Archive for the ‘movie reviews’ Category

Cocktail’s Veronica & Meera – behind the stereotypes

Posted: July 16, 2012 by moifightclub in bollywood, cinema, movie reviews, reviews
Tags: , , , , , , ,
15

SPOILER ALERT

Not again, I said. Bhartiya naari gets the guy. Boozie naari gets converted to bhartiya nari as she tries to get the guy. And the guy is desi at heart who is also Mama’s boy- will sleep with boozie, will fall in love with bharatiya. Imtiaz Ali, Sajid Ali and Homi Adjania took bollywood’s oldest and most favourite formula of love traingles and did just one brilliant thing – remove the communication gap between the three which has always been a bane in desi love triangles. So all three of them sat together and discussed it openly – tum mujhse, main isse pyaar karta hoon. And then? Nobody had any clue what to do – writers, characters, makers. As the formula goes, cool and confused lovers will travel a distance to discover true love. London —-> Cape Town —-> Delhi.

Fatema disagrees. She says there’s more to it. So, over to Fatema Kagalwala and Nadi Palshikar for the rest. We are going with the Cocktail trend. This post is also by 1 guy + 2 women –  @CilemaSnob

Cinema feeds us so many stereotypes. Loudly, brazenly, irresponsibly. In the race for finding the formula, women characters have been brutally pigeonholed in our cinema for ages, making us believe there isn’t anything more. The curse of populist feminism as well as quick mass appeal has given us generations of blanket portrayals of loud, gender role-defying women as ‘strong’ and shy, silent and traditional women as helpless wimps. It is easy for us to see a gun-toting Zoya and the sassy Veronica as perfectly liberated but is it a true portrayal of liberation or is there more? Are we missing something because the definitions we are fed are shaky themselves and years of gender polarisation have left us no gaps to sieve characters that don’t fit in? Is Meera as wimpy as she comes across and is Veronica as care-a-damn as she looks? Let’s uncover the world behind the characters of Veronica and Meera discovering what makes them tick and different in Imtiaz Ali’s and Homi Adajania’s Cocktail. First, over to Nadi…

Veronica’s Parents. They send her money but do not really care. So our girl is a wild child. An attention-seeking child. She breezes into places and then behaves brazenly. Look at me, I am being bad. The loud music gets faster and faster until towards the end she says, “I can’t do this anymore” Tantrums are tiring. The tantrums have not worked either. Kya hai mere paas, she asks- not once saying “what did I get after loving you so much?” There has been no question of that anyway. There was supposed to be no question of that anyway. But that she is fatigued, exhausted. Going round and round like a child having a fit. Having banged her head against a wall to seek attention and then complaining that her head hurts to the same person that never saw anyway. For now that she knows that the love she wants can never be had, does she want to gain bliss by being child to this couple? This couple, who unlike her own parents, will stay together. This woman who has given her house a feeling of ‘Home’, this man for whom, what started as a superficial thing has turned into a love so deep that he has to be clung to- whatever maybe the rules of the game. Like Martin who does not mind being scolded like a child and then comforted by his wife Antonia when he finds her with Palmer in iris Murdoch’s A Severed Head. Like Anais Nin in some moments, felt about Henry Miller and his wife. And in our own cinema- my favourite ‘triangle- Gulzar’s Ijaazat (based on  Jatugriha by Subodh Ghosh)  where Maya says  about Sudha, her lover’s wife- “Didi maarengi toh nahi” while Mahender has said – I will put you in Sudha’s care. She will know what is to be done with you. And the bitter words between Sudha and Mahender that Maya hears over the phone- which remind her of the fights between her parents. And she goes away-

But coming back to Veronica-

Outside the club, Gautam glances at Meera- like an adult signalling to another about taking care of a child who is sick. Veronica quiet easily slides into the role of child being taken care of by parents. Two people who love each other, and yes she knows that, but are responsible for her well being. Deep, difficult, this. The scene – Lest we do not recognize that this has gone beyond mere two friends taking care of a drunk friend, is the explicitly spelt out – “Why can’t Gautam take me to the bathroom?” The tantrum of “Why can’t Daddy take me to the bathroom?” which is usually explained by a “Because you are a big girl now, and so you go with the women.” Which usually appeases the child.

But here the script goes dangerously close to the enactment of incest or rather an incest –like fantasy with the shocking “There isn’t anything you haven’t seen before.”And how easy it is to sink into fantasies. (Maybe this is the way he need not give this girl up?) Sink together near Veronica’s bed after tucking her in and ask a very adult, really caring. Are you okay? Parents saying thank God, the children have finally slept.

The next day- while Meera who is good and kind has done what she thinks is the right thing – gone away, we have veronica trying to win Gautam back. Not like an adult woman. But emphasizing the imitation of Meera – See, I got the recipe off the net – I will cook – just like her. The apron almost a disguise – poised with a ladle in hand. Saying defiantly – I sent her away. The simulation of the fantasy of mother being banished – I’ll look after father – I can even make ‘the yoghurt salad thing’ and the difficult biryani. And here, thankfully, I thought, Gautam does the responsible thing. He is angry, rightfully so. From somewhere far away there was more than money coming for this neglected child at last. Sensible, stern ‘parenting’?

And ‘stern’ I do not think she would mind. For looking back, we now remember that comic scene with Gautam’s Mama telling her how to sit properly, for Kavita Kapoor would surely disapprove. This comic scene in retrospect, seems poignant as this is what Veronica has never had – a gentle reprimand for the way she has been dressing and behaving wilder and wilder.

Here, when Gautam does the right thing- reprimands her for this silly behavior, looks for Meera, I saw hope for Veronica. After that  little relief that is awarded to her – Gautam looking after her- making her laugh, feeding her. Plaiting her hair- (reminding me of that other film – Sadma which too hinted at a kind of quasi-incestuous relationship), I hoped Veronica would realize the situation that she was in.

And so we are okay with Meera ordering Gautam to take care of Veronica, this being agreed to. Sure. Sometimes the writer would like to provide just a little succour for a character he can’t help but love.

And Veronica did not let us down. Being cared for a while- like someone blowing softly on all those wounds the crazy girl carried on herself- the hospital-bed scene actually bringing out the wounds, making visible, the scars of Veronica. This almost dying and then being given a chance to make a new beginning- and she does realize what the situation is. And decides to restore the rightful couple to each other. It is here that the script is not very kind to this, its most lovable character. And we see that although the character arc of Veronica seems to be on the way to something good, Gautam has not become adult enough. So there’s the jumping out of autorickshaw and dialogue like “My best friend’s marrying my other friend” or something as corny as that! And our photographer girl who has put them in the rightful frame and would have liked to click and walk away, is pulled into the frame- collective hugs all around. Once again, she is let down. You can’t really blame the Kapoors for not knowing the right thing to be done of course – after all, the D’costas didn’t.

For this is where she should have been restored to her place, the door shut in her face, so to speak. However traumatic it might be for her, the script should have left her behind while Gautam goes to India (Meera’s located nicely in this other separate world to where he can go ‘leaving’ Veronica to her own resources of which she has quite a few, considering her realization etc).

But even as the potential darkness is broken by a loud song, as the screen fulfils the Indian fantasy of both these girls dancing with the hero,  I say to myself – once again a ‘not really my type of movie’ has connected in a way I cannot describe. Once again, just a love story – good looking people in pretty locales – written by Imtiaz Ali has gone beyond – has shown me the painful journey, the remarkable transformation of a character. And just like that other time, Homi Adajania has very subtly gone dangerously close to taboos, hinted at the terrible hurts that lie behind our ‘bad’ behavior.

And now Meera. Nadi Palshikar’s intuitive post on Veronica made Fatema want to delve deeper into Meera. She was intrigued to uncover the world behind her character because something told her there was more to her. She felt Imtiaz hadn’t written a stereotype howmuchever our sensibilities may push us to believe… Read on.

Meera – In our cinematic landscape where women characters have to be one of a few ‘types’, on first glance Meera seems to be your regular chhui-mui, sacrificing goat because she knows no better. The first time we see her she is dressed in a demure salwar kameez, with jhumkas and a mangalsutra, extremely uncomfortable sitting close to a garrulous gent on a cramped flight to London. She manages her luggage awkwardly while she waits for a husband who doesn’t show up. We see her as a reserved and simple girl from the heartland of India (assumed by her dress and demeanour) and think she will be the dependant, helpless type as we are generally shown such girls to be. Soon after a long wait at the airport of a foreign land where she knows no one, has no place to stay and whose ways are completely unfamiliar to her, she heads to the police station to seek her husband. Her first action when she meets trouble is to look for a solution. Her first thought is not a victimised ‘oh what will I do?’ something we’d expect a character like hers to automatically do. She breaks down only after her husband brutally rejects her. We see her hiding in the bathroom of a store sobbing away…It is only later that we understand she wasn’t sobbing because she was feeling helpless at her plight but because she was deeply hurt. If by then we have already typecast her in our heads we are likely to miss out on more that we learn of her later…

Meera is a product of her upbringing. An upbringing that is rooted in values very Indian across the spectrum of positives and negatives. She does not understand live-in relationships and relationships without commitment. She is a self-respecting girl, one who is a little out of her depth in this foreign land but who does not let that become an excuse to wallow in self-pity. She willingly looks for and takes up a job to support herself, as if it is the most natural thing to do. Yes, she blames herself for her husband leaving her and that hints at a typically low self-esteem but how many of us haven’t blamed ourselves for our partners leaving us? Especially if you come from a space where marriages are sacred and a world where women’s identities are closely linked to their house-bound roles…Actually even without either…

One would expect Meera to ‘Indianise’ the rootless Veronica and Gautam, and the film to an extent. Any other film would have done so and that’s where Meera’s character becomes independent of the demands of the story. It does not use her character to sell Indian values, which is what we are used to seeing. She is who she is but she also lets the two stay who they are. She draws the limits of her comfort but does not impose her will. Yes, she does lack a confidence in herself in relation to the larger world but not in her own values; hence, she does not shy from praying to her gods in the irreverent household she lives in but refuses to give friendly hugs to Gautam, even after they become friends. Yet, she straddles both worlds beautifully, allowing herself to change some and then drawing her boundaries tight. She keeps emphasising ‘Main aisi hi hoon’. She rejects an idea not because it scandalises her but because that is who she is and that is what she identifies with. That is what she does not want to change… She does not flee at the first hint of trouble, but then we know she is not the fleeing type. She leaves when she thinks that is the right thing to do. Right not because she believes sacrifice is a great virtue and as a woman she is supposed to be so, but because that is what she sees as doing the right thing by her friend Veronica, someone she has come to love like a sister.

It is a thin line Imtiaz Ali and Homi Adajania tow in keeping Meera just this side of stereotyping but they do it with an intuitiveness and maturity we aren’t used to. It is another thing that a lot of this is swept by in dialogues and the compulsive yuppie-ness of the film. Some more is in the over-weaning need of romantic films to be dreamily so. Extrapolating a bit, it is this strength of character that must have made the flighty Gautam fall in love with her, something the film should have emphasised rather than go on a romantic trip of ‘you are this’ and ‘you are that’. She grounded him, something Veronica (or any other girl) couldn’t do for him. Isn’t love after all, about finding a home for our souls to rest in? Gautam had to find it in Meera because she always chooses to remain who she is not because she cannot go beyond her boundaries but because she won’t. Choice is empowerment and what better symbol of strength than the ability to make it?

It is for this that despite her shy exterior, Meera comes across as a woman stronger than cinema would have us believe. Because being true to oneself requires far more strength than we can imagine, in cinema as much as in life. It isn’t an exciting thing many times, hence Meera is a boring character and Veronica is attractive. But isn’t the foundation of ‘self’ far more solid than colourful antics and a glossy exterior that barely manage to hide the chinks inside? As a film, Cocktail didn’t strike me as anything more than a warm romance but all its superficiality couldn’t hide the worlds of its characters…created with a subtlety we aren’t used to watching.

50 reasons to watch Supermen Of Malegaon

Posted: July 3, 2012 by moifightclub in cinema, Indie, Movie Recco, movie reviews, reviews
Tags: , , , , ,
17

Indian cinema turns 100 this year. And there’s a great film currently playing in the theatres which celebrates this magic of cinema. It’s a small film which you might not have heard about because it has no ads on tv, no chartbuster songs on radio and no hoardings to boast about. The film is Supermen Of Malegaon (SoM). And indian cinema can’t get a better homage than this documentary made by Faiza Ahmad Khan.

The film has been doing the festival rounds since last few years. But good or bad, we don’t watch docus in theatres. We don’t even release them to give it a chance. Thanks to PVR Directors Rare, SoM has got a limited release across few PVR properties. Make sure you watch it. And if you have any doubts, we are giving you not one or two, but 50 reasons to watch it. And since “crowd-funding” for indie films is in vogue these days, we crowd-funded this post to go with the same spirit.

Do watch and do contribute your reason in the comments section. Will start with mine.

1. Because Vijay and Ravi can finally move on. Mere paas ma nahi, cinema hai! It has one of the best, unrehearsed and unscripted scene between two brothers – one consumed by the addiction called cinema and the other……well, watch it. Poignant.

2. If you watch or love or make cinema and you miss SoM in theatres, you’d miss the cinema equivalent of finding the G-spot – @varungrover

3. Because 1hr of supermen of malegaon is more fun than 2hrs of Spiderman – @ronyd

4. Because even Brando would be appreciative of Jor-El and the ‘method’ here – @krnx

5. Because it blurs the line between fiction & docu. It was more entertaining than a commercial Hindi feature –  @ghaywan

6. Because SoM doesn’t sell itself on sympathy like the recent “indie” filmmaking fad – @auteurmark

7. Because these people have not collaborated on the film : Samir, Sajid, Bhansali, Shetty, Bellary, Ekta, RGV, Bhatts, Kohlis, Kapoors – @mihirfadnavis

8. Because it’s a better (hate the term but…) Love Letter to Cinema than ‘The Artist’ or ‘Hugo’ could ever be… @jahanbakshi

9. You’ll laugh a lot, being fully aware that there’s a lot of grimness in the tale as well. Its a unique feeling   @RangbadluGirgit

10. ‘Pairon ki bediyaa khwabo ko bandhe nahi re..’ Madhyam ki garibi sabse badi prerna kaise banti hai @koripaati

11. See Pic

12. Why else do we watch films ? To get entertained ! And entertained you shall be !! – @z_maahir

13. Location is not Switzerland and the lead would not look like a million bucks even with plastic surgeries STILL SoM is Beautiful – @humHeroine

14. Superman with a 24″ waist. A costume that involves rubber chappals. A film that is inspired and inspiring – @ashish_mehta_

15. Because it celebrates the simple human notion that if you are passionate about something then no one can stop you. There is always a way around. Always. Equipments, technology, know-how, resources etc just don’t matter. As long as you want it badly enough – @ghantaguy

16. You should watch SOM because it will make you pick up a camera and shoot – @varunvarghese

17. Bolchaal mein itne achhey Urdu shabd bahut dinon baad sun-ne ko miley – Rakhi (on FB)

18. That cinema by all other names would still be magical! – Suhel Banerjee (on FB)

19. Kyuki bhai ise ‘naa dekhne ka’ ek bhi reason nahi hai ! Puneet Sharma (on FB)

20. Which was the last film you saw that you wished you could see more of? – @gyandeep4a

21. For one poem Chand. Just that is worth the ticket money – @shubhas

22. Because it gets over in about an hour and you won’t get bored. Forget all the irony and the film about a film business blah blah – Swati Trivedi

23. Kyuki aisi filme dekhkar khud se ye sawaal poochhne ka man karta hai…. Ab to bahana banaane chhod de, ja aur kuch man ka bana !!!! Puneet Sharma (on FB)

24. It makes us feel that good filmmakers still exist. Faisal Numan (FB)

25. See pic

26. The one reason that counts – it is paisaa vasool – Vinay Jain (FB)

27. Simple. Because its one of the best films you will see this year –  Anant Raina (FB)

28. Because it makes you smile. The passion for Cinema in India is equivalent to religion. This 60 minute beauty inspires everyone to do something even if you cannot afford it – Abhinav Bhatt (on FB)

29. kyonki yehi Cine-Maa hai!! – Nitin Baid (FB)

30. “Life is full of sorrow, so it is very important to dream. No one should ever stop dreaming,” says the narrator of #Supermen of Malegaon, the funniest, sweetest movie I have seen in a long time. The writer in the movie says things like “Most of the films you see is only 20% output. Imagine being a writer and having to live with 80% of the angst. It’s hard. But it doesn’t stop you.” In an age of multi-crore promotion budgets for glitz, here is an honest movie with a soul, a story of dreams and passion, a movie that you won’t see ads and promos of, as they have no money for them. It’s playing at PVR Juhu at 6.20 pm. I am going back for the lines. Who is coming? – Lalita Iyer (FB)

31. Because tragedy brings out the best comedy – @ronyd 

32. Because it completes the Unique distinction of having watched Superman, Spiderman and Batman in the same year – @nitinnair81

33. Because its a RICH film made by POOR people which you get to see in a POSH theater for CHEAP price. Rs 110. Pvr Juhu. 6.20pm – @navjotalive

34. Because despite it being a documentary avoids all the docu cliches and still becomes accessible for just about every man jack who likes movies – @mihirfadnavis

35. See pic

36. Have you ever seen a superman wearing naadewala kachha and slippers, and ppl wiping their face with his red cape? @thepuccacritic

37. Because, in fact more than Hazanavicius’ film, Supermen Of Malegaon could actually be called ‘The Artist’ and *earn* that title – @jahanbakshi

38. As a filmmaker, it made me want to get out and start shooting my first. Thoroughly inspiring! @ghaywan

39. Not everyday you see a film where the hero is flying on one hand and paddling on a float in the river the next min @HumHeroine

40. FUN ke beyond, sach aur jhoot se pare , ek khula maidan hai.. Superman Of Malegaon tumhe waha milega @AmritaThavrani

41. Well, one reason is definitely that writer, Farokh. He had more personality than half the film industry combined –  @pradeep_smenon

42. Because it really does take supermen only to make films – Malhar Salil (on FB)

43. Because if you believe in your dreams, it can happen. Passion for cinema = SoM = Simply Superb!!  – Himanshu Vora

44. Without a VO, the film is spoken from the residents’ pov which makes it experiential than being a hawk eyed narrative – @ghaywan

45. Because some guy in a small town made his film Undaunted by BO, ratings, festivals,100crs or twitter trends. And that’s rare – Vasan Bala

46. Because it’s the best rated film of the year. See pic

47. The writter in Supermen ka Malegaon, Hamid Faroghi – Kya bhaari awaaz aur kya personality, jab bhi koi baat kehte the toh har baat me ek gehri baat hoti thi! – Yogesh Dube (on FB)

48. It just made me extremely happy and uplifted. Not even hint of manipulation, morality or design. They just let it be..the protagonists just do their thing only because they love doing it, not to prove anything. Only complain was it ended too soon – Apan Singhal

49. Because it celebrates that aspect of a film which most of the people have just a surface-level idea of – filmmaking itself. – Gyandeep Pattnayak (on FB)

And here’s the most important reason…

50. To support PVR director’s Rare so that it can continue to bring more such quality cinema to you – @ShiladityaBora

So what’s your reason for not watching it?

‘गैंग्स ऑफ़ वासेपुर’ – क्योंकि ये ज़रूरी है

Posted: July 2, 2012 by moifightclub in bollywood, cinema, film review, movie reviews, reviews
Tags: , ,
17

He is a certified boob-yist. Well, i remember he won a contest on twitter where you had to figure out the faces from just the cleavage pics. And he got all six of them spot on! But that story is for some other day. Shivam Sharma masquerades as GhantaGuy on twitter (#FF) and describes himself as “Passionate movie-buff. Not a critic”. Over to him. on Gangs Of Wasseypur.

Even after seeing the movie twice I could not bring myself to review it because there was so much in it, so much to take in all at once and I was not sure from where to start. The following post started out as about some amusing reactions and things that I have observed in the last week regarding Wasseypur. Things that surprise me and make me laugh at the same time. Though there is a lot that I still want to write, it’s still a start. Read on.

‘गैंग्स ऑफ़ वासेपुर’ को रिलीज़ हुए एक हफ्ता हो चुका है. समीक्षाएं पढ़ी जा चुकी हैं. पिक्चर को पसंद-नापसंद किया जा चुका है. पर वासेपुर अभी भी दिमाग पे छाई हुई है, ज़ाहिर है कि और कुछ हो न हो, ये एक ज़रूरी फिल्म है.

“The Magic of Cinema”.शायद वही.

पर कुछ बातें जो मुझे खटकी हैं वो हैं audience के अलग और कुछ अजीब reaction. मैंने ये फिल्म नागपुर के एक ठसाठस भरे पिक्चर हॉल में देखी थी (गौरतलब है कि नागपुर सलमान खान का गढ़ माना जाता है और ‘दबंग’ के all-India collections में नागपुर सबसे आगे था.) पिक्चर में करीब ७०-८० बार गालियाँ आती हैं. फिल्म सच्ची घटनाओं पर आधारित है और गालियाँ ज़रूरी हैं क्योंकि वासेपुर कि गलियों में घूमने वाले, बात-बात पर कट्टा चलाने वाले जिन लोगों की ये कहानी है वो गालियों का प्रयोग रोज़मर्रा में करते हैं. आप और मैं भी गरमा-गर्मी में इनका प्रयोग करते हैं और कुछ अपने मन में ही देकर सुकून का अनुभव कर लेते हैं.

बहरहाल, फिल्म में जितनी बार भी गालियाँ आयीं, लोग जोर से हँसे. जोकि मुझे खटका क्योंकि ये लोग भी आपस में गालियाँ देते है पर हर बार उसे मज़ाक के तौर पे नहीं लिया जाता और न ही ठहाका मार के हंसा जाता है. फिल्म में भी सब जगह इन्हें मज़ाक के तौर पर नहीं डाला गया. जहाँ हैं वहां सही हैं. पर शायद हमें सच्चाई को मज़ाक में और मज़ाक को सच्चाई की तरह लेने की आदत पड़ गयी है.

ये कहानी उस जगह की है जहाँ की ख़बरें ‘अमर-उजाला’ और ‘दैनिक जागरण’ के क्षेत्रीय पन्नों पर छपती हैं. अर्नब गोस्वामी और राजदीप सरदेसाई के आदी शायद उससे relate न कर पायें और क्योंकि हम उनसे काफी दूर हैं इसीलिए वो गालियाँ हमें या तो हंसाती हैं या discomfort महसूस कराती हैं.

क्या एक normal reaction देना इतना मुश्किल है? शायद हाँ.

कुछ लोगों का कहना है कि पिक्चर बहुत vulgar और cheap है.

हमें ‘शीला की जवानी’ और ‘मुन्नी बदनाम हुई’ आदि, जोकि सिर्फ अंग प्रदर्शन के लिए बनाये हुए item songs हैं, उनसे कोई आपत्ति नहीं है. अगर कोई शब्द अपने आपको सबसे आसानी से explain करते हैं तो वो है “item song”. साफ़ तौर पर ये वो गाना होता है जिसका प्रयोग सिर्फ लोगों को खींचने के लिए किया जाता है और उसके लिए अधनंगे खुले प्रदर्शन से बेहतर हथकंडा नहीं है. (ऐसे गाने ज़्यादातर उन फिल्मों में होते हैं जिनकी कहानी लोगों को खींचने के लिए काफी नहीं होती. यहाँ मेरा उद्देश्य इन गानों को बनाने वालों के विरोध में नहीं है पर हमारा दोगलापन दर्शाना ज़रूरी है.) जितना बड़ा स्टार उतना बड़ा गाना. और ‘aesthetically shot’ होने के कारण इन्हें public domain में accept कर लिया जाता है और ‘vulgar’ tag तो दूर-दूर तक नहीं दिया जाता.

इस समय मेरे मन में एक गाली ज़रूर आ रही है पर उससे मेरे अभिप्राय पर कुछ ख़ास फर्क नहीं पड़ेगा. छोडिये.

खैर, वासेपुर में कोई item song या kissing scene नहीं है. क्योंकि गाँव और छोटे कस्बों में मुंह पर चूमना कोई आम या ज़रूरी बात नहीं होती. बल्कि, kissing भी एक तरीके से यहाँ western (या french कहें) phenomenon है और पिक्चर में दिखाए गए उस २०-३० साल पहले के fridge की तरह ये भी अभी तक अंदरूनी भारत में पूरी तरह पैठ नहीं कर पाया है.

अगर तब भी आपको फिल्म ‘vulgar’ लगी हो, तो इसका मतलब है के आपका दिमाग स्क्रीन पर चल रहे scene से आगे निकल गया है. निर्देशक और किरदार, और किसी को न सही पर आपको उत्तेजित करने में सफल हो गए हैं और ‘vulgar’ शायद आपके दिमाग में बनी वो image है जिसे अब आप guilty-feeling के तौर पर बाहर उलटी करके निकाल रहे हैं. निकालते रहिये.

शायद कुछ देर बाद आपको अच्छा लगे.

और एक बड़ा मुद्दा उठाया जा रहा है के फिल्म में बदला तो हुआ ही नहीं, सरदार खान बाकी कामों में लग गया और यूँही बिना बदला लिए मर गया. दर्शक को उसके किरदार से कोई sympathy नहीं हुई और इसलिए फिल्म भी मात खा गयी.

जनाब, ये एक सच्ची कहानी पर आधारित है. फिल्म में कोई हीरो नहीं है. मतलब, conventional defintion वाला तो कतई नहीं. सरदार खान निहायती कमीना, शातिर, ठरकी और एक हत्यारा है. राह-चलते आदमी को जो चाक़ू गोद-गोद के मारने में हिचकी नहीं लेता उससे आपको बहुत sympathy तो नहीं होनी चाहिए.

अगर आप ऐसे इंसान को ढूंढ रहे हैं जो किसी महिला की इज्ज़त लुटने से बचाता है, या किसी गाँव को डाकुओं के आतंक से या फिर जिसकी बहन की हत्या हो गयी है और ऐसी ज़बरदस्ती थोपी हुई sympathy आपको चाहिए तो साहब ये गलत फिल्म है आपके लिए. यहाँ कहानीकार आपको ज़बरदस्ती कुछ “feel” करवाने की कोशिश नहीं कर रहा है. ये वो manipulative सिनेमा नहीं है जहाँ हीरो के आंसू निकलते ही पीछे से १०० violin मेघ-मल्हार बजाने लगते हैं और आपकी रुलाई फूट पड़ती है. वो काम आजकल के prime-time TV shows बेहतर कर लेते हैं.

इसे एक new-wave कह लीजिये या फिर सालों से चली आ रही इस तरह की फिल्मों का mainstream हो जाना कह लीजिये कि आज की हर फिल्म आपको manipulate नहीं करती बल्कि काफी कुछ आपकी judgment पर छोडती हैं और वासेपुर इस मामले में मील का पत्थर साबित होगी. आज से कई साल बाद तक इसका नाम याद रखा जायेगा जिसने सही मायने में unconventional और conventional के बीच की रेखा को पूरी तरह मिटा दिया.

वासेपुर भारत की underbelly को दर्शाता एक दर्पण है जिसमें हम झांकते हैं और हमें गंदगी दिखाई देती है. हमें दिखाई देते हैं रेलगाड़ियों का पाखाना साफ़ करते हुए छोटे बच्चे और एक ऐसा नर्क जहाँ इंसान की जान की कीमत कोयले से कम और कौड़ियों के भाव है. शायद इसलिए हम इसे देखकर या तो हँसते हैं या घिनौना समझ कर नज़रंदाज़ करने की कोशिश करते हैं.

ये कहानी बड़े शहरों को जोड़ते हुए किसी चौड़े highway की नहीं है, बल्कि उस highway से उतर के पांच मील अन्दर, इधर-धर दौड़ती हुई पगडंडियों और टूटी सड़कों की कहानी है.

Problem आपको तब होगी जब आप highway पर अपनी air-conditioned कार में बैठे हुए ही अन्दर की तरफ देखेंगे.

थोडा सा धूप में बाहर निकलिए और अन्दर जाकर देखिये..

क्योंकि ये भी ज़रूरी है.

(PS – Shivam blogs here and here)

Film Recco : Kshay because as the very poetic title suggests it Corrodes the being.

Posted: June 21, 2012 by moifightclub in cinema, film, Indie, Movie Recco, movie reviews
Tags: , , , , , , ,
7

In her twitter bio, Svetlana Naudiyal describes herself as Murphy’s favourite child. So over to the child who is just back from a country where there is almost no cinema culture and she was trying to make them understand what is the point of a film festival. Back to India and here’s her recco of the film Kshay, which has been doing the rounds of film festivals since quite sometime.

There is no local popular cinema in the theaters. The only theaters are the ones in the malls. From malls to pirated dvd stores – all you’d prominently see is Hollywood. I’ve just returned from Cebu City, so to say, the second largest city in Philippines. The townesque city is burgeoning with Malls, Multiplexes, BPOs and all possible American Chains. The city glistens, roads are well done, cab drivers never say no and their peso is better placed against dollar than the rupee. In this seemingly ‘developing’ state of affairs, local cinema has no ground beneath its feet. I get to meet a few Cebuano Filmmakers and see their films. Great work and talented, no doubt! But what do they do?

Cut to – my country, my crazy cinephile country.

Here back home, I see Kshay on the big screen, and I am moved by the mere thought that here someone can not only make the film they want to but also hope that it would see the light of theatrical release someday.

But is that why you should support it? Just because someone really struggled to make an Indie film and then eventually managed to get it to the box office?

——

Kshay, as the very poetic title suggests, corrodes.

Corrodes the being.

Chhaya, a simple housewife, becomes strangely obsessed with an unfinished idol of Goddess Lakshmi. Her husband, Arvind, works for a reckless building contractor and struggles to make ends meet while reeling under the guilt of not being able to give Chhaya the life he promised to. Their lives are thrown in a downwards spiral as Chhaya slowly becomes oblivious of their circumstance and succumbs to faith turned into obsession.

It is not often that the frames and sequences of a film hover in your mind for long after you see it. They corrode the mind, resonate with life and create a surreal-real world of obsession, hopelessness and love. It’s beautiful how the textures, lights and score accentuate the psychological corrosion of Chhaya. Together with Arvind’s frustrations and the hopelessness a viewer sees in their situation, the film builds a strange tempo as it progresses; it might not be evident in the pace but most certainly so in the feeling it leaves one with.

Shot in black and white, the cinematography by Abhinay Khoparzi, is highlight of the film. The eerie absurdity of dreams, delusions, reality and the textures, all stand out in black & white frames. The background score is by director Karan Gour himself is the perfect companion to it. Rasika is unbelievably real as Chhaya and beautifully brings out her pain, coldness, obsession; Alekh complements her as much in portraying Arvind’s frustrations, hope and hopelessness. Even the small roles of building contractor and neighbour lady, are marked by really fine performances.

To me, story apart, Kshay also questions – questions faith, questions reason and questions the merciless set up we live in. It’s a world where WTC crash becomes table-top merchandise.. Exploiters continue to have their cake and eat it too.. Exploited barely find a way.. It’s a world of faith becoming obsession and obsession ending only in….

Coming back to the question – Don’t watch it because it’s another oh-so-poor-striving-for-support indie film, watch it because it’s good cinema, that totally deserves your time and money.

———————————————————————————–

– Here’s a preview of Kshay’s hauntingly gorgeous music –

Kshay OST – Home

Kshay OST – Everywhere

– And the trailer

– To know more about the film click here. And click here for the FB page of the film.

– PVR JUHU (Mumbai) will have one show running in the next week at 6:35PM. Don’t miss this one!

– And if our recco isn’t enough to convince you, here are some more reviews – Namrata Joshi of Outlook rates it 3.5/4, Karan Anshuman (Mumbai Mirror) has rated it 3.5/5 and Aseem Chhabra (Rediff) has also given it 3.5/5.

जाने भी दो शांघाई

Posted: June 11, 2012 by moifightclub in cinema, film review, movie reviews
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
82

Image

“What is any good film without the extreme reactions it sparks? What’s any bad film without the guilty pleasures it gives?” said Peddlers director Vasan Bala after watching the debate around Shanghai. So many of us loved it, and a surprisingly big number hated it. Surprisingly because it’s a Dibakar Banerjee film. The man who reinvents himself every time, makes films so technically brilliant and well-detailed that rest of Hindi film industry must feel like Salieri in front of him, whose films are at that rare edge of feel-good and feel-bad and has not yet seen many bad reviews for his 3 earlier films.

While we wait for a long juicy post from someone who hated the film, (here’s a medium-sized one by Bikas Mishra on Dear Cinema), Varun Grover, writes one on why he loved it. Debate is still open though.

***************************

नोट: इस लेख में कदम-कदम पर spoilers हैं. बेहतर यही होगा कि फिल्म देख के पढ़ें. (हाँ, फिल्म देखने लायक है.) आगे आपकी श्रद्धा.

मुझे नहीं पता मैं लेफ्टिस्ट हूँ या राइटिस्ट. मेरे दो बहुत करीबी, दुनिया में सबसे करीबी, दोस्त हैं. एक लेफ्टिस्ट है एक राइटिस्ट. (वैसे दोनों को ही शायद यह categorization ख़ासा पसंद नहीं.) जब मैं लेफ्टिस्ट के साथ होता हूँ तो undercover-rightist होता हूँ. जब राइटिस्ट के साथ होता हूँ तो undercover-leftist. दोनों के हर तर्क को, दुनिया देखने के तरीके को, उनकी political understanding को, अपने अंदर लगे इस cynic-spray से झाड़ता रहता हूँ. दोनों की समाज और राजनीति की समझ बहुत पैनी है, बहुत नयी भी. अपने अपने क्षेत्र में दोनों शायद सबसे revolutionary, सबसे संजीदा विचार लेकर आयेंगे. और बहुत हद तक मेरी अपनी राजनीतिक समझ ने भी इन दोनों दोस्तों से घंटों हुई बातों के बाद भस्म होकर पुनर्जन्म लिया है. मैं अब हर बड़े मुद्दे (अन्ना, inflation, मोदी, कश्मीर, और काम की फिल्मों) पर उनके विचार जानने की कोशिश करता हूँ. और बहुत कन्फ्यूज रहता हूँ. क्योंकि अब मेरे पास हर सच के कम से कम दो version होते हैं. क्योंकि आज के इस दौर में हर सच के कम से कम दो version मौजूद हैं.

इस अजब हालात की बदौलत मैं हर चीज़ को दो नज़रियों से देखता हूँ, देख पाता हूँ. अक्सर ना चाहते हुए भी. यह दिव्य-शक्ति मुझे मेरा political satire शो (जय हिंद) लिखने में बहुत मदद करती है लेकिन मेरी बाकी की ज़िंदगी हराम हो गयी है. अब मैं किसी एक की साइड नहीं ले सकता. (मुझे याद है बचपन में मैं और मेरा छोटा भाई क्रिकेट के फ़ालतू मैचों में भी, जैसे कि जिम्बाब्वे बनाम श्रीलंका, अपनी अपनी साइड चुन लेते थे. इससे मैच का मज़ा कई गुना बढ़ जाता था. और देखने का एक मकसद मिलता था.) और साइड न ले सकना बहुत बड़ा श्राप है.

यह सब इसलिए बता रहा हूँ क्योंकि शांघाई में भी ऐसे ही ढेर सारे सच हैं. यह आज के शापित समय की कहानी है. ढेर सारे Conflicting सच जो पूरी फिल्म में एक दूसरे से बोतल में बंद जिन्नों की तरह आपस में टकराते रहते हैं. आज के हिंदुस्तान की तरह, आप इस फिल्म में भी किसी एक की साइड नहीं ले सकते. उस डॉक्टर अहमदी की नहीं जो अमेरिका में प्रोफेसरी कर रहे हैं और अपने लेफ्टिस्ट विचारों से एक बस्ती के आंदोलन को हवा देने चार्टर्ड फ्लाईट पकड़ के आते हैं. वो जो निडर हैं और सबसे नीचे तबके के हक की बात बोलते हैं लेकिन सच में आज तक एक भी displaced को rehabilitate नहीं कर पाए हैं.

डॉक्टर अहमदी की बीच चौक में हुई हत्या (सफ़दर हाशमी?) जिसे एक्सीडेंट साबित करना कोई मुश्किल काम नहीं, जगाता है उनकी पूर्व-छात्रा और प्रेमिका शालिनी को. लेकिन आप शालिनी की भी साइड नहीं ले सकते क्योंकि वो एक अजीब से idealism में जीती है. वो idealism जो ढेर सी किताबें पढ़ के, दुनिया देखे बिना आता है. वो idealism जो अक्सर छात्रों में होता है, तब तक जब तक नौकरी ढूँढने का वक्त नहीं आ जाता.

शालिनी का idealism उसको अपनी कामवाली बाई की बेटी को पढाने के लिए पैसे देने को तो कहता है लेकिन कभी उसके घर के अंदर नहीं ले जाता. और इसलिए जब शालिनी पहली बार अपनी बाई के घर के अंदर जाती है तो उसकी टक्कर एक दूसरी दुनिया के सच से होती है और शालिनी को उस सच पे हमला करना पड़ता है. उसकी किताबें कोने में धरी रह जाती हैं और वार करने के लिए हाथ में जो आता है वो है खाने की एक थाली. Poetically देखें तो, दुनिया का अंतिम सच.

हम middle-class वालों के लिए सबसे आसान जिसकी साइड लेना है वो है IAS अफसर कृष्णन. उसे अहमदी की मौत की रपट बनाने के लिए one-man enquiry commission का चीफ बनाया गया है. (“हमारे देश में ऐसे कमीशन अक्सर बैठते हैं. फिर लेट जाते हैं. और फिर सो जाते हैं.”, ऐसा मैंने देहरादून में १९८९ में एक कवि सम्मेलन में सुना था.) कृष्णन IIT का है. IITs देश की और इस फिल्म की आखिरी उम्मीद हैं. अगर इन्साफ मिला तो कृष्णन ही उसे लाएगा. लेकिन अंत आते आते कृष्णन का इन्साफ भी बेमानी लगने लगता है. वो दो चोरों में से एक को ही पकड़ सकता है. एक चोर को इस्तेमाल कर के दूसरे को पकड़ सकता है. कौन सा चोर बड़ा है यह ना हम जानते हैं ना वो. और पकड़ भी क्या सकता है, इशारा कर सकता है कि भई ये चोर है इसे पकड़ लो. उसे हिंदुस्तान की कछुआ-छाप अदालतें पकड़ेंगी या नहीं इसपर सट्टा लगाया जा सकता है. (आप किसपर सट्टा लगाएंगे? बोफोर्स मामले में किसी पे लगाया था कभी?) कृष्णन का इन्साफ एक मरीचिका है. जैसे बाकी का shining India और उसके IIT-IIM हैं. (एक लाइन जो फिल्म के ट्रेलर में थी लेकिन फाइनल प्रिंट में नहीं – कृष्णन की कही हुई- ‘सर जस्टिस का सपना मैंने छोड़ दिया है .’)

शांघाई के बाकी किरदार भी इतने ही flawed हैं. इतने ही उलझे हुए. (शायद इसीलिए Comedy Circus को अपनी आत्मा बेचे हुए हमारे देश को यह फिल्म समझ ही नहीं आ रही.) लेकिन इन सब के बावजूद शांघाई एक serious फिल्म नहीं है. Depressing है, डरावनी भी…लेकिन उतनी ही जितना कोई भी well-written political satire होता है. दो हिस्सा ‘जाने भी दो यारों’ में एक हिस्सा ‘दो बीघा ज़मीन’ घोली हुई. ’दो बीघा ज़मीन’ से थोड़ी ज़्यादा भयावह… ‘जाने भी दो यारों’ से काफी ज़्यादा tongue in cheek. (‘जाने भी दो यारों’ से कुछ और धागे भी मिलते हैं. Politician-builder lobby, एक हत्या, अधमने पत्रकार, ह्त्या की जाँच, और एक अंतिम दृश्य जो कह दे ‘यहाँ कुछ नहीं हो सकता.’)

दिबाकर की नज़र

Image

दिबाकर बनर्जी को बहुत से लोग हमारे समय का सबसे intellectual फिल्म-मेकर मानते हैं. वैसे मेरे हिसाब से intellectual आज के समय की सबसे भद्र गाली है लेकिन जो मानते हैं वो शायद इसलिए मानते हैं कि उनके अलावा कोई और है ही नहीं जो कहानी नहीं, concepts पर फिल्म बना रहा हो. दिबाकर की दूसरी फिल्म ‘ओए लक्की लक्की ओए’ देखने वाले बहुतों को लगा कि कहानी नहीं थी. या कहानी पूरी नहीं हुई. हाल ही में प्रकाशित ‘शहर और सिनेमा वाया दिल्ली’ के लेखक मिहिर पंड्या के शब्दों में “‘ओए लक्की..’ शहरी नागरिक समाज की आलोचना है. इस समाज की आधुनिकता की परिभाषा कुछ इस तरह गढ़ी गयी है कि उसमें हाशिए का व्यक्ति चाह कर भी शामिल नहीं हो पाता.”

उनकी पिछली फिल्म ‘लव, सेक्स, और धोखा’ voyeursim को तीन दिशाओं से छुप के देखती एक चुपचाप नज़र थी. यानी कि voyeurism पर एक voyeuristic नज़र.

अब आप बताइये, आज कल के किस और निर्देशक की फिल्मों को इस तरह के सटीक concepts पे बिछाया जा सकता है? और क्योंकि वो concepts पर फिल्में बनाते हैं इसलिए उनकी हर फिल्म एक नयी दुनिया में घुसती है, एक नया genre पकडती है.

लेकिन उनकी जो बात सबसे unique है वो है उनकी detailing. शर्तिया उनके level की detailing पूरे हिंदुस्तान के सिनेमा में कोई नहीं कर रहा. उनके satire की चाबी भी वहीँ है. बिना दो-पैसा farcical हुए भी वो सर्वोच्च दर्ज़े का satire लाते हैं. Observation इतना तगड़ा होता है, और इतनी realistic detailing के साथ आता है कि वही satire बन जाता है. और शांघाई में ऐसे observations किलो के भाव हैं. कुछ मासूम हैं और कुछ morbid, लेकिन सब के सब effortless.

स्टेज शो में चल रहे Item song का एक नेता जी की entry पर रुक जाना, और item girl का झुक कर नेता को नमस्ते करना, कृष्णन का अपने laptop पर भजन चलाकर पूजा करना, चीफ मिनिस्टर के कमरे के बाहर बिना जूतों के जुराबें पहन कर बैठे इंतज़ार करता IAS अफसर और कमरे में जाते हुए रास्ते में एक कोने में पड़े गिफ्ट्स के डब्बों का अम्बार, सुबह gym और शाम को हलवे-पनीर की दावत  की रोजाना साइकल में उलझा सत्ता का एक प्रतिनिधि, तराजू पर मुफ्त में बांटे जाने वाले laptops से तुलता एक ज़मीनी नेता, हस्पताल में अपने मरते हुए प्रोफेसर को देख बिफरी सी शालिनी के चिल्लाने पर नर्स का कहना ‘आपको fighting करना है तो बाहर जाकर कीजिये’, अंग्रेजी स्पीकिंग कोर्स की क्लास में दीवार पर मूँछ वाले सुपरमैन की पेन्टिंग, एक पूरी बस्ती ढहा देने के पक्ष में lobbying कर रहे दल का नारा ‘जय प्रगति’ होना, अपने टेम्पो से एक आदमी को उड़ा देने के बाद भी टेम्पो वाले को दुनिया की सबसे बड़ी फ़िक्र ये होना कि उसका टेम्पो पुलिस से वापस मिलेगा या नहीं – यह सब हमारे सुगन्धित कीचड़ भरे देश के छींटे ही हैं.

दिबाकर के पास वो cynical नज़र है जो हमें अपने सारे flaws के साथ अधनंगा पकड़ लेती है और थोड़ा सा मुस्कुरा कर परदे पर भी डाल देती है. शांघाई के एक-एक टूटे फ्रेम से हमारे देश का गुड-मिश्रित-गोबर रिस रहा है. आप इसपर हँस सकते हैं, रो सकते हैं, या जैसा ज्यादातर ने किया – इसे छोड़ के आगे बढ़ सकते हैं यह कहते हुए कि ‘बड़ी complicated पिच्चर है यार.’

फिल्म की आत्मा

जग्गू और भग्गू इस फिल्म की आत्मा होने के लिए थोड़े अजीब किरदार हैं. इन दोनों ने सिर्फ पैसों के लिए उस आदमी को अपने टेम्पो के नीचे कुचल दिया जो असल में उन्हीं की लड़ाई लड़ रहा था. और उसके मरने के बाद भी कम से कम भग्गू को तो कोई अफ़सोस नहीं है. उसे बस यही चिंता है कि जग्गू मामा जेल से कब छूटेगा और उन्हें उनका टेम्पो वापस कब मिलेगा.

Image

ऐसे morally खोखले प्राणी इस फिल्म की आत्मा हैं. और यही इस फिल्म का मास्टर-स्ट्रोक भी है. फिल्म इन्हीं से शुरू होती है, और इनपर ही खत्म होती है. पहले सीन में भग्गू अपने मामा जग्गू से पूछ रहा है कि मटन को अंग्रेजी में क्या कहते हैं. उसने सुना है कि मिलिट्री में लड़ाई पे जाने से पहले मटन खिलाया जाता है. उसके इस सवाल का अर्थ थोड़ी देर में समझ आता है. प्रोफेसर अहमदी को मारने के काम को भग्गू युद्ध से कम नहीं मान रहा, और इसलिए वो मटन की सोच रहा है. वो एक कोचिंग में अंग्रेजी भी सीख रहा है, ताकि इस गुरबत की ज़िंदगी से बाहर निकले. कहाँ, उसे नहीं पता, पर बाहर कुछ तो होगा शायद ये धुंधला ख्याल उसके दिमाग में है. लेकिन अंग्रेजी सीख रहा है इसलिए भी मटन की अंग्रेजी सोच रहा है. (संवादों में इस detailing का जादू दिबाकर के अलावा किसकी फिल्म में दिखता है? और इसके लिए फिल्म की सह-लेखिका उर्मी जुवेकर को भी सलाम.)

भग्गू फिल्म में (और देश में) दिखने वाले हर उग्र aimless युवा का representative है. हर उस भीड़ का collective face जो भंडारकर ओरिएंटल रिसर्च इंस्टीट्यूट में घुसकर तोड़फोड़ करती है क्योंकि किसी ने उन्हें कह दिया है कि शिवाजी के खिलाफ लिखी गयी किताब की रिसर्च यहीं हुई थी. भग्गू को नहीं जानना है शिवाजी कौन थे, या किताब में उनपर क्या बुरा लिखा गया था. उसे बस तेज़ी से दौड़ती इस भीड़ में अपना हिस्सा चाहिए. उसे दुनिया के शोर में अपनी आवाज़ चाहिए. उसे थोड़े पैसे चाहिए और कुछ पलों के लिए यह एहसास चाहिए कि वो कुछ ऐतेहासिक कर रहा है. किसी म्यूजियम या पेंटिंग exhibition पर हमला करना, किसी किताबों की दुकान जला देना, किसी पर ट्रक चढ़ा देना…सब ऐतेहासिक है, और भग्गू ये सब करेगा. क्योंकि भग्गू वैसे भी क्या ही कर रहा है?

जग्गू मामा थोड़ा बूढा है. वो शायद जवानी में भग्गू जैसा ही था. लेकिन अब वो दौर गुज़र गया. अब वो बोलता नहीं. लेकिन वो मना भी नहीं करता. फिल्म की सबसे यादगार लाइन में, शालिनी के हाथों बेहिसाब पिटने के बाद और ये पूछे जाने के बाद कि ‘तुम्हें शर्म नहीं आई सबके सामने एक आदमी को मारते हुए?’, जग्गू कहता है – ‘आपने भी तो मारा मुझे. मेरी बेटी के सामने. मैने आपका क्या कर लिया?’ जग्गू सर्वहारा है. जग्गू ‘पीपली लाइव’ के बाद एक बार फिर प्रेमचंद के ‘गोदान’ का होरी महतो है. जग्गू को हर सुबह अपना ही घर तोडना है और रात में उसे बनाना है. क्योंकि उसी में बाकी की दुनिया का फायदा है.

बाकी की फिल्म…

बाकी की फिल्म में ढेर सारे और किरदार हैं…हमारे आस-पास से निकले हुए. जात के बाहर शादी ना कर पाया, जोधपुर से भागा एक लड़का है, जो अभी चीज़ें समझ ही रहा है. प्रोफेसर अहमदी की बीवी है जो फिल्म के अंत में एक hording पर नज़र आती है और कालचक्र का एक चक्र पूरा करती है, IAS अफसर कृष्णन का बॉस है जो बिलकुल वैसा है जैसा हम आँख बंद कर के सोच सकते हैं. और हमेशा की तरह दिबाकर बनर्जी के कास्टिंग डायरेक्टर अतुल मोंगिया का चुनाव हर रोल के लिए गज़ब-फिट है.

इतनी अद्भुत कास्टिंग है कि फिल्म का realism का वादा आधा तो यूँ ही पूरा हो जाता है. इमरान हाशमी तक से वो काम निकाला गया है कि आने वाली पुश्तें हैरान फिरेंगी देख कर. फारुख शेख (जिनका ‘चश्मे बद्दूर’ का एक फोटो मेरे डेस्कटॉप पर बहुत दिनों से लगा हुआ है), कलकी, तिलोत्तमा शोम, पितोबाश, और अभय देओल ने अपने-अपने किरदार को अमृत पिलाया है अमृत. लेकिन सबसे कमाल रहे अनंत जोग (जग्गू मामा) और सुप्रिया पाठक कपूर (मुख्य मंत्री). अनंत जोग, जिनके बारे में वासन बाला ने इंटरवल में कहा कि ‘ये तो पुलिस कमिश्नर भी बनता है तो छिछोरी हरकतें करता है’ इस फिल्म में किसी दूसरे ही प्लेन पर थे. इतनी ठहरी हुई, खोई आँखें ही चाहिए थीं फिल्म को मुकम्मल करने को. और सुप्रिया पाठक, जो पूरी फिल्म में hoardings और banners से दिखती रहीं अंत में सिर्फ एक ३-४ मिनट के सीन के लिए दिखीं लेकिन उसमें उन्होंने सब नाप लिया. बेरुखी, formality, shrewdness, controlled relief…पता नहीं कितने सारे expressions थे उस छोटे से सीन में.

जाते जाते…

फिल्म में कुछ कमजोरियां हैं. खास कर के अंत के १०-१५ मिनट जल्दी में समेटे हुए लगते हैं, और कहीं थोड़े से compromised भी. लेकिन अगर इसे satire की नज़र से देखा जाए तो वो भी बहुत अखरते नहीं. बाकी बहुतों को पसंद नहीं आ रही…और जिन्हें नहीं आ रही, उनसे कोई शिकायत नहीं. क्योंकि जैसा कि मेरे दो मित्रों ने मुझे सिखाया है – सच के कम से कम दो version तो होते ही हैं.

*******************

Why Rowdy Rathore should flop

Posted: June 3, 2012 by moifightclub in bollywood, movie reviews, reviews
Tags: , , ,
35

If the header is not self-explanatory, then over to Navjot Gulati for the rest. Read on.

THIS POST CONTAINS SPOILER. DO NOT READ, No, wait. READ IT IF YOU ARE PLANNING TO WASTE YOUR MONEY ON THIS FILM.

I often hear an argument by filmmakers and film Buffs that masala films generate money for the smaller (better) films to be made, and they provide good time pass fun. Not so very long ago I also believed that, but on 1st June my belief went for a toss – from Andheri to Malad to Filmcity to some studio in the outskirts of Bombay(that’s where the most of this piece of crap was shot). I wasn’t mighty impressed by Rowdy Rathore’s (RR) promos but somewhere I could see the wickedness which Prabhudeva portrayed in Wanted and that gave me a hope that RR might be a good fun, but alas.

I firmly believe that staying true to the genre is the most difficult thing to do, and if you succeed in doing that, then a Singham or a Wanted is born. For me, Singham and Wanted are true to the genre. I have been using this word too much I guess. Yes, I’m. I like to call it the Punjabi Dosa (ok, I just coined it).

The ingredients are as follows :

1. An emotional story ‘inspired’ or ‘lifted’ or ‘officially bought’ from a Southie Film.

2. A big star who is famous in North India, has six packs to show and shirts to take off.

3. 5 well-directed action sequences.

4. Humorous dialogues.

5. An item number.

6. Peppy Music.

7. A very strong villain.

8. Standout performances by supporting cast.

By no means I’m endorsing these kinds of films. I’m just stating a fact. Now, let’s analyze Raddi Rathore on these parameters.

1. Emotional Story

A pickpocketeer doppelganger of a cop takes revenge from a crime lord in Devgarh. This revenge is for the cop’s murder after he is tricked into becoming the guardian of cop’s little daughter, who still has a walkman in 2012! Because? Precisely, there’s no reason. Nostalgia, i say. Well, whatever rest happens in the film is because of only one reason – that is what happens in the original film which they have got the right to remake.

And they also have a homage to Jadu, the alien from Koi Milgaya, as the Cop is suffering from a tumor and can only fight like a Hulk when water is sprayed on his head.

2. A big star with six packs who takes his shirt off.

I disappoint. No Bhaai. No Duggu. No Devgn. No Shirt off. Probably Akki was not prepared since this is his 1st action film in AGES (CCTC, Tasveer,Tashan, Singh is King, Family had NO ACTION).

3. 5 well directed Action sequences.

I will give a 5star to anyone who can point out those to me I as was busy yawning throughout the slow-mo punches and the blasting cars in CG, all lifted from the original film (Vikramarkudu).

4. Humorous dialogues.

An example of film’s humor?

Well, it was nonexistent.

5. An item number

Wanted and Dabbang had better. Even Singham for that matter.

6. Peppy Music

The music by Sajid-Wajid is functional. Won’t last beyond the weekend of the film.

7. A very Strong Villain

They cast a guy from Southie films called Nasseer, who is trying to hard do a Prakash Raj, and he is playing a Bihari guy whose voice has been dubbed. #Enoughsaid

8. Standout performances by supporting cast

The guy who played the photographer, he has made a living out of the phrase, Bhaiyya Ji Ismile. Singham had Prakash Raj’s comic act towards the end. I crack up whenever he says, “Yeh Cheating hain”. Wanted had Prakash Raj again. Also, it had Vinod Khanna in an unintentionally funny performance. In this film, we have Yashpal Sharma visiting Baapji, played by Nasseer, with his kids and begging him to help find his wife. Later on he sees her as the sex slave of the son of Baapji, and keeps quiet to avoid his irk. As pointed by Karan Anshuman in his Mumbai Mirror review, this has to be the most regressive scene in hindi cinema history. For me, the character of Yashpal Sharma defines the film.

Now, coming to my biggest problem with the film – the ‘sur’ of the film. The reason all the films I have mentioned have worked is because they didn’t take themselves seriously, but strangely for good 50 minutes Rowdy Rathore is cringe worthy with its stupid take on all sorts of regressive films that Dharam Paaji used to do with B-grade directors. And suddenly towards the last 30 minutes, it becomes a goof ball comedy where the villain is now scared of the Police Inspector, and it miserably fails while trying to pull off a Prakash Raj.

Why It should Flop.

If this film also goes on to have a steady run from Monday, then it will give rise to many clones which will take our cinema nowhere. The ‘virus’ started with Bhaai, moved to Devgn, and now has reached Akki. I won’t be shocked if we see SRK doing such a film and making an ass of himself soon. Shahid Kapoor is already doing the remake of Vettai. And even bigger fear I have is that somewhere an aspiring filmmaker, after seeing the success of the film, will believe that the film is not about the script but the star (although it’s true but there are many who are trying to change that).

The day is not far away when Tushar Kapoor will ask Ekta Kapoor to ‘relaunch’ him in a southie remake, or for that matter, even, ‘Uday Chopra’. Be prepared for it or spread the word and make Raddi Rathore a weekend phenomenon which tanks Monday onwards.

(P.S – I’m not against masala films but the ones made ‘Badly’ like Buddha Hoga Tera Baap and now Raddi Rathore. Also, I have intentionally left out many points mentioned in other reviews/posts because I am also trying to be original 😉

Miss Lovely and Gangs Of Wasseypur – Tracking all the Cannes buzz

Posted: May 28, 2012 by moifightclub in bollywood, cinema, film, Film Festival, Indie, Interview, movie reviews, News, reviews, video
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
13

Ashim Ahluwali’s Miss Lovely and Anurag Kashyap’s two-parter Gangs of Wasseypur premiered at Cannes Un Certain Regard and Directors Fortnight section respectively.

This post is to track all the buzz from the Cannes – reviews, interviews, videos and more. For the Cannes buzz of Vasan Bala’s Peddlers, click here.

Starting with some generic news links.

– Edouard Waintrop, Artistic Director of the Directors’ Fortnight, talks about the new wave of Indian cinema. Click here.

– VIDEO : Tom Brooks’ Cannes edition of Talking Movies starts with Indian films. Click here.

MISS LOVELY

– Review published in the Screen International is here.

– The Hollywood Reporter’s review is here, which describes it as Bollywood meets Boogie Nights in stylized retro-sleazy thriller.

– Variety’s review is here. You need account to read it. But if you are too curious, go close to the screen, squint your eyes and you will be able to read through the black screen.

– A small review in Sight and Sound is here which says the film is mesmerising for the first hour or so, during which, the echoes of Boogie Nights aside, I found myself thinking of Wong Kar-Wai, Scorsese, Matteo Garrone’s Gomorrah and even Irma Vep. Unfortunately the film then palls somewhat – director Ashim Ahluwalia can’t hold onto a story, or develop characters. But while it’s good it’s very good indeed, and had it been that touch better (and shorter) it could have been a game-changer for Indian cinema.

– A french review is here which is not too complimentary. Use Google Translate (GT).

– Ahluwalia makes ‘Lovely’ impact, says Saibal Chatterjee in The Sunday Indian. Click here.

– New York Times piece on the film is here.

– Ashim’s interview in Another mag is here.

– Ad Vitam has picked up the French rights of the film. News link is here.

– VIDEO : Anupama Chopra’s interview of Ashim Ahluwalia is here.

GANGS OF WASSEYPUR

– Review in Screen International is here which says, this Tarantino-tinged Bihari take on The Godfather has what it takes to cross over from the Indian domestic and Diaspora markets to reach out to action-loving, gore-tolerant theatrical and auxiliary genre audiences worldwide.

– The Hollywood Reporter review is here which calls it a dizzying explosion of an Indian gangster film, whose epic structure and colorful, immoral killers capture the imagination for over five hours..

– Review on desi site DearCinema is here.

– In Italian. click here. Use Google Translate (GT).

– Long piece in french edition of Huffington Post is here. Use GT.

– Coverage on BBC website.

– Saibal Chatterjee’s report in The Sunday Indian is here.

– VIDEO : Anupama Chopra’s interview with Kashyap and Bala is here.

– Click on the play button to watch the official video of the screening

If we have missed any links, do post it in the comments section. We will keep on updating the post with new links.

Ishaqzaade – In defense of Zoya

Posted: May 18, 2012 by moifightclub in bollywood, cinema, film, movie reviews, reviews
Tags: , , , ,
15

Has SPOILERS. DON’T read if you haven’t seen the film.

We are running a week late on this one. A new film by Ramu has already released this week and as expected, it’s call-it-whatever-you-want-to-call. Because of Do Dooni Chaar and the way the first promos of Ishaqzaade played out, we were really looking forward to Habib Faisal’s film. I liked lot of things in the film but it had the same problem which most desi films suffer from – 2nd half. It was the same story with his Band Bajaa Baraat and Do Dooni Chaar. And then a thanda climax. If it had to end that way, i would have liked to see them jumping from the roof with guns blazing from every side on the beats of the romantic title song and freeze!   say Thelma and Louise kind. The other criticism that the film received was of being sexist. Habib tried to defend it here.

And we have someone who is on the same page – Neeraja. She is from one of the many Almodas of India. She loves to think and her priorities in life includes books, cinema, mathematics, philosophy, politics and arguing about the same, in no particular order.

Ishaqzaade is an interesting film because it throws up interesting questions and reactions. I wouldn’t call it a love story but then what one takes away from a film is very subjective. After all, there are people who enjoy bodyguard and wanted.

Ishaqzaade is a story of a girl born in a society where violence is a way of life. There is not a single character in the film that is averse to violence. It is shocking and from what I know pretty close to truth. Upper-caste gun-toting warring political families is a cliche in real life…and not only in these parts (UP/Bihar) but in most parts of the world. Modern Politics at grass-root level is bullet-ridden and blood soaked. Patriarchy is a common feature of politically influential families across the world. Power flows from the barrel of the gun. Everywhere. In india, it has its own flavour blended with caste, religion and feudalism.

The film is a “love story” set in the backdrop of warring political families (hindu and muslim) in a small town somehwhere in north India. The kind of families that perpetuate honour killings, where only women worth loving are either prostitues or mothers and domestic violence is culture. To have a female character that defies all this and comes out a winner at the end would have been awesome but very unreal. The film portrays an honest and ugly picture of patriarchy that exists in it’s most violent form in some parts of our country.

Zoya is a spirited girl. She owns a gun (which she buys by selling her jhumkas) and she can address a crowd like true blue small town sharp-tongued politician but she is also naive. What she doesn’t understand is that most of this freedom has been handed out to her for she is the youngest and the only girl in a moderately progressive family. Most of her strength is inherited. It comes from the fact that she was brought up in a politically influential family. A family where everyone carries a gun in their hands and a dhamki on their lips all the time. She gets to do things that perhaps other girls in the neighbourhood cannot and won’t even dream of doing. Her peers see her as a strong young woman who makes her way while her family just sees her as a spoilt little girl who wants to be like her father but will be married off to a nice muslim boy soon enough.

What’s a strong female character really? According to most of the reviews/opinions that I have been reading, it is someone who subscribes to feminist ideas of urban women. Zoya’s world however is very different from that of ours. She lives in a society where for young boys to visit prostitutes is coming of age (and is even encouraged by their fathers/grandfathers). Where a woman’s opinion is non-existant and her body is only for abuse. Where young adolescent girls do not learn about love by reading romantic novels. They watch crappy hindi movies where the hero is usually a stalker and a charmer. So, when they experience the hormonal rush of emotions when a boy touches them or claims to be in love with them – they are smitten and they get foolish. So, it is not a surprise that when Zoya falls in love, she falls hard. An outspoken, argumentative Zoya at home transforms into a blushing and smiling girl when she is with Parma. The boy, on the other hand, knows love, sex and manipulations all too well to succumb to any emotion.

Her values come from the society that she lives in and in some sense helps to perpetuate them (she tells her mother to shut up because she didn’t understand politics but she wouldn’t dare to talk to her father like that. It just shows how women are treated in the family and how this treatment is considered acceptable by other women members of the family). She wants to be a part of the very system that treats women like that. She wants to be an MLA like her father and agrees with the power hungry, violent politics that surrounds her. She just wants to be one of the boys but at some level she is aware of the fact that no matter how many shots she fires, she is a woman at the end of the day. She knows that being seen with Parma in college bathroom will bring dishonour to her and therefore to her family because she is a girl and a girl’s honour is attached to her family’s honour. She doesn’t however agree with the concept which is what makes her different from other women in her place. She is not angry at Parma for having sex with her under the pretext of a fake marriage (which is technically rape), she is mad at him for betraying her. She cannot stand the fact that she was stupid enough to fall for someone who betrayed her and made her look like a fool in front of the whole community which is why instead of attempting a suicide, she tries to kill him. The fact that in her mind her honour is not attached to her body makes her different. That is also why she is able to forgive him later on.

In the end, what do people really want to see? A khoon bhari maang like woman who wields a gun and seeks revenge? Is that liberated enough? Will that change the fact that no matter what she had done, she would have to die in the end because there is no place for a spirited independent woman in that society.

My biggest problem with the movie is that there is no emotional involvement. There are very few moments where you get to feel what the characters are feeling. None in case of Parma which is why the change in his attitude towards Zoya is unbelievable. There is a lot of running around, shooting and lost and found moments but you hardly ever get to feel what the characters are feeling. The Romeo-Juliet-esque death scene is hilarious and almost spoiled the film for me.

What makes it work is Parineeti Chopra’s Zoya and the small town ambience. Zoya’s character is so close to reality, it hurts to watch her. If you have lived in a small town, if you have met spunky, street-smart, sharp-tongued girls from conservative families, it would do you good to go back and check what happened to them. How and when they were tamed. It’s not always cruel. Most of the girls believe that it’s the right way…just like most of well educated independent girls believe that no man can dominate them but at the end of the day they must marry someone who is smarter or more educated or at least earns more than them. There traps after traps and you succumb somewhere and justify it to yourself using your brilliant analytic skills that you acquired through higher education. We have all fixed boundaries for ourselves according to the freedom and strength granted to us. There are few who venture beyond and try to break the status quo. Lets not judge them for not breaking your boundaries.

Just because a woman wields a gun and talks like a boy, doesn’t mean she is liberated and just because she fails to challenge the patriarchy on all fronts (in the way we want her to) doesn’t mean she is not strong.

Just for the sake of irony, I leave you with this poem by Meena Kandasamy

Paracetamol legends I know
For rising fevers, as pain-relievers—

Of my people—father’s father’s mother’s
Mother, dark lush hair caressing her ankles
Sometimes, sweeping earth, deep-honey skin,
Amber eyes—not beauty alone they say—she
Married a man who murdered thirteen men and one
Lonely summer afternoon her rice-white teeth tore
Through layers of khaki, and golden white skin to spill
The bloodied guts of a British soldier who tried to colonize her. . .
Of my land—uniform blue open skies,

Mad-artist palettes of green lands and lily-filled lakes that
Mirror all—not peace or tranquil alone, he shudders—some
Young woman near my father’s home, with a drunken husband
Who never changed; she bore his beatings everyday until on one
Stormy night, in fury, she killed him by stomping his seedbags. . .

 

We: their daughters.
We: the daughters of their soil.
We, mostly, write.
PS: I wonder if one can make the same film with a muslim boy and a hindu girl? Won’t that be a blasphemy in our shining secular nation!

Film Recco : Bhooter Bhobishyot – when ghosts become endangered!

Posted: April 27, 2012 by moifightclub in Bengali, cinema, film, Movie Recco, movie reviews, Must Watch, Regional, reviews
Tags: , , , , , , ,
3

For small and regional films, social networking platforms can be quite a boon. If anything is good, one doesn’t need to worry about its audience. When people become your ambassador, you don’t need advertising or pr. I discovered the wonderful trailer of Bhooter Bhobishyot on FB and was instantly hooked. Have been following it since then and it’s finally getting a limited release in Mumbai today. So here’s a recco post on the film by Aniruddha Chatterjee. But first watch the trailer. Wish they had released it with subtitles.

Imagine this. Two ghosts, one a zamindar who got killed by the dacaits, and the other, a British officer who served in pre-independent India, are auditioning other ghosts to fill the zamindar’s abandoned mansion. This is because most old mansions and houses are demolished and turned to shopping malls and multiplexes by money hungry promoters and are ruining the culture and heritage of the city. So the ghosts all over the world, especially in Kolkata, are finding it very difficult to find a place to live in. Interestingly, even the ghosts are worried about their food, entertainment and security. The selections in the audition are made accordingly. This is the crux of debutant director Anik Dutta’s delicious bengali film Bhooter Bhobishyot.

Siraj-ud-Daulah’s trusted cook who gave his life in the Battle of Plassey, an Indian army officer who got killed during the Kargil war, an actress cum singing Kanan Devi-isque sensation of the 1940s who committed suicide after her producer boyfriend ditched her and married someone else, a Bangla rock band member who overdosed himself to death, a Bihari rickshaw puller who was killed due to reckless driving by a rich brat, a Hindu refugee from Bangladesh who was killed during partition, and a modern day city girl who jumped from her apartment terrace when her industrialist father refused to let her marry a Muslim boy – all of them get selected after the audition. The thread connecting all the ghosts is that they all died unusual deaths.

The ghosts sing, dance, romance, go to picnic, argue over hilsa and prawn, and when endangered, unite to fight against a promoter who wants to destroy Choudhury mansion and build a mall.

The script is unique and original, and is one of the most satisfying satirical comedies of late. The filmmaker takes a dig at everything that is Bengali – the intellectual filmmakers who only prefer Godard, Fellini and Ray, the pseudo communist rebel who thinks wearing Che Guevara t-shirt proves everything, the Dada and Didi of Bengali politics including the Rizwanur Rahman incident, and the everlasting fight between ghoti and bangal. It is refreshing to see usage of Spookbook, Facebook for ghosts, to find a suitable match for an item number.

Interestingly, the narrative is a tribute to Ray’s Hirak Rajar Deshe, as almost every character in the film speaks by rhyming their lines. The humour is subtle and situational. Literal and political references are plenty, and so it needs to be seen whether non-Bengalis find the humour appealing or not.

Another aspect that must be mentioned is the music. Raja Narayan Deb has created one of a kind soundtrack with influences from every genre possible – rock, pop, rabindra sangeet, jazz, folk or qawwali, and also from the different eras the characters belong to. (Click here to watch a terrific song medley from the film)

Also, it has excellent performances by the entire ensemble cast, but Sumit Samaddar as the Bangladeshi refugee and Swastika Mukherjee as Kadalibala, the actress cum singer of the black and white era, are the scene stealers.

Anik Dutta, the writer-director of the film is a renowned ad-filmmaker. This is his first feature film and for that he deserves every bit of accolade he is receiving for creating such an entertaining film.

Currently, the film is playing in theaters all over West Bengal. It’s getting a limited release in Mumbai on 27th April. Don’t miss it!

For more details, film’s Facebook page is here. For Bombay’s theatre listing, click here.

Film Recco : Sandesh Kulkarni’s Masala – The Adventures of Revan-man

Posted: April 25, 2012 by moifightclub in cast & crew, cinema, film, film review, Movie Recco, movie reviews, Regional, reviews
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
9

After working in the television industry for about 15 years in various capacities, Rony D’Costa decided to quit it all and pursue happiness. He generally finds it in dark theatres or under the open sky and write about those adventures here and here. Here’s Rony’s recco post on the marathi film Masala.

“Do you do this for your own happiness?”, when this question is asked to the character played by Dilip Prabhvalkar, a scientist experimenting to create bio fuel, he says, “mi anadasaati kaahich karat naahi. Ananddaani karto”. Loosely translated as, “I don’t do things for happiness. I do it with happiness”. Sandesh Kulkarni’s Masala is filled with such gems of wisdom and is casually thrown in scene after scene by characters straight out of Malgudi Days. It almost works like a self-help movie for entrepreneurs without any high-handed preaching. No wonder then that it reminded me of ‘The Pursuit of Happyness’.

Revan(Girish Kulkarni) and his wife Sarika(Amruta Subhash) keep shuttling from one village to another hiding away from creditors. Not because they are dishonest people but, as it’s shown in one scene, they are more worried about the problems of the people who owe them money. From one failed business to another one quietly supported by his wife, Revan reaches Solapur where he meets Sarika’s long lost cousin (Hrishikesh Joshi) and his wife (Sneha Majgaonkar). Thus begins Revan’s encounters with some crazy, quirky and eccentric characters who ultimately become his family.

The film is not in a hurry to reach its destination. It doesn’t even care about the plot much and to go by traditional rule book, it’s devoid of any conflict too. Debutant director Sandesh Kulkarni invests all the screen time in his characters and their bittersweet life. It works like a Hrishikesh Mukherjee film as Girish Kulkarni’s writing is simple and effective and never resorts to melodrama to make a point. Like RajKumar Hirani’s films, this one also chooses to look at the goodness in human beings, so none of the characters have any shades of black.

I strongly feel that Masala should be made compulsory viewing in business schools and can work as an anti-depressant for people who have given up on their dreams. It also reminded me of ‘The Alchemist’ in the way it talks about finding the treasure within you. Add to that the lilting background score which makes its presence felt only if you choose to focus on it. On acting front, Girish Kulkarni plays the role of Revan with the right amount of innocence and Amruta Subhash ably supports him with the silent portrayal of her character. Hrishikesh Joshi’s character is one of my favorites in the film and Sneha Majgaonkar, who makes her debut with this film, has an infectious smile. I loved the scene in which she tells Sarika about her husband’s problems with a smile on her face as if she is praising him.

It also has one of the most romantic scenes I have seen on the big screen in recent times. The scene when Sarika has to take her husband’s name in the form of an Ukhane (a Marathi custom in which the wife takes her husband’s name in the form of couplets).

The film is loosely based on the life story of Hukmichand Chordia of Pravin Masalewale fame. It looks at their struggle in a lighter vein and with the rose-tinted glasses. The next time I look at a packet of Pravin Masala, scenes from this film will start floating in my head.

Older Entries
Newer Entries