Author Archives: admin

HEROINE

This “Heroine” overacts …….
Written (more so collected magazine clippings), directed (insincerely as if he was in a rush) and co-produced (aesthetically in the league of a DD TV show) by Madhur Bhandarkar, this movie just does not live up to its hype.
This movie professing to be true to life, lives in its own weird reality. The boyfriend, the PR agent, even the hero’s wife can get you a part as a heroine in a movie. Noone in this reality has apparently ever heard of auditions !!!! If you believe in Bhandarkar’s bottom line, a cricketer upon seeing his “mehbooba” on the big screen in the stadium gets the power to hit sixes and centuries !!!! Make her the coach !!! An MMS clip makes a movie a hit, screw the crores others spend to promote their flicks. Madhur’s material treats the audience as dim-witted suckers…. All this would have been forgiven had the movie been a parody, but this one purports to be a “slice of life” !!!! We are left wondering which weird, whacko, way-out world the people making this film inhabit. Check out especially the red-light area scene where our heroine goes to learn about the “real” people she portrays.
Starting with an expletive, the story unfolds in an episodic manner depicting a number of wrong decisions an actress can make with her life – fall in love with a married guy – tick, do a movie where she is just a prop – tick, do an arty movie which is box office kryptonite – tick, you get the point. There is absolutely no semblance of suspense or texture or layers to the plot.
Infact the movie could have showcased so many twists and turns like say a botched plastic surgery, losing one’s looks, marriage, pregnancy etc. which are much more relevant problems for an actress. But no, Mahi’s personal agenda (bipolar disorder, which men to bed, which PR person to hire etc.) takes precedence over the movie’s portrayal of her professional life. Also the screenplay is crammed with so many instances that the focus is completely lost. Add to it a lousy soundtrack (Salim-Sulaiman), zero humor and an absent editor and all that the audience is left with is 148 wasted minutes of their life.
Coming to the acting department, there is more hamming here than any pigsty in the world. Most of the character actors give cringe-worthy performances. Kareena Kapoor looks super and acts competently but this script would have made even an Oscar winner look awkward. Arjun Rampal as her obsession is ok. Randeep Hooda is below par as the other guy. (Shudders, Madhur’s next movie “Cricketer”). Then there is cleavage(Shahana Goswami), a parade of starlets, an aging Helen, a Bengali director, a faux Khan, a pushy PR person (Divya Dutta) and the entire fashion/page 3 extras cast.
The dialogue by Niranjan Iyengar comes up with gems like “Why do you take her words seriously? Because you (person C) don’t take me seriously” Are you serious ? But its not all bad, some lines which Helen says at the award function are fantastic as are the last couple of lines of the film. So that’s a perfect 10 for the dialogue………..out of more than a thousand. All the DoP, Mahesh Limaye can do is make KK(K?) look delectable. The other frames are as garish and out of sync as the script.
To sum up if a regular multiplex ticket costs Rs. 300 this movie is not worth the paper the ticket is printed on. You would demand your money back even if you snuck in free into the theater. It personifies the dictionary meaning of the term “Made for TV”.

SAUMIL BHANSHALI

LOOPER

LOOPER
Urban Dictionary will soon have a new meaning for “Looper”. A thrilling, thought-provoking, time-tested, talented treat….( Eg. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is a great catch for any woman, he is a Looper). But seriously, Looper is that good a movie to deserve its own definition like google, muggle etc. It should be introduced in movie-making seminars as Essential Viewing 101…….
To case it in a genre would be to say it’s a blend of sci-fi, good old action and an uncommonly clever script written and directed by Rian Johnson, whose previous credits include “Brick” and “The Brothers Bloom”. He may not yet be the new Nolan, but his impressive filmography shows his speciality in crafting inventive, tightly wound thrillers which end satisfyingly.
This movie is a big idea – time travel, telekinesis, blunderbuss guns — all the good stuff, showcased on an equally big budget platform. At the same time it doesn’t just rely on its time-travel conceit (always a great concept when told properly) it humanises its characters. As a result it gets the viewer to suspend disbelief while investing themselves in the characters’ arcs. The interactions between Bruce Willis (future Joe) and Gordon-Levitt (present day Joe) are electric, sublimely acted and a throwback to the old days when movies required acting rather than special FX.
It starts with the protagonist living in the year 2044, where he works as a “looper” for the Kansas City mob. In another thirty years, someone’s going to invent time travel, but only the Mafia will have access to it. Loopers then kill whomever the mafia choose to send back from 30 years in the future. Innovative, because if there is no body, there is no evidence…. And finally in what is called “closing the loop,” his last target is his future self, 30 years down the line. This is where the two Joes come in. Its obvious to assume that the present-day Joe’s assassination of his future self goes awry…. Fitted with prosthetics to look like Bruce Willis, Gordon-Levitt connects with him in more than a physical sense, making us believe that they are infact the same person. While the first half plays out like a chase thriller, there are a number of hairpin turns later on and like all of Johnson’s movies a thoroughly satisfying conclusion.
This movie may evoke shades of “Terminator” and “12 Monkeys” and even “Minority Report” but it holds its own and is every bit as good as these classics….. Few movies pit good guy vs. good guy, both of them being the same !!!!! And both include a single mother, Sara, superbly portrayed by Emily Blunt. Cameos by Jeff Daniels as Abe, the future boss of the crime syndicate, and by Paul Dano as Seth, further enrich the film. Kudos to Steven Yedlin (DoP) and James Geralden (art direction) for making both the futures believable.
To sum up if a regular multiplex ticket costs Rs. 300 this movie is worth Rs. 600. Yes !!!! Its that good, go see it, twice !!!!

BARFI

Like the name, its sweet, its simple, its soulful like a symphony but its also stretched and at times feels synthetic (particularly with the frequent flashbacks)…….. Props for being spectacularly “sui generis” (one of a kind) but brickbats for the skeletal script…..
Don’t get the critique wrong, this movie can infact hold its own in the company of some other world cinema like the Artist and Life is Beautiful.
For Bollywood this film is truly path-breaking and to use a cliché, a breath of fresh air.
No foreign locales, no item songs, no crass background score, and definitely no timepass jokes. No sir, this movie is shot in the most loving manner possible in Darjeeling. With its beauty captured perfectly on camera, every frame seems like a picture perfect postcard. Kudos to the cinematographer Ravi Varman, it’s a feast for the eyes….
At its heart , it’s a romantic film, but in the able hands of director Anurag Basu it acquires a rare complexity and depth that will definitely be appreciated by the multiplex crowd. He uses a non-linear approach to the story (in the hope that we may miss the fact that it has very little meat), which although confusing at times is a welcome change from the weekly masala we are subjected to…
The protagonist Murphy/Barfi ! (Ranbir Kapoor) is the premier prankster in his precinct.
A charmer who is deaf/mute (Surprise, surprise given the marketing blitz), he occupies all the time of a cop (Saurabh Shukla). The movie deals with his relationships with firstly Shruti (Ileana D’cruz), the upper class Bengali and Jhilmil (Priyanka Chopra), an autistic girl yearning to be recognized as a woman. We follow the emotional, leisurely, humorous and sensitive cycle (and the promos do have their share of cycle rides !!!) of love, heartbreak and joy between these characters.
Shruti, being engaged and Jhilmil, being disabled represent the obstacles our hero has to face in this heartwarming tale of finding happiness in the smallest things in life. Barfi !’s character infact reminds one of Thoreau’s quote “It is better to have your head in the clouds, and know where you are… than to breathe the clearer atmosphere below them, and think that you are in paradise” Don’t worry be Barfi ! as the films tagline suggests.
Pritam’s music is fantastic. Apt and more importantly one of the most melodious scores heard in recent times. It fills the gaps and remains with you long after the movie is over.
Coming to the performances, Ranbir Kapoor is superb. “Rockstar” and “Barfi !” have cemented his place as the next superstar of Indian cinema. Evoking shades of Chaplin and his granddad his performance “shouts” . Priyanka Chopra has proved to the critics that she has grown with every performance and this may be her best one yet. No hamming, no manipulation just Jhilmil. Ileana D’Cruz in her Bollywood debut is assured and very pleasant to watch on screen.
The supporting cast of Saurabh Shukla, Roopa Ganguly (as Shruti’s mother), Akash Khurana (as Barfi’s father) and the rest are more than competent.
Now if only the writer and the editor came to the party this would truly be a Barfi ! worth serving at the Oscars. Nonetheless unlike the 100 crore boys which are easily forgotten when one steps outside the cinema hall this movie is truly mesmerizingly memorable. A film among flicks !!!
To sum up if a regular multiplex ticket costs Rs. 300 this movie is definitely worth Rs. 400 — Go see it in the theater and then buy the DVD if for Ranbir Kapoor’s performance alone….

SAUMIL BHANSHALI

Friends With Benefits

FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS
As you can guess from the title and the posters it’s a rom-com. There’s even a rom-com within the rom-com, starring Jason Segel and Rashida Jones. The title conveys the premise too. Talk about subtlety. Understandably, The premise: Can two people have a successful ongoing sexual relationship without becoming lovers? Well of course they can’t, but this is the second movie this year (No Strings Attached was the other one) to pose the question. By now most of the core viewership targeted by the movie would know what to expect – the formulaic – meet, become friends, have sex, fall in love, meet obstacles, break up etc etc. In fact apart from the sex part it could easily pass off as any one of numerous bollywood rom coms too.
But I still enjoyed it thoroughly and I suspect so will most of the audiences. The main reason is the “Friends” which greatly benefit the wafer thin storyline. Megastars Justin Timberlake and Mila Kunis infuse sparkle, energy and humour in their performances making you smile and want to fall in love. The onscreen chemistry they share (whether they are chatting or making love) burns through the screen. Both are likable actors, the banter between them is enjoyable and most importantly they look nice dressed and undressed. Hard to believe that they’re not a real-life couple.
Another plus is Will Gluck’s (Easy A) direction. It’s a believably engaging effort highlighting the stars’ charming performances. Through the first 2/3rds the movie excels at identifying and then deconstructing the clichés of the romantic comedy. Finally however it paints itself into a thematic corner by trying to bend the rules and follow the formula. But then like I said earlier the audience knows what its expecting and the expectations are fulfilled.
The movie is also bolstered by resonant supporting performances. Richard Jenkins (“The Visitor”) portrays Dylan’s father, whose shrewdness is fighting a losing battle against his Alzheimer’s. Patricia Clarkson (“Shutter Island”) enjoys some of the best lines as Jamie’s flighty mom. And Woody Harrelson brings hilarity to the role of Dylan’s co-worker, GQ’s candidly gay sports editor. GQ art editor = straight, GQ sports editor = gay. Another example of how clichés are reworked in the film.
The final highlight is the dialogue delivered quickly by the cast and filled with great punchlines and a crisp contemporary vibe.
So, no plot description here. There’s no need. No need for character names either. Suffice to say that the non-couple couple spends time in New York City for a while, then they go to Los Angeles, then back to New York.
If a ticket at the multiplex costs Rs. 300, this movie is worth at least Rs. 600. @200 for the dialogues, @200 for Mila Kunis and @200 for Justin Timberlake (and note that either Mila or Justin are present in almost every single frame of the movie.)

Rise of the Planet of the Apes

Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Even Apes get their origin story…..
Hail Caesar !!! Snuck out in a blanket from Gensys, this bright eyed chimp (Andy Serkis’ soulful, performance-captured portrayal) is the character that imprints itself in our minds far out-shining the humans…
Rupert Wyatt’s reboot – slash – prequel does have large plot related loopholes but that’s a given when you consider the premise (Apes ruling the world). It does do a lot of things right – sending a cautionary message (messing with mother nature), superb rendering of the CGI simians, exposing societal prejudices (Animals are God’s creatures too !!) and above all the climactic confrontation set on the Golden Gate Bridge.
Will Rodman (James Franco, wasted) has been testing a new anti-Alzheimer’s gene therapy on chimpanzees, who undergo astonishing cognitive enhancements as a result. He has a personal stake in this drug christened ALZ 112 – his dad (John Lithgow, wasted) once a great pianist, suffers from Alzheimer’s. Obviously things go wrong resulting in Caesar being taken home with Will. Over the next few years, man and monkey bond. Enter, a comely veterinarian (Freida Pinto, also wasted) and things are looking good. But, you know changes are bound to happen when the adorable chimp turns into a 300 pound gorilla…
Following an altercation with a preternaturally obnoxious neighbor, he is collected by Animal Control and remitted to the custody of a corrupt keeper (Brian Cox, wasted again) and his snidely sadistic sidekick (Tom Felton, you guessed it – wasted). And from then on its Caesar (Andy Serkis, a no-contest, hands-down Oscar-worthy performance) all the way.
One must see the film if only for the way the CGI team at WETA Digital (the team behind Avatar) and Andy Serkis have brought the ape to life giving him an unprecedented range of emotions. Who knew he would out-act the other established names. Caesar is by far the most expressive character in the film : in turns innocent and touching when an infant, curious while growing up, confused when grown up, forlorn and defeated when in captivity, cunning when he fights back and finally resolute as he decides to take fate in his own hands… Truly, puts all the King Kongs, Godzillas, Lassies and even an ET in the shade.
While the movie does end abruptly, it does contain a spectacular summer-movie set-piece. The bout of gorilla warfare atop the Golden Gate Bridge as the movie reaches a jaw-dropping crescendo is alone worth the price of admission.
If a ticket at the regular neighbourhood theatre costs Rs. 150, this movie is worth at least Rs. 300. Definitely worth the wait for it to come to the multiplexes (when the problems are resolved). A large screen for the larger-than-life hero. Audiences will surely “Go Bananas” for the Apes !!!
Saumil Bhanshali

Cowboys and Aliens

Cowboys & Aliens
A western sci-fi movie. That’s a first.
Pairing the current James Bond with Indiana Jones, that’s also a first..
Unfortunately the movie doesn’t live up to the first-rate prospects on paper….
Set in 1875 against the backdrop of the town of Absolution which has fallen on hard times, the trailers of this movie had fans like me salivating for more. While the movie builds up really well it’s the sci-fi part that doesn’t really mesh. The aliens seem completely unnecessary and clichéd, to use a cliché, like a third wheel on a bicycle. And obviously since its Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford playing the cowboys, the aliens pale in comparison.
As the movie begins, a stranger (Craig channeling Eastwood’s signature man-with-no-name) stumbles into the New Mexico Town, with a mysterious shackle around his wrist and an intriguing case of amnesia. This town is run by the iron-fisted Colonel Dolarhyde (Ford playing a no-nonsense gruff guy). When the town is attacked by mysterious marauders from the sky, no doubt the two unite to fight.
So far so good, but the second half is riddled with clichés, bullets, more clichés, inconsistencies and still more clichés. “Let’s be friends” – check, “Rag-tag search group” – check, “Cut off by bandits” – check, “Surrounded by Indians” – check, “Clichéd alien intelligence” – check and so on.., culminating in a completely predictable battle at the end. Olivia Wilde who plays the love interest looks good but sadly the good part ends there. Her role is very poorly written and she seems out of her depth in the presence of the veterans.
Jon Favreau who previously helmed Iron Man may have the right ingredients but doesn’t mix them properly resulting in wastage and an unsatisfied audience. Maybe it’s a case of too many cooks spoiling the you-know-what as the story is credited to no less than six writers !!!
Rosenberg’s graphic novel on which this movie is based does come to life in the scenes of the Wild West shot lovingly and realistically on location by Matthew Libatique, but sadly the alien CGI seems outdated and generic. In fact the alien of Ridley Scott’s 1979 movie is much more menacing. So while the concept suggests something out of this world the result is definitely terrestrial.
While we all know the fact that science fiction killed off the western genre in Hollywood, so this movie where the roles seem to be reversed is definitely a good idea. But an idea is only as good as its execution. (“If you had invented Facebook, you would have invented Facebook” – Zuckerberg to the twins). The movie seems to play out like a rough draft and I’m sure could be remade and reworked to be brilliant.
If a movie at the multiplex costs Rs. 300, I would pay only Rs. 150 to watch this one. Watch it only for the Cowboy part !!!!!

The Tree of Life

THE TREE OF LIFE
“There are two ways through life: the way of nature and the way of grace,”
First things first, this is a movie unlike anything anyone has ever made. Its less of a movie (dictionary meaning – a narrative seeking to inform/entertain) and more of a vision (dictionary meaning – a series of vivid images open to interpretation).
Terrence Mallick (who incidentally has made only five movies so far ) is less of a story teller and more of a poet in this epic saga of how both brute nature and spiritual grace shape not only our lives as individuals and families, but all life. Saying this movie is indulgent is like comparing the Stanchart Marathon to a stroll in Jogger’s Park. Its an inside-Terrence’s-mind essay on family, remembrance, atonement and above all Nature. Like a painting the movie is gorgeous and abstract at the same time and like a symphony it leaps around in time and space unlike a conventional narrative. In fact it reaches a crescendo very quickly as within 20 minutes the film shifts to a stunning visual representation of the creation of the universe. We go from a spark to the big bang, to the creation of earth, to the age of the dinosaurs, and everything in between. Unlike other films which build up to the big finish, this virtuoso scene comes pretty early. Like someone said it is more ambitious than Mayor A.M.Bitious of Ambitiousville.
Now to the story within the macro picture. Kicking off with a quote from the Book of Job, we meet Mr and Mrs O’Brien (Brad Pitt and Jessica Chastain) learning of the death of their 19-year-old son. Elsewhere, the dead boy’s brother Jack (Sean Penn), now middle-aged, tells his dad he thinks about the lad every day, prompting a series of flashbacks to his childhood, set in American suburbia in the 1950’s. This template of Texas family life forms the hub from which various tangents are explored. The vignettes of life in Waco are easily understood but the conclusions are completely random. No two people will feel the same way about the film. “Feel” – that’s the operative word because that’s what the filmmaker hopes his audience will be throbbing with at the end of the 140 odd minute look at existence.
A word of caution though, this is not a “multiplex” film. There maybe less than half an hour of dialogue for the 2 hour plus duration. Although the acting especially of the young boys (Hunter McCracken and Laramie Eppler) is pitch perfect, a point to note is that the Grandmother who appears as the seventh-billing in the credits appears on screen for less than a minute !! The co-stars here are the grass, the trees, the fireflies… Indeed Nature herself. The original music/soundtrack by Alexandre Desplat is awe-inspiring and in sync with the sublime content. But again with the contrast, the movie ends extremely abruptly and the credits in fact roll without any sound. So, the movie is alienating and frustrating yet at the same time (depending on your mood) sumptuous, spiritual and spectacular.
Whether it deserves a Palme D’or not is, like the movie, open to debate. But this I can say is that its that sort of movie that if you feel bored you’ll feel its your fault !!! (Somewhat allegorical to the story of the Emperor’s New Clothes)
Unlike other movies which encourage you to go and see them with no pre-conceived notions, for this one do go with the knowledge that its going to be tedious and incoherent but no doubt about it – A work of Cinematic ART…
If a ticket at the multiplex costs Rs. 300, this movie is worth at least Rs. 600. Watch it and then watch it again !!! After all on the first viewing the Monalisa may also appear to some as just another woman !!!!