Film review: Could this be love (French)

Watched this French film at an ongoing European Film Festival in Pune yesterday and liked it quite a bit.

This Pierre Jolivet directed film is about a charming 43 year old man, Lucas (Vincent Lindon), a rich, divorced industrialist, who tends to go all out when he’s in love.Smarting from a recent affair (where the woman was set up by one of his competitors), Lucas feels it imperative to know all about the woman he’s freshly fallen in love with. He’s incredibly attracted to the 38 year old Elsa (Sandrine Bonnaire), a ceramist whom he’s commissioned to create a fresco for his office foyer. To put to rest all his doubts, he hires his detective friend to know all there is about his ladylove.

Initially, the feisty and quick-witted Elsa plays quite hard to get but finds herself falling for her employer. Their first few attempts at love making prove disastrous for one reason or the other but they get over it soon, and find each other head over heels in love.

But just when life looks perfect, Elsa gets a whiff of the ‘spy devises’ installed in her house and thinks of Lucas as a ‘whacko’ She shuns him, only to have him go into a major depression and snack on frozen Pizza for days on end.
Yet, in the end, the real story gets around to Elsa and to Lucas’ surprise, he hears about his ladylove finishing the fresco in his office foyer. Overjoyed, he rushes to her and it’s all good again for the love birds.
This is quite a light-hearted film, paying a nice little tribute of sorts to the art of ceramics. Vincent Lindon, as the handsome businessman with his heart on his sleeve, is delight to watch. All in all, a nice little love story here.
-Sandhya Iyer

Fiilm review: Firaaq

Cries from a carnage

Starring: Naseeruddin Shah, Paresh Rawal, Deepti Naval, Tisca Chopra, Sanjay Suri, Raghuvir Yadav
Director: Nandita Das
Stars: ***


Nandita Das’ directorial debut Firaaq starts with a particularly macabre scene with two men burying a mass of dead Muslims in the aftermath of the Gujarat carnage. The next scene cuts to a worried, lower-middle class Muslim couple, retuning back to their area, and shocked to find their house almost burnt down. These two back-to-back scenes, with its inherent bid to grab the audiences’ attention, are a bit shaky and loud – where one fears Das is probably over-directing. But that’s a doubt that gets put to rest in the subsequent reels, where the story starts to introduce you to the various characters of the film.

In Mumbai Meri Jaan fashion, the film alternates between various episodes, trying to give the audience a sense of the dread that permeates after the incident. And Das takes care to include people affected from all demographics. So there is Muneera (a poor mehendiwali) and her husband trying to figure out who burnt their house and in the bargain start suspecting many of their own friends. The blatant anti-Muslim stance that many believe the Gujarat government took, is depicted in the story of a well-to-do inter-caste couple, Anuradha Desai (Tisca Chopra) and her husband, Sameer Sheikh (Sanjay Suri). Their showroom is robbed and the couple starts to feel unsafe in the very state they’ve always considered home.

The story involving Naseeruddin Shah, as a devout musician and his caretaker (Raghuvir Yadav) is probably the most understated ones among all of them. Naseer’s character is in a state of denial about how his surrounding has altered and becomes quite disoriented when some of these changes stare him in his face.

But the most satiric and scathing attack on certain Hindi factions in the state is represented through Paresh Rawal’s character, a callous, self-serving middle-aged Gujju, who loves throwing his weight around, occasionally beating and deriding his compliant wife (Deepti Naval), when he’s not cheating people along with his equally phony brother.
And in all this, two of the stories include an orphaned five-year-old (Mohsin), who is witness to the violence and depravity around him.

Das is clearly making a statement about Hindu fundamentalism and how the minority community was almost on the verge of a wipe out - with both the State’s police and even many of the citizens turning against Muslims (there’s a particularly hard-hitting scene here where Muneera’s husband – after escaping from a police – is hit on the head with a stone thrown on him from a balcony.)
This is probably one of the few films where not too much effort has been made to ‘balance out’ things —- Yes, some Hindu characters are shown to be sympathetic and there is Deepti Naval, who is deeply affected by her inability to help out a Muslim woman chased by a mob. But for most part, the film only highlights the atrocity on Muslims. Since the film is ultimately about human suffering and not expected to be a docu-drama, one wonders if Das should have concentrated so pointedly at the sufferings of the minority alone.

Firaaq has some extremely well-shot scenes and superb performances by almost everyone. Paresh Rawal is the pick of the lot, followed by Naseer, Raghuvir Yadav and Tisca Chopra.
However, what prevents the film from really being as engrossing as it should be is the fact, that unlike a Mumbai Meri Jaan, there is very little progression in all the stories. The suffering is internalised, which causes the film to drag a lot. And even though, one is happy the film got made, the fact that Das is pretty judgemental (rightly or wrongly) could prompt the audience to be defensive. So in that sense, one might get a feeling of only being privy to one half the story – though in Das’ view there was only one side to this story!
All in all, Firaaq is a bold film, with some excellently done scenes but for its slow pace, lack of any respite and a bit of repetitiveness, it could demand a fair bit of patience from the audience.
- Sandhya Iyer

Nandita Das on Firaaq

'It's time to reclaim our spaces'

Nandita Das, whose film, Firaaq is up for release, speaks to on why she felt compelled to direct this subject and how she’s upset with the lack of promotion

for it

Nandita Das is on a media overdrive, giving one interview after another. When you call her, she politely asks if an email interview would be okay but then soon relents. “You know I’ve been speaking about the same thing to so many people,” says the actress- turned-director who is just back from an international film festival in France where Firaaq was showcased. But as we start conversing, Nandita gets into the mood and tells us all we need to know about her debut directorial venture.


So how was the film received in France?

It was fantastic. There were 1500 people and they empathised completely with the journey of the characters in the film. The feedback I got reaffirmed my faith that problems of violence affect everyone. It’s a very universal feeling.

One sees a lot of international critics and even audiences now relating to every Indian film through the prism of Slumdog Millionaire. Did you find that happening?

There is a growing interest in India per se. And it goes beyond just yoga or our curries. But yes, Slumdog Millionaire has brought the spotlight to India and Mumbai. In fact, a lot of critics have compared Firaaq to Slumdog…

Are you comfortable with that…?

People always label things very quickly. For example, people ask me if Firaaq is like Parzania (both have the backdrop of the Gujarat riots). I mean, c’mon, why would someone make another film then? There is no riot shown in my film at all. What it shows is the after-effect of such an occurrence… how the violence lingers around, leaving back anger, ambivalence, hope and so on.


You’ve been an actress…were you always interested in the process of filmmaking even then?

Yes, I was interested. I find post-production to be a huge thing. It was completely unfamiliar terrain for me since I was an actor, but I found it all hugely exciting. I especially liked editing. To have all your material together and then to be able to play around with was great.

So was it interest in the medium that resulted in Firaaq?

No, Firaaq was born for a different reason. It’s an outcome of my Human Rights’ work. The kind of things I saw there and experienced compelled me to tell a story. There was a lot of research happening even without me knowing that I would be making it into a film. But once I made up mind on it, I started meeting more people who had gone through violence. I wanted documentaries, held talks…Even our film opens with the lines ‘A fiction with a thousand true stories” It was essentially the desire to tell a story and conviction in the subject that drove me towards making it.

What about cinematic influences?

I’ve grown up in a family of artistes (her father is the famous painter-sculptor Jatin Das), so the influences are bound to be there. I’ve done street theatre for five years. Cinema is ultimately a collaborative art and even your instincts are all governed by your sub-conscious mind – which keeps gathering details and experiences all along. So essentially, I wasn’t playing by the standard rules while making Firaaq. That is, in fact, one of the compliments I got, where I was told I had managed to create a language of my own.


With actors like Naseer, Paresh Rawal and Shahana Goswami, the film’s cast is a clear highlight…

Whether it is the casting or locales, I literally handpicked stuff. I was very sure I wanted Dipti Naval and Raghuvir Yadav in the film, along with Naseer, Paresh Rawal and Shahana Goswami. Some other names didn’t work out but most of the cast is what I wanted.


The film may not be explicitly about the Gujarat riots but one presumes it will be making a statement…

The film is really about what goes on in people’s mind when they are faced with situations of this kind. I haven’t shown violence and that’s how I wanted it. A lot of films are so called critiques of violence but they can’t do it without showing a lot of violence. That, in my opinion, defeats the purpose.

Firaaq – at least on the surface – appears like a film that is recipe for controversy, isn’t it?

I can’t let that affect my life. Is it wrong to feel for something, to take a stand or push the boundary? Controversy has already become such an ugly word. Any five people anywhere will get offended by what you make. The moral policing just has to stop. It’s high time we reclaimed our spaces, otherwise you’ll have people coming into your homes and telling you want to do. But I have no fears, because I wrote precisely what I wanted to and my motivation behind the film was very clear. It is more of a healing process than anything else.

So is Firaaq a one off for her, or there will she be directing more films?

The greatest freedom in life is to be able to do what you like, so yes, I will pick up subjects that interest me -both as an actor or director. One can have fun without something defying one’s sensibilities, being regressive or sexist. For example, I would to be part of a comedy or even direct one.

Finally, the publicity of the film by producers Percept has been almost nil…

Ask them! I don’t understand these things. You know, when you make a film, it’s important that there is visibility. The whole idea is to reach out to as many people as you can. It’s not only about a few reviews and getting my friends to see it. I have faith in word-of-mouth though. But yes, you should seriously direct this question at the producers.

-Sandhya Iyer

Film review: Little Zizou

Just for Kicks

Starring: Boman Irani, Zenobia Shroff, Jahan Bativala, Iyanah Bativala, Imaad Shah, Sohrab Ardeshir
Director: Sooni Taraporevala
Rating: ***






It’s been long since we’ve seen a film showcasing a particular community, bringing out their little quirks and specific traits. There have been Baaton Baton Mein, Pestonji and a few more in the past, which have delved into culture/community specific subjects, leading to an endearing comedy of manners.

In that respect, director Sooni Taraporevala – (screenplay writer for Mira Nair’s The Namesake, Mississipi Masala) is the spot-on choice for her directorial debut, Little Zizou, which essentially is all about the Zoroastrian community, that mildly touches upon some of the larger issues Parsis are faced with.Given that Taraporevala understands the community so well, enables her to etch out a textured screenplay with the right tone, and characters, situations and dialogues that ring true at every point. If you’re one for subtlety (note how a South Indian character in the film speaks just in the right intonation) and a certain assured style of story-telling, Little Zizou could well be your weekend treat.

So what’s the film about? Nothing much really. The script is mostly happy to meander around, capturing lives around a Parsi locality. The film starts with 11-year old Xerxes (Jahan Bativala), who loves football and dreams of meeting his icon Zinedine Zidane someday. He’s nicknamed fondly after his idol, Zizou. Motherless and lonely, he spends most of his time being treated to fish curry and other stuff by his kindly neighbours, The Presswalas (Boman Irani and Zenobia Shroff) — much to the chagrin of their younger daughter who sulks at the attention given to Zizou by her mother. Boman Presswala regularly pokes fun of Khodaiji through his newspaper, which forms the crux of the story in the later reels.

Zizou’s own family is a dysfunctional one. His father, Cyrus II Khodaiji (Sohrab Ardeshir) is an archetype, a pathetic remnant of the Raj– the kind who speaks high-flown English and insists on crisp toast and bacon for breakfast. That is when he’s not driving his uptight Girl Friday (Shenaz Patel) crazy, expecting new levels of perfection from her every day. But all this could be excused as perverse eccentricity, except that Khodaiji is obsessed with a certain ‘cause’ to keep his community pure and not allow “riff raff”, as he puts it, to pollute them. When an articulate foreign journalist points out at Parsis’ dwindling numbers, Khodaiji’s retort is, “Quality matters madam, not quantity”
Meanwhile, Zizou’s elder brother, Artaxerxes (Imaad Shah) is a writer-artiste –who visualises his vicinity through caricatures (this is a nice touch to the theme) — keeps himself busy with a bunch of wacky friends, trying to convert a crashed cockpit into a flight-of-fantasy machine, when he’s not getting disappointed in love.

What Sooni Taraporevala gets right is the setting and mood. She never goes over-the-top and ensures there’s a certain comic vein that runs through the film. But the most howlerious and interesting part of the film is hands down Boman Irani and his wife, played by the pretty Zenobia Shroff. The latter is a delight to watch, as she tries to bring a semblance of calm and grace to her otherwise tumultuous surrounding. Boman is predictably brilliant. See him interacting with his younger daughter in Parsi, it’s great fun. This is really the highlight of the film and most of the charm of the movie resides in this household alone. Imaad Shah (the only non-Parsi in the cast probably) is impressive while John Abraham has a neat little guest appearance. The director has tried to include as many Parsi personalities in the film as possible (there’s Shiamak Davar and Cyrus Brocha too), making this a tribute film to the community almost.

Even though the film stays fairly engaging, it needs to be said that this is ultimately a very unambitious film that is happy to skim the surface and not really address any of the issues in detail. Also, many threads are left incomplete. What happens to Zenobia’s senile, chatterbox mother in the film – (a very good, Mahabanoo Mody-Kotwal) is not clear. More importantly, the central premise (the fight for ‘pure breed’) hardly comes through and the ending is all too convenient and half-baked.

So while there are these nice vignettes you can carry home with you, none of them add to the whole, making it ultimately a film you can enjoy watching, but hardly one that makes you sit up and take note of it.
-Sandhya Iyer

Film Review: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Not quite on the button
Director: David Fincher
Starring: Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett, Taraji P Henson

Rating: **1/2

F. Scott Fitzergerald’s wonderful short story on degeneration and regeneration through the utterly curious life of his protagonist Benjamin Button was always going to be rich fodder for a cinematic translation. And it is indeed the concept and the special effects used to achieve a fantastical and profound story that makes the film worth your time. But sadly, unlike his earlier films, David Fincher (Seven, Zodiac, Fight Club) fails to inject the story with enough vigour or zip, leading to the end product to appear a bit too plodding and meandering.

The film starts with a bang though. To everyone’s shock, our protagonist, Benjamin, is born looking like an 80-year-old. His father, Mr Button is so horrified that he leaves the ghostly-looking baby at the doorstep of a home for the aged. A kindly nurse, Queenie (a brilliant and very effective Taraji P Henson) is struck by the baby’s ugliness but takes him under her care.

Even though Benjamin looks every bit like a tottering grandpa, everyone around treats him like a kid. The doctor who examines him doesn’t think he will live long. But live he does, and curiously starts to grow younger as the years progress. He starts to walk erect, his head looks fuller with grey hair and the wrinkles start to lessen.

Meanwhile, he gets friendly with one of the inmate’s granddaughter, the eight-year-old Daisy, and finds it perfectly normal to find her attractive (his real age being same as hers), until he’s told otherwise. The rest of the film takes us through Benjamin’s life, including his adventures at the sea and his meeting with a minister’s wife, who he drinks coffee with night after night. This is probably the film’s most tiresome part. Also, for a guy who spends all his time in the sea, why in the world was Brad Pitt given such a professorial look with long silver locks and robes!
The film, which almost comes to a standstill pre and post interval scenes, gathers some steam when Benjamin visits the home for the aged again and rekindles his affection with Daisy (Cate Blanchett), now a graceful ballerina. Their relationship has its ups and downs but the couple decides to stick together. There’s only one problem —Benjamin — with reversal of age — is growing younger.

Fitzergerald’s original story really emphasised on the vanity of youth and how nothing remains forever. Also, it’s a telling take on the age dynamics between man and woman, and our vulnerability against the ravages of time. Obviously, the writers of the film have made modifications to the author’s original story and fleshed it out more, but one isn’t sure if it necessarily adds to the film’s basic idea. While Fitzergarald’s short story passes like a breeze, thereby not letting you argue on logic, Fincher’s version is very long, so questions invariably pop in your head. Why would Daisy find the old Benjamin attractive in the first place? Also, the makers have kept Benjamin’s character a bit too hazy and placid, so as to bypass some logical questions, such as ‘Does he keep forgetting events and people of the previous year, considering he’s growing younger?’ and ‘What is it about him that women find attractive, since you’re given no idea of what his mental age is?’

Fincher’s story and characters are a mixed bag. Brad Pitt has been saddled with a role that is more a showcase for the special effects team than anything else. The characters are far too sketchy and their motivations unclear. Watch it for its interesting concept, but this isn’t a perfect film by any means.

‘I don’t care what the world thinks of Aashayein’

John Abraham speaks to Sandhya Iyer about his image post Dostana, his new film NewYork and why he still stands by the much-delayed Aashayein









John Abraham has two things at the moment that is keeping him busy and excited.
The first one is his participation with UTV’s latest youth movement called Ungli Utao Bindaas, that aims to encourage youth to vote in the forthcoming elections. The UTV Bindass movement also plans to take issues like global warming and corruption to the youth and initiate a change.
So what prompted him to take up the above cause? “Two reasons,” he shoots. “One is because of my long association with UTV. I was very honoured when Ronnie Screwvala approached me for this drive. Also, I believe I have a strong connect with the youth. I come from a middle-class family and somewhere they see a connection,” he says.

But while it is important to vote, does he believe we have the kind of political candidates whom we’d like to see leading out country? “That’s an important question. What is interesting is that through their website, UTV is recommending some names of candidates after checking on their credentials. So you at least won’t have people with criminal background and so on,” he says. On whether the drive will also encourage youngsters to be part of the change by joining politics, he says, “Er…we’d like to take one step at a time. So the initiative this time around is to get as many youngsters to vote.”

Somewhere John’s eagerness to attach himself to a worthy cause is reflected in his choice of films and filmmakers as well, where in spite of his career never really being exactly secure, he has supported directors like Anurag Kashyap and Nagesh Kukunoor. He didn’t resent the backlash that came to him after No Smoking and instead backed Kashyap. Today, the director has vindicated himself with Dev D, how does that feel, “I have always taken chances, even when the need to take them was not perceived at all. After Dev D, I’m in a ‘I told you so…’ phase. Now I have people who tell me that they saw No Smoking and it wasn’t bad at all. There’s renewed interest for the film and all I tell them is “I told you so’,” he says.
There was recently talk about Anurag and him coming together for another film called Bombay Velvet. “Anurag and I will work with each till the last day of our lives. Bombay Velvet is a very exciting film…it’s still in the planning stages though,” he informs us.

His last film, Dostana where he flaunted his oh-so-sexy body had the nation swooning over his looks. While the film reiterated the fact that John is indeed one of the country’s hottest man, it did nothing for him as the actor. In fact, his pin-up boy image seems to be working against him in some ways. Ask him this and he accedes, “You know, when Karan offered me Dostana, I asked him precisely this. I said, ‘People already think of me in a certain way and this is only going to reinforce that perception’ That’s when Karan said, ‘But cinema is all about body and face. Acting is a visual medium. Looks are always going to come in your way, so use it to your advantage and gradually you can take on stronger roles and make a mark as an actor’ So I’m not going to fight my pin-up boy image and honestly, I don’t have a problem with it,” he says.

He takes the opportunity to emphasis another point about male looks. “I think it’s great that women are noticing how good or bad men are looking. For ages now, we’ve had the men who make statements like ‘Oh, she doesn’t look perfect.’ These standards of looks are forever applied to the women. What about the men? It’s time the women expected more from them too,” he says.
Men are not going to like him too much for saying this… “The advantage I think I have is that I connect with the men as much as I do with the women. Unlike regular male models who bring in a
certain arrogance to the screen with a ‘you can’t look like me, so just watch’ attitude, I have always appeared like a normal guy. So I think most men, let’s say 99 per cent of the men relate to me,” he says. We agree!
Turning to his films, what are his hopes from his next, Aashayein? “I can tell you about my next release, New York, which is a very strong film. It’s a film I believe in, just like I did with Taxi No 9211, No Smoking, Water and Kabul Express. This is arguably my best performance and it has me, Neil (Nitin Mukesh) Katrina (Kaif) and Irrfan –the ultimate star,” he tells us.

But what’s happening to Nagesh Kukunoor’s Aashayein? The film landed in court, when Anil Ambani’s Reliance Big Pictures --- who had paid producers Precept an advance for the film’s rights --- alleged that the story-line was changed mid-way. But recently, there was news of the film being cleared by the court but John’s response hardly sounds positive. “You know, about Aashayein, Nagesh just yesterday smsed me as said, ‘I’m going all over the film again and it is beautiful’ No matter what the world thinks about Aashayein, I stand by Nagesh,” he says, clearly hinting that things are not looking too good for the film even now.
This seems to be one of John’s qualities, that of standing by his friends in their hour of need. “I believe it’s easy to stand by successful people, it’s more difficult to stand by those who are talented and not that successful. By principle, I always stand by people once I put my faith in them,” he says.

It's about Rahman and Resul really!

Beyond the fact that Slumdog Millionaire’s emphatic win at the Oscar has given the country and especially the media much cause for celebration, this memorable event has also been an eye opener to our own film industry in many ways.

From the time one recollects - Bollywood – the world’s biggest movie making machine – has been unabashedly star-driven, rarely looking beyond its charismatic matinee idols. The winning of the triumvirate, lyricist Gulzar, music composer, the incredible music composer A R Rahman and Resul Pookutty for sound mixing, proves once and for all that our country’s real strength and talent resides in the men and women behind-the-scenes. Again, many years ago, it was an Indian, Bhanu Athaiya who won for Best Costume for Richard Attenborough's epic movie Gandhi.

Whether one thinks highly of the Oscar Awards or not, whether or not Slumdog Millionaire deserved its honour and beyond debates of whether the Danny Boyle flick is an Indian movie or not, one thing we need to thank this moment for – it finally brought three of our best men to the fore…and they weren’t Khans this time!

Technicians and people behind the scenes, in general, have always had the most creative and challenging jobs on hand. And yet, our country and industry too, has rarely recogonised their contribution in any sense. Our desi awards are a joke where technical and such ‘lesser’ awards are handed over without the slightest ceremony.
But then, all this is really symptomatic of our own obsession with a handful of stars, without showing enough readiness to support the cause of progressive cinema. Only an industry that puts its films above its stars will ever be able to appreciate the contribution of the people who make it happen.

Coming back to our three victors, A R Rahman has been carrying on a silent revolution in music for years now. Experimental, even as he remains unwaveringly original, it’s difficult not to be ‘invested’ in the Oscar at least for Rahman’s sake. No one possibly deserves an international honour more than Rahman and Slumdog…was a good excuse we thing.

Again, Gulzar has been one our finest directors and lyricists. We live in times where mediocrity is often celebrated, which is why it is even more heartening to see our geniuses getting their due.
Finally, Resul Pookutty’s win for Sound will hopefully impact the film industry the most. First of all, his win emphases the vast technical talent that resides in the country and that is great news in terms of the opportunities it might bring. But more than anything, this has been a huge morale booster for our technicians (sound design, editing, mixing, cinematographers, costume….and many others) who got their first moment in the sun, by way of Pookutty.

Even if it does not bring about any tangible benefits, one hopes it will at least bring about a change in the attitude of the film industry and yes, in us too! Let’s respect our hidden (literally!) talent, and please, let’s not wait until an international body fetes them.

-Sandhya Iyer

Capital Interest

The last few years have seen Delhi turning into a veritable hot-spot for Hindi filmmakers. Sandhya Iyer explores the reasons

What is it about our capital that drives more and more present-day filmmakers to use it as setting for their films?Delhi, with its wondrous forts, lush gardens, not to forget cultural oddities, blatant materialism and class divide, makes a rather cinematic and colourful location no doubt. But beyond the obvious, there seem to be more reasons why Delhi is featuring so constantly in our movies these days. Part of the reason is undoubtedly the feeling of nostalgia that the place evokes in our new breed of young directors. But clearly, the city - viewed both as the political capital and major commercial and cultural metropolis—assumes greater significance in terms of offering an archetype for India itself.

Let’s start by looking at the rather long list of films that have used Delhi as its setting in recent times. It kickstarted in a big way with Rang De Basanti and Fanaa in 2006, where the city was captured in all its architectural splendour. Then came Dikaber Banerjee and Jaideep Sahni’s dark comedy Khosla Ka Ghosla, a superb take on Delhi middle-class and the builder mafia. Dibaker revisited the capital again for his next, Oye Lucky Lucky Oye, capturing Old Delhi, peppering it with colloquial lingo and lampooning its inhabitants. In between there was the college caper Dil Dosti Etc and Jimmy Shergill starrer Delhi Heights, which didn’t make much of an impact.This year, we’ve already had Chandni Chowk To China Manoj Bajpai’s Jugaad (note the ‘Delhiness’ of the title itself) and Dev D. And this week we have Rakeysh Mehra’s Delhi 6, a film that the director refuses to catagorise as a Delhi-centric film. According to Mehra, the theme would find a resonance anywhere in India, Delhi being the epicenter. And it doesn’t look like our filmmakers are going to tire of the capital city any time soon. Later this year, there will be Aamir Khan’s raunchy comedy, Delhi Belly (the title sits perfectly for a place that boasts of some of the most scrumptious street fares).So what exactly does this city offer that has prompted so many films to use it as a setting and even name their films after Old Delhi’s famous bylanes?

Even as one delves into why Delhi delights Bollywood, there is another valid debate that needs to be included here. Is the shift towards Delhi a shift away from Mumbai – the very heart and soul of India and Bollywood itself? For all this while, Mumbai has been the ultimate symbol of aspirational India – the Maximum City that never sleeps. But now the city’s backdrop post the riots in 1993 and the terror attacks appears to be vastly altered and thereby the kind of films we’ve seen based on the city have also been mostly angst-ridden. There’s been Mumbai Meri Jaan, Aamir, A Wednesday, Black Friday – all about a city that is struggling to keep itself alive.

Hence, is Delhi emerging as the cinematic alternative to Mumbai in some ways?“Capitals are somewhat chauvinistic places! As is Washington to New York so is Delhi to Mumbai. The latter after the glorious 70s period started fading. Eventually it returned in the 90s as gangland and really the representation of the ‘ugly’ metropolis. With Delhi, I think of it as capital and hence the site of the ’state’ in a very literal sense has been surging in cinema as the country itself makes headway in a global sense,” observes film buff and writer, Kaleem Hasan.Which is also precisely one of reasons why films tackling broader issues like socio-political conflict (Rang De Basanti, Delhi 6) would be looking at a figure head state and Delhi offers that representation.

However, filmmaker Anurag Kashyap, who saw an unlikely success in Dev D last month, believes there is no Delhi ‘fixation’ and filmmakers are only choosing the capital because it’s a trip down memory lane for many of them. “Everyone is seeing a lot of Delhi suddenly because there has been an influx of filmmakers who are from outside Mumbai and have a connection with Delhi. So rather than setting their film in some fantasy land, they’d rather go back to their roots. I mean I did my college from Delhi, so I’d like to revisit that in my film some day,” he views.
Also Kashyap does not really see a connection between the city and the subject, which means he is not willing to necessarily view Mumbai as a changed city in terms of what it represents. “My subject could turn any place into an angst-ridden one, it doesn’t have to be Mumbai. If Debakar (Banerjee) is making the kind of films he does, it’s because he has a funny, cynical bone in him, and that applies to most others,” he says.

Delhi’s cinematic significance also stems from the fact that the place abounds in rich expressions of Hindi and Punjabi that lends it a unique flavor. Hindi in many ways is the ‘decider’ when it comes to choice of setting. Rarely are films set in states that do not have a Hindi-speaking tradition, which essentially means that only the Hindi heartland and to some extent Mumbai are even considered for a setting. And this is where, Delhi with its eminence and ethos offers the perfect North Indian template. And with the new lot of directors all having a strong connection to Delhi, it’s unlikely that Bollywood will be able to shrug off its utterly ‘Punjabified’ avatar any time soon.

Jaideep Sahni, who has written films like Khosla Ka Ghosla and Aaja Nachle, believes it is natural for storytellers to express the most universal things when they find them in their mother cultures, because that’s where their connection to human emotions and circumstances is the strongest. “I think it’s a good thing for whatever culture you may be from to show up in your work. Where else will it show if not in your work?” he asks.
“If you see dialects of Hindi sub-cultures in Hindi films over last forty years, they have been from Urdu to Mumbai-cosmo to UP-Bihar belt to Punjabi, and now a broad-based metro Hindi. There’s no grand conspiracy theory behind the rise or fall of any one of these I think, at least I haven’t seen any. It’s just that Hindi films will have various dialects of Hindi because they are Hindi films.”

But wouldn’t too much of Delhi or the North start to feel repetitive after a while? “Yes, if all films start being about the same kind of people or cultures or even genres, it’s no fun, but I don’t think that’ll happen, because I don’t really see any intention anywhere around me to push a culture or sub-culture, especially in the mainstream. It’s just a lot of folks doing what they like, whether this or that,” he views.

So is language at the core of Hindi cinema and will most other states remain untapped? This only time will tell but Kaleem Hasan certainly thinks more places can be looked into. “I would love to see new sites explored. Why not have a film set in Ahmedabad? This has been one of the great industrial cities of India…. Bangalore would again be a good city to explore the Dil Chahta Hai kind of universe given the tech boom began here. Hyderabad is another old city/new city paradigm and this city is a kind of bridge between ‘north’ and ’south’. Really there are lots of cities to explore. It’s just the paucity of imagination on the part of Mumbai filmmakers that prevents this from happening.”

But for now, it is Delhi that is the toast of Bollywood and from the looks of it the capital city has far from exhausted its stock.

Delhi 6 film review

Delhi highs and lows








Director: Rakeysh Mehra
Starring: Abhishek Bachchan, Sonam Kapoor, Waheeda Rahman, Om Puri, Rishi Kapoor, Divya Dutta, Deepak Dobriyal, Vijay Raaz, Pawan Malhotra among others
Showting At
: City Pride (Kothrud, Satara), Gold Big Cinemas, E-Square, Inox, Mangala, Rahul

Much like his last Rang De Basanti, Rakeysh Mehra’s latest, Delhi 6 boasts of great many things that make you sit up and take note of it. For starters, there’s his trademark visual panache and his ability to build characters well. Not to add, a splendid music score by A R Rahman that is possibly right up there as one of his best works.
Yet, much like Rang De Baanti and Aks even, Mehra appears far too simplistic and confusing with his story, thereby making his concepts appear quite half-baked.
At least with Rang De Basanti (even with a very problematic ending), the anarchist resolution connected well with the youth, and tapped into their disenchantment with the political system in the country. Unfortunately, Delhi 6 has none of that urgency and takes up general issues like casteism, the Hindi-Muslim conflict, orthodoxy using Chandni Chowk as an archetype for India as a whole.

NRI Roshan (Abhishek Bachchan) accompanies his ailing grandma (Waheeda Rahman) to Delhi 6, where she wants to spend the rest of her days amidst people and places she’s known. The film beautifully captures the smells and sights of the place and Roshan, as the unobtrusive visitor, captures it on his mobile. Mehra does a fine job with his ensemble cast and the setting is truly electrifying. There’s a constant vein of humour that runs in the film and that makes the movie eminently watchable, even if you’re conscious that the movie isn’t really going anywhere.
Many of idiosyncrasies and even outright regressiveness that some of the characters exhibit becomes palatable solely due to presence of ‘outsider’ Roshan – whose reactions – raging from amusement to shock –is an easy character to relate for youngsters.

It is the film’s key metaphor of the ‘Kala Bandar’ episode (the monkey man incident that caused intense fear in Delhi) that fails to make an impact. Apart from the fact that it’s old hat, Mehra has not been able to incorporate it well into the story. This results in the film pretty much falling apart in the second half, getting overly preachy and pointless.

Now, RDB itself wasn’t very focused story-telling, but it was still on course till the pre climax struck. Delhi 6 is more scattered, happy to linger on, offering mostly vignettes in the form of episodes of the Chandni chowk inhabitants and you’re happy to watch it (thanks to some brilliant performances) for a long time. But once the setting is grilled into you, there’s very little to look forward to in terms of story.

Among the cast, Abhishek Bachchan does well, though a wee bit too understated and unremarkable as a character. Sonam is very good but she doesn’t have much to do here. In fact, her’s and Abhishek’s love story is hardly fleshed out. The rest of the cast comes up with outstanding performances.
In fact, the character actors and Rahman’s music should be your only reason to check out this otherwise underwhelming film.

Rating: **1/2

-Sandhya Iyer

Exclusive: Aamir asks John Matthew to work on Sarfarosh 2

Director John Matthew Mathan is giving the final touches to his next release, the Himesh Reshamiyaa starrer A New Love Ishtory but he’s already working on the script of what could be Sarfarosh 2!

The 1999 Aamir-starrer, Sarfarosh about Pakistan and ISI was a runaway hit and we must add, provided enough scope for a sequel given its theme and open-ended climax. “To be honest at that time, we had no plans of making a sequel to the film or exploiting the idea further. But fact remains that the film does lend itself to a sequel, considering how Ajay Rathod (Aamir Khan) goes on to his next case,” he says.

It was a year back that Aamir called up John Matthew and asked him if he could work on Sarfarosh sequel. I said, “Why not?”
Given that Pakistan and the ISI are once again in news, one would assume that the director-actor team will carry the theme forward but that doesn’t seem likely. “No, this script won’t be about the Pak ISI. Fact is Taliban is hijacking Pakistan itself, so I really have nothing more to say than I did in Sarfarosh. But yes, it will be about national security,” he tells us.

The director says today’s faceless terror posed several problems for him while writing the script. Also, he reliases that a lot of research needs to go into the film. “See, cinematically, you need your villain to have a face, otherwise there is no story. And today’s villain is faceless, so I spent a lot of time thinking how it could be worked out. Now, I have found that face and hopefully, the script will be ready soon,” he says.

There appears to be one small problem though. The original had Sonali Bendre as Aamir’s love interest. Is he planning to approach the much married actress for this one too? He smiles, “We haven’t thought about it seriously but you see I didn’t show Aamir and Sonali married in Sarfarosh, did I? Neither were they engaged,” he cheekily adds, clearly hinting that Aamir will have a new heroine for Sarfarosh 2.

But of course much depends on the final script, which has to be approved by Aamir. “In the past, we’ve had disagreements about the script but Aamir always gives you your space. Once he knows you’re going in the right direction, he literally pushes you to do it,” he says.
Talking about his upcoming film with Himesh Reshyammiya, the project seems to be a rather odd choice for a maker who has dabbled with serious subjects. “Yes, Sarfarosh and Shikhar couldn’t be treated lightly, because one was about terrorism and the other about our environment. The film with Himesh is a romantic comedy and it has been treated in that manner,” he says.

Yet, he doesn’t have the sensibility to make a no brainer, he adds. “I can’t make an illogical film. I mean you won’t see me taking all kinds of cinematic and dramatic liberty. I don’t believe in have coincidences in films. You can have one coincidence – where the boy meets the girl but not more. In real life, you could have more coincidences but your audience will never pardon you if you do in a film. That makes it a convenient script,” he says.

When he started A New Love Ishtory, Himesh was at all time high. His Aap Ka Suroor was a hit of sorts and there were a lot of takers for him. But post Karzzzz, things have slowed down for the singer-music composer, haven’t they? The director gives a familiar response, “All actors go through ups and downs. I have never believed in hastily saying somebody has ‘made it’ or then writing off someone as quickly. All actors have struggle periods. Some are lucky to make it in Bollywood after eight flops, others do it after fourteen. So, I look at the situation optimistically,” he tells us.

One believes the film is about a tapori and his love story. “Yes, he’s virtually a bum and falls in love with a woman who is way above his league. He aspires to have her in his life and on the surface of it, it’s an impossible love story.”
And is he happy with Himesh’s performance? “Yes I am. He plays a nobody in the film, a wannabe actor…and he’s played it with restraint. There was no scope for any overacting since it’s a casual role,” he says.

Himesh has made much of him being an Aamir fan in the film, but John Matthew corrects that there are just a couple of references to the Ghajini superstar. “He just has a poster of Aamir in his room and there are some dialogues where he’s spoken about how he wants to be like him, but otherwise, there’s nothing much to it,” he says.
While the Himesh film could well surprise us, all eyes will now be on Sarfarosh 2 if all goes well.

Sandhya Iyer

Billu review

The Barbar-ic act continues

OPINION
Sandhya Iyer








Why is it that film after film is allowed to get so vulnerable at the time of its release? Can filmmakers and the government show the will to combat the intimidation or is it a losing battle?

Crores of rupees ride on a film and yet, the laws of the land seems to be such that anyone can pull the plugs on a release anytime –either legally or through hooliganism.

The latest to be bullied into compliance is none other than Shah Rukh Khan who was forced to remove the word ‘Barber’ from his latest Irrfan Khan flick, Billu Barber after the Hairdressers and Salon Association found it objectionable. Much like how a section in the country was upset at the use of the line, ‘Samjhe mochi bhi khud ko sonar hai’ in Aaja Nachle( ‘mochi’ is seen as a reference to cast), similarly, the association found ‘haajam’ a derogatory usage. If a film can come under such pressure in spite of having a Censor certification, it raises questions at the relevance of such a body itself, doesn’t it?

Not so long ago, Ghajini’s release was threatened when two court cases against it cropped up. The film’s preview show tickets were selling like hot cakes when the Aamir Khan starrer was stalled, giving its makers and lead actor a mini-heart attack.
But the more serious problem remains that of films being affected due to various ‘special interest groups’(read publicity seekers) who threaten to disrupt screenings on one pretext or the other. Last year, there was Jodhaa Akbar that could not find a release in Rajasthan, after objections from a few Rajput groups.
It’s interesting to see how Danny Boyle reacts to the criticism against his film Slumdog Millionaire. He says, “Protest is a way of life in India. It’s an extraordinary democracy. You just hope it won’t become violent.”
Boyle has been lucky, because his film at least has had a peaceful run in the country. Many films that become controversial invariably endure losses in some form or the other. And it’s not even about ‘objectionable content’ all the time. Last year, a seemingly harmless comment from Jaya Bachchan was enough for the MNS chief to announce that all films starring the Bachchans would be banned. In 2006, Aamir Khan’s Fanaa was banned in Gujarat after his statements on the Narmada Bachao Andolan. Imagine the vulnerability under which the industry and its stars operate!
Which is exactly why one feels hesitant to blame top stars for not responding in time with sound bytes on national or other sensitive issues. One completely understands their position when they choose to refuse the proverbial ‘long rope to hang themselves with’

Coming back to SRK’s decision of going with just ‘Billu’, a lot of it is to do with the fact that the producer and distributors are really alone in their battle. State protection is limited. Similarly, not many multiplexes are willing to take the onus of protecting a film. So is there a solution? Well, only if there is united effort from the whole film chain and most importantly, political will. Film bodies and the State government could invest jointly in high-end securities to protect films that get into trouble in spite of the Censor Board passing them.

The bottom line is simple. Our films do not deserve the constant Friday jitters, unless it is the boxoffice we’re talking about.

Review of Victory

Bat's More Like It

Starring: Hurman Baweja, Amrita Rao, Anupam Kher, Gulshan Grover

Rating: **1/2

The one thing that immediately strikes you about this redemptive tale of a cricketer is that it strangely finds a strong emotional resonance with lead actor Hurman Baweja’s own failed debut (Love Story 2050) and his subsequent struggle to prove himself. And in many ways, this emotional hook works in the film’s favour.

Victory has an all too familiar story - that of a young aspiring cricketer from Jaisalmer, Vijay Shekhawat (Hurman) trying hard to get the selectors to notice him. His dada (Anupam Kher) takes great pride in his game, while his childhood friend, Nandini (Amrita Rao) who secretly loves him, boosts his morale when his chips are low. Vijay’s struggle continues and just when he’s about to give up the game, he makes an impression at a cricket camp and is selected. Soon, he makes it to the national team and starts heaping on the centuries.

What follows is the familiar trapping of stardom that overtakes his life. His new-found fame blinds him and his friendship with a self-seeking celebrity manager Andy Singh (Gulshan Grover) proves to be a mistake, as his career starts to nosedive. His game suffers and the final jolt comes when a scandal involving him leads to national outrage and shame.

The rest of the story is about how Vijay reinstates himself, and his effort to rise in the esteem of people who he let down. In all respects, Victory is a perfectly watchable film, well-directed by debutant Ajitpal Mangat with good performances all round. The director clearly loves the game and has an expertise in the subject, which is why cricket fans will find the commentary and other such elements in the film extremely authentic. The fact that there are so many real life cricketing personalities in the film - from Harbhajan Singh to Navjot Siddhu from Jayasurya to Bret Lee, lends the film some novelty and every time they make an entry, you could see the audiences (all of 21 people where I saw it) cheering for them.
Also, the dialogues are smart. When Hurman stars to shine as a cricketer, Amrita’s friend advices her to quickly tie the knot to him, “Varna koi heroine-veroine le jayegi use’ she cheekily says.

Yet, for all its earnestness, the story remains awfully predictable. People in the hall were guessing what would happen after every ball and they were invariably right. The problem with showcasing the fall and rise of a cricketer is that it is easily recogonisable to what we see happening to real life cricketers. In that sense, the visuals offer no real freshness.
Also, with sports films, especially cricket (given its overdose) it’s important to create an unusual setting to make the experience unique for the audiences. For example, Chak De! India was about a bunch of women hockey players, Iqbal has a deaf and dumb boy trying to make it as a cricketer. Again, Lagaan was a period film set in the colonial times. Victory in that respect falls short because its template is not new.
Also, the climax does not make a great impact, because the film peaks in the first half itself where the hero manages to find a place in the Indian cricket team. A sports’ cannot afford to have two major conflicts which are resolved in the same manner.Since he has already been an underdog once, seeing him going through the same grind once again takes away most of the fun.
Yet, Victory is a good one-time watch. Hurman Baweja is sincere and though he cannot be called a natural talent, he has screen presence and fits the role. Amrita Rao is delightful here. Anupam Kher is good as usual. It’s also nice to see Dilip Tahil after all this time as the team’s straightforward coach.
All in all, a neat film but not a really different ‘ball-game’.
-Sandhya Iyer

Interview with Sudhir Mishra

The Dark dazzler

Sudhir Mishra talks to Sandhya Iyer on his shelved film Ek Aur Devdas, and why our top heroes prefer roles that are either black or white


After Shyam Benegal last month, it will be Sudhir Mishra on UTV Movies this time, adding to the channels list of 50 movies to see before you die. The four movie he has chosen, namely Three Color White, The Man Without Past, The General and 3 Brothers will be aired every Saturday all of February. The filmmaker spoke to us about his choice of films, his up coming projects and what the future holds for Indian cinema

So when you choose films - do you select films that have influenced you personally or ones that you view as ‘important’? And this aspect extends to your role as a jury member at several award functions also…

Well, the awards are a different ball game. You’re not the only one taking a decision. For example, when I was the chairman for the National Awards, I wanted Shah Rukh Khan to get the award for Swades that year. But the others said ‘no’ and I went with that. So this is really a collective thing. But yes, when I choose my favourites, I tend to select films that have ‘affected’ me as a human being and has changed my life in some way. Of course, one has to acknowledge merits even in films that one doesn’t personally like.

If you were to name a few Indian films that one has to see before one dies, which ones would they be?
Jaane Bhi Do Yaaron, Sahib Biwi Aur Ghulam, Apu trilogy, Jalsa Ghar, Mughal-e-Azam, Pushpak. Among the recent filmmakers, I’m very impressed with Anurag Kashyap. I also saw Luck By Chance the other day and thought it was wonderful.

You haven’t worked with any top star in a while

I have nothing against stars but they shouldn’t be used as a gimmick. They’re films can easily turn into ‘events’ and unfortunately, that’s what our audiences want. No one wants to invest anything in the film as a viewer.
Having said that, if stars are rightly cast, they can help widen the appeal of a film and its boxoffice potential. Then, why not? I think somewhere the problem lies with my subjects. Most of my themes lack precedence, so the stars can’t find reference to it. Moreover, my lead characters make mistakes, carry regrets and don’t necessarily end up as the ‘hero’ of the film. Our top stars like to play ‘direct’ people – either it has to be an uncomplicated hero or then an out and out negative role like Iago (Othello). They don’t like complications.

I know you decide your actors after you write your script. But have you ever thought of writing a script particularly for any star?

Aamir is very inspiring for me. His personal methodology, versatility… is something I admire. Let’s see if something comes my way and he fits in. In fact my next film, which will be a political thriller needs a charismatic actor, someone who can create mass hysteria. But at this stage, I don’t know if big stars can be feasible for the film.

One thought you were doing Ek Aur Devdas with Shiney Ahuja and Chitrangada?
Anurag Kashyap has already made a very good film with Dev D, so what’s the point of making one more. The political thriller that I’m making now has some shades of Devdas in terms of a man trying to conquer his own demons. Alcoholism is just an external metaphor after all. I’m rewriting Ek Aur Devdas for this.

Will Shiney be in the film?
I can only say after the script is complete. But I am doing another film with Chitrangada called Who’s Speaking.

You’ve been a mentor to Shiney. Does it concern you that his career is in the doldrums?
I will be working with Shiney when there is a part for him. See, your children choose their own paths once they grow up. I’ve offered Shiney advise but then he has other advisors too to tell him about commercial aspects and so on, which I may not understand that well.

You were among the first to stand up in support of Slumdog Millionaire. What do you make of the criticism it is facing from different quarters?

I personally loved the film. The way it is shot, the values it shows. It takes the structure of a Hindi film and does something else with it. The film has lots of qualities. When they show the boy emerging from a pile of shit, the allusion really is to a boy from the slums ‘going through shit’ in life to find nirvan. At the same time, I don’t mind people criticising it. But I should say that an Indian filmmaker would have been treated far more harshly if they had of theatres in the second week of its release and not one person from the industry stood up for me. They watched me getting demolished and terrorised.

Some of the anger is also directed at the Oscars and other such international awards, who haven’t acknowledged Indian cinema enough…

This happens because we tend to be overly obsessed about their honors, while they are never looking at us for any kind of endorsement. But more seriously, we need to understand that Indian cinema is not about Bombay alone. Many of our good regional films don’t even get sent to the Oscars. If we had sent Satyajit Ray’s films then, we’d have at least three Oscars by now.
There’s another point to this. We are not one industry, but four film industries – Mumbai, Kerala, Bengal and South – all make a large number of films and we must fight for more representation at the Oscars. Through international film bodies and forums, we must emphasise how we’re like Europe. It’s up to our youngsters to start a campaign on this.

So what’s next?

There’s Tera Kya Hoga Johnney, about a coffee-wala and his aspirations in a big city. And then there another film I’m producing called Sikandar.

Interview: Aamir Khan

The God Of Small Things

Aamir Khan, who’s made big hits out of small films like Taare Zameen Par and now, Jaane Tu… speaks to Sandhya Iyer on the high hopes he has from his next, Ghajini and his love-hate relationship with the media

Aamir Khan is in a joyous mood after the super success of his film, Jaane Tu…Ya Jaane Na –a film he produced for his nephew, Imran. The actor, who has been intensely working out for the past many months for both his forthcoming films, Ghajini and 3 Idiots, looked in excellent shape and more importantly in buoyant spirits, as he came on a media visit to Inox, Pune.Accompanying him were Imraan, Genelia D’Souza, director of the film, Abbas Tyrewala and some of the other actors in the film.

On Ghajini
If Jaane Tu… can do so well with Aamir merely being a producer on it, does it scare him to think the response his next, Ghajini could elicit? Clearly, the prestige factor is working heavily in his favour, wherein any film he’s associated with finds an enthusiastic audience these days. Ask him about it and he smiles, “It indicates people trust my abilities and I’m very happy about that. I took up Jaane Tu… because I believed in the film. The foremost criteria is that I should be convinced about the script and that is how I will be moving forward with my production house as well,” he says. Considering that his name seems to spell magic these days, what kind of opening is he expecting for Ghajini? 50 crores? Aamir chuckles at the suggestion. “That’s a film I like a lot too,” is his knowing reply.


On ‘Different’ films
For a while now, the audiences have come to expect the unexpected from Aamir. Does he feel the pressure of delivering something unique each time? “I do tend to get attracted to subjects that may not always be good for the mainstream. My near and dear ones keep telling me not to take such risks. But when I take on a serious script— which I believe in— I want to give it a platform and that’s a challenge I’m happy to take on. Mostly, I want to do all kinds of films – not necessarily ones with a social message. For example, Jaane Tu…is not a very different film, it’s the treatment that is very fresh. Similarly, Ghajini is a film I’m very happy with, but that doesn’t deal with any social issues either. It’s a romantic, action thriller, a classic mainstream film. Maybe my audiences won’t expect me to do that.”


On the Media
Aamir also went on a media overdrive for Jaane Tu….why such aggressive promotion? “The thing is, when I saw Jaane Tu…, I realised it was a very well-made film and I was telling Nuzhat (Imran’s mother –who I’m very close to) that if the film doesn’t run, it would be because of me. So it was my responsibility to ensure it was well-marketed and promoted and I did it,” he says.But in general too, he has warmed up to the media like ever before. Is it because he realised that staying aloof was resulting in his failures getting highlighted and successes underplayed? “Honestly yes, it was happening. I’ve been very outspoken and frank but I saw it didn’t go down well with a lot of people. I’ve always been available to the media, except during the release of Fanaa and Rang De Basanti. These films proved to be the biggest hits of my career! Not that I was trying to prove a point. I wasn’t happy about the situation at all. But then I realised I had to be part of the system if I desired to change it in any way. Much like RDB,” he smiles.
He’s also talking to the glossies now! “Yes, that’s because there’s not much difference between what film glossies and the mainstream press is doing these days. So it would be a case of double standards if I spoke to one and didn’t talk to the other” he admits.Does he believe the media has underplayed his success? Aamir has himself hinted, albeit jovially, about him being the real number one. Isn’t it about time he laid more serious claim on it? Aamir gets serious, “I have no doubt about where I want to be and where I am! As for the number game, this is something the media decides. If they aren’t saying I’m number one, it’s probably because I don’t deserve it. When I do deserve, they will say it,” he says.


On Television Shows
Shah Rukh Khan and Salman Khan are both into television shows? Is Aamir planning to follow suit? “I don’t think I’ll do TV. I mean, I appear on television regularly but I don’t think I’d like to do a game show. Not to say they are not fun. Both SRK and Salman are doing a great job but I just feel it’s not for me,” he says.

On Imran
So will he let Imran pick up awards next year? Aamir smiles and passes the myke to the newcomer who seems unconfortable with the questions itself. He says, keeping a straight face, “I don’t think I will get an award, especially since Aamir has upset everyone.” He then hems and haws and finally says, “Well, depends on how important the award is,” and then just lets the photographers cover him up, so as not to answer the question.