Dir:Priyadarshan (sorry couldn’t get hold of his phone number!)
Cast: Shahrukh Khan, SRK, brand Khan, Red Chillies Entertainment.
Music:Bullcrap
_________________________________________________
It seems like that recession has even made a dent in the image of Bollywood’s biggest brand. Otherwise why would a superstar of the stature of Shahrukh Khan make a three hour long advertisement? Yes, I am talking about SRK’s latest venture Billu B****r. Priyadarshan’s (the film is produced by SRK’s Red Chillies Entertainment) ‘modern’ take on Krishna – Sudama tale is no better than a very long advertisement on Brand Khan. .
This film is absolute junk, and the only relief being the other Khan...Irrfan Khan, who gives yet another sizzling performance, as Billu/Sudama. Manikandan’s photography is brilliant in patches, and so is Lara Dutta’s back...Deepika’s abs...Priyanka’s eyes...and Kareena’s.....sorry, can’t think of anything good in Kareena!
My suggestion: Switch on the television, and watch ads...They are much more entertaining than the film.
Dir: Anurag Kashyap
Cast: Abhay Deol, Mahie Gill, Kalki Koechlin
Music: Amit Trivedi
________________________________________________________
I sat for hours in front of the computer trying to think of the perfect opening line, but my mind just kept drawing a blank. It had never happened before. Every film leaves an imprint, evokes some emotion. But his one left none. And that is what makes this film special. Anurag Kashyap has freed the spirit of Devdas from its fossils. It has managed to break free of the shackles of sentimentality that had kept it bound for ages.
Kashyap’s Dev D is intensely political, played out like a Brechtian drama, and yet at some level managed to capture the changing emotional topography of a rapidly changing psychological landscape. Unlike a tragedy from the classical mould, the protagonist is not a victim of circumstances; rather, he is caught in the structures he has created for himself. Thus the film is devoid of any emotion of sympathy for any of the characters. Although, Chanda does have a rather sad past, her actions too, are of her own accord, and by her own admission she seems to be content with the dual life that she leads. In a sense, Chanda exemplifies the Kashyap’s philosophy. In this overtly existential film, the characters are responsible for their own actions, and there is no sense of regret or revenge. Even Dev’s descent has little to do with unfulfilled love. Rather it is a tale of a protagonist trying to forge/find an identity for himself.
Instead of being mere cardboard cutouts (as they were, in the previous versions) Kashyap’s Chanda and Paro, are made of flesh and blood. Paro’s sexually confident, and she is not shy in taking the first step. In a brilliantly composed sequence, Paro vents out her sexual energies on a handpump, after being denied by Dev. Similarly, Lenny is not afraid of flaunting her sexuality, (her fascination with riding a bike can be read in the same light as the handpump scene) and even after she’s been cheated on, Lenny has the courage to move on. She is a ‘randi’ and does not take refuge in euphemisms. This sheds light on the conceited psychology of the patriarchal society. As long as Lenny wanted to remain Lenny, her presence was uncomfortable and unacceptable, but the moment she became Chanda, her presence became not only acceptable but at some level desirable too.
Kashyap’s Dev D is not a mere rereading of an old text, it is a new rendition altogether... a story so powerful, that even Sarat Chandra would have been proud of it. But does it make a good watch? You bet.
Inspite of it being heavy on philosophy, nowhere in the film does it weigh you down. It is rather quirky, crazy and to certain extent even funny. The casting is brilliant, and so is the photography. Infact, the photography is so good that it manages to induce a heady feeling, and you come out of the theatre on a high. Just go and watch this film to realise (and acknowledge) that films can be political, sensitive and yet score highly on entertainment value.
Dir: Zoya Akhtar
Cast: Farhan Akhtar, Konkona Sen Sharma, Rishi Kapoor, juhi Chawla, Dimple Kapadia, Isha Sharvani.
_________________________________________________________
Bollywood is holding up a mirror for itself? I don’t know. And to be very honest, my feelings about this film are ambivalent. I can not call it a bad film, then, I can’t even call it a brilliant or even a good film. It is, at best, JAF (Just another Film). I don’t even know what to make of the latest fad of realism that all of a sudden has gripped Bollywood (I am using the term in its truest and most commercial)
At one level, the new wave of realism... outgrown realism, seems a good idea, It provides us with a much deserved break from the excesses of the last decade. But on the other level, it is perhaps, undesirable. I call it undesirable, because, somewhere I feel that it is a foreign concept, and we are adapting & adopting, to accommodate this in Bollywood. Perhaps, we are trying to transform Bollywood into Hindi Film industry, and LBC is a step towrds that.
Luck By Chance, at least for me, is essentially is a ‘realistic’ film on the ‘(melo) dramatic’ Bollywood. However, on the apparent, it is a coming of age tale of a ‘struggler’. Cross an Andy Warhol movie crossed with a Dil Chahta Hai, and the result would be similar to LBC. It is lengthy, dull boring, with flashes of brilliance (the last shot, with Konkona in an extremely long scene) but lacks an overall entertainment value. Farhan Akhtar is good, in his usual understated way. Konkona is brilliant as usual. Isha Sharvani should seriously take Vikram’s (Farhan Akhtar) advice and take some acting classes. If the young brigade was good, the old guards were brilliant. Rishi Kapoor, as Rolly the producer, is fantastic, and so is Dimple, as the fading superstar of the 70s. The music is nothing to write about. And the photography is, at best, ordinary.
So, should you go, and watch it?
Well... if you want to see the things you have already read about in the numerous film magazines, just go ahead, and watch it... it’s really not that bad!!!
Why do IITians poke their nose into everything? Do they think that they are the best that the country has to offer? Or is it that the rest of us are totally worthless? Now before you ask, why am I ranting and panting, this is about a book that I recently read... Its called Above Average, which if anything, is way below average. Probably, it’s not the author’s (Amitabha Bagchi) fault; he was just emulating what his fellow mate, Chetan Bhagat did. (He not only got away but also made tons of money with it.)
Probably, its not even Chetan’s fault that the book did well (commercially, I mean)... Probably, it’s our fault. Yes, our collective fault. The importance that we have accorded to technical education, especially engineering, is absolute madness. Just take a trip down, Hauz Khas in Delhi, and you’ll find scores of youngsters, with here- and-there moustaches with a bag carelessly slung across their shoulders, entering the numerous FIITJEEs that throng the area. Go to any school, and you’ll find half the class missing...Why? Well, they are all preparing for the entrance exams, and school studies are just not worth it!
Catch hold of one, and ask him. Why?
Just why does want to be an engineer? 6 out of ten would say, they don’t have an idea. Three would say their parents asked them do so, and one smarty-pants would push his spectacles up, look at you with an air of superiority, and would say, ‘I just love computers. So I wanna be one a Software Engineer.’ Ask him, why IIT? The answer, ‘Oh its the best...that is why.’ And what’s so good about it? They would ramble something about professors and the curriculum, and before you can ask a counter question, they would quietly slip away, making some excuse about getting late for a class or something like that.
The truth is, that none of them actually have a reason. All they know is that, IIT is the first step to a commercially successful career. IITs, IIMs, and then a plush job with Goldnam Sachs or a Lehman Bros. (Hmmm.... Wonder, if its still at the top of the list!!) Probably, their thought about the ladder is not completely wrong. But then, have we ever wondered why has success been reduced to mere numbers, and even it has been, then why all the zeroes get added only to a specific sector/profession? ( Zero...Ask Fuld!!) Why is a course that teaches you to crunch numbers being accorded a higher status than any other form of education? And is education worthwhile only if it translates into numbers? And why, only certain degrees are able to make that transition, while others are stuck at the doldrums?
These are some of the questions, that we need to think about...consciously, collectively. And if we don’t arrive at the answers soon, than probably we’ll have to live through the ignominy of reading/listening trash from people like Chetan & Amitabha, bragging...and adding to the myth.
Dir: Danny Boyle
Cast: Dev Patel, Madhur Mittal, Freida Pinto
Music: A R Rahman
________________________________________________________
The Question
Slumdog Millionaire has won 10 Oscar Nominations. But why has it evoked such varied emotions
A. It is an emotional rags to riches story
B. It is the first film to depict the life of Mumbai's slums
C. It is written by an Indian
D. It is made by a white man.
The Film
'Slumdog' try typing the word on any text editor, and you'll have the spell check suggesting a typing error. Probably, it is the only space where the film is still unknown. Yes, Danny Boyle's Slumdog Millionaire set in the slums of Mumbai, is the most talked about film at the moment. But what is it that makes it so special?
Loosely based on a an Indian bureaucrat's novel (Vikas Swarup's Q&A) about a boy from the slums winning a quiz show, the film charts the life and journey of Jamal Malik, from the gloom of Dharavi to the glitz and glamour of television. At first glance, it is a simple rags to riches story set in a Dickensian world. But look closer, and you'll find that this ain't that simple.
Although Jamal's life serves as the foreground, the film is as much about Mumbai and its sociological history, as the story of it's protagonists. Infact, not a single film in recent history has been able to capture the changing topography of India's biggest metropolis in a better way than this film. Whether it's the city's obsession with film stars or the nation's frenzy about television. Whether the nightmare of the communal riots or the city's tryst with 'development'... Slumdog has it all. And yes, that's not it all. It also manages to capture the essence of Hindi cinema, with it's numerous coincidences, 'filmi' love story... and to top it all, also has a song & dance sequence. In a sense, it's a film about opposites. And Danny Boyle has managed to generate such electricity by clashing opposites that it has managed light up a gloomy year. ( The film was released in the US & UK towards the end of 2008 )
The film uses a stream of consciousness narrative, and the finesse with which the director has incorporated the context with the text is remarkable. Loveleen Tandon, the film's Co- Director, deserves more than just a pat on the back for the perfect casting. Whether it's Ayush Khedekar as the five year old Jamal or Madhur Mittal as the teenaged Salim, no one...absolutely no one else could have performed it better. The photography by Anthony Dod Mantle is ... Beautiful...as one of the cast members said, 'He even made look shit beautiful.' It is simple, and yet it manages to make the ordinary look extraordinary. Much has been said about Rahman's compositions, but to be honest, he has given better music in other films...
The Reactions
The film premiered in India this week, but even before it was released it evoked strong reactions which ranged from adulation and glory to rage and fury. If on one hand we were enthralled by it's 10 Oscar nominations on the other hand, we were enraged by its portrayal of India. Some even went as far as calling it Poverty porn, while other have claimed that this is, perhaps, the best film, ever been made in/about India.
The Answer
We are enthralled because we need certification from the West for every little thing we do. The dabba system has been a phenomenon in Mumbai since ages, but we needed a Prince Charles to certify its efficiency. We needed a Bill Gates to realise that Indian Cuisine is great. We needed a Don Bradman’s certification before we proclaimed Sachin was God. And yes, we need the Academy of Motion Pictures to say that we make brilliant films.
We are enraged not because this film has shown poverty. We are enraged not because this film has spilt the beans about India Shining. We are enraged not because this film has showcased our hypocrisy.
We are enraged because a White Man did all of this.
The End
