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.

Movie Review: Dor

This evening I saw the movie "Dor" (means cord in Hindi), written and directed by Nagesh Kuknoor. If I were to review in Mumbai street talk I would assess Dor as "Dor phillum boley to ekdum hatke hain.....kuch dhinchak nahin hain par apun ko ekdum jhakaas lagaa," which if any non-desi wants/cares to know translates as, this film is not your run-of-mill Bollywood fare but is unique, there isn't any glamour in the film (that is typically associated with Bollywood) but still I loved it!

I had seen Nagesh Kuknoor's "Hyderabad Blues" way back in the 90s. I haven't seen any of his subsequent films. Based on my past experience I did know what to expect from a Kuknoor film and wasn't disappointed one bit. This story is about two women from different parts of India who, by cruel stroke of fate, are bound by one common thread. One of the women, Zeenat is a strong independent muslim woman from Himachal Pradesh. This part is essayed beautifully by Gul Panag while the other Meera, is a very young girl from rural Rajasthan, essayed by Ayesha Takia. Both their husbands are working in Saudi Arabia. The former's spouse is wrongly accused of murdering the latter's spouse and is facing capital punishment. The only way out would be amnesty granted, if the victim's widow signed a petition forgiving the accused. By the way what kind of law is that, when someone is condemned to a death penalty without any trial? I have read the book Princess, written by some female member of the royal family, which describes the life of women in Saudi Arabia. Why am I surprised by this law?....duh. Anyway this movie talks about Zeenat's journey to find Meera, their friendship and the subsequent emancipation of Meera.

It is a feminist film, written by a man. There are couple of things which are very disturbing in this movie. One is that women are treated like a chattel, with no rights and their lives are filled with despair on widowhood. Also it drives home the fact that women are sometimes each other's worse enemies. The other thing is that her father-in-law, played by the venerable Girish Karnad, on one hand talks about the family honor but on the other is ready to send his young, beautiful, widowed daughter-in-law to the bed of some man who will save their ancestral mansion (haveli). A widow lives a hopeless life where she is treated as a commodity for barter. This makes sense why women from Rajasthan used to jump en masse on their husband's funeral pyre during the medieval times. For them a horrific death was a better option than being a part of the conqueror's harem! What is this nonsense about the family honor? The men in this film are all emasculated.

This film isn't dark, except the fact that two young women's lives come crashing down, but is in fact positive. It is very heartening that Zeenat inspires Meera, which gives her the strength to break the shackles that bind her. Gul Panag was very convincing as Zeenat. Ayesha Takia is a young, talented actress. She brought out the emotions and poignancy to the character but her accent was way off! She did not have the rural rajasthani accent that was so necessary for her to be convincing. Girish Karnad has a miniscule role so he is wasted in this film. I loved Shreyas Talpade as the "bhairoopiya," who helps Zeenat in her quest and is besotted by her. Bhairoopiya means someone who is a master of disguise. These are entertainers, who are nomadic and move from town to town entertaining people. He however doesn't have the strength to go through the entire mission with her and leaves to go his way, which implies that women don't need men to give them courage. This should be intrinsic.

The cinematography is beautiful, moving from the verdant slopes of the Himalayas to the desert of Rajasthan. The colors and character of both these distinctly different places is captured superbly. The clothes and make up are realistic so you don't have any village belles wearing heavy make up a la Bollywood from the 60s to the 90s. The music score is mediocre, except for Kesariya Balama. One of the songs sounded like a TV commercial from India (like "Jo OK sabun se nahayein kamal sa khil jayey....you get the point). Jokes apart, if you haven't seen this movie, I would definitely recommend that you watch it.

What the hell was she thinking?

The above picture and related article is from the rediff website.

Who the hell wears a leather jacket and boots in Mumbai's weather? I am not going to waste my time commenting on what she has worn. All I can say that the wearer needs to take a Style 101 course. If some designer/stylist (?) has dressed her then she needs to fire her/him immediately!

To those who are Bollywood virgins or are too embarassed to admit (like me, depending on whom I am talking to....lol!) that they watch Bollywood movies, this is Aishwarya Rai, beauty queen and an Indian actress.

Bollywood Friday

I saw Dil Chahata Hai (2001) last evening. I had gone to see it in 2001, when the Indian Students Association at my university had screened the film for all the desi students. It was held in one of the large lecture halls in the Engineering school. At that time I was a graduate student and was far more interested in writing my paper than any Bollywood movie, so half-way through the movie I was completely overcome by stress and the prospect that I might not get an A, which at that time seemed far important than some stupid movie! I did not sit through the movie and I could not remember anything about it. Anyway so I saw it again last night and loved it.

I loved the pace of the movie, subtle emoting and a very contemporary story. These guys could be your buddies from school. Saif and Akshay held their own opposite Aamir Khan, who from what I hear is apparently a very selfish actor. Farhan Akhtar has maintained the tempo and you are hooked on to how the story unfolds throughout the movie. Normally I hate song sequences but in this case, not once did I not want to sit through the songs. I enjoyed the movie thoroughly.

Farhan Akhtar will be doing a remake of “Don” with Shah Rukh Khan. I have absolutely no doubt that his remake would hold its own against the original, which was such a super-hit film. From the description in Wikipedia, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_-_The_Chase_Begins_Again) it appears that he will be adapting the movie to the contemporary times.

My generation has grown up with Amitabh Bachchan’s films. I guess Farhan’s film would be our generation's homage to the legend. I do have serious doubts though about SRK holding his own against his predecessor, the Big B. Those comparisons would be inevitable and I feel that it would be an uphill task for the King of Hamming to literally fill the big boots of the Big B. Perhaps Aamir or Abhishek could have been a more appropriate choice, but one never knows.

It is scheduled to be released during Diwali, which is next week. I can’t wait to see it or perhaps I should wait and see what the reviews are like first. :-D

Omkara

I finally saw Omkara yesterday. I watched the movie with a lot of expectations because I had previously seen Vishal Bharadwaj’s Maqbool, which is based on Macbeth. This movie unfortunately was a disappointment. Among the pluses is the fact that he has adapted Othello to the contemporary north Indian setting. I am not sure from the dialect and the accent, if the theme was set in Rajasthan, Haryana or Uttar Pradesh. There are some gaps in the script, the tempo wasn’t sufficiently maintained and in between the movie drags on. Also the language is very crude. There is only so much crudeness and double entendre one can tolerate. There are light moments in this film and thankfully the film is understated with no melodrama, characteristic of Shakespeare and Hindi films!

This movie belonged to Saif Ali Khan. He has totally stripped himself of his sophistication and has gone under the skin of this character. This actor is so versatile and I am glad he is finally being given his due now in the industry. His performance does not disappoint one bit. Konkana Sen Sharma has complemented him really well. The one actor who surprised me totally was Kareena Kapoor. She has understood this character and has rendered so much of freshness and innocence to it. Unlike her older sister, she does not have dilated pupils in every emotional scene. Vivek Oberoi is all right. I had loved him in Company but I feel he is a limited actor. Ajay Devgan as Omkar is unconvincing. I had liked him in Raincoat but that role did not require him to bring in plethora of emotions and complexity in character. His limitations as an actor are exposed in this film. In my opinion, Manoj Bajpai or even Vijay Raaz (Dubey in Monsoon Wedding) would have done justice to this role. Bipasha Basu is too sophisticated to play Billo Chamanbahar. Unlike Saif she has not managed to strip the patina of urban India and understand this character.

Overall it was entertaining and in a different league than other Hindi films. Would I watch this again? Probably not!