Friday, November 10, 2006

Movie Review: Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna


I saw Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna last evening. Why? Well I did not have anything better to do so I thought I might as well torture myself. Yes, the verdict is out now…Sai is a masochist. All I can say is that Karan Johar (KJ), whose level of maturity is comparable to a fifteen year old school girl (scratch that I am sure a fifteen year old would be more mature than Karan Johar), should restrict himself to writing candy floss, feel good romances about inane people who are caught in a time warp and adhere to customs and traditions that are totally irrelevant in today’s society. This time the moron has tried to explore extra marital affairs and relationships in general. I don’t know where he has met such people or on whom has he based this film on. If they are based on real life characters then I am so grateful to God that I haven't met such people.

He hasn’t established the reason or reasons why Shahrukh or Rani who are married to Preity and Abhishek respectively have had troubles in their respective marriages. The reasons he has alluded to are rather flimsy and unconvincing. Shahrukh broke his foot and couldn’t play soccer professionally while Preity became a successful fashion editor…big deal! Life is tough and for some people it is lot more tougher than others. Preity's character is just a busy professional and a rather nice person and if KJ would have looked around beyond the vacuous Bollywood types, he would realize that a lot of female professionals in our generation are indeed very busy and it is not a big deal in most modern homes. You actually feel sorry for Preity's character to land up with such a loser spouse!

I want to understand the thought processes that go on in KJ’s head. This will enable me to understand why someone like Amitabh was cast as an elderly debauch? It seemed that this character was introduced to provide some comic relief but I fail to find humor in vulgarity. Here is this man who leads a licentious life but at the same time during crises wants to guide his family. He has a hypocritical view to life. I cannot imagine a man with no respect for women based on his tasteless jokes would have so much wisdom. KJ is insulting the intelligence of his audience. Preity Zinta was cast as a fashion editor for some fashion magazine in New York. Now if one has to see a convincing fashion editor it has to be Meryl Streep in the movie “The Devil wears Prada.” The sleekness, sophistication, the subtle sarcasm and drive were so elegantly portrayed by the wonderful Meryl Streep. She was fabulous…."that’s all. " The reason why Rani was unhappy with Abhishek was not established in a convincing fashion at all. In the end it appears that the characters potrayed by Shah Rukh and Rani are these selfish, unhappy, egocentric people who walked out of a perfectly workable situation.

Someone needs to tell Karan Johar, who only knows to show films about people falling in love in exotic locales and running across snow clad hills in chiffon sarees and halter blouses, that people usually work hard in consolidating their relationships. If one has made a commitment then one does need to work (some days are especially arduous) to nurture and strengthen it. People holding hands and walking into the horizon is just the beginning not the end! There will be situations where one has to work hard to keep that relationship alive, expecially when there are children involved.

How would KJ know all this? Alas! From his movies one gets the impression that the only serious literature he must have read in school must have been romance novels like Mills and Boon. Perhaps that is where he gets his inspiration from. Note to self: It will be more fun to pick lint from my sweater OR even watch the ever so boring “Chocolat” over and over again than watching any of Karan Johar’s movies!

Devil Wears Prada

Meryl Streep as Miranda Priestley in the movie "The Devil Wears Prada"

Since I mentioned the movie “The Devil Wears Prada,” while reviewing KJ’s “KANK,” I thought I might just add my two cents. I saw this movie first day first show in July. It was a Meryl Streep week for me. The previous Friday, we had had seen the movie “Prarie Home Companion,” which is a fictional account of off-the-stage activities of one of our favorite shows on NPR with the same name. For some reason I love the Midwest and the polite Midwesterners, who are such a contrast from people from the east coast especially the tri-state area, are so beautifully portrayed by Streep and others. I even thought her accent was dead on!

The movie “The Devil Wears Prada,” is based on chick lit book with the same name and is allegedly semi autobiographical. I NEVER read chick lit so haven’t read the book, but do sometimes watch chick flicks, having enjoyed films like “Bridget Jones diary in the past, therefore I have seen this film. I know it is paradoxical, isn't it.

Anyway I digress, so moving on to the story Ann Hathaway (Princess Diaries) who is a graduate from Northwestern, is this frumpy girl who lands up a job as an assistant to the high priestess of fashion and an editor of a fashion magazine, essayed so beautifully by Meryl Streep.

The one thing that bothers me is the notion that if you are academically inclined then you must be frumpy or must take pride in not being stylish. Most of us, including yours truly, are guilty of frumpiness in our teens and early twenties; especially when you want to be taken seriously. For some reason if you are stylish and wear make up, then of course it is assumed that there is nothing going on between your ears. That is a stereotype that must be busted and usually is busted by women in their thirties and older (for example, the journey of Hillary Clinton from her Yale days to her current avatar) who are more confident about themselves and are confident to not care how others perceive them.

This movie showcases her journey as this gawky young woman who gets transformed into a fashionista. She initially looks through the superficiality but then gets sucked into the high fashion world of New York and Paris. Betrayal of trust and doing whatever it takes to get ahead seems to be the norm there. She seems to be on-call 24/7, running errands for the demanding boss than spending time with her boy friend who teaches fourth graders in South Bronx, which is such a contrast to her career. Her friends make fun of her but neither are they paying her bills nor are offering to do so.

Ann Hathaway is refreshing but of course the film belongs to Meryl Streep. She has given such a human touch to this ogre boss that you actually like her in the end. You feel that she is just a victim of circumstances, which is staying ahead in the dog-eat-dog world of fashion. Of course the movie is not a complete satire but there are funny moments, when as an outsider you look at that shallow and superficial world but think that it must be exaggerated and could be more a caricature of the personalities than their reality. The dichotomies faced by Ann Hathaway are understandable and you empathize with her character. She is immensely likeable in that movie. Predictably she leaves the job to pursue a more serious writing career.

No comments: