Matinee Mix

West Is West review

2011-06-10T08:01:00.000-07:00

Director: Andy DeEmmony
Starring: Om Puri, Aqib Khan, Linda Bassett, Ila Arun, Vijay Raaz
Rating: ***
English

In East Is East we saw a harried Jehangir Khan aka George (Om Puri) with his dysfunctional Anglo Pakistani family, running his shop along with his firang wife Ella (Linda Bassett), and trying fruitlessly to instill a sense of Muslim rootedness and tradition in his seven children. The family lives in Salford, UK in lower middle class circumstances.

Twelve years later, the makers have come up with the sequel to the British comic-drama, where Jehangir is disappointed that most of children have turned completely English. The period is still 1970s. His last hope rests with his youngest son, Sajid (Aqib Khan). He is keen that the teenager should develop pride for his Pakistani roots. However Sajid is a tough cookie, and is already upset at being referred to as 'Paki by a few school bullies. He is not willing to bend down to his father's tyrannical ways.

The scene ends in a showdown, and Jehangir is determined than ever before to turn his son around. He brings him to his village in Pakistan (the shooting happened in Chandigarh) to the house where his first wife (Ila Arun) and her daughters live. The script doesn't shy away from bringing out Jehangir's callousness in dumping his family and not bothering to visit them in 30 years. He sends them money, but beyond that, he’s been largely unconcerned about them all these years. His grown-up daughters are surprised at his visit and cannot hide their resentment. They accept his small, token gifts with forced smiles.

There's a wonderfully poignant scene where his first wife --- though irrevocably scarred --- for the first time in years perhaps bothers to check her weather-beaten face in the mirror and make herself presentable before her husband. She enters his room tentatively, with the hope he might need her in bed. You realise her own despondency of living without a man for so many years. Jehangir senses this, and gets uncomfortable. Without meeting her eyes, he says he's very tired and shifts in the bed. The wife comes out and weeps quietly, knowing nothing can change now. This is the single-most effective scene in the film.

In the meanwhile, Jehangir wants his younger son to adapt to his new surroundings and entrusts him with a sage. Sajid initially hates the new place calling it a 'dump, but slowly warms up to it. Meanwhile, Jehangir is also looking for an appropriate bride for his eldest and most obedient of all his sons, who has been staying in Pakistan for a year. In all this, his British wife, Ella comes down and some more chaos follows.

West Is West is languorous, spacious film, never in a hurry to fill up the time. Most characters are shown to speak in English, even if it is broken. This seems unrealistic, but can be viewed as permissable cinematic liberty. When the two wives come together, there are the obvious fireworks, but in a few days, both slip into an empathetic calm and even have a heart to heart chat. Even though Ella has stayed with her husband, she points out to the Pakistani women - in a moment of agony - that she too has suffered and that her life has been no easier.

In all this, it is easy to detest Om Puri's character, but you don't. There is an innate warm-heartedness to him. He is very vain and proud, which makes him seem acutely vulnerable and pathetic when his importance is undermined. The film has flaws - the sub plot about his eldest son and his marriage hunt is not too well-etched. Also the theme of identity and belongingness that the writer tries to bring forth through Sajid's character is somewhat half-baked. But there are enough nuances and subtleties to carry the film through and make it interesting enough.

Interview Ram Sampat

2011-06-06T07:24:00.000-07:00

The success of D K Bose and Delhi Belly's soundtrack has elated music composer Ram Sampat. He talks to Sandhya Iyer about getting a new lease of life, and takes on director Anubhav Sinha for making remarks about Aamir Khan

The first time one really heard of Ram Sampat was when he took on the might of the Roshans and dragged them to court over a plaigirism issue. Rakesh Roshan had to cough up four crores for the Krazzy 4 number, which angered a section of Bollywood hitherto not used to being held accountable. Though Sampat was a known name in advertising circles, the period after the controversy proved to be an especially trying one for him. "I was out of work for a while. What I felt was pure indignation. I was upset that so much disrespect was being shown. Here, I am asking for credit for what I have created and is genuinely mine. It made me wonder why I am in this business at all? It was great the way the judiciary acted. I just needed to present facts and the decision was made," he says, recollecting the incident with mingled emotions.

The industry was divided over the issue. Some supported him, some didn't. "And among those who did was Aamir Khan," he says. When the actor offered him Delhi Belly, it meant the world to Sampat. "I was struggling at the fringes, so bagging Delhi Belly was huge. In the beginning, there was supposed to be just one song in the film, and the background music. The song was Jaa Chudail... After doing that, I was pretty much left to my own devices. As I went through the script again, I realised that a lot could be developed. Meanwhile, the film's writer, Akshat (Verma) had left a few hook words for me like Jaa Chudail and Teri Tirchi Nazar and Bhag D K Bose...they were just ideas which he thought we could work on. The film was still developing at this stage and was going through an edit change. Aamir was busy with Ghajini, and I asked him if he could hear some of the songs I had created. He heard it and was like 'Wow'. He was very excited," he says.
But Delhi Belly's music is not what one would immediately associate with Aamir Khan, isn't it?. "That's the thing. He's anything but conservative. He's a hip guy and a hip producer," says Sampat.
Once Aamir gave him the go ahead, the composer swung into full action, and created seven highly original and experimental tracks. The theme of the underdog in the film and the accompanying frustration fuelled his imagination. "Sure, I was going though the same feeling," he laughs, "But basically, the tracks came out of a strong feeling to express myself. I was sick of music that said nothing. Also, there were highly talented people who I wanted to introduce through this album. Besides creating something fresh and original, the idea was to reinvent the way songs are used," he says. Now that the tracks are out, he's thrilled with the way the songs are being promoted, with special music videos.
But the popularity of D K Bose has also seen a controversy cropping up, with filmmaker Anubhav Sinha going hammer and tongs at Aamir Khan for being 'irresponsible' for airing the song on prime time TV. Sampat has decided to take on the Cash and Ra.One director head on. Aamir himself is shooting in Pondicherry for his upcoming film, and the composer says that the actor himself would have laughed off Sinha's comments. "But I was very angry when I saw what he said, and I asked Aamir if I could express my opinion. He said 'okay'."
"Of course, I feel protective about Aamir and the whole Delhi Belly team. Also, here I had clawed my way back into the industry from the wilderness. I did it on my own terms. So I really do take this very seriously. Anubhav Sinha - if he has a problem - must argue this factually, not get into cheap mud-slinging. The censors have approved what they have to. I don't find anything wrong with D K Bose. It's a very honest song. It's about underdogs, who have taken blows in life. That one line in it ' Yeh Bheja Garden Hai, Aur Tension Maali Hai' is a profound one, and better than anything I've heard," he says.

Sampat is especially upset because he feels Anubhav Sinha has no right for moral policing when his own films like Cash and Dus have had titillating songs and lyrics. "It's laughable and blatant hypocrisy. What about lyrics like Saiyyan Saiyaan, love the way you touch me' He didn't have an issue with his son listening to it then? Why pick on a hit song, when he has regularly churned out meaningless crap," he retorts.

The composer is not sure why Sinha would want to speak against the film. "It does seem like an attempt to garner cheap publicity. I wouldn't know why else he is doing it. There is hidden agenda for sure, but that only Mr Sinha with his great 'anubhav' can tell and enlighten us. It's not for me to say whether he did it to promote Ra One. His film has to stand its own ground when it releases. There's no point trying to pull others down. It's a petty mentality. We hope Ra. One does well. We want all the films to do well.," he says.

Besides Delhi Belly, Sampat has also signed Reema Kagti's next starring Aamir Khan, Rani Mukherjee and Kareena Kapoor. "Yes it was Aamir who recommended me to Reema, but he only asked her to see if I suited the bill. So I had to impress Reema. Fortunately, we hit it off really well. The film has a fabulous script and great scope for music, and is the polar opposite of Delhi Belly," he says.
Other offers are pouring in for the hit composer but Sampat says two films a year is all he can handle. "Script is important to me In fact, the first thing Reema and Amair said to me is 'Go through the script and see if you 'd like to be a part of the film' I'd want to be choosy. For now, these two films are more than enough I think," he says.

Review: Ready

2011-06-03T06:21:00.000-07:00

Ready, very unsteady

Director: Anees Bazmi
Starring: Salman Khan, Asin, Paresh Rawal, Mahesh Manjrekar, Sharat Saxena, Akhilendra Mishra, Anuradha Patel, Arya Babbar
Stars: **

Ready is exactly the kind of film that gets made when a lead star is going through a lucky purple patch in his career. The script then moves along with a smug consciousness of having a superstar as its chief mover and shaker. The assumption is that most of the film will revolve around the star, who will play to the gallery and draw heavily upon his various signature styles. Not that Salman Khan's films are known for their scripts, but Ready particularly hopes to ride on its male lead's shoulders without bothering to come up with anything new or remotely interesting.

In many ways, Ready looks like a residue and cheap imitation of some of Govinda's 90s romcoms, which anyway had far more spunk and humour. Right from the tacky title credits to the stale script and insipid treatment, Ready seems like a blast from an unwelcome past. The first half is especially trying, as the film drags along endlessly with unfunny gags and a nonsensical plot-line. The second half gathers some pace, and there are the occasional scenes which elicit a faint smile, but none of that pulls the film from its mire of inanity.

Prem (Salman Khan) belongs to a large, extended family, who are keen to get him married. He himself is reluctant and shows no interest when he is packed off to receive a girl at the airport. Simultaneously, a runaway bride, Sanjana (Asin) is desperate for a place to hide, as she is being chased by a few goons. She poses as Salman's proposed bahu and joins his family, who take a great liking to her. Salman stays aloof towards her, but warms up once she tells him about her two warring gangster-uncles (Sharat Saxena, Akhilendra Mishra). Each of them wants her to marry their respective sons for her wealth, and have been chasing her around the town. If you can get past this ludicrous plot, the rest of it revolves around Salman's efforts to bring the uncouth uncles around and create a Hum Saath Saath Hain out of the Kaminey families.

In many ways, Ready is a watered down version of director Anees Bazmee's own Welcome, an infinitely funnier comedy. It stays marginally watchable of course, thanks to a few individual scenes. There are a couple of characters, including the one of Paresh Rawal, who reveal Bazmee's talent for comic writing. But this is all very few and far in between, and much of what goes on is childish and puerile to the extreme.

Coming to the man of the moment, Salman Khan surprisingly seems a little out of form at the start of the film. He looks too bulky and the role of a 'young' bachelor-in-the-house -- that the 45 year old Khan has played in countless films -- heightens the sense of deja vu. He gradually slips into the part, but the role is unlikely to gain as much favour as Wanted or Dabangg. The choice of Asin works quite well for a film that is urgently in need of some freshness.

Calling it a 'time-pass' flick in some ways denotes that it probably isn't high art, but entertains reasonably well. Ready can't even be called that. Fans of Salman may find it bearable enough, but really, this is low IQ tripe that is one, long, pointless exercise.

Kuuch Luv Jaisa

2011-05-27T05:45:00.000-07:00

Some Vows, some lows

Director: Barnali Shukla
Starring: Shefali Shah, Rahul Bose, Sumeet Raghavan
Stars: **1/2

After Stanley Ka Dabba that explored the word of dabbas in schools, this week's Kuuch Luv Jaisa is a similar slice-of-life film, where in a downcast housewife takes off alone on a bizarre one day adventure. The film looks at a familiar domestic situation where romance starts to fade off from a marriage, and a slow resentment starts to seep in. The film starts with the beautiful title track, where the couple's honeymoon period slowly over the years turns to a humdrum existence with their two children.

Its protagonist, Madhu ( Shefali Shah) is tied down with house work, looking harried and tired in a crumpled salvaar kameez. Her life has slipped into a predictable routine, and the only thing to look forward to is cursing the maid, as she jokingly tells her mother on the phone. The trigger point comes when her husband, Shravan (Sumeet Raghavan) forgets her birthday. The date is February 29, a leap year, a date that comes once in four years, to emphasise the callousness. Madhu is initially upset, but the disappointment soon gives away to rebellious rage after she has a nasty argument with her husband. She takes off and goes on a shopping overdrive. She goes for a makeover, smokes, and looks around to heighten her sense of adventure.

She spots a man called Raghav (Rahul Bose) sitting next to her in a restaurant and somehow assumes he's a detective. Being in an excited mood, she wonders if she can be part of one of his cases. In reality, Raghav is a criminal on the run. The journey ends up forming an unsaid bond between the two, that comes to influence their lives.

Though this is an original desi flick, Kuuch Luv Jaisa could remind you of films like Wong Kar-Wai's In the Mood For Love and The Bridges Of Madison County. The point at which Madhu leaves her home is plausible, and Shefali being a natural actress to the core makes it all very believable. Again, there is a great subtlety to Rahul Bose act and he makes his character a real life and blood one. What proves to be a major issue with the film is the sub plot involving Raghav's girlfriend (Neetu Chandra) who is double crossing him. This angle is confusing and for the longest time, you don't know what's happening. Also, Madhu's character begins to appear too naive to get into such a potentially dangerous situation. Their attraction is asserted too soon by the script. Raghav is laconic and introverted, while Madhu is bubbly and talkative. It's not impossible to see why they could get attracted to one another, but that process does not come through in the most effective way. The result is that you find Madhu's emotional outburst towards the climax a little too overstated and premature.

Sumeet Raghavan's character as the slightly overbearing, smug husband is realistic, however, his performance itself is a little jerky.

Debutant director/writer Barnali Shukla, also actor Saurabh Shukla's wife, is a talent to watch out for. She can portray delicate emotions well, and the psychological underpinnings of the characters come through beautifully. Kuuch Luv Jaisa had the potential to be a truly good film, but there are serious weaknesses that prevent it from being a really memorable experience.

Stanley Ka Dabba review

2011-05-24T05:58:00.000-07:00

Director: Amole Gupte
Starring: Partho, Divya Dutta
Rating: ***1/2
HINDI

Amole Gupte’s new film is a fresh, original effort, one that feels closest to classic slice-of-life Iranian cinema like Where Is My Friend's Home and Children Of Heaven. It has tremendous strengths, even if it ends up valorising the protagonist — the delightful Stanley (Partho) — also Gupte’s son — more than necessary. This makes it entirely character-driven, which somewhat dilutes the impact of the film. Yet, let’s not get into the negatives first.

There’s no doubt Stanley Ka Dabba is as pure and seamless a film as they come. Amole, having worked in the area of childrens’ welfare for long now, is beautifully in touch with their world. And it is this sensitivity that he brings to his writing, portraying bitter-sweet memories of childhood —bench-mates elbowing each other for desk space, a hungry student pinching a piece of vada-pao from his dabba before recess. The film almost entirely centres around the world of school dabbas, and through food, Amole explores a variety of situations, emotions and character quirks.

Stanley (Partho) is always the first to arrive and his dishevelled state with bruises indicates that something could be wrong. As he puts his head down on the bench, you see a great anguish and agitation in him, as if he’d want to scream out for help. But the bell rings and Stanley quickly rubs his face, and steadies his emotions. He’s a great favourite among his classmates, who admire him for his ability to narrate interesting things. Even otherwise, he’s a boy impossible to dislike. Radiating warmth and boyish charm, he’s keen to keep up appearances of belonging to a normal household. He comes up with creative excuses that invariably centre around his mother. But one soon sees a pattern with Stanley. He never gets a dabba. His friends want him to share their food, but Stanley — though hungry — is too ashamed to borrow everyday.

His rapport with each teacher differs. He blooms with confidence when his English teacher Rosy maam (Divya Dutta) is around, but feels stifled under the unkind, rigid gaze of his science teacher, Mrs Iyer (Divya Jagdale). But the teacher who seems to particularly dislike him is Babubhai Varma, their Hindi teacher (Amole Gupte). Babubhai is unkempt and shamelessly digs into others’ dabbas. His colleagues are exasperated with him and frown each time he eyes their tiffin. The children too don't seem to have much respect for him.

Babubhai’s dislike for Stanley perhaps stems from the fact that the former sees a reflection of himself in the boy — of taking food from others. Or then it could be envy that Stanley is popular and gets offered food all the time, while he is rejected by the students and kept at bay.

All this is wonderful to watch. But then the film starts to become completely about Stanley. Even TZP was about Darsheel, but the film never lost sight of the issues it was trying to address. Of course, here too, Amole wants to stress on Stanley’s indomitable spirit in the face of difficulties, but it gets a bit exaggerated and over-the-top by the end. And this jars, because the rest of the film is pure gold. This is still a terrific debut from Amole. And a special mention to the couple of kids who play Partho’s friends. They exude such natural warmth and goodness, it almost made me imagine what lovely people they would make in their characters when they grow up.

Shefali Shah on Kuuch Luv Jaisaa

2011-05-24T05:55:00.000-07:00

Shefali Shah's film Kucch Luv Jaisa, where she plays a housewife who gets into an unlikely adventure with a criminal, releases this Friday. The talented actress talks to Sandhya Iyer about the film

Shefali Shah is currently seen in the delightful promos of Kuuch Luv Jaisaa, where she plays a desperate housewife who in a rebellious state, takes off and indulges in expensive shopping. She goes further ahead and joins a detective on one of his cases, while her perplexed husband (the delightful Sumeet Raghavan) wonders what's happening. The detective, played by Rahul Bose, is in fact, a criminal on the run. The story tracks this bizarre adventure that brings this unlikely couple closer to each other.

The film releases this week, and Shefali - who has played an array of interesting characters in a career dotted with some well-chosen films (Satya, My Father Gandhi, Monsoon Wedding), is excited about it. The film is directed by debutant Barnali Shukla and produced by her filmmaker-husband, Vipul Shah. This is a departure for Shah as well, who has mostly dabbled in strictly commercial potboilers like Waqt, Aakhen, Singh Is Kinng and the recent Action Replay. The director has not had much luck in recent times, what with Action Replay and London Dreams proving to be duds.

Talking about it, the actress who started her career with television serials, says flops are not a matter of grave concern. "Vipul is a very sorted out man. He has taken it in his stride. It's also about luck you know. London Dreams was a good film, but it didn't do well," she says about the Salman Khan- Ajay Devgan starrer.
Shefali is an undoubtedly a talented actress, but as is the case with the Hindi film industry, scripts hardly allow scope for mature actresses in lead roles. In such a scenario having a supportive producer-husband who can back her up in a project as Kucch Luv Jaisa is surely heartening. Shefali understands that the question means no offense, but she insists, "For Vipul, his film is more important than anyone. He would never take me unless he is clear I suit the role. He doesn't take me in commercial set-ups as the lead. But in the case of Kuuch Luv Jaisaa, he loved the script," she says. "Barnali had brought the script to me and wanted me on board. She was on the look out for a producer. That's when Vipul heard the script and wondered if he could produce it."

The actress is delighted about her role in the film and says she could completely identify with it. "Madhu is an extension of me. She falters, is very passionate, but not melodramatic. Women get so busy taking care of other's needs that they forget their own. And that sometimes causes a trigger point. When it happens to Madhu, she turns a rebel and does all the things in one day she would never imagine doing otherwise. And in the process gets into all kinds of weird situations."

One of the challenges involved was to look good in the film for Shefali. "I've never really bothered about how I look. I'm very comfortable in my skin. But then, I do realise that there are some expectations from the heroine of a film. Earlier I would just dress up like the character. Here I had to adhere to some requirements. There are unsaid norms - the leading lady has to be desirable, alluring, attractive, thin with fabulous make-up. All that took some effort for me. I had to lose weight, especially since I was donning western clothes in the film. And I am wearing lycra where the slightest flab is going to show. But I'm glad I did it and lose weight," she says.

Of course, Shefali was also easily persuaded because the role demanded it, "The character goes through a drastic make-over. The idea is that every woman has it in her to look great and do wonders with herself if she so desires."

Increasingly more female writer/directors are dotting the Bollywood scape. Does she find their approach different and fresh? "Their sensitivities are sharper. Men tend to look at the bigger picture, women like to go into every small detail. Barnali is someone who makes her film from the heart. She is honest and true to the calling of the film," says Shefali, who has previously also worked with the inimitable Aparna Sen in 15 Park Avenue.

Taking of Sen, reminds us to her co-star in the film, Rahul Bose, who plays the unlikely role of a scrubby small-time criminal. Shefali lights up at the mention of the star. "When Barnali said she wanted Rahul to play the character of Raghav, I was like 'Really?' Because we know Rahul as this South Mumbai guy, politically correct and polite and well-behaved. And here was a character who had to look convincing as a guy from Dharavi. But he's done it so well, I can't think of anyone else doing it now. And it's treated very differently from your usual tapori character. It has none of the -apun-tapun' lingo. Madhu is the boisterous one, and he is quiet. They are a mad couple, like fire and ice," she explains.

Is there a hint of romance between them? "It has something like love, certainly. But it's not called so in the film. So many times we meet strangers and form an unsaid bond. Such an unexpected relationship may not culminate into anything, but it can still change your life," she says.

Amole Gupte interview

2011-05-12T06:07:00.000-07:00

'Food is a metaphor in the film'

Amole Gupte, whose film Stanley Ka Dabba releases today, talks about the benevolent shooting patterns he adopted for the film, and how acting can never be his priority. Sandhya Iyer chats up the director/writer

Amole Gupte is visibly nervous and excited. His film Stanley Ka Dabba releases tomorrow, and the pre-release reports he tells us have been excellent. "I'm getting 4 star reviews," he says, as we catch hold of him for a quick interview during his Pune visit. Incidentally, the actor's parents stay in the city, and Amole is a regular visitor. Positive reviews are a shot in the arm, but the actor-director-painter is still anxious for his film. "It's delivery day, so I'm feeling labour pains now," he says.

Amole came into prominence with his writing for the celebrated Taare Zameen Par - - a poignant tale of a 8-year-old on the precipice of suicidal depression. He was supposed to direct the film as well, but as is public knowledge, an ugly controversy erupted with actor-producer Aamir Khan taking over the directorial reigns. It was seen as an act of betrayal from an old friend and much newspaper ink was expended on the topic. Whatever the truth of that episode, the one thing that emerged through the film was Amole's passionate commitment towards the cause of children. And TZP was certainly not going to be the last of it, he had made clear. Having worked for years with his wife Deepa Bhatia in the area of childrens' welfare, Amole knew there was a fount of stories that needed to be told. And thus came about Stanley Ka Dabba.

The writer/director agrees that the film is a continuation of the process that started with TZP, though the feel and tone of Stanley...is very different, he says, "TZP was about depression in a child, Stanley...celebrates life seen through the life of a 9 year old."
Not many know but Amole has a great love for food, both eating and cooking - and at one time he had been all set to make a film about Mumbai's delectable street-food. It almost appears he found a way to bring together two of his favourite subjects in his new film. "Yes, you could say that. You'll see a lot of food in Stanley.... It is going to make everyone madly hungry," he smiles. But the film per se is not about food, and has other issues it deals with, though Amole would not like to reveal them just yet. "Food is the metaphor, because the theme is about hunger of a certain kind. Food is the carrier of that message, a Dabba."

Stanley Ka Dabba, produced by Fox Star Studios, also saw a unique shooting pattern devised by Amole, where the kid were called for just four hours every Saturday, and a still camera was used. "All the children were from the same class, so there were no auditions. I held some workshops with them and on other Saturdays, we filmed the scenes. There was no paper given to them. It was all oral narration," he says. Amole is clearly pleased with the departure he made from conventional shooting practises where children are asked to be on the sets for hours. "I think I changed the rules of the game. I wanted the process to be benevolent for the children. And none of that affected the lucidity or grandness of the film," he says.

Amole is also an acting in the film, but he insists, it was only because he couldn't have got another actor to make time every Saturday. "Senior actors like Divya Dutta etc showed a lot of grace by adjusting their schedules, and rallying behind the kids." he says.

There was speculation that Amole had taken this script to Aamir, who in spite of their acrimonious split, had given him a patient hearing. Ultimately, it was reported that Aamir thought the film was too similar to TZP. Amole terms the news complete concoction. "I never went to him with anything," he says firmly. Would be work with Aamir again? "I can't say that." he dismisses.

There were creative differences between Aamir and Amole during TZP. Were there any aspects that he found freedom to rectify this time around, considering he was the director on Stanley..? "I wouldn't say I had problems with TZP. That was also my vision," he says, clearly unwilling to make any controversial statements at this juncture.

Amole started off being an actor, having done over a hundred diploma films at FTII. He was also a stage performer for many years, until he turned his attention to cause of children. He started to be identified as a talented painter, writer and social worker. Acting was long forgotten, until a couple of years ago, when Vishal Bhardwaj offered him a meaty role in Kaminey. Amole says the gesture flattered him. I asked him 'Why are you taking me when there are so many other actors?' But I enjoyed that film. For me processes are important. But no, I don't suddenly perceive myself as an actor now, because I always knew I was one. But my priority is not acting. My focus is always to table childrens' issues. When I do films, it's to earn some money. Like I did Bheja Fry 2 and Phas Gaye Re Obama," he says candidly.

For now of course, the actor only has Stanley... on his mind, before he embarks on anything new. "This is it for now." he says.

Nana Patekar interview

2011-05-09T05:42:00.000-07:00

Never failing to call a spade a spade, Nana Patekar is for once delighted with the way his film Shagird has turned out. He also lets out why he refused the Agneepath remake. Sandhya Iyer meets up with him at his Pune residence - the house he considers dearest to him

Nana Patekar is not known to mince words, and this extends to his own films, many of which he bluntly refuses to endorse if he does not fancy the final product. Which is why we were pleasantly surprised to get a call from the temperamental, albeit highly talented actor's media managers informing that Nana would like to speak on his Friday release Shagird at his Pune residence.

Shagird has Nana Patekar in the central role of a Delhi cop, with director Anurag Kashyap playing an important character. The film, directed by Tigmanshu Dhulia, who made a fine debut with Haasil, is about corrupt police officers and moral choices. Shagird also has Mohit Alhawat (James) in a pivotal role, and Nana swears by the actor's work in this film.

As we reach the actor's apartment, it is Nana's son Malhar who opens the door for us. As we make ourselves comfortable, we notice how aesthetically the home has been done up - with wonderful Victorian style wood furniture, artifacts and carvings. Every corner of the house has quite evidently been done up keeping the actor's fastidious tastes in mind.

As we get called in, we see Nana reclining lazily on his bed in his shorts, watching TV. "Sit where you want," he commands with an informal, cheery air. Once you begin your questions, it's impossible to keep the actor from constantly digressing. His mind flits from one thing to another, as he alternatives between English and Marathi, interspersing the conversation with many dialogues from both his film Shagird and his other forthcoming Marathi film, Deool (Temple) - on the commercialisation of religious shrines - which he's terribly excited about.
He talks a great deal about Shagird. "He's a mad character, totally eccentric with a weird sense of humour and peculiar way of talking," he says enacting a few scenes. Its mere recollection fills him with child-like delight. "You have to see it, that's all I can say," he says with a wide grin.

Malhar enters the room, with glasses of lime juice. He asks if the AC needs to be switched on. Nana wonders why he is still at home. "Let someone else do this ..don't you have to go!," he says in Marathi. The actor informs us that Malhar has studied filmmaking and acting in New York and is looking to enter films. "Let's see what he does," he says trailing off.
He once again plays a cop in Shagird. So how will this be different from Ab Tak Chappan, we ask? "The plot is somewhat similar, but that was a straight character. This has many shades of grey," he says, talking some more about why the film is so special.

The fact that he plays a twisted cop, with some interesting quirks may be delightful to watch again, but hasn't that anyway been a signature style of Nana's? From Parinda to Krantiveer and Agnisakshi to Taxi No 9211, he has played edgy, troubled, volatile characters, hasn't he? "But in Ab Tak Chappan and recently Raajneeti, I played straight roles," he counters. "I had very few dialogues in Raajneeti. That was decided by me and the director (Prakash Jha)," he says. Is all well between him and Jha? There were reports that Nana was unhappy with his role that led to his split with the director. "No no," he shakes his head. "I fight with everyone. I liked Raajneeti a lot. It was a good film. Now, whether he wants to work with me or not, he has to decide," he says.

We try and get him to talk a little more about his aggressive characters and he attributes it to his early days as an actor. "I must have been in my 20s. I had this massive inferiority complex. I was too aggressive as a human being. I would insult others before they could say anything to me. It was a defence mechanism. I think I used that feeling a lot in my films. Now I see everyone is doing the kind of roles which I did at one time. That's human nature. Everyone has quirks." he says, speaking as and how his train of thoughts will travel.

Frequently, the actor has been accused of being repetitive with his high-pitched dialogue delivery. "But I always go by the pitch of the film. If people in an area are starving and food is being distributed, they have to shout if they want to get a packet. If they are going to whisper it, then no one will pay attention," he says, acting out both versions. "So in a film like Krantiveer, I had to be high-pitched, because that was its tone. It was a loud film. I modulate my performances in keeping with what the film demands from the character," he says.

Talk veers to a film he recently turned down - Karan Johar's Agneepath remake, where he was offered Danny Denzongpa's role. "I thought the script was too gory and violent. I don't like that. I feel violence never shouts. If you go to see, Agnisakshi was a very violent film, but there is nothing gory about it. There is no bloodshed. Kiran (Malhotra) is actually my friend, Ravi Malhotra's son. Kya karen. I don't like too much sensationalism," he says. So it was not a script he fancied, you press the question some more. "Have you seen Jackie Chan movies? Do you see blood anywhere? I prefer that," he says, avoiding being too blunt about the subject.

Somewhere from there he turns to the actors whom he likes, and names Dilip Kumar, Balraj Sahni and Naseeruddin Shah. "These are consistently great actors. No one else apart from them have lingered on in my mind," he says. He talks about Neeraj Pandey's A Wednesday and heaps lavish praise on his performance. Did he wish he had done the part? "You know when I met Naseer, he said to me, 'Arre, yeh role ke liye maine pehle tera naam suggest kiya tha' But it seems the makers thought I was a difficult guy to work with," he smiles.

On his direction plans, Nana passionately narrates to us the script that has been ready with him for a while. But he has no idea when he will make it. "In my mind's eyes, I have already seen the film. Then it's only about making it for the audience, and I'm not always in that mood," he says.

For now, Nana is eagerly awaiting the audience response for Shagird. "They are going to love it," he says, as a final note. "I never hesitate from calling my films bad. I never see them even. I'm very detached after I complete a film. So when I sign a project, I make it clear to the makers that I will say what I feel about a film if the media asks me, depending on how it has turned out. I say, I will only market a film if I believe in it."
It goes without saying that the actor is completely bowled over by his Friday release.

Luv Ka The End

2011-05-06T22:58:00.001-07:00

'The End' never seemed more welcome

Director: Bumpy
Starring: Shraddha Kapoor, Taaha Shah, Jannat Zubair Rahmani, Shenaz Treasurywala
Rating: *

Yash Raj, at their worst can be accused of manufacturing shallow, synthetic, lame films, but they've never been one for crudity. There is a minimum quality control that goes into their ventures and occasionally they do surprise with a particularly fine film - like Band Baaja Baarat last year. It did look like the banner was on redemption path, and perhaps spurred by the success of the Anushka-Ranveer rom com - Yash Raj decided to peddle Y Films that would make youth-centric films with newcomers. The beginning couldn't have been more inauspicious, because Luv Ka The End is horrendously vulgar and puerile.

If this is what the youth wants, it is indeed very disconcerting. The film's story and screenplay is by none other than model-actress Shenaz Trasurywala, who mentioned in some interview that the theme was inspired by one of her own break-ups. She happily assumes all the stereotypes associated with the multiplex youth audiene - shallow, materialistic and frivolous - and together with director Bumpy, they end up making a film that is trivial and embarassing to the extreme.

The only area where it manages to be revealing in some socio-cultural sense (and this is again entirely unintentional, so credit is due to the makers), is in fricing home the point about how much today's youth and their world is driven by technology. It's all about texting, Facebook, and other technology-related social networking that has completely changed the way we communicate.
This transformation itself holds immense possibilities for stories, so starting a wing just for youth-related subjects is not such a bad idea per se. It's just that Luv Ka The End is plain obnoxious for most part, and is a definite error of judgement from YRF.

The story is painfully predictable, and its self-conscious swagger and fake boldness make it altogether unappealing. Rhea (Shraddha Kapoor) is a lovely teenage girl, madly in love with her boyfriend, Luv Nanda (Taaha Shah). Just as she's about to celebrate her 18th birthday, she overhears Luv's friends at a mall who boast about the former's Casanova image - chattering away about his two-timing ways, with location details and so forth (this is the kinbd of convenient screenplay you will see.

In a bizarre plot plot, Rhea discovers that Luv has merely been using her to win an online contest, which has rich boys uploading lusty vieos. Rhea and her two close girl friends swear to take revende and come up with totally ridiculous ways of getting back. This track is again lifted from She Devil. Rhea plans to strip him of his car, his money and his chamchas. So in one nioght, they smash his bar, steal his credit cards, spray itching powder on his panties (all this while I was curious to know which shop sells itching powder or which factory makes it?), make muffin cakes with laxatives, and send suggestive messages to his friends from his cell, indicating he might be gay.

Oh of course, Rhea's parents are conveniently away to see an ailing relative in another city. It's all set up in an artificial manner and gets progressively dumber.
Also, director Bumpy has an extremely crass sensibility, which makes this further unbearable to watch. The scenes are stagey, with loud acting all round.
The only bright spot is Shraddha Kapoor, who has natural charm and definite screen presence. For the rest, highly avoidable.

Film review: Game

2011-04-01T07:15:00.000-07:00

Game
Director: Abhinay Deo
Starring: Abhishek Bachchan, Kangna Ranaut, Boman Irani, Sara Jane Dias, Gauhar Khan, Shahana Goswami, Jimmy Shergill
Stars: * 1/2

It's hard to believe why producers Farhan Akhtar and debutant director Abhinay Deo would want to make a thriller, if all they could come up is a poor version of a Abbas-Mastan film. The latter pair is known to adapt Hollywood thrillers, turning them into stylised masala fares that are more often than not, quite watchable. With Game, the problem is that it's neither a plausible, edge-of-the-seat thriller and neither does it work as a commercial entertainer. The moments of drama, emotions and songs are all tepid and dull. The premise is both weak and unconvincing, the characters are poorly etched and the script singularly lacks spunk and originality.

A billionaire, Malhotra (Anupam Kher) in a bid to settle some scores for his daughter's (Sarah Jane Dias) murder, invites four strangers connected to the incident to his island. None of them really know why they are being called, except that Malhotra has promised to forward their careers in whatever way. This itself is a bizarre idea - that people staying in different continent would line up to meet a businessman they've never even met. The trouble begins there and the script remains drab and scratchy till the very end.

The persons invited include an Istanbul-based casino-owner, Neil (Abhishek Bachchan), a Bollywood actor, Vikram Kapoor (Jimmy Shergill), a ministerial candidate (Boman Irani) and a suicidal crime reportar (Shahana Goswami). Each of them is named guilty by Malhotra for various reasons. But before he can avenge his daughter's death, another murder takes place in the island, and the needle of suspicion is directed towards each of the characters present. Also part of the mix is Malhotra's secretary, Samara (Gauhar Khan).

None of this is remotely fresh. Malhotra's back story about losing his wife and daughter is laughable, while the Abhishek-Sarah Jane romance is a yawn-fest. The film stutters and stumbles throughout the first half, never really being able to establish the story. The twists are all predictable and stale. The second half gathers some momentum with Kangna's entry as an investigating officer, but the film never acquires the edge that is so important for a thriller.

The only actor who shines in this lack-lustre fare is Boman Irani. The rest, including Abhishek, Kangna and Anupam, deliver average performances. This was supposed to be Sara Jane's debut film, and though she looks smashing, hers is an altogether badly conceived two-bit role. Shahana Goswami, who is generally solid, seems confused about what she's exactly expected to do here.

Abhinay Deo's debut directorial effort is a terrible let-down. The onus must essentially be on writer Althea Delmas Kaushal and Excel for the mediocre script. And Deo of course has been unable to rescue it in any which way.

'I don't believe in having a signature style'

2011-03-30T06:35:00.000-07:00

The cricket frenzy might have reached an all time high, but there's a high-profile release this week- Game. Its director Abhinay Deo talks to Sandhya Iyer about his journey from an ad filmmaker to film director, among other things

Even as all eyes were set on the India-Pakistan game yesterday, director Abhinay Deo who makes his directorial debut this Friday was concerned about his own, Game - produced by Farhan Akthar's Excel and starring Abhishek Bachchan, Kangna Ranaut, Boman Irani, Shahana Goswami and new find, ex Miss India Sarah Jane. "I want India to win of course and reach the finals. Yes, our film will miss out on shows on Saturday if that happens, but that's okay. I strongly believe that a good film will work. And I have faith in my film," he says.
The young director of course is no newcomer to the glamour world. He's been a name to reckon with in the ad world, having worked with the top most stars of the industry. That apart, he's the talented second son of veteran Marathi actors, Ramesh and Seema Deo, who one will recollect made an endearing couple in Anand. It was his Marashtrian roots, he says, that made him doubly keen to hold a press conference in Pune, though Sarah Jane who was supposed to accompany him could not make it due to a sudden vertigo attack. Affable and warm, the director took questions patiently and tactfully, alternating between Marathi and English.
It wasn't Game, however, that Abhinay was supposed to debut with. It was Aamir Khan's Delhi Belly that he directed first, but the film got delayed and meanwhile Abhinay got started on his second film. "I actually signed Game first, but Delhi Belly shooting happened soon after. The first cut was ready. But Aamir had had two other films - Dhobi Ghat and Peepli Live which he had look into, so it took time. Meanwhile, I shot Game. Earlier, both Delhi Belly and Game were supposed to release in quick succession with hardly a month's gap. But we decided, Delhi Belly is a youth-oriented film and this would not be the right time to release it. It now releases in July," says the filmmaker, who also did his architecture before venturing into the ad world.

Game, he describes as an edge-of-the-seat murder mystery, with interesting twists and turns. He agrees that whodunnits aren't exactly condusive in today times of intense social networking with smses and twitter flying around all the time. “That's true and I hope the twitter world won't spoil it for us. But more than who the killer is, the journey that leads upto this is equally interesting. There are many twists and turns, and obviously that can't be enjoyed unless you see the film,” he smiles. “As for why we don't make enough thrillers. That's because our industry thrives on second viewings. Why would you watch a film after knowing who the killer is. The penny has dropped, so what's the interest? But Game is different because the journey is as much fun.”

Talking about how the film came to him, he says, “This was a script Excel had. The writer of the film is Althea Delmas Kaushal and when I read it, I totally loved it. It's an exciting genre, something I wanted to do,” he says.
Farhan Akthar is the dialogue writer of the film, and Abhinay believes it has added greatly to the film. “Of course Farhan never interfered. He was making Don at the same time. And besides, we've been good friends and known each other well. I think Farhan writes very interesting dialogues. And he doesn't treat it as a stand-alone job. He think about the film in its entirety and captures small details, which are important.”

Detailing is something that Abhinay holds dear. “That is something that I get from my 17 years of advertising background, where you have to say your story in a 30-40 seconds. Detailing becomes a habit in such a case. This is something we miss in Hindi cinema, so that's something you'll see in Game – not just technically but also story-wise,” he says.
The challenge, again, was one which ad maker turned film directors frequently face. “In a feature film you have to maintain a graph, it's like a spinal chord that has to stay in place. In some ways, the process is like making 200 ad films and putting it together as a film. But the graph has to be built correctly. And would you believe, we shot the climax first before the rest of the film. That's a very steep arch,” he tells us.
In the past, almost every ad man turned director - R Balki, Rakeysh Mehra, or previously Pankaj Parashar – has come up with fresh, innovative treatments for their scripts. Will it be the same for Game? Abhinay candidly says he isn't making any fresh departures in terms of technique. “The film is stylised, but I wouldn't say I'm trying new things technically. That's because I don;t think the film needs it. I've always believed that one of the important qualities in a director is that he must let the script determine the technique. Moving the camera unnecesarly or adding too much colour is not my idea of technique. But you'll find some of the editing in the film interesting – the way the plot is revealed is quite unique I think,” says Abhinay.
The film introduces newcomer Sarah Jane. “We wanted someone who would come with no baggage. We auditioned for almost four months and then when we saw Sarah, we thought she was fantastic. She is extremely striking,” the director says.
Wasn't Aishwarya Rai the first choice? “She was considered. In fact at that time the film was called Crooked. It was not Sarah Jane's character. At that time, we were still undecided on the heroine's part. But the dates didn't match.”
The film's lead, Abhishek Bachchan is going through a rather rough patch in his career. Are the makers bothered about it, which is why the film is being promoted as an ensemble one? “ Not really. This is an ensemble cast and it would be wrong of us to promote it in any other way. We can't call it an Abhishek film, because that would give a wrong picture. I could have Tom Cruise in Game, and we would still promote it this way,” he says. On Abhishek's dismal form, he thinks all it takes is one film to bounce back.

While it's too early to talk about Delhi Belly, the director is clear that he doesn't want to be attached to any particular genre. “I believe I am a story-teller and don't believe in having signatures. As it is you give two years of your life to one film. If you are going to attempt a similar genre, I think there's a good chance of you getting repetitive. So I want to try everything. I want to do a romantic film. I'm penning a childrens' film as well,” says the director, whose all time favourite film is Anand, and all other Hrishikesh Mukherjee films, especially Golmaal. “Not the new one!,” he says specifically. “I don't enjoy slapstick comedies.”
Here's looking forward to all that Abhinay has in store this Friday.

Basu Chatterjee interview

2011-03-17T06:19:00.000-07:00

Basu Chatterjee, who was at FTII for a seminar, speaks to Sandhya Iyer about some of his delightful, evergreen films that continue to be a great source of enjoyment

His films, along with Hrishikesh Mukherjee's, remain the most avidly viewed films on television by far, and the countless re-runs have only added to their timeless appeal. Films like Golmaal, Baaton Baaton Mein, Chupke Chupke, Choti Si Baat and Rajnigandha have been a source of endless delight, and new age filmmakers too have come to see them as wonderfully conceived classics. And even if these two veterans have been out of the limelight for years, their films feel as fresh as ever.
We met up with Basu Chatterjee at FTII and though he admits he's not really a talker and has preferred to be the man behind the camera always, he does sit down for a tete-a tete, even as he politely waits for his sugarless tea that shows no signs of arriving.

Chatterjee had a long and impressive body of work, but the film that appears closest to his heart is Saara Akash (1969), which was his debut. It also remains important for the reason that almost the entire cast and crew were chosen from FTII. “The only person I could not get was Jaya Bhaduri. I was told that she could not act before completing the course. My point was that the very purpose of such a course was to get an opportunity to act and here I was offering it. So I had to take someone else. But otherwise, almost all the technicians were from FTII and I remain grateful for that,”he says.
Saara Akash is a story about a young, immature man — with political ambitions — and the turmoil he faces when he is pushed into an arranged marriage. The film on the one hand was a satire on the unpreparedness of youngsters with respect to marriage and on the other, was about two strangers discovering each other under one roof. Chatterjee says he surpirsed himself by coming up with such a good film and theme. “That is my best work I feel and very path-breaking for its times,” he says.
As for his other outright classic Rajnigandha — about a woman's struggle to decide between two men she loves — he credits his writer Manu Bhandari. “The story was written by a woman, so it got the complexities right. This was the time when the girl was viewed as sati- savitri and this film subverts that idea because here she is in love with two men at the same time. Originally, the story was written as letters shared between two ladies. I sat down and worked out the screenplay.”
A lot in the film is left unspoken. For example, one doesn't know if Dinesh Thakur's character really loved the girl. “He does,” says Chatterjee. “It's just that he is not expressive.”
The film starred a young Amol Palekar and Vidya Sinha. “I had seen Amol on stage and had liked his face. He was working as a clerk in a bank at that time. Vidya Sinha was struggling for years in the industry when she got this break. She looked very young in the film, but she was almost 28 by then. She was married too,” he tells us about the film that offers one of the most nuanced exploration into a woman's mind.
His films like Chameli Ki Shaadi, Baaton Baaton Mein, Choti Si Baat were all set in a middle-class milieu and were narrated with ironic humour “That’s becauseI belong to the middle-class and was the only thing I knew. Also, comedy by nature appeals to me. I was called a balcony class filmmaker in those days, because most of my films had the balcony full,” tells the filmmaker who also made one of the most popular television serials, Rajini.
Chatterjee's obvious strength was his ability to pick good stories. “Even today I don't think there is a dearth of ideas but you must know how to recogonise and grab the good ones,” says the director who made a Bengali film called Trishanku a year ago — about the conflict between a mother and daughter.
Among recent films, Chatterjee mentions A Wednesday which he liked, and among the filmmakers he likes Sanjay Leela Bhasali. He doesn't see the Hindi market conducive enough to make a film himself, though he readily admits that the industry and audience are changing for the better.
All of Chattejee’s films were greatly entertaining, and studded with several useful gems of wisdom. Would he share what he believes about love, life and relationships today? “I don't think my views have changed much since then. I'm almost 80 now. I believe you are wiser when you are younger. Experience is not necessarily useful. Most people who attain something in life do so in their youth. By the time they are old, they are already established," he says. As always, Basu Chatterjee leaves us thinking and smiling.

Aamir's b'day pics and new look

2011-03-14T19:47:00.000-07:00

Madhuri Dixit to be on a food show

2011-03-09T23:11:00.000-08:00

Madhuri Dixit, who has taken up a food show with chef Sanjeev Kapoor, talks about cooking and how she minds her kitchen

The gorgeous Madhuri Dixit who has been consenting to be part of many events and shows these days has just agreed to join master chef Sanjeev Kapoor’s channel, Food Food as part of their new show, Mahachallenge. The show is essentially pegged as a male-female cooking battle, with Kapoor and Madhuri helming each of their respective teams.
Madhuri who was put up at Hotel Westin looked fresh and stunning in an orange-gold sari. Beaming with confidence and frequently flashing her million dollar smile, she spoke in chaste Marathi at the request of the local press. “When I was acting, I didn’t cook too much. Not that I didn’t know how to cook, I knew a few things... but it was only after I got married and had kids that I turned to cooking in a big way,” she says.
“I hate to admit it but my husband (Shreeram Nene) cooks better than me. He makes a salad with bell pepper which is awesome. I love Maharashtrian food, my favourites are kande pohe, zunka bhakri and modak,” she tells us.
The fact that she is a doting mother to two growing up sons makes her all the more conscious about healthy and tasty cooking.

“My elder son is very fussy, the younger one is easier. It’s tough to get kids to eat. It took some time for me to know that my son likes everything sweet - which may not be healthy all the time. So then, you have to find ways around it. You have to cheat a bit - keep the food interesting and yet make sure they are eating right. If they don’t like cucumber, I tend to cut it in different shapes and put tomatoes,” she says, speaking with passion about her kids.

Madhuri intends going back to the US now, and returning back again to shoot the show in a month’s time. “I’ve been here for four months now, and I have three big fans waiting for me in the US, and they are the ones who matter the most to me,” she says.Does that mean there isn’t any film on the horizon for the dhak dhak beauty? Madhuri is tentative, “Let some good script come along...”

She’s excited about the food show in question though. “It’s about culinary skills and lifestyle and every woman sees herself balancing these two things. I’m one of them too,” she says.
The show would have her supporting the women’s team and she sportingly indulged in a mock-verbal dual with Sanjeev Kapoor. The latter spoke about his recently launched channel once again, and said it was doing very well. “It was seven years ago that I dreamt of having a channel entirely dedicated to food. At that time, people said I was mad. Why would people be interested in a 24/7 food channel, they asked? But in the last 2-3 years, things have been changing and the project started seeming viable. Food Food is already doing very well, and in fact, it’s TRPs have gone ahead of many channels in the same genre,” he says.
On Madhuri, he tells us that he needed someone with credibility and a love for food. “We needed a big personality to be associated with the channel so as to take it to the next level. Normally, all the film people I meet are scared of food. They are overly health-conscious. Thankfully, Madhuri was not like that.”
“Oh I have no such problems,” says Madhuri. “I eat what I want to and say to myself, ‘I can run a bit more on the treadmill tomorrow’. In any case, the channel and this show in particular will be promoting the idea of healthy eating,” she adds.
Food shows - that are well executed - have an excellent chance of succeeding, but only recently we saw a major dud with Akshay Kumar’s Master Chef, that Star Plus had launched with great hype and hoopla. So has Sanjeev analysed what goes into a hit show?
“I know about food and I know this will work. Yes, if I was a doing a film, I wouldn’t be sure at all,” he smiles at his implied response.
The show looks all set to begin in a month or so, and given the charismatic players at the centre, there’s not much doubt that the channel will get its much-needed visibility.

Just like Juhi

2011-03-07T09:06:00.000-08:00

The affable Juhi Chawla was in the city on Thursday evening for a screenplay launch, and Sandhya Iyer caught up with her for a quick tete-a-tete

Looking younger by years and slimmer than ever, Juhi Chawla made for an extremely pretty picture, as she joined director Onir and co-star Sanjay Suri at Pune’s Landmark book store to release the screenplay of their 6- year old film, My Brother Nikhil, that over the years has been evoking discussions on many forums around the world, due to the sensitive issues of homosexuality and AIDS that it handles.

Coming to Juhi, we ask her how she’s managed to shed so much weight, but the cherubic faced star is in a painfully self-effacing mood and doesn’t take any credit for her lovely looks. “Hardly,” she says giving us her chirpy smile. “Maybe it’s because I’m wearing black. Everyone looks slim in it,” she says. Is the weight loss a result of the IPL planning where she’s part-owner of Kolkata Knight Riders along with Shah Rukh Khan, we joke? “No, I’m not really involved with it. The others manage it,” she says about her team that has been putting up a disappointing show the last three years.

Coming back to films, throughout her career, Juhi firmly stuck to commercial films. There wasn’t even a hint of anything arty in the work she did. But with films like Teen Deewarein, My Brother Nikhil and some others, she suddenly seemed to be patronising meaningful, hatke films? Does she see this as a natural transition for a top mainstream actress like her? “You’re right. I never did anything arty in my career. I was very happy running around trees, and banners etc did matter to me. In general too, I am a fan of regular Hindi cinema. I like films to be entertaining, matlab they have to keep me engaged. My Brother Nikhil happened because of Jhankaar Beats that I was doing with Sanjay (Suri) and Rahul Bose. I did that film because it was being produced by Pritish Nandy and his name rang a bell. Also it was such a sunny, happy film. Sanjay was the one who introduced me to Onir, and when I heard his script, I was blown away. That is how the association happened,” she tells us.

Now that Juhi has got a taste of the more sensitive, subtle cinema, she says she’s not enthused much about the purely mainstream fare. “I think I have outgrown those kind of films. Moreover, what can commercial cinema offer me? I am not ready for mother roles yet, thoda ruk jao abhi...,” she says, her humour intact.

The actress who is married to industrialist Jay Mehta and is mother to two children didn’t take a longish break at all from the industry. Unlike her contemporaries, she eased into all her roles and today appears to have kept a fine balance between family and career. “Well, I know how chaotic my life is, but if people think I am balancing everything beautifully, I am happy to appear like that,” she says. “I love my work, films are very important to me. At the same time, my family matters a lot too. Social events, get-togethers, I like all these aspects of my life.”

Among today’s actresses, the QSQT, Darr and Hum Hain Rahi Pyaar Ke star is fond of Vidya Balan, who perhaps comes closest to her own comely personality. “She’s the only one who is pushing the boundries, so it would have to be Vidya,” she says.

Juhi’s next film, which she has also co-produced, is Onir’s film I Am where she plays a wealthy Kashmiri Pandit, who is forced to come face to face with an uncomfortable past. The film also stars Nandita Das, Sanjay Suri, Rahul Bose and Manisha Koirala. The film allowed Juhi and Manisha to connect after so many years. “Imagine! I never really knew her when we were contemporaries, but we spent a lovely time in Srinagar,” says Juhi.

We do hope to see this talented actress in several different roles, but Juhi, prompted by director Onir sitting beside her, agrees that she is perhaps in a happy, comfortable zone and doesn’t feel a strong need to push herself. Yet, as an audience who is feeling the lack of strong actresses more severely now than ever, one does hope to see more of the lovely Juhi.

Tanu Weds Manu team in Pune

2011-03-02T06:59:00.000-08:00

The team of Tanu Weds Manu were at Inox, Pune and were visibly thrilled with the positive response to the rom-com. Sandhya Iyer brings the details

2011 is seeing several surprise hits and Tanu Weds Manu is an addition to that list. The rom com is being lapped up and the film's lead actor R Madhavan, in particular, is getting unprecedented praise. The charming actor came to the city with his co-star Kangna Ranaut, director Anand Rai and Deepak Dobrayal (the actor who did a marvellous job as Madhavan's friend).

Looking slimmer than he ever has in recent times, we tell the actor how his entry on screen in Tanu Weds Manu was greeted with huge whistles - something which one sees only when an A list superstar is at the helm. Does he believe his popularity that sky-rocketed after 3 Idiots rubbed off on Tanu Weds Manu as well? The actor agrees. "The success of 3 Idiots is unparallelled and I am sure that popularity must have helped. But I also had 13B which did well. So now with Tanu Weds Manu it's been three hits in a row," he says with some pride.
Sitting next to him was Kangna Ranaut, who said she completely identified with her character in the film. "Every girl can relate to Tanu. It was my most satisfying and fulfilling roles. Tanuja is not dumb. She's a smart, intelligent outspoken girl and knows the effect she has on men."
The film is about a reticent, affable NRI groom falling for a loud, capricious small-town girl with plenty of airs. We ask Madhavan about the scene where he sees Kangna as a sleeping bride-to-be and agrees to marry her. It is testimony to the actor's talent that one buys a somewhat absurd situation like this, but was it just physical attraction that makes him fall in love so instantly? We put the question to the director, but Madhavan is eager to field this one. "I'll answer it, because it is my interpretation. Every love story begins with looks. You probably cannot find someone ugly and yet fall in love immediately. Looks do matter. The other thing is that, even in real life, when I was of marriagable age, I thought it looked quite unmanly to go and see a girl and then call in saying you don't want to go ahead. I think that same feeling is with Manu. He knows his parents have approved the family, so he's made up his mind to marry without too much fuss. He doesn't fall in love with Tanu instantly, but he is charmed by the fact that a girl can be so cool so as to sleep when a guy is coming to see her. He falls in love much later," Madhavan explains.
The actor has a relatively low-key role in the film, but Madhavan made it extremely memorable. Says the actor about his part, "No other hero would have agreed to do the role after reading the script. There are no turning points for him. He hardly talks in the film. It's not author-backed at all. But I'm glad it worked," he says. Director Anand Rai agrees, "Yes, his role isn't author-backed, but it is director-backed. Manu is extremely strong in his thoughts - once he decides, he decides."
There have been points of criticism against the film, where people have found it somewhat strange for Madhavan to stick on in such a harrowing relationship. The director has no qualms joining the critics' chorus. "I agree with them, the film is not flawless at all. But I tried to make the characters lovable. You fall in love with them, so you forgive many things," he says.
There has been talk about a sequel to Tanu Weds Manu. The team is toying with the idea after the media presumed it themselves. "If you ask me whether I had thought of a sequel, then the answer is no. We're hearing it for the last ten days. I might consider it, but nothing as of now," says Rai.
Madhavan is less enthused. "How do you make a sequel to a love story? It has a beginning and an end. Sequels are made for films like Dhoom and Krrish. But let's see if something works out," he says.
The film's leading lady too is happy that she got to do a different role after playing a series of on-the-edge characters. " I am a happy person by nature. And I was a bit tired to do the on the edge roles. I'm thrilled this happened," she says.

Tanu Weds Manu

2011-02-25T09:29:00.000-08:00

Director: Anand Rai
Starring: R Madhavan, Kangna Ranaut, Deepak Dobriyal, among others
Stars: **1/2

Considering some of the edgier, more interesting themes have all come from smaller films in the last couple of years, much was expected from Tanu Weds Manu. Add to that, the promos have been extremely eye-catching. The film even begins on a promising note, and bristles with atmospheric, small-town charm.

The premise is again ripe with possibilities. It begins in very convincing fashion where an NRI groom, Manu (R Madhavan) is on a bride-hunting trip to India. He's shy and inhabited, with an affable, heart-melting smile. He's a far cry from the arrogant, accented English-speaking NRIs one normally gets to see in films. Manu as a doctor in London for ten years has mostly lived a boring life with little or no interaction with women. The bride-hunting is planned at break-neck speed by his mother (so as to accommodate as many girls as possible) and Manu - though surprised at such urgency- is too nice and affectionate to complain. Such an old-fashioned routine for marriage is not something he's terribly happy about, but he also realises he cannot put it on hold forever, and hence resigns to his parents' wishes. This entire portion has been shot with pitch perfect authenticity.

However, as it turns out, the girl he sees in Kanpur, Tanu (Kangna Ranaut) gets drunk to avoid him, and collapses on the bed where the couple is left in a room. Just a glance of her pretty face causes a great flutter in Manu's heart. Perhaps out of repression and a sudden release, or because Manu is genuinely attracted to Tanu, he's never able to get over her even when she declines to marry him. As it turns out, Tanu is a rebel without a cause, and smokes, drinks and abuses freely, and has a boyfriend whom she is set on marrying. Heartbroken, Manu returns back to Delhi. But the couple meet again, and Manu starts building his hopes.

What works for the film is R Madhavan - in an understated, yet very effective and credible character - who effortlessly slips into his role, and plays it with immense conviction. His performance has to be doubly lauded because Kangna is the weak link here, and it's left to this wonderful actor to hold their scenes together from slipping. Besides Madhavan's character - which is easily the highlight of the film - and Deepak Dobriyal's performance, as his friend, Pappi (fantastic!), Tanu And Manu is otherwise a regular rom com that takes a few false steps, especially in the second half. Only a very charming female lead could have made all the chaos believable. Sadly, Kangna is not upto the task. Her appearance and attitude don't go with the tone of the film at all, and her dialogue delivery is painfully bad and often incoherent. The actress perhaps thought this would be a Jab We Met moment for her, but Kangna plays the character as a weird, confused and crude female without any redeeming features. She walks around like a zombie, and Indian clothes look doesn't suit her Medusa- hair at all. Also Kangna's lip job has gone drastically wrong, and with her three inch pout, Donald Duck could be feeling a bit threatened. Kangna's look and performance - both let down a well-made film that deserved a more appealing actress. Of course some of the blame should rest on the writers and director, who perhaps could have justified Manu's intense liking for the girl better. On a script level, the situation is perfectly plausible of opposites attracting. Manu -being the timid, restrained and obliging guy that he is - gets drawn to the impudent and loud Tanu. But Kangna's character, and her relationship with her boyfriend are not satisfactorily explored at all.

The dialogues are crackling and all the character actors have done a sterling job. The music and background score is addictive. The film is of course enjoyable in parts, but one does get a bit tired by the end of it all, which suggests it's not such a joy ride after all.

7 Khoon Maaf

2011-02-18T06:08:00.000-08:00

7 Khoon Maaf
Director: Vishal Bharadwaj
Starring: Priyanka Chopra, Naseeruddin Shah, Neil Nitin Mukesh, Annu Kapoor, John Abraham, Vivaan Shah, Konkona Sen Sharma, Aleksandr Dyachenko, Irrfan Khan
Stars: ***

Nothing to kill for

Vishal Bhardwaj's film has always been something to look forward to. From Makdee to The Blue Umbrella and Maqbool to Omkaara, the filmmaker's works have stood out for their cinematic richness, in terms of story-telling, treatment and music. At least three of his five films so far have been literary adaptations, two of them derived from Shakespeare, while The Blue Umbrella was adapted from Ruskin Bond's utterly poignant and beautiful short story. Though Maqbool and Omkaara were fine efforts, there were critics who felt that Bhardwaj did a literal reading of the Bard's texts, without uncovering their deeper layers. But the music, the texture and the performances more than made up for some of the complexity in the classics that the director may have missed out on.

But this literal reading becomes a problem in 7 Khoon Maaf. The premise of a young woman always craving for love and being disappointed each time in marriage, and ultimately killing her husbands, is an intriguing concept. However, for all its thrill-value, the story is never challenging or provocative. And with a distinct lack of depth and layering, the theme in fact falls a bit flat.

Again, the story is a literary adaptation of Ruskin Bond's short story, Susanna's Seven Husbands (the septuagenarian also features in a guest appearance in the film), where the author was requested to expand upon the original story by fleshing out each episode.

The film begins with a young Susanna (Priyanka Chopra), who grows up in a wealthy Christian household with a loyal governess (Usha Uthup, used cheaply) and a couple of other servants. She takes under her wing a cute boy, who grows up to be the narrator of the film (Vivaan Shah). After the death of her parents, Susanna honours her father's last wish and marries an Army officer (Neil Nitin Mukesh). Having lost a limp, she discovers that her husband is a cruel, possessive and violent man. Susanna kills him in what appears to others as a freak incident. Then comes husband number 2, John Abraham, a rocker, who turns out to be a drug addict. The others prove to have other extreme problems, which forces her to kill each of them.

The film stays more or less engaging throughout, and the curiosity about what could possibly go wrong with the next husband is what sustains the narrative. Also, veteran actors like Irrfan Khan, Anu Kapoor and Naseeruddin Shah (delightful in pitch perfect Bengali accent) give solid performances in their respective sequences, frequently infusing life into a story-line that starts turning dull and pointless. The best written and most chilling part is for Neil Nitin Mukesh, who does an adequate job of it. But John Abraham disappoints in a role that is the most unconvincing of the lot. The section where Susanna falls in love with a Russian is also one of the tamer bits.

The disappointment in 7 Khoon Maaf is that in spite of its different theme, and some interesting characters, it never scratches much below the surface to throw any fresh insights on human behaviour or relationships. All the husbands have serious problems, which leaves Susanna with no option but to kill them. This makes the film quite regular, with standard situations.
Also, one would think that 7 Khoon Maaf would be a milestone for Priyanka, given that she gets to play a character from age 20 to 50 plus. Unexpectedly, Susanna's is a much under-written character, and you never really get into her head. Clearly, she has no special quality or allure, and is in fact, quite ordinary and meek. It is the husbands who take centre-stage, and Priyanka is left with a role that never really connects at any point.

Bhardwaj justifies all her killings by presenting her as the victim, thereby making it quite a shrill and straightforward film. There are ironical aspects to some of the characters (like Irrfan), but by and large, this is a less edgy, and not a very emotionally involving film.

He is especially unsuccessful in creating a wholesome character with Susanna. Think Being Julia or Scarlet O Hara, and the female combination of evil and manipulation, charm and impishness, spunk and spirit they represent. This one is a far cry from any of that, and a big missed opportunity in that regard. In stead of hard-core reasons to kill a man, it would have been so much fun if Bharadwaj would have subverted that idea by showing that any reason can be good enough to kill a husband!

Patiala House

2011-02-11T05:39:00.000-08:00

This House has its charms

Director: Nikhil Advani
Starring: Akshay Kumar, Rishi Kapoor, Anushka Sharma, Dimple Kapadia
Stars: **1/2

Patiala House is Akshay Kumar's best film in recent times, but that's not saying much, given that his movies have lately touched new lows. Director Nikhil Advani, who already has two failures behind him — Salaam-e-Ishq and Chandni Chowk To China — has been itching to prove himself, and doesn't do too badly with Patiala House. The 'goings on' are kept interesting, with fairly engaging scenes, even if the basic premise remains a silly, stretched out one.

The film combines a dramatic father-son story, with the thrills of a cricket match, so you have some key plot points to look forward to. Not all of this comes together very well and the central conflict starts thinning out quite soon. Gurtej Kahlon (Rishi Kapoor) turns a stuanch hater of the English following a few racial attacks in Southall against the residing Sikhs. He takes it as a mission to turn the whole town into a self-sufficient mini-Punjab with schools and hospitals. Soon, he has his entire extended family staying here, toeing his line. Gurtej is respected in the community for his rebellous spirit, but the writers (Advani and Anvita Dutt) leave no doubt that he’s a vain, difficult and over-bearing man. And Rishi Kapoor being the fab actor that he is, absolutely nails the character. Most stunning is the actor's body language for this arrogant man, who seems to be pursuing the cause more for egoistical reasons than anything else. So while his quivering paunch in Do Dooni Chaar was endearing, denoting middle-class humbleness, in Patiala House, the same paunch gives him the appearance of an unpleasant, intolerant man.

Obviously, his wife (Dimple Kapadia) and elder son, Parghat Singh Kahlon aka Gattu (Akshay Kumar) are at the receiving end of Gurtej's bullying ways.
As a collegian, Gattu is a talented cricketer, but his father commands him not to play for England. Forlorn and disillusioned, Gattu gives up his dream and runs a shop instead. He's 34 now, and viewed as a loser by his younger cousins. They hold him responsible for setting the wrong precedent in the house, by following the patriarch's diktats blindly. So far so good. But from here, the film moves ahead in ways that are never quite convincing. For example, Akshay goes about listlessly for the first 90 minutes of the movie. One understand he's supposed to be inhabited and slightly depressed, but it comes out looking one-note and unidimensional. His character should have had more layers for the audience to feel a stronger empathy and connect. Again, the angle with Anushka, as the girl-next-door who prods Akshay to pursue his dreams is never effective. Anushka's exaggerated facial expressions and loud pitch do nothing to complement Akshay's character. The actress doesn’t seems to get that reacting is the better part of acting — the result is that she gives the same expressions and speaks in an affected manner. Her acting never gels with the overall tone of a scene. There's no doubt Anushka needs a good director to reign her in, and Advani isn't very successful here. This section partly affects the film's appeal. A more mature/ capable actress would have perhaps brought something more to this romance. There's a nice scene where the usually timid Akshay exchanges a few heated words with Anushka and immediately regrets it. This is a pivotal scene. It is his fondness for the woman in his life that really spurs him on. But given that this relationship is not very well-executed, the effect goes missing.

The film has many loopholes. If Rishi Kapoor's character hated England so much, why didn't he think of moving back to India? It's also a bit tough to believe that all the cousins consider Gattu the reason for their stifled existence. One doesn't see why they can't move out of the house and do their own thing if they really want to. Again, the father-son relationship has not been explored to its full potential. All these problems don't completely derail the film at any point, but your emotional involvement as an audience does get minimised.
The direction is competent, and there are a few scenes that evoke a genuine smile. Like the one with the bride and her obsession for a grand, filmy marriage. There's touch of class to the cricket matches shot in the final half and hour, but the emotional content is just not strong enough for us to be moved like one did in Lagaan and Chak De! India. Yet, not a bad effort and certainly, one of Akshay's better films in recently times. Go for it.

Yeh Saali Zindagi

2011-02-04T06:12:00.000-08:00

Stars: Irrfan Khan, Chitrangada Singh, Arunoday Singh, Yashpal Sharma, Aditi Rao Hydari
Director: Sudhir Mishra
Showing at: Citypride, E-Square, Inox
Stars: ***

The thing with certain filmmakers is that the themes they tackle in their most influential works tend to find a way into their subsequent films. In Sudhir Mishra's case, Hazaaron Khwaishein Aisi, a period movie set in the 70s, can easily be counted as a modern-day masterpiece. Not surprisingly then, when Mishra tries to portray love in the seedy and labyrinthine universe of assorted thugs, corrupt police officers and shady businessmen in Yeh Saali Zindagi, you see a distinct trace of the romantic themes he dealt with in his earlier celebrated film.
Mishra, being the unconventional man that he is, joyously destroys chiches with his by-now-familiar tone of subversion and irreverence. However, this brash and erratic style of filming is something one has come to associate with new-age directors, almost to the point of repetition. Hence one looks for more than mere shock value. Mishra’s film is promising, but tends to rely too much on the sensational — what with it making news for having its actors thrash Mallika Sherawat’s 22 kisses record.

Yeh Saali...like the title suggests, is full of colourful cuss words, most of it meant to scanadalise and titilate. If it stays engaging and amusing for major part of its two hour running time, it is largely because of the excellent actors on board, and Mishra gives his character wonderful touches. However, the central plot itself, has the Hazaaron... hangover, and in this case, is less satisfying to see on screen. There are also definite points where you feel somewhat exasperated with all the chaos and confusion happening in the film. Chitrangada's sketchy character contributes to that feeling as well.

As has become a trend with many small-budget black comedies and satires, the narrative moves back and forth, with many interesting characters being part of the mix. When the action starts, you see a despondent Arun, a fixer (Irrfan Khan) who is madly in love with Priti (Chirangada Singh). But she falls for another guy (Vipul Gupta). Meanwhile, Kuldeep (Arunoday) is a thug trying to begin on a clean slate, and appease his upset wife (Aditi Rao Hydari). But he's willing to take up one final assignment, a high profile kidnapping case, which involves getting his boss (Yashpal Sharma) released from jail, that also promises some moolah.

Kuldeep and his gang are supposed to kidnap the CM's daughter and his proposed son-in-law (Vipul), the same guy who Chitrangada is seeing. The gang makes a mistake and kidnaps Chitrangada instead. This proves frustrating for the players, because the CM's daughter has now given up on her fiance and the minister won't make any concessions. Irrfan goes to all kind of lengths for his lady love, and her lover! Much like Hazaaron...Irrfan's character is inspired from Shiney Ahuja's masterful role as a fixer, and his attempt to do the unthinkable for the girl he loves, is also taken from there. In the same way, Chitrangada's character, who loves one man sincerely, but will take favours from another, was better written in Hazaaron.
There are individual scenes that are extremely well done, but the central plot involving Chitrangada-Irrfan-Vipul is somewhat unconvincing. One can't quite see why Chirangada ditches Irrfan in the beginning, and some montages trying to explain this doesn't make anything clear. But Irrfan, the actor, is flawless and delivers yet another solid performance. Ditto with Yashpal Sharma, who is terrific. Arunoday's act is fresh. Chitrangada is decent, though her expressions keep alternating between a pouty smile and a harried frown.

Mishra, with his unique sensibility and maturity, is always someone to watch out for, and though Yeh Saali Zindagi isn't anything out of the world, and certainly this could have been a much better film, it still has many strengths to recommend itself.

Review: Dil Toh Bachcha Hai Ji

2011-01-28T05:06:00.000-08:00

Director: Madhur Bhandarkar
Starring: Ajay Devgn, Emraan Hashmi, Omi Vaidya, Shazahn Padamsee, Shruti Haasan and Shraddha Das
Stars: **1/2

Madhur Bhandarkar might think he's made a major departure with Dil Toh Bachcha Hai Ji, a dramedy about three bachelors (Ajay Devgn, Emraan Hashmi and Omi Vaidya) of different temperaments trying to find a mate. The filmmaker's other films have all been based on specific settings (Page 3, Fashion, Corporate, Traffic Signal, Jail) where Bhandarkar focusses on their ugly underbelly through the voyeuristic gaze of middle-class morality.

Dil Toh Bachcha Hai Ji is not too different from these films, except that it is not restricted to a segment of society. It's not so much a comedy, even though it has been billed as one. It has many devices and character-types here that are common to most of Bhandarkar's films. Of course, the one-liners pop up at regular intervals for the laughs. But what is most distasteful about this film is its attempt to extract humour at the cost of gays (portrayed in the most offensive manner)and middle-aged women. The director has always used some of these crude stereotypes in his other films, but when the attempt here is to garner some cheap laughs, it appears all the more pathetic. In particular there is a funeral scene where some shockingly callous remarks are made at the diseased female model. In the bank that Devgan works, you see a plump, regular-looking colleague. For a while, you are fooled into thinking that probably Bhandarkar is aiming for an authentic office environment by having real looking people. But no such luck.

Bhandarkar's insensitive portrayal is extended towards animals also. There's a scene where playboy Emraan is trying to get introduced to a rich socialite (Tisca Chopra) at her pet parlour. He buys a puppy from someone on the road, only to see its mother desperately trying to chase him down. And this is supposed to be funny?

Anyway, one can't help feel that the film would really have been better without some of this offensive stuff, because on the plus side, it is still quite a rooted, situational film, without too much of the loud, slapstick comedies that are getting churned out. Of course, the maker's penchant for drama and twists remains. And what's with the horribly loud background music and cues that are spoon-fed to the audiences at every point?

All three tracks have some decent moments. Yet, the one involving Ajay- Shezahn and Omi-Shraddha Das are the most interesting. The Emraan-Tisca Chopra track is made immensely watchable because of the lovely Chopra, who is reliably solid and believable. Ajay is a divorcee looking at life anew, and his new intern, June Pinto (Shazahn Padamsee), a pretty, giggle-head catches his fancy. Omi is a traditional Maharashtrian boy who falls madly in love with an ambitious RJ, who keeps using him for free booze and so on. Right from the beginning, you sense that these are not workable relationships, but towards the end, you almost expect the director to smoothen the edges and go in for a contrived happy ending. Thankfully, Bhandarkar shows enough sense, and that alone saves a film which would have otherwise appeared extremely lame. Besides, it also stretches endlessly. The track involving Emraan-Tisca-Shruti Haasan is high on drama and coincidence and if your interest is still sustained, it's because of the two lovely ladies. Shruti is a real looker, with a strong personality. Hope she find more roles that can explore her talent.

Bhandarkar extracts good performances from his entire cast. Ajay Devgn, Emraan and Omi are all excellent. Among the women, newcomer Shraddha Das has the least charming part, but she grows into her character well. Shazahn Padamsee is extremely believable as the irritating and perky youngster.

This could have perhaps been a good break-out film for Bhandarkar, only if he has abandoned many of his regular devices and opted for something fresher. As it stands, Dil Toh Bachcha Hai Ji is marginally watchable, but nothing terribly interesting.

Interview: Ranveer Singh

2011-01-04T04:58:00.001-08:00

Ranveer Singh's stunning success with his debut film Band Baaja Baarat proves that good talent, if backed, can reap rich rewards for the industry

Ranveer Singh can't contain his excitement, and most would agree he has good reason to be thrilled. His Yash Raj film, Band Baaja Baaraat has slowly but surely been creating some boxoffice magic. The news is equally heartening for an industry that rarely shows the gumption to invest in a talented newcomer, but is willing to applaud when the dice falls on the right number. Ranveer's success is as special for him personally, as much as it is a sign that the industry needs to come out of its mind-set of falling back always on established names. The pool of stars needs to grow and Ranveer is its latest proud entrant.

Bubbling with the same youthful energy of his character, Bittoo, he agrees that nobody had expectations from the film to begin with. "The promos got mixed reactions. People wondered what kind of a hero I was. I'm quite unconventional looking I think. The opening was very lukewarm, but slowly after the first few shows, word got around about the film and by Sat--Sun, there was a 100 per cent jump. On Monday in fact we picked up and stayed steady. Unfortunately Tees Maar Khan didn't do well, so all the screens that we lost in the second week to accommodate it, came back to us," he says with the unmistakable elation of having won as the underdog.

Though from a fairly affluent family, Ranveer did his bit of struggling before he landed what has now become a famous launch. "I grew up in Mumbai, am a Bandra boy. Then I went off to America for my BA. When I came back I dabbled in theatre and assisted on a few films. I wanted to get into acting, so I got my photos clicked. I was basically spreading the word around...that I'd be available for auditions etc. I was getting offers, but I didn't want to take up just about anything. I decided I would wait till 26-27 and wait for that one offer I can't refuse. And that big offer came with Yash Raj. It wasn't easy of course while doing the film. I was under pressure, as I'd never worked before in such a professional arena. But I was happy to be doing what I was and on some days, it was a blast," says Ranveer, adding that acting was all he ever wanted to do.

The fact that Ranveer proved to a gem of a find and did it as a rank outsider has given hope to many aspiring actors. "I'd like that to be my calling card," says the spunky newcomer. "The fact that I could make it with no lineage, solely based on talent is something I am proud of. And I think this will encourage filmmakers to back new talent and not be averse to outsiders. This is a very fraternised industry and it's rare to get a foot in. In that respect Aditya Chopra has set the example," he says about his mentor.
Though a supporter of hatke films and with the certain hope that he will be a part of the new-age movement, the newcomer understands the compulsion under which Bollywood functions. "The star system can't be avoided. Aaj-kal the whole game is in the opening only," he says. "A producer can't cast a newcomer unless he is 100 per cent sure. But I think now they will be more 'open' to the idea than they were."

We come to his much appreciated role in his debut film, where he played a Jat Delhi character, with North Indian machismo and chauvinism only offset by his vulnerable charm. "The one thing I felt about Bitto is that he is a 'dil ka banda' and I let myself go. But besides that I did employ a complex process to get into the skin of the character. My director Manish (Sharma) took me to Delhi University and said, 'Jaa Delhi ka launda ban jaa,' I started observing the guys there, their lingo, their demeanor and basically was trying to get an insight into their thinking. I shortlisted a few students and started hanging out with them to see who seems most like 'Bittoo'," he tells us.

Ranveer Singh played the part so well that most aren't able to separate him from his on screen character. In real life, the actor is perfectly suave. "Yes, that happens a lot. But I did pour a lot of myself into him. Many of my mannerisms are there. But I think I am more sorted that Bitto is. Let me say Bitto is just one aspect of Ranveer," he says, which assuredly gives us the hope that there are many more shades and dimensions to this talented newcomer.

Ranveer says he personally wants to invest in characters that are distinct and specific. "I want to 'become' those characters, so much that people won't realise I am the same actor," he says.
He recogonises Band Baaja Baarat as a terrific team effort and puts writer Habib Faisal for the top honors, "We already had gold on paper, and just needed to enhance and embelish it," he says.
His perky co-star Anushka Sharma has also received rave reviews and Ranveer too is generous in his praise. "One thing unique about Anushka is that she is a complete natural and amazingly gifted. She is not touched by anyone's opinion about acting. She's very uncorrupted in that sense. Her character Shruti is one of those rare, well-written and wholesome characters in cinema and Anushka did a fantastic job of it," he says.

In the beginning though, this aspect did cause a few tiffs between them, says Ranveer. "Yeah, I used to wonder what kind of an actress she is who doesn't rehearse. I'm the complete opposite. I like to rehearse till it is in my bone marrow. So we took a while to get into sync," he smiles. Now after the release, rumours are rife that the two actors are seeing each other. For the first time in a free flowing conversation, Ranveer is uncomfortable, but denies the development altogether. "The press even says I've signed 6 films! Arre, what is this!," he sidesteps.
But he's back to his happy mood as he browses the Screen Awards nominations, which has him in the "best debutant' category. Many believe he's the clear favourite, but the actor does not want to be presumptuous. "I'm not taking it for granted. There are many other talented names there. Suriya was brilliant, but I hope the jury knows that he's not a newcomer," he says, slightly anxious. Any doubts then that Ranveer is simply the most feisty, talented and ambitious star-actors to have arrived to Bollywood!

Summary - Hindi cinema 2010

2010-12-29T22:11:00.000-08:00

In a year where most big budget films came a cropper or severely fell short of expectations, it was the smaller films and debutant directors who salvaged what was otherwise an extremely average year

The crisis of content continues for Bollywood and with every subsequent announcement of a sequel or a remake, the industry underlines the fact that is stuck in a critical and commercial rut. In many ways 2010 was a brave year, where many big budget films tried to experiment with their subjects and themes. But since most of them failed at the boxoffice – mostly due to their own limitations of script and execution – and in contrast many some low IQ comedy dramas hit bull’s eye, the message that might have registered is that too much risk isn’t worth taking. This is dangerous for an industry that is fast losing a grip on an audience that is simply tired of enduring sub-standard, nonsensical tripe week after week. Amidst this bankruptcy of ideas, what kept the quality meter from fully dipping were the small-budget films and debutant makers, who infused some fresh life into a cinema that seemed to be plunging deeper under the weight of its mediocrity.

The year of small wonders

There were very few films that were outrightly excellent in 2010. Still, the Anurag Kashyap- Vikram Motwane film Udaan should rank as a commendable effort, that essayed a poignant coming-of-age story of a teenager, who has to reclaim himself from the hostile environment he finds himself in. The setting of the film – the industrial city of Jamshedpur with its fumes and heavy sounds – is a metaphor for this cruel interruption in the young protagonist’s tender, artistically-inclined existence. Ronit Roy, as the boy’s brutish father was a revelation in the film, and overall too, Udaan sparkled with credible performances and many of the scenes would count among the best of the year. Another gem was Do Dooni Chaar, that went largely unnoticed at the boxoffice. Starring Rishi Kapoor and Neetu Singh, debutant Habib Faisal’s film was a satiric take on the teaching profession and the denizens of Delhi in general. His textured, witty writing extended to Yash Raj’s Band Baaja Baaraat, that proved to be one the better entertainers of the year, with spirited performances from its leads, Anushka Sharma and newcomer Ranveer Singh. Otherwise too, most of the good films that were released were the small budget ones. There was Road To Sangam, Phas Gaya Obama, Ishqiya, Tere Bin Ladin, Shahrukh Bola Khubsoorat Hai Tu, Peepli Live, Love Sex Aur Dhokha (LSD) – all of which experimented with different themes, and proved to be winners in their own right. Most of them did reasonably well at the boxoffice, but the high ticket rates and a general mind-set stuck on stars, continued to prove to be an impediment in their commercial success.

Big ones that didn’t make the cut

It’s one thing for small-budget films to aim to be different and non-mainstream. That in many ways is their raison d’etre. This year, however, many risks were taken by frontline production houses and directors, who attempted to push the envelope. The first name that comes to mind is Karan Johar who made My Name Is Khan with Shah Rukh Khan. Known for his frilly song and dance romantic sagas set in lush foreign shores, MNIK’s theme of a Muslim man’s appeal for justice and peace in a 9/10 world was a far cry from anything Johar had done before. The film -though ambitiously mounted and well-shot – needed a more masterful and mature handling to make a real impact. As it stood, it came across more as a bid for the Oscars. But nevertheless, a good departure for Johar and SRK even if the film didn’t make the cut. At the boxoffice of course, the film stayed afloat in India and did marvelous business overseas, courtesy its Muslim-sympathising theme and presence of superstar Shah Rukh Khan.
The other ambitious film that had a tough time with the mainstream audience was Mani Ratnam’s Raavan, attempting a captivating subversion of the Ramayana. Every bit an auteur’s work, Ratnam’s film had unmistakable moments of beauty, and a ravishing Aishwarya Rai at the centre. Southern star Vikram who played the second lead in the Hindi version, came with a smoldering presence that made every one of his scenes memorable. Sadly, Abhishek Bachchan as Raavan failed to register, as the actor floundered in an author-backed role that begged for a more solid actor who could portray effectively the various shades of this very complex man. Abhishek plays Raavan like a maniacal man-child, which would have been as valid as Vikram’s grim-brooder version in Raavanan if only he could have got into the head of the character.

Ashutosh Gowariker tried a well-intentioned historical film with Khelein Hum Jee Jaan Se, but the film was so sapped of energy and depth, it proved to be a complete critical and commercial failure. Sanjay Leela Bhansali doggedly stuck to his operatic style of filmmaking with Guzaarish, a film about a quadriplegic who wishes to die. The film was a major departure for Hrithik Roshan, who has mostly been seen in larger-than-life avatars. The film had moments of passion and beauty, but Bhansali seemed interested only in the emotional purging of his characters, without providing enough coherence or arch to his story.

What worked!

The big hit of the year was undoubtedly Dabangg, followed by Raajneeti, Golmaal 3, Once Upon A Time In Mumbaai, I Hate Love Stories and Housefull. Neither of them came in for any great critical appreciation, but each of them had something or the other going for them. The only film that evoked some hysteria was Dabangg, courtesy a gallant performance from Salman Khan and a chartbusting sound track.

The Hype vehicles that crashed

There’s a long list of films that made the audience suffer. But leading the pack are two Akshay Kumar starrers, Khatta Meetha (terrible!) and Action Replay. His Tees Maar Khan has also had extremely mixed reactions, but nothing to beat the earlier two, which were torture chambers. Anees Bazmi tried to pull off another Welcome with
No Problem, but failed miserably. The idea that any multi-starrer comedy – however forced and unfunny – can work at the boxoffice was finally debunked. Hrithik Roshan’s Kites had been in news for almost three years and was supposed to be the star’s grand introduction to the West. But its uneasy mish-mash of theme and treatment found no takers and the film was a resounding flop.

Overall, it was a year where big ideas could not be adequately backed with equally compelling scripts. Hopefully, Bollywood will find its balance next year.

Tees Maar Khan

2010-12-24T07:00:00.000-08:00

Director: Farah Khan
Stars: Akshay Kumar, Akshaye Khanna, Katrina Kaif, Apara Mehta, Sachin Khedekar
Rating: **1/2

Farah Khan's much-hyped Tees Maar Khan is sporadically a very funny film, but as a whole never really comes together. Akshay Kumar aka Tees Maar Khan is a self-proclaimed con artiste who when arrested and flown down by two CBI officers, locks up all the four pilots(!) while he uses the loo and then turns savior for everyone as he uses his special skills. How he actually achieves this con is glossed over and there's only a stylistic representation. So you never get into the head of this character or know why he's so clever. Once home, he lands up on the sets of a sleazy B grade film, where his girlfriend, Anya (Katrina Kaif) is a starlet. And this is the situation for Farah's all-eggs-in-one-basket song, Sheila Ki Jawani that never really rises beyond being a manufactured hit. Katrina tries too hard to be sexy and many of the body movements including one where she's heaving heavily behind white sheets are downright tasteless.

For one of his biggest con jobs, which involves a train robbery, Khan realises he can't do it without some serious man power and security. Hence he comes up with the idea of shooting a film on the location that would enable him to get to the loot. He approaches superstar Aatish Kapoor (Akshaye Khanna), who spends his time ruing how he missed Danny Boyle's call and thereby losing out on the Oscar moment. (One would know Farah's best friend turned foe Shah Rukh Khan had been offered Slumdog Millionaire. Later there's also a reference to SRK's 'back problem'). Once Kapoor agrees, what follows is a farce that quickly degenerates into the realm of the ludicrous and juvenile.

The central plot - copied entirely from the 1966s Hollywood film, After The Fox - sounds great on paper, but it's not the most easy idea to pull off. This needed a masterful screenplay and more than just a serviceable director with a bent for irreverent humour.
The story has ambition, but lacks in execution. In that sense, the film is about cleverness and ingenuity, but it been treated in a brain-dead, over-the-top and completely unrealistic way, which makes it fall flat.
On the plus side, there are more than a couple of sequences which are genuinely hilarious. In fact, some scenes including the 'Master India' - Mr India's son gone wrong, and the Manoj 'Day' Shyamalan sequences sparkle with imagination. The whole of the first half - in spite of its premise and characters being superficial - is still fairly entertaining.

But once the film-within-the-film part arrives, Tees Maar Khan loses steam. This is primarily because you don't for a second believe the characters or their situations. It becomes a spoof within a spoof, so you are never ever invested in the plot.
The songs are a sad let down. Farah's earlier, Om Shanti Om and Main Hoon Naa were never anything more than strictly time-pass fares, but they rode on the back of a peppy soundtrack and other effervescent highlights. The Sheila Ki Jawani number, the Salman item song ...all seem very forced this time. And the other numbers are not even worth a mention.
On the performance front, Akshay Kumar is earnest and does his job well. Katrina however gets the worst role of her career as the dumb, wannabe starlet and does a miserable job of it. Akshaye Khanna is funny in a role that requires him to go completely over-the-top.

The majority of the contribution for the film has come from Farah's husband, Shirish Kunder (script, screenplay, background, dialogues) as the end credits show - an Oscar ceremony where the entire team ends up winning. In the film, this team unintentionally end up making a classic. This is only asserted and not once do you sense this, which is why the film ends up being so lame.

There was perhaps a very good movie in Tees Maar Khan, but it's so absorbed in its flippant humour and spoofs, and so smart for its own good, that it ceases to be a life and blood film. For most part, it ends up being an unimpressive caricature of itself, though some of its humourous sequences are among the best of the year.

Film review: Band Baaja Baarat

2010-12-10T04:35:00.000-08:00

Knot to be missed!

Director: Maneesh Sharma
Starring: Anushka Sharma, Ranveer Singh
Stars: ***1/2

Yash Raj's last release of every year is turning out to be their best. In 2008, they gave us Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi, a charming film that has aged rather well. Last year, there was Rocket Singh and though it proved to be a non-starter at the boxoffice, it went on to amass plenty of critical acclaim. The banner often berated for high-gloss, shallow, assembly line commercial tripe have still been coming up at least one good film a year. And that film this year is Band Baaja Baarat. In a pleasant surprise, it hits all the right buttons. The script has vigour and swing, crackles with humour and for the better part of its running time, is very entertaining.

The film is set in Delhi, where Shruti (Anushka Sharma) having assisted her aunt as a wedding planer has plans of branching out on her own. She meets Bittoo (newcomer Ranveer Singh), who dreading having to go back and help his father in his sugarcane farms, pleads with Shruti to take him as her business partner. Once they start working jointly as wedding planners, they are an immediate success. They move on to bigger things and all seems well. High on success, both give way to their passion on a particular night. While Shruti falls headlong in love with Bittoo, the latter gets nervous and confused. His immaturity and bravado, in spite of his essential goodness, make him fail to recogonise love and he inadvertently hurts Shruti. Along with his North-Indian Jat machismo, there is also a hint of chauvinism in Bittoo's attitude. The couple separate acrimoniously and the rest of the story hinges on whether these two will ever come together again.

The film is set in the heart of Delhi - a city often defined by its ostentatious show of wealth, and the setting therefore compliments the theme of the film perfectly. The director does not satarise its denizens like how Khosla Ka Ghosla or Love, Sex Aur Dhokha did, but there are moments that gently touch upon the frivolity and excesses practised in high-profile weddings in the city. For example, there's a scene where an affluent family talks to a elite wedding planner about how it was embarrassing to see lilies instead of roses being showered on the groom. The wedding planner herself talks to prospective clients about how she likes to keep her wedding classy without the high-decible tackiness. There are such telling scenes that bring a smile to your face.

The detailing and authenticity keep the film rooted and likable. From the succulent bread pakodas that the characters bite into to the pitch perfect accent to the colourful local lingo, all of this helps to wonderfully bring out the atmospheric flavours of Delhi. The director has taken many fresh faces and extracts understated yet striking performances from all of them.
But the two actors leading the show are obviously Anushka and Ranveer. Both are highly effective in their parts and effortlessly 'become' their characters. Anushka has an especially meaty role and she shines in her part as she portrays all the contradictions in her character. Ranveer makes a smashing debut - extremely confident with a crackling comic timing. This film allows him to showcase his skills without it ever becoming a conventional Bollywood launch for a hero. The characters are all well-etched and the conflicts are all reflective of today's generation and echoes themes seen in Break Ke Baad and Love Aaj Kal, where the couples battle with their emotions vis a vis friendship and love, love and marriage and love and sex.

The film has no glaring flaws, but a better music score would have aided it greatly. It has 'Lut gaya...' which is its best bet, but all the others are sub par. The other niggling criticism is about the pre climax dance sequence with Shruti and Ranveer taking centre stage. Now, which wedding planners would have time to perform in such an elaborately choreographed dance sequence?

But on all other counts, this is a refreshing ride by all means.

Khelein Hum Jee Jaan Sey

2010-12-03T05:51:00.000-08:00

Director: Ashutosh Gowariker
Starring: Abhishek Bachchan, Deepika Padukone, Sikander Kher, Vishakha Singh
Stars: **1/2

No 'Jaan' in this Khel...

Ashutosh Gowariker probably meant well when he thought of bringing alive the Great Chittagong Uprising of the 1930s and the life of young Bengal revolutionary Surjya Sen who helmed it. The episode is not too well known and certainly, a figure like Surjya Sen ought to be more nationally recogonised. So the effort is commendable and sincere.

Unfortunately, Gowariker's execution is unbelievably flat and lacklustre. His actors are weak, there is no lived-in feeling to the characters and the period look is a fake. For one half of the film, the action just doesn't move and every actor (a whole bunch of unknowns) appears too self-conscious about being transported into a period set, wearing dhotis and speaking sanskritised Hindi. There is nothing organic about the characters' action and reactions, result being that the film comes across as a poseur. The film was shot in Goa, when it actually needed an authentic Bengal texture and topography. Deepika Padukone (horribly miscast) paints her nails in transparent gloss and makes sure to tantalisingly keep her shapely waist exposed in her starched cotton sari. This attempt to create an illusion of the real thing makes Khelein Hum Jee Jaan Say greatly disappointing.

The film captures a valiant chapter in history, where Surjya Sen (Abhishek Bachchan) along with his trusted friends, form a group of young revolutionaries, training them in guerrilla tactics. Many of them are impressionable teenagers and two of them are women (Deepika Padukone and Vishakha Singh). They plan an armoury raid, with the idea of launching an attack on the Britishers. They succeed only partially and soon enough, the British start chasing them down with a vengeance. The revolutionaries put up a brave fight, but not many survive in the end.

The first half, where the director tries to establish the setting is terribly drab. There's so much artificiality, with Deepika perennially standing like she's about to recite poetry, that you don't buy these characters at all. The screenplay again is limp. For example, there's an episode where Surjya Sen agrees to admit the two women into the fold - but only if they can prove themselves with a particular task. Gowariker spends a long time setting up this sequence, but there is no pay off, because the next thing you know the goal has been accomplished! How it was done you have no clue. The second half gets more interesting, but there's not much even here that is truly spectacular.

It's fine for Gowariker to recreate a period in history, but he ought to have added more depth and contemporary resonance to his narrative. The episode itself, about revolutionaries attacking the Britishers, was never going to be terribly unique -unless it had other interesting period narratives added to it. If nothing, the film should have rivetting characters to hold the drama. Khelenge...unfortunately has none of that. You don't ever feel for the characters, because Gowariker's characters are all so tepid. For a film about Surjya Sen, Abhishek Bachchan doesn't have one worthy scene or dialogue in the film.

This is certainly one of Gowariker's weakest and most sluggish films. The filmmaker needs to revisit his own Lagaan to see how to combine patriotic flavour with hard-hitting drama.

Break Ke Baad review

2010-11-26T06:06:00.000-08:00

Director: Danish Aslam
Starring: Imran Khan, Deepika Padukone, Shahana Goswami, Sharmila Tagore, Yudhishtir
Stars: ***

Heartbreak house

Kunal Kohli produced Break Ke Baad is a surprisingly personal, yet perfectly plausible story of a young girl who cannot make up her mind about love. Taking a cue from Imtiaz Ali's Love Aaj Kal, which brought out the cluelessness of today's youngsters about matters of the heart, Break Ke Baad deals with similar mental vicissitudes, and rather refreshingly looks at the subject from the girl's point of view. Like Deepika Padukone says in the film, 'I am the star of every scene in my life', so the focus is on her throughout, while Imran's is a muted presence.

Abhay (Imran Khan) and Aliya (Deepika) are in a relationship. While Abhay is steadfast and boringly predictable - he spouts romantic lines straight out of cheesy Bollywood romances - Aliya is flighty, self-absorbed and commitment phobic. After some awkward scenes at the beginning, dominated by Deepika's luscious, super-toned waist, the film quickly comes to the point. Aliya wants to explore new things, as she's gotten too used to Abhay's unconditional love. She finds reasons to not like him and ultimately flies off to Australia saying she wants a break from the relationship. Abhay, the ever enduring boyfriend is heartbroken, and soon lands up at Alia's place, a beach side home, where she's staying with two whacked out friends (Yudhishtir, Shahana Goswami.) None of the action that follows is very memorable, though nothing that should particularly irk you either. The screenplay moves fluidly, with some decent punch-lines and light moments, until the film hurriedly arrives at its climax. Fortunately, even if Alia is routinely called 'weird' and 'selfish' in the film, her failings are rightly viewed as a personality type and not an immoral character that needs curing. The climax gets this correctly where she momentarily reverts back to her original skepticism and doubt, once she pleads and gets what she wants.

The theme is a sensitive one, and though debutant director Danish Islam doesn't insult your intelligence at any point, and manages to hit several right notes, the film still doesn't quite pack an emotional punch. For a theme as intimate as this, the characters and setting should have had a far more lived-in feel to them. The use of a foreign location isn't as forced here as in some other films, but it still makes Break Ke Baad seem quite outlandish and distant with a Salaam Namaste hangover. The other issue is Imran's character, which is far too placid and goody-goody - the kind who will carefully pack lingerie into the bag of a girl who has just dumped him. Such men no doubt exist in real life, but unending devotion and mushiness don't necessarily impress a woman. The film gives him no interesting shades at all and merely waits for Deepika to change her mind.

The performances are appropriately in place, though neither Imran or Deepika are the most natural of actors. Imran's dew-fresh good looks and sincere performance see him through, but the actor's lack of expressions and emotional range don't make this role very different from what he did in Jaane Tu..Ya Jaane Naa.
Deepika Padukone is convincing in her part, and delivers what is required of her. Yet, neither actors in the film have the charisma and charm to rise above the limitations of the script at any point. Shahana Goswami is expectedly solid, while Yodhishtir is fun to watch.

Danish Aslam makes an assured debut, with a film that singularly caters to the Facebook generation. What can be said in its favour is that it's not a shallow film, even if it does not end up being an emotionally satisfying story in the end.

'I choose the best from what I get'

2010-11-25T06:44:00.000-08:00

Suriya talks about his debut Hindi film, Raktra Charitra, why he chose Ram Gopal Varma's film and all about his career choices down South

He's one of the most loved stars down South, with a string of hits behind him. His boyish good looks and intense eyes made him an instant heartthrob, and over the past few years, the star - concentrating on massy fares - has seriously got the cash registers ringing. And now, with his first Hindi film, Rakta Charitra 2, the star hopes his act will appeal to an all India audience.

The first time the Hindi audience heard about him was when Aamir Khan announced Ghajini, a remake of the Tamil film that starred Suriya. The ever humble star is full of gratitude for Aamir's gesture of introducing him to the national press. "It was so kind of Aamir sir to call me before doing Ghajini. And when we started speaking it was as if we knew each other for years. It was amazing what he did for me, because he didn't need to. Most actors don't do it, including me. I remember when I did a remake of a Malayalam film, though I spoke to the actor, my interaction was not similar to how it was with Aamir," he says.

Which is why, the actor was rather happy that people in Bollywood were not entirely unaware of him. Yet, Hindi films were not something he planned, he says. The star's modesty prevents him from telling us how popular he is down South, but he states how he is content catering to the Southern audience. Ultimately the break came along because of his keenness to work with Ram Gopal Verma. "He's a filmmaker who attracts me. Whether Rangeela or Satya, he creates his own style and all of us down South have been influenced by his craft. We both wanted to work together and when this opportunity came alone, I wanted to do it," says the actor, who is married to actress Jyothika, who one will remember was seen years ago in Priyadarshan's Doli Saja Ke Rakhna. Today, they are a much adored couple staying in Chennai, with their little daughter.

The big question was also about Suriya learning Hindi. "I don't know much Hindi, but Ramu sir assured me that it wouldn't be a problem because my character of Suryanarayan Reddy is a South Indian and it would be normal for him to speak accented Hindi. I have dubbed for the film," he tells us.

Rakta Charitra 1 & 2 tracks the respective journeys of gangster-turned-politicians Paritala Ravi and Suryanarayan Reddy and their brutal rivalry. Part 1, starring Vivek Oberoi released last month and the film underperformed. Suriya is aware of this. "Yes, it didn't do very well, but I'm confident this is an engaging idea. It will be a very different film for the Tamil audience," he says, adding that the audience won't be at any great disadvantage for not watching the previous part. The first part of Rakta Charitra has been compressed into 20 minutes which will be seen in the second part.

Though Suriya never yearned to be a national star, he says he's nevertheless thrilled to get an all India release. He's also happy about bilinguals coming into the picture with Raavan and now Rakta Charitra. "Who wouldn't want a film that releases all over India and gets accepted? Also, if my film works in the South and earns a few more crores from other states, that would be great," he says.

The actor initially seemed more inclined towards edgy, sensitive films. He did Mani Ratnam's Ayitha Ezhuthu, that was simultaneously re-made in Hindi as Yuva. Then he had other films like Varanam Ayiram, Ghajini and Silluna Uru Kadhal. But off late he seems to be going all out with masala blockbusters, Ayan and Singham. The move has helped him gain supremacy at the boxoffice, but these films have been the run-of-the-mill, potboiler hits. Ask him about it and he says, "You know, I was sitting idle at home for 6 months after Varanam Ayiram. I just wasn't getting any script I liked. That's when I realised that I would have to choose the best from what I get. About Ayan, I thought the customs and cargo angle was relatively unexplored. I like the film's 'catch me if you can' tone. And the film was fairly well-researched an, so I felt it would offer the audience something new and exciting. As for Singham, it was an old commitment. I wasn't sure whether to do it, because I had played a cop in an earlier film, Kakka Kakka. But I eventually did it and the film was a hit," he says.
"When I sign a film, I like it to be a complete package, and offer a different experience to the audience each time. I don't mind whether the film is off beat or an entertainer. I can't cater to a small pocket of audience, I have to think about both my rural and urban audiences," he says, adding that he does care to keep his producers happy.

Tell him about contemporary Southern star, Vikram comment that Surya was earlier more in the Kamal Haasan mould doing edgy films while he was more like Rajinikant doing commercial fares like Kandasaamy, and how there seems to be a reversal with Surya turning to commercial cinema and Vikram doing a film like Raavanan. "Did he really say that? I'm not aware" Surya says. "There can be only one Kamal Haasan and Rajnikant and I cannot dream of being that. But I don't think Vikram will say that about me next year after he sees my line-up of films." The actor's next includes Murgadoss' next with Shruti Haasan, 7aam Arivu and another one with K V Anand (his Ayan director).

"Of course I care about my body of work," says Suriya, as we come to end of our interview. "I don't want them to be just Friday releases. I'd like them to be remembered for long. All films may not be up to the mark, but at least I'd like 75 per cent of my films to be very good." Reassuring words indeed from one of the most talented actors, who seems to have turned too boxoffice oriented in the last few years.

Film review: Guzaarish

2010-11-19T05:32:00.000-08:00

Director: Sanjay Leela Bhansali
Starring: Hrithik Roshan, Aishwarya Rai, Shernaz Patel, Rajat Kapoor, among other
Showing at: E-Square, Inox
Stars: **1/2

Stung by criticism for his last film Saawariya, one knew that Sanjay Leela Bhansali had immersed himself headlong into his next, Guzaarish, tackling a theme close to his heart - that of human suffering born out of extreme physical handicap. You sit back waiting to be taken through a memorable roller-coaster of emotions, assured in the knowledge that the director -whatever his other weaknesses -will never fail to pour all his energies and passion into his vision.
The emotion of pain is what drives Bhansali's masochistic universe, but in his operatic world, removed from reality, and too self-consciously dolled up, one feels a certain disconnect with his characters and their situations. At least his last Saawariya, with its theme of love and separation perhaps allowed an abstract, poetic representation of the feelings. But this otherworldiness in Guzaarish creates a gulf between the film and the audience, where you are never truly able to feel for the characters.

When the film starts, you see Ethan Mascarenhas (Hrithik Roshan), struggling with his life as a quadriplegic. A great magician at one time, Ethan's world crumbles when one of his tricks goes wrong and he's bed-ridden for life. It's been years now, and Ethan with all his troubles is carrying on well enough, when he suddenly announces that he no more wants to live and makes a plea for euthanasia.
To this bleak world, Bhansali brings a beautiful nurse, Sophia (Aishwarya Rai Bachchan) who has been serving Ethan for years now, and continues to do so with a protective, single-minded zeal. The other character to the mix is Devyani (Shernaz Patel), Ethan's best friend and lawyer -fighting his case. Together, they have a nice rhythm going and the film too moves fluidly. The first jerk in the plot is the unlikely entry of Omar Siddiqui (Aditya Roy Kapoor) as an apprentice. Kapoor, who was recently seen in Action Replay, brings too much of his yuppie-ness to the role, and his mocking tone and expression are altogether unappealing. When he's introduced, you think he would have a definite role to play in the proceedings, and some of his actions even suggest this. But like most characters, he's used merely as a prop in Bhansali's canvas.

The singular lack of an emotional arc - both in the growth of the characters and the narrative as a whole - is Guzaarish's biggest failing. Bhansali brings you to the third act directly, and goes headlong into a purging exercise. The script asserts that Sophia has been serving Ethan for 12 long years, and that he's lived the life of a quadriplegic with dignity and so on. But this emotional journey is never truly felt and Ethan's own trauma and why he wants to die, his motivations and so on, are sketchy at best. Bhansali doesn't let you invest in any of the other characters either. For example, Sophia is given a serviceable back story of a husband who beats her up (Makrand Deshpande -refreshing choice), but beyond that, you have no idea what this gorgeous woman, wearing flowing gowns and lovely stone earrings is doing with Ethan.
The tragic twists are all cliched, and there is no thought or idea that the film dealing with such a theme leaves behind. There are all the feel-good, pop spiritual messages peddled around, as one would expect from a dying protagonist.

Yet, expectedly, the film looks beautiful. There are moments of sheer magic, literally and otherwise, and Bhansali once again manages to extract superb performances from the leads. In spite of the limitations of the script, Hrithik Roshan is exceptional in his role of a man who lives life on his terms. It's a controlled, believable portrayal. Aishwarya Rai is more alluring than she has ever been, and it's only Bhansali who can get her to act in such an uninhabited, natural manner.

Overall, the film is not the profoundly emotional experience one might have hoped for. It's got some merits, but Bhansali doesn't quite touch the high notes.

Film review: Action Replay

2010-11-09T21:58:00.000-08:00

Comic collapse

Director: Vipul Amrutlal Shah
Starring: Akshay Kumar, Aishwarya Rai, Om Puri, Kirron Kher, Aditya Kapoor
Stars: *1/2

As the film opens and you see Akshay Kumar and Aishwarya Rai in hideous make-up, with the latter hamming it up as a shopaholic wife, you suspect this might not be an easy film to watch. And true enough, Action Replay gets progressively bad, and you rue about how much star power and money gets wasted on subjects that amount to zilch.

Heavily inspired from the Hollywood flick, Back To The Future, director Vipul Shah attempts a rom-com with a science fiction twist. But it fails sadly on both counts. As a science fiction, it simply isn’t convincing, and save for a few scenes, the comedy is not remotely funny. Vipul Shah’s own credentials as a director have been curiously mixed. He made the edgy Aakhen and then followed it up with a loud film like Waqt. He made a perfectly watchable Namaste London and then had a potboiler, Singh Is Kinng. His last London Dreams didn't do well, but it was not without potential. With Action Replay, he makes a film that is possibly his worst.

Bunty (newcomer Aditya Kapoor) is saddened to see his parents, Kishen and Mala (Akshay Kumar and Aishwarya Rai) bickering all the time. His girlfriend’s granddad happens to be a scientist (Randhir Kapoor), who is working on a time machine. Bunty uses this to go back in time to 1975 and meet his parents to set things right between them. He is shocked to see his father as a complete loser who is relegated to cooking and hence referred to as 'Kitchen' instead of Kishen. His mother, Mala is a tomboyish, gorgeous beauty. Both are indifferent to each other, but Bunty plays cupid. He gives Kishen a complete makeover, and offers him all the clever tips on how to make Mala fall in love with him.

Now, this film could have worked perfectly. But Vipul Shah ignores that even fantasies need to be grounded in reality and some theoretical plausibility needs to be established for the viewers to take a leap of faith. The maker is in a tearing hurry to get on with the film and heads straight to the lead pair’s antics, and hence all explanation is done away with. Randhir Kapoor looks bemused, as if he can't believe someone would think of casting him as a scientist. The Mumbai of the 70s is as shoddily done, with men walking all over in bell-bottoms and women dressed like Christmas trees. Forget any lived-in feeling to the sets, they look outright fake and tacky – even the plants and trees don't look natural in the film.

The film has plenty of flaws, but the gravest one is its appalling lack of attention to detail. When the screenplay itself is a dud, one could have at least expected to be charmed by the period look. But no such luck, because Shah invests little time or effort in it, and seems to have dumped the work on his dress designers and background composers, who go in for loud, literal choices to capture the 70s flavour. The comic drama itself is far from interesting. One has already seen Akshay playing the loser in one too many films and the ensuing drama — if it can be called that — is so limp, it seems to have been scribbled in a hurry on a piece of tissue paper. Except for a few scenes involving Kirron Kher and Om Puri, the rest of the comedy is puerile and on many occasions, tasteless even.

The film is par for the course for Akshay Kumar, but it is certainly an embarrassment for Aishwarya Rai, who not only finds herself in an extremely poor film, but her own performance is abysmal as well. Always a director's actress, Aishwarya can be ethereal and effective in the hands of an able filmmaker. Here, she is supercilious, pretentious and loud. In a comic drama, acting is all about reactions, but Aishwarya seems content performing her own part and exiting a frame, without even bothering to acknowledge or making eye contact with her co-stars in the same scene.

The other big downer is the music. Pritam has rarely given such forgettable music, but to be fair, nothing could have saved the film. The only chance Action Replay had, was if Vipul has chosen to use the time machine for himself and gone back and made a better film.

'I was outrightly rejected by Aamir'

2010-10-26T06:11:00.000-07:00

Pakhi, Abbas Tyrewala’s wife and now the actress of Jhootha Hi Sahi, tells Sandhya Iyer that she always desired to be an actress but Aamir had rejected her in a screen tes

Many would believe Pakhi, the writer and actress of the John Abraham starrer Jhootha Hi Sahi got her big break only because she happens to be the pretty wife of Abbas Tyrewala. Of course that’s not entirely wrong, but not too many know that Pakhi always desired to be a heroine. She was a model to begin with, with aspirations to make it to the big screen. She even screen-tested for the Manjiri Phadnis part in Jaane Tu ...Ya Jaane Naa, and got outright rejected by Aamir Khan. “It was a terrible blow to me, because I hold him in such high esteem. He’s been my idol. I broke down completely and really believed I didn’t have it in me, precisely because it was someone like Aamir who made that call. Now I just hope he sees Jhootha Hi Sahi and if he says I’m okay in it, that will mean a lot to me,” she says emotionally.

In spite of Aamir’s rejection, Abbas took to her and asked her to assist him with the casting, “And he really demands out of you. He didn’t want the same faces one sees in television and ads. He expected me to really find people,” she says. And as one knows, the fresh casting of the film was one of the prime reasons why Jaane Tu.. came in for such enormous appreciation.

The couple also got married in the course of the film, and the spunky Pakhi on her part, started work on a script that Abbas could film immediately after Jaane Tu... Briefly, Jhootha Hi Sahi traces the friendship (and then love) between Sid and Mishka which is forged over the phone. In order to impress her though, Sid makes up several lies which to his friends are amusingly unbelievable. Caught in the web of lies, the lives of the couple go through a series of dramatic turns. The supporting cast includes actors Raghu Ram, Manasi Scott and Anaitha Nair. R Madhavan is also said to feature in the film in a cameo role.

Pakhi says the couple had several disagrements during the scripting stage, but none whatsoever during their long shooting schedule in London for the film. “Looking at the way we fought, most thought our marriage wouldn’t last. But in the end, it all came together well,” she says.

Incidentally, it was her co-star John Abraham, who heavily recommended her for this film, she says. “Abbas was apprehensive. But John liked the way I narrrated the parts and he told Abbas, ‘If you are anyway looking for a newcomer to play the part, then why not Pakhi?’ And it is true. The role does require someone with no star baggage. Abbas thought about it and finally I was cast,” she says.

The experience of working on the film was unbelievable, says Pakhi. “It’s a great feeling to be among people who want the best for you and are a constant source of support. John is incredibly generous actor, who really makes sure that his co-star is comfortable, giving his/her best. It was really unforgetable,” she gushes.

Releasing on October 22 and having music by A R Rahman (which incidentally hasn't caught on all that much), the film is a labour of love, and should be an effort to watch out for.

Review: Jhootha Hi Sahi

2010-10-25T06:50:00.000-07:00

Director: Abbas Tyrewala

Starring: John Abraham, Pakhi Tyrewala, Raghu Ram, Mansi Scott, Anaitha Nair, Nandana Sen and Alishka Vardhe

Rating: * *

In today’s technology-driven world, love blossoming on the net or the phone, without the two people actually meeting, is an extremely plausible scenario and throws up several possibilities. Jhootha Hi Sahi starts on such an interesting premise, but gets progressively banal and pointless, with one never really being able to make a connection with the lead pair. Just like Abbas Tyrewala’s debut hit, Jaane Tu...Ya Jaane Naa, there are plenty of cameos and some decent punchlines. The whole setting is like a American sit com, with a gang of friends, token gays and so on. There are sporadic moments of good fun, but quite often many of these scenes also come out looking awkward and stagy. For example, John lives with a Pakistani brother and sister duo (Raghu Ram and Alishka Vardhe) whose conscious use of ‘tauba’ and ‘hai allah’ seem so obvious and forced. To be fair, even Jaane Tu...suffered from some of these problems, and yet sustained because there was a semblance of charm and innocence to the relationship of the lead young couple. That is simply not the case here, which makes the story a bit of a lost cause very early on.

Sid (John Abraham) is a nerdy book-store owner, whose phone number gets accidentally mixed up with that of a suicide hotline. One of the callers is Mishka (Pakhi), who in a fragile state opens up to Sid, thinking of him as a counsellor. The script never explains why these two should like each other so much in such quick time, but what you see next is Mishka falling in love with her phone pal and Sid on his part realises that he is not happy with his current girlfriend (Mansi Scott). Sid recognises Mishka in his book store and falls head over heels in love, but feels reluctant to reveal his real self. So he meets her as Sid, and keeps talking to her as her phone pal also. There are some other sub plots, one including a pregnant Alishka, who for some reason refuses to marry her boyfriend, who is also the father of her child. He pursues her almost to nauseating levels, and as an audience one has no idea what is going on between these two. The other more funny plot involves Raghu Ram and Mansi Scott and their love-hate relationship.

Pakhi, as the lead actress and writer of Jhootha Hi Sahi, lets down the film on both counts. It’s not so much of a problem that she has three men in her life at one point (the two Johns and R Madhavan in a cameo), but Pakhi isn’t able to convey these emotions at all and not once do you get into the head of her character. The fact that her part is the pivot does not help at all. The role required someone younger, vulnerable and alluring. Pakhi is not any of that. Also, her being Abbas Tyrewala’s wife could have something to do with it, but the filmmaker shows almost every male in the film to be in love with her. And this comes across as grossly exaggerated, because there’s nothing to her character or the way she plays it that seems attractive. In fact, the other women (Mansi Scott and Alishka) play their parts with far more spirit and chutzpah.

The other big let down is A R Rahman’s music, that is as listless as it comes.

John Abraham is sincere, the other supporting cast is equally good. However, the film just doesn’t come together as a whole, and in the end, Jhootha Hi Sahi ends up being quite lame.

Review: Aakrosh

2010-10-17T08:03:00.000-07:00

Director: Priyadarshan

Starring: Ajay Devgn, Akshaye Khanna, Bipasha Basu, Paresh Rawal, Reema Sen

Rating: * * 1/2

The problem with director Priyadarshan’s recent films is that though they’ve seldom been outrightly bad, they’ve also stopped being interesting altogether. Like a practised old hand who has a certain proficiency, but too fatigued to try anything new, Priyan clearly has been making Hindi films out of habit for a while. Whether Billu or De Dana Dan or Bum Bumm Bole, all have been passable at best.His latest, Aakrosh is the most serious film Priyan has attempted in a while. And thankfully, the maker has opted for some fresh faces. Also, unlike what he is notorious for, Priyan has chosen an authentic location this time, and not tried to pass off some place in South India as a crime-ridden North Indian town. The setting is real, and cinematographer S Tirru captures the Hindi heartland well, adding the requisite atmospheric depth and texture to the narrative. The other highlight is to see Akshaye Khanna and Ajay Devgn teaming up once again after Deewangi years ago. The script itself does not allow anything spectacular to emerge out of this pairing, but these two talented actors at least ensure that the proceedings don’t dip too much.

The story is heavily inspired from the Oscar nominated, Mississippi Burning, which was about two FBI officers who go to investigate a case involving the disappearance of some civil rights activists. A hard-hitting drama, it captured up close the issue of racism and the tragic plight of African-Americans. In Aakrosh, the issue of racism has been turned into casteism that has led to several appalling incidents like honour killing in places like UP and Bihar. It’s not a bad subject to adapt, and for some time, the film stays on course. But too many filmy flourishes with loud scenes and unidimensional characters dilute the realistic tone and essential seriousness of the subject.

Siddharth Chaturvedi (Akshaye Khanna) and Pratap Kumar (Devgn) are two CBI officers given the charge of investigating a case, wherein three medical students have gone missing from Delhi. Both land up in a lawless North-Indian town, infested with goons and corrupt policemen. The chief perpetrator here is Ajatshatru Singh (Paresh Rawal). He does not co-operate with the CBI officers, and along with a local rogue group, tries to derail the investigation at every point. The whole system seems hand in glove, and both Siddharth and Pratap have several narrow escapes. There’s an inane plot involving Bipasha Basu, as Paresh Rawal’s wife, who gets slapped and kicked around by him. Then in a flashback, you see her with Devgn wearing skimpy outfits. The sub-plot makes no sense, and Bipasha is painfully unconvincing in her two bit role.

There are sporadic moments of thrill and drama, and the dialogues are good. Ajay Devgn and Akshaye Khanna look fresh and give their best shot. Yet, the narrative is neither layered nor incisive. There is a general lack of subtlety that takes away from the credibility of the proceedings. The policemen are not just inept and corrupt — they are also murderers and womanisers. Ditto with the local politicians. There’s not even a good-natured quirk in any of them to distract from their jet black characterisation.

In the end, the film looks a bit under researched and unimaginative.

The title is borrowed from the Govind Nihilani directed, Om Puri starrer that was one of the most grim films of the art film movement in the ’80s. If Priyan’s Aakrosh hoped to be anything like that, it’s obviously not. However, for those who don’t mind actioners, steeped in over-the-top drama, it’s not a bad deal either.

Do Dooni Chaar

2010-10-08T05:24:00.000-07:00

Starring: Rishi Kapoor, Neetu Singh, Aditi Vasudev and Archit Krishna
Director: Habib Faisal
Showing at: E-Square, Inox
Stars: ***1/2

You can count on this

Do Dooni Chaar is perhaps the next best thing if you're a fan of Dibakar Banerjee directed Khosla Ka Ghosla. It's probably not as witty or sharp, but the film certainly has its heart in the right place, and is a small gem that delivers a worthy message, without being overly preachy. The teaching profession - for all the token nobility it carries - has always been a low-paying and often thankless job. Of course, the last few years have seen a drastic improvement in these pay scales, but still Do Dooni Chaar emphasis this point further about the dejection felt by teachers at neither getting the respect due to them, nor being compensated adequately.

Duggal (Rishi Kapoor) is a middle-class man in Delhi who has a family consisting of an understanding wife, Kusum (Neetu Singh) and two teenage children (Aditi Vasudev and Archit Krishna). They live in a one-bedroom flat and have all the aspirations that today's generation has. Unfortunately, they do not have enough resources and each penny has to be accounted for. Duggal has an old scooter, which is a source of embarassment to his family. A mini crisis occurs when Duggal's sister pleads with him to buy a car or at least hire one during her daughter's wedding to keep her 'izzat'. Severely complexed about her position at her inlaws' due to her modest family background, she is overjoyed when Duggal and family do manage to arrive at the venue with a car (a borrowed one from a neighbour). But more problems come calling, and the rest of the film is about the family's struggle to come up with finances to buy their own car.

The film is engaging throughout and has no rough edges at all. The mood and setting is perfectly captured. Not all plot points are equally clever, but there's an understated charm to the scenes and the performances - even by actors with bit scenes - are all endearingly real. Of course, the star holding it all together is Rishi Kapoor, who delivers a sincere, heart-felt performance. Over the years, the actor has been so solid with his acts, that one would think it impossible for him to surprise now. Having played a rich man in a majority of his films, and his stature as an actor, one would perhaps have doubts about him playing a struggling, middle-class man that convincing. But the actor effortlessly slips into the character of a well-meaning, hard-working Maths teacher, who can't help but feel downcast at seeing the world move ahead of him and all the students he taught earning in lakhs, while he continues to languish where he was.
The film also marks the comeback of Neetu Singh, who made a terrific pair with Rishi Kapoor, until she married him and gave up her career to look after house and the children. The director weaves these real-life similarities into the film. So in the film Kusum talks about how they would have been better off if he hadn't made her quit her job as a librarian. Again, Duggal's essentially nervous nature and inability to handle pressure is offset by Kusum's great presense of mind.
Neetu Singh is decent, though she's never quite reaches her husband's level of performance. Her long sabatical from acting make her seem mildly uncomfortable in the role of a middle-class housewife speaking accented Hindi. Yet, it feels nice to see both husband and wife on screen together and there some lovely, tender moments that the two share in the film.
Do Dooni Chaar has its flaws, in the sense, it's not really concinging when a moral issue is made about their son making some quick bucks through cricket bettting, but the family seems game to accept the money that a student offers in return for marks. But for most part, Do Dooni Chaar stays very identifiable in capturing middle-class aspirations and their oscillating emotions with every small change in fortune.
An admirable effort from Habib Faisal and producers Walt Disney and Arindum Choudhury, and a film that 'drives' home its point with elan.

Review: Robot/Enthiran

2010-10-08T05:12:00.000-07:00

Not quite the ‘Rajni’ experience

Director: Shankar

Starring: Rajnikanth, Aishwarya Rai, Danny Denzongppa

Rating: * *

Considering Rajni’s demi-god status down South and his colossal fan following, one has long stopped looking for a story in his films. It is just the experience of watching him that makes it worthwhile, his million plus fans will tell you. Even going with this knowledge, his latest, the mega budgeted Enthiran/Robot is an extremely lacklustre affair, with poor music from A R Rahman and an overdose of technology that gets tedious to watch after a point.

Dr Vaseegaran aka Vashi (Rajnikanth) is a scientist, who spends several years of research in creating a robot called Chitti with a face like his. The robot can perform several tasks, is highly accomplished and has knowledge of all arts and sciences. The only thing he lacks is human emotions. When the time comes to evaluate the robot before a panel, Vashi’s ex prof and rival Dr Borah (Danny Denzongppa) is consumed with jealously at his own failed attempts, and rejects the model on grounds that Chitti does not have human sentiments and therefore can be a threat. So Vashi reworks on his robot and gives him human qualities of love and hate. But it creates a confusion, as Chitti starts to love Vashi’s beautiful girlfriend, Sana (Aishwarya Rai). This causes complications, with Vashi ending up dismantling Chitti. Borah, under pressure to deliver a robot to a foreign company desperately looks out for Chitti and gives him destructive tools. Chitti — now a man with sinister intentions — models many other robots that look like him and builds an army of iron men. It’s left now to Vashi to find his own creation and put an end to his evil deeds.

Knowing how much money has gone into making the film and the unprecedented hype associated with it, the makers probably wanted to ensure there was enough and more of Rajni. So not only is the superstar in a double role, millions of his prototypes have been created. The problem with such splintering is that you never know whom to root for really. Is it Vashi — the creator, a man who gets jealous of his creation, or the robot Chitti — who turns evil? The film has too many Rajnis walking around, as if providing the audience with a wish-fulfillment where each can take one of them home.

Yet, the first half is somewhat watchable. There are some light moments between Chitti and Aishwarya, and a few of the thrills — though not very ingenious — that keep you at least midly interested. But boredom sets in, in the second half, as the storyline takes a predictable turn where the robot falls in love with his creator’s girlfriend. It’s not so much the plot that is to blame, as much as the insipid treatment and screenplay. The Tamil dialogues are just about passable — there’s none of the chutzpah and humour you associate with a Rajni film, and the romance is altogether serviceable.

In a film about robots, real emotions actually go missing and what one gets is a synthetic film, where one doesn’t feel like one has experienced a Rajni film. The sheen and setting of the film was almost surely going to take away a little from the rawness and fun that has come to be the hallmark of all of the superstar’s movies, but even otherwise, Enthiran is not even a good sci-fi film. Even fantasies must have a semblance of truth to it to be effective, and especially with sci-fi, one has to imagine the happenings in the realm of the probable. The film doesn’t quite achieve that and becomes too much about nuts and bolts and mindless action.

The songs by A R Rahman additionally are a huge disappointment, that lowers the fun quotient considerably.

As for the performances, Rajni will be liked and adored by his fans again, but they might miss his usual histrionics, given he’s playing a robot here. Aishwarya is simply the romantic interest, and has nothing comparable to the challenging role she had in Raavanan.

All in all, an average fare, with a story that defies common sense at several points, and never quite hits the high notes in terms of entertainment.

Review Dabangg

2010-09-10T06:03:00.000-07:00

As stylish and as shallow

Dabangg
Director: Abhinav Kashyap
Starring: Salman Khan, Sonakshi Sinha, Sonu Sood, Vinod Khanna, Dimple Kapadia and Arbaaz Khan
Stars: **1/2

If you loved Wanted and can't get enough of Salman Khan, then Dabangg is totally up your alley. If not, it isn't easy to feel charitable towards a film that has nothing by way of substance and very self-consciously relies on its lead star's appeal. Salman, who found some measure of success with his macho act in Wanted, goes the full hog here, playing his Chulbul Pandey in an excessively stylised manner, derived from the Rajnikath school of acting. Salman can't claim to have half of Rajni's charisma, but he has a kind of roguish charm in real life that gets successfully transferred on screen. There is not one moment in Dabangg where Salman isn't trying to play to the gallery, and even though you see great promise in his role in the beginning - a Quixotic self-confessed Robin Hood - you realise there is nothing beyond the surface showiness. In many ways, his Veer character was a more wholesome and well-etched part.

Chulbul Pandey (Salman Khan) grows up disgruntled with his step-father, Prajapati (Vinod Khanna) and half brother, Makhi (Arbaaz Khan), who he believes treat him unfairly. His mother (Dimple Kapadia) tries to make him see sense, but his feeling of disdain remains. Sharp tongued Chulbul Pandey grows up to be a police inspector and is openly corrupt. He soon becomes a thorn in the eye of a political youth leader (Sonu Sood), who tries to kill him on a couple of occasions. Almost out of nowhere, Chulbul sees a pretty girl (Sonakshi Sinha) in his neighbourhood and starts wooing her. She has a drunken father (Mahesh Manjrekar) who she attends to and does pottery on the side. Meanwhile, Chulbul's uneasy equation with his father and brother continues, leading to several ups and downs.

The problem with Dabangg is that it is so consumed with trying to evoke claps and whistles for every scene that it ceases to be anything serious. All the three main plots, involving Salman with Sonu Sood, Sonakshi and Arbaaz respectively are utterly lame and shallow. The romance has no spark, and the love story, much like Sonakshi's role itself, is a serviceable one. You don't feel for any of these characters, and are never moved at any point in the film. The lack of a strong emotional core is the biggest weakness of Dabangg. The only scenes that do touch a chord are the ones with Salman and Dimple. Chulbul's affection for his mother is an understated, heart-felt one.

There's also a singular lack of intelligence in the script. Incited by on Sonu Sood, Arbaaz takes a box of mangoes into the Home Minister's residence, which are actually explosives. Is it so easy to enter with bombs in a high security zone?

Salman looks his best and fittest in Dabangg, the film has been shot well, and the setting looks ripe with possibilities - it takes the essence of Southern masala dramas and implants it in the North Indian soil.
Moreover, Sajid-Wajid's music is truly explosive. Whenever the lack-luster screenplay bring about a sense of ennui, the music infuses energy back into the film. Whether it is Tere Mast Mast Do Nain or the raunchy Munni Badnaam Huyi, Dabangg would've faced a truly uphill task without its chart-busting music.
With so many pluses, all the makers needed to do was invest in a decent story-line, but they choose to go with the most insipid of plots. You wait for some real drama to kick start, but nothing happens.

For all its shallowness, the film will probably appeal to those who are not looking for anything more than time-pass entertainment. For Salman fans, who like his style and humour, Dabangg is a good watch. For the rest, it's mostly a forgettable fare.

Review: Aashayein

2010-09-05T22:23:00.000-07:00

There’s hope for Kukunoor
Sandhya Iyer

Director: Nagesh Kukunoor
Starring: John Abraham, Anaitha Nair, Sohan Sehgal, Girish Karnad
Stars: **1/2

Nagesh Kuknoor may have stumbled badly with his last two films, 8 X 10 Tasveer and Bombay To Bangkok, but with Aashayein you see many of the qualities that this chemical engineer-turned-filmmaker exhibited in some of his better films. Which is why, it is a pity that the film got so shabbily treated due to disagreements between producers Percept and distributors Reliance Big Pictures. It has been cursorily released without any publicity, and it seems quite unfair to a decent enough film.

Now, almost all of Kukunoor’s past work, whether Hyderabad Blues, Dor, Rockford, Teen Deewarein have been interesting, well-meaning concepts that caught your attention primarily for certain compelling scenes, wonderful performances and excellent dialogues, despite the lack of cinematic novelty. Self-confessedly, the director makes wordy films, and it’s no different with Aashayein.

The film, even though it falls short in the end, and does not live up to the potential of the subject, boasts of fine performances, especially from its leads John Abraham and Anaitha Nair (Aalia Bose of Chak De! India). It is their bitter-sweet relationship that forms the centerpiece of the film, and ultimately makes Aashayein worth a watch.

Rahul (John Abraham) is a compulsive gambler, who throws a party to announce his engagement to his girl-friend, Nafisa (Sonal Sehgal). He faints that night, and soon discovers he is afflicted with a life-threatening cancer. Sonal is heart-broken, but has every plan to stick by her boyfriend. She even insists they get married. At a time when there is so much medical advancement, some more explanation should have gone into the illness, and why Rahul’s case is not treatable and so on, rather than painting the whole disease with broad, outdated strokes.

So our hero has only three months to live. And just so that we don’t think Kukunoor is copying Anand, he even includes some clippings from the Hrishikesh Mukherjee film later on. But he cleverly uses it for a moment where two characters make light of their illnesses, boasting of how their disease has the longer technical name than Rajesh Khanna’s.

Not wanting to feel miserable anymore, Rahul escapes to a resort-like wellness clinic in a different city, where people aflicted with terminal illnesses spend their last days. You are introduced to the different inmates, and this is where the film really picks up and becomes interesting. There is Girish Karnad as a patient who has lost his larynx, and talks using his food pipe. Shwaas kid Ashwin Chitale, plays a boy called Govinda — a comic book addict — who enthralls people with fantastical tales which closely seem to mirror their own lives and offer them solutions. Farida Jalal, dressed in immaculate Kanjivaram sarees, plays an Aids victim. While it’s clear that Kukunoor deliberately makes her so unlikely a patient — to stress on how we have preconceived notions about the disease — Jalal is the only character who does not seem convincing enough. There’s no pain or emotions that flit through her face. The absolute dynamite performance though is from Anaitha Nair as the 17-year-old Padma. She has an acidic tongue, but her twinkling eyes and broad smile suggest how she’s trying hard to ward off the bitterness that is growing inside her. There are wonderfully touching moments involving her and Rahul, and each one is a gem. The other sub-plot where Rahul imagines himself to be Indiana Jones and lives his own fantasy is interesting, intending to show how life is an ongoing adventure. But the script peters out towards the end, and you are left with the feeling of being served an undercooked meal that had all the right ingredients.

The performances are all uniformly praise-worthy. John Abraham is the pick of the lot, and delivers a sincere, heart-felt performance. For the first time probably, the actor in him takes over completely, and Kukunoor ought to be given credit for it. Whether Aashayein does well or not, John is sure to benefit from the film.

Review: Lafangey Parindey

2010-08-22T05:40:00.001-07:00

Director: Pradeep Sarkar
Starring: Deepika Padukone, Neil Nitin Mukesh, Piyush Mishra, Kay Kay Menon
Rating: **1/2

Much of Lafangey Parindey suffers from the same problem that the director’s last film, Laga Chunri Mein Daag had. A seemingly serious subject, with plenty of dramatic and life-altering events is treated in fast-forward mode, with no real character and narrative build up. You are cursorily introduced to a Mumbai chawl, where Nandu (Neil Nitin Mukesh) fights blind-folded every Friday for local goon Usman bhai (a superb Piyush Mishra). He is called ‘One shot Nandu’, because that is all it takes him to demolish his opponent. Anna (Kay Kay Menon in a guest appearance) works closely with Usman, and tries to keep Nandu away from the crime scene. However, on Usman’s prodding Nandu agrees to participate in a shoot-out, which goes all wrong. Anna is shot dead, and in the same incident Nandu ends up running over a girl, who strangely turns blind!

The girl in question is Pinki (Deepika Padukone), an aspiring dancer and ace skater from his chawl. An ambitious go-getter, she’s always desired to win a reality talent show that would enable her to change her fate (Rab Ne..?) Feeling guilty, Nandu offers to help Pinki, and soon falls for her. The rest of the film hinges on the predictable question of how Pinki will react when she knows the truth.
The thing you instantly notice is the overuse of the tapori lingo, and some crude lines. Looks like Yash Raj decided to take a break from their ultra-sanitised dialogues for this one.

The film has a bit from both Ghulam and Tum Bin in terms of story. There is an emotional core to this film, which could have been explored better. The narrative never seems to pause enough to allow the characters to reflect on their actions and feelings. This is one of the main failings of the film, which otherwise had some potential. For instance, Deepika’s accident, her entering into coma, and quickly again wanting to participate in the reality competition is all too sudden.
The other weakness is the performance of Neil Nitin Mukesh. He lets himself get buried into the setting, and his act is so reticent and expressions so limited, you don’t know what to make of his performance really. Sure, he has the appeal of a gentle, well-meaning man, which is important for the character, but one really wishes he had pitched his character a bit more strongly. His lack of expressions doesn’t sufficiently convey his emotions, especially ones where he starts to fall in love with Deepika.

On the plus side, the film’s treatment by Sarkar feels quite fresh. Unlike Laaga...which seemed quite superficial, Lafangey Parindey has more heart. The narrative takes the predictable twists and turns, but the premise of the Pinki-Nandu relationship is interesting enough to keep you mildly curious.
Deepika Padukone is easily the star-actor here, and it’s her character that holds the film together. Tomboyish and embodying a never-die-spirit, the actress has certainly improved compared to her previous films and she brings a level of believability to her character.

The other wonderful performance is from Piyush Mishra, and one has to applaud the writers for making him a flesh and blood villain. His last interaction with Nandu where he explains his point of view is especially a gem.
As it stands, Lafangey Parindey is a decent watch, but it feels like a film comprising only of highlights. It’s like a bird which sporadically flutters its wings, but never quite takes flight.

Review: Peepli Live

2010-08-13T07:22:00.000-07:00

Director: Anusha Rizvi
Starring: Omkar Das Manikpuri, Raghubir Yadav, Nawazuddin Siddiqui, Shalini Vatsa, Farrukh Jaffer and Malaika Shenoy, Vishal O Sharma
Stars: ***

Aamir Khan may be putting all his weight behind Peepli (Live) and making a Gulliver out of a Lilliput, but it's important to see this as debutante director Anusha Rizvi venture more than anyone else's. Prior to this, Rizvi was working as a journalist for NDTV, and the script seems to be born out of her on-the-job observations. Because even though the film's central theme is the relevant and burning issue of farmers' suicide and the expanding divide between villages and urban India - Rizvi's focus is primarily on the TRP-driven electronic media, and the limits they can cross! This is a world Rizvi knows and understands well, having been privy to it. The satire is almost entirely targetted at the media, which makes Peepli (Live) a competently and clevely made film, but not terribly fresh or new. Also, it doesn't cover enough in its ambit to qualify as a really powerful satire.

Brothers Natha (Omkar Das Manikpuri) and Raghubir Yadav (Budhia) are in a helpless state after losing their land. The local administrators are portrayed as callous louts, who laugh at these two farmers when they approach them for help. A half-baked rural legend about how the government gives compensation of one lakh to the families of famers committing suicide reaches their ears, and it's decided that Natha should die. The news gets leaked and a media circus ensues. Meanwhile, the politicos have their own private scores to settle and the Natha story is used as a pawn in the process.

There are wonderful touches of humour, the dialogues remain constantly crisp and entertaining, sparking with colloquial wit. The references and nuances are all part of a well-reaserched, intelligent script. Rizvi understands the media, its compulsions and motivations, and portrays it very effectively. The characters of Malaika Shenoy (Nandita) and Deepak (Vishal O Sharma - fabulous!), represent the elitist English and desi Hindi channels respectively, and how there is so little to choose between them in terms of their aims. Similarly, the politicians are portrayed as self-serving and manipulative. All this is done with a certain flair, which makes it feel less predictable. In all the madness that goes on, you see a nation without a sense of direction or focus, and where the urban world has started looking upon its villages as distant 'neverlands' and Natha as an exotic creature. All these points hit home and the film has enough moments to keep you interested.

However, one is oddly detached from the story, because Rizvi's target remains the media and politicians, and no one else. The urban-rural divide could have better explored, with more characters from both sides. Also, the film - even if it makes its points well - it doesn't have anything very new to say. The degenerating nature of politics and media is well-known to everyone, so Rizvi is merely stating the obvious.

Besides the feeling of deja-vu, the film starts to seem repetitive after a point. Afterthe premise is established, and you're amused for a while, you sense a strain in the narrative, as Rizvi fills the space with gags (they are all funny of course).

Peepli Live is cinema verite, and offers a slice of today's India. The film is treated like a semi-documentary, and is a far cry from the escapist Bollywood cinema one has got used to. In a bold ending, it does not allow the audience to 'feel-good' and leaves you with the uneasy feeling of having seen things in its bare, raw form.
At a time when hardly any films are made about our village - where 60 cent of Indians reside - Peepli (Live) must be commended for focussing on it. It does not provide any new insights or solutions, but it's a film that will hopefully evoke discussions on various levels.

Interview: Cyrus Sahukar

2010-08-11T22:42:00.000-07:00

Cyrus Sahukar, whose impressive performance in Aisha has come in for much praise, talks to Sandhya Iyer about his transition from hosting to acting, among many other things

Cyrus Sahukar, the man known for his comic acts and spoofs on MTV, made a cursory appearance in two films, Rang De Basanti and Delhi 6. They were itsy-bitsy roles, and one didn’t get to see anything of him as an actor. However, in Aisha, he springs a pleasant surprise, bringing a distinct sense of originality and plausibility to his character. Cyrus is obviously happy with the praise that is pouring in. “Many important people have noticed my performance. Karan Johar tweeted about it — that felt nice. The reviews have all been good to me,” he says, enthusiastically.

Cyrus plays a nouveau-riche guy called Randhir Gambhir, who is constantly at the receiving end of Aisha and her best friend, Pinky’s jokes. Yet, things take an unexpected turn, when Pinky falls for him in a love-hate scenario.

“Randhir represents a very interesting demographic in India today — there are many youngsters who hail from small-time business families. Over the years, their shops have grown into chains, and suddenly more money has started pouring in for them. The youngsters get good education, but their family background remains mostly conservative. So they feel a bit conscious mixing in the company of the affluent and classy. And yet, they want to desperately ‘fit in’. If you notice, my character, Randhir Gambhir always dresses up in ‘sets’ — like a mannequin, because he does not know how to mix fashion,” says Cyrus, explaining the many things that went into preparing for the role.

The performance could have easily ended up looking bafoonish, but the young actor has lent the role just the right amount of simplicity and honesty, that makes his character quite likable in the end. “What I understood about Randhir is that he’s a pure, clean guy — not cynical and jaded. Initially, I wondered how I would play him. I used to go to actor Deepak Dobriyal’s house to understand my character better. Then I came across this lovely line from Oscar Wilde — ‘All bad poetry springs from genuine emotion’ — that gave me an idea about approaching the part,” he says.

Cyrus recollects Anil Kapoor giving some inputs as well. “That scene where Pinky and Aisha are having a fight and I excuse myself saying, ‘I’m going to the toilet’ — that was Anil Kapoor’s idea. That was also my first scene in the film. Initially, I was supposed to get all upset about Aisha’s statements and walk out in a huff. But Anil said, ‘He’s a light-hearted person. He would rather want to run away from the situation where two women are fighting.’ he said. I played it that way,” Cyrus tells us about the scene that is evoking the maximum chuckles in theatres.

And how difficult is to be an actor after being a successful anchor for television? “It is extremely tough to break out. When you are hosting, you are paid to be yourself. With acting, you are doing the opposite — you have to be your character. I’ve had a strange career so far. I started with radio and then got into hosting for television when I was 18. I did the Simi Garewal and Taare Zameen Par spoof. It was around that time that I got a call from Rakeysh Mehra to play a small role in Rang De Basanti. Then later, he wanted me for Delhi 6. I enjoyed playing a bit of a sleaze in that film. Rhea Kapoor and Sonam liked me there, and so approached me for Aisha,” he says about his journey so far.

Even though Randhir is Cyrus’ meatiest role in Bollywood so far, he says, he won’t be giving up on hosting and writing. “I want to create my own content, which I am doing for MTV by way of a mockumentary series. It will be on the lines of Borat and Office. In any case, at this moment, I want to have fun without thinking about the medium,” he says.
Ask him about the rumours linking him up with Sonam, and he elaborates without reserve, “We are good friends, but hardly ‘everyday hang-out buddies’. We had a Delhi 6 reunion sometime back, and that is when we got linked next day. There is nothing to be embarrassed about dating Sonam — she's gorgeous — and I would have admitted if it was true,” he says.

For now, we allow Cyrus to enjoy the success of his film and performance — both well-deserved.

'Thrilled with response to Aisha'

2010-08-08T07:24:00.001-07:00

Anil Kapoor and Sonam made for a beaming father-daughter team, as both expressed happiness over the reception for their new film, Aisha. Sandhya Iyer brings the spot report

In spite of mixed reviews for Aisha, Anil and Sonam were in an upbeat mood, as they came as celebrity guests for the finale of Zee TV's Dance India Dance L'il Masters, held at Balewadi Sports Complex on Saturday evening.
At a brief press meet at Hotel Sayaji, Sonam walked in looking resplendent in a maroon-gold sheer sari. “I am so happy with the response to Aisha,” she gushed. “You know, I’m not so much into boxoffice figures, but my brother follows it closely. That's his forte. In the morning, he woke me up, saying ‘Didi, these are the numbers, and they are awesome!' The reviews have all been nice to me,” she said, looking genuinely pleased at the turn of events.

Anil too played the part of a proud, supportive father, “Actors must not get into the business aspect of a film. Bas, apna kaam karo. It’s the job of the trade and media to convey numbers correctly. I was on the phone with the PVR CEO just before coming down and he was very excited about the collections. The film is doing encouraging business everywhere. It has done a total business of 9 crores gross worldwide on the first day, which is phenomenal for a niche film, meant for youngsters – they are all loving it! And that’s great for a film all about girls. I am really proud of Sonam,” he said.
Many believe Aisha was produced by their home banner as a mega-launch and showcase vehicle for Sonam, though she debuted with Saawariya. Anil, however shrugged this off, saying that a launch was never the idea, “Our co-producer PVR was interested because Sonam was in it. She was the main attraction for them. I’ve never done anything to launch Sonam and I say this honestly.”

When did Anil first think that Sonam had it in her to become an actress? “When I used to see her dancing as a kid at our family events – that is when I knew she would be in films. The party would be over, everyone would have left, and here, she would still continue dancing on stage all alone. We all thought she might want to grow up and act in films. Then she decided she didn’t want to be an actress. And then again, she wanted to be one,” he said, smiling.

Aisha is about a young rich heiress who has a penchant for match-making. But Anil has no such ideas for pretty daughter, and believes people must find their own life partners. “That’s the best thing. Only if one feels that they are making a totally wrong choice, must parents advice them that ‘hey, you’re not doing the right thing’
Later both came for the finale of Dance India Dance and enthusiastically took part in the proceedings. There was a lot of playful banter seen between the show’s grandmaster Mithun Chakraborty and Anil – who kept pulling each other’s leg. Anil was effortless on stage, throwing excellent impromptu comic punches. When the show's achor, Manish Paul (superbly entertaining) asked Anil what he felt about Sonam's success as a father, the actor protested in mock anger, “Kya tum! Why do you keep saying, ‘father' father'. You must say, Mr Kapoor, how do you feel about your film, Aisha, as a producer? Kya mein father lagta hoon!” He asked the audience the question, and the entire mass of crowd lustily cheered for him.

BOX

In a tightly fought contest, it was 11 year old Jeetu Moni who was declared winner of the immensely popular dance show on television. The Grand Finale, held in Pune at Balewadi marked the end of a thrilling dance journey for 16 bright kids from across the country, who dazzled screens with their performances week after week.

Film review: Aisha

2010-08-06T08:23:00.000-07:00

Fresh, but forgettable too
Director: Rajshree Ojha
Starring: Sonam Kapoor, Abhay Deol, Ira Dubey, Cyrus Sahukar, Arunoday Singh, Amruta Puri
Stars: **1/2

Hindi cinema, given its unique framework and form, has seldom lend itself easily to literary adaptations. But Jane Austen's novels - with their romantic appeal and lush characterisation have been a hot favourite with desi makers too. There was Rajiv Menon's Kandukondain Kandukondain, a wonderful adaptation of Sense And Sensibility in Tamil. As for the women - Austen's influence has been profound - there was Gurinder Chadha's curry musical, Bride & Prejudice, and now, there's Rajshree Ojha and Devika Bhagat who have adapted Emma for the screen.

Yet, it must be said that Austen novels, for all their wit and acute sense of characterisation, have never had much of a plot. This is not a problem for filmmakers in the West who adapt her novels in their pure form. The novels have enough highlights to keep it engaging, and the period appeal is massive. However, to adapt it, and that too for a desi audience, requires some work. So are the Aisha makers upto it? They seem on track for a while, and it tickles you to see an out an out chic flick being attempted in Hindi. A whole song is dedicated to L'oreal products!
However, the film runs out of ideas once the screenplay exhausts itself working around the wafer-thin plot.

Aisha (Sonam Kapoor) is rich, fashionable and giddy-headed. Her partner-in-crime is Pinky (Ira Dubey). And together they have a rollicking time - shopping, looking for frivolous pass-time, and teasing their 'too uncool for us' acquaintance, Randhir (Cyrus Sahukar). They come across Shefali (Amruta Puri), a bumbling, small-town girl, who is actively looking for a husband. Buoyed by the success of her previous match-making attempt, Aisha promptly takes her under her wings and promises to find her a suitable match. She tries to bring Randhir and Shefali closer, because she believes they would be right for each other. The plan does not work, and ends in an unexpected match. All this while, Aisha's family friend and relative, Arjun (Abhay Deol), is displeased with her match-making activities and admonishes her on several occasions.
The film realises that there aren't enough strands to work with, and hence introduces two NRI types - Druv (Arunoday)and a desi Angelina Jolie, Aarti (Lisa Haydon) --- each one meant to serve as rivals and 'supposed' love interests of Aisha and Arjun. But it starts getting predictable, and the second half is repetitive and long drawn. All this while, you could at least appreciate the understated, subtle treatment that Ohja gives to the narrative, but the last 30 minutes of the film goes haywire. Suddenly, everyone behaves out of character, and everything is spelled out loudly for the audience. There's no clear build-up to the events or characters, so many of the later outbursts by Arjun, Shefali and Pinky don't seem convincing enough. And the climax is just laughable.

The film is a great showcase for Sonam, who gets a meaty role to essay and looks like a million bucks. But her poor dialogue delivery again mars much of the effect. The bigger problem is that you never get into the head of her character. There's just a lot of surface acting going on. And since she's there in every frame, she fails to carry the audience along.

On the plus side is the peppy sound-track, the good-looking sets (lots of English-looking outdoors, floral curtains and frocks, curled hair). The Cyrus and Ira Dubey love-hate relationship and Amruta Puri's gawky act are the best things about the film. Abhay Deol has become something of a poster-boy for new age films, but his acting has rarely come in for much attention. Here, he shines and plays his supporting part effortlessly. Arunoday has a brief role, but he does well too.

The film's effect disappears faster than the taste of toffee in your mouth, but it's still better than many of the recent flicks one has seen. It has patches of understated humour(derived from a lot of American rom coms) and has the novelty and freshness of a desi chic-flick.

-Sandhya Iyer

'I've learnt you can never underestimate your audience'

2010-08-05T00:06:00.000-07:00

Parvin Dabbas, best known for his work in Monsoon Wedding and Khosla Ka Ghosla, is currently working on his directorial debut, Sahi Dhandhe, Galat Bande

Parvin Dabaas, the actor with a clipped firang accent, has been seen sparingly in films. And yet, he has two of the most popular and acclaimed films, Monsoon Wedding and Khosla Ka Ghosla to his credit. Now, the actor has turned his attention to his new film, Sahi Dhandhe, Galat Bande, which he is directing and also partially producing.

Ask him if filmmaking was always on his mind and he says, “Production was on my mind, but I hadn’t thought of direction. My idea has been to make films which I want to watch. Not the pop-corn entertainment. When I was writing the script, I knew how I wanted the film to be, so I took on the challenge of direction,” says the actor, who is married to Preeti Jangiani.

The film is about a gang of four friends (Parvin is one of them), who belong to a village on the outskirts of Delhi. The government wants a land vacated there, so as to facilitate an industrialist to build his factory. They want the protest of the farmers, who own the land, to be broken and entrust this job to the gang. The friends are torn between their desire to grab the fortune that awaits them and the demands of their conscience to help the farmers of the village they belong to. The film takes place in urban and rural Delhi and presents an image of a society stuck between a need for development and a government hungry for land. It also examines the media’s selfish and constant desire to see conflict.

Parvin says that though he spent a major part of his life in Toronto, and then went off to do an acting course in New York, he never lost touch with the village he was born in. And hence, the writing came naturally to him. “The village is called Kanjhawla and I stayed there as a kid. Even when we lived in Delhi, I used to go there quite often. It’s just one and half hour’s drive. Also, it’s not really a village with kachcha ghars. It is a modernish village actually. So it’s a subject I could very well relate to,” he says.

The film has actors like Anupam Kher, Yashpal Sharma, Neena Gupta and Sharat Saxena, among others. Yet, the fact that it’s a small film, with no A list stars is not worrying Parvin too much. “I am confident people will come and watch. It’s not a preachy film. And people are very smart, they can gauge a film from its promos — they don’t see recycled stuff. They want something fresh and interesting.”
Parvin’s past success in films like Khosla...and Monsoon Wedding has taught him to respect his audience. “When I did Khosla, people said, ‘Isme star nahin hai’ . They were laughing at the subject and title. But these films performed excellently. I never expected Monsoon Wedding to be such a big success. I’ve learnt you can never underestimate your audience. Too many people make too many assumptions about how a film should be,” he says.
He even quotes recent films, to stress how today’s audience has matured. “You had Udaan and Tere Bin Laden releasing a couple of weeks ago. Both films did well, compared to another film that released with stars in the same week. If my film does badly, it will be because it wasn’t good enough. I would never blame the audiences,” he says.

Now that he is interested in filmmaking, will he be putting acting on the back-burner? “I would like to explore both areas. I’ve already worked with top directors like Mira Nair, Dibakar Banerjee, Karan Johar, but there are many more filmmakers I want to work with. Time is on my side, and besides, acting involves less headache. I can just sit back,” he smiles.

The actor may have done a couple of memorable films, but he’s not been a very visible actor. And when he’s cast, it is mostly as an NRI or an urban high-flier. Isn’t he getting typecast? “It’s just that my films which became successful had me in those kind of roles. I played a different character in Via Darjeeling, where the guy was street-smart, not very clean-cut. But the film didn’t do too well, so it wasn’t noticed. But I hope to do a variety of roles,” says the actor, who was also seen in Maine Gandhi Ko Nahin mara and My Name Is Khan. Here’s hoping Parvin joins the growing list of promising new-age directors.
— Sandhya Iyer

Shefali Shah interview

2010-08-01T23:10:00.000-07:00

'I can be very critical with Vipul'

Vipul Shah and Shefali Shah have gone back to their first love - theatre. Vipul is producing the Hindi version of the landmark Marahi play, Dhyanimani, which will have Shefali in the lead. Sandhya Iyer speaks to the husband-wife duo about what makes the stage so special. Meanwhile, Shefali also speaks about her film career and why she's taking it easy.

Vipul Shah, who is a well-know producer-director in his own right, and Shefali Shah, who is probably one of the most underutilised actress of her generation, are coming together with their new play, the Hindi version of the landmark Marathi play, Dhyanimani. The husband and wife jodi started their careers from theatre, and then went on to find success in both television and films. This play marks their comeback to theatre after almost 10 years.
Most of Vipul Shah's early work was for the stage. And he's happy to be producing this play, which will have Shefali in the lead. "I know 14 years is a long time to be away from something like theatre. But I was always connected to it emotionally. And also in these 14 years I did not get an opportunity or time to do something in this field. But I am glad that I am going to be associated with theatre again. Dhyanimani is one of the most critically acclaimed plays from Marathi theatre. Also Shefali wanted to get back to theatre and I am glad that it is this play that marks both our comebacks to what we love,” says Shah.

Shefali, who was last seen in Karthik Calling Karthik and The Last Lear, is excited to be back on the stage, and believes the play will offer her one of the finest roles of her career. The play - to be directed by Chandrakant Kulkarni - will be ready by August, following which it will travel to different cities in India and abroad. Shefali says theatre gives her a different kind of high altogether, because it challenges her on every level. "It affords you none of the luxuries that you have when you do a film. You don't have retakes, no close-ups or silences. You have to hold the play together yourself and ensure that you don't lose the audiences' interest for a second. It pushes you to your limits. I find the whole process of rehersals very enriching," she says. "In theatre, you are banking on your voice --- there is no other option, so it tends to become verbose. When I do films, there are so many ways of expression - close-ups etc - that I tell my directors, 'don't me a single line to say' . Doing a play is very different from doing a film, " says the actress, who came into the limelight with her power-packed role in Satya.

Shefali has mostly played parts that have portrayed her as a strong, opiniated woman. One gets the idea that perhaps her real life persona shadows her characters. But the actress believes she always puts her characters before herself.
"I am a strong woman in a real life too - that is true - but I don't think I consciously model my characters on my own strengths and weaknesses. I have always believed that the play or the movie are above me. Lot of actors have this attitude that 'yeh mera scene hai, main phod doonga' - even if they are in the background, they will keep doing something to get noticed. They do not have the grace to give the other actors their space. I have always believed that any creative venture is a joint effort. I am willing to dissapear into the set, if need be. That was the beauty of Monsoon Wedding. Till the last bit, you didn't even know my character existed. Each actor was a supporting character and each one had their moment. I have got over the insecurity of proving that I am the best. I don't feel the need to outshine anyone. I want to be true to my role," says the actress, who will soon be appearing in a film with Rahul Bose, called Kuch Love Jaisa.
The play, yet untitled, is tipped to be a grand affair. "Like other plays, I don't see myself doing 10-12 shows of it every month. It won't be possible, given its scale. But it will travel a lot, and Vipul is putting all his expertise and resources to make sure it turns out great," she says.

Meanwhile, Shefali is excited about her next film, Kuch Love Jaisa opposite Rahul Bose, which first-timer Barnalee Shukla is directing and Vipul is producing. The actress is extremely gung-ho about the film. “"The character is my age. I have mostly played older characters. Here, she dresses and looks exactly the way I do in real life. She is goofy and funny. I am very eagerly looking foward to the film," she says.
However, Shefali denies that her husband is producing the film, only to showcase her talent. "Actually, Vipul was nowhere in the picture when I got the offer for this film. Barnalee came to me with the script, which I loved. She was looking for other producers at that point. I discussed this script with Vipul and he asked me 'who is the producer?' When I said, it's not decided, he asked me if he could make the film, if all the terms could be worked out. From some time, he too has been wanting to diversify his company and make cinema such as this. That's how it happened," she says.

Vipul Shah has been mostly associated with complete masala fares and pot-boilers, while she has consistently done more subtle and niche films like Gandhi My Father, The Last Lear and on. Does that mean their sensibilities are quite different from each others? "It's true I've done more off-the-road cinema and he's done masala films. But that doesn't undermine his work," she says firmly. "Vipul's films are a creative expression of his, but it involves such tremendous hard-work from everyone, that at the end of the day, the film has to work' He does not make indulgent cinema. If a director wants to do that, he must make home videos," she says, adding, "Out of the films he's made, I loved Namaste London, Aakhen. And London Dreams, even if it did not work at the box-office, I saw a definite growth in Vipul as a maker. He is a great combination of commerce and creativity."

Shefali says she gets involved in her husband's work and vice versa. "When he writes a script or comes across one, he gives it to me to read. Also, I am the first person who gets to hear the music for his films. And gets quite nervous, because he knows I can be extremely critical. He knows I'll rip it apart. But finally, it is his interpretation and he has to take a call on what he wants to make and how. On my part, whenever I get a film, I run it by him," she says.

The actress - being a successful producer-director's wife- has the luxury to refuse work, but she says she wouldn't have accepted sub-standard work anyway. "That's how I am. I give my 100 per cent to anything I accept," she says.

While Shefali has done quality work, she admits that the roles she would like to do don't come to her often. "Why would a director take me when he has the option to cast mainstream actresses, who are all dying to do parallel cinema? Look, at Chameli and Raajneeti. These were roles done by leading heroines. They are saleable, so I don't blame the makers. I do realise that I don't do enough work, but I have also come to terms with the fact that the kind of work I choose to do doesn't happen every day. so in the end I might not have 25-50 films to my credit, but I will have a few landmark films that will be remembered. I had a seven minute part in Satya, but it was worth doing every bit of it. I have done just five films, but all of them have been solid, credible work I really prefer to wait it out for that one good film, than take up work I don't want to do. I'm not prepared to leave my house and kids and my space for doing stuff I am not interested in," she says.

What's Tanvi upto these days?

2010-08-01T06:34:00.000-07:00

The beautiful Tanvi Azmi talks on why she's not doing enough acting work, and remembers her transition into the Azmi household after her marriage

The cherubic-faced Tanvi Azmi never fails to evoke fondness, even if she gave up films in her prime and did the disappearing act on television too. The actress, married to cinematographer, Baba Azmi was in the city for the book launch of Gouri Dange - who happens to be one of her oldest friends. Looking fresh, and younger by years, and dressed in a simple black-gold salvaar kameez, her kohl eyes sparkled as we wondered aloud about her absence from acting. One saw her last in a forgettable role in Delhi 6, but otherwise, she's been completely out of the film circuit. In between, she'd put on plenty of weight and didn't seem inclined to act. But looks like the actress is gung-ho about life once again.

About her disappearce in the last many years, she smiles acceptingly, "I know. Both sides of my family are completely tired of me. Shabana, in particular is very upset with me. I am such a fuss-pot you know. And to make matters worse, whenever we're watching some film, I blurt, 'Hey, I was supposed to do that role!, 'Hey, that role was offered to me' - that really irritates everyone. They're like 'Then why aren't you doing these roles?' I don't know what to say... mera dimaag kharab hai."

Remind her of how she is viewed as a tremendously underutilised actress and she twinkles back, "Good na... since I work less, people don't find out about my limitations. They keep thinking - 'she has something more to offer'"

The actress, who charmed audiences with her debut film, Pyaari Behna, fell in love and married the film's cinematagrapher, Baba (Shabana Azmi's brother), several years older than her. She was all of 21, and was entering an illustrious family, comprising of strong-minded and highly accomplished women like Shabana and Shaukat Azmi (Tanvi's mother-in-law). Was it a tough transition to make? "Yes, people felt I would be completely over-shadowed and over-powered by the women in the family. But that never happened really. I gave them respect, and I got it from them. Of course, you must earn your respect, and I think I did," she says, adding, "My background was very different from my husband's. I belonged to a middle-class Maharashtrian family. My father was a professor, my mother (Usha Kiran) was an actress. Yet, in terms of cultural leanings, I was never out of place at my in-laws. Because even at my maher (mother's place), we had writers and poets visiting us. There would be discussions and talks. Hence it was only about adjusting from Marathi to Urdu, the sensibilities were the same," she says, even as she warmly hugs some of her close friends from Pune, who walk upto her in the course of the interview. There are many - acquaintances and buddies - vying for her time, so we suggest that we could talk on the phone later. "Oh no," she reasons, "My phone is always on silent, I rarely pick it up. If I had to do an interview on the phone from home, it will never get done. There are more people there and I will be called for one thing or the other," says the actress, who also happens to be a great dog lover.

Just a word on her husband, Baba, who we spotted inquiring about the availability of a few Hindi books. Being several years younger than him was she babied in the initial years of her marriage? "No, I was never babied," she smiles with a 'please-don't-believe-me' expression, "Men don't baby their wives. But I think I have a great comfort level with him. He's always been there. I asked him to come with me for this launch, and he did," she says, with happy thoughts of domestic bliss.
So is she planning on taking up more roles now? "Yes, I am doing a film with Nagesh Kukunoor called Yeh Hausla. It's about five women protagonists, and I absolutely love the way the film has turned out. It's just the kind of work I want to do," she says excitedly.
We too can't wait to see more of her!

-Sandhya Iyer

Once Upon A Time In Mumbaai review

2010-07-30T07:07:00.000-07:00

A designer gangster flick

Director: Milan Luthria
Starring: Ajay Devgn, Emraan Hashmi, Kangna Ranaut, Prachi Desai and Randeep Hooda
Rating: **

Milan Luthria, who showed promise with his earlier films like Kachche Dhaage and Taxi No 9211, takes a Ram Gopal Varma subject, and treats it how a Karan Johar would. Over-stylised and shallow, the film serves old wine in a new bottle, with none of the grittiness and punch that one saw in gangster flicks like Satya and Company. And even if it tries to be different in tone, it doesn't have the class of a Johnny Gadaar. Luthria peddles a less than serviceable script, perhaps hoping its period details will keep it interesting for the audiences. It tries to capture the zeitgeist of the 70s as seen in Deewar and Trishul, but the setting comes off as too staged - the result being that the film moves in a self-conscious manner, with stock, one-dimensional characters and relentless dialogue-baazi, that is the single-most irritating part of the film.

The year is somewhere in the 70s. Sultan (Ajay Devgn) grows up as a poor, but large-hearted man, who slowly but surely rises up the ranks in Mumbai's underworld - which the film insists - wasn't all that bad then. The goons had a heart and loved the city. So even if Sultan smuggled items and participated in petty crimes, he made sure that Mumbai remained clean from crime. The film keeps re-asserting Sultan's largess and his essential goodness with literal scenes like him distributing cash to beggars at traffic signals and so on. He falls in love with an actress, Rehana (Kangana Ranaut), who he woos until she finally gives in. Sultan has no real enemies and all seems fine. The only minor irritant being an inspector (Randeep Hooda), who keeps issuing threats of arresting him, but never does so. Things change after an upstart, Shoaib (Emraan Hashmi) joins the gang. He has none of Sultan's morals, and once he assumes some power, things go haywire, and herein are sowed the seeds of Mumbai's infamous and gruesome gang-wars.

The subject had potential, but save for a few scenes, the script has little novelty. Also, the three main relationships in the film don't touch a chord. The Ajay-Kangana romance is insipid. The Prachi (Desai)- Emraan track is better fleshed-out, but there is a sense of deja vu. The worst is the Ajay-Emraan pairing; they don't connect as characters at all. It seems odd that a sensible guy like Sultan would hand over the reigns of his gang to a trouble-maker like Shoaib. Omkaara, Company, Satya - all had this angle, and it was deftly handled. Here, Shoaib's accent is forced and unconvincing.

Once Upon a Time....is a designer gangster flick, which could have still been watchable, if there hadn't been such an onslaught of smart-alecky dialogues. All the characters spout cringe-worthy lines, that grow progressively desperate in trying to evoke a response from the audience. The writers have obviously tried to match writers of the yore, but they end up with stuff that's so poor, Salim-Javed would disown to have written them even in their sleep. Sample some of the gems - 'mera mizaaj aur mera message Sultan tak pahuncha dena' 'Aaj ka kam kal pe rakhoonga, toh aaj bura maan jayega' ' Jo mauka chodd de woh kaisa mard' The dialogues really interfear with the experience of watching the film.

On performances, Emraan's character is the only one which stands out. It's not particularly fresh or nuanced, but it makes an impression for the simple reason that no attempt has been made to redeem him or give him hero-like qualities. He is portrayed as a petty-minded, morally bankrupt, and an irascible crook. Emraan does well, but the limitations of the script and the lack of subtly on the whole, doesn't it make it a memorable role.

Ajay Devgn sleep-walks in a character that he played to perfection in Company. His body language is lethargic, and his courting scenes with Kangana are so half-heartedly done, you'd think he wants to get on to others scenes where he'd be left alone with his cigarette. The heroines have nothing much to do. As for Randeep Hooda, he has enough screen time, but the actor seems to have been embarrassed about not being considered one of the leads of the film and has accepted a 'special appearance' credit instead
Luthria really disappoints with Once Upon A Time... His direction is heavy-handed and unappealing.
The only person who shins is Pritam. All his tracks make an impression.

- Sandhya Iyer

Khatta Meetha review

2010-07-23T06:55:00.000-07:00

Director: Priyadarshan
Starring: Akshay Kumar, Trisha Krishnan, Neeraj Vora, Rajpal Yadav, Urvashi Dholakia, Makrand Deshpande, Manoj Joshi, Johny Lever
Stars: *

Peppered with blandness

For a while now, director Priyadarshan has been making films akin to how a careless, bored cook would dish out stale food, re-heating it, hoping no one would notice. Akshay Kumar, on his part, stays consistent in delivering duds. However, with Khatta Meetha, their pair touches a new low, churning out a film that is mind-numbingly bad. After remaking each one of his Malayalam hits in Hindi, and finding some measure of success with them, Priyan now with Khatha Meetha attempts to recycle some of Mohanlal's 80s films that were true gems and extremely relevant to their times. However in the hands of an out-of-form Priyan, Khatta Meetha ends up worse than a David Dhavan film on a bad day. As for the peg of R K Laxman's common man, it is precicely the aam janta who ought to protest against such scams in the name of a film.

The action happens in a small town in Maharashtra, where down-on-luck road contractor, Sachin Tichkule (Akshay Kumar) is struggling to find a few lucrative contracts. His ancestors belonged to the royalty, so his family -- which includes his parents, sisters, their husbands --- stay in an antique building, even if they aren't that rich anymore. Tichkule may be a common man, but he has a bunch of contract workers who rather uncommonly keep breaking expensive things in different homes and commiting deliberate mischief - like peeping into bathrooms when women are bathing and so on - and you're expected to sympathise with such characters! They have to starve, because the Municipal body won't pass Tichkule's bills for the substandard roads he has built, even if the roads he makes has led to serious accidents. And how is he justified? Oh, because his brother-in-laws are more corrurpt and have also murdered a guy, so he's proportionally better-off. The new Municipal commissioner, Gehna (Trisha) is his ex, with whom he had a sour parting. The flashback, showing Tichkule as an idealitic, is another ludicrous piece of writing in a script that has so many big holes, it ought to have been broken up into a grave and given a burial right at the start.

The film keeps getting progressively worse and predictable. There's a scene where Tichkule is upset with Gehna for not passing his bills. So he dupes her into taking money, calls up the anti-corruption officers and gets her arrested. She ends up in hospital after her attempted suicide. Feeling sorry, Tichkule lands up at her bed, and narrates his sorry condition to her. And guess what, she not only forgives him, they even break-out into a song!

If Akshay Kumar and Priyan's last few films can be categorised into 'dumb, dumber & dumbest, this one would beat the others hollow. I found exactly two scenes mildly funny - one of them involving Johny Lever. For the rest, the film is offensive in how much it insults the audience's intelligence. Also, the film throws around random Marathi words, as if that was going to bring any realism! And Akshay Kumar repeats his 'Tichkule' surname so many times, and is so obviously delighted with it, it almost feels like the makers thought they'd bettered Archedemes' 'Eureka'.
All the characters ham to their heart's content. Each one screams at the top of his/her voice, perhaps knowing that the audience might go into a slumber otherwise. Such films beg that oft asked question - what is ailing Hindi films these days?

-Sandhya Iyer

Dream catcher - Prahlad Kakkar

2010-07-21T23:48:00.000-07:00

Ad guru Prahlad Kakkar, who was in the city for an FTII seminar, spoke to a rivetted audience about the scope and possibilities of advertising. Sandhya Iyer reports

"Advertising in India is the only field in entertainment that is as good as a anything in the world. Our ads can compete anywhere," said ad guru Prahlad Kakkar while talking to students at a highly charged session at FTII. The seminar was on 'New Trends in Television Programming and Broadcasting'. He expressed how some of the most edgy, creative and wonderful work gets done in the sphere of advertisement. "As a training and breeding ground for talent, it is simply unparalleled. It is this little cousin of films in the entertainment industry, but it is superior in terms of all that it can explore in 30 seconds. The biggest plus is that you can experiment with form, technique and content, using someone else's money!," he said, smiling, tongue in cheek.

He also pointed out how filmmakers and advertising guys are all essentially dreamers. "I remember always being distracted in class and being punished for it. All over, the greatest advertising guys are drop-outs from some institution or the other. Dreams are always about a world we aspire for. We never dream about being at the same place, we want something better. Advertising is all about representing this aspirational world of the common man on screen - that is what lies at its heart. The key to good communication is to tap into this collective dream," he said. He also pointed out how it would be an excellent idea if FTII could introduce a weekly session called 'Dream Catcher' where students can come up and exchange dreams. "What a great fund of knowledge, fun and creativity that will be! And all these will be original ideas! It will be electric," he exclaimed.

Kakkar also showed the audience present some of the best ads made in recent times. Some of them included Times of India, Nike, Century Ply, among some others. There was applause after every commercial. "You will notice that these are not your average, hard-sell ads. The story-telling is layered, complex and that is what crafting is all about. You visualise an idea to its last detail. Everything is pre-thought, deliberated. Nothing is an accident when you create something so special," he says.

However, Kakkar also believes that there is need for ad-content to be monitored. "It is not about what is said, but what an ad suggests. That is the power of the subliminals. The Nazis used nursery rhymes to forward their propaganda among children! Currently, it's not happening in India, because the government is not that sophisticated in its propaganda machinery, and their ads are so literal that people can see through it. But once that changes, it will have an impact on minds. We need a body of psychologists, sociologists and advertising professionals, who can take a call on ad content," he viewed.

Some present in the audiences pointed at how the advertising world is ruled by commerce and they don't seem to take on social responsibilities. The example of contamination in soft drinks was taken up, to which Kakkar replied, "Pepsi and Coke are aware that they are political soft targets, and hence they take several intense measures to purify water. You can imagine how much contamination there is in the regular water and milk that you get. I would rather trust myself with soft drinks! The Pepsi and Coke issue is only the tip of the ice berg. The ad world can't concern itself with social issues all that much. It has to be a public-motivated movement," he noted. So can advertising play a proactive role in society at all? "They can, but they don't do it. I can only think of Tata Tea, which took out money from its mainstream ad budget to make 'Jago Re'. Like everyone else, advertisers also chase the eyeballs," he viewed.

As for the future, the ad guru believes ads will become more and more sophisticated in content and technique. "I see ads becoming more interactive like video games. The only thing we need to watch out for is the
subliminals - the message that we give out," he said.

Review: Udaan

2010-07-16T07:43:00.000-07:00

Udaan
Starring: Ronit Roy, Rajat Barmecha, Ram Kapoor, Aayan Boradia
Director: Vikramaditya Motwane
Showing at: E-Square, Inox
Stars: ***

Udaan is easily recogonisable as an Anurag Kashyap-backed project. It has the same desultoriness and teenage angst of a Dev D, there's the anti-establishment sentiment that runs through all his films and of course, dialogues and situations that are provocative. In that sense, the tone of the film and its underlying emotions are not completely new. But as can be expected, the writing is competent, the treatment stays real and the performances are all extremely powerful. While the subject itself has similarities with Taare Zameen Par - creativity getting crushed in a hostile setting and the callousness of adults towards children - the real freshness comes from the dark and rather bold tackling of the father-son relationship. Udaan focusses entirely on it, seeing the father-figure as the foremost symbol of autocracy and rigidity. It perhaps colours him a bit too negatively, but the unfolding of the father's character (Ronit Roy in a once-in-a-lifetime role - brilliant!) stays riveting throughout, and this is what lends the story its freshness.

Rohan (Rajat Barmecha) is expelled from his boarding school along with his friends. He is received by his father (Ronit Roy), who hasn't come to visit him since eight years. Rohan's sense of calm is cruelly disrupted when he reaches Jamshedpur and the noise and fumes fill up the air - the industrial city and its harshness standing in sharp contrast to the soft, wandering mind of the young protagonist.

When Rohan enters his room, he is surprised to see a six year old boy, who his father casually informs is his half-brother. As for the wife, he coldly states, 'jama nahin!' Soon you find the father behaving like Hitler-incarnate. He insists the boys call him 'Sir' . He will hear nothing of Rohan's aspiration of turning writer, and demands that he should finish his engineering and work with him in the mornings. The factory is a dingy place, and Rohan is treated like a common labourer. It's dangerous work too, so one really wonders if fathers would immediately go to that length. You soon learn that the father is fighting his own private demons and is a control-freak and a sadist. How Rohan escapes from his clutches is what the story ends up being.

The film speaks to all those young men who have felt resentment towards their fathers at some stage or the other. However, once Ronit Roy's character becomes too extreme, it loses some of that resonance. Also, director Vikramaditya (Anurag and his gang actually) appear to model their films on European/American templates. The narrative and style (lots of pauses, lingering on images) is certainly derived from there. In some respects, the writing is also directly adapted. The situation of the 'dysfunctional American family' has been replicated in a desi setting, but not all of it rings true in the Indian setting - especially some of the scenes between Rohan and the father, where the latter asks him to smoke in front of him and so on.
Again, scenes that try to establish Rohan's artistic bent of mind fall sort. He gazes at nature and insists people listen to his poetry, but you get no sense of his genius spark. Taare Zameen Par gave you a definite sense of the boy's latent talent.

Yet, Udaan works fine as a metaphor for any oppressive and rigid system. The film wisely decides that its reformation may not be possible, and escape is the only way out. As mentioned, performances are brilliant. Newcomer Rajat Barmecha does very well. Ram Kapoor is as usual top class. Take this flight, you won't regret it.

Interview Amit Trivedi

2010-07-15T06:09:00.000-07:00

Music composer Amit Trivedi didn't have the easiest time working with the all women cast and crew of Aisha. Yet, it was worth the effort, he tells
Sandhya Iyer

Amit Trivedi, who caught the fancy of music enthusiasts with his funky, unconventional music in Dev D, followed by Aamir and Wake Up Sid's Ek Tara, is awaiting the audience response for two of his films - the Anurag Kashyap produced Udaan and Sonam Kapoor starrer, Aisha. Giving music for the latter - a mainstream, chick-flick -- was especially challenging for the composer who has mostly done music for serious, dark themes. He's composed six tracks for it, all of which are already gaining a fair bit of popularity. "It was a tough one. It has a salsa number, a Punjabi song and funk rock... the experience was new and fresh. But before I sat down to compose, all the song situations were in place. The film's writer Devika Bhagat and the director Rajshree Ojha gave me a complete narration - all the home-work was done, so that made it quite easy," says Trivedi, who is born and brought up in Mumbai.

Considering he wasn't a natural choice for the film, how did he come on board? “Devika had heard Aamir and Dev D. They wanted young, hep music with an edge to it, something not very conventional. They liked Pardesi and Nayan Tarase from Dev D,” he says.

But working on Aisha was no cake-walk. The talented composer makes no bones about the fact that working with women proved to be quite frustrating initially. Besides Devika and Rajshree, the film's 23 year old producer Rhea (Anil Kapoor's younger daughter) was also taking a call on the film's music. "I would compose one song, which Rajshree would like, but Rhea wouldn't. She would say, 'Nah, scrap it, it's not working.' Then, Rhea would approve a song, but Rajshree would say 'no' to it. Yes, I'd come to a point when I was starting to pull my hair! I had all these women to please. Initially, there were lot of disagreements and I did think too many people were getting involved, but gradually as we got to know each other, things settled down and we enjoyed the process." However, Trivedi is very impressed with Rhea Kapoor. "She was barely 21 when she started work on Aisha. She is so sharp and very clear about what she wants. She'll go a long way," he says.

Trivedi says he enjoyed working with women, but he got along far better with the men while working on Aamir, Dev D, Udaan and Wake Up Sid. "I had a blast with the guys. They knew what they wanted and our wave lengths matched," he says.

The composer believes the current phase is the best time for music, as filmmakers with fresh sensibilities and an experimental bent of mind are dominating the Hindi film scene. "I firmly believe that the future will be better and will mark the return of the golden era. There are so many talented composers, singers, bands and technicians coming to the fore. Also due to the net and DVD parlours, the awareness about international films and music has grown a lot. Many influences are coming in," he say, adding that music composers in Bollywood have never had it better than now!

The role of the composer has altered in some ways, says Trivedi, who gets deeply involved with every film, taking a keen interest in the script. "Gone are the days when actors would break out into a song with no real connection to the story. These days, songs are used to forward the narrative and elevate the mood and emotions. It has to be a blend of creative elements. Look at Vishal Bharadwaj - he writes his films, directs it, does the dialogues, gives great music - he's literally a one-man industry. Those are the kind of people we need," he says.

While composers are in great demand, the singers - coming in dime a dozen - aren't in such an enviable position. The insistence for fresh voices and the profusion of talent hunt contestants has reduced a singer's shelf life, or so it appears. Trivedi believes true talent will survive. "Due to these various reality shows, there is a perception that singing is a ready vehicle for fame and money. There is too much bombardment of new singers. But just having a good voice or tonal quality is not enough. The person has to be an excellent singer to play a long innings ," he says.

The composer has been selective with his work, and that's how he intends to be. "I don't want to burden myself with work. I don't feel the need to compose every day. I take my Sundays off. I compose instinctively. Once my songs are out, people put labels on them, but I don't think about it when I'm making them. They are what I am," he says.
Given his enormous talent and panache, one can safely expect some very memorable music from him in the time to come.

Not so red-Hot - review Red Alert

2010-07-14T05:36:00.000-07:00

Director: Anant Narayan Mahadevan
Starring: Suniel Shetty, Ayesha Dharkar, Seema Biswas, Naseeruddin Shah, Makarand Deshpande and Ashish Vidyarthi, Vinod Khanna
Rating: **1/2

Given how the Naxalite movement is assuming dangerous proportions in the country, Red Alert is an extremely timely theme to tackle. Anant Mahadevan’s name as director doesn’t inspire all that much confidence for a serious subject of this kind — he’s made masala fares like Dil Maange More and Aksar — but its sheer relevance makes you sit up and take notice.

With writer Aruna Raje on board, the film starts off by acquainting you with some facts about Naxalbari that is spreading its tentacles across the country, and is posing a huge internal security problem. You’re told the story is a real-life one and tracks the life of a poor cook, Narsimha (Suniel Shetty), who is asked to drop off food at a forest for a group. Little does he know that they are Naxalites. The police manage to get there by following Narsimha and what follows is heavy cross-firing. The Naxals don’t let Narsimha leave and the group’s leader in particular (Ashish Vidyarthi) is quite rough with him. The former needs money to send to his wife and children, but his requests are constantly dismissed.

The film’s setting is a small town in Andhra Pradesh and much of the first half gives you a fairly realistic idea of how Naxals live and function.
Red Alert succeeds in bringing out the ideological extremism of the Naxals, wherein they seem so consumed by their cause that they fail to recogonise the day to day problems of the ordinary citizens.

Narismha finally escapes the camp and finds himself in an unenviable situation, where both the Naxals and the police are chasing him. But he decides to go with the ‘lesser evil’ in the end.
Red Alert — while it does not make outright villains of anyone, takes a politically correct position where it stresses on how the Naxal movement is misplaced and is harming the very people it’s claiming to help. There is no ambiguity in this respect. Narsimha represents this exploited class that feels threatened from both sides.
The film is engaging through its first half and succeeds in unmasking some of the ‘martyrdom’ associated with Naxalism. It asserts that there can be no excuse for violence. But beyond that, there are no insights or a complex study into the problem.
The second half is no different from a regular commercial film, where the hero is on the run. It loses steam after what appears initially to be a genuinely different film. The ending especially takes a filmy turn while suggesting other alternatives to Naxals.
Yet, it’s a decent effort from the team of Red Alert. The performance from the cast — Suniel Shetty (effective), Seema Biswas, Ayesha Dharkar, Naseeruddin Shah (only there for one scene!) Sameera Reddy, Makarand Deshpande — are uniformly good. But Ashish Vidyarthi in particular is superb. It’s a bit of a shame that the actor has not got enough roles to showcase his immense talent.
Director Mahadevan’s treatment is realisitic and he creates some moments of simmering tension in the first half. Sadly, his bent as a commercial filmmaker takes over in the second half, and what you get is a film that falls short of its potential.

- Sandhya Iyer

"Small films MUST experiment' - Interview Udaan director, Vikramaditya

2010-07-14T05:27:00.000-07:00

Vikramaditya Motwane, director of Udaan, talks about how the multiplex era has opened up the market for small-budget films, which will usher in a lot of fresh stories

Small-budget films must always explore and experiment. What’s the point making a love triangle with non-stars?,” opines first time director Vikramaditya Motwane, whose film Udaan — a coming-of-agedrama — and an official selection at Cannes, releases this Friday. “In small films, the star is the story. Look at Love Sex Aur Dhokha — who were there as actors? They are all newcomers. The subject makes it unique,” says the debutant director, who co-wrote Dev D with Anurag Kashyap and was an assistant director and sound designer to Sanjay Leela Bhansali on Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam.

Udaan is the story of an 18 year old, who is abandoned for eight years at a boarding schools. When he returns back home he finds himself amidst an authoritarian father and a younger half brother who doesn’t even know he existed!
Forced to work in his father’s steel factory and study engineering against his wishes, he tries to forge his own life out of his given circumstances and pursue his dream of being a writer.
Vikram wrote the story as early as 2003 and showed its first draft to his “out-of-work director-friend” Anurag Kashyap, who was impressed with it. He promised he would produce the film at a later stage. “In March 2009, after years of trying to get an producer on board, Anurag and his friend Sanjay Singh raised enough money for me to turn that script into a film. They packed me off to shoot and backed me all the way to make the film I always wanted to,” says Vikram. Incidentally, his initiation into the field happened because his mother worked as a production manager on documentary films. She later went on to do talk shows for television, and Vikram’s love for making movies grew from there.
Although Udaan took flight after several years, the director says he has no regrets. “The struggle period is fairly normal. I was a debutant and mine was not going to be a masala film, so I can understand the reluctance on the part of producers. Also, around that time, multiplexes weren’t that dominant, so in a way it’s good that Udaan is releasing now. This is the right time for it to release,” he says.

“Besides, all directors need reference when you narrate a story. They have to relate it to something, otherwise they don’t feel confident of it. Give them a DVD of a Hollywood film and they will find it safe. Here, I had no reference to give for Udaan,” he says.
Once the film got made, they showed it to UTV who immediately decided to buy it. “They absolutely loved the film. Its budget is just 3 crores and if you add the distribution price, it comes to 6 crores. That’s hardly much to recover. When producers and distributors are confident of not losing money, they will back you,” says Vikram.
In the days to come, Vikram believes a wide variety of films for all age groups and segments will become a viable proposition. “Things take time to evolve, but I already see it happening. We’ve had films like Dev D, Taare Zameen Par, Kameeney and LSD all managing to attract audiences,” he says.
So how confident is he feeling about his own film?
“I would like to think I’ve made a good film, but you never know. Yes, the film has won accolades at festivals, but for both me and Anurag, the focus is always on the domestic market. We want it to appeal to our own audience. It’s important that Udaan does well, because it will pave the way for other independent filmmakers to go ahead and make the films they want. There’s no time like now!” he says.
We agree with him on that.

-Sandhya Iyer

Interview - Aisha director Rajshree Ojha

2010-07-04T08:10:00.000-07:00

Rajshree Ojha, director of the forthcoming Sonam Kapoor starrer Aisha - that is an adaptation of Jane Austen's book Emma - speaks on the various challenges before her while turning the classic into a film, her disagreements with Sonam and Anil Kapoor, and how her film is not similar to Clueless

'I've stayed faithful to 'Emma'

Rajshree Ojha is ready with her new Sonam Kapoor-Abhay Deol starrer Aisha that releases on August 6. The film is an adaptation of Jane Austen's 1815 classic, Emma about a rich heiress with a penchant for match-making. This is the director's first commercial outing in Hindi films, but she has to her credit several short films which made it to numerous prestigious film festivals. In fact, she informs us that one of them was even selected at the Oscars in the 'student's section. She also studied filmmaking formally at a foreign university. "Aisha is my first mainstream film, but I have a lot of experience behind me," she says.

So how did Aisha come about? "I was always interested in adapting Emma in a desi setting. So I wrote the script along with my writer Devika Bhagat and we pitched the project to different producers. I'd never thought of approaching a star as such. But it did land up with Sonam, who loved the script. When Anil Kapoor heard it, he loved it too and wanted to produce the film. At that time Anil had just done Slumdog Millionaire so he could understand where I was coming from and what our vision was for the film," she says.

But Ohja agrees that she had to make a few compromises, so as to fit in with Bollywood conventions. "I don't make loud films. But then, too much subtly can also be a problem for Hindi films. Yes, there were times when I would be told that things are not looking 'happening' in the film, and I would try to enliven the narrative. On certain points, I was very adamant and had my way. On other occasions, I relented as I saw the other's point of view. Finally, I am happy with the film and I think the compromises I made have been for the betterment of the film." says the director.

Incidentally, there were several rumours emerging from the sets about disagreements on how the film was being shot. Ohja does not clearly state this, but she admits that initially she wasn't happy with he way Sonam was playing her part. "She had some pre-conceived notions about how to play her character and I had mine. I didn't want her to play her role in a goody-goody way. I like my characters to have shades. I wanted her internal struggle to come to the fore. Sonam had read Emma and she loved the story, but she was quite lost when it came to pitching the character. But after some initial hiccups, she understood where I was going with her role, and it turned out fine," she says, adding, " Actually, I learnt through this project to give my actors freedom. I would encourage them to make their own back-story for their characters. Earlier, I would hold everything and not give them enough space. So it was a learning process for me too," she says.

So why Emma? "I am an Austen fan, much like all women are. Her two novels which I've always been interested in adapting are Mansfield Park and Emma. I love the grey shades in Emma. She is strong and yet a bit lost, not knowing what she wants from life. In fact, even Austen said about Emma that she's a heroine who only she loves and not many others will. She's an interesting character. Sometimes, she's manipulative, at other times a lost child. Also the theme of the novel ie match-making is very prevalent to our society. Everyone indulges in it at some point or the other. The book is also about a woman's yearning for love and finding the perfect a man - that's a theme that is universal and evergreen. Whether 19th century England or 21st century India, women haven't changed in that respect," she smiles, explaining why she was drawn to the classic.

And while the makers have fully contemporised the subject and have based it in Delhi, showing Sonam Kapoor - who plays Emma - as a young, rich girl, who loves shopping and being with friends, Ohja says she's stayed quite faithful to the original. "There aren't too many changes, though we've tried hard to keep the setting and characters as real as possible. I had to condense a few characters, because, it's a two and half hour film after all. Also, we haven't treated any character as fully negative. There is some bitchiness among the women, but no one is all bad. We've treated it like a romantic comedy, nothing too dark," she says.

While her words for Sonam are measured, her praise for Abhay Deol - who plays Sr Knightley of Emma in the film - is wholesome. "Abhay was the best casting decision we made. He's always done very different films, so he could see where I was coming from. Now when I think of Knightley, I can't think of anyone else besides him. He's made it such a flesh and blood character - you'll love him in the film," she says.
But in the book, Knighley is a fairly mature man - 40ish perhaps. Here the character is younger. Ohja says she's happy with the age difference between Sonam and Abhay and didn't want anyone older. "I think there is a 10 year age difference. Abhay is 35-35, which is good enough for me. I didn't want the character to be a father-figure," she says.

Finally, there is some speculation that Aisha is closer to the 1995 Alicia Silverstone starrer Clueless - that was also a modern-day adaptation of Emma. The director denies the similarities. "Yes, there is a fair bit of fashion in Aisha too. That is natural, because Emma is rich. But this is not based in high-school, like Clueless was. Aisha is a 24- year old, a typical Delhi girl. It won't be similar at all," she says.

For now, she's delighted with the final product. "I am very satisfied.” she says. Hope the audience is too.

- Sandhya Iyer

I Hate Luv Storys

2010-07-02T07:39:00.000-07:00

It's all about loving Johar

Director: Punit Malhotra
Starring: Imran Khan, Sonam, Sameer Dattani
Stars: **

One can almost visualise how director Punit Malhotra must have pitched the film to his boss, Karan Johar. Let's have Dharma Productions as the setting for the film - so ready-made references available. The hero hates love stories but is reluctantly working for a hot-shot director (Johar?) who makes mushy love stories that he calls 'sagas'. The hero mocks at romantic films - so in the garb of spoof (that favourite excuse to make a film when you have no original ideas), each one of Shah Rukh Khan's films from the Johar-Yash Raj stable is plugged. It's like Johar will either make movies only with Shah Rukh Khan or have a proxy for him. The heroine is the art director on the sets and is a die hard romantic - the kind who carries a white gerbera in her purse every day to work. So after turning his nose up at his boss' films till interval point, the hero magically realises that all those love stories were true after all and turns all puppy eyed by the end. After such thumping validation for his films, getting a green signal for the project from our Koffee man may not have been too difficult.

The hero, Jai (Imran Khan) is modelled on Aamir's character in Dil Chahta Hai (DCH), a non-believer in love. In fact, a large chunk of the film is a remake of the Farhan Akhtar coming-of-age comic-drama. Jai is a flirt, looking for short-term affairs. He cringes when the topic is romance. He is irreverent and comes up with wise-cracks. The girl, Simran (Sonam Kapoor) believes she has a perfect love life with boyfriend, Raj(Sameer Dattani), until cupid strikes again. Problem is, Jai does not believe he is in love, so Simran ends up hurt and disappointed. But sooner than later, he too is headlong in love, but now Simran has second thoughts.

The film may or may not have intended it, but it brings to light how confused our generation is about love and relationships. And this little complexity is achieved because the writers do not attempt to present Simran's boyfriend in a bad light. He's a gentleman, attentive and caring - a bit too much probably, but this is done subtly. So you stay mildly interested in Sonam's conundrum of choosing between the two men.

The vacillating heart of a die-hard romantic, who swears by movies might have perhaps made for an interesting film, but the makers operate in extremes throughout. Sameer Soni, who plays the director in the film admits that he sells the same mush to audiences film after film, but his movies have some magic that people connect with. This is the argument that the makers want to peddle in Johar's favour, so Imran after being the nonchalant, non-believer turns only one peg short of becomming Devdas by the end. There's a scene where he builts a tent of red baloons, wears a red shirt and then goes on his knees to propose to Sonam! This transition is far too dramatic and unconvincing. The nuances are simply not there. You don't get enough sense of how they fall in love. Imran is supposed to be a brash charmer who mouths some smart-alecky lines. But frankly, his act comes across as quite rude and annoying for anyone to fall for it. Compare this with SRK's act in DDLJ, where he is a cad in the first half, and falls in love later. His personality doesn't altogether alter. That restraint that SRK brings to his role or the one Aamir brought to DCH is not there here.

Imran has great presence and shines in some of the earlier scenes and is at home playing the cynic (though he didn't convince me as womaniser for a moment). He's awkward in the second half. Sonam looks pretty, but like most of her contemporaries, no depth in acting. Also, she needs to work hard on her dialogue delivery. Since neither of them engage you particularly, the film does tend to become a drag in the middle.

In the end, I Hate Luv Storys serves more as an ego massage for its makers. Imran's character has to grovel and be a total convert to Johar's idea of love before he can have the girl. Other than that, the film is just passable fluff.

-Sandhya Iyer

Review Toy Story 3

2010-06-26T19:38:00.000-07:00

Director: Lee Unkrich

Voices of: Tom Hanks, John Cusack, Tim Allen, Don Rickles, Ned Betty, John Morris among others

Rating: ***

The Toy Story series has been a landmark in Hollywood’s animation history, and an unqualified achievement for Pixar/Disney. The good news is that, the latest addition and perhaps the final one, Toy Story 3, is a delightful and worthy follow-up to the last two films.

Andy (John Morris) is seventeen and all set to go to college. His mom insists that he clear his trunk of toys and either put it all in the attic or donate it. Andy looks at his play things affectionately one last time before he decides to dump them in the attic. He decides to take along his favourite toy, Woody (Tom Hanks) with him to college and puts the rest of them in a bag. In a mishap, the toys end up among the junk meant for donation. Woody desperately tries to explain to the others that Andy never meant to dispose them off, but it falls on deaf ears. ‘If he doesn’t want us, we should go away,’ they argue.

And their decision appears correct when they find themselves at a colourful and vibrant looking day care centre called Sunny side. But the toy gang’s joy is short-lived, as they get treated roughly by the kids who come to play there. Moreover, the place is controlled by a sinister bear, Lotso (Ned Betty). When the toys protest about their condition, he gets them locked in a place that serves as a prison. Woody returns and springs into action, as soon as he learns that his friends are in trouble. The rest of the film is a prison-break adventure, with numerous twists and turns.

Even though Toy Story 3 has all the action and thrills that will please children, the film is by no means frivolous. Its central theme gently touches upon the unexpected shifts in life, when one feels discarded and worthless. Scenes where the toys feel homeless and unwanted have been very well executed and your heart goes out to the them. The voices and animation effects compliment the characters admirably. The expression on Lotso’s face when he reveals his evil side is so effective, it makes you wonder if even real-life actors can match up.

The film is engaging for most part, but one’s interest flags in the middle. There is a cheesy love story thrown in, where Barbie and Rex get together. The more interesting sub-plot is one where Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen) is captured and his configurations are reprogrammed so that he turns against his own toy-friends. Some of the scenes in the jail seem a bit long-drawn. Also, the theme about a bully using his henchmen to control the inhabitants is hardly a new one and is in fact an oft repeated plot in animation films. The dialogues are good, but not particularly witty. Yet, things remain watchable at the very least and post the prison-break, things start to get quite exciting.

There is a dark, lingering sadness to this story about abandonment, but hearteningly, the film settles on an enlightening note, where it points at the unending joys and sense of wonderment that toys bring with them. If the old toys get discarded, someone else will pick them up.

The film is in 3D, but my guess is that audiences will enjoy it as much in 2D. The 3D does not enhance one’s experience of watching Toy Story 3 at all. All the same, this is a very competently made film, with its heart in the right place.

Raavan review

2010-06-18T07:50:00.000-07:00

Ten-tative epic!

Director: Mani Ratnam
Starring: Abhishek Bachchan, Aishwarya Rai, Vikram, Govinda, Ravi Kissen
Rating: **1/2

The Stockholm syndrome, where the captive develops feelings for her captor, is always a fascinating one to explore, and not often seen in Hindi cinema. To employ this element in the Sita haran episode from the Ramayana, and ultimately make a larger point about human complexity and frailty, is undeniably a wonderful concept. But as it happens often with ambitious ventures, quite a few things go wrong with Raavan reducing what could have been an explosive drama to a flickering beauty.

Beera (Abhishek Bachchan) is an outlaw, a Robin Hood figure who is loved by the poor people of his village (no idea where this place is, there's no reference to any Naxilite movement as one believed earlier). In the course his violent skirmishes with the police, he one day abducts Ragini (Aishwarya Rai), the wife of police inspector, Dev (Vikram). Initially, Beera plans on killing her within 14 hours of bringing her to a secluded forest. But captivated by her beauty and courage, he no longer has the heart to kill her. In fact, he passionately harbours hope of possessing her, but realises that she's way above his league. Meanwhile, Dev launches a massive search operation to retrieve his wife. He is aided by a forest guard, Sanjeevani ( Govinda), who helps him find Ragini.
Govinda is meant to be Hanuman, but Mani makes it too literal, by having him clumsily jump from one tree branch to another. And with all that bulk the actor has, it ends up looking extremely funny.

The film is a visual masterpiece no doubt. Rarely has one seen an Indian film so beautifully shot. But the downside is that Ratnam is so preoccupied with getting the perfect frames, that the drama ends up taking a backseat. There's no conflict or even a definite plot in the first half. Ratnam is happy to just give you one great looking shot after another. The camera seems especially focussed on Aishwarya Rai, capturing every contour and expression, as she struggles for her dear life. The actress is marvelous in her no-make up look, her translucent green eyes being her sole adornment on a face constantly filled with bruises and mud.

Ratnam lingers on forever on the visuals and perhaps this may not have been a major grouse if Beera's character had been more revetting. Call it either a major mis-reading of the character by Abhishek or an inability to pitch it correctly, but the actor makes a caricature of his role, doing a poor imitation of Heath Ledger's Joker. He grunts, makes faces, mutters incoherent stuff to himself, and keeps widening his eyes in what is an altogether unpleasant sight. Ratnam, for a considerable length of time, is enamoured with Ragini alone. As for Beera, the director tries to build a legend around his character, trying hard to sell him as something of a devil-child. But none of the gimmickry works, and Beera never rises beyond appearing anything more than a petty criminal. The character - in spite of his villainy - needed to appear more majestic. But Abhishek plays Beera as if he were a maniac, with no shades or layers. Obviously Ratnam must take some blame for this. This not only affects one's interest in the drama, it also has a bearing on the Veera-Ragini relationship which appears entirely passionless and placid, in spite of the narrative trying to suggest otherwise. This is partly because the leads don't share any chemistry on screen here. And perhaps because Ash and Abhi are real-life husband and wife, there is no chord struck when Veera says in the film,
' I'm jealous of your husband'
Again, when Beera touches Ragini on her cheeks in one scene, it's supposed to be a moment of simmering sexual tension, and justifies Veera professing his liking to her in the next scene. But that feeling doesn't come across at all.

While the film is slow till the very end, it gallops in the last 20 minutes. This part contains the crux of the story, and though the sequence where Dev demands an 'agni pariksha' from Ragini in the form of a polygraph test appears too literal, Ratnam understands the complexity of the Ram-Raavan ie good-evil equation. How can a good man remain one, when the evil man shows so much goodness?

Vikram is formidable, perhaps a bit too strong in a film where the role of Raavan does not make an impression. All in all, a film that had enormous potential to be great, but falls quite short.

- Sandhya Iyer

Myths & Mythology

2010-06-13T23:59:00.000-07:00

Mythology has always been a fascinating treasure for our filmmakers to delve into. What’s the lasting appeal of our epics, will mythology be relevant to our cinema in the future, too? Sandhya Iyer explores...

With Raajneeti and Raavan — films that are adapted from our great epics, Mahabharata and Ramayana respectively — one would think there’s a certain revival of interest in mythological themes. However, fact is that Indian cinema has always drawn from the deep well of these influential epics. Every character and story within these epics have been so entrenched in our psyche and collective consciousness, that they have invariably come to determine our ideas of culture and morality. And the fact that our epics are such a compelling artistic and creative tour de force have made them timeless in their appeal and relevance. Not to add, they remain the ultimate source material for our arts, especially cinema.

Straight from epics

Naturally then, when Indian cinema took its first baby steps, it was mythological subjects that became the obvious choices for filmmakers. Dadasaheb Phalke’s most well-known films included Mohini Bhasmasur (1913), Satyavan Savitri (1914), Lanka Dahan (1917), Shri Krishna Janma (1918) and Kaliya Mardan (1919) — all derived from our great epics. And this was the trend across the country, with almost every film made down South, through the ’30s being a mythological one — Sakkubai, Sita Vanavasam, Krishna Tulabharam in Tamil cinema, to name just a few. These were all straight-forward representations of the epic tales and the fact that the audience were well-versed with the stories allowed them to make an immediate connection with the films. Hence, the transition to cinema proved to be an easy and pleasant one, where the content was familiar, even if the medium was a new one.
“Indians have a deep connect with their mythological texts. It’s an umbilical cord,” says writer and director Vinay Shukla. “There are so many strands in the Mahabharata that a filmmaker can base every story on the epic if he wanted, and yet never run out of material.”

The myth continues

With time, as cinema started evolving, filmmakers began experimenting with their stories, making it more contemporary. However, they seldom moved away from the templates and archetypes created by mythology. So the hero was mostly a representation of the ideal man Ram or the manipulative Krishna. The inspiration for the heroine came directly from the image of Ram’s dutiful wife, Sita — an embodiment of purity, compassion and sacrifice.
Even in the ’70s, when the anti-establishment wave took over, and youths were disenchanted with the old ‘ideals’, people got a new anti-hero after their own heart. Amitabh Bachchan’s characters in Trishul and Deewar, the illegitimate son and the underdog respectively, can easily be compared to that of Karna in Mahabharata, the illegitimate son of Kunti, who rebels and succeeds against all odds. Not only was such a character completely resonant with the mood of the nation, it also fired the imagination like none other. “Everyone has fantasies of being this abandoned child. It’s a universal fantasy, which is why Karna’s situation strikes such a deep chord,” says Anjum Rajabali, writer of films like Raajneeti, The Legend Of Bhagat Singh and Ghulam. “The don and his loyal henchman seen in countless films invariably draw their energy from the Ram and Hanuman relationship. Similarly, all our old villains have the same motivation that drove Raavan. It was revenge and lust. So he abducts the heroine to teach the hero a lesson and eventually falls in love/lust with her.”

A timeless treasure trove

“I have no doubt that our mythology is timeless in essence. Our epics are an external and dramatic representation of an inner life. Since human nature does not change, our epics will remain as compelling and influential as ever,” says Rajabali.
Almost everyone agrees that mythology has a treasure trove of stories and if they are are well-woven into contemporary settings, they will always find a resonance. “I would recommend every student and filmmaker to read the epics to simply understand how to tell stories and what these stories actually reveal. It helps one to see the entire range of depths and the layering of characters. They are simple, but never simplistic. For example, take the episode of Hanuman entering Lanka to retrieve Sita. Here is a man who is completely devoted to Ram and yet when he enters Raavan’s palace, he is struck by his glory and exclaims, ‘this man is fit to rule this world!’ This is the conflict which even Valmiki mentions in the original Ramayan. So our epics keep throwing cues at us, telling us not to look at things in a very simple way,” views Rajabali.
In spite of other narrative influences coming in, filmmakers believe that mythology can still be a great source of stories for films. “Mani Ratnam’s Roja is actually a simple tale of Savitri wanting her husband’s life back from Yama. And Mani does it very cleverly, so that the reference is never overt. I think South Indians perhaps have an advantage because mythology is very deeply ingrained in them. They can easily take the emotions from the epic stories and present them in the modern context,” says Shukla.
Rajabali too agrees that a lot more of mythology can flow into our films. “Unfortunately, the literary aspect of our films has not been explored enough. You need a literary tradition. Our earlier writers were all authors. Today, we don’t see that,” he says.

Mythology, a gimmick?

Author of several mythological books, Devdutt Patanaik believes our films, which directly try to adapt the epics or borrow recognisable elements from them, present very primitive versions. “They are cosmetically fantastic and alluring, but their soul is missing. They present to you a cosmetic archetype. So any person who is manipulative is Krishna, but then what about Shakuni? Earlier scholars who researched the Mahabharata and Ramayan tried to explore and impart the wisdom in it. That is not the intention of the films that one sees. Most of them only play with popular perception. They will glamourise the villain (Raavan) because the dark side is always interesting. But I doubt it is done with any understanding of the story. So I will say, they are great cosmetically, but on the soul level, there is a complete disconnect. A good katha should shake you up from your complacency and uplift you. Do you see that happening with any of these films?,” he asks.
Rajabali has a contrary view and argues, “I don’t see anything uplifting about Ramayana and Mahabharata. In fact, these epics make me ponderous and reflective. Both these texts end in tragedy. In Ramayana, you see Ram being the best king and having the ideal kingdom and yet, his life ends in pain. It is a way of telling us how life is very difficult and is ultimately very painful.”

The future of mythology

Since epics are living texts, the understanding is that they can be re-interpreted in a million ways, and they will still find a resonance among the future generations. Ultimately, whether one sees our epics as cautionary tales or inspirational parables, it is evident that their greatness lies in their narrative craftsmanship, emotional depth, and profound understanding of the human nature, something which every artiste can take inspiration from.
William Dalrymple’s Nine Lives sums it up best in a chapter about the Pabuji epic in Rajasthan and oral traditions, when he says. “Myths pick up the pieces when philosophy throws up its hands. Great myths help to think through the unthinkable and make sense by analogy.”

Interview: Anjum Rajabali

2010-06-10T23:14:00.000-07:00

Anjum Rajabali, who penned the script for Raajneeti along with director Prakash Jha, speaks to Sandhya Iyer on how he isn't really satisfied with the film, among other things

Considering the sweeping success of Raajneeti, one would have expected its writer Anjum Rajabali to be elated. However, when I called up the man behind films like The Legend of Bhagat Singh and Ghulam among others, he accepted the congratulations, albeit stating that he was having mixed feelingS. “A writer is never pleased. It was a very ambitious task, to take the Mahabharata, an all encompassing, influential text and adapting it into a contemporary electoral set-up. I won’t say we succeeded entirely, but it was a worthy endeavour nevertheless” says Rajabali, one of the most well-spoken and erudite film writers we have today.

“Am I satisfied with the way the film shaped up? No, not fully. But yes, it’s good to have a hit, rather than have a film you are not entirely content with, and also ends up being a flop! So yes, in a qualified sort of way, I am happy," he says.
Raajneeti has come in for some criticism, for taking scenes too literally from the Mahabharata and not incorporating it deftly. For example, the scene where Kunti meets Karna seemed out of place. The writer says he was aware of the flaws and was not surprised when these portions were criticised. “I’ve watched the film so closely and Prakash (Jha) and I have discussed the film so much, that I knew where it suffered. I was unhappy myself with certain parts, so the critics weren’t far off the mark when they pointed out mistakes,” he says.

There were genuine difficulties too, he notes. “Within the format of a two and a half hour feature film, we had to squeeze in all the main events of the Mahabharata, at least the essence of it. Some in the audience could take a leap of faith and they didn't mind the transformation in characters. There were others who were dissatisfied with the narrative.”
Talking about how the subject came into being, he says, “I have a view on the Mahabharata. I have grown up on it. My grandma used to narrate it to me as a child. Since then, my interest in it has been a continuous and consistent one. The Mahabharata has a world of situations, but in this particular film I was primarily interested in re-interpreting the character of Arjun and his moral decline. The Pandavas do a lot of things in the end that are not honorable. Instead of Arjun being a passive character, I wanted to see him as an active protagonist, who starts enjoying his demonic nature. I wanted to look at the darkness residing in his character. Samar’s subject as a student is ‘sub textual emotional violence in Victorian poetry’. He has a predilection for violence that is sublimated in the arts. But when he enters the war-zone, those demons are unleashed.”

Many have compared Arjun’s character (played by Ranbir Kapoor) to that of The Godfather’s Michael Corleone. In fact, many felt that the film itself had several shades of the iconic Hollywood film. Anjum Rajabali assures that it was never done consciously. “Perhaps Prakash and I should have been more careful and taken the Godfather parallels away. We allowed it to go how it was going. For example, that bomb blast scene between Sara and Prithvi would instantly remind people of The Godfather. Inadvertently, some resonances came about. The archetypal graph of Samar and Micheal Corelone are similar, but their motivations are very different. I never had The Godfather in mind,” he clarifies.

In spite of not being entirely satisfied with Raajneeti, Rajabali agrees that the process has whetted his interest, and he would love to take up more aspects of mythological in films. “I derived great joy writing the first few drafts of Raajneeti,” he says. Given how conscientious and candid he is about his work, one can expect the bar to be set much higher the next time around.

Review Raajneeti

2010-06-04T08:10:00.000-07:00

Starring: Ajay Devgn, Nana Patekar, Ranbir Kapoor, Manoj Bajpayee, Arjun Rampal and Katrina Kaif

Director: Prakash Jha

Promises big, delivers little

Political films are rarely attempted in Bollywood - the kind of awareness and insight that is required for tackling such a subject is not generally found among directors. And even otherwise, save for a niche audience, the genre has never received much attention or interest. The last political film that made a stunning impression was Sudhir Mishra's Hazaaron Khwahishein Aisi, but apart from that, we've had no film seriously exploring the political scene. There was Ram Gopal Varma's Sarkar Raj, but its framework was still that of a standard commercial film.

But when Prakash Jha - the director of serious social dramas like Mrityudand, Gangaajal, Apaharan - directs Raajneeti, with heavy-weight actors on such a grand scale, one naturally expects it to be a definitive film on politics. Also, given that Jha has always taken a keen interest in politics and even fought an election makes him a credible name. The director's previous films have all been gritty and dark, also somewhat heavy and lacking in respite. In Raajneeti, the novelty rests with the fact that he attempts to re-tell the Mahabharat by setting it in a contemporary political world. The result is mixed and Jha does not really succeed in balancing both aspects and creating a plausible narrative (screenplay Anjum Rajabali and Jha) that would have made for a compelling watch.

The first 15-20 minutes are highly confusing, as too many characters are introduced. The story is about the struggle for power between two cousins - Veerendra (Manoj Bajpai) and Prithviraj Pratap (Arjun Rampal). Veerendra considers himself to be the rightful heir of their political party, as his father was their chief - before he got struck with paralysis. The power equation gets shifted to the other family and Veerendra sees red. To get even, he takes under his fold a promising Dalit youth leader, Suraj (Ajay Devgn). When things still don't go as he desires, he plots the murder of his uncle (Prithvi's father). All of a sudden, Veerendra again is in the driver's seat, but now he has to contend with Prithvi's younger brother, Samar (Ranbir Kapoor). So far, the young lad had distanced himself from politics, and was quietly studying 'subtextual violence of Victorian poetry' in America. But now, determined to teach his enemies a lesson, he turns all evil and conniving. So you see him sitting and smoking, giving intense expressions against the backdrop of a chess board. From here on, the Mahabharat is forgotten and the film goes full blast into Godfather mode.

Raajneeti is a colossal disappointment for those expecting a nuanced, incisive look into the world of politics. Stunningly, Jha's focus is minimal on real politics and his aim is mainly to weave in the chief characters and episodes of Mahabharat into the narrative. This proves to be a double-edge sword. The film has little or no resonance with contemporary political figures or families, and the action that take place is cliched and uninspiring - seen dime a dozen in standard family revenge dramas. The film shows one leader after another getting killed in quick succession - as if it is so easy to murder important political figures! Also, there's too much gloss and grandeur in a film about politics, making the drama somewhat superficial. The characters stay in a palatial house, wear expensive clothes. Even the folks who appear in the background are dressed in spotlessly clean, designer kurtas. Perhaps Jha intended to retain the majestic appeal of the Mahabharat - the dialogues have words like 'jyeshta putra' and 'kartavya', but all this weakens the film's contemporary appeal considerably. Again, some of the instances taken from Mahabharat - like Kunti meeting her illegitimate son, Karna - seem ludicrous the manner in which they appears in the film. Without adequate character build-up and contained drama, the scene feels out of context and redundant.

Mani Ratnam adapted Mahabharat far more successfully in his Rajnikanth-Mammooty starrer, Thalapathy. Jha struggles to balance the two ends and achieve a coherent narrative.

On the upside, the film is shot very well. Some of the scenes between Ajay Devgn and Manoj Bajpayee are highly watchable. These are really the only two actors who seem completely convincing in their parts. Bajpayee, in particular, gives a solid performance as Duryodhan. For the first time in his career, Ranbir Kapoor looks lost in a film, where his character is extremely ill-defined. Again, Katrina for the first time gets to prove her acting skills, to disastrous results! What was supposed to be a showcase vehicle for her ends up exposing her limitations as an actress. Arjun Rampal's role is very loud. Nana Patekar, who doubles up as modern-day Dronacharya and Krishna, plays his part well.

Raajneeti is worth a watch for Bajpayee, but in terms of crafting and narrative, the film achieves very few of its goals.

Rating: **1/2

- Sandhya Iyer

'Why hasten our extinction?'

2010-06-04T02:14:00.000-07:00

Pooja Bhale's zealous work towards the protection of wild-life and the larger cause of environment is an attitude that many more people can do well to emulate

While most of us take a cursory interest in environmental issues and related concerns, for Pune-based 26-year-old Pooja Bhale, it is a life-long commitment and a way of life. A qualified conservation biologist, the young achiever is running an organisation called Protecterra Ecological Foundation that aims to spread awareness about the environment, with special focus on wildlife protection.
Pooja always had her mind set on environmental studies and by 18, she was in London pursuing a course in it. “As a kid, I remember my mom telling me a story about a baby elephant who gets separated from its mother in a poaching incident. It stayed with me for a long time and I knew then that I would do something related to wildlife."

“Often, people don't know how they can contribute towards wildlife protection. The 'Save Tiger' campaign was great, but you were never told how you could make a difference. What we can do is watch our individual habits - stop littering, not play blaring music near jungles. We also need to strengthen our wildlife protection laws. Right now, the conviction rate is less than 0.01 per cent. The more we protect our environment, the better the chances are that we retain our wildlife. Our economic stability depends on our ecological stability. Otherwise, both collapse,” she says.
In 2008-09, she helmed the 'conservation awareness programme' at the Wildlife Protection Society of India (WPSI), Delhi and worked as assistant to prominent wildlife conservationist and executive director of WPSI, Belinda Wright.
In the next few months, she intends to have an army of volunteers who can work towards targeting different age groups. "When I go to schools, I see that a lot of children are well-aware about the problems of pollution, climate changes, and so on. It is the adults who need to be re-educated about their civic responsibilities," she says.

Besides the various schools Pooja visits and the workshops she conducts, her diligence towards the cause prompts her to even talk to perfect strangers at a traffic signal, if need be. "I live my work. I am collaborating with a Mountain & Adventure Group called Trekdi. The message is to respect one's surroundings. Not many know that the stretch to Mount Everest has an incredible amount of garbage. I'm also associated with another group, PEM in Ratnagiri, which empowers rural people and educates them on environment," says Pooja, who herself is heavily into adventure sports.

At the moment, her own home (a sprawling bungalow in Aundh) is where the action lies. "I intend to get my own place soon. I have a 300-plus collection of books related to environment and about 100 documentary films on it. The idea is to create a dialogue first. But for me, it's not about merely imparting information only. It is about empowering people to make a difference," she says with youthful zeal.

Pooja's passion for nature extends to all walks of her life, and no slack is cut for friends and family. Any one bringing a plastic bag to her place is duly fined Rs 5. "And if it's my mother, I take Rs 500," she says, without being amused. "My father is a builder, and I ensure that every project of his is environment-friendly." And understandably, every conceivable eco-friendly measure from rain-water harvesting to solar heating is adopted at her place.

“Extinction is the rule of evolution. That is bound to happen, but we are quickening the pace and losing our species faster than ever before. I hope our environmental concerns pick up as a movement, wherein each person feels responsible for the consequences of their actions,” she says.

- Sandhya Iyer

For more details, contact www.protecterraef.org

Singam (Tamil) review

2010-05-28T20:40:00.001-07:00

Starring: Surya, Anushka, Prakash Raj, Naseer, Vivek
Director: Hari

The film opens with the face of a lion - which is what Singam means in Tamil and then grandly announces this to be its lead actor, Surya's 25th film. It's evident then that Singam will be another grand showcase vehicle for its talented lead actor and the film turns out to be just that. Once actors down South acquire a kind of mass fan following, a lot of their films are only interested in coming up with a plot-line that will do best to project the star's heroism and virtues. It happens with all Rajnikanth starrers, where a script is entirely dispensible against his towering image and charisma.

From the past few films, Surya seems to be consciously aiming to shed some of his 'thinking actor' image and turning towards massy entertainers. The actor who impressed critics and class audiences alike with his films like Ghajini, Varanam Aayiram, Silluna Uru Kadhal and Ayutha Ezhuthu has been doing hard-core commercial fares like Ayan, Aru and now, Sigham. It's certainly helped him garner tremendous clout at the boxoffice, but one hopes he can balance it with more meaningful films.

Does that make Singam just another run-of-the-mill film? The subject is certainly not new in any sense. Durai-singam (Surya) is an honest cop in Nallore and enjoys immense good-will among his people there. He meets a businessman's daughter, Kavya (Anushka), who falls for his brave acts and sense of justice. In between, there are a dozen long action sequences, where Surya single-handedly takes on petty criminals and eve teasers in his area. He chases them all over the place, beats them up mercilessly, and then as the poor men grovel before him, the hero unleashes dialogues on them that go on forever. And in utmost reverence to the leading man, the camera captures all his flying kicks in slow motion, and when there is an opportunity for a close-up, Surya's face gets graphically morphed into that of a real lion. Much of this is so funny, that even people who generally dread a lot of blood and gore in films would not seriously mind any of this. Incidentally, it's also low on vulgarity, unlike films of this genre, so families can go ahead and watch it.

The not-so-big twist in the tale comes when Singam is promoted as an inspector to Chennai. This brings him in direct confrontation with one of the most dreaded local goons of the place, Mayilvaganan (Prakash Raj). The script suggests that there would be a powerful conflict here, and the fact that the film takes a heavy-weight actor like Prakash Raj for the villain's part, sets up the drama nicely. However, the makers are so focussed on establishing Surya as peerless and ferocious and all that, that the conflict becomes entirely lopsided. Singam wins every battle against Mayilvaganam and the latter, who till Surya enters the scene seems like an interesting character, is relegated to the role of a standard villian.

In spite of flaws, Singam works as a decent masala entertainer, and that's thanks to a superlative Surya. He does not have Rajni's flamboyance, but he is still a very watchable actor. The best part of the film is the romance between Surya and Anushka. It's not overdone and the emotions feel just right. Anushka resembles Kareena Kapoor from certain angles, and is competent in her part. Director Hari, who made commercial fares like Saamy and Vel, has an assured style, and his screenplay is pacy. Overall, Singam has nothing new to offer in terms of story-line, but the mix of action, thrills and romance makes it one of the better films this season.

Rating: **1/2

-Sandhya Iyer

Kites review

2010-05-21T07:58:00.000-07:00

Director: Anurag Basu

Starring: Hrithik Roshan, Barbara Mori, Kangana, Kabir Bedi

Rating: **1/2

Sandhya Iyer

Flutters, but sputters a lot

In the making for over three years now, Kites was expected to soar high and possibly turn Hrithik Roshan into a global star. Sadly, all those ambitions come crashing, as this kite loses its way badly in a script that is both run-of-the-mill and formulaic.
The film is not only about clash of language. It also appears to be a clash of creative minds, where the project was getting pulled in different directions. The result is that it ends up looking confused about what it wants to be. It's clear that producer Rakesh Roshan wanted a film with a certain international appeal, so as to showcase his son's abilities to the world. So you have Hrithik doing everything in the film from action to dance to drama. Even his singing abilities are on display. It's almost like Sr Roshan keeps re-launching his son every few years. The film's director Anurag Basu clearly has a distinctive style, one that is more subtle and intense (Metro, Gangster). When these two men come together, it's a bit of an uneasy mix, and it shows in the film. For a less than serviceable script such as this, Basu's treatment is too heavy and intense. He's the right director for the wrong film. Again, each time he tries to infuse some life into the love story, you are distracted from it with some mindless action sequences.

The drama unfolds in Las Vegas, where Jai (Hrithik Roshan) and Linda (Barbara Mori) are hustlers. Before they even get to know each other, Jai is already set to marry the super-rich Jina (Kangana), whose father (Kabir Bedi) runs all the major casinos in the city. His son (Tony), on the other hand is already engaged to Linda. Theirs is a notorious family, as Jai finds out, but the idea of becoming rich keeps him interested in Jina. This is until he sees Linda and flips for her looks. She speaks Spanish and can't follow English. He doesn't understand Spanish. In quick time, you see even Linda responding to him and both reveal they are in their respective relationships only for the money. This brings them close and Tony's brutish behaviour towards Linda leads to an ugly showdown. Both Jai and Linda have to flee to save their lives. As the couple is on a chase, Basu does a Bonnie and Clyde, with a bank robbery and a few other light scenes thrown in.

It appears that when you're in love, not following each other's language should be the last of your concerns. So even if the Hrithik-Mori love story looks incompatible, without the couple being able to communicate (unless, they are happy to be making shadow-birds on the walls all their life), the makers go ahead with their ambition of making an epic love story with these two. Quite conveniently, Hrithik and Barbara keep finding Indian and Spanish people everywhere to translate for them.

The first 15-20 minutes at the start with Hrithik and Kangana are extremely engaging, as are some portions with Barbara Mori (who looks abolutely gorgeous). The film gets sluggish then, but picks up again when the light-hearted portions come along. In fact, the semi-comic portions are the best parts of the film, and it makes you wonder whether it would have been wiser for Roshan and Basu to just go ahead and make a cross-cultural comic-drama, rather than get into the serious zone. The biggest problem with Kites is that the love story (in spite of Hrithik and Barbara's chemistry), is never felt as strongly by the audience, even if the script asserts it. Both appear pretty practical when you are introduced to them. Their sudden change of heart when they see each other and the intensity that follows is not convincing. Language may not be the most important thing, but surely only looks alone don't drive people to mad love.

Yet, in spite of the story not really working, Kites is worth a watch for Hrithik Roshan, who is fabulous as ever. The film does not deserve him. Barbara is alluring, and fits the bill. Kangana has a small role, but Basu does not let his favourite actress down and manages to flesh out her character and give it an arch for whatever it's worth.
But finally, the film itself is a dull affair and will leave both its desi and international audiences disappointed.

3D - a passing fad or here to stay?

2010-05-18T23:35:00.000-07:00

Is the Hollywood obsession with 3D a temporary fad or the way to go now? Meanwhile, Bollywood too is seriously flirting with the idea. Sandhya Iyer explores the various dimensions to this trend that’s catching on fast and furious

All those who thought the Avatar wave was a short-lived affair and Hollywood’s infatuation with 3D would flicker out sooner than later, have been left flummoxed. Already, we’ve seen three major 3D films releasing this year and turning money-spinners — How To Train Your Dragon, Clash Of the Titans and Alice In Wonderland. Out of these, the last two were shot in 2D and later converted to 3D to cash in on the Avatar wave. The films came in for harsh criticism, both for their content and slipshod employment of 3D. However, Hollywood productions aren’t willing to let go of the 3D formula — the proverbial golden goose — one which they believe is the much-needed ‘premium’ to get audience into theaters. After all, why would a viewer go to the cinemas if there is no novelty and larger-than-life experience, they argue?

The 3D boom

Hollywood Studios has already announced about 20 releases in 3D for 2010. James Cameron has stated that he will be converting his last mega blockbuster, Titanic into 3D. Even a serious filmmaker like Martin Scorsese has bitten the bullet. The maker of legendary films like Taxi Driver and Raging Bull has announced that his new film, The Invention of Hugo Cabret will be in 3D. When asked about it, the filmmaker described the 3D experience as “natural that we would go that way”. The 3D craze is obviously conducive to Disney, who has announced that it would now be focussing entirely on animation and super hero flicks. So are 3D films going to be a way of life for Hollywood from here on? Is it healthy in the larger interest of good cinema or is it just a temporary marketing gimmick to charge viewers a premium on tickets?

The argument against 3D

Skeptics believe the ‘stampede’ for 3D movies might not augur well for robust filmmaking and good old story-telling. Eminent Hollywood film reviewer, Roger Ebert is one of the staunchest critics of 3D and believes the third dimension adds nothing new to one’s movie-watching experience and is often nothing but a distraction.
“Some 3D consists of only separating the visual planes, so that some objects float above others, but everything is still in 2D. We shouldn’t notice this. But we do,” he writes in his latest Newsweek cover story, titled, ‘Why I hate 3D — and so should you!’ Ebert makes several points on why he dislikes 3D. He says the technology is bad for the eyes, is often dull, and an unnecessary addition to the ‘self-sufficient’ 2D and so on. Ebert makes it clear he is not against 3D as an option. He praises Cameron’s Avatar, but also warns that a mad rush for 3D and fake conversions could impact the industry in a negative way. He rues that even filmmakers who made films for ‘grown-ups’ are now making a beeline for the kiddie 3D market. He concludes by saying that audiences must be given a reason to come to the cinemas but that reason need not be 3D!

Bollywood falls for 3D, too

Even as Hollywood carries on its affair with 3D, Bollywood is starting to flirt with the idea too. In quick time, Ram Gopal Varma has announced that he wants to make a horror film in 3D. The director has been a huge fan of Cameron’s Avatar and can’t wait to extend the technology to his favourite genre. Meanwhile, Boney Kapoor has serious plans of making Mr India in 3D. One can understand the above two choices. But even Pooja Bhatt has stated that she wants to make a sequel to her Bipasha Basu-John Abraham starrer Jism in 3D! Perhaps to show a bikini clad Bipasha walking towards the audience?
Kunal Deshmukh of Jannat and Tum Mile fame believes Bollywood is still light years away from making a genuine 3D film. “We’re just talking about it now. The whole process will be expensive for us. Maybe 2D to 3D conversions are feasible, but to shoot an entire film in 3D is out of question. We don’t work with those kind of budgets,” he says. Not many theatres are 3D enabled in India yet. “Till that figure goes up to 500 at least, making a 3D film doesn’t make sense. Take for example a film like Kites. The film can never have the kind of wide release it is seeing today if it were to be in 3D,” he adds. Besides, he doesn’t think 2D can ever be wiped out, “3D is doing well in Hollywood, but then so is Iron Man 2 — which was in 2D.”
On the other hand, Vroom director, Savin Tuscano, is very confident about 3D in India. “If I were to make a sequel to Vroom, I would love to make it in 3D. I see the cameras getting much cheaper in the next two years and many people here would be interested,” he says.

3D feasible in India?

Sunil Khaturia, vice-president of Scrabble Entertainment, the company that’s currently converting multiplex screens in India to digital equipment (3D enabled screens) says, “India has the biggest 3D potential in the world for the obvious reasons that people worship their superstars and make them their idols here. To see your idol with 3D effects is something! As of now, we have around 80 screens that are 3D enabled. The technology to produce 3D content is being outsourced as of now due to the economic limitations of every production house. This will change very soon after our production guys get trained under the companies who have mastered the art of live shooting in 3D. Again with good quality product, there is no reason why a big budget 3D film should not be commercially viable in India.”

Screening 3D... and soon 4D?

The multiplexes in the country are quite excited about 3D and believe that in the next two years we could see a fair number of Bollywood films releasing in 3D. “It obviously enhances the experience and given the right content, it can work very well in India,” says Neerav Panchamia, vice-president (operations) at E-Square. But there are a few hindrances, of course. “The set-up for 3D is expensive — it costs about 35-45 lakhs. So only multiplexes where Hollywod films are watched or have an audience favouring 3D can invest in it. I can tell you the returns come to us very slowly, but it is a USP for any multiplex,” he says.
Will 3D be a way of life then? “It may not suit every film, but it could be very effective for certain subjects,” he adds. “And now, there is 4D coming in also, where your seat moves and you get a sense of being ‘inside’ a film. We will have more of these things in the future,” he says.

Will 3D tick in the long-term?

Be it Hollywood or Bollywood, people at both ends believe that if 3D is used judiciously, it can sustain interest. “It was great to see a film like Avatar, but I thought Final Destination in 3D was horrendous. Why would one want to see six people dying on your face? There has to be some meaning to using 3D,” says Tuscano. Sunil Khaturia also agrees that only time will determine the future of 3D films, “These are still times of testing the waters and nobody knows what’s going to work or not in 3D as there is no success formula to anything,” he says.

3D beyond movies
The IPL matches that were shown in 3D drew a dismal response, so multiplexes and others realise that the 3D card may not work at all times. Yet, once the set-up is in place, one can expect to see live music shows and major sports event covered in 3D. Whether the audience interest in it sustains and whether they are willing to pay a premium for it, is anyone’s guess.
Meanwhile, television companies are also cashing in on the craze and coming up with sets where a few programmes can be watched in 3D. But everyone seems to agree that content is what will drive the business from here on. Even those who are thick into 3D and gung ho about its future like Khaturia are wise enough to realise this. “Like in any form of entertainment, content is the king. Technology cannot take over from that fact. If you sell good content, there is no reason why 3D is not sustainable,” he says.

Bumm Bumm Bole

2010-05-14T08:17:00.000-07:00

Little goody two-shoes

Director: Priyadarshan
Starring: Darsheel Safary, Ziyah Vastani, Atul Kulkarni, Rituparna Sen Gupta
Showing at: Citypride, E-Square, Mangala, Inox
Rating: ***

If you haven't seen Majid Majidi's Children Of Heaven, the celebrated Iranian film of which Bumm Bumm Bole is a scene-to-scene desi adaptation, chances are that you will enjoy this effort from Priyadarshan. There is enough simplicity and warmth to the story that both children and adults will find endearing. On the other hand, those who have already seen Majidi's film may find some of the additions distracting and unnecessary. Yet, two things the film achieves. It does not embarrass itself in any way, and after Taare Zameen Par, this is a fairly good, if not excellent follow up to the criminally ignored genre of childrens' films.

Bumm Bumm Bole is about a poor family living in the ULFA-infested terrain of Assam. The father (Atul Kulkarni) is struggling to make ends meet and often keeps losing his job. Their mother (Rituparna)is busy either with household chores and calming down her angry husband who cureses the world for all their troubles. Life is not easy for their two children either, but when Pinaki (Darsheel Safary) accidentally loses his sister Rim Jim's (Ziyah Vastani) sandals, it causes nothing short of an upheaval in their little world. Pinaki is scared to tell his father and knows they the family can't cannot afford a new pair anyway. So both decide to use the one pair of shoes they have. Rim Jim uses it for school in the morning and then hurriedly hands it over to her brother who needs it in the afternoon. The rest of the story is about how they pull this off, even as they try their best to get a new pair of shoes.

The parts between Darsheel and Ziyah are beautifully handled and both child actors are utterly delightful to watch. It's wonderful how Priyan has managed to extract such natural performances from them. Never do you see them over-acting. While Darsheel conveys a great deal with his eyes, Ziyah is cuteness personified. Bumm Bumm Bole is worth a watch just to see their performances.

The film is not without some problems though. Priyan has set the story in North-East, justifiably to create a certain 'alien' mood and ambiance that will do justice to a script adapted from an Iranian film. But the film has been shot in Tamil Nadu, Ooty and while the film has beautiful postcard-like visuals, it takes away from the authenticity of the setting. It's not enough to show tea plantations and a few people from the North-East. One of the reasons why the Iranian film experience is so valuable is because it gives you a real and simmering sense of a difficult, strife-torn place. Here, the director uses the terrorist-ridden backdrop for dramatic effect, but without authentic setting, the impact is greatly reduced. This has been a problem with both Priyadarshan and Mani Ratnam, who keep trying to pass off a South Indian topography for North India! It most decidedly kills some of the film's essence.

Yet, this may not ruin your experience of the film. Children will still enjoy it and be delighted with Darsheel and Ziyah's act. There are enough positives in the film. For one, it wonderfully conveys the disparity in living standards that children are unfairly faced with. It's heart- breaking to see Darsheel's expression when he sees a dozen sparking shoes arranged in an effluent home, while he can't get a single pair for his sister. There is a message in it for our over-pampered city kids who get everything on a platter.

Priyan may not have filled Majidi's shoes, but this certainly doesn't pinch.

-Sandhya Iyer

Badmaash Company

2010-05-07T07:24:00.000-07:00

Director: Parmeet Sethi
Starring: Shahid Kapoor, Anushka Sharma, Vir Das, Meiyang Chang and Anupam Kher
Rating: **1/2

In times of economic uncertainty such as ours, it can be tough to sympathise with a tale about a wonder-kid swindler. On occasions, your heart goes out to those who are getting cheated and unfairly bearing the brunt. Hence, Badmaash Company --- about a bunch of youngsters who carry out mini-scams to get instantly rich - would have been a rather difficult film to enjoy were it to be set in contemporary times. Its theme and treatment also qualify it to be nothing more than an average film. But what gives this Parmeet Sethi directed film some edge is the year it is set in.
The story takes place in 1994 - a significant period in our times when one had started to experience numerous changes. The post-liberalisation years brought about a great shake-up in the old, established order, opening up a whole new world of exciting opportunities. It is this era of 'aspirational India' that is evoked in Badmaash Company.

Karan (Shahid Kapoor), is unhappy with his present and wants to get rich quickly. He finds it impossible to live by the ideals of his middle-class father (Anupam Kher). So along with his friends, Zing (Chang), Bulbul (Anushka Sharma) and Chandu (Vir Das), he starts out by smuggling items for a Custom store owner. But soon enough, he comes up with his own con ideas, where he gets imports Reebok shoes - a prized commodity in those days -- and makes his money by successfully evading the huge custom duty each time. But with the watershed Finance budget, where the then FM Manmohan Singh slashes all custom charges, Karan's business plan gets derailed. The gang then moves to the US and carry out some more scams, till trouble begins.

The film's attempt to chronicle a time in recent history is refreshing, and the con jobs keep you interested. The soundtrack, especially Jaska Jaska and the background music are catchy, and the pace is good. It's not a patch on the frolicsome Bunty aur Babli, but Badmaash Company is not without its charm.

However, the film goes downhill after a perky first half, and settles to become a tired, cliched tale about redemption. It slips into predictable zones and for a con film, that can be a heavy let-down. Scenes where Shahid turns arrogant and loses his temper are all a bit artificially set up to show his subsequent down-fall. His relationship with Anushka is unconvincing and abrupt.

Besides, even though Sethi loves bringing in several period details, there's not much to distinguish his characters as youngsters of the 90s - neither in their appearance nor attitude. Yes, Anushka wears accessories that were peculiar in the 90s ('Raveena earrings and floral ribbons). But that's about it.

Among the performances, Vir Das, as the incorrigible flirt who turns out to be a loyal, loving man, is excellent. Chang is alright, with not much scope to perform. Anushka Sharma's pudgy nose and Punjabi accent which served her well for a film like Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi does not go too well with her hip character here. Shahid Kapoor looks good and delivers a confidence performance.

Parmeet Sethi makes a fair debut as director. He has style and flair in his story-telling and keeps his narrative fluid. But as writer he is inconsistent. The ending is simplistic and the film is disappointingly unambitious. Yet, not a bad effort for a first-timer.
In the film, Shahid says a successful venture sustains on great ideas. Badmaash Company sadly runs out of it mid-way.

Just Imagine!

2010-05-04T06:02:00.000-07:00

Sandhya Iyer speaks to Imagine’s VP (marketing and communications), Nikhil Madhok on why the channel considers its provocative shows like Swayamvar and Raaz Pichhle Janam Ka a recipe for success, among other things

Television, as it stands

Not all of us are thrilled with the current television scene in the country. Just when one thought the saas-bahu menace was starting to recede, channels caught on to stories based in rural India. Many of these shows — under the garb of presenting women’s subjugation — are proving to be even more regressive. Then there’s of course reality television that continues to stump us with its provocative programming with each passing day. First, Splitsvilla, then Swayamvar and now Emotional Atyachar, channels are pushing the envelope in a bid to get more eyeballs. By the look of it, most channels in the general entertainment (GE) category believe that anything that catches the viewers’ attention is good enough. The idea is to give the public what it wants. Imagine’s VP, Nikhil Madhok talks about various aspects regarding the channel, giving a clear perspective of what goes into programming decisions and the attitude GE channels are adopting now.

Shaky start, good pick-up

Imagine — as NDTV Imagine — had a tepid start, when it was launched a couple of years ago. Its much-hyped show, Ramayan flopped, as did their celebrity dance shows, Dhoom and Saroj Khan’s Nachle Ve. The channel appeared to be struggling untill it hit upon the idea of getting television drama queen, Rakhi Sawant married through a reality show. Rakhi Ka Swayamvar was an instant hit. Its second season with Rahul Mahajan also did well, and now the channel is already preparing for a third season. “Yes, our initial shows did not cut ice. We realised we needed to do what the biggies are not doing. The Swayamvar series really helped us. Before that, we had Farhan Akhtar’s Oye, it’s Friday which didn’t do too well, but it brought some freshness. We followed it up with fiction shows like Bandini and Kitni Mohabbat Hai, which improved our trajectory,” says Madhok.

On the Swayamvar success

The theory circulating was that Imagine wanted to do a show on marriage because wedding sequences tend to be the high points in soaps and the TRPs invariably shoot up. “That’s true,” Madhok admits, with candour, adding, “We thought, why not take it from a fictional space and put it in a real one.” The same logic applies to Imagine’s new reality show, Desi Girls, where eight television hotties will be staying in a small village up North, doing all the work that village belles do. Obviously, one of the reasons for green-lighting the concept is because rural shows are the flavour of the season. Again, the channel does not deny this connection. “Why not? We will take what is working around us and give it a twist.”
But Swayamvar almost threatened to get derailed when Rakhi Sawant broke off her engagement with her fiance. The channel admits this. “Yes, it could have easily derailed. We were very keen that it should end in marriage. Maybe we weren’t all that forceful. It ended up with Rakhi getting a lot of flak and we too were upset that she didn’t get married. Which is why with Rahul (Mahajan), we hammered this point right from the beginning,” says Madhok.
For now, Imagine has shortlisted one cricketer and two Bollywood stars for Swayamvar 3.

Tackling criticism

The channel has certainly managed to come out of its doldrums with a couple of hit shows, but it has been at the cost of some credibility. Their shows are now viewed as controversial and voyeuristic, “That’s true, but in today’s times, it’s better to have some image than have no image. When we did Ramayan, we were considered a channel for old people. We needed to do something dramatic. Yes, our shows are controversial, but that keeps us in the news.” The channel is happy that including Swayamvar and Raaz Pichhle Janam Ka, they’ve seen more success with reality shows than any other channel. “The others have had one hit show, followed by a couple of failures. Star Plus’ Sach Ka Saamna worked, but many other stuff they did failed. Colors got a success with Fear Factor, but Bingo flopped very badly. We at Imagine are happy to give people what they want, even if it is at the cost of the content appearing titillating. Look at Emotional Atyachaar — it’s a big hit for UTV Bindaas!”
So would Imagine also get into that zone soon? “I think a show like that is right for a youth channel. It may not be suitable for a GE segment like ours. It’s certainly not because we consider such a show bad,” says Madhok.

Towards the future

The perennial question is, why can’t our channels get more experimental with their content? Reality shows are fine, but why not offer more quality fiction? “You have to understand that there are two Indias before us —India 1 and India 2. The ones to comment on our shows are from India 2. When I look at a lot of the content on TV, I can’t believe anyone would want to watch it. But for 70-80 per cent of the viewers, it is their reality. Recently, Yash Raj launched television shows that were of absolute international quality. None of them worked! The viewership for such shows is minuscule. In 2001, we had 20 million viewers in India. In 2010, there are 140 million. The viewership has changed drastically, and we obviously want to cater to the largest segment,” Madhok says.
He adds that their channel does not want to be a Louis Vuitton, catering to a niche segment. So they’d rather be Lux underwear? “Ya, why not! When we tried to be Calven Klein, no one watched us. One has to have clarity while running a channel,” he says.

How ‘desi’ is Imagine’s Desi Girls show?

2010-05-04T05:51:00.000-07:00

Behind the scenes

After a spate of failures, Imagine (not NDTV Imagine anymore) finally found a big success with Rakhi Sawant’s Swayamvar last year and since then, the channel has been going all out and getting in provocative, eye-ball grabbing shows, even if it means coming in for a fair bit of flak.

The channel’s new offering (in association with BBC) is Desi Girl, where eight hotties have landed up in a small, nondescript village called Sialba Majri in Chandigarh. The chosen eight are a combination of the usual suspects and some fresh faces. Spit-fires Sambhavna Seth and Kashmera Shah are part of the show. Then there’s also Roshni Chopra, Monica Bedi, Ishitta Aun, Dhokha star Aushima Sawhney, Rucha Gujarati, and Anmol Singh, who was seen in a couple of shows on MTV.
So at the end of April, when summer is at its harshest, we journos got a dekko into the world that these beauties are inhabiting. Those who came with the images of Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge and the lush mustard fields in mind, were obviously disappointed. It’s not really your scenic village from what we saw. But the channel insists it had its own reasons for choosing Sialba Majri. After a long recce, Sialba was ultimately chosen because “it was found to be far less conservative compared to other villages.”

So what is Desi Girl going to be all about? In what promises to be a high-voltage drama, these glamourous city slickers, will be required to spend over a month in the village. The concept has been taken from Fox Television’s reality show, The Simple Life, where wealthy socialites Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie were required to do low-paying, manual jobs.

The channel has identified four families from the village, who will be playing host to the girls. Each room is to be shared by two girls, and they will be doing all the work that village belles undertake — milking the cows, making cow dung cakes, cooking food and so on. And the girl who manages to win over the villagers will be declared the winner.

Clearly, many things are looking scripted at this stage, though as a concept, the channel does look to have a winner on its hands. We were given a tiny glimpse into the dreary conditions in which the girls are staying — very small rooms, no air conditioners. It’s a little difficult for us to believe the girls are staying here, but the channel vouches that the participants are indeed being given an authentic dose of the ‘desi’ life.
And as if to prove the point, the eight hotties walked in, dressed to kill, in the middle of an open field where they demonstrated their skill with catching chickens! Later, each of them individually spent time talking about the rigours of village life. “Look at the condition of my nails! I’ve never worked so much,” rued Kashmera, even as some others with perfectly manicured hands (Monica and Sambhavana) made sure to hide theirs while they were up on stage. “There have been no fireworks between us girls so far, maybe because we still don’t know each other that well,” added Kashmera.

Sambhavana spoke about how she was thrilled to have finally learnt her mother tongue and waxed eloquent in Punjabi. Monica spoke about her ancestors hailing from Punjab, and how her decision to take up the show was an emotional one. Her co-participants didn’t seem to believe her, because we saw Kashmera whispering to others how Monica had never mentioned any such thing to them. ‘Humein toh nahin bataya tha...’ she said. Almost all the girls spoke about how the show was an unforgettable experience.
The only male on the show is host Rohit Roy, who says he’s having the time of his life. He’s of course not required to stay in the village and has been put up at a five star. So isn’t wife Mansi worried about having her hubby surrounded by eight sultry women? “Ah, not really. Mansi’s my anchor. I can’t do without her. I know I have a stud image, which I am happy to keep. It helps my career,” he says, quickly adding, “Actually, Desi Girl goes against that image of mine. Here, I am more like a friend, father or brother to the girls. I listen to their problems, try to help them.”

So is the channel going to flatly propagate how urban women are less capable than their rural counterparts? Nikhil Madhok, Vice President — Marketing and Communications is quick to defend the charge. “No. I think the message will be about how there can be a healthy exchange between urban and rural life. For example, when one of the elders admonishes the girls for dressing skimpily, another family member takes up for her, pointing out that she’s doing all her work well. So why should it matter what she wears,” he says.
Hmmm... that should give you some idea of what to expect from Desi Girls.

Housefull review

2010-04-30T07:44:00.000-07:00

Director : Sajid Khan
Starring: Akshay Kumar, Deepika Padukone, Lara Dutta, Riteish Deshmukh, Jiah Khan, Boman Irani
Stars : **

For a film where the hero supposedly gets married to three different women, Housefull is strangely limp, completely lacking in vigour. The comic punches are few and far in between and even many of these are direct lifts from one film or the other. There's a bit from The Heartbreak Kid and Meet The Parents. Almost the entire drama that ensues in the second half is a copy of the Rajesh Khanna-Nanda 1972 starrer, Joru Ka Ghulam. Not only that, the writers (Sajid Khan, Milap Zaveri, Vibha Singh) are at such a loss for original comic ideas that they've repeated the entire Kanta ben joke from Kal Ho Naa Ho as it is.

Director Sajid Khan seems to think that by using the 'homage' excuse, he doesn't need to work on the writing, which stays tepid almost for its entire running time. Arush (Akshay Kumar) is an unlucky man, who spells trouble for whoever he comes in contact with. Depressed and alone, he joins his friend, Bob (Riteish Deshmukh) and his wife, Hetal (Lara Dutta) in London for a few days. The couple get Akshay married to their boss' (Randhir Kapoor) daughter, Devika (Jiah Khan). Just as Arush thinks his luck is about to change, Devika confesses that she got married to him only to placate her dad and does in fact have a boyfriend. Arush finds love again with Deepika, but has to deal with her tough, hard-to-please brother (Arjun Rampal). On the other hand, Hetal, in order to pacify her angry father (Boman Irani), lies to him about her husband's financial status. She even tells him they have a child. Now, all the characters have to assume different roles to escape being caught.

The first half can be called amiable time-pass. There are some scenes that induce a slight chuckle – like where Akshay uses the vacuum cleaner on a high mode and everything in the house, including the parrot gets sucked into it - but even this scene goes on and on and becomes ludicrous by the end of it. Chunky Pandey, as theItalian hotelier is funny. Another scene where Boman is shocked to see that his daughter has an African child (because that is the only baby they can find in quick time) is amusing. But that's about it. The film has very few comic punches and Sajid and the writers fail to infuse the story with much energy or freshness. They rely on the same old gay jokes and gags, and it's only when a song comes on (all are entertaining numbers) does the film get some life.

Housefull's drama and plot points are all manufactured. Every confusion in the film is either a result of some silly coincidence or because the characters insist on behaving like total fools. For example, why does Hetal allow Arush to be misunderstood as her husband by her father and the land-lady? In Joru Ka Ghulam, Nanda gets someone else to play her husband in front of her dad because her own hubby, Rajesh Khanna has fought and left her. So when Khanna returns to her, he has no option but to don some other role. That is what situational drama is about. It needs to have a semblance of logic.

Things are still tolerable until the last 30 minutes of the film. But with Arjun Rampal's entry and the final laughing gas sequence, the film became distasteful and loses whatever little good-will it earns through the rest of the film.

Sajid Khan should be thanked for not making a crass, sexist film out of a subject such as this. But that's just a small consolation. Khan does not show any special spark with his direction and the writing especially is a no go. He tries hard to make a paisa vasool dramedy, but with a lack-lustre script and tepid characterisation, the film never really gathers steam. In fact, the use of a masala gem like Apni Toh Jaise Taise amid such poor drama is criminal.
One of the reasons why the film is so plodding is partly due to Akshay Kumar's character. For a lead actor, his is a dull, listless role. Lara Dutta and Riteish have ill-defined characters and their hamming doesn't help. And after all this, in a self-congratulatory mode, Sajid Khan has inserted a clap track at the end - as if applauding his own effort.

Housefull is an average film, that just doesn't pack in enough. Watch it if you must.

Film review: Marathi film, Wavtal

2010-04-20T03:51:00.000-07:00

Director: Shivaji Lotan Patil
Starring: Tejaswini Pandit, Ashok Samarth, Mukesh Tiwari, Vinay Apte, Sunil Shende
Rating: **

When filmmakers take up issues like sex, rape, homosexuality or prostitution, there are often faced with a conundrum - how does one tackle an essentially sensational subject without resorting to sensationalism oneself? Of course, this is a question applicable only to those who are at least reasonably serious about the cause they wish to highlight. The vast majority tend to operate in bad faith, taking up these themes precisely because they attract eyeballs. If not that, the temptation is to go the full hog, be as graphic and titillating as possible - all under the garb of making a gritty and noble film.

Unfortunately, Marathi film Wavtal falls under the third category, where a reasonably good story-line (based on Anant Samant's novel, K-5) is made ineffectual, thanks to the above reason. In telling us about the horrors of a rape victim, the makers put their female lead ( Tejaswini Pandit - good) through every kind of torture at the hands of the man who takes her captive (Mukesh Tiwari - one note). The scenes are all extremely graphic and tasteless. We even saw a few in the audience walking out in disgust. The premise itself would not have been offensive, if it were to have a psychological edge and if Tiwari was not portrayed as a completely dark character. But just showing a woman suffering and being put to every indignity in the world amounts to nothing but titillation.

The story itself has potential. The film starts with an Army commando, called K-5 (the name of his section and his own number) raiding a small terrorist hideout. He finds a young woman (Tejaswini) with a child there, and thinks her to be a part of the gang. He brings her to his work station, located in the middle of a desert, and waits for her to break her stony silence. When she finally does, he's shocked by what she recounts. She tells him about her blissful married life before she and her husband are attacked by a mob during their visit to Mumbai. She is captured by one of the men, and the rest leads her down a horrific path.

In the hands of a better director and screen-play writer, Wavtal could have just been a hard-hitting film. Ashok Samarth(good, solid performance), as K-5 is an intense character, and his relationship with the young woman makes for some engaging moments. K-5's confrontation with Tejaswini's influential father-in-law in the final scenes are also well-done. But apart from that, the film's tone is too loud. Wavtal has the framework of a proper commercial film, which is why one is not willing to buy the makers' attempts to pass off grossly disturbing scenes as realism. Finally, it's the treatment that does the film in.

Paathshaala - film review

2010-04-18T07:37:00.000-07:00

Worth Mass-bunking

Director: Milind Ukey
Starring: Shahid Kapoor, Nana Patekar, Ayesha Takia, Saurabh Shukla and Anjan Srivastav
Rating: *

Even some of the worst films have something to redeem themselves with, but Paathshaala is an atrocity that’s hard to sum up in words. The film is relentlessly cringe-worthy, with some of the most appalling writing (choreographer Ahmed Khan) one has seen in a long time.

Debutant Milind Ukey’s direction is shockingly amateurish and heavy-handed, and it doesn’t help that he flashes his FTII credentials in the title credits in the hope of winning some brownie points. Every scene is exaggerated, every response overdone. He even makes a competent actor like Anjan Srivastav ham it to the hilt. The background music takes the cue from the director’s simplistic, loud narrative, and ends up making Paathshaala an experience that is worse than the most dreadful day you can recollect from school life.

So you have a boarding school (tacky set) in the middle of nowhere, where Nana Patekar is the principal. In Mohabbatein style, his authority evokes fear among the staff and students. Shahid Kapoor joins as an English teacher, but since he has some training in music, Nana suggests that he could double up as a music teacher as well! Someone has to sing the romantic songs you see. But he’s not the only teacher who is expected to multitask. There’s Ayesha Takia, who works as nutritionist, hostel matron, canteen manager and make-shift music teacher.
Again, Ukey’s idea of a Hindi teacher is someone who looks like a ’70s actress, with a bouffant and rose stuck to it.

Nana acquaints his teachers about the emerging competition from other schools and the need to introduce more hi-tech facilities. The school fees are increased in the middle of the term and Nana’s high-handed assistant (Saurabh Shukla) rudely dismisses off parents who protest.
To create more visibility for the school, a PR agency is hired. Soon, television channels are brought in to hold auditions in the school. The way Ukey presents these people who take auditions — they either talk on the phone as the kids perform, or yell at them when they forget to name the sponsors — is caricaturish and silly. I resist from mentioning the other scenes, because they are just embarrassingly bad. Suffice it to say, the film is an insult to one’s intelligence and gets progressively offensive with every passing scene. Schools to teachers to students to TV channels might just want to sue Ukey and they would be justified!

Taare Zameen Par beautifully brought out many things that need to be questioned about the education system and our attitude to children. And perhaps, more films can be made on aspects relating to school life. Educational institutions getting commercialised is a valid issue. Similarly, the trend of having children on various reality shows, where they are faced with gruelling hours and unrealistic expectations, is possibly another story that can be explored. Ahmed Khan and Ukey are just not the guys for it.

The performances are decent. How Shahid manages to come out of this embarrassing tripe without causing irrevocable damage to his image is a wonder. But the actor needs to pull up his socks and stop doing films as favours for his old pals. Nana Patekar’s role is listless and for the first time, you get the feeling that the actor himself is not convinced about his role. Saurabh Shukla shines in a role that could have been unbearable in the hands of a lesser actor.
This school is then, only an education for aspiring filmmakers on how not to make a film.

Film Review: Prince

2010-04-11T06:31:00.000-07:00

This Prince ain't charming

Director: Kookie Gulati
Starring: Vivek Oberoi, Aruna Shields, Nandana Sen, Sanjay Kapoor, Neeru Bajwa
Rating: **

Increasingly, Bollywood is making showcase films that aim to push the envelope where action sequences, thrills, and grandeur go. We saw it recently in Blue where money was endlessly spent to ensure that audiences have a never-seen-before experience. The film ended up being one of last year's most forgettable, big-budget disasters. With Prince again, the makers have gone to great lengths to duplicate Hollywood and come up with the kind of hi-tech action thriller that the West makes dime a dozen.

What is predictable here is that the film aims to impress with its slickness and spectacles, while its writing is woefully sub par. Similarly, the dialogues - which should have been crisp and smart for a film of this sort -- are inane and silly. On one occasion, someone tells Sanjay Kapoor, a CBI officer not to act smart and he retorts with a cocky, "I am smart!' That's the only line I remember, the rest of them are either listless or plain bad.

The film begins with Prince (Vivek Oberoi) waking up and finding that he has lost his memory. Different people try to mis-lead him about his real identity. He also meets three different women - each of whom claims to be his girlfriend, Maya. The first half has Prince struggling to find out who he is, even as various people try to chase him down. These parts are frustrating, because the screenplay and characters do not hook you enough.

The ambition in scale is obvious, but with so much of computer generated images and gadgetry, it turns far-fetched and the sets too are uncomfortably larger-than-life. The action, with Vivek jumping off skycrapers using para shoots at will, or flying with his mobike across mountains evading a thousand bullets... all of this seems too unreal for you to connect with the film. For the longest time, you get the feeling of watching a video game, where anything and everything is possible.

Vivek is not a superhero in the film, so the suspension of disbelief that is possible in a film like Krrish does not happen here. Also, truth be told, films that aim to be all about style and action, need loades of star charisma and attitude to work. Prince is low on star appeal, among other things. Vivek is no Hrithik Roshan as we know.

The second half gets much better, as the various pieces of the puzzle start to fall in place. It's not that there's nothing in the story. The idea of a chip destroying memories is an interesting one, and in the hands of a more able director and writer, it might just have made for a riveting watch. But as it stands, the film has nothing besides its high-budget look going for it.

This is the biggest film that Vivek Oberoi has starred in, but it's not necessarily a great role. So a grand comeback for this Prince-in-waiting can be ruled out.

Tum Milo Toh Sahi

2010-04-06T01:21:00.000-07:00

Director: Kabir Sadanand
Starring: Nana Patekar, Dimple Kapadia, Suneil Shetty, Vidya Malvade, Anjana Sukhani and Rehan Khan
Rating: **1/2

Tum Milo Toh Sahi follows the by now familiar pattern where many separate stories collide into each other. Like the recent English film Valentine’s Day, this one has couples from different age groups, dealing with one issue or the other. And much like V-Day, this Kabir Sadanand directed film too has no fresh insights to offer on love and for most part, there is an acute sense of deja vu in at least two of the three stories.

If there’s anything worth watching here, it is Nana Patekar in the role of the diligent, no-nonsense South Indian man who lives with memories of his dead mother. It is his part alone that adds some gravitas and poignancy to an otherwise average film.

The first 15 minutes chaotically introduce you to the different players. Dimple Kapadia as the middle-aged Dilshad Nanji is a kindly, loud Irani Cafe owner. The character is clearly a take off from her Saagar act, where she yells all the time to get things done. While shopping at a supermarket, she meets the stand-offish Subramanium (Nana Patekar). Though initially annoyed at his curtness, she is amused by him as well. How ‘Subbu’ — as Dilshad refers to him — loosens up and falls in love, is what their story is about.

The second couple, Amit and Anita (Suniel Shetty and Vidya Malavde) are facing a bit of marital discord. The husband can’t stop thinking beyond work, and the wife can’t stop complaining about it. In all this, Amit promises his boss that he would use his wife’s friendsip with Dilshad to get the latter to sell her Cafe. The company is interested in acquiring prime locations and starting their own chain of cafes. Trouble begins when Dilshad refuses.
The third story is a juvenile college romance between Shalini and Bikram (Anjana Sukhani and Rehan Khan), who stir up public support for the Cafe, citing it as a heritage site.

Obviously, the only story that holds your attention is the Nana Patekar-Dimple one.
It’s not like Nana has not played a brusque and aloof man before, but here he wonderfully internalises his character, getting many of the nuances right. Yes, his Tamil accent is not always on the mark, but his is an earnest, heart-felt and restrained performance. Dimple, as the sociable Parsi aunty, is a good foil to the reclusive Nana. She does tend to go over-the-top in many scenes, but she also manages to bring out the character’s helplessness well.

The other actors don’t stand out much, but that’s because their stories have nothing new to offer. The Anjana Sukhani-Rehan Khan track — with singer Raghav Sachar thrown into the mix as well — is especially plodding and a needless distraction. Suniel Shetty and Vidya Malavde are not bad, but again, the writing here is quite sub par. Suniel is the CEO of his company, but his boss keeps making veiled threats at him that the former would lose his job if he failed to acquire the Cafe. Over one case? He goes on to say further that Suniel has his monthly installments to think of and so on! Again, all Vidya is required to do is express anger and dismay at all her husband’s actions — at all times.

Director Kabir Sadanand manages to make some of the parts involving Nana engaging. There’s also the admirable intent of drawing attention to the need to preserve the identity of many of our cities, by protecting and maintaining its old structures and sites. Sadanand would have done better to cut out the teenage love story completely, and add some more meat to the other two.

All in all, there’s not much to dislike in Tum Milo Toh Sahi, but there’s very little to rave about it as well.

Film Review: Well Done Abba

2010-03-26T20:56:00.000-07:00

Not quite the Done deal

Starring: Boman Irani, Minissha Lamba, Ravi Kissen, Ila Arun, Sonali Kulkarni
Director: Shyam Benegal
Rating: **1/2

Not quite the Done deal

Shyam Benegal has always believed in films that have an overarching social message. So much so that Benegal often comes across as a keener student of history and sociology rather than cinema itself. His last few films, be it Hari-Bhari, Bose: The Forgotten Hero and Welcome To Sajjanpur have to an extent been social documentaries in the NFDC mode of public service films.

Obviously, the above isn't a commercially viable model; which is why Benegal, even when he wrote a serious film like Sajjanpur that dealt with age-old rural India issue, tried to make it palatable by turning it into a comic satire. He does the same with Well Done Abba, but clearly, the comic diversions continue to look somewhat forced in films. The lack of vigour and movement in his screenplays has been a problem, resulting in an acute sense of tedium. In that sense, his scripts have been like social essays projected on the big screen, rather than being cinematic with strong drama, plot and so forth.

The above problems are evident in Well Done Abba too. And yet, Benegal's message is a timely and important one, because it tackles the issue of government schemes for the poor that do not reach them at all due to rampant corruption among officers and middlemen.
Armaan Ali (Boman Irani), a driver in Mumbai, takes a month's leave from work so that he can find a groom for his daughter (Minishha Lamba). He hails from a small town near Hyderabad. Since there is an acute water shortage there, Armaan Ali applies for a loan to get a well dug up in his yard. He is prodded by some to apply in the below poverty line segment, so that all these benefits will come free to him. Armaan is confused by all the happenings around him, but he toes the line - adhering to what is expected in this maze of corrupt officers. The money is released in quick time, but none of it reaches Armaan. The well is built on paper, not on land. Taking matters in her hands, Minissha registers a complaint with the police officer (a listless Rajat Kapoor) that her well has been stolen. Others in the town also come forward to register complaints about their missing wells, thereby putting the government machinery into a spot.

Adapted from two short stories, Narsaiyyan Ki Bavdi and Phulwa Ka Pul, the best thing about Well Done Abba is its setting. As can be expected from Benegal, he etches quotidian life in an authentic, textured manner. The Hyderabadi dialect lends the film a distinct freshness, though the dialogues and script do not tap into the potential for humour enough. Benegal tries to lighten up his story with a few funny scenes (Boman has a twin brother and sister-in-law (Ila Arun) who are notorious for stealing) but there is always such a heavy air of sobriety that pervades his world that it weighs the film down. There are severe pacing issues and many scenes seem repetitive. Mind you, many of the characters and even individual scenes start off in an interesting manner, but Benegal lingers on too much, not willing to move on - so a lot of it appears stretched. For example, the meeting with an officer who glibly demands Boman's watch as a bribe or even Ravi Kissen as the newly wed, sexed up husband make you grin, but this just goes on and on.

Yet, in spite of these problems with the narrative, the subject itself is an admirable one and hammers home the message well. The freshness of the setting offsets some of the other weaknesses, so that Well Done Abba turns out to be a well-intentioned and fairly enjoyable film.

The performances are all good, though Minissha Lamba's botched up nose job is a major distraction. Boman Irani - the wonderful actor that he is - gives the role his best, but you get a sense he's more suited for flamboyant roles. Here, he plays an ordinary guy and doesn't quite nail it.
All in all, a watchable film… but not quite sharp enough.

-Sandhya Iyer

Film review: The Young Victoria

2010-03-21T07:22:00.000-07:00

Crowning Glory

Director: Jean-Marc Vallée
Starring: Emily Blunt, Rupert Friend, Paul Bettany, Miranda Richardson, Jim Broadbent
Rating: ***1/2

Whenever films have been attempted on the Queens who ruled England - Mrs Brown, Elizabeth or The Queen - they have almost always made for a sumptuous and often riveting viewing experience. Besides the insatiable desire most of us have for these rose-tinted, elaborate period dramas that offer a peek into English royalty, there is also the added interest of seeing a woman at the absolute helm of affairs.

The Young Victoria concerns itself with the Queen's early life - it portrays her overly sheltered childhood till she is coronated. Her early years of rule are not the easiest, given her youth and inexperience. However, good instincts and a great choice by way of a husband, helps Victoria tide over most of her troubles as she settles into her role.

When the film begins, you see the young Victoria regarded as rather precious because she is tipped to be Queen after King William IV. As none of her uncles have children, she becomes the natural heir to the throne. Her mother, the Dutchess of Kent (Miranda Richardson) and the latter's private secretary, rumoured to be her lover, Sir John Conroy (Mark Strong) want to exercise regency and allow them to rule instead of Victoria, till she turns 25. But Victoria's willful determination to assume her rightful position sees her through. She's also delighted to be free at last and not be dictated by her mother. For all these years, Victoria is not allowed to walk the stairs without holding someone's hand. She resents this all along, and the moment she is declared Queen, she coldly refuses to comply.

But there are other troubles that besiege Victoria. Her closeness to the Whig Prime Minister, Lord Melbourne ( Paul Bettany) is resented by the opposition parties. The Queen does not budge from her postion on Melbourne, which prompts her aunt to comment that she may be 'confusing stubborness with strength'. But a timely marriage to her German cousin, Albert ( Rupert Friend) proves invaluable.
Both ruled England for 20 years and had nine children, until Albert died of typhoid at age of 42.

The film is a faithful bio-pic and almost all the episodes have a mention in history. Of course, Victoria was known to be exceedingly short and tubby - both of which Emily Blunt isn't. But much of the other drama - King William IV's strong hatred towards Victoria's mother - the public outcry over her attachment with Melbourne - the assassination attempt on her - all are fairly accurate happenings in her early life.

The Young Victoria is an enchanting visual feast, with its impeccable art design, great costumes and gorgeous sets. Director Jean-Marc Vallée says his story in a straight-forward way, with the right amount of class and flair. It's a nicely laid out film, which knows what it's doing. The only underwhelming segment is the one involving Lord Melbourne and Victoria. From the script point of view, Melbourne is meant to seem like a rival to Prince Albert, in that the Queen leans on him heavily for political advice. This is asserted by the story, but not really felt. Paul Bettany comes across as too intimidating and in fact, is too much a hunk to suit the role of a political mentor. On the other hand, the Albert-Victoria romance touches a chord. Albert, as the soft-spoken, earnest man is the right foil for the Queen, who in her earlier days seems very possessive of her power, and unwilling to share it in the slightest even with her husband.

Emily Blunt makes a wonderful Queen, getting all the nuances of her character right. She's especially successful in bringing out certain key facets of Victoria. She was a woman who always wanted to rule and never shied away from it. Her decision to marry appears a pragmatic one, though some passion and immense respect was visbily involved. All these emotions Blunt portrays admirably. Rupert Friend too is excellent.
All in all, at 105 minutes, The Young Victoria is a pleasant film, with the right mix of document and drama.

Film review: Right Ya Wrong

2010-03-12T21:06:00.000-08:00

Starring: Sunny Deol, Irrfan Khan, Konkona Sen Sharma, Isha Koppikar, Deepal Shaw
Director: Neeraj Phatak
Stars: **1/2

There is nothing particularly odd when underserving films get hyped to no end and ultimately turn out to be unmitigated disasters. But more unfortunate is when decent fares go unnoticed because they are either poorly publicised or no effort goes into making their promos exciting. It happened with Rocket Singh last year, where an endearing film suffered on account of poor promotions. Right Ya Wrong is no great film, but it's quite watchable - thanks to a taut script and the presence of Irrfan Khan, who turns in a wonderful performance again. However, bad promos and a curious combination of actors ( Irrfan and Konkona starring alongside Sunny Deol and Isha Koppikar!), may not give it the kick-start it could have otherwise got.
Neeraj Pathak directed the forgettable Gumnaam in 2005, but he has also been the screenplay writer of successful films such as Apne and Pardes. That probably explains how he got Subhash Ghai to distribute the film and Sunny Deol to star in it.

Right Ya Wrong is a crime thriller, that borrows its basic plot from both the 1973 Vinod Khanna starrer Achanak and the Sanjeev Kumar-Sarika murder mystery, Qatl (1986).

Ajay Shridhar (Sunny Deol) and Vinay Patnaik (Irrfan Khan) are brave cops who share a warm equation. In a particular shoot-out that is otherwise successful, Sunny Deol gets injured and his legs are paralysed. This is when he learns about his wife's (Isha Koppikar) long-time affair with his step-brother (Aarav Chawdhury). Angry and hurt, Ajay incites them to murder him saying he has lost the will to live. He promises them a fool-proof plan that would not only keep them safe, but also enable them to avail of the insurance money. Secretly thrilled, both of them agree. But there's a twist to the crime. Things are not what they seem to be, and the only person able to detect this is Vinay. The whole world, including his lawyer sister, Vidya (Konkona) think he's acting in bad faith, leaving him alone to fight for what he believes is right.

The film starts quite badly, with a lame item number picturised on Isha. The music by Monty is terrible. Also, it's painful to see some of the minor characters hamming it up. But once Irrfan comes on screen, all seems well with the world again. The actor is terrific and lends the film its much-needed edge. There's a scene where Konkona slams him in court saying his actions reveal his jealousy. It pains Irrfan, but once back home, the sister-brother duo exchange an awkward affection that explains how their actions are driven by their believes, not malice. The Irrfan-Sunny pairing is a bit odd. And even though Sunny manages an effective, understated performance, somehow these two don't seem to belong to the same world. Isha does her job well and Konkona shines in all the court scenes.

More than the suspense element, it is the impressive study of character in the film that is interesting. It recogonises that often it is our preference for people or lack of it that colours our judgment of what is right or wrong, fair or unfair. For some of these reasons, Right Ya Wrong certainly won't be the wrong choice.

Sandhya Iyer