant in this film is so very young – remember this came out in 1988 – he’s about 20 years older now, and I must say he looks much better now.

Circa 1988, Supriya Pathak was a thin waif. Well, OK you still can’t call her a waif – I mean if I inhaled really deep and blew out with full force she isn’t getting blown away, now or any time previously. Thin, yes, waif, no. And with a booming laugh that must be heard in the nether worlds, waif somehow just doesn’t fit. These days, you can watch Pathak, who’s tripled in size, as Gujrati housewife Hansa Parekh in comedy serials like “Instant Kichdi”. I wonder how that must feel – going from a Bazaar to a Khichdi ? But who’s to say ? Paapi pet ka sawaal and all that. Shabana Azmi then still looked young. Azmi has now almost retired from films (save the occasional “Honeymoon travels”)

The film is based on the book “La nuit Bengali” by sociologist Mircea Eliade, and is apparently based upon a true story. Allan (Grant) is an engineer, working under Mr. Sen (Soumitra Chatterjee). When Allan falls sick, Sen graciously invites him into his home to recuperate, and asks him to stay on even after, if he so wishes. Allan, who does, keeps to himself, until the elder daughter of the household Gayatri (Pathak) draws him out. They fall in love, but when this is known by the elder Sens, the repercussions are not pleasant for the lovers . . .

Now the story seemed a little off to me; thus did not feel Allan’s angst. Why would the Sens encourage Allan, a young man, to stay unless they had other motives ? It was made clear in the film that they had no such designs; thought him a son, a brother for Gayatri etc. and the whole premise seems a little shaky. As far as acting goes, Azmi, as Gayatri’s mom Indira Sen, is her usual magnificent self. Pathak appears naive enough, and worried enough, as an unmarried, young, “good” Bengali girl would be. Grant is not as polished as he is now, although one can see he’s trying. Soumitra Chatterjee as Mr.Sen is very new “English” with his “Allan, my boy”. Utpal Dutt had a fleeting role as the postman at the Sen’s residence.

The film is sort of choppy, editing a bit sparse. The film doesn’t flow. And the DVD’s sound quality wasn’t very good – background sounds at times louder than the dialogues. Parts of the film, such as those of Allan with his friends in their little apartment, seemed surreal. This film left me unmoved. I can’t actually call it ghastly, because I really don’t feel enough about it to decide. But you get my drift.

Posted in All Netflix, bollywood, english, rating-PG15 | 4 Comments

Review : Just Married

Posted on May 19, 2007 by amodini

Rating : Average (3.0/5)
Genre : All-in-one
Year : 2007
Running time : 3 hours 17 minutes
Director Meghna Gulzar
Cast : Fardeen Khan, Esha Deol, Satish Shah, Kiron Kher, Mukul Dev, Sadiya Siddiqui, Tarina Patel, Raj Zutshi, Perizad Zorabiyan, Bikram Saluja

JUST MARRIED (JM) : Sweet, simple and very average

Another movie with a bunch of people on a bus. And again all honey-mooners. Or almost. This did remind me of Honeymoon Travels, but HMTPL was so much more interesting. HMTPL had many stories running in parallel, each of them being equally important. JM, on the other hand, is focussed on one particular couple Abhay (Fardeen) and Ritika (Esha) and the others are just there to support them or make a point for the script.

Meghna Gulzar in her second directorial venture after “Filhaal”, in which she also tried to portray the sensitive side of an unusual story, tries to show us the bonding of two strangers after they’re married. So, Fardeen is the affable, ex-NRI Abhay, and Esha is the pretty Ritika Khanna. Both harbor doubts about the arranged marriage system, but have not the gumption to question their parents outright. Thus, the duo find themselves at the wedding Mandap, and off honey-mooning to Ooty soon after.

Since they are veritable strangers, there is awkwardness and reticence, mostly on Ritika’s part. In the film, she is supposed to be an educated (MA) girl holding down her first job. However, Ritika appeared to be what can only be described as painfully shy, something which I’d thought a job could cure you of (how do you work with people if you can’t even look them in the eye ?). The director seems to substitute shyness for awkwardness. And while I can understand the awkwardness, I wasn’t sure why Ritika was SUCH a shrinking violet.

Abhay’s character is a nice guy and all, and he’s making a real effort to allay Ritika’s fears, whatever they may be. But I’m thinking – what about the guy ? It’s his wedding too. Doesn’t he have qualms ? What about his feelings ? Ritika and Abhay should have an equal awkwardness so to speak. And they don’t. Once they get back from the honeymoon to the joint family home, I could think of Ritika’s burden as heavier (the whole “the woman must adjust” idea), but at the honeymoon, just the two of them – no kith and kin to cause trouble – it should have been a level playing field.

The film thus moves along, very, very slowly. In the middle it got boring and I almost gave up hope. My husband didn’t like it at all; he found Ritika and Abhay boring – as in boring characters. They weren’t really smart, or snappy, or even energetic. They had no bright ideas, they didn’t say much striking stuff. My take on that was that at that minute level, in the nitty-gritty of everyday lives, we are all boring people. But then, must you take the film down to that level, and should you be making a film that depicts that “boring-ness” ?

You can, theoretically. Will it work ? That’s sorta up in the air. But to do it so that it sticks in your audience’s head, and nobody can just wave it away as a simple little bit of fluff (which it is in JM) takes talent and/or vision. Which I’m not sure that Meghna, and Gulzar’s daughter she might well be, has at this point of time. Most people I know have actually either liked this film, or are indifferent to it. No-one thought it bad. It’s considered a simple story told simply. Not outstanding, not fantastic, not “oh my God what a movie it was”. Just simply that it was nice and that was all it was.

I do think that the supporting cast were all very competent, and that’s added considerable sparkle to a film that could have turned to be as dull as ditchwater. There was Sadiya Siddiqui and Mukul Dev as a newly-wed, urban, Muslim couple, Satish Shah and Kirron Kher as an older couple with many years of married life, Raj Zutshi and Tarina Patel as the American-born/NRI couple, and Perizad Zorabiyan and Bikram Saluja as the very-much-in-love couple. Kher and Shah were, as reputation suggests, very good. And Esha, in mannerisms and acting, is very much her mother’s daughter.

I do appreciate that we have now in Bollywood directors with varying sensibilities; our good fortune thus being that we now have a burgeoning “multiplex” genre – films that stray from the filmi-masala factory and tell different stories in ways yet unexplored in traditional Hindi cinema. Still not everyone that tries succeeds, and while Meghna Gulzar seems to be taking steps in the right direction, she isn’t yet there.

When she is, hopefully some time (soon) from now, we will surely have a much finer product than “Just Married”.

Posted in 2007, bollywood, watchable | 3 Comments

Review : Ta ra rum pum

Posted on April 30, 2007 by amodini

Rating : Below average (2.8/5)
Genre : All-in-one
Year : 2007
Running time : 3 hours
Director : Siddharth Anand
Cast : Saif Ali Khan, Rani Mukherjee, Javed Jaffrey, Angelina Idnani, Ali Haji

TA RA RUM PUM : SLICK PACKAGE CAN’T SAVE THIS ONE

Another film from the director who made Salaam Namaste. And as I leave the theatre, I’m wondering how old the guy is. He’s actually 27 or more, I’m amazed to find. You’d think at 27 you’d make less juvenile movies. But no, TRRP proves me wrong.

I’d seen the trailer, so had a pretty good idea what the movie was about. If you’ve heard about it even in passing, you know it’s about car-racing – Rajveer Singh or RV (Saif) being the car-racer, who’s starts out as pit-crew but ends up behind the wheel when he accidentally impresses a racing team’s manger (Jafri). He also meets pretty young pianist Radhika (Rani), they fall in love and wedding pheras (sans Radhika’s Dad’s blessings) follow. A lovely modern house, and two precocious, annoying kids (Champ and Princess) help complete the suburban, desi, richie-rich package in Manhattan.

And all is well until (surprise, surprise) RV speeds into disaster at the race-track . . .

The film is set in New York, so nice, polished locales are a given. Plus if you’ve seen SN, you know the director pays attention to detail – clothes, sets the works. The film even features a cartoon character filled song. The story is the usual – happy-happy romancing, marriage and kids etc. and then problems strike. The film ran along it’s predicted path pretty tamely, and if I had to relate to you the entire story verbally, it would be a saga of un-ending sentences starting with boring “And then ……”s.

By the time the interval came, it seemed like eons had passed, and not a single emotion in that first-half had moved me – I had trouble believing, and sympathizing with the flaky characters. One does not feel for morons. Major flaws in Rani’s characterization – pre-marriage, she’s thrifty even being super-rich, and post-marriage the woman can’t open her mouth to tell her extravagant, “let’s pay for everything in installments” husband to straighten up. Plus being a parent, I was pretty ticked off with the whole “let’s not tell the kid’s we are poor” philosophy. Kids are smarter than that – they’ll cotton on. Yes, people make mistakes, and do dumb stuff, and my problem is not with the fact that Radhika and RV do all of that – what leaves me unmoved is that they have very few redeeming qualities.

Rani appears as a rich, college-girl majoring in music, in the first half of the film. Thus, I assume the choice of mini-skirts – which Rani can’t carry off at all (unless she majorly loses weight). She ends up looking dumpy. And that terrible, fusili-inspired hair-do didn’t help at all. What exactly was that supposed to be ? Delicate tendrils of hair framing her face? It widened her face, and she looked vacuous. Along with the mini-skirted bottom, she looked like a walking-talking cylinder – which is amazing because she’s a gorgeous woman and I’d imagine you’d have to try hard to make her look bad. Saif could stand to lose some weight too.

The kids, who were specially selected to play these roles, did well, considering the terrible, and sometimes very mature lines they were given – I’m thinking which kid actually talks like this ? Kids are mostly smart and interesting to talk to – why are they always so annoyingly ESP-ish on desi films ? Whatever credit is due in this film, goes to Javed Jafri as strongly accented Harry, and Rani who’s managed to imbue this improbable role with some sincerity. I didn’t feel Saif in this film at all, no spark, no sizzle, and his sweat-encrusted face (in his helmet) was a total turn-off – he looked like he had cold sores all over his face. Plus the name RV – when I hear RV, all I can think of is recreational vehicle (the kind SRK drove in Swades).

The second half is just about tolerable, and that’s a relative measure because the first half left me indifferent. Tepid, very tepid, and in retrospect something I wished I hadn’t watched.

Posted in 2007, bollywood, watchable | 2 Comments

Review : Teen Deewarein (3 Walls)

Posted on April 23, 2007 by amodini

Rating : Above average (3.8/5)
Genre : Drama
Year : 2003
Director : Nagesh Kukunoor
Cast : Naseeruddin Shah, Jackie Shroff, Nagesh Kukunoor, Juhi Chawla, Gulshan Grover

TEEN DEEWAREIN : TWIST IN THE TAIL !

I’d heard a lot about this film, and everyone pretty much gave it rave reviews. And while Kukunoor has proved to be quite adepting at presenting stories on the screen (Dor, Iqbal), he is not quite the director, yet. Expecially when he casts himself. Still, this is an interesting film, and well worth the watch.

The film is about 3 convicts on death-row, and a film-maker Chandrika (Chawla) who comes in to interview them and get to know more about their lives and compulsions. There is Jaggu (Shroff) a philosophical almost-poet, who believes he deserves to be hanged and that death is his atonement. There is Nagya (Kukunoor), who tries to convince everyone he knows that he hasn’t committed the crime he’s going to be hanged for. Hope is what his life hinges now, believing that one day his truth will come to light. The 3rd convict is Ishaan (Shah) a small-time con-man, who’s gotten an accidental death on his hands. He seems the most unrepentant of the lot.

Chandrika follows them around their daily chores, talks to them and films them talking about their lives and their guilt. The wife of an abusive man, Chandrika also has her own problems to deal with. But as Ishaan discovers later, Chandrika has motives beside the obvious for choosing to dissect these three convict lives . . .

The story has quite a few twists and turns and unexpected connections. This de-glamourised film is presented sans frills (no song and dance routine here) and is stark and at times brutal (like the scene where Chandrika’s husband tells her he wishes that she was a bit more attractive). The actors do a competent job, although I could have done without Kukunoor as Nagya; it’s not that he’s ineffective, his acting just lacks the punch which comes with a strong delivery.

The script and screenplay are fairly strong, so the film holds your interest, although if you’ve watched other Hollywood convict films (The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile) you might not be quite as enthusiastic as a greenhorn.

Posted in bollywood, drama, watchable | 2 Comments