Rating: ***
A lot has been written about Sarkar, Ram Gopal Verma's dream project. About connections of the film with Shiv Sena supremo Bal Thackerey, and about how the father son duo of AB Senior and AB junior are working together. And of course about the adaptation of Mario Puzo's acclaimed bestselling novel The Godfather. Well, I think that there has been too much of talking without anyone actually fairly reviewing this movie as a movie - not as a dream or an adaptation. And I hope to do so now.
To be honest, I liked the movie. Yes, I did. But I didnt love it. It definitely has the RGV stamp and grooming, and I would say it is much better than some of RGV's latest projects like Naach. Technically, the film is awesome, and the shots have been called in a manner that is not very typical. Innovative camera angles and amazing sense of lighting and shadows is superb. The background music and chanting of "Govinda Govinda" is used very effectively. Although, at points the use of sitar in the background somehow doesnt gel too well with whats happening in the frame. The setting of the movie is well chosen, and the haveli that RGV has used looks very authentic and well chosen. Costumes and make up suit the setting and ambience. RGV has used mostly black, grey, white and rather earthy shaed in most of the movie, and that sets the mood for this film very aptly. There are no songs and the editing is very crisp. The fact that the movie is less than 2.5 hrs is also a welcome change. All in all, I would say that the movie is technically near its best.
Let us now talk about the characters. They are very well defined and casting is very convincing. Amitabh Bachchan has once again, given a restrained performance after his recent role in Black. And he does a very good job at playing this role. The camera mostly focusses on the faces and eyes of most characters in the movie, and that makes it very very important that everyone delivers a good performance. And indeed, everyone does. To my surprise, even Katrina Kaif does a pretty decent job of her small role (not to mention the loud whistles every time she came on the screen). Tanisha seems okay and quite likable in her role, though the way her dialogues were written didnt impress me. Supriya Pathak looks every bit a marathi housewife, with serene and uncomplaining eyes. A typical mother (NO, not a typical Bollywood mother, but a real life mother). Rukhsaar, playing Kay Kay's wife doesnt get any scope to act at all. Abhishek Bachchan delivers in yet another good role, although he isnt quite as impressive as he was in Yuva. But his fan following is definitely going to increase after this role. And last but not the least, Kay Kay is the scene stealer in the movie. Playing the elder son of Sarkar, he imbues his role with such emotion that it almost pours out of the screen. And in the real close ups with just his face or eyes in the entire frame, you can see what a marvellous actor he is.
So far so good! But it is not that rosy a picture after all... Although Sarkar has everything going for it, I think there are some things that go to make it less than phenomenal. Some of them are probably to subtle to explain in words. But it feels that RGV has used some sterotypes in his film that he has used in most of his gangster or underworld movies. The dilemma of Abhishek Bacchan when he decides between going back to America and helping out his father could have been focussed more on. Amitabh's character, Sarkar, is unnecessarily shown to be too-white - meaning that he is shown as a do gooder to people and not doing any evil deals against the people or the country... though there is a mention of his illegal activities, but not even one instance of that is shown. I would have preferred a picture that was more grey than Colgate white. Besides, the revenge of Abhishek Bacchan on his father's enemies is shown so fast and rapid that the impact doesnt register. Particularly, how Abhishek manmages to know who the kingpin in the whole enemy gang is beyond me! RGV has certainly tried to make a quality product, and I would also say that he succeeds to a certain extent. But to call this another Godfather would be a mistake. The characters are not as strong and the whole movie does not have the kind of impact The Godfather had. Actually, the two are so different, that we must actually not even try to compare the two. And yes, there is no resemblamce between Sarkar and Bal Thackerey except for the rosary beads that Sarkar carries all the time.
A good film and well directed venture. Worth a see!
February 21, 2006
February 08, 2006
Paheli: Movie Review
Rating: *
Although not exactly the Webster's definition for the word, Paheli literally translates to 'riddle'. And it stands true to its name. The million dollar question is 'How?'. And I would earnetsly try to answer the quesion here in this review.
This is a story about love - I know that you have heard this one before, but please be a bit more patient before you jump to any conclusions. Based on a famous Rajasthani folk tale 'Duvidha', this movie's story looked very promising at the very onset - not the usual la-la-hoo love story, but a more sensible and interesting one. After the previews, I expected nothing but an awesome movie. My hopes were however, completely quashed.
The film boasts of a mammoth star cast - Shahrukh 'The King' Khan and Bollywood's erstwhile numero uno Rani Mukherjee, not to mention the cameos by Amitabh Bachchan, Juhi Chawla and Sunil Shetty, and the narrators Naseeruddin Shah and Ratna Pathak Shah. This film is the story of Lachi (Rani) and Kishna (Shah Rukh), the latter leaves her the night after wedding without having so much as touched her, Lachi is distressed, a ghost who in love with Lachi arrives to her in-laws' home in the guise of her husband, and expresses his love. So far so good!
Just about then, he reveals to her the truth. And just about then, the film also starts faltering, and there is no redemption till the very end of the film. Amol Palekar, a very experienced and critically acclaimed director is holding the directorial baton. But this time, he fails, and fails by a long margin. I would not say that the idea of a ghost and his muse in love is not interesting enough. No. But the director totally and utterly has missed the point! What could have been an engrossing story about love and relationships, about the moral dilemma of right and wrong, about individuality and society turns out to be a sheer disappointing potboiler.
The setting is supposed to be in Rajasthan - yet there is not even a single actor in the film who can speak Rajasthani without making a mockery of it. Just like adding an 'o' to all words does not turn Hindi into Bengali; Rajsthani is not just about making the 'n's in all words more nasal and glottal. I was not expecting a perfection la Meryl Streep - her near perfect adoption of Australian, British and Texan accents in her films - but the dialogue delivery in Paheli is just pathetic! Absolutely no homework has been put into training the actors how to look or feel the part.
Sharukh Khan proves yet again that King Kong can act better than King Khan. He is truly a revelation - a shocking one! Abyssmal would be my description of his entire presentation - he is evidently uncomfortable in the dhoti, has no body language to convey his emotions, has butchered the Rajasthani language to shreds and exhibits complete lack of sensitivity in his performance. Right from the first frame till the very end of the film, you see Shahrukh Khan and not Kishna - the husband or Kishna - the ghost. So different from his Mohan Bhargav act in Swades.
Rani Mukherjee, as always, looks very beautiful and lends some credibility to her part. But given the plot, a better characterization and control over the subtle nuances of the situation would have made all the difference. Here again, the director is entirely to blame.
One wonders why Amitabh Bachchan was added to play the role of the old shepherd. Not only was his presence unnecessary, but the part was too insignificant and inconsequential that it would hev been played by just anyone. Moreover, the character just seems too unwordly to make any sense in the already trouble enterprise that Paheli is. Likewise, Juhi Chawla and Suniel Shetty are completely out of place and have no significance in the entire movie whatsoever. Even if all their frames are edited out of the movie, the movie would remain just the same. Coming from the man who has given us amazing films in the past, not to fogret the recent Marathi film Anahat, this one is a huge disappointment. To the extent that great orators like Naseeruddin Shan and Ratna Pathak Shah sound jaded and fail to arouse either humor or emotion in the viewer.
The single * that I have given the movie is surely because of the visual treat that it was to see the colors of Rajsathan in their full glory. The costumes are vibrant and the art direction is surely a treat for the eyes. The songs are like a huge canvas of paintings that has been very aesthetically crafted. But the songs, though superbly shot, are far too many and appear everywhere in the movie out of nowhere. Although this time, they do bring relief from the other atrocities that the film inflicts on its viewers.
To conclude it all, Paheli is a great film to promote Rajasthan tourism. But why the director felt so strongly about the story to make it into a film remains a paheli to me. The whole controversy about Paheli being sent as India's entry for academy awards seems moot. The judgement is clear - Paheli doesnt have anything that would qualify it even for the roadside cine-awards in Matunga or Church Street, let alone the Academy Awards. The choices that our jury makes for official entries to Oscars are surely getting worse with each passing year. While an entry like Iqbal could have given us a respectable representation, Paheli makes sure that we definitely miss the bus this time, and make it difficult to catch it in the near future either!
Although not exactly the Webster's definition for the word, Paheli literally translates to 'riddle'. And it stands true to its name. The million dollar question is 'How?'. And I would earnetsly try to answer the quesion here in this review.
This is a story about love - I know that you have heard this one before, but please be a bit more patient before you jump to any conclusions. Based on a famous Rajasthani folk tale 'Duvidha', this movie's story looked very promising at the very onset - not the usual la-la-hoo love story, but a more sensible and interesting one. After the previews, I expected nothing but an awesome movie. My hopes were however, completely quashed.
The film boasts of a mammoth star cast - Shahrukh 'The King' Khan and Bollywood's erstwhile numero uno Rani Mukherjee, not to mention the cameos by Amitabh Bachchan, Juhi Chawla and Sunil Shetty, and the narrators Naseeruddin Shah and Ratna Pathak Shah. This film is the story of Lachi (Rani) and Kishna (Shah Rukh), the latter leaves her the night after wedding without having so much as touched her, Lachi is distressed, a ghost who in love with Lachi arrives to her in-laws' home in the guise of her husband, and expresses his love. So far so good!
Just about then, he reveals to her the truth. And just about then, the film also starts faltering, and there is no redemption till the very end of the film. Amol Palekar, a very experienced and critically acclaimed director is holding the directorial baton. But this time, he fails, and fails by a long margin. I would not say that the idea of a ghost and his muse in love is not interesting enough. No. But the director totally and utterly has missed the point! What could have been an engrossing story about love and relationships, about the moral dilemma of right and wrong, about individuality and society turns out to be a sheer disappointing potboiler.
The setting is supposed to be in Rajasthan - yet there is not even a single actor in the film who can speak Rajasthani without making a mockery of it. Just like adding an 'o' to all words does not turn Hindi into Bengali; Rajsthani is not just about making the 'n's in all words more nasal and glottal. I was not expecting a perfection la Meryl Streep - her near perfect adoption of Australian, British and Texan accents in her films - but the dialogue delivery in Paheli is just pathetic! Absolutely no homework has been put into training the actors how to look or feel the part.
Sharukh Khan proves yet again that King Kong can act better than King Khan. He is truly a revelation - a shocking one! Abyssmal would be my description of his entire presentation - he is evidently uncomfortable in the dhoti, has no body language to convey his emotions, has butchered the Rajasthani language to shreds and exhibits complete lack of sensitivity in his performance. Right from the first frame till the very end of the film, you see Shahrukh Khan and not Kishna - the husband or Kishna - the ghost. So different from his Mohan Bhargav act in Swades.
Rani Mukherjee, as always, looks very beautiful and lends some credibility to her part. But given the plot, a better characterization and control over the subtle nuances of the situation would have made all the difference. Here again, the director is entirely to blame.
One wonders why Amitabh Bachchan was added to play the role of the old shepherd. Not only was his presence unnecessary, but the part was too insignificant and inconsequential that it would hev been played by just anyone. Moreover, the character just seems too unwordly to make any sense in the already trouble enterprise that Paheli is. Likewise, Juhi Chawla and Suniel Shetty are completely out of place and have no significance in the entire movie whatsoever. Even if all their frames are edited out of the movie, the movie would remain just the same. Coming from the man who has given us amazing films in the past, not to fogret the recent Marathi film Anahat, this one is a huge disappointment. To the extent that great orators like Naseeruddin Shan and Ratna Pathak Shah sound jaded and fail to arouse either humor or emotion in the viewer.
The single * that I have given the movie is surely because of the visual treat that it was to see the colors of Rajsathan in their full glory. The costumes are vibrant and the art direction is surely a treat for the eyes. The songs are like a huge canvas of paintings that has been very aesthetically crafted. But the songs, though superbly shot, are far too many and appear everywhere in the movie out of nowhere. Although this time, they do bring relief from the other atrocities that the film inflicts on its viewers.
To conclude it all, Paheli is a great film to promote Rajasthan tourism. But why the director felt so strongly about the story to make it into a film remains a paheli to me. The whole controversy about Paheli being sent as India's entry for academy awards seems moot. The judgement is clear - Paheli doesnt have anything that would qualify it even for the roadside cine-awards in Matunga or Church Street, let alone the Academy Awards. The choices that our jury makes for official entries to Oscars are surely getting worse with each passing year. While an entry like Iqbal could have given us a respectable representation, Paheli makes sure that we definitely miss the bus this time, and make it difficult to catch it in the near future either!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)