2014 : Queen & Highway - 2 movies, 2 remarkable performances

2014 ; The year of the Indian woman

Call it happenstance or call it providence, 2014 is the year of the woman. We are nearly 75 days into this New Year; an election year too, with 49% of the electorate in the country being women. The voice of the female gender is a significant one even in a regressive society like India because in a count, a vote has no gender. Does this gender exercise its right, and if it does, does it exercise as per its own free will, thought and conscience? This is exemplified in an ad campaign, one of the most soul stirring ones seen in a long time; the Tata Tea “Jaago re” that tackled this issue by coupling it with women’s safety. This was the first sign. The latest one came from Kalki Koechlin an actress who wrote a script and presented it as a soliloquy on International Women’s Day, 8^th March. Kalki’s refrain is as chilling as it is true and without whining makes a strong statement for the female voice in the making of an equal society.

Art reflects life and contemporary art is an indication of the same. For this I went to the movies after a hiatus and it was a long weekend well spent. Since the year began we have had just about 5 big releases in 'Dedh Ishqiya', 'Jai Ho', 'Gunday', 'Gulabi Gang' , 'Highway' and about 30 odd mid range to small films that flew in to the theaters. Madhuri Dixit having the most releases could be thinking of going back to the USA, recession or not she is the biggest star to take a fall. Salman's magic does not work for his little brothers 'Jai Ho' as it may end up doing just about cost coverage while Gunday has done moderate business. This is despite having a Priyanka in the lead but it is a Yash Raj film hence may cushion her from the box office backlash. Performances across the board have been over the top and the audience has not liked it one bit by the looks of it.

Highway and Queen :

The two movies that stand out differently and shall make the box office till ring again and again are Highway and Queen. Remarkably similar on the points that both begin with wedding scenes cut on steady cam and the plot taking off from there. One wanders into the 'Desh' while the other to 'Videsh'.  Both are journeys of self discovery and liberation. Not an easy act under the best of circumstances to portray. Both the lead actresses in each of the movies deliver and in spades. Two surprise packets whose acts may have gone unnoticed in all this starry glitter of bigger releases otherwise. Aaliya Bhatt the latest star kid on the block and the other from a girl, considered a perpetual outsider; one who has been improving her act with every successive film she has acted in yet never got credited for performing, Kangana Ranawat. Karan Johar on his 'Koffee' show asks his guests to rate actresses for their performance abilities and neither of these two names feature ever despite one being launched by his company. K Jo needs to update himself. The ladies have upped the benchmarks of performance in the game and if he relaxes on his couch for too long they may even change the game before he knows it.

The year of the Queen :

Does Kangana make a statement with her performance in "Queen" or what? Her's is the more astute performance because it comes in a small film that flew under the radar. Much like what Vidya Balan did with 'Kahani' in early 2013, Kangana carries this film fabulously on her own shoulders, and her ability should now never ever be held in doubt. Vikas Bahl the director can take a bow for this. Queen is a 100% effort giving full marks to the director and his muse. It is an absolutely honest film and a must see for anyone who loves good cinema. Amit Trivedi's music is in sync with the flavour of the journey. If Kangana Ranawat does not get awarded for this performance, I shall stick my neck out and say ban all the award ceremonies, they do not know what they are doing.

Highway, potholed in parts

Highway on the other hand is a film with baggage, loads of it.  The journey is scenic, the camerawork being stellar in this movie. What spoils it primarily is the music, A R Rahman clearly is having an off day with this movie and has sleep walked through the film. This movie did not require a score and only Resul Pookutty would have sufficed as a sound designer. The credits say “original score” and it is correct, no one else would own this mess. Not only is it incoherent and not go with the geography or the texture of the film, not a single song is hummable despite Aaliya lending her voice to one of them. 
Imtiyaz Ali made a more complete film in “Jab We Met”. Highway is a darker and starker film and the script meanders towards the middle, some shots are rushed through while those that need not have been there in the film are the one that end up dragging it down. Though it’s a social evil we have seen the pedophiliac relative act before in 'Monsoon Wedding' and Mira Nair presented it with much better clarity and panache. In here it is a mumble that is supposed to create the rumble. Stockholm Syndrome meets Monsoon Wedding drama is the one line review which could have been sufficient but for the two leads who rescue the film. Randeep Hooda looks the part and his performance is unobtrusive yet compelling. The show is stolen by Aaliya & one can’t take one’s eyes off her. Here is a potential star in the making with a superb screen presence and a range that is wonderful to see in one so young. She has the same appeal and star quality that one can see in a Jennifer Lawrence across in Hollywood.

The final word 

• Queen is not to be missed, 5/5 for both Kangana and Vikas Bahl. Repeat viewing potential for sure.
• Highway can be seen just about once and only on the big screen to make it tolerable,  Aaliya 4.5/5, Randeep Hooda 4.5/5 and Imtiyaz Ali 3.5/5, as for A R Rahman we shall forget he gave music to this film and forgive him only if he honorably retires from film music.  

Dhoom 3 : Common Sense – “Teri Aisi Ki Taisi”

Two things stand out clearly in Dhooms 3, one that like New York , Chicago too has an impressive skyline and two it has lousy policing .

Then you know why they need the services of Lone Ranger Indian super cop Jay Dixit ( Abhishek Bacchan, looking very good at points and absolutely bored in the others ) and his Tonto, Ali ( Uday Chopra) who till two movies ago of the same franchise operated a tin shed garage outside a pipeline and culvert in Mumbai.

Obviously there is money in franchising is a given. It does allow for locations to shift from Bandra Mumbai ( Dhoom ) to Mumbai & Brazil (Dhoom 2) and now all of it happens in the windy city. It happens with such aplomb that one may be forgiven for almost wondering what the whites are doing there in the North-Indian city of Chicago where they even have a monument to an Indian entertainment enterprise carved in stone called The Great Indian Circus. TGIC for two scenes is owned by a trade magician and conjurer ( Jackie Shroff ) and later by the evil banker Anderson ,who is waiting to pounce on it after casting fish eyes on Shroff’s most awesome performance for a loan extension. Shroff shoots himself in front of the bankers and his son Sahir, who sees all of this in a flashback/dream sequence. The rest as they is history Dhoom style, the bank is the villain and has to be robbed at will till it collapses, by the son who has grown up to become Aamir Khan (in a bowler hat and his eight pack avatar from his Ghajini days - why was it required when there is hardly a fight is confounding ). The banker 20 years ago had requisitioned for a skimpy dressed girl to supplement the show as a song and dance item when he was curtly and dismissively told that this was the future. The son however heeds that advice and gets a grunge clad gorgeous beauty to sing in chaste Punjabi (The YRF map states that London , Chicago, Switzerland etc are but suburbs of Bhatinda ) . Two songs run to packed shows, which actually told me that the poor venture capitalist banker may not have been so wrong in his advice to Shroff after all. But his bank has to go and does albeit after several Motorcycle / Motorboat chases. As a bonus we also have the Indian super cop hanging on an extended ladder in windy Chicago firing a gun in the USA on a bonafide US citizen and they do nothing to him. Then again guns are allowed in the US and had they asked to see how much Uday Chopra was being paid then there was the larger possibility of a serious crime being registered and he being jailed and strip searched. After all if they could get Capone on tax evasion then they certainly could have got Jay Dixit on exploitation of a garage mechanic ( a la Devyani Khobragade ) who has to wear the same bandana in 3 movies of a franchise that is supposed to have garnered collections in excess 10 digits measured in any currency of the world.

Suspension of disbelief is a must. Once it is acquired then the movie becomes enjoyable and one can see why Aamir Khan is a superstar. His brandy eyes and acrid demeanour conveys an angst and power waiting to be unleashed, the ticking brain apparent from just his bearing. He is the soul of this movie. He is totally believable in the ridiculous one line plot which yet is a marked improvement on the earlier versions. In the first part John Abraham wrested the control of the franchise and put it firmly into the hands of the villain rendering Bacchhan – Chopra to furniture status. Whatever they do now or in the future has and will have no bearing on the outcome. The star is the villain for ever. Aamir Khan slam dunks it home and in imperious style too. 

Katrina is the other surprise, breathtakingly beautiful, the girl has come a long way from her Boom days with Kaizad Gustad for sure. There is serious promise in the Aamir Katrina pairing. Their chemistry is apparent as her eyes twinkle with mischief when she teases him. She is very easy under the skin of Aalia. 

The machines are the other heroes and while these films would never rank in the same league as the Fast and the Furious movies, the fact that BMW associated with them is an indication of its rising popularity. Franchise movies are like changing different photographs in one single photoframe and Vijay Krishna Acharya is no Christopher Nolan /Sam Mendes ( like with Batman or Bond respectively) to tweak this frame itself. With such directorial talent at its helm it will never become either spectacular or end up being completely boring. It will remain to be the standard cheerful nonsensical fare for our samosa & popcorn crowds to keep the Chopra till ringing. 

Suspend belief and you get a Dhoom, go expecting logic or sense (the 'h' immediately goes silent ) and you are Doomed ;-)

Ram Leela : Shakespeare raped somewhere in Gujarat

Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s (SLB) film Ram Leela has us going to the absolute first principles of the cinematic experience and questioning it.  What is Cinema ? 

• Silk in the Dirty Picture defines it by saying Cinema is only three words “Entertainment, Entertainment, Entertainment”. Well SLB’s movie was not that...so we go to the next definition
• Cinema should be meaningful: In this definition a feature film would have a certain story, a rhythm a flow in the dialogues or timelines.... Well SLB’s movie was not that either...so we go on to the next one
• Cinema is about Realism: Like the art films of the 70’s .... SLB’s movie was also not that at all by a far stretch...so again we are pushed to the next definition
• Cinema is/should/can be Artistic : Garish explosions of colour in various shades of Red, totally fantastic sets which even a showman like Raj Kapoor only put in a dream sequence make a part of everyday ethos...no its Arabian Nights meet Japanese advertising meet Kathiawad... good art does carry with it a coherence which is absent here ...SLB’s movie is not Art either are there any more categories whose definitions are left ?
• Documentary Cinema, Short Film, Meaningful cinema, Good cinema, Bad cinema, Average cinema, which one exactly is this,  I asked myself and then it became apparent, truly apparent. 

This is "the revenge of the nerd". SLB is taking revenge on films, film making and film folk by taking their money and packaging it just so that it seems outwardly like a motion picture but instead is a mindless soul destroying experience. His greater crime, dragging William Shakespeare into this muck. Now William Shakespeare is the one author who has been most favoured by filmmakers, playwrights across the world for a story inspiration. His writing has been interpreted sometimes ordinarily, sometimes tolerably and sometimes superbly but it has always been his work. SLB in Ram Leela rapes Shakespeare himself. Coming out of the theatre, I was completely numbed...could see Billy the Bard otherwise a benign fellow who smiles in black and white from his frock collared photograph looking reproachfully at me...with hurt eyes, his self destroyed...why did he (SLB) do this to me? Have I ever done anything bad to this fellow?  I had no answer to give this impressive author. 

SLB says this movie is his interpretation of Romeo and Juliet. It sketchily creates that skeleton and then bends it, finally crushing it. Romeo Juliet by Shakespeare one line synopsis is 'a romantic tale of two star crossed lovers from opposing factions who die'. SLB’s sets are a confluence of the remnants of the Kendall Shakespeare company’s set pieces, all the stuff in Philip Antiques-Colaba, crowded into one frame thrown in with a peacock who is also killed in a bizarre invite. Shades are pastel when its romantic and red when guns, bullets and ghagras fly most of the other time. Houses in this mythical town can’t have roofs because for 500 years people have drawn out handmade guns and automatic weapons and fired in the air wherever they are standing or at each other. Millions of bullets fly and only 5 people get hit and die, just so you also know that bullets kill, else you would have gone out and wanted a gun for yourself. People here fire bullets randomly, make obscene pelvic thrusts, break into a song , fire more bullets, Ram and Leela are into each others mouths, we have extreme close ups of the lead actors till we see the pores on their noses, their waists, shadows on chiseled bodies in unspoken places, more songs & just quite as suddenly a few more bullets later the movie mercifully ends.

 So we have a Ram’eo and Leela’iet in Ranveer and Deepika who valiantly try and make this motion picture watchable for whatever it is worth, they certainly exude a raw sex appeal but it is not enough. The other star cast has Supriya Pathak, Gulshan Devaiyaah, Abhimanyu Singh, Richa Chaddha and small screen actors led by Sharad Kelkar & Barkha Bisht. Few film old actors & the TV stars may have been thrilled in the beginning at having a big budget film on their CV’s during its making, but how many would own it now is a question that begs answering. Individually, every single actor has done her job, it is the skipper who has screwed up big time. Music again by SLB himself (is there no end to this guy's megalomania, he inserts himself into almost every department for credit be it story, scripting , dialogues etc ) is a revisit to his earlier Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam but that had an accomplished composer at its helm in Ismail Darbar. Choreography is impressive if seen on TV, one song at a time but together it is a tad repetitive like the music.

As a conclusion I would recommend that SLB gets serious help , he has to visit a psychiatrist, or in the best case be institutionalized and not be let loose near a camera ever again. He is angry with films and film folks else a person in his right mind would never make this and have the audacity to call it cinema. 

Alternately if he has to make films they should come with a sovereign money back guarantee;  as a minimum  protection of the pockets of paying customers. We can't do much for the trauma they are subjected to by watching his work except only warn them. Instead of a disclaimer the film should have a statutory warning like they have on cigarette packs. 

This is a fan of cinema and a paying consumers frustration at seeing pretenders getting big budgets to play around with, to splurge and to lay it waste. While on the other hand many real filmmakers with good ideas, stories struggle to find finance and marketing or even a platform where they can contribute to the pantheon of Good Indian Cinema. 

Do not waste your money here folks. Eat Bhelpuri or if you want the promised experience or better yet  go eat a Gujarati Thali at Thacker Club - Girgaum, Mumbai or a Rajdhani-several branches in Mumbai, that will most certainly be immensely more fulfilling. 

Captain Phillips : Tension on the high seas

A Tom Hanks movie comes with its own level of expectation and he has rarely fallen short.

Here though more than Hanks the work belongs to Bill Ray’s book ( A Captains Duty: Somali Pirates, Navy SEALS and Dangerous Days at Sea ) and the captain of the movie, its director Paul Greengrass( Bourne Supremacy, Bourne Ultimatum). Maersk Shipping Lines vessel Alabama being hijacked on the high seas by Somalian pirates is the one liner of this superb work on celluloid. 

The movie attracted controversy in Hanks portrayal of Phillips as being inaccurate, the original Merchant Master being arrogant, and is said to have had disregarded the crews safety by ignoring piracy warnings for those waters…that apart.

As a film it is an edge of the seat drama, and Greengrass makes it pacy and real. Barkhad Abdi as Abdullah Muse the pirate leader is chillingly matter of fact. The movie maintains the balance of underlining the bleak situation back home for the Somalian fisher folk; who were responsible for rejuvenating piracy as an industry on the world map. It’s just business between the have not’s and the have’s. What else could they do with the fishing gone to larger trawlers and the politics back there doing very little for their survival. Maritime laws prevent merchant ships from carrying arms. This has created a chink in the armour of the sea trade, making it ridiculously easy for smaller armed groups and vessels to board sailing vessels and hold them for ransom. It happens in the far-east Asian waters and on the African seas and though patrolled still remains a huge area to cover. As a tense hostage drama it ranks right up there and as a situation facing the world trade it creates uncomfortable questions in the mind; On different worlds on a collision course in the times of today. 

Captain Phillips boards the ship, MAERSK Alabama with a set course from Oman to Mombasa with her cargo. The course runs through the Indian Ocean on the Somalian waters that have a history of piracy. Cut frame back to Somalia and we have a fishing village at the edge of the sea being forced to shake butt and grab a ship. It’s the matter of fact manner in which arms are carried by fishermen of all ages that paints a scary picture of a hopeless situation within. A ship any ship and the one that they pirated last week was last week’s job, this week another one is needed to be hijacked. When the captured Captain screams “you are not fishermen”, Muse replies “After the ransom, I want to get to the USA, its different for you there, here I have bosses too”.

The chase, the piracy act on high seas, the hostage drama and the rescue is the stuff to be watched and experienced. Tom Hanks is excellent but the high strung presence of Barkhad Abdi grabs our attention from the time he steps into the first frame. Full marks to be awarded to Greengrass for touching upon a sensitive headlined subject and treating it with a balanced fairness. 

As to the inaccuracy claims they can remain as the subject of a debate like most of the worlds recorded history. 

The Lunchbox: Simply Delicious

There is magic in cinema, undeniably so. Everyone who goes to the movies knows this and experiences it. The most common item on the wish list of every individual sometime or the other has been the ‘want and ability’ to be invisible yet present in the lives of other people and watch them go about their motions. There is power in this simple voyeurism. We are treated to one such. Ritesh Batra, the director here takes us on a magical ride of watching three separate souls going about their lives at the mere price of a ticket. It is money well worth spent and how.

The Lunchbox is a simple tale very well told. As we remove the lid, with the separate tiers and compartments the tale opens out in its many layers and nuances. It’s a sensual movie, strictly not in the commonly understood meaning of the word, but in the manner in which it embraces your every sense.  It heightens the sensations, inadvertently tickles your funny bone and engages cerebrally with a feel last seen in the 70’s when Hrishikesh Mukherjee, and the two Basu's were making their movies. We have in Ritesh Batra , a genuine claimant to the large vacant spot left by these unassuming giants of middle cinema.

It is a Bombay story, a story of lives in constant motion. The lifeline of this city is effectively captured in two systems that transport men and material to their places of work and home. The local trains of Mumbai and the system of the dabbawala’s (the lunchbox couriers). The dabbawaala system is a widely known case study in Harvard University for its six sigma efficiency of a network of largely semi-literate people. They were feted by the Prince of Wales and invited for the Royal Wedding of his son. But that’s by the by, as one lunchbox sent by a young housewife in suburban Malad, Ila ( Nimrat Kaur ) falls outside this bell curve of efficiency and lands on the table of Saajan Fernandes (Irfaan Khan); a curmudgeonly claims clerk in some government department on the verge of retirement. And then unfolds a story of charming proportions. This honest mistake is perpetuated by the similar external wrappings of the box and a lonely housewife’s lovingly cooked food gets gobbled up clean by the widower subsisting on mass catered canteen fare. Both realize their mistake but persist in this culinary adventure and find comradeship. It highlights the plight of the lonely in large populated cities that are hungry for the simple things in life, a kind word, a shoulder, a person to talk to, to be understood and understand. Into this milieu steps in a third character Shaikh ( Nawazuddin Siddiqui) as an understudy to Saajan to take over after he retires. He is the pesky, sticky colleague who unnecessarily gets personal and familiar till one gets to know his story. It’s a tale of Ila & Saajan who unburden their inner thoughts to each other through notes in a dabba. The tale is also of Shaikh, an orphan making his way alone in his worklife; In his own way he too is hungry for acceptance and a camaraderie that he looks for from Saajan. In all of this the people seek and hope for happiness, in a crowded city where the closest can be very far and by a quirk of fate find that a mistake can actually turn out and make things come out right.

The performances are excellent. Irfaan is a superlative actor and can stand up to be counted in the pantheon of India’s finest. His eyes express in a manner best articulated by the Marathi poet Kavi Grace in these lines 

“Shabdatun Artha Umagava (From the word emerges a meaning)

Arthaatun Shabda Vagalata” (And then the meaning does not require the very word it emerged from)

He says it all and without many words too.

Nimrat Kaur is a find for cinema, her face is very familiar from the various commercials and stage shows she has done. As a performer she comes into the film honed, intelligent, beautiful and bringing to the character of Ila a rare honesty, integrity and balance that is a fitting footage share with an actor of the caliber of Irfaan. It’s no mean achievement for a first film. 

Nawazuddin Siddiqui is totally believable, and like a chameleon fits into every part he accepts colouring it with shades making Shaikh an important element of this story. A lesser actor would not have done. The other notable performance is of Bharati Acharekar, an actor who is not seen on screen we only hear her voice. It is through the crisp homilies, suggestions and interactions with Nimrat that she visually fleshes out her part and it’s a masterful angle in the script. Lilette Dubey comes in a part that could well have been edited out and really adds nothing to the interplay of the others; even the children around Irfaans house convey a lot more. About the technicians, the Food Designer who has created the Lunchboxes visually deserves a pat, even without Irfaan the food looks delicious onscreen to cause a rumble in my stomach. Niharika Khans apparel design is spot on and the dabbawala’s who were to be the primary subject of Ritesh’s documentary, become the system through which he conveys this tale. Yet as the promos said it is not a story of love (that was marketing), it is a story of communication, unlikely friendship and finding a confidante with whom you resonate.

I love the idiom of cinema the way it is panning out with newer voices emerging telling tales that though rooted in India can be understood by a global film viewer with ease. Zoya Akhtar, Farhaan Akhtar, Kiran Rao, and now Ritesh Batra are directors who are world citizens and great storytellers. The variety of the 70’s is coming back into Hindi Cinema and augurs exciting times ahead.