Desicritics Category: Media: Films

Movie Review: Peepli [Live]

Gaurav Rathore — Sat, 14 Aug 2010 08:49:37 EDT

Let me set the tone of this review. Peepli [Live] is not a 'must watch' film. It's a good and different movie which you don't see often in Hindi cinema. A commendable effort by Aamir Khan Productions and Anusha Rizvi, the debutante director. Anyways, if you watch only 'must watch' these days, you will end up seeing only a couple of movies or worse, none in entire year!

The movie is a slapstick drama set in a sleepy village called Peepli where Natha, a destitute farmer who is about to lose his land, decides (or rather coaxed by his brother) to commit suicide in anticipation of handsome compensation from government. The film depicts how the plight of a poor farmer become the TRP catching fodder for media and a tool to go one up among politicians.

Natha is played by one Omkar Das Manikpuri an outsider to anything remotely related to Bollywood. He fits the character to perfection. He may have very little dialogues but he brilliantly portrays a simple man who is just overawed by the occasion and the attention he gets from everyone ranging from media and local touts to national politicians. On the flip side, Rizvi never tried to explore the psyche of a man who was hounded by thousands just to capture his suicide, live.

Three characters stand out in the movie. Shalini Vatsa as Natha's wife Dhaniya, Farrukh Jaffer as foul mouthed amma, and Vishal Sharma as television reporter Kumar Deepak (a cloned Deepak Chaurasia). Raghubir Yadav has done full justice to his part but a seasoned actor like him could have sleepwalked through a role which is his forte. All other characters fit the bill too and looked lively on the screen, be it TV reporter Nandita (Malaika Shenoy) or the local Journalist Rakesh (Nawazuddin). Almost entire cast has theatre background and you should not be amazed by their acting prowess. Such is the bar theatre people have set for themselves on big screen.

Though the director has tried to keep the movie short (a little under 100 min), squabble among the journalists for a news-bite becomes a bit repetitive after the first half. Dialogues are crisp and the local dialect and accent makes them even more interesting. Rizvi has brilliantly captured the mood of a village and superbly portrayed the TRP hungry media houses. On music front, you will surely enjoy 'Mehengai Dayan' sung by Raghubir Yadav in his rustic base voice.

Films like Peepli [Live] come few and far between as the producers today simply don't see any commercial viability in subjects like farmer suicide. It's a film which has shades of black humour. You surely won't be disappointed if you decide to visit a theatre near you to watch it.

Movie Review: Aisha

Kaushik Chatterji — Fri, 6 Aug 2010 11:21:38 EDT

I have not read Emma, the classic whose adaptation Aisha happens to be, but from what I've gathered, it is the fluffiest of all Jane Austens. I am not the greatest fan of romantic comedies either - I do appreciate the comedy and that too only at times, but the romance, almost never. Clearly, I was not the target audience for Rajshree Ojha's debut directorial venture, toplining Sonam Kapoor and produced by daddy Anil, his other daughter Rhea as well as the Bijlis of PVR fame.

Yet, I was somehow drawn to this one right from the start. Maybe it was because my expectations were raised due to it being an adapted screenplay, maybe it was just the irresistible combination of Abhay Deol and Amit Trivedi (the brand new music directing sensation maintains his enviable success rate with a formulaic yet immensely enjoyable soundtrack). Whatever be the reasons, I went in to see the tale of an upper-class Delhiite who thanks to her unfounded belief in her cupid-playing ability wreaks havoc in the lives of the fellow members of her swish set, and that one person from outside her high society whom she was hell-bent on turning into a BTM.

Down to business. Sonam, you are naturally squeaky, giggly and everything that was needed to fit the role of Aisha Kapoor to the T, so there was no need for you to try and act out your part. Ira Dubey, if not for those godawful moments with Aisha, Pinky Bose was quite likable. Amrita Puri, thanks for making the stereotypically written behenji role of Shefali such joy to watch. Cyrus Sahukar, never mind the fact that you've played the bumbling idiot over and over again - no one does it better than you. Abhay, why in heaven's name did you have to spoil it right at the end? We went from loving Arjun Burman (esp. when you managed to tick off Aisha almost every single time) to wishing that the damn ladder would snap.

Aisha is a joy to watch on a select few occasions, a pain on most others and absolutely cringe-worthy at some of the most crucial junctures. It's probably a good movie for a first date, but I wouldn't know that. Me, well, not only have I not read Emma, after seeing this I am definitely off all literary classics written by or centred around females, other of course than that evergreen genre of film otherwise known as the rom-com. Then again, if I had L'Oreal, Fortis et al giving me crores to make some ads for them, I'd probably make into a film just like this one just in order to try and earn even more. Greed is, after all, a basic human desire.

Movie Review: Tere Bin Laden

Kaushik Chatterji — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 05:21:32 EDT

Remember Jaane Bhi Do Yaaron? If you do, you probably love it for its darkly comic plot that highlighted the nexus between the officials, media and big business. Or - and this is equally likely - you hate it for its low-brow, slapstick humour. If it's latter, don't even consider watching Tere Bin Laden. If it's the former, or if you don't remember that riot, read on.

The very first scene where you see (Piyush Mishra; editor, proprietor, CEO of the ramshackle Danka TV) Majeed Khan's wig flying off sets in stone the comic style the films is going to follow. What follows are the trials and tribulations of Ali Hassan (Ali Zafar, the Pakistani singer-turned-actor who reminds you of both Zach Braff and Kunal Khemu), one of the employees of that news channel who, like so many around us here in India, dreams of a better life in Amreeka.

Except that it's not India, it's Pakistan. And when you add a partner-in-crime Gul (Nikhil Ratnaparkhi), an aspiring stylist Zoya (Sugandha Garg), a textbook intellectual RJ Qureshi (Rahul Singh) and their collective scant disregard for the intelligence of the older and the rural, especially poultry farmer Noora (show-stealer Praduman Singh), you realize that Karachi and Mumbai are, after all, part of the same subcontinent.

So Ali discovers the Osama lookalike that is Noora, convinces his peers to help him out, records a fake terror tape - and all hell breaks loose. In steps Tedji (Barry John) on behalf of the Amreekkans. In spite of its sheer escapism, it still makes you think - something that can't said of the cheap and increasingly vulgar diet of comedy that we have been fed on courtesy Priyadarshan et al. While it is only slightly offensive to our neighbours, Uncle Sam is sure to feel the full force of the punches it is on the receiving end of.

It may not quite be Jaane Bhi Do Yaaron, but it is sure to have you either smiling or laughing out loud throughout. What My Name Is Khan failed to do in over 2 hours, Tere Bin Laden does even before the opening credits start to roll. watch it before its theatrical run gets over, 'coz it's the quirkiest peace message that you're likely to see in quite some time to come.

Movie Review: Udaan

Kaushik Chatterji — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 06:44:40 EDT

Why Jamshedpur? It could have just as easily been any other small town of our country that can boast of being industrialized. Putting this thought in the back of my mind took some doing, but I did succeed in doing so.

At the heart of Udaan there might be the story of Rohan Singh (Rajat Barmecha), a boy who is forced to study engineering (the conservative cliche) even though he aspires to be a writer (the liberal cliche). But before you start thinking 3 Idiots, let me assure you, right at the outset, that the two films have almost nothing in common. While Rajkumar Hirani's blockbuster dealt with a very specific topic and was written and shot in a highly commercial manner, Vikramaditya Motwane's debut directorial feature, on the other hand, is the generic tale of the clash of traditional values and modern aspirations in heartland India that has rarely been given its due, at least as far as mainstream cinema is concerned.

Mainstream this is, let's not have any doubts about that. Very different from the usual and a purely multiplex release, but mainstream nonetheless, a fact that is very evident from the writing that, for instance, exaggerates the character of the father Bhairav Singh (a very excellent Ronit Roy) to demonic proportions while forcing some really cheesy lines upon uncle Jimmy "Chhotu" Singh (an equally brilliant Ram Kapoor). So, while all the locations are as real as they get, they merely act as backdrops; the dialects are paid only passing attention to; the usage of the songs - ridiculously infectious mid-tempo ballads as they are - could have been avoided all together, especially when you look at each of the parts without any background score that, coupled with the raw camerawork in such scenes, have an impact that is more than all the montages put together.

Luckily, unlike almost all the previous films from the Anurag Kashyap camp, none of these is anything more than a minor blip on the radar. You know that this - the strict parent, the friendly uncle, the conflict between hopes and dreams as well as the small private houses, the factories, the railway stations - is all as real as it gets. Plus, when you can't stop raving about the excellent support that Manjot Singh (as Muninder, over the phone beyond the opening credits) and the kid Aayan Boradia (as Arjun, the half-brother) offer, you just know that this film is a winner whose images are going to linger in your head for quite some time to come.Minor bumps notwithstanding, this is a ride which you must hop onto. Sure, the ending might seem to be weak, forced and also unreal, but that shouldn't disappoint - remember that it is, after all, mainstream.

Movie Review: Inception

Kaushik Chatterji — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 13:04:01 EDT

If you want to explore Lucknow's Bhool Bhulaiya, you shouldn't be doing it all alone, at least not the very first time. It is recommended that you take a guide along with you who knows his/her way around the labyrinth, lest you become a tragic little footnote in its history. Of course, if you've been there before and know your way well enough, there's no stopping you - be warned, though, that mightier souls have fallen prey to that temptation.

Christopher Nolan's body of work thus far, if you think about it, has much in common with that legendary Indian maze. His trademark is disorientation - his characters suffer due to it, but more importantly, the audience does as well. So, die-hard fans of his who have been following his career since, well, Following will remember to go in with a fresh and attentive mind. And they will be able to keep track of all the action that is going on at quite a breakneck pace with reasonable ease - and I daresay that many of them will be able to predict some of the most crucial twists.

But for someone whose familiarity with him is restricted to The Dark Knight or, worse, Ghajini (and the number of people who fall into this category, believe it or not, far exceeds the figure pertaining to the other), his latest offering Inception will not exactly be easy to grasp. The story of Dom Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) as he weaves through a world that's part-real, part-dream all the while stealing thoughts that exist in the subconscious or planting ideas that don't is extremely densely plotted and amazingly unveiled.

Without giving anything away, a major part of Inception deals with various dream levels i.e dreams within dreams and this is one place where it shines brighter than a full moon on a dark night. Each level seems to be designed in such a way that it pays tribute to a particular style of film. So while level one is your typical Hollywood fast-paced action thriller, complete with high-speed car chase sequences interspersed with super slo-mo, level two is, at the same time, a direct tribute to The Matrix and an indirect tribute to all those kung-fu and other martial arts films. And while the exotic snowy locations in level three remind you of James Bond style espionage thrillers, the depiction of an apocalyptic world in level four is a throw-back to the disaster film genre.

But he reserves the best for the last, the very last. The clear masterstroke is the final frame and the final cut, so make sure you absolutely do not take your eyes off the screen till the credits start to roll. In spite of it very clearly being intended to be a Hollywood summer blockbuster - which is something it most definitely will be - the final scene refuses to succumb to a formula. That's it - even a word more and your experience is bound to get spoiled.The plot provides almost every answer you're looking for. Mr. Nolan, then, is your guide through his very own Bhool Bhulaiya. If you're a first-timer, make sure you take all the help he's offering while you're in his domain; if you're not, back yourself to find your own way through the catacombs. Either way, if you give this one a miss during its theatrical run, you'll be doing yourself one great disservice

Movie Review: Red Alert - The War Within

Kaushik Chatterji — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 05:30:11 EDT

The Naxal issue isn't a recent one, but there has definitely been a recent upsurge. So, while there have been films based on it for about 40 years now, this being the first one that dealt explicitly with Naxalism v2.0 aroused considerable interest, the lead cast notwithstanding. In fact, one was hoping that Red Alert - The Fire Within could - in the vein of certain great films of yore - throw some hitherto unshed light on this delicate issue that's not given due coverage by the media. The story of Narasimha (Suneil Shetty) and his involvement with a group of Maoists deep in the jungles of Andhra Pradesh definitely had the potential to do so.

So when the viewer got treated to a mix of content straight out of the national pages of a daily broadsheet and typical Bolly action fare complete with glaring inaccuracies, the experience - needless to say - was not a particularly pleasant one. Several key turns in the plot merit a mention here but those would act as spoilers for the two or three of you who still intend to watch this, so here's another instance. Would a delegation of multi-national corporates and government officials move around on a narrow, winding road surrounded by cliffs with almost non-existent security? I think not.

So, journalist being led into their lair, blindfolded? Check. Power-hungry leader who had convinced himself more than others they were leading a revolution for people's rights? Check. Tribal girl molested by the tyrannical local police? Check. Unsympathetic politician looking to wipe out the rebels with help from high level police officers? Check.That's right, all stereotypes as created by our mainstream media were duly reinforced. But a much bigger problem was the one-sided perspective we were offered - other than a few stray dialogues, there seemed to be no genuine effort on the maker's part to dig deep and present us a PoV that could possibly arouse sympathy in the hearts of the urban audience.

The saving grace, then, surprisingly, was the acting. The leads - Suneil Shetty and Sameera Reddy (as the violated tribal Lakshmi) - were good as long as they were not required to mouth scripted lines. The supporting cast was, as expected, rock solid, although one couldn't help but feel how most of them were reprising an extra-judicial character from earlier in their careers, be it Bandit Queen Phoolan Devi (Seema Biswas here as Saralaka), Malli The Terrorist (Ayesha Dharker here as Radhaka) or Wazira from Maachis (Suneel Sinha). Ashish Vidyarthi played his part of the unsympathetic leader Velu to perfection while Vinod Khanna's cameo as "high command" Krishnaraj was good enough for such a poorly scripted character.

But the recent trend of exploiting the brand name that Naseeruddin Shah is in the world of meaningful cinema has just got to stop. We saw it at the start of this year with Bolo Raam; we saw it again recently during Raajneeti. While the latter was marketed on the basis of how Naseer liked the script so much he worked for free, the latter featured him prominently in all the trailers, posters as well as the website. In this, his appearance in one inconsequential scene is literally blink-and-miss. Clearly, the legendary actor needs to get more judicious before giving the nod.

Both sides of the coin are what we don't get to see, and while this film does touch upon the raw nerve that is the People's War (or whatever else it is that you want to call it), it only succeeds in bringing to life what we keep reading almost every single day on the big screen. The action sequences are unwarranted, while the ending is quite preposterous - the solution offered is simple and unreal; if it weren't, we wouldn't have had such a movement in our hinterland for over 4 decades now. But what absolutely kills this one - and what, sadly, is almost surely the reason for whatever accolades it garnered at foreign film festivals - is a quote that graces the frame immediately after the film ends, and which quite clearly tells us where the makers of this film stand.

Watch it, only if you don't read the papers at all, and are okay with a slow narrative injected at certain points with escapist action as well as with an over-simplistic solution to this complex problem that (given your age, location as well as your socio-economic background) doesn't affect you and hence don't really give a damn about.

Movie Review: Amen

IdeaSmith — Tue, 6 Jul 2010 07:48:02 EDT

What’s better than spending Saturday night with a gorgeous, intelligent, witty and sensitive man? I had the privilege this weekend. Harish Iyer invited me to a private screening of the short film AMEN based in part, on his life. My first question was to ask if I should dress up. He said, “No yaar, I’ll be there in my regular jeans and all.” Thank goodness for me then, that I’ve met Harish before and I know what his idea of ‘regular jeans’ is. Never trust a gay man who says he isn’t dressing up!

The movie was screened at Pixion, a luxurious 24-seater in Bandra. The poster shows a part of the famous Michelangelo fresco depicting the Genesis and bears the tagline,

“Life does not let you choose your parents or your sexuality.”

One social message is a heavy charge for a film to bear without getting typecast into the shoddily made, preachy documentary mold. AMEN touched on internet hookups, rape, incest, child abuse, trust issues and love, in addition to homosexuality. It is remarkable that a film could accomplish all of that without sounding like a laundry-list of the ills of society.From a storyteller’s point of view, it was interesting to see how the team managed to make a powerful commentary about the life of a gay man, fraught as it is with much uncertainty, loneliness, fear, mistrust and anger….all of this through the very intimate portrayal of two characters. The film could have gone two ways – maudlin or sleazy. Instead, it came through as sensitive, realistic, disturbing but also thought-provoking.

AMEN is a 24-minute film with taut storyline and a certain freshness without the glitches of an amateur production. The characters were well-defined and both actors (Karan Mehra and Jitin Gulati) essayed their roles without any of the self-consciousness that one might associate with such a bold project. One of the best compliments of the evening came from Vinta Nanda (director, Tara). When she said,

“Ordinarily when you watch a boy-meets-girl story, the women associate with the heroine and the men with the hero. I am a woman but I was completely immersed in the story of two men.”

Personally I liked the two intertwining threads of story within the film - two characters who’ve come to a situation from different places. Their individual experiences have shaped them differently and as a result, how they come to terms with their lives and their sexuality is different. Everything that we watch and read about love stories involves a certain automatic slotting of characters into their gender roles, a certain, ‘It’s a guy thing’/ ‘That’s so girly’ attitude. But AMEN made me see the characters as two people, each one a unique set of emotions and experiences. It made me empathise with each one separately and isn’t that an artist’s greatest challenge?

One normally expects a certain kind of scene to draw a certain premediated response. The violence and intensity of the starting scenes were disturbing. However it was the subtlety of Harry (Karan Mehra)’s mirror scene that really brought tears to my eyes. The mirror, as a metaphor for self-reflection, for facing one’s fears and the subsequent connection of fingertip to reflection was beautifully done.

I also liked the way the conflict was resolved realistically and not in the conventional ‘happily ever after’ way. The ending completely satisfied me as a viewer and that may be the best thing that can be said about any movie.

The making of AMEN is probably enough material for another movie altogether. A labour of love for both Ranadeep Bhattacharyya & Judhajit Bagchi, the experience had them playing producer, director but also spotboy, technician, teaboy and scriptwriter. The shoot commenced over 3 days in a small bungalow, after which the team hand-packed the sets, bundled into a tempo and delivered back the props borrowed from friends and family. Midway during the production, they found even their tight budgeting would not cover the costs of the film. Then Harish put up a status update on Twitter about this and to their surprise, a stranger offered to help them. Expenses were often cut down but money would continue to make its way to them till they finished. Their online guardian angel, Tina Valentina, actually met the team for the first time only at the preview of the film. AMEN was helped greatly by an excellent background score, a gift from Jonathon Fessenden, Hollywood composer and a professional look/feel thanks to Prasonjit.

In sum, AMEN is a fine movie with a solid story that also carries a number of powerful messages. It will definitely be of interest to the gay community but also to anyone who likes good cinema.

(pictures from the AMEN Facebook Fanpage)

The Feminist Hangover

IdeaSmith — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 07:12:53 EDT

I feel let down. I put my foot right into my mouth justifying why women want to watch Sex And The City 2 despite the first movie having been such an epic disaster. The second one wasn’t just bad, it was mortifying! I’m tempted to suspect that the second movie was secretly scripted by men and acted out by guys in reverse drag, all part of the anti-feminist movement. But credit where it’s due (or blame in this case). The SATCmania has spiraled downward into a place where even your best galpals don’t want to follow, or indeed be associated with.

Whininess, cheating (and being condoned), shameless ignorance of and blatant disrespect to other cultures, spoilt-princess behaviour….okay, none of these were ever on the agenda for women’s lib. The Vigil Idiot posts a satirical comic based on the movie but mostly all he has to do is relate the facts as they are. We did it to ourselves this time.

I feel like I should apologize to all the men I’ve been preaching to over the years about equality and empowerment. This, ah….this wasn’t what I meant.

At another level, I feel like this movie mirrors my own attitude shift in the recent times. A close guy friend (yes, there is such a thing even though he’s straight) said something interesting.

“You know what the trouble with you women these days is? You’ve got your grades and then your promotions. You’re taking care of your families. You’ve got great careers and fabulous lives. And so you believe you’ve achieved everything and that you’re invincible. You know, you still do fall sick, you still need other people too. Everyone does. It’s not a man or a woman thing. But all of you act like no one else matters, run over anyone who cares about you because you think that’s how a powerful woman is supposed to behave.”

I didn’t like hearing that at all. But there was truth in what he said. He was thinking about his ex- who was sacrificing her health for career and lifestyle and refused to listen to his concerns over it. But I was thinking of my own workaholism, my arrogance and ruthlessness. I cultivated all of it thinking I needed it to survive in these times. Well, maybe that’s true or maybe it’s not. But it’s also left me with an unhealthy level of cynicism, I’ve lost a number of good friends over the years, there’s judgement where there used to be connection and oh yes, the health has suffered too. I’m not condoning chauvinism or saying equality was a bad idea. But that’s why this is so difficult. Toughness has meant losing gentleness, caring and indeed some of the most wonderful things about being me, being us.

The other side of feminism was supposed to acknowledge that men had emotions too and could be just as nurturing and caring. But somehow it spiraled into a blamegame, an ugly, vindictive ‘up-yours’ crowing-over. It’s not about equality anymore, it’s one-upmanship (upwomanship?). All of us are losing.

My friend is as torn up over his breakup as I’ve ever been over mine. I just fear his lady is as well but she doesn’t know it or won’t acknowledge it. Remind me again how this is good for any of us? It takes two to build a relationship. How do we proceed when one of us is hungover on power, sado-masochism and inaccessible?

I had another thought about the classic equation of relationships – men trading love for sex and women trading sex for love. At that oversimplified level, all these years were about men reneging on their side of the deal by taking sex without paying back with adequate love while women withheld sex till love was forthcoming. It was a business and it worked with all the bartering, the bad debts and the constantly fluctuating scales on both sides. Today though, it’s women saying they’re not interested in shopping at this market anymore. Why pay for love when you can get its substitutes (power, fame, respect, attention, awe) far more easily? And there are the women who decide to infiltrate the competition and take over the business. Enter the Samantha Jones prototype – a woman who trades for sex the way men have been thought to do.

I’m not going to judge what anybody wants and how they go about getting it. But I do wonder about the fabric of our society, based as it is on the warp and weft of both sexes, the constant barter and transfer of emotions and sex, of needs and provisions.

This is the morning after the party and we’re hungover on that potent mix of power, glory and attention. I don’t think most of us are thinking straight any more. Who’s going to rescue the world now that Superwoman has ousted Superman and killed the collaboration?

Movie Review: Raavan

Blokesablogin — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 05:55:01 EDT

Finally the wait was over. I had asked my mom to book tickets from the US as I was in Delhi for the opening. A sweltering Saturday saw us entering the air conditioned climes of the local mall cine hall. The cool air was a welcome blessing from the unrelenting heat of the outside.

A month ago, a friend had sent me the Raavan songs in Tamil. Most of the tracks reminded me of the Taj Mahal tracks, an old Bharatiraja film from 2000 for which AR Rahman was the Music director. The Behne De track in Hindi sounds more sophisticated than the Tamil equivalent, Usure poguthe which captures the "tribal" earthiness of the film. The few trailers I got to see on Youtube were stunning in their cinematography and lushness.

Expectations were running high as the mercury outside. The first scene of the two boats colliding was poetic and reminded me of The Gladiator for some strange reason. I guess, the film was poetic in a lyrical sense where the rhyming was forced in parts. That, I think, was what made our expectations hit rock bottom, no pun intended.

The allusion to the Ramayana was obvious and forced. I commend Mani Ratnam for taking on this onerous task of reinterpreting India's oldest epic poem. Sadly, he is overconfident in his idea of perfection, and like I said earlier, the poetry is forced. That, sadly, is the demise of an otherwise beautiful film.

Be it the names of the characters, Sanjeevani (for Hanuman) or the "Agni Pariksha" (Trial by Fire) and such situations including the Search for Sita, the mise en sc�ne looked like a high school stage play.

The stunts including that of Ragini falling down the cliff was stunning and truly worthy of watching on the full screen. Even the wedding sequence of the sister "Soorpananka", was beautifully picturized, though totally off the cuff against the original story line and characterization: Mani shows a tribal setting and suddenly shifts to an urban, city-like splendor for the wedding. That grates.

The tut-tutting of Abhishek as Beera was way too clichéd � la Rajinkanth. We expect it from Rajini, but not from Mani Ratnam and Abhishek. We saw these two together in Guru. What a huge shift. Many of the "serious" sequences lost their punch as they were so funny and comical. Ravi Kishen's scenes were comedy at its best.

In my opinion, the rudimentary problem with this film was that the genre went undefined. Was it a spoof or was it an art film in an avant garde way that is meant to leave the audience thinking about what could have happened had Sita confronted Ravan and Ram together.

As much as the film tries to show the perspective of Ravan and that he was necessarily not a "bad" guy, I would like to remind Mani Ratnam that this oft-repeated Dravidian/ Aryan divide is outmoded and out of place in the 21st century.

When we read Valmiki's Ramayana, there are several instances when Hanuman exclaims the richness and grandeur of Lanka and wonders what a great king and ruler Ravana must be to rule such a wonderful country as Lanka. Further, he is so intrigued by him that he allows himself to be bound to have an audience with him. This praising of Ravana continues when Angadh is sent as an emissary by Rama before the final battle. Angadh again is stunned by the magnificence of Ravana's court and city and wonders why such a great ruler would want to invite destruction to self and his country. Even Sita, in one of her entreaties to Ravana when in captivity, pleads with him asking him why he wants to destroy all the wonderful things he has.

Valmiki praises Raavana and enumerates his greatness, much more than Mani Ratnam has done in his childish narrow-minded way with Beera. What saddened me was that Mani Sir could have done so much better. He is after all a great storyteller if we go by his previous films like Kannathil Muttamittal, Guru, Bombay and Roja.

The greatest mistake in Mani Ratnam's Raavan is that his Dev is no Raam. Valmiki's Rama loses his temper but once, when Varuna, the ocean refuses to part ways for him to cross over to Lanka. Varuna himself begs forgiveness and Rama cools down immediately. Mani's Dev acts in anger and kills unnecessarily. That is a mistake that is inexcusable in the eye of the average Indian audience. The odd, Hindu-bashing leftist might get a vicarious pleasure out of this obvious "Raam bashing", but no more. That goes beyond grating. And because the allusion is to Rama and not Mohammad or Christ, in our truly "secular" land, it goes unchallenged.

Aishwarya was stunning dressed in rags. But then, she is truly stunning. She had a few powerful scenes including the one on the train where she confronts her husband and later Beera on the cliff. Her fall from the cliff was awesome and reminded me of Dhoom 2 with Hritik.

Once again, the dance sequence and her romance with her husband are over stylized and makes for some bad poetry. The natural poetry of Roja was missing.

The river scene with the broken statue of Vishnu in the middle of the jungle is something to be expected of Indiana Jones. It ill befits Mani Ratnam to pull such a stunt. Had it been a muslim theme, it would have attracted a fatwa. Fortunately the reclining Vishnu is said to be "dreaming" this world and none of what is happening is real. So, the average Hindu will let it pass without a whimper. What is there to get worked up about a dream, after all?

All in all, a visual treat. A sensuous overload of water everywhere, but not a drop to relish. Stereotypical performances from all that borders on caricature, losing the impact of some serious realism that is depicted in a few scenes. The overuse of dramatic tools such as "masks" of ashes, colors, cloth and Ash's over-pleated Henna style dresses, an echo of Mughal paintings- all point to a spoof rather than an artistic experience.

So, do I recommend that you watch this film. Well, had it been called anything but Raavan, yes. It would have been a great entertainer in true Bollywood style of a man who takes to his own law when he sees atrocities committed in the name of the law. It would have been a delightful retro experience of a slickly presented 21st century version of an 80s Amitabh starrer.

The Ramayana is part of the cultural ethos of this ancient land. It is not easy to ask the audience to remove the moral compass established by this Adi Kaavya and expect to "change sides". As much as Ravana is greatly admired, we do understand why he was destroyed as he broke the Golden Rule- Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Nowhere in the film does anyone question Beera why he should expect others to take better care of his sister while he himself was instrumental in causing anguish and grief to several families in the name of meting out his own law. In the Ramayana, even Kumbakarna entreats Ravana to return Sita. Vibheeshana deserts him, but Kumbakarna continues to be loyal to his brother and stays with him knowing that his days were numbered. This is where this rendering falls short of the original tale.

Forget the word Raavan, forget that it has anything to do with Ramayana and go ahead, and enjoy a good entertainer with a decent music score, stunning visuals and a drool worthy Ash, Abhishek (if you like them unshaven) and Vikram (if you like the alpha male phenotype).

Movie Review: Raavanan - Read Amar Chitra Katha Instead

IdeaSmith — Sat, 19 Jun 2010 02:47:10 EDT

If you haven’t seen Ravan (or Ravanan) already, I’d suggest you not bother. If you’re the only person in this country who doesn’t know the story, pick up an Amar Chitra Katha rendition of Ramayana. It has the basic plot, the facts as most of us have heard them and the visuals are nice enough. It’ll be cheaper on the pocket too.

I would have given the movie a definite skip if it had been called Rama or Ramayan. I mean, I was weaned on the Ramanand Sagar classic and the aforementioned Amar Chitra Katha culture. I even saw the various renditions on television, movies and pop culture, edifying the perfect man, his perfect wife and the exact opposite embodiment of evil with all the paraphernalia of Hanuman, Vibhishan, Lakshman and Surpanaka.

If by some chance, I found I’d forgotten a tiny point, I could retrieve my copy of the original or I could turn around and ask just about anybody and expect the right answer. Why then, would anyone in their right minds, want to spend time and money to hear the same story in a theatre?

I was intrigued by the title Ravanan. While I’ve seen the old story in the old setting and in new settings, I haven’t heard it from the other point of view, the darker side. I’m sorry to say, it was a sad trick to lure the audiences into the theatres. As a vision, the idea of telling the Ramayan from Ravan’s point of view is interesting but it didn’t carry through in execution.

*spoiler alert*

A movie that set out with such lofty ideas didn’t even explore the complexity of some of the other characters. Hanuman, for instance, is depicted by a washed-up actor portraying a jungle officer given to silly dancing and pesky monkey-like behaviour. Vibhishan is no more than a nondescript younger brother who has exactly one dialogue and gets shot dead soon after. Lakshman is a lackey cop who is unconscious/dead for most of his screen time. Each of these depictions comes across as a parody in poor taste.

The idea of a tribal leader on the wrong side of the law is intriguing and the tough forest terrain would well explain his personality and behaviour. But it wouldn’t explain spending an entire hour showing what looked like rejected National Geographic clips. I kid you not, I was surprised when the interval came and my watch showed only an hour had gone by. And the Vicco Vajradanti ads in the interval were far more entertaining than what I had been subjected to, before that.

The second half picks up (though not before a forced back-to-back two songs) but by then the damage has been done. Too much, too late. There just isn’t enough time to think about the character conflicts, the depth of each of their emotions. Mostly by then, you just want the movie to get over and be done with it.

I’ve never liked Aishwarya Rai as an actress and with this movie, I add the rest of the cast to this list too. Vikram does an Ajay Devgan with grunts and a perpetual scowl to depict menace. I’m sorry to say that Mani Ratnam and A.R.Rahman fall in my ratings too. This is just lazy creativity – poor storytelling and rehashed tunes.

The bigger question is why are we so stuck on the two great epics, Ramayana and Mahabharata? Granted, they were great stories (and that’s why they’re called epics). But have centuries worth of storytellers not been able to come up with new fare? Have we become pathological remixers?

Last week’s fiasco Rajneeti was a foul remix of Mahabharata and The Godfather. It grated on my nerves for how the characters seemed to be forced into the roles of their Mahabharata counterparts to the point of ridiculous serendipity (Ajay Devgan being the driver’s boy a.k.a charioteer’s son, Ranbir Kapoor as the sharpshooting Casanova a.k.a. Arjun). Ravanan didn’t even get that far. With the caricature of Hanuman in the first few minutes of the movie, they had already lost me.

My tweets on this have been getting a few replies to the effect of human emotions being finite and there being only so many stories to express them. I disagree. The art of storytelling is universal and timeless. It is an art because it moves, it flows, it engages and it grows. It’s what made Omkara wonderful even as it was a retelling of Othello. Vishal Bharadwaj managed to find his Iago in a rustic local goon called Langda Tyaagi. His version, in an English script could have been called Iago and not Othello. That’s what a different story is all about, even though it’s the same plot.

With a movie, there are several components that can drive the story forward – an original script, great casting and acting and good screenplay. Ravanan, I regret to say, enjoys none of these.