Radio 9A

La Battaglia di Algeri (The Battle of Algiers) - A Review

2009-02-23T15:22:00.001-08:00

Grade: A+

A wonderful film.

This is a film which every human being should watch or should be made to watch. Till humanity ceases to exist.

Delhi 6 - A Review

2009-02-22T11:49:00.000-08:00

Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra is the bravest "mainstream" film maker in Hindi cinema. He is skilled enough to venture into the so called parallel or indie cinema and make a no holds barred film. But he has chosen to sacrifice his art for the sake of improving the grammar of mainstream Hindi cinema itself. He wants to vanquish the idea of something called parallel cinema or mainstream cinema or NRI cinema.Cinema is after all cinema. Period.

Mehra is also a masochist. He casts big stars in his film and adopts the "big film" framework, the key ingredients of extreme self flagellation. But he understands that these ingredients are vital for achieving his objective. He is literally on a crusade and he is prepared to be a martyr for the cause. He is an idealist who sincerely believes that the solution to improving the grammar of Hindi cinema is not by creating a "parallel" cinema. That experiment has been conducted once in Hindi cinema and it has failed. The true, and in fact, the correct solution is by making films which progressively expose the entire audience to ideas and techniques which they have never been exposed to. His objective is not to raise the bar for the average multiplex audience but to raise the bar for the entire audience. In this cause he needs help: from the so called "informed" audience. They need to understand his mission and be an active and integral part of it. And one day after his mission is accomplished, he will make that one film where he will fly, and for once won't care if anybody is flying with him.

In RDB he exposed the general audience to the ideas of a simple yet innovative screenplay, the unconventional use of music and ensemble acting. In Delhi 6 he goes a step further,not only in terms of the depth of ideas and techniques but also in the degree of restrictions he imposes upon himself. He first of all chooses a story which is full of big themes: Hindu-Muslim existence, caste system, poverty,corruption, Indian diaspora etc. Practically everything about the Indian experience is present in the film. Many films have tried to tackle all these ideas in one film and failed miserably. But this is where Mehra triumphs. He chooses to marry this completely conventional story with with the ideas and idioms of great film making.

The first half and the first 25 minutes of the second half of this film is officially the first Hindi film ,mainstream or indie, which employs "irreverence of the meter" (Oye Lucky and Dev D as I have mentioned in my posts on my blog still stuck to the meter). Mehra takes a blank canvas and spends his entire first half randomly painting broad brush strokes using different colors. The painting emerges in the latter part of the second half. By choosing an American born Indian protagonist who actually is curious about his heritage, rather than an NRI, Mehra could afford to tone down the emotional impact of all experiences (Indian heritage unfortunately for most NRI kids is the Yashraj/KJ/SRK Bollywood). This helps Mehra to get rid of the nostalgia and "cum shots" (thanks to Dibankar for this phrase) completely and focus more importantly on the confusion that an outsider experiences when he encounters the Indian life in full flow. Mehra does a wonderful job in all these sequences and portrays Roshan's emotional trajectory realistically (the Jaagran scene is the standout scene of the film)

Now the second idea we encounter in the film which also is the most talked about aspect of this film: Kala Bandar. The biggest casualties of the "thematic" genocide perpetrated by Hindi film makers in the last 40 years are : metaphor and surrealism. The system of dreams sequences and songs completely killed the development of these two themes. And in the process, the Indian cine goer has been completely numbed to their existence in the medium of cinema. Kala Bandar, The Mad Man with the Mirror and the linking of these metaphors through the Ram Leela is Mehra's attempt to reawaken the Indian cine goer to the idea of a metaphor in narrative art. While doing so, Mehra uses all his skill successfully to make sure that the film doesn't reduce to a play, or more importantly into a street play.

This is the only film I have seen till date which has captured the tenuousness of the existence of the idea of India itself. Mehra ensures that the all the big themes are lurking in the background. Once in a while, one of these themes suddenly jumps on the audience and makes a quick exit. That is exactly how life in India is. India hangs by a million threads, one of which snaps every once in a while, causing the whole country to go into a disarray. And yes, the cause for snapping could be as simple as a monkey.

The biggest grouse that the "informed audience" so far have had is the voice over and the detailed explanation of the metaphors. This is where they need to help Mehra and understand that he is helping the Indian cine goer to recover from the genocide. The good thing about this film is that the "informed" audience can clearly see where Mehra is flying and where he is in a crusader mode. None of his films will be perfect for the them but they need to get past these aspects of his films for the bigger cause. They need Mehra to succeed not for his sake but for their sake. He is, quite literally, the Obama of Hindi Cinema.

Dev D - A Review

2009-02-18T16:49:00.000-08:00

Grade: B

The most talked about film of the season and I finally got around to watching this. Anurag Kashyap has the most violent cult following in Indian cinema (yes his fans are more passionate than the fans of Rajnikanth and AR Rehman). By the time I had seen Black Friday, Anurag had already developed quite a following but it wasn't a cult as of yet. Black Friday was a remarkable effort (weak in some parts) and it was the dispassionate tone of the film that impressed me the most. For No Smoking he was lauded by his fans as the new David Lynch and some said he was the new Luis Bunuel ( I told you "It's a cult !"). I am not ready to buy into this hyperbole. But the fact remains that he is a very talented film maker and one who is willing to experiment even if it might kill him.

Dev D is far subtler than it appears in the advertisements. It's a fairly accurate portrayal of the path to self destruction that a lot of alcoholics, drug addicts or addicts of any kind embark upon. The "Boyle" school's camerawork is put to surprisngly good and restrained use during the drug scenes (I feared the overuse of this technique more than anything else). Anurag at last showed on screen what the actual deal is with the character of Devdas. He is not a Shakesperean tragic character by any stretch of the imagination. Infact he is a self obsessed man who thinks he loves a girl because he ought to. His self destruction is not born out of dejection or rejection. The story of Devdas for me was always about addiction and Anurag conveyed that interpretation of the story throughout the film. There are many instances where Anurag shows the complete lack of true family support for Dev but keeps reminding us that his requests for money are never turned down. One of the best scenes in the film is the one where just after his father's funeral Dev's brother gives him money for his legal battle but none for Dev's personal use. Dev promptly asks him for money but the request is, for the first time totally disregarded. Dev's journey on his path to recovery has begun.

One of the most discussed aspects of this film is the portrayal of Paro and Chanda. Anurag shows women in his film as GOOD human beings WITH DESIRE and its a leap forward for the portrayal of women in " Hindi Multiplex Cinema " ( Yes even in multiplex cinema! and I have always wondered why it took so long. Oye Lucky nervously flirted with this idea ). The Hindi Parallel Cinema movement had long broken this barrier and hopefully the multiplexes will act as a catalyst for this change to be adopted on a wider scale.

The other widely discussed aspect is the ending. The ending shown in the film doesn't mean that the textbook ending is still not possible. Anurag chose to walk away from Dev because he wanted to do so. Dev might have relapsed and died or Dev might be in rehab undergoing treatment. Choose an ending that suits you. Thats how every film should end.

Of course the film has its flaws: Anurag makes the mistake of marrying the Devdas story with a couple of social scandals of our times: the DPS MMS clips and the Sanjeev Nanda BMW case. I don't understand why the character of Chanda should have the MMS background to become a prostitute. I would have preferred Chanda to be a prostitute out of choice (there are many in Delhi who are just like that and in fact hail from respectable families and who attend reputed schools) or the background not even discussed. The whole background episode of Chanda dumps unnecessary sentimentality on the film and reduces the impact of what is a very interesting performance from Kalki. The BMW episode is dealt with in a better fashion and in fact compels the audience to think who Sanjeev Nanda actually is and humanizes him (going beyond the usual rich,spoilt and arrogant impression that we might have formed of him).

On the whole its a film that should be definitely rewatched. The first watch would allow the viewer to get past his curiosity regarding the retelling of the Devdas story. It's the second watch, I suspect, that will make the movie more interesting to many viewers. And of course the song. Do I even need to say anything about it ?

PS: For me from the MMS clip episode popped up a situation which I think is worthy of a film itself : The moral quandary of a father whose daughter in involved such a scandal.
(naturally Anurag has no time to devote to this issue in detail as he has other issues to attend to and thereby zooms through it)

Luck By Chance - A Review

2009-02-18T15:51:00.000-08:00

Grade: D

There have been a slew of Hindi films of late taking potshots at the "film fraternity". I am fed up of these dishonest films and disgusted with these film makers.

Zoya Akhtar joins these band of film makers with her debut effort Luck By Chance. Given her lineage I expected a more honest but mediocre attempt in portraying the film industry. But she has taken the cowardly route just as her peers have, and ended up caricaturing the film industry. It's as if before these film makers start these type of films they have certain rules:

1.If it is set in contemporary times I will caricature this industry.
2.For an honest portrayal of the film industry I will set the film in the 1950's and show the dead people realistically .
3.If nothing works out maybe hire Madhur Bhandarkar and produce the film which will end up making everybody feel disgusted yet titillated.

The film industry is full of intelligent people who make dumb films. And instead of having the courage to show this, Zoya Akhtar shows these people to be dumb. The people in the film industry probably live in their own reality but that doesn't mean they are idiots. Caricaturing and even worse, propagating lies about the industry is the best strategy to be excused for turning out junk year after year. "We make junk films because we are dumb" is the slogan but the truth is " We make junk films because we can't make good films". And to top this all is the promotion of the idea that any film that criticizes the Hindi film industry is serious/intellectual cinema. And then the industry PR machine will kick in and the stars and the film makers on talk shows will indulge themselves in critiquing this wonderful new age liberating cinema.

The funny requirement for all these films is that the struggles of wannabe stars/actors need to be shown realistically in order to obtain artistic cred but the industry personalities are hidden behind caricatures. Show them the way they are: Smart people living in their own world and working hard to make dumb films.

That's a film I want to watch. Not this tripe.

Oye Lucky Lucky Oye- A Review

2009-02-18T11:11:00.000-08:00

Grade: B+

Possibly the best Hindi film in a long time. Khosla Ka Ghosla I thought was one of the few Hindi films I had seen where it seemed as if the director was actually familiar with the city. This familiarity is actually a rarity in Hindi cinema and generally in modern cinema itself (unlike writing). Most of the time the directors study the prospective surroundings and then make a film set in it. Dibankar Banerjee is obviously an exception, and in fact is somebody who if given a chance, would make films which progressively delve further into the lives of the sort of people, he has grown up with in Delhi. Oye Lucky Lucky Oye after Khosla Ka Ghosla is precisely a step in that direction.
(Heck I have grown up in those areas and I can easily visualize a couple more films filled with all the details of those places and its citizens. And that might still not be enough)

Letting the city be the leading character in a film is amounting to blasphemy in Hindi cinema unless of course it is the mafia infested areas of Mumbai. This movie serves as a perfect example for why Slumdog is a mediocre and superficial film and I am glad this film released this quickly after Slumdog. This film is a remarkably accurate and more importantly a detailed study about the people in the middle class parts of the Delhi. Dibankar himself is one of them and he does not hold anything back portraying these people. To me the most exciting parts of the film were the character studies of Gogi and Mr Hooda and its implications. Let me elaborate on this more:

After watching Khosla Ka Ghosla I was very sure that Dibankar had very little clue about actual criminals(the property dealer)and their lives. This belief was reaffirmed with the portrayal of the character of Gogi in this film. And I like that about Dibankar. If he doesn't know the world of certain set of people it immediately comes across on the screen as forced and inauthentic. He usually tries to conquer it by infesting the characters with comical menace which allows him to put in some comical dialogues/scenes and exaggerated physical gestures (Boman Irani scratching his balls, Paresh Rawal in the Goodfellas scene). But the hurry in which he wants to exit out of this world is evident on the screen.

It is in portraying the Mr Hooda type of criminal where he excels. This is the type of criminal he has seen and the type we usually encounter in our lives. The good news about all this:
Dibankar might actually make a film in the future where he will simply have no characters or situations that he is just not familiar with. And this might mean joy for us as an audience and him on his way to becoming a great film maker (yes he will be great even if he sticks to the "meter").

Dibankar still sticks to what I call the "meter" (something I dislike;more about it in some other post) but I am willing to excuse him. The music is outstanding and he makes wonderful use of it. Hindi film producers are definitely coming of age regarding how the director wants to use music in their films (maybe its just UTV Spotboy). The dialogues are very well written and there is appropriate restraint to avoid the scenes from becoming overtly and unneccesarily comical. The screen play other than the Gogi part is wonderful and it emphasizes that its never about only the story but its also about the characters and their thoughts and actions. The actors have all played their characters really well. Its truly an excellent ensemble performance and there is no bigger compliment that I can offer to the actors. The production quality is excellent and it goes to show how skillful the entire crew is.

Its a film I will definitely rewatch and maybe buy one day.

PS: If Dibankar were to tell me that he's making a film with an "irreverence for the meter" I will be the first one to watch it.

Slumdog Millionaire - A Review

2009-01-09T15:32:00.000-08:00

Grade: C-

It's a bad film. And mind you I am not one of those jingoistic Indians who despises each and any movie that shows India in a so called "poor" light.

Boyle knows Edinburgh and its surrounding areas inside out. He knows it's residents and he can make an equivalent of a Trainspotting for every type that inhabits these areas. In case of 28 Days later, the subject by itself allowed Boyle to set it in known surroundings and his task was to make these surroundings unfamiliar (which he did rather well). But with Slumdog Millionaire, Boyle is forced to make a film that's set in a city that he is not familiar with at all. And on top of that the film is based on a script that has an interesting premise but is riddled with stereotypes that plague every single script churned out about Mumbai. The screenplay falls into the category of the classic "modern day" screenplay where a montage of incidents is constructed and the characters just jump from one incident to the next. In short the screenplay is just like that of any Hollywood disaster movie.

If the above is not bad enough, Danny Boyle adopts the 2 most important tenets of "modern day filmmaking": fantastic editing and breathtaking camerawork. They do what they are exactly meant to do: induce an artificial and racy flow to the story-telling thereby not letting the film breathe(this is something the new age filmgoer seems to prefer and love). And because of Boyle's unfamiliarity with Mumbai, the film is full of cliched images of Mumbai that pervade every movie set in it (with the exception of some movies of the Hindi "parallel cinema" movement). These cliched images make Boyle look like a "superficial Hollywood director" or an "accomplished Bollywood director" without any insight at all into the internal mechanics of the city. There are the customary aerial shots of the slums, an aerial shot of the red light area crowded with people, a scene between brothers on the 20th floor of a skyscraper under construction which then pans out to show the city, thus conjuring up profound imagery that Mumbai is city of slums and skyscrapers. It is equivalent to setting the film in New York and populating the movie with shots of Manhattan, Harlem and the subways.

The much praised soundtrack is possibly Rehman's weakest score, but it does suit the film in parts. As far as acting goes, the characterization of the quiz show host and it's audience is shocking to say the least. The adult actors are adequate and most of them either seem to be struggling to act or are sleepwalking through their roles. The child actors are the saving grace of the film.

To make a film which is trying to encapsulate all the aspects of 21st century India is impossible. Boyle had a huge challenge to turn an awful script into a good film and I am sure he was fully aware of the it's quality. This might explain why he chose to overcome it's deficiencies with the technical wizardry, but unfortunately for him and the viewer, he is unable to do so.

PS: For readers curious to read a more detailed analysis of this mediocre film you can visit Passion For Cinema.