GRUDGE NAHI,BUT MEMORABLE BHI NAHI

MOVIE: Ghajini
CAST: Aamir Khan, Asin, Jiah Khan
DIRECTOR: AR Murugadoss



Shah Rukh Khan recently told in a press conference that he felt special every time someone used him as a brand to get publicity. He also added that it was unfortunate that he could not use anyone else for this as there was no brand bigger than him. Well we all know that someone is Aamir Khan. In one of the scenes in Ghajini he makes fun of Shah Rukh by making fun of the Ruk Ruk Khan of Kya Aap Panchvi Fail Champu Hain fame. Truly, Aamir knows to use the biggest brand in India greatly to his favour. The business his adaptation of Memento has made in few days is much more overwhelming than what Aditya Chopra's return has!

After the Oscar nomination of Lagaan. Aamir Khan has neglected mainstream Bollywood cinema. He has rather brought good, art film type scripts into mainstream cinema and has been away from the typical dance hero villain drama. The pathetic YRF Fanaa was an exception though. Ghajini is more than three hours of pure masala. Aamir Khan returns to the mainstream with this flick.

The title Singhania is somehow synonymous to very rich and powerful as far as Bollywood is concerned. Countless flicks name the rich guy as some Singhania. Ghajini carries this trend and names Aamir as a Sanjay Singhania. He has lost his wife Kalpana, played by Asin. Asin is no doubt awesome. Her screen presence was of unmatched charm and she has overplayed the others pretty easily in this movie. No wonder why Murugaddos cut short Jiah Khan's only song Lattoo.

Circumstances lead to a condition when Sanjay is hit by an iron rod when he comes to save Kalpana from a goon called Ghajini played by the Ashwatthama of the Mahabharata(Pradeep Rawat). He goes into a mental state when he cannot make new memories. Forgets things in say fifteen minutes. This movie is not Memento though. It has got a much wider canvas and story line. Only the mechanism of remembering things is like Memento(infact better). Aamir Khan has done a moderate job as an actor while depicting the patient. He has overacted at times(reminded me of Himesh in Aapka Suroor) and at times has been very comic with his serious look. His lip sync was not correct most of the times too, so important to get it right in Bollywood musicals.

The unwanted close ups, the fast forward action and the very poor background score made the action scenes of this action based movie truly pathetic. It was highly highly tamilised . I am an ardent fan of Tamil movies but I do not aproove to the Rajnikanth ways of action. This movie was not like Rajni's style, it was relatively real, but not really believable and not really nouvelle.

Jiah Khan is not a good actress. She was the low point of the movie. Though she did not have a great role but she did not give a great performance either. So thumbs down to her. Asin on the other hand as I mentioned had a great charming quotient. She was fabulous with her acting too. Truly speaking I enjoyed only those parts in which she was there, that is to say the love story part. Neither did I like the action sequences nor did I enjoy Aamir Khan's eight pack and his animalistic behaviour supported by his moderate acting. The love story was very sweet. That is something for which Ghajini is watchable to be frank.

The movie can be best described as a good Tamil movie made in Hindi. The directional approach is very much south Indian. That is difficult to digest for a Bollywood buff like me. Though I enjoy watching Tamil and Telegu movies, but I would not like my Bolly masala movies to lose their style of narration. Unwanted song sequences, over dramatic acting and direction and not really catchy dialogues(unlike Memento where the dialogues are the reason of its greatness). The movie has a runtime of more than three hours and for the look of Asin you can skip some evening agenda and have a taste of this masala and shout aloud in the theatre, "What a scene, Asin!"

CAN YOU CHANGE DESTINY?

MOVIE: If Only
DIRECTOR:Gil Junger
CAST: Jennifer Love Hewitt, Paul Nicholls



In Jhoom Barabar Jhoom, better known as a Bollywood disaster, half of the movie is spent out showing what the lead actors were bluffing about. Talking about scenarios and people who never existed and talking about such things which did not have anything much to do with what followed. In Junger's If Only half of the movie is spent in a dream sequence. But this is the very basis and foundation of the movie. Ian Wyndham, played by Nicholls, wakes up in the morning with his girlfriend Samantha Andrews played by Hewitt. He goes through a day where he is not an ideal lover. He does not know what his girlfriend likes. May be he is caring and really loves her but does not actually know her.

He does not know whether she has a red sweater, he does not know the importance of the graduation concert she has this evening(infact he doesnt know if she has a concert). He does not realise the love that a small student of her has for her. But he loves her and cannot lose her. But he does. And with that he realises it was a dream.

The day which we were talking about has actually begun now. He spots an uncanny similarity between the two days and observes that things which happened in the dream are recurring in his actual day. The sequence and the style and the outcomes are slightly different but they do happen. He is now afraid as he knows the outcome of the day. He is going to lose her. With that fear that its his last day with her, Junger shows a massive change in the man. He loved her more than what he ever did on that day.

This movie may be a sweet one time watch but it raises a question deep inside us. A question regarding destiny. Can we really know what will happen? Can we really change what is to happen? Can we exactly know what is going to happen or can we just reach upto certain possibilities which are probable to happen. These are not only questions of philosophy but also nowadays of Metaphysics. Though an action masala movie like Krrish is just considered a time pass watch, it too raises such a question about time. Will tell that in detail some other time.

This though is not exactly what the story stresses upon. The story stresses about the change which was brought about in the life of the guy. Ian knows he will lose Samantha if he behaved the same way he did in his dream. So he behaves in a much more caring and nice way than his dream to undo what happens in his dream. He not only remembers her concert but makes it special for her. That is undoubtedly the best scene of the movie. Also the bracelet scene is something very romantic and something to die for.

Ian wanted to change the outcome of the day. So he changed himself. By changing his behaviour, he changes everything, everything indeed.

This one is dedicated to my best friend Malay. He loves this movie. I love it too.

DONT FORGET THIS ONE

FILM: Memento
CAST: Guy Pearce, Carrie-Anne Moss, Joe Pantoliano
DIRECTOR: Christopher Nolan
WRITER: Jonathan Nolan



While the whole of India right now is more than geared up for the Christmas release of the Aamir Khan's Ghajini, I would like to introduce you to Memento, the original version of Ghajini. I went through the newspapers today that the film may not release on Christmas due to problems of copyright with reference to its Tamil predecessor. My reaction to it was, what the hell! Both are bloody lifted stuff from Nolan's masterpiece(I mention both Christopher and Jonathan here). What are they fighting over? May be they are fighting over who is a more original duplicate!!

Cristopher Nolan has got a very different narrative style in any of his movies barring the The Dark Knight and Batman Begins which followed linear narration. Otherwise he follows a very non linear pattern of narration. For example he puts a scene from the end in the beginning and jumbles it up by narrating past and present together. This was I think best done in The Prestige.
Here in Memento he follows a pattern not ventured much into; Reverse Chronology. It means that the movie starts from the end of the story and ends at the beginning!

Leonard played by Pearce is the male lead here. His wife was raped and murdered by some John G. And during that incident he hit his head badly and damaged his brain to step into a very strange mental disease. He did not forget everything. He just could not make new memories. A similar case was shown in the Drew Barrymore and Adam Sandler starrer 50 First Dates.

Leonard, also called Lenny had vengeance in him. He wanted to find whosoever John G was. He being previously an investigator started investigating himself again with this condition. For this he created a very disciplined and bizzare mechanism. He tattooed vital information about the killer on his body (He does not have an eight pack, thats more realistic). He always had a Polaroid camera with him which would instantly give him the picture of the person he just met. He would write down vital information about the person then and there and refer to it again when he lost his memory again.

Natalie played by Moss, is a bartender who gets involved in this case too, somehow. She has an interesting dialogue to Leonard. Is that what your little note says? It must be hard living your life off a couple of scraps of paper. You mix your laundry list with your grocery list you'll end up eating your underwear for breakfast.

Also a vital character in the movie is played by Pantoliano. I think he has done the finest job in the movie. He plays the killer. He is John G, disguising himself as Teddy, the cop. He tries to deviate Lenny from his investigation. Lenny having realised that long back had scribbled in his notes: Dont Believe his Lies.

Considered as one of the best movies of all time(ranked 27 currently in IMDB's top 250), Memento surely is a great one to watch. But there are some vital flaws in the movie. For example if he remembers only till he was hit on his head, how can he know that he doesnt remember anything and that he has a condition which is not amnesia. Simply speaking, how can he know that he doesnt know anything. On similar lines, how does he remember his photograph mechanism. Everytime he cannot remember, how does he know that he has to look for the photographs? I believe these are big enough flaws as it questions the basis of the whole drama.

Performances cannot be questioned though. Nolan chooses the best in the business. The dialogues are something which are the best aspect of the movie: keeps you intriguing and blends, rather enhances the whole drama beautifully. The best dialogue for me was when Lenny tells Natalie that wounds heal when you have time with you, how could his wounds heal when he doesnt feel time at all!

Many might say that the Reverse Chronology pattern was made to create something interesting in a rather predictable plot. True. But there is more to it I believe. The normal human brain is trained to see things from A to Z. But when you are moving from Z to A, you still would anticipate a Q after P. But if you are shown an O after P, you are confused and you actually forget something which happened around. This master idea of psychology was exploited by Nolan to give the audience an experience of memory loss as well while watching the movie based on short term memory! This fact makes this movie one of the bests in the world.

The last dialogue of the movie is when Lenny comes to a tattoo shop for the first time(remember the movie is going reverse), he says, "I have to believe in a world outside my own mind. I have to believe that my actions still have meaning, even if I can't remember them. I have to believe that when my eyes are closed, the world's still there. Do I believe the world's still there? Is it still out there?... Yeah. We all need mirrors to remind ourselves who we are. I'm no different."

HE'S QUITE ENGAGING, SHE'S OTHERWISE ENGAGED!!!

MOVIE: Four Weddings and a Funeral (1994)

CAST: Hugh Grant, Andie McDowell

DIRECTOR: Mike Newell

WRITER: Richard Kutis




Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge is the movie which comes in my mind whenever I talk of this British classic. Though the story line and characters are entirely different, there are uncanny similarities in the two classics. DDLJ is India's longest running and top grossing movie and Four Weddings.... is the UK top grosser of all time(recently replaced by some other). Both these classics released around the same time(DDLJ released in 1995). With DDLJ, Shah Rukh Khan became a house hold commodity and eternal lover boy. Same was the case with Hugh Grant after Four Weddings......Also, Dulhaniya in hindi means the bride and it has got something to do with "weddings"!

The thing I love about British movies, be it Notting Hill or be it Love Actually, is that they reflect the Britain blood through the movies. Even though highly romantic, these movies are somewhere patriotic as well. Well patriotism for the British seems to be passing some sarcastic remarks on the development of Americans. The shades of that can be seen here too. Our female protagonist, Carrie, played by Andie McDowell is an American. And as I told you, America has been shown in poor light as her character is somewhat like a "playgirl".

In the first wedding ofcourse where our male lead, Charles played by Grant, meets Carrie and it is something like a love at first sight situation. Carrie gives him positive vibes and they end up sleeping with each other the first night they met.

What is to be loved about this movie is the cinematography. The portrayal of England is so delightful. The four wedding scenes and the funeral scene are shot with utmost sincerity and the intelligent and apt dialogues make things very very realistic.

In the second wedding, Charles is overwhelmed to see Carrie. But all his excitement fizzes out when she introduces him to her fiance. She was engaged! The movie henceforth takes brilliant turns and is pretty entertaining to watch. Four Weddings and a Funeral apart from being a top grosser, has two oscar nominations along with 23 other wins and 14 nominations in its kitty. Its a nice little film which because of its simplicity of grandeur made its way into the people's hearts.

Talking about performances, Hugh Grant is one of my favourites. He has given classics like Notting Hill, Love Actually and ofcourse the recent blockbuster Music and Lyrics. He is the binding factor of this movie and his presence on the screen is nothing but pure charm. To be honest I did not like the casting of the female lead, Andie McDowell. I do not thing she was apt for the role of a seductress or a charmer rather. I think someone who possesed a more feminine face should have been chosen for the role.

Kristin Scott Thomas, who played Charles' best friend, Fiona was the one who impressed me by both acting and looks. Everybody else gave fine performances to make the movie really intriguing. The climax obviously is that Charles gets Carrie. But I believe that the direction failed to create a public sentiment for Carrie(may be it did for the British public). She was always portrayed as a "slut" and you never feel that Charles should go for her. Sentiments rather create a desire that he should go for Fiona. That I beleive is a major shortcoming of the movie.

In good Bollywood movies(like DDLJ), this anticipation is marvellously crafted. The drama which is built up gets unbelievable at times but nevertheless keeps a person at the edge of the seat and a great public desire is created so that Raj gets Simran! Four Weddings..... missed out on that. Otherwise if you are free on a saturday evening looking for a classic to watch this one should be a good enough choice.

OYE LUCKY CHAMAK GAYA TU!!!

FILM: Oye Lucky! Lucky Oye!
DIRECTOR: Dibakar Banerjee
CAST: Paresh Rawal, Abhay Deol, Neetu Chandra




In the world of stage acting it is a very common trend that one actor plays more than one unrelated or related characters. Its a common thing in cinema that father and son being played by the same actor, like Amitabh Bachchan did best in Aakhri Raasta. But in Bollywood its rarely seen that one actor plays two or more characters who are not at all related. Paresh Rawal plays three unrelated characters here. Some might term this as a producer's style of reducing budgets but considering the producer is as liberal as Ronnie Screwala from UTV it can be given more of an artistic explanation. By playing three different characters, Rawal not only brings in additional comedy but also proves his versatality. But thats not it. There is something more to it as I will explain later.

Our male protagonist is Lucky, played brilliantly in his career best performance by Abhay Deol. I always thought that he is better than his father and brothers when it comes to performances. Lucky is a street smart(actually much more than that) guy with an unimaginably high amount of optimism. Along with that optimism he has got an intelligent mind to achieve what his high optimism has made him dream of. The movie shows a young lucky of 15 years to start with. Paresh Rawal is the agressive and "beat the child" kind of Punjabi father. The 15 year old Lucky is impressively played by Manjot Singh. Situations around young Lucky force him to take wild steps to achieve the smallest of wishes he has. So from then starts his bizzare and weird journey to achieve everything he wants.

Goga Bhai is a typical north Indian don: moneyed, powerful and soaked in the cheap human desires or money and lust. He is engaged in all sorts of illegal activities and is fearless as his connections range from the havaldar to the commissioner. Goga Bhai is again played by Paresh Rawal. Lucky gets to work for him and he steals for him. Under the banner of Import-Export Lucky intelligently, very intelligently, keeps making robberies one after the other and Goga Bhai is very happy with him, not until.....

Dr.Handa on the other hand is a spectacle clad veteranarian. He wants to open a restaurant. Again played by Rawal, Handa befriends Lucky and convinces him to fund his wish. His wife is played by Archana Puran Singh. They are very good to Lucky, like family, not until....

Sonal played by Neetu Chandra is Lucky's love interest. She makes a fine appearance and is of interest to Lucky as she is the only person who loves Lucky and not his money (which is all stolen). She is the only one who discourages Lucky from stealing, others encourage him, for their own good!

Amidst all these few good and most con characters, Lucky faces many victories, few defeats, betrayals and show of hatred from his family as he becomes a renowned thief. Lucky's ordeal is captured brillantly in this two hour flick by Dibakar Banerjee. Khosla Ka Ghosla his first venture was a great experience. Oye Lucky! Lucky Oye! is a more matured direction though. His serio-comic story telling pattern is what is most impressive. Along with entertainment he supplies basic messages of life.

Coming to the fact that why has Paresh Rawal played a triple role. Its no cost cutting scheme but the reason why I love this movie even more. Rawal portrays Con and Bad. In the first part of the movie he plays a baddish father who has an extramarital affair and who harrases his children. Goga Bhai and Dr. Handa are other two forms of villains. So by making one actor do the three roles, Dibakar Banerjee has tried to show the various colours of bad. They all are bad by doing different things at different levels, but after all they are all bad. Parallely, they are Goga, Handa and Lucky's father (all villains of different degrees) but in the end they are all bad(Paresh Rawal). Thats one of the strongest messages of the movie.

Without a doubt, this has to be Paresh Rawal's life time best performance. Abhay Deol plays a masterstroke too. Everyone had a lovely role to play and everyone played it well. And it wont be an exaggeration if I rate this one as the top three movies this year along with Jodha Akbar and Its A Wednesday!

Lucky is finally caught by the officers of the Special Branch. They carry him to the local station, not until.....

A HEART WARMING DELIGHT

FILM: Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi
DIRECTOR: Aditya Chopra
CAST: Shahrukh Khan, Anushka Sharma, Vinay Pathak




In the classic comedy Chachi 420 Kamal Hasan played a double role. One in which he looked like his normal self and the other in which he had to look like an old chachi. No one in this world could actually say that the old woman was actually Kamal Hasan. The make up was just brilliant.
Here, the two looks of SRK are pretty different from each other, but not that one cannot recognise that these are the same people. Unfortunately though in this movie, we were made to believe that the heroine did not know in whole of the movie that the two are the same! The whole movie is built up on this really weak plot and this is the biggest minus of the movie.

If somehow we ignore this mistake and rather term it as an "artistic liberty", then this movie is one of the bests this year. Our female protagonist, Taani, played by debutant Anushka Sharma and Surinder Sahni(Khan) get married under bizarre circumstances! And there begins the story as Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi!

The character of Surinder is supposed to be the USP of the movie. The reflection of the common man in the gallis of Amritsar. Full shirt, grey pants, best buy sasta sport shoe , champu hairstyle, fat glasses and the moustache! Honestly though Shahrukh has sported much much costlier and trendier things, he has not looked so sexy before. This has honestly made the common man a more sexier item than ever before.

So now the chemistry between the couple is increasing. Suri is sweet and disciplined and unexpressive but very very romantic at heart. Taani was bubbly, but is trying to kill her old self and is compelling her soul for a compromise with life. Suri senses that. He doesnt want compromise. He wants love (which he in the movie pronounces as lau!!)

Now Taani loves dancing and wants to take part in a dance competition. Suri, to see her dance becomes Raj(again, Raj) with the help of his hair stylist friend Vinay Pathak who plays Bobby and as always plays it brilliantly!! He transforms the champu hairstyle into a spiky one, the loose full shirt into a tight T shirt, the grey pant to sexy faded jeans and the fat glasses to matching goggles. The rather quiet Suri is suddenly transformed into a blabber mouth Jat, Raj.

The later part of the movie is based on the beautiful lines of self vs self which I may not like to reveal. But it is pure magic what follows. Though my initial comment about the minus point in the movie might make me sound that the attention to detail was poor, but no, Adi has done a good job with it. He has canvased Amritsar very beautifully throughout and has made the movie simple and charming.

Coming to performances now. This has to be one of the best performances by Khan. He has portrayed two characters with complete ease. His expressions and mannerisms while playing Suri were the biggest plus in this performance. I dont know whether Khan gets to meet common people at length and actually observe their mannerisms but the way he has done it is really hats off to him. Anushka has shown complete ease considering its her debut. Its obviously a better debut performance than what Deepika Padukone or Sonam Kapoor might have produced. Vinay Pathak is always a charm and plays Bobby very nicely.

One observation I made was that there was a lot of borrowed maal in this movie. Dialogues from OSO and KANK were lifted and at times extended. Like the "Phir Milenge" in KANK was converted to Hum Hai Raahi Pyaar Ke, Phir Milenge Chalte Chalte. Then the song Phir Milenge reminded everyone of Om Shanti Om (lets find out whether Yash Raj cut costs by taking udhar ka used costume from Red Chillies). All this was though to induce comedy in the movie and it was successful in doing so. And if you observe SRK from top to toe, you would observe that he wears the same Tag Heuer watch he wore in Don in one of the scenes.

Though I expect a mixed response for this movie, it still will create its own space in the hearts of the poeple and the box office. It will teach and melt your heart and make you believe that there is something extraordinary in every ordinary jodi!! The moral of the story is that you can get something by being someone else, but if you want everything, you have to be yourself, howsoever you are.