colour-me-kubrick Reviews

Titane (2021)

Not coated in Titanium.

[3 August 2021]

Original. Daring. But doesn't quite gel.

I am writing a review after ages. Perhaps it's a sign of a good movie that provoked this response. Or perhaps it's just appreciation for a director who really did go for it. Ducarnau demonstrated the Cronenbergesque body horror and satire in her first feature film. Titane has confirmed that she is definitely could be the next champion of extremely physical movies. Film reminds of themes of Crash ( 1996 ) and to some extent Videodrome ( 1983 ) .

Keeping the cryptic and puzzling aspects aside, it's a basic story of finding closure and a place in this world, when you have ambiguous intimacy / sexuality, distorted physicality, suppressed emotions and childhood trauma.

Ducarnau is however not quiet able to meet the ambition of ideas she is putting down on canvas. There is rather drastic shifts in tone of movie, which can be confusing. There is no harm in mixing genres but I felt a bit lost in parts of second half.

The shock values of the scenes ( and they are shocking ) wears off once you are no longer sure of motives of players especially when you are not totally buying into it. In first 15 min, the film hits such high note that the twists and turns that follow almost negate the impact.

I would say if you are looking for a provocative film, this is the one. However, keep an open mind. Titane is ambitious but it's not able to live up to its potential.

Sacred Games (2018–2019)

Don't buy the hype

[10 November 2018]

Sacred Games is an interesting effort with strong content and great team. Do not buy the hype. This is not yet at the world standards when it comes to screenplay, development of characters or technical finesse.

By the mediocre standards of mainstream a Indian cinema, it is gritty and rather unhinged when it comes depiction of violence, nudity and sex. But it lacks depth. The characters are not well etched out. Apparat from Gaitonde ( Nawazuddin ), nothing really hits home. Yes, there are some great actors who deliver but the characters don't show consistency in action or clear motive.

This was yet again a case of per matured celebration of mediocrity that we so love to do in India. I felt the filmmakers and writers were more interested in making personal statements than tell the story. Kashyap and Motwane have made more accomplishes movies than this. Some of the character performances by Joshi and Sarna are brilliant.

Nothing to write home about. Don't believe any of the hype on India's first. We do get prematurely excited.

Mumbai Diaries (2010)

Tribute to the City

[27 January 2011]

For a majority of Indian cinema audiences, films are essentially their only resort for entertainment which inherently implies escapism. Their expectations are not any different from a child being taken to local circus. Expect the child to get distracted and bored during the show if instead of the pyrotechnics of the Trapeze artists he is getting an anecdote from the Clown. With cinema in India, it is no different. The audiences want to be put into a different space preferably a more comfortable one. They want to be told how to feel and they invariably want to feel good at the end of the film. All of this would not go down well with lot of them, but in the spirit of the film, I would rather be truthful than be loved. In this climate of very limited expectations from the medium, comes a movie like "Dhobi Ghaat" which tells you a story without a plot ( 3 part structure ), without a necessarily "happy ending" in traditional sense, without the usual pomp and reverence that only the elite in this country enjoy, but just snippets from lives of 4 people and how they connect with each other in this great city.

Without giving anything away from the film, we meet Arun ( Aamir Khan ) an ambiguous, reticent, awkward, cynical and probably bored painter who has lost motivation for his work. This struggle with his work also impacts his relationships especially with certain Shai ( Monica Dogra ), an NRI, who returns to India on a "sabbatical" to discover the city. After one intense encounter, both seem to be reconciling and gauging their emotions from different view points. Then there is Munna ( Pratik Babbar ) who works at Dhobi Ghaat during day, works out at night (among other things ) and nurtures ambitions in the film industry. He is also connected to the above two characters. Now we come to Yasmin ( Kriti Malhotra ) through whom Arun and we as audience rediscover the city in all its beauty, brutality and innocence.

Reasons to watch the film : - 1) The cinematography, especially some of hand held shots, the still shots of the Mumbaikars at work. Director Kiran Rao shows great clarity, conviction and control with every frame. One is reminded of the great works of Wong Kar Wai. 2) The movie is shot on actual locations. Now, for most this might seem like a trivial comment, but it is an incredibly arduous task to shoot in the crowded locations especially with star like Aamir Khan whose presence could cause a stampede at most places in India. It is very important to capture the places in all its chaos to capture the vibrancy of the city cutting through different classes of people that reside in the city. 3) Absolutely haunting score by Gustavo Santaolalla ( of Brokeback Mountain fame ). Like any great Soundtrack, it never overwhelms the scene but underlines the essence and lingers in our mind long after you left the theater. 4) Performances by the entire cast especially a Kriti Malhotra. She is not an actor by profession which works for the film with "raw" and "innocent" nature of her performance.

I can't think of many better debuts in recent times than this one by Kiran Rao. There were so many times I was pinching myself "Am I really watching an Indian film!!". She shows great courage and maturity with her first film. There is lot to admire in her especially the subtlety and mis- en-scenes which makes the characters even more endearing. Not much is said "literally", but much of it is implied. This is her love letter to City of Mumbai. It is also not an overtly "flattering" one, but honestly embracing the city in all its fallacies. She also seems to have a stamp on every frame in the film, which reminds me a bit of one of my other favourites Sofia Coppola. Both dealt with themes of loneliness and longing in such honest and tender way.

I am not sure what it will do for Indian cinema. I am not even sure if another movie like this will ever get made. But I am glad for now. It brought me closer to my city. Sometimes you go through these very places without feeling anything. Through Yasmin I have fallen in love with Mumbai again.

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007)

Sublime Filmmaking

[6 December 2010]

The title of the film "Assassination of Jesse James by Coward Robert Ford" says almost everything about the film, almost. But what it doesn't say is that Jesse James gets assassinated or murdered more than once. Jesse James embodied this larger than life Robinhood figure who was a criminal by the very definition of it and a cold blooded killer when he had to be one, but also by some accounts a committed family man who generously distributed the usurped wealth to the needy. Now, this perception may or may not be tenable, but it certainly appeals to a primal aspect of most human beings who strive for that contradiction of winning, ruthlessness, courage and fame, yet want this image of kindness, generosity and some inherent sense of righteousness. All this becomes even more aspirational when the state has failed for the people. James's folklore image could be a product of some of these factors.

Robert Ford ( Casey Affleck ) was a product of the times, a young 20 year old smitten by the image of James, collects every possible piece of literature mystifying the glamorous outlaw as he and his brother join the gang. His "fascination" with Jesse is akin to comic book fanatic idolizing his super hero, except maybe Ford had a certain innate infatuation which maybe not all would share. You want to believe that the ideal you idolize is real. There is something pure about it, not obscured by the ambiguous ideas of morality or decency. But the image is castigated when it confronts reality. This is where Jesse James gets murdered many times over in Ford's mind. As he watches, James sit alone and awkward as his brother leaves, as he sees James despondent with the failed train robbery, as James becomes increasingly paranoid, insecure and moody during his final days. But more importantly, Ford feels neglected by Jesse or not appreciated enough. Maybe all those conversation he had in his mind with Jesse as he explains to him the 12 things he had in common with him did not go according to plan when it actually materializes.

Every encounter with Jesse probably killed some part of him in Ford's mind, which by his own confession "he lost some curiosity over the years" and as he conveys to his brother of his motive to kill James "He is just a human being". I bet part of Ford also died during this time since all he wanted to do or be was Jesse James "You want to be like me or you want to be me". All the players in this dance of death were doomed from the beginning. Jesse James was in his final few days reviewing his life, trying to protect his family or cut off the possible trails but losing his peace of mind. By the end, he just wanted to be put out of his misery. Better to die as a mystical hero betrayed by one of his own which will only enhance the legacy than be caught and reduced to a trial of an average Joe. Ford had committed the act even before he pulled the trigger, Jesse was no longer the same for him. However, what he probably did not foresee, was that people still held James as the Robinhood figure and he would antagonizing them all, leading to his own end. Probably, he too wanted to end his misery, since he would only be the guy who killed Jesse James, nothing more. I feel for for him.

Andrew Dominik is one of the great talents of modern cinema who exploded on the scene with "Chopper", another story of a glamorous criminal although told in completely different tone. By his own admission he wanted to make the film, in a Terrence Mallick narrative with greater focus on tone, on images, on time and space. The film is contemplative and meditative. You can see the characters journey to the point they have to they were meant to. I shudder to think that there has been over evocative and sublime cinematography in recent years as one by Roger Deakins here. The Train Robbery sequence, as the light strikes through the dark frame reflecting from the surrounding trees will be the legacy of this great film. And lastly the score is haunting and evocative like the images almost transporting you in time amidst the snow clad mountains.

One of my all time favorites.

Peepli [Live] (2010)

Long Overdue

[28 August 2010]

Satire is always a tricky genre for directors. Always a possibility of making a mockery of a grave situation or making it too serious for the audience (especially Indian) to take it. This balancing act between the poignant and theatrical is a precarious one, which is why Anousha Rizvi's directorial debut is noteworthy. Rizvi, a former reporter/journalist from NDTV brings a more insightful approach to the problem of farmer suicides and dynamics of media coverage.

I am not a great fan of Indian cinema. But every once in a while a movie comes along that shows ambition and reach which is not reminiscent of our cinema in general. The script while focusing on the predicament of farmers also manages to bring in the role of the media and the politicians. Probably, one of the more well rounded scripts in Hindi cinema in recent times.

The plot:-" Natha a poor farmer from Peepli village in the heart of rural India is about to lose his plot of land due to an unpaid government loan. A quick fix to the problem is the very same government's program that aids the families of indebted farmers who have committed suicide. As a means of survival Farmer Natha can choose to die!!! His brother is happy to push him towards this unique 'honor' but Natha is reluctant. Local elections are around the corner and what might have been another unnoticed event turns into a 'cause celebré' with everyone wanting a piece of the action. Political bigwigs, high-ranking bureaucrats, local henchmen and the ever-zealous media descend upon sleepy Peepli to stake their claim. The question on everyone's lips - "Will he or Won't he?" As the mania escalates what will be the fate of Farmer Natha; nobody seems to care how he really feels?"

The criticism levelled out at the film inspite of the positive reviews is the lack of empathy it generates for the state of the farmers. It is a fair argument if those were your expectations from the film. My take is that it wasn't and it shouldn't be a director's prerogative to "effect" the audience. Especially in a satire, where the prime motive is to poke fun at the theatrical failure of system and its participants. Be it "Dr. Strangelove or how I learn to stop worrying and love the bomb" , "Network" , "Wag the dog", "Jaane Bhi do Yaaron" or any other great satire, I never really think the writer was conscious of establishing sympathy or empathy for the characters. Humour in life and films was essentially developed to convey some real harsh absolute truths in a sugar coated manner. We from the cities who our so pre occupied with planning our weekend, our holidays, our Diwali shopping, job appraisal etc can't be realistically expected to be social workers and understand the true plight of the farmers after paying Rs. 200 for an A/c theatre with sofa seat. It is quite incredible how insulated we are from "less privileged".

Of the performances everyone if top notch. Raghuveer Yadav is an explosive talent and I am glad he got this role. On a slight negative, the gag got a bit stretched in second half which could have been edited by 5-10 minutes. It is always a risk in a satire, when unnecessary emphasis is added on an element that audiences have understood, in this case it was of media "sensationalization". I think it was truly insightful in showing political and media nexus and how the cover stories and sound bytes are planned for. Maybe after this, people consuming the news will be more discrete.

The Dark Knight (2008)

Brilliant adaptation

[17 July 2009]

There is haunting poetry to the narrative and characterization of Christopher Nolan in "the Dark Knight". It refuses to be reduced to just another comic book movie with actors wearing costumes and good guys fighting the evil ones. It refuses to be limited to the defined caricatures that we have seen other adaptations to do. The Batman unlike most other superheroes is not bestowed with super natural powers. He is a human being who happens to gifted with will power, money and technology but also inherits the human weaknesses and moral ambiguities. Hence, it is the most relatable super hero from the audience perspective. Hardcore comic book fanatics of all ages pride themselves on reading between the words and beyond the costumes, of being able to assess the theological and mythological undertone to these "cartoonish" comic books. I suppose Chistopher and Jonathan Nolan are two of them.

The film starts where Gotham is now under a strict vigil of the Batman. He has inspired fear among the thugs, smugglers, gangsters which has lead to an "escalation" of the battle for the city. This peculiar situation calls on a new kind of nemesis, one who is not drawn by money or power, one who can not beaten or toned down morally or ideologically, one who is driven by a certain philosophy "Anarchy", THE JOKER. In one of the performances that will define the genius of one of the short lived talents, Heath Ledger is the Joker. Nolan and Ledger play it smart by portraying Joker as an "absolute", without necessarily dissecting him. He is conniving, intelligent, driven and convincing which makes him doubly scary. The joker poses impossible moral, ethical and philosophical dilemmas to Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman), Batman and the people of Gotham city. It is a battle for the minds more than the city, battle of the good and evil within Batman who has his own demons.

And then there is Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart), Two face, who becomes a challenge, a personal project for the Joker, as an emblematic mean to propel his philosophy. The film has great dialogs that you would remember and keep thinking about even after you leave the theater. The screenplay is a bit rushed at times and story works on one too many tracks. The editing is bit shoddy at places. The Imax camera works brilliantly especially for the action sequences which are jaw dropping to say the least.

Overall, this is film, that all of us will look back on, and say, finally they got it right.

Watchmen (2009)

Mission impossible

[16 July 2009]

Not just the task of the Watchmen superheroes trying to prevent World War III, but also Zack Snyder who was trying to translate to film the only comic book that I can recall which was a masterpiece in literary terms . Needless to say I had very low expectations, since the previous adaptation of the same director 300 was reduced to a simplistic visually arousing film with no heart. But Watchmen is like no other comic book, its mythology and philosophy is not as abstract. It is based during the cold war when most of these moral questions were being asked, when absurd ideas and abstract notions were being put forth.

Now that I have underlined by initial apprehensions, let me assess how the movie faired in the wake of it. It did exceed my expectations to a large extent. The movie is visually stunning and captures the essence. Snyder got the tone right. It is not an upbeat story by any stretch of imagination. It is a story of superheroes in all their weakness and loneliness, in their anguish and disconnect with the people and establishment they are supposed to defend, in their pursuit for a normal life in an abnormal world.

For me the only thing that definitely didn't work was the casting. These are powerful characters written. I need some powerhouse actors to perform instead we get a bunch of efficient actors who don't do a bad job, but none of them stand out. Snyder is clearly not one looking for nuance in performance, more concerned of the look of the film. It is a tough movie to make, since the narrative will take its time, there will be intermittent flashbacks, so the audience might get restless. Snyder tries to infuse some life in the relatively dull moments with some soundtracks. Some of which fit perfectly others don't.

Please the rabid comic fan boys, please the large theater audience, it was a tough job. I think he struck the right balance tilting towards the latter. It is not an envious job. Watchmen as a multi layered comic book is very difficult to adapt to a film with the time constraints, maybe series might be more feasible.

ONE POINT:- Do you need to read the book to watch the movie? No, in fact, if anything reading the book hampers your attentiveness and involvement withing the film.

Knowing (2009)

Just go for it, if you believe in it

[16 July 2009]

There is a reason why I don't listen to critics or audience reactions before deciding to get of my couch go for a movie I believe could be good. It was again clarified with Knowing by Alex Proyas who gave the great "Dark City" comes back with an absorbing sci-fi that will keep you by the hook for the whole length.

Without going into the nitty-gritty of the plot, the movie revolves around the nature and existence of our being. Whether it is deterministic, derived from a defined set and sequence of circumstances or just probabilistic (randomness). It is not a unique theme but not explored in this fashion. We have seen it in Matrix, Dark City and few others. But the drama is unique to the film.

Knowing is not without some problems, especially with some of the writing as the mystery unfolds, but it is fair to say there is absolutely nothing you can preempt. Proyas is a top director and story teller and I feel comforted to submit to his narrative.

Top Sci Fi, falls short of greatness, but aspires for it and succeeds for best part.

Head-On (2004)

One of a kind love story

[15 July 2009]

Here is a rare story that explores the darker aspects of Love. It can save you from self destruction, it can redeem for certain misgivings, it can provide a sense of comfort and closure but it can also lead to a path of jealousy, anger and self destruction. We learn this through our protagonists who are disinterested, disillusioned, narcissistic and suicidal. In a way made for each other and we explore their journey.

In St. Pauli, Hamburg, the alcoholic, drugged and hopeless German with Turkish roots Cahit Tomruk (Birol Ünen) lives like a pig in a small dirty apartment and survives collecting empty bottles in the night-club "Der Fabrik". One night, he gives up living, and hits his car against a wall. However, he survives the crash and is sent to a clinic, where he meets Sibel Güner (Sibel Kekilli), a younger German Turk, with suicidal tendencies. Sibel is the younger daughter of a conservative Turkish family, and proposes a fake marriage to Cahit, in order to permit her to leave her family; in return, she would share the rent of the flat, and she would cook and clean the place, and they could have independent lives. Cahit accepts, but while living with Sibel, he falls in love for her until something unforeseen happens.

The movie is based on Turkish immigrants in Germany with their rather orthodox cultural background colliding with the liberal German society. However, this disconnect that Sibel feel is more peripheral to the main love story. There are some magnificently shot sequences. The car crash with "I feel you" by Depeche Mode playing in the background is one of the best I have seen. Never has the impact seem so real, never has the "moment" of madness so beautifully captured. Faith Akin has a lot to offer to this medium.

A unique love story that is truthful and breaks every possible cliché.

Boogie Nights (1997)

One of the best of the 90s

[15 July 2009]

90s was a great decade for films. We saw uprising of this whole new breed of young talent most of whom learned about film-making through movies and books. Linklater, Tarantino, Rodrigues and of course the best of the lot Paul Thomas Anderson. They brought a sense of freshness to scripts and screenplays as suppose to the zombie film schools technical writing that we were being dished out With his second venture Boogie Nights, Anderson sought to go back to his first amateur film "The Dirk Diggler" story.

For a young director, this was a tough film to make for several reasons. Can he make a film about Porn stars and the industry with nudity but without alienating the audience? Can he make a film that makes the audience connect to these characters who are more or less alien to these world? Can he make a film compassionate, emphatic and non judge-mental of these actors? Can he retain the audience interest and the pace of the film when it deals with so many characters with different sub plots? Can he re create the magic of swinging 70s? Of course will the prosthetic penis work? In many ways P.T.Anderson's task was just as daunting as that of Jack Horner (Burt Reynolds) who had the ambition of keeping the audiences in the theater with an enticing story even after they "get off" on it.

The movie essentially centers around Eddie Adams (Mark Wahlberg) who is an aspiring actor, gets discovered by Jack Horner, a porn director who considers his job an art form. Eddie then changes his name to Dirk Diggler and gets sucked in the lifestyle and relationships of the pornography industry of the late-1970s. The movie is an exercise in evolution of Porn Industry through the 70s and the 80s, the highs and lows of the characters especially Dirk. It reminds a lot of the great works of Robert Altman in its "ensemble" nature and also of Martin Scorsese in some of the camera work. Anderson is not shy and shows of every trick in his book, even the shot of camera following the girl into the pool from Soy Cuba.

The movie is fast paced, extremely funny in places, insightful in others with some of the most jaw dropping sequences one would hope to see. The sequence with Chinese crackers is out of this planet, early indications of the phenomenal talent of the man. But most of all, I feel the film is not judge-mental about any of the characters be it Rollergirl (Heather Graham, I never take my skates off), Little Bill (William H. Macy, My is wife is the back with a "cock" in her "ass"), Buck Swope (Don Cheadle), Reed Rothchild (John C. Reilly), Amber Waves (Julianne Moore), Jack Horner (Burt Reynolds) and many others who have taken this film to a new level.

Arguably one the greatest movies of my lifetime, it is a must watch for one and all.

Religulous (2008)

A lost opportunity

[11 July 2009]

I am not a religious person by any stretch of imagination. So even though I am in agreement with Bill Maher on basic nature and lunacy of religion, this movie was definitely underwhelming. Now if Bill Maher wants to get across his point on religion, why would he choose to talk to these dim witted fanatics. You really don't have to interview them to make them look stupid. Surely, if he was confident of his own beliefs, he would have talked or debated with more "intellectual" religious leaders or followers, at least those who can present a counterpoint, engage in a reasonable discussion. Bill Maher would have earned a lot more respect had he done that, instead they resort to cutting off people's statement, editing and interspersing it with some pop culture moments and movie scenes, to take the mickey out these guys.

I am sorry Bill Maher, you have ruined an opportunity to create some genuine discussion and reduced it to odd moments of "shitz and giggles".

Network (1976)

I am mad as hell

[8 July 2009]

2009:-As I write this reviews, I find Paddy Chayefsky's words in Network more prophetic than anything Nostradamus wrote. The television network including the news, has become a circus, a dog fight in search for higher TRPs, leading to propaganda and "bastardization" of what was essentially the means to enlightening the public with the "truth". Well the truth has been reduced to numbers. Now it is the numbers that dictate the truth.

Look at the American news network. It is entertainment. You have mad prophet in Bill O Reilly who screams from the extreme right and then you have Olberman from the left and I am just another person in search of making some sense getting squeezed in between. Look at reality television, look the WWE, it is just a reflection of what we have become, transistorized, deodorized humanoids as Paddy Chayefsky says. The film is less of an attack and more of an "expose" on reality of the tube. It is one of the great satires but not just on the television culture but on us, whose anxieties and emotions have been "tranquilized" by "corporate" nations. We have been reduced to "nothingness"

"It is the individual that is dead". It is hard to think of any other script that had the such command over its ideas, that had such genius in its tones, that had such clarity in its narrative. It is hard to think of any of any film which had such great cast and performances as Peter finch, Faye Dunaway, William Holden, Robert Duvall, Ned Beatty and Cindy Creamer. I want to make special mention for Ned Beatty and Cindy Creamer. It is a clear evidence of the impact great actors with brilliant writing and direction can make even with their limited screen time. Sidney Lumet is one of the unsung heroes of American Cinema. I rank this as his best work. But the master of the show clearly is the writing. Paddy Chayefsky, take a bow. Just in awe of your writing and your vision.

Coming from India, I find this movie more relevant, since I find that America is already saturated with its television culture. India and other developing countries are the new market. I find the movie in my home country, where in search of TRPs, the news channels have reduced themselves to knee jerk, reactionary and sensationalist coverage. It is an apathy that this irresponsible medium is bestowed with such power over nation of millions.

The Matrix (1999)

Wonderful achievement

[7 July 2009]

For the best part of first 5 or so viewings, I saw The Matrix purely for the action and the special effects. Never really bothered with much else and I wasn't probably at an age to understand the depth of thought and the underlying philosophy and truth of the story. I am still amazed at the "connect" I have with the film. I pretty much endorse the idea of a matrix, in terms of the world we live in, where everyone seems to be on a zombie auto pilot, where even the "out of the box" seems programmed until some great philosopher like Socrates, Neitzche or Schopehauer unravels the syntax.

Matrix is an extremely entertaining Sci-Fi with ground breaking special effects and masterful stunt co-ordination. It is also a dramatic achievement in terms of the performances and the screenplay. The film also derives to a large extent from a great sci-fi "The dark city" by Alexis Proyas. I would imagine most here would be more than conversant with the plot. Although, I would suggest repeat viewings for this one. It is not really a multi-layered film, but is structured in a way that the audience will catch the little details with successive viewings. It is a pity that the Wachowski brothers could not take the franchise to the next level instead just became slaves of technology.

But this is one to treasure. Action packed, intellectual, philosophical and entertaining, will stand the test of time.

Fast Food Nation (2006)

Not meaty enough

[6 July 2009]

Considering Linklater was at the helm of the affairs, it is fair to say this was a bit of a let down. The movie clearly has a very strong theme with enough facts and materials to drive home the point which it very well does for the best part.

"In California, the VP of Marketing of the Mickey's Fast Food Don Anderson is responsible for the hamburger "Big One", the number one in selling in Mickey's chain of fast food restaurants. When an independent research in the meat patties produced in Cody, Colorado, indicates the presence of cow manure, Don is sent to the facility to investigate possible irregularities in the meatpacking production plant and also the major supplier of kettle. Along his surveys, Don finds the truth about the process and how meat is contaminated. Meanwhile, a group of illegal Mexican immigrants arrive in Cody to work in the dirty jobs in the plant while a group of activists plot how to expose the terrible situation of the Mickey's industry." Therefore the film deals with subject of meat production from the whole range of different perspective from the retailers to the manufacturers of burgers to the meat producing agencies to the illegal immigrants who get employed and are exploited to the fullest and of course to the consumers who finally bear the burden. This broad spectrum helps to look beyond just the malpractices in the meat industry but a basic flaw in the modern mindset.

The culture of "do what it takes" that has been instilled into the corporate house has made the everyone pay a big cost monetarily or otherwise, other than the elite who continue to grow bigger. Might is right as they say. "Fast" food in the film reflects not only the obsession and addiction to the quick food, but as a reference to culture which has been instilled in our system to produce the results, to earn the profits with any means necessary, moral or immoral, legal or illegal.

The film is an "eye opener" and will make the audience more aware of the goings on in the meat industry. On the downside the screenplay gets a bit sluggish and could have been cut by at least 20 minutes. Still an important film for everyone to watch and form an opinion.

Before Sunset (2004)

Let's talk

[6 July 2009]

What chances would you give to an 80 minute film to hold your attention which has nothing but an American man Jessie (Ethan Hawke) and a Parisian woman Celine (Julie Delphy) talking? Not much I would imagine. Well, this film not only grabs and holds your attention but makes you fall in love with the characters like the prequel "Before Sunrise". Our young protagonists in their early 20s were in Vienna for the day. In "Before Sunset", they are in Paris, 9 years from their tryst in Vienna, having lost complete contact of each other during the time.

We follow these characters as they have grown from their previous romantic meeting, become more matured, responsible, more cynical and probably more regretful for their predicament to be apart. It is intriguing to listen to their delightful conversations to listen to as they walk through Paris and one of the reasons for that is, Julie and Ethan have written their own dialogs. Which makes the performances look so completely non-rehearsed and natural. It brings to life their characters which is all we remember of the film and it is most that as an actor and writer you can achieve.

Linklater has always been a master of conversations, although he has set a very high yardstick in terms of the quality of it. It has to be engaging, quirky, real, meaningful. He is a master director and the diversity of his filmography speaks for itself. There is always a sense of languid ease to his film, maybe reflective of his persona.

A great love story. One that will stand the test of time and will definitely touch your heart.

Mulholland Drive (2001)

Freud would have been impressed

[5 July 2009]

Mulholland Drive is the movie Lynch has been working towards all his career which has culminated into the most beautiful, sumptuous, hypnotic and erotic film one could hope to see. It is futile to go into the plot and the structure or the performances when you discuss a movie like this. There enough interpretations here, but the first viewing can leave you either disillusioned or in complete awe of the masterful story teller David lynch

The movie definitely needs couple of viewings to fully appreciate and catch the little details that you are bound to miss out. But it is not nearly as complex as has been made out to be.Lost Highway is comparatively more complicated than this one. It is not even an open ended film as many claim to be. There is an explanation and cause for every event in the film.

"After a brutal car accident in Los Angeles, California, Rita (Laura Harring) is the sole survivor but suffers mass amnesia. Wandering into a strangers apartment downtown, her story strangely intertwines with Betty Elms (Naomi Watts), a perky young woman in search of stardom. However, Betty is intrigued by Rita's situation and is willing to put aside her dreams to pursue this mystery. The two women soon discover that nothing is as it seems in the city of dreams."

The movie on one hand is a satire on Hollywood, on the other it is a love story, a story of betrayal, revenge and redemption and even then I have not even come close to covering the film. It is not an upbeat film by any stretch of imagination, but it probably Lynch's wittiest film. He took a lot of pains to get this made, but the end product is every bit as good as it is touted to be.

Arguably one of the best movies of the decade, this is best movie for those unfamiliar with Lynch's work to enter into his world.

Waking Life (2001)

Are you a dreamer ?

[3 July 2009]

Waking Life is a daring, insightful and visionary effort by one of the finest directors around Richard Linklater. Linklater through his filmography has shown a fascination for conversations, for opinions and he sets a fairly high benchmark for his characters in that regard. Waking life is simply the concoction of different conversation, different view points of people from different strands of life and their take on meaning of life and purpose of life as they see it.

Why are we here? What is it that makes us human? Is this a reality or a dream? Questions that Linklater has pondered over through his filmography. As one of the reviews put it, it is a film for passionate thinkers. It can come of as pretentious for some, but for me the movie struck all the right chords. It was released few weeks after 9/11 when there was a sense of disorientation with world for me. This movie was exactly what I needed just to put things into perspective.

What is the story? As one of the character says, "there is no story just people, gesture, moments, bits of rapture, fleet of emotions. In short, the greatest stories ever told". The protagonist floats and flies from one dream to the next, from one conversation to the next. Ther is no coherent screenplay, just ideas bouncing off the characters in an urge to find new meanings to our existence and purpose. The protagonist clearly is an intelligent person as can be assessed from the grade of the discussions in his dreams. "Life understood is life lived".

Waking Life is philosophical and playful at the same time. It's an extravagantly inventive film that begins with actual footage of real actors and then translates them into animated images; it's called motion-capture, and you can see it in "Beowulf" and "300," but it was startling when Linklater made his film in 2001, and showed it didn't need to cost millions. A founding member of the Austin, Texas, film-making crowd, he collaborated with a software genius named Bob Sabiston, who did it all on Macs. It's visually bright and alive -- a joy to regard. The animated nature of the film also gives Linklater the license and technique to create a dream like quality to the film, of course it looks absolutely stunning.

It is a film that requires patience from its audience, but also need them to submit. Here are few monologues or conversation from the movie that got through to me:-

"Boat Car Guy: I feel like my transport should be an extension of my personality. And this is like my little window to the world... and every minute's a different show. I may not understand it. I may not even necessarily agree with it. But I'll tell you what I've accepted: just sort of glide along. You want to keep things on an even key, this is what I'm saying. You want to go with the flow. The sea refuses no river. The idea is to remain in a state of constant departure while always arriving. It saves on introductions and goodbyes. The ride does not require explanation - just occupancy. That's where you guys come in. It's like you come onto this planet with a crayon box. Now you may get the 8 pack, you may get the 16 pack but it's all in what you do with the crayons - the colors - that you're given. Don't worry about coloring within the lines or coloring outside the lines - I say color outside the lines, you know what I mean? Color all over the page; don't box me in! We're in motion to the ocean. We are not land locked, I'll tell you that."

"Guy Forsyth: The trick is to combine your waking rational abilities with the infinite possibilities of your dreams. Because, if you can do that, you can do anything"

"Guy Forsyth: The worst mistake that you can make is to think you're alive when really you're asleep in life's waiting room"

"Soap Opera Woman: Excuse me. Wiley: Excuse me. Soap Opera Woman: Hey. Could we do that again? I know we haven't met, but I don't want to be an ant. You know? I mean, it's like we go through life with our antennas bouncing off one another, continuously on ant autopilot, with nothing really human required of us. Stop. Go. Walk here. Drive there. All action basically for survival. All communication simply to keep this ant colony buzzing along in an efficient, polite manner. "Here's your change." "Paper or plastic?' "Credit or debit?" "You want ketchup with that?" I don't want a straw. I want real human moments. I want to see you. I want you to see me. I don't want to give that up. I don't want to be ant, you know?"

"Guy Forsyth: Did you ever have a job that you hated and worked real hard at? A long, hard day of work. Finally you get to go home, get in bed, close your eyes and immediately you wake up and realize... that the whole day at work had been a dream. It's bad enough that you sell your waking life for minimum wage, but now they get your dreams for free"

"Boat Car Guy: The idea is to remain in a state of constant departure while always arriving"

Groundhog Day (1993)

Movies can change lives

[3 July 2009]

Often you hear the adage, "It is just a film". Well, for most times it is true. But on rarest of rare occasions, it isn't. This was one of them. Like a great piece literature, painting, poetry, speech it has the capacity to change the way you feel and think. It is the biggest compliment I can pay to a film. I rank Groundhog Day with Seventh Seal, Wild Strawberries, Waking Life, Synecdoche New York, Tokyo Story, Ikiru as one of the moves that has the capacity to change.

It is anything but a preachy film as the "intro" to the review might suggest. In fact it an extremely entertaining and funny film with one of the best performances ever by Bill Murray. The plot revolves around a weather man (Bill Murray) is reluctantly sent to cover a story about a weather forecasting "rat" (as he calls it). This is his fourth year on the story, and he makes no effort to hide his frustration. On awaking the 'following' day he discovers that it's Groundhog Day again, and again, and again. First he uses this to his advantage, then comes the realization that he is doomed to spend the rest of eternity in the same place, seeing the same people do the same thing every day.

The challenge here for the makers was in terms of screenplay, editing and performances. Bear in mind that, the "loops" Bill Murray's character goes through, might become redundant for the audience after a while. This is where the genius of Harold Ramis and Bill Murray comes into play, who seem to introduce a "novelty" factor with every shot of the same sequence. I couldn't think of any actor other than Murray who could have pulled this one off.

It is a movie likely to deceive you in its effortless narrative and casual comic tone. Yes, it is funny, but make no mistake about it, it is a film with a strong philosophical undertone. This is a quality that separates Groundhog from rest of the movies with similar intent. It tells you what it intends to on your terms. It deals with the questions that bother us for a better part of our lives i.e. meaning of life, purpose of life, existentialism, death, god but never preaches, nor propels any propaganda. But by the end of it, you know that something has changed, something you didn't see coming has happened. And then you watch it again only to realize the moment of Epiphany that eluded you the first time.

Every time I am down or losing perspective this is the movie that eases everything and makes me ask a simple question, "What is important?". One of the absolute great films of the 90s, but more than just a film for me.

Videodrome (1983)

Long live the new flesh

[2 July 2009]

Videodrome is one of those Cronenberg movies that grows on you with every viewing. It can seem grotesque, confusing, surreal, mind bending, but you know what I realized after "n" number of viewings. That it is extremely witty and funny.

Here is the basic plot, the president of Civic TV Channel 83, Max Renn, is always looking for new cheap and erotic movies for his station. When his employee, Harlan, decodes a pirate video broadcast showing torture, murder, and mutilation called "Videodrome," Max becomes obsessed to get this series for his channel. He contacts his supplier, Masha, and asks her to find the party responsible for the transmission. A couple of days later, Masha tells that "Videodrome" is real snuff movies. Max's sadistic-masochistic girlfriend Nicki Brand decides to travel to Pittsburgh, where the show is based, to audition. Max investigates further, and through a video by the media prophet Brian O'Blivion, he learns that that TV screens are the retina of the mind's eye, being part of the brain, and "Videodrome" transmissions create a brain tumor in the viewer, changing the reality through video hallucination.

The film was made at a time when network television was at its peak and the video culture had just set in. The film argues that the nature of reality or the "perception" of reality will be either altered or distorted by television which has become in Oblivion's words "the retina of the mind's eye". The special effects are "organic" and very well done. Cronenberg as usual intellectualizes his ideas with the ferocious command over the narrative. The performances are terrific especially by James Woods.

Here is a quote that more or less encapsulates the film for me, "North America's getting soft, *patron*, and the rest of the world is getting tough. Very, very tough. We're entering savage new times, and we're going to have to be pure and direct and strong, if we're going to survive them. Now, you and this cesspool you call a television station and your people who wallow around in it, your viewers who watch you do it, they're rotting us away from the inside. We intend to stop that rot"

Harold & Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay (2008)

Run of the mill

[2 July 2009]

Other than being more political (Anti-Bush), I can't see one thing that is new in this sequel. The "nude girls", "the busty wh*&^", "the lesbian sex, "piss", "shit", "fart", "Doogie Howser". I think these "slacker" comedies are becoming too predictable and maybe too gross for sake of it. Another gear up and it will "Salo".

Can't recall one laugh out loud moments. A few giggles here or there, but thats about it. Really not much to write about in terms of performances or writing. I get a feeling most of the stuff on these are impromptu. I mean if you run out of ideas you can always go back to nature "piss", "shit", "fart" and "f@#$".

All in all, clearly makers were in a hurry to cash in a new found attention for the franchise. Harold and Kumar had basically gained attention after the DVD release. The first one was a decent effort where some of the jokes clicked. This one was a "bummer".

Check it out if interested in "bottomless" young chicks. Can't think of one single incentive. Then again maybe that is a good enough reason.

13B: Fear Has a New Address (2009)

You cannot trust the idiot box

[30 June 2009]

I never thought I would see a good old horror flick in India which would spook and tickle me. Well 13B does exactly that and much more. With a tongue in cheek concept like the Romero's "Dawn of the Dead" which was based on the isolated nature of the modern society, this is a take on the "soap opera" obsessed Indian diaspora especially the women who practically live in these manipulative stories which last for ages and manage to bitch and gossip about them.

In today's world, the major source of relief, information and entertainment is the TV. So much so, that it has moved up from its modest position of being just another 'household appliance' to actually determining the power equation in a family. It is easy to identify the hierarchy in the family depending on who controls the remote control. So what happens when the TV realizes this power and begins to take control? What happens when instead of showing you the facts, the TV, begins to show you what it wants you to see? What happens when Manohar, to his great horror, realizes that this is exactly what is happening with his wonderful family, who has just moved into their sweet new home at 13B.

The plot unfolds as the main protagonist (Madhavan) begins to learn the "secrets" of the house and dwells into areas you cannot foresee. It is a breadth of fresh air in Indian Cinema where in general you can preempt whole movie down after one or two scenes. Not this one, you are left completely at the mercy of the makers. The performances in general are efficient and honest making the plot more believable especially by Madhavan. The key to the brilliance of the movie is that the director Vikram Kumar only takes it seriously enough without going overboard. It is intended to be a fun ride for the audience, yet not disconnecting them from the subject and the possibility of the story. It is a tough balance. The movie retains its satirical tone in the first half but then gradually changes colors.

There are flaws in the film which prevent it from achieving the supreme quality and scope that the script carries. One, the camera at times is unnecessarily shaky. Most Indian filmmakers have the obsession with the tacky and overly slick camera-work and over emphasis on background score but it really hurts the storytelling, especially in a movie like this where the impact moments get somewhat diluted. Second, the climax could have had a better resolution. It was good, no doubt but the build up was so impressive that anything less than brilliant would fall short. Thirdly, some of the performances were too loud to my liking.

All in all, it was sheer pleasure watching a movie like this in India which did not spoon feed the audience, which worked on different levels and which was a rollicking fun ride. I am not surprised at the news that the film will be adapted in Hollywood. It is a universal subject and I am sure it will be executed with greater finesse.

Guide (1965)

"Na Sukh Hai Naa Dukh Hai, Naa din Hai Naa Duniya, Naa Insaan Naa Bhagwaan, Sirf Mai"

[29 June 2009]

If I were to make a list of movies I would want to watch moments before I die, it would be The Seventh Seal, Waking Life, Wild Strawberries, Groundhog Day, Pyaasa and a few others. But one movie which I would pick above all great ones I have mentioned, is Guide by Vijay Anand. It is hard to put into words what this movie means to me.

For starters, it reminds me of my grandmother and the expression on her, every time she saw the film. Sometimes when you watch a movie again and again, eventually the emotional connect gets somewhat diluted but not this one. Based on the book by R.K. Narayan, Guide treaded into areas considered taboo for Indian society let alone films whether it is the "extra marital affairs" or "living in relationship". But the greatness of the movies lies in the fact that the brilliant script and the honesty of the performances never distracted the audience from the "crux" of the film. Easily Dev Anand and Waheeda Rehman's best performances who handle a delicate subject with maturity and create the "arc" of the character through the film that actors so crave for. It was a once in lifetime role and they made it their own.

The plot revolves around Raju makes a living by acting as a guide for tourists on one hand, and a con-man on another. He meets with Rosie Marco during one of his tours, and is attracted to her. He finds out that Rosie is unhappily married, would like to separate from her spouse, and take up acting and dancing. With Raju's encouragement, Rosie succeeds and both become rich beyond their imagination. Raju's lifestyle becomes easy, and he succumbs to gambling, and drinking in a big way. He forges a signature, is caught, arrested, tried in court, found guilty and imprisoned. Rosie will now have nothing to do with him. After Raju completes his prison sentence, he is released and travels far and wide in an attempt to meet Rosie and also to try and avoid returning to the city. He is mistaken for a Saint, and asked to preside over a temple in a region that is stricken by severe drought. Raju must offer prayers for rain and appease the people, or else they will expose him for fooling them. The question remains will he succeed in conning devotees that have come far and wide to watch him perform a miracle?

What makes the film stand the test of time, is the truthful writing of the characters. Instead of reducing them to caricatures and making the film simplistic, they are shows as human being. Flawed, ambitious, capable of love or hatred, jealousy, greed and ultimately redemption. And how can I complete review on Guide without mentioning the music by S.D.Burman, truly one of the all time greats. But the champion of the film is arguably Vijay Anand. Till date I reckon he is technically one of the finest Indian directors. Unfortunately, we did not see a lot of him behind the camera and too much in front of the camera for my liking.

A masterpiece of the highest order which not only abides by the "bollywood" format, but asks some pertinent questions about presence of God, nature of the man, existentialism.

Blow-Up (1966)

Reality is a "perception"

[29 June 2009]

Probably the most influential movie of the 60s and the best from the master director Michaelangelo Antonioni. His most successful movie both commercially and critically. In fact, it generated a lot of buzz at the time with the supposed "orgy" scene. But the beauty of this film is the unpredictability of its genre. It looks like thriller for the best part, becomes a movie about "ennui" (a constant theme of Antonioni) or a photographer's creative block and ultimately does a complete U-turn and becomes a movie about "nothing", but just the "perception of reality". It is easily his most engaging capturing the swinging 60s with some of the most amazing camera-work and editing you will hope to see. The legend is, the movie was intended to be a thriller, but in the editing Antonioni changed the whole context of the plot

The influence on the likes of Coppola, De Palme, Scorsese and the whole generation of directors of this film is there to be seen. It. also inspired the remake "Blow Out" by De Palme

Persepolis (2007)

One of the better adaptations

[29 June 2009]

Iran is probably one of the most interesting and accessible countries in the middle east with rich culture, an interesting historical background and a young generation questioning and rebelling age old adage and the place of religion in the society. It also is the most westernized region in the middle east where pop culture has managed to penetrate through despite the attempts by the regime to keep it under a tight leash.

Year 1979:- Revolution breaks out against the Shah led by the Islamic republic, a mark key moment in the history of this nation. Shah who had the support of the Americans could not withstand this overwhelming pressure by its people, was eventually overthrown. However, the Islamic republic brings with it a "radicalization" of what was a relatively liberal society. It is in this backdrop we trace the journey of girl tracing her identity, question the authority and breaching it in some cases, but eventually submitting to the reality of the situation. The movie is a very commendable adaptation of the acclaimed graphic comic books , staying true and pushing the intentions of the original work. The triumph of the film is the feminine perspective of the protagonist from her childhood memories, to her juvenile delinquencies, to her personal battles with the system have been very aptly portrayed.

Year 2009:- A similar revolution has broken out as I write this. It is interesting to watch this film as Iran is on the cusp of another change.

Gulaal (2009)

Long way down- just one last thing

[19 May 2009]

"Sarfaroshi Ki Tamanna Ab Hamare Dil Me Hai Dekhna Hai Zor Kitna Bazu-e-Kaatil Me Hai Waqt Aane Pe Bataadenge Tujhe E Aasmaan Hum Abhi Se Kya Batayen Kya Hamare Dil Me Hai

Oh Re Bismil Kaash Aate Aaj Tum Hindustaan Dekhte Ki Mulk Saara Kya Tashan, Kya Chill Mein Hai Aaj Ka Launda Yeh Kehta Hum To Bismil Thak Gaye Apni Aazaadi To Bhaiya Laundiya Ke Til Mein Hai.

Aaj Ke Jalson Me Bismil Ek Gunga Gaa Raha. Aur Behron Ka Wo Rela Naachta Mehfil Mein Hai Haath Ki Khadi Banaane Ka Zamaana Lag Gaya Aaj To Chaddi Bhi Silti Englison Ki Mill Mein Hai

Sarfaroshi Ki Tamanna Ab Hamare Dil me Hai… ….Kya Batayen Kya Hamare Dil Me Hai" By Piyush Mishra

Piyush Mishra is arguably one of the great stage actors and writers in India. Gulaal unlocks his relentless energy and passion and tries to give more resonance to Sudhir Ludhianvi's haunting poetry on the state of the world as he sees it.

But I think this movie falls short in its attempt. Kashyap, I believe now is entering a dangerous territory, where the predictable nihilism and pessimism of his works more or less mirrors the escapism and fantasy of Yashraj. It is hard to say what anyone can take home from Gulaal, other than a renewed passion to hate the system. There is no light at the end of this tunnel. Probably, reason why he calls it his most "angry" work, but as an audience I find no reason to buy it.

Aside from the thematic flaws as I stated above, there are also the structural and technical flaws in the film. Objectivity has never been a strength of Anurag Kashyap. In an urge to pack every idea related or peripheral to the subject in the film, he loses the control over his narrative. The film works on many different tracks. I wouldn't' say that they are hard to follow, but a fractured screen time for most characters doesn't allow them to develop. Hence, we feel no empathy with any of the characters. The editing is inept and abrupt at places.

What about Abhimanyu Singh's performance? What about Piyush Mishra's brilliant theatrics? What about the concept of "Ardh Narishvar" character in the film? I say they were all great, but the film simply does not stick. It is fair to say that Anurag has bitten more than what he can chew.