Desicritics Category: Media: Films - Hollywood

A Reviewer's Dilemma

Cine Cynic — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 13:06:41 EDT

While critics often garner our respect for their insightful analysis and interpretations of works of art, reviewers have their share of distress while reviewing. Unlike critics, reviewers do not have much liberty in choosing the books, movies, or albums. Reviewing something which they feel strongly about (especially negatively) is when reviewers may tend to get into trouble.

Jeevi of IdleBrain.com is the most popular Telugu movie reviewer on the Internet. He used to review almost every single movie, straight or dubbed, immediately after its release. A couple of years ago, he skipped reviewing a big-budget movie called Bangaram. The movie turned out to be the worst movie in hero Pawan Kalyan's career and the grapevine was ripe with speculation that Jeevi might not have written the review only because it would've sounded a death knell to the movie's meagre chances.

Earlier this year, Rediff's Raja Sen revealed the climax of Race in his review, and after some controversy and debate about whether a review can or can not reveal the ending of a movie, half-heartedly apologized to the film-makers while justifying his actions.

Around the same time, Maxim's David Peisner gave a 2.5/5 star review to the Black Crowes album Warpaint without actually listening to it. It blew into a high-voltage drama that ended with Maxim's president releasing an official apology.

These instances, and perhaps most others which have created controversies, originated from a reviewer's strong feelings, which he or she is entitled to have. The reviewer may find a movie god-awful and might feel dutiful to advise the readers against watching it. The trouble comes when the god-awfulness ebbs over the objectivity. And even Roger Ebert wasn't immune to it.

Last week, Ebert gave a 1 star review to an indie Tru Loved after watching only eight minutes of the 102-minute movie! He made a full disclosure in the review itself, though that might not usually be enough to avert a controversy, especially for a reviewer of Ebert's stature.

But there isn't much controversy over it. His actions in the aftermath have been truly exemplary. Being the honest and wise man he is, he poured out his thoughts into his widely-read journal. He listened to the reader's comments, pondered even more, admitted his guilt of affection for his prose, watched the whole movie this time, and reviewed it again. (The 1 star remains.) The man who perhaps has contributed more to film criticism than any other single individual showed the path, that more than a review or a movie or readers, it is the plain truth that deserves priority.

However, this doesn't end the debate nor the dilemma. Can a reviewer skip a review to help his friend-filmmaker? Can a reviewer reveal a climax? Can a reviewer walk out of a movie and still review it? If yes, can he review it watching just the promos? If no, where is the tipping point, the time after which it may be allowed?

It won't be futile for every reviewer to face these questions, and more importantly to answer it in his or her own manner.

DVD Review: Remember the Titans

Cine Cynic — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 05:39:12 EDT

"Based on a true story" is one note that tunes our minds to suspend disbelief more willingly than we normally would. We have come to accept that truth is stranger than fiction, at least when books are written or movies made about them. As an outsider from a different place and time, I have no idea how true Boaz Yakin's Remember the Titans remains to the original events. The reality may have been harsher, definitely less cheesier.

In 1971, Alexandria, Virginia, blacks and whites still referred each other as "they" in public and worse indoors. It was easy to distrust a fellow human based on his or her appearance. A new court order, to everybody's dislike, forcefully desegregates the T.C. Williams High School. I like the movie already. There are wonderful movies like Paul Haggis' Crash, but they are set in a period where racism has already been acknowledged as incorrect, at least politically, unlike here.

Herman Boone (Denzel Washington), a black, is hired as head coach for the school's football team to replace Bill Yoast (Will Patton). The onus is on him to show what a coach, black or white, is to his team and the town. One "mistake" might get him fired; it had happened before. Yoast doesn't want to play second fiddle, but reluctantly complies to overlook the future of the white football team that was under him. Two football coaches and two teams. One black, one white each. To win as one team is their goal. The team comes together by the end of the camp, but there are more conflicts, some of them appearing only after a previous one had been overcome and with a potential to erase their previous achievements.

What is fascinating to see is not how Boone inspires and bonds the team, nor how Yoast sacrifices his cherished dream for the sake of the greater good. The young, adrenaline-filled players quickly realize that they are on the brink of changing history. They learn what it is to be human, "to trust the soul of a man rather than the looks of him." Here is where Remember the Titans succeeds in giving us hope. Gerry Bertier, the captain of the team, e.g., willingly loses his girlfriend, his old best friend, his mom, and his community to stand up for his newly-learnt principles. He wins them all back again, and it is not very surprising.

People distrust another race only because of a misplaced fear of the unknown, because of how they have been brought up. Another wonderful example is Sheryl Yoast, the assistant coach's nine and a half years old daughter. She is the first to change, from telling Boone that "the coach is busy" to telling the players, "Y'all are acting like a bunch of sissies!" She does what the adults she looks up to do. Hayden Panettiere steals every scene she is in with this character.

At the end of the movie, I am the little man jumping out of his seat clapping. I rate it above Shimit Amin's Chak De! India. With very well-crafted characters in a formulaic genre, this movie deals with a greater issue that cripples mankind to this day.

Remember the Titans was released eight years before today.

Movie Reviews: Trade and Human Trafficking

Kim — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 20:41:20 EDT

By coincidence, I happened to watch two movies dealing with the same subject in two days. One a video rental, the other, a Lifetime miniseries on Hallmark. Both deal with the subject of women and young children being kidnapped and sold in a modern day form of slavery.

Trade is a movie seen from the eyes of a Mexican teenager following the trail of his 13 year old sister and her kidnappers across the border. Human Trafficking mostly follows from the point of view of an NYPD agent working with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

In both movies, the women are brought from all over the world into Mexico and then into the US by walking across the Mexican border.

Both show Mexican cops hand in glove with the traders. In both movies there is a scene where the Mexican cops get to "sample the merchandise" when it is being en route.

In Trade, the group is caught by the border police in the US and placed in detention until they can be sent back to Mexico. And the American officials simply turn away when one of the women tries to explain that they have been kidnapped.

Both movies are very realistic without being sensational or titillating. The horrors the girls and children (little boys and girls) face are unimaginable.

In Human Trafficking an entire set of young children is sequestered in a container and sent on a ship bound for Saudi Arabia on a 10 day journey from Mexico when their pimp gets news that the cops are about to raid his den.

Trade introduces two new child actors who are absolutely brilliant in their roles. Kevin Kline is the only well known actor in that movie and is in more of a supporting role.

Human Trafficking has a star cast of Donald Sutherland, Mira Sorvino and Robert Carlyle (the Scottish guy from Full Monty) who turns out an amazingly chilly performance as a Eastern European Sex Trade boss.

The entire situation of Human Trafficking is summed up absolutely eloquently in Mira Sorvino's press statement at the end of that movie.

Worth a watch for the realistic view of a universal problem. As Sorvino says, "It could be your daughter, your sister, your best friend next."

Movie Review: WANTED - Some Kickass Action!

Varun P — Tue, 2 Sep 2008 08:35:35 EDT

Not since Iron Man came out earlier this year have we seen such kickass action - I am certainly not taking into account The Dark Knight which came out a couple pf months ago!

If you thought only Bollywood could think up weird storylines, then you need to watch WANTED where the storyline is staler than the morbid Bollywood script we have become so familiar with.. But what stands out in the movie (apart from Angelina Jolie's butts ;-) ) is the sheer graphics and action sequences which leave you gasping for breath! The standout moment was obviously the car chase in the beginning of the movie when Angelina manages to beat the crap out of her sports car!!

Don't worry, I am not going to give much away, just don't go looking for a svelte story line guys -- because there ain't one!! But Hollywood being Hollywood, the cool cats easily blindside the audience with tattoos all over AJolie's lithe body; it's a good flick where they trace how our hero has to undergo the rigorous of trainings to find what he was born for (I am growing kinda bored of this type of a storyline) ... The movie somehow reminded me of Jumper though I'm still trying all feasible permutations and combinations to connect the two movies!

Go catch this movie if like me, you too couldn't get tickets for Rock On!! Even if you do get the tickets for Rock On, take out a couple of hours and watch this great flick!

Indian Movies - Very Much Without Verisimilitude

Cine Cynic — Sun, 3 Aug 2008 11:52:03 EDT

Last week, I pondered about the director's need to research about a subject that is an important aspect of his or her movie. Extending that thought process, I feel that verisimilitude is a quality that lacks in most of our movies.

Everyone is doing a good job with railway stations. But take a police station, for example. I have only had the opportunity to see them from outside so far, but the friends who have been inside assure me that they are nothing like what they show in our movies. Walls are not painted in red on the lower half, and white/off-white above. Cells are not always visible from the first room where most of the cops sit.

This was perhaps true about stations in the olden days (pre-Independence?). The sets in our studios erected decades back may have been renovated and repainted but not rethought about. Today's stations are usually dilapidated independent houses which have been furnished to suit a work environment for cops. I must say that Bollywood is doing a good job here, considering the sets in the multitude of cop tales being produced. Telugu film industry remains far behind and blissfully ignorant.

And what about the jobs? Novelists and short-story writers take pains to glean tidbits and jargon about various jobs, especially the jobs of their protagonists. Arthur Hailey was hailed for taking years for each novel, and oft-quoted as an epitome for researching.

Film makers, however, are exploiting the 20% rule to satisfy themselves and the audience. The 20% rule, say in animation, suggests developers to ignore 80% of a fast-paced action and to concentrate on the take off and landing of the animation. Like in a sequence where Tom chases Jerry. The chase itself is shown as a blur but the initial and final microseconds are crystal clear.

I recently watched a nondescript movie where the hero repairs a car that broke down. We have all seen it a number of times. The camera shows a closeup of the hands, then a closeup of the heroine waiting, then a longer shot of the sweaty hero collapsing the bonnet, and finally a closeup of getting some water to wash his greasy hands. The entire activity is not glossed over because it is a trivial issue; it is glossed over because our film makers aren't patient enough to clearly define that car problem and find out (theoretically) its solution.

When I learned driving, my driving school skipped the theory class where I was to have learned changing tires, pouring water in the carburetor, and making minor repairs. I always wish one of our movies imparted a little such knowledge.

Showing details about the above activity would make a greater impact when the character has a job of a car mechanic or, umph, engineer. People among the audience who really have that job feel proud and thankful for showing a snippet of their everyday lives, and the remaining who are in obscurity have an 'aha' moment.

Today we take for granted the omniscience of our protagonists whether in driving and fixing vehicles, or wielding and defusing weapons. The conflict, if any, faced by the protagonist no longer carries that high tension among us had we known that the protagonist is like one of us, without all the knowledge about the universe.

Verisimilitude is not an end in itself, rather a means to increase our belief and tension in the story.

Movie Review: The Gold Rush (1925)

DeeptiA — Fri, 1 Aug 2008 06:55:56 EDT

I had the chance to watch this classic Charlie Chaplin movie recently on TV, and was pretty impressed, hence writing about it. As you move along this old-movie review, you will find the story start to show up, so you can stop reading at any point further if you don't want the whole storyline.

The Gold Rush is a silent-era movie released in 1925. As with many Chaplin movies, the movie was written and directed by him, and starred him in the lead role. It was another of the 'Little Tramp' roles. As per Charlie Chaplin, The Gold Rush was a movie that he wanted to be remembered by. The movie also starred Mack Swain, Tom Murray, Henry Bergman, Malcolm Waite, and Georgia Hale. Georgia Hale got the role by chance, since Lita Grey was originally selected for the role, but Lita then got married to Charlie Chaplin in 1924, and hence was no longer to be the lead lady for the role. However, ironically, during the making of the film, Charlie's marriage to Grey collapsed, and Hale (who had idolized Chaplin from the beginning) was much more intimate with her leading man by the end of the movie.

The movie was a huge commercial success, earning more than $4 million at that time. In 1942, Chaplin took the movie into the talkie space, re-releasing the movie with a musical score (that was nominated for an Academy Award), adding a personal narration in his own voice, and doing some more editing to reduce the length of the movie by a few minutes.

Chaplin's previous movie A Women of Paris, had failed, and Chaplin was looking to see how he could recoup from that. He wanted to make a great movie, something that he would be remembered for. And then he came on the stories of some of the tragedies of the Great Alaskan Gold Rush; with tales of hardship, struggle and tragedy. The movies takes The Tramp in the Yukon, along with many others like him, heading over the Chilkoot Pass (some spectacular shooting on Hollywood sets). He gets stuck in a remote cabin with little supplies, along with another prospector and an escaped fugitive.

In this setting occurs one of the most iconic scenes from the silent film era - the eating of a leather boot by a starving man. Another iconic shot from the movie is of the cabin tottering on the edge of a cliff while the inhabitants struggle to get out. You also have the betrayal of The Tramp and the other prospector by the fugitive (who in turn meets his end at the hands of an avalanche).

The Tramp becomes very rich after finding gold. Once he reaches the town, The Tramp thinks that he is falling for a dance-hall girl (Hale), but why would she notice him ? She initially snubs him, but they have a happy ending. The movie is now considered an iconic movie, and is surely worth watching.

Why Do Celebrities Make Sex Tapes?

Deepti Lamba — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 11:36:31 EDT

After the Mini-me sex tape fiasco starring Verne Troyer there is a whiff of a Madonna sex tape. Why do people, especially celebrities, make tapes of themselves having sex? In my mind its as weird as recording one's genitalia.

Sex is a private act. We talk about it but to record it seems way out there. What do people do with these tapes? Sit back and watch them on their home theater systems and say - hey I could have humped you better? Or For the next video we must try the 69 position?

There have been so many sex videos and most have been worse than the regular porno videos like the one with bits of Paris Hilton showing after her simpering - I want you to touch me there

Fact is real life sex does not look like porno tapes.

There is no glossy production quality or retakes; its just two people having regular sex and watching two regular people doing it without the artificial fluff makes it tardy.

It feels good to those doing the act but to the audience its like an illegal National Geographic porno moment and the tape is then dissected. Which was why Verne Troyer fought tooth and nail to stop the distribution of his sex video tape and Paris Hilton was emotional wrought when her tape leaked.

With the regular leaking of sex tapes one would think it would deter celebs from making them but I guess having glass ceilings just doesn't do it for them any more. They want to be the 'star' of the orgasmic moment.

It is some kind of narcissism to make these tapes and save them for posterity?

Do people then re-play the tapes? Do they save them along with their marriage tapes?

When they break up do they return the tapes and swear the returned tapes were original copies?

Do they have any pre-nup agreements about these tapes?

These questions need answers, maybe they are answered. The world of celebrities is way different from ours. It's what fantasies are made of, the only problem is when their world and ours collide they tend to burn and we enjoy the fireworks;)

List : The Definitive Geeta Dutt

Ritu Chandra — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 02:57:31 EDT

20th July 2008 marked the 36th Death Anniversary of Geeta Dutt. A small tribute to the memory of this enchanting songstress.

It is difficult, almost unsettling to think of Geeta Dutt as a shriveled septuagenarian(what she would have been if she were alive). Time stopped aging her voice long before she actually passed away in 1972. Even today her voice represents a youthful joie-de-vivre that can lift anyone out of the bluest of blue moods. Her sad songs have an aching vulnerability that makes one want to weep for her and with her. And her richly-layered bhajans are strangely soothing. No other singer could traverse such a complex range of emotions with the ease and spontaneity that Geeta Dutt did. In addition to the richness in expression, her was voice was rich in tonal quality, robust and sweet quite like a juicy Dasheheri mango!

Despite all these qualities, today she is merely a memory in the history of Indian film music. Slotted early in her career as a 'club song' singer, Geeta unfortunately got stuck in the very mold that she created for herself with such blazing individuality. Couple this with her own battles with the bottle, failing marriage to film-maker Guru Dutt and a lackluster approach to her career, Geeta Dutt faded away, much before her times.

Yet, her small repertoire is dazzling to say the least. This list more than amply strengthens the belief that God sends all good things in limited editions.

Note : Click on the link to view the video of the song

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Tadbeer se Bigdi hui Taqdeer Banale (Film : Baazi(1951); Composer: SD Burman; Lyrics : Sahir Ludhianvi) The seductive and persuasive strains of the guitar, SD Burman's path-breaking western treatment of Sahir Ludhianvi's ghazal, Geeta Bali's energetic screen presence and Geeta Dutt's vibrant singing, the dice had no option but to roll in favour of this 'Baazi'. 'Tadbeer se Bigdi' was the greatest attraction of Baazi and the audience went to see the film in repeat mode only to witness the magic of the two Geetas.

2. Thandi Hawa Kali Ghata (Film : Mr and Mrs 55(1955); Composer: OP Nayyer; Lyrics : Majrooh Sultanpuri) Raju Bharatan, the much maligned film music critic, summed up the effect of Geeta Dutt's voice in a rare moment of clarity- "'Geeta Dutt was thandi hawa and kaali ghata rolled into one. The moment she came, you got the refreshing feeling of aa hi gayi jhoom ke. There was a rare swing in her voice. She hit you like a thunderclap"
What more can one say to recommend the freshness in this song other than to say that the effect on yours truly is without fail '....naache jiya ghoom ke' .

3. Aaj Sajan Mohe Ang Lagalo (Film : Pyaasa(1957); Composer: SD Burman; Lyrics : Sahir Ludhianvi) Guru Dutt's innovative idea of using a vaishnav bhajan to depict the purity of the romantic situation in the film, was ably supported by his wife's singing. Geeta brings a very human yearning to her rendition and yet keeps it sublime and other worldly like a true bhajan. Geeta Dutt's interpretation of bhajans was very distinctive. Whether it is 'Tora manwa kyon ghabraaye' or 'Na mein dhan chahun' or our chosen 'Aaj sajan mohe ang lagalo', she blends the sensual with the sublime seamlessly. This is true to the sufi tradition whose texts abound in erotica that couples with spiritual fervour. It can be argued that if Meerabai made a time-travel trip to the 50s and 60s she would have sung in the voice of Geeta Dutt!

4. Ankhiyan Bhool Gayi Hain Sona (Film : Goonj Uthi Shehnai(1959); Composer: Vasant Desai; Lyrics : Bharat Vyas) The classic Geeta chutzpah brims over in this duet with Lata Mangeshkar. The coy and docile heroine being teased mercilessly (or praised to the heavens) by a bunch of giggling sahelis is one the staple daal-roti situations done to death in hindi film songs. Yet, Geeta's sweet and wicked take of the situation makes this song a standout. Note the way she sings 'Sona' in the first line. This song also represents the female-female genre of songs of which Geeta has many memorable examples like Bachpan ke din, Jaanu Jaanu Ri, Thandi Thandi Hawa , under her belt.

5. Koi Chupke Se Aake (Film : Anubhav(1971); Composer: Kanu Roy; Lyrics : Kapil Kumar) The soft, romantic type of songs flowered in Geeta's melodious and expressive voice. Geeta's singing in Anubhav demonstrates how much she still had to offer even at the fag-end of her life. In the chosen song, she is soft, teasing, whimsical, romantic all at once and the ever so slight tinge of pathos in her voice highlights the enigma that was Geeta Dutt.

6. Babuji Dheere Chalna (Film : Aar Paar(1954); Composer: OP Nayyer; Lyrics : Majrooh Sultanpuri) The slow and sensual club song is Geeta's comfort zone. She could sleep-walk through those kind of songs. Yet, this one stands out for hitting all the right notes at once. The measured sensuality, a hint of vibrancy, a slight edge in the voice and a full throated bass-heavy tone all combine to make this OP Nayyer composition into a classic club song. OP Nayyer composed a slew of such songs for Geeta and later Asha Bhosle. Aayie meherban could be considered the successor to his body of work with Geeta.

7. Mera Naam Chin Chin Choo (Film : Howarah Bridge(1958); Composer: OP Nayyer; Lyrics : Qamar Jalalabadi) This irrepressible upper is arguably Geeta's signature song. The swing in her voice can get even the most languid of people out there up and jiving. It is high energy, peppy and brimming with the joie-de-vivre that is the quintessential Geeta Dutt.

8. Nanhi Kali Sone Chali (Film : Sujata(1959); Composer: SD Burman; Lyrics : Majrooh Sultanpuri) From the seductive to the soothing - the transition is as smooth as butter. The synergy of the Majrooh-SD Burman combination and the nurturing vocals of Geeta Dutt make this lullaby from Sujata as one of the most memorable loris created for Hindi films.

9. Waqt Ne Kiya (Film : Kagaz Ke Phool(1959); Composer: SD Burman; Lyrics : Kaifi Azmi)A brooding film-maker, his honey voiced wife, the beautiful actress and the inextricable mess of their liason - Life was a pre-scripted tragedy for the Dutt couple. Kagaz Ke Phool was Guru Dutt's semi-autobiographical magnum opus that immortalised his personal situation. Kaifi Azmi's lyrics are poignant, SD Burman's tune wistful, but it is Geeta's singing that stirs up the storm of emotions. The songs aches with nostalgia. The travesty of time and the indelible stain that it leaves on the soul is universal. Rare is the person who looks back at his life and does not wistfully discover.... 'hum rahe na hum' .

10. Na Jao Saiyan (Film : Sahib Bibi aur Ghulam(1962); Composer: Hemant Kumar; Lyrics : Shakeel Badayuni)
The character of Chhoti Bahu in Sahib Bibi Aur Ghulam is undoubtedly one of the greatest written for mainstream Indian cinema. Meena Kumari immortalised the tragic Chhoti Bahu with a stellar performance. Anguish, devotion, desire, self-disgust, rebellion and a repressed sexuality every little facet that constituted the complex character of Chhoti Bahu comes to life in this song. When Geeta Dutt poignantly mentioned that this song represented her own emotions rather than that of the film's character, Chhoti Bahu, Meena Kumari and she all fused into the same person. This song is a fitting finale to the list.

See Also

Upperstall Profile : Geeta Dutt

Raaga : Geeta Dutt songs

Geeta Dutt : Biography

Note: This is an edited version of a longer article. The complete article along with some pictures can be found here

Movie Review: Kung Fu Panda - Awesomeness - For Kids

Just Another Film Critic — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 15:04:06 EDT

Traditionally, there have been two paths for animation filmmakers. One is to make the films as close to reality as possible. That is the path taken by Pixar and Sony Animation, which try to push animation technology to new extremes and squeeze out every bit of processing power and skill set they have. The other is the conventional path that tries to realize the creators’ most bizarre and outlandish fantasies and attempts to emulate the peaks attained by Disney and Miyazaki. The second path is what companies like Dreamworks Animation have adopted and, to an extent, succeeded. Their latest offering, Kung Fu Panda is a clever idea, but inefficiently harnessed.

Po (Jack Black) is a chubby panda working in a Chinese restaurant but dreams of making it big as a Kung Fu hero. He idolizes the biggest Kung Fu heroes of the village, namely, Tigress, Snake, Monkey, Mantis and Crane (Angelina Jolie, Lucy Liu, Jackie Chan, Seth Rogen and David Cross respectively). He, then, hears about the induction of the Dragon Master who will be selected by Master Oogway himself. By seemingly sheer luck (or bad luck), Po gets selected as the Dragon Master who is to protect the village from the claws of Tai Lung (Ian McShane). In his mission he is assisted by Master Shifu (Hoffman, unidentifiable) who first seeks to drive out Po, but turns over a new leaf after a while.

Po is as cute as an animation character can get, but it is a pity that the creators have not utilized Jack Black fully for Po and vice versa. A bit more dedicated reconstruction could have not only guaranteed a great character, but also a huge brand value for the character which could then be merchandised well. With a enviable cast for the Furious five, it is but natural to expect some big role for them. Unfortunately, the film spends most of its time bringing out Po’s vulnerability and innocence and hence, the characters are merely reduced to a bunch of creatures you will fascinate staring at a zoo. However, Shifu’s small stature (a red panda) and Hoffman’s efforts suit the etching of his character and makes his presence worthwhile. The depiction of Tai Lung is anything but novel.

One of the minor commendable points of the film is the choice of its fauna for the images of the characters. The monochromatic Po is totally out of place in the colourful world of Valley of Peace, the slow and steady tortoise is the intellectual master of the palace, subordinated by the relatively rash, hare-like Shifu and a black and white polar creature, Tai Lung is pitted against another. However, the writers are to blame for the biggest blow for the film, the utterly stale and predictable plot that has become a favorite of critics to pan down. No sir, we did not expect this from the creators of Shrek (2001) and Madagascar (2005).

Now there must be something in the film to counterbalance the wound created by the plot and there is. The fabulously rendered world of Valley of Peace and Chinese architecture, never once pretending to be realistic, vibrant and daring use of colours and Kung Fu action that can substitute many Hong Kong flicks are definitely noteworthy. The tone of imagery, which is now fast becoming the trademark of Dreamworks, is thankfully retained and this paves way for the future flicks from Dreamworks to add girth to the plot. Finally, there is a huge opportunity for a sequel with a lot of spaces to be filled from the first one. I guess the image of the Furious five can be reinstated there.

Unlike Madagascar, which provided visual treat for the toddlers and also retained the adults with its hilarious one-liners, Kung Fu Panda is clearly for the children and hence focuses more on slapstick and juvenile verbal humour. This, without doubt, will entice the young ones, but grown ups (cinematically, that is) beware. With Madagascar’s sequel to hit in a few weeks, it is a good time for Dreamworks to recapture the adult market it may have lost with Kung Fu Panda.

Movie Review: Hancock

DeepakMaini — Thu, 3 Jul 2008 13:44:01 EDT

I’ll rate the movie, just for you, against my will: 3.5/10. I won’t tell you why. That’s for you to find out.

*** WARNING SPOILERS ***

The movie starts with this guy sleeping on a sidewalk bench, snoring, drunk out of his stocking cap, macho-ising big-ass, Burger King’s burger-sized sunglasses. Suddenly, some cops are shot at from a van on the interstate. This awakens the badass superhero and taunts him to save this fucked up world — fucked up at least for me. The superhero clutches a bottle of I-have-no-clue-what and begs his pardon and lets the cutie know to mind his sweet, little ass business. At least, he doesn’t shoot him on an intergalactic trip, as he does later. Now, I could write the whole storyline and bore everyone to chronic constipation, but I know better.

The movie raises many questions. I enjoy questions. There is a delinquent superhero. Fantastic. Many bagfuls of points to the writer. The writers create a superhero, but with a twist. This time the superhero is fighting himself more than any bad guy. The first question is whether he can fight himself better than fighting anyone else. Good. Over this fuming cauldron, they add Charlize Theron and make the superhero like this goddess. He does. He likes her. To connect all this up, they make the goddess’s husband want to change our delinquent superhero’s image and add a little heart shape on his chest. So the story kicks in. Superhero. Goddess. Public Relations Expert.

Flying, bullet ricocheting, wolverine flying suit. All that nonsense. Then, the meat of the story. The superhero gets back with the fucked up world. Truce. Clap clap. He saves people, police officers. He says Goo…d Jaaaab to everyone, several times. Cool. Before that he goes to jail, where he sticks someone’s head up someone else’s ass. Good stuff. There is some cute humor, too, which I liked, at the very beginning of the story, when the Public Relations Expert brings the superhero home, after the superhero saves his life from a fast-moving train.

The first part of the story ends here. Go get some popcorn.

The Goddess is a superheroine. She had lived through ages. 4 BC, too. People came after her with swords, and our superhero saved her, so he did in Miami, the last time around. Confused? Hehe. Ok. The superhero and superheroine are…I won’t tell you, go find it out. They are immortals. They were not alone, once. There were others of their kind, but they all died…because…because they became human. They died because they fell in love, just as humans do, and became mortals. Sorry shit. They were made in pairs. They were love bluebirds, cooing somewhere in the desert. So the deal is to choose between a normal, loving life and wife, and a life full of frolicking, drinking, flying, immortality, over that a superhero status, badass image, and droves of Los Angeles bitches, and truck and whale hurling, and finally a chance of being an asshole. Ooooh. Ooooh. Ooooh.

The second part ends. The fucked up writers of this fucked up world weren’t happy with just one story. I hate it.

Now, the big question. Would our superhero worry about the second part of his name or would he like to stay alive (staying close to the superheroine means death, remember?) and jump in out of the planet and hurl whales and trucks everywhere in the atmosphere? That, my friend, is the question that touched my heart. It has a direct relationship to human life. God fucked this world up by giving two things to men (women bear a similar analogy. Please sit down and keep your gun away, feminists of this world. OK. Write an article and publish it — you know where). First: Brain. Second: Something Hancock has, a man has, the name “Hancock” has, and the husband of a hen has, however small. That’s a fucked up mixture. Right? Why do I have to go after this half-species called women? Why? I spend so much of my time around the two things, of course, only when they work in tandem, not as separate entities, because separately at least one is endearing, I mean the brain is.

So our superhero has to make a choice, which is the climax. The movie starts with our superhero being lonely and shit pained with his bad image and ends with making the choice between “ahem ahem” and flying in the Los Angeles sky. And he makes the choice, as we all make at some point in our lives. Booty or Boom Boom? I say booty. Oh yeah?