I always thought Deepika couldn’t act. One up for her! She lives up to my expectations. She s-p-e-a-k-e-s her dialogues. Poker face. (Oh, I think she does move her brow once in a while - or is it just a twitch? ;) Ahem. And, how about getting a better hair stylist next time, Deepika? I can't recall the last time your hair (or even you!) looked good. Sexy legs won’t work every time.
Not sure what explains Imran's blank expressions in some frames, but he was definitely more tolerable than Deepika. Charming in a few scenes. He looked his best in I Hate Love Storys but.
Here's the plot. Imran, the good guy, is least ambitious unlike his chuddy buddy Aaliya (Deepika). He's not sure what he wants in life (like most of us). All he's really sure about, is Aaliya. (Aw, that's sweet!) He loves her to pieces. She loves him but is as sure about what she wants in life. An aspiring actress (even in the film ;) she moves to Australia to study. Imran, who can't imagine life without her, breaks on hearing this.
I won't say watch the movie to see what follows. The first half an hour is painfully slow and boring. (barring the credits in the beginning - innovative, for sure!) Keep no expectations from what ensues. Besides the first few minutes, all I really liked were the last 10. I wish that's where the film had begun. Music by Vishal Shekhar, is mediocre at best.
If you have seen the film, take a break (or indulge yourself in better films ;) if you haven't, don't book the tickets just yet. Wait for the DVD!
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
The film is about a man, paralytic for the last 14 years, who's last wish, unlike anyone's, is to die. Ethan (Hrithik) has his reasons in place, while his friends, are convinced to the contrary! He files a petition for Euthanasia, mercy killing, nevertheless. A heart-warming, heart-rending tale follows, therafter.
Director Sanjay Leela Bhansali gets the best out of everyone. Mr Roshan is wondrously amazing. His best so far. It's not (just!) about his looks (he's scruffy in quite a few frames). He leaves behind all (his few and far between ;) rival contemporaries) when he means business. Be it the way he cracks up to lighten the most sombre of moods or the way he emotes in the gravest of shots, without letting out a tear. [Guzarish promises what Kaho Naa Pyar Hai did for him in 2000. If he does manage to grab the best actor award for this one, 3 out of his 4 awards would be for films with Aishwarya, after Dhoom 2 and Jodha Akbar].
Not a bad job for a first time music director by SLB. Sau Gram Zindagi by Kunal Ganjawala and Udi by Sunidhi Chauhan are beautiful tracks. Besides being a brilliant actor, Hrithik charms all with his voice. He goes behind the microphones yet again (after Kites) with Life is Wonderful.
If you have a heart, you'll love it!
Thursday, November 18, 2010
G3 takes you back yet again to the 1980s cine-maa. [Are directors today really fascinated by the bygone era or just short of ideas - Dil Chahta Hai, Main Hoo Na, Golmaal 1, Billu Barber, Once Upon a Time in Mumbaai, I Hate Louv Storys, Action Replayy, and now Golmaal 3, offer little more than a peek-a-boo into the 70s, 80s era]. The atmospherics, nevertheless, are a welcome change. Mithunda's disco dancer avatar is as hilarious and fun as his hackneyed dialogues, or the camera zooming and panning. Theatre artist Ratna Pathak (of the recent Sarabhai vs Sarabhai fame), opposite Mithunda, is convincing to say the least.
Kareena Kapoor is her usual bubbly self, overdoing her bit sometimes but mostly pleasing. We've seen better of Arshad Warsi in the Munnabhai series. [After the release of Munnabhai Chale Amrika, he'd be the only bollywood actor to be part of two (and only) Bollywood trilogies]. The most annoying character, I thought, was Jonhy Lever. Completely unnecessary! His 'supposed' schticks hardly evoke a laugh.
Friday, November 12, 2010
Posted by Lakshya
First off, the good part: everything. The film is perfect. Flawless. The cast, the writing, the stunning look and cinematography, and the music - everything is top notch. So everything I say about it below is besides it being one of the best films of the year, probably my favorite for the year. So my opinion about some of the things in the film does not change the fact that this is one of the finest films I’ve seen, thanks to the entire ensemble. This film is one of the best character studies in a long time.
Now, everything about the concept of making and watching this film demands not to be taken seriously - something the filmmakers knew very well. Which is why they hired Aaron Sorkin (A Few Good Men, The West Wing series) to write the film and David Fincher (Fight Club, Seven, Curious Case of Benjamin Button) to direct - pretty much the most subject-oriented A-list writers/directors.
The film is exactly what Mark describes facebook as in the film - it’s cool. But I think it is probably easier to make something look cool - and say (in the film) that facebook has the “potential” to be a billion dollar company - if it already has. For a film that is being promoted as “not about facebook” (to make people go to the theatres), it does take a lot of credibility from facebook’s image and status to help make the plot more understandable.
So, for a film that is trying to say so much about a website, a company, a “movement”, it also wants to say “you don’t have to like or care about or have an opinion about facebook to watch and like this film”. Also, and maybe I feel this because I’ve always seen Aaron Sorkin as a series writer, but I wanted to see more of many scenes/situations. I may be biased but sometimes it felt more like a tv show pilot episode to me (but a reallyyyy good one). This isn't necessarily a bad thing though. I love films that end at a high point, leaving you wanting more - something tv show writers are very good at. It's a hard sell to a studio though, but Sorkin's image and quality of writing pretty much lets him get away with anything.
Another observation, the film rarely shows Mark making decisions that affect the story (once he starts the website) - which gives him more of a puppeteer’s image while looking like a puppet. Since the film is told from 3 different opinions (depositions), it is hard to say which is true; which works great in the scenes when Mark is accused of, in separate situations, sabotaging Edoardo's share in the company (through the 'chicken' story in the newspaper), and taking Sean out of the equation (not being present at the frat party). Both scenes were my favorite since even though it's hard to believe that he did do those things, it does sound really cool in a Al Pacino from the end of The Godfather sort of way. Obviously, he could have easily done those two things, but his character's mysteriousness and ambiguity are brilliantly portrayed by Jesse Eisenberg and Aaron Sorkin.
The cast is perfect - basing half the film in college and using young actors gives it the most casual look - even though deeper down the film is about CEOs that run billion dollar companies that affect the lives of 500 million people (1 in every 12 people on earth, approximately). And the big themes - friendship, loyalty, lies, betrayal would have come off more drama-like if Mark was played by Leonardo Dicaprio and Edoardo by Brad Pitt. BUT every major shift in plot is caused by a decision which is “allegedly” made by Mark. The film makes him look like a billionaire nerd and a billionaire godfather at the same time - but it does it very well. That is the best part- this film does everything well. And when a film with such a debatable concept and plot does everything right - it is very easy to find bad things to say about it.
(Quick note: Jesse Eisenberg is one of the best actors in the industry. People will talk about his work in this film for a long time, and I really hope he gets an oscar nod.)
Still, let’s face it - if you’ve seen the film - you had no idea going into this biopic (that too about the invention of a social networking website) that it would be such a thrillride with flawless execution by everyone involved. This film is amazing. The writing, the direction, and the awesome music is flawless. But even all of those things can not make the package look less stupid. Deep, deep, deep down the plastic surgery of acting, music, writing, and direction, this film is about nerdy best friends who became rivals and fought for millions of dollars of damages to their egos.
This film is art - and the credit goes to the director, writer, music composer, editor, and the entire production - so what if the subject is something as mundane as facebook? Facebook is a genius idea - a business plan that should make anyone envious, and this is what the film does - it make you want to hate Mark Zuckerberg. But didn’t many people already hate him? Aren’t there already many reasons to be jealous of the guy’s success? Youngest billionaire? His worth increasing exponentially every year? This film helps his fame, but not his image.
Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard and became the richest person in the world. Steve Jobs too dropped out of college, then started Apple and is the largest shareholder of the Walt Disney Company which is the biggest entertainment conglomerate in the world. Mark Zuckerberg has the same genius genes and is the youngest billionaire, worth more than Steve Jobs and many others. But people don’t respect him as much as Bill Gates or Steve Jobs. This film won’t help that - but it will make him more famous than facebook could or has so far. It’ll win oscars and other awards and everyone will applaud everyone involved - except the man it is about.
But well - the internet does that sometimes.
Epilogue: When the film ended, I didn’t like it. I wanted to see more. But that is a problem I have with all good films and tv shows - especially those written by Aaron Sorkin. His dialogues and script are addictive. It can even make a show like Studio 60 On The Sunset Strip (2006) look very good. Even though that again was a serious drama about the behind the scenes of a live television sketch show. But that show failed where The Social Network succeeded - subject matter. Facebook is huge - and if every facebook user in the world were to go and watch this film, it would make over 4 billion dollars. But it didn’t. And it won’t. Because in the end, no matter how great the acting, direction, writing, music, etc. all is - it’s still a movie about a website. It doesn’t change the world or the medium, and it probably won’t be as entertaining to everyone as it was to me. Still, it does absolutely nothing wrong, once it starts. Also, I can’t imagine how less interesting the film would have been if it was actually all true, since accuracy is a liability when you’re making a film about people who are still alive.
Also, just a quick mention - Andrew Garfield ( the actor who plays Eduardo) is going to be the next Spiderman in the rebooted film franchise which will probably make a few billion dollars. So anyone who feels bad for his character in the film shouldn’t because the actor already is the next big thing in hollywood.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Twisted drivel, waste of time, money goes the popular rhetoric. I missed it on the theatre (courtesy advance bookings in its first week after all the hype, and the negative publicity, thereafter) but finally happened to see it last weekend.
Some scattered thoughts.
Great cinematography, hackneyed plot (that's not something to fret about in B'wood) but executed well, a few wasted characters (Kangana Ranawat for one) and a delectably delicious Mr Roshan. Every frame. Every move. [Girls, you won't tire watching him]. A pretty decent start from newcomer Barbara Mori. Convincing as an actor. [She smiles a smile you can't lie to].
The green-eyed couple have their moments but I felt the Hrithik and Barbara's overdone on-the-run sequences took away from what could've otherwise metamorphosed into a beautiful love story. Hrithik's narrative in the opening shot -- Kites, fly in the sky, free... dancing in the wind....with no worries...like two lovers...they meet, they fight, they embrace...they almost become one...but it is not the will of the kites...that makes them dance...coz someone else always holds the strings -- is 'supposed' to be reflective of the tragic climax but it instead bespeaks of their fizzles-out-even-before-it-takes-off chemistry ;)
I wish there was more of them to watch than the repetitive shootout scenes.
The music is hummable. Dil Kyu Yeh Mera with KK on the vocals is the best in the album. Title track Kites in the Sky in Mr Roshan's voice is mediocre at best.
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Delhi seems to have become a hot spot for Bollywood directors, of late. Hum Tum, Cheeni Kum, Fanaa, Dilli 6, Paa, Milenge 2 (haven't seen that one, though), Aisha, Do Dooni Chaar, the-yet-to-be-released Delhi Belly, and now Band Baaja Baraat. Yash Chopra seems particularly enamoured by the city, his second love. [How can we forget his first (anyone?)] Silsila, Kabhi Kabhi, Chandni, Lamhe are some of his films extensively shot in Delhi. For now, I have my eyes on B3. Anushka Sharma may not have the looks to swoon over, but certainly gets her mojo working with her screen presence and effortless acting. Besides, the title track sounds funnn!
Cute couple. Cuter chemistry. Imran Khan, Deepika Padukone. I now seem to have gotten use to Deepika's (in;) acting skills. Imran leaves an in-sight-in-mind impact. Or is that expecting too much from a four-films old actor? [Titbits - the boy appeared as a child artist in Qayamat Se Qayamat tak (1988) and Jo Jeeta Wohi Sikander (1992), starring mammu Amir Khan. I'll keep my eyes more open the next time I watch these films].
Shahrukh Bola "Khoobsurat Hai Tu"
I was listening to the title track last night - Shahrukh bola khoobsurat (meaning beautiful) hai tu. All sounds well until... aur khoobsurat ho gayi main (sung by the newcomer lead, Preetika Chawla). Now that's a serious personality disorder. Why on earth wouldn't you believe you're beautiful until someone came and told you that? Anyway, for all Shahrukh fans, Shahrukh makes a 20-minute appearance in the film. Releasing on November 19, it's all set to give competition (it might just ;) to Guzarish.
Monday, November 1, 2010
The film is a quick-paced, action-packed thriller that unravels (or rather mystifies) as quick as lightning, keeping you hooked till the last shot. One scene spawns an idea, the other leaves you pondering over its veracity!
CIA officer Evelyn Salt (Angelina Jolie), is done for the day and about to leave office, when she's asked to stay over, to interview a Soviet defector, named Orlov, who has come to their headquarters to give information about Day X, a Russian-masterminded operation that will eventually lead to the destruction of the U.S.
The operation will begin with the murder of the Russian president at the U.S vice-president's funeral in Manhattan. And the agent who will carry this out is Evelyn Salt.
Orlov's neural scans tell he has been truthful all through. Salt is on the run thereafter, stoking suspicion. What ensues is a relentlessly pacy, adrenaline-rousing adventure. The film is an out and out entertainer but not without loopholes. What explains Jolie's (unscathed!) escape, from the car, that falls from the flyover (that's quite a height), crashing onto another car? (She uncuffs her hands and
The good part, nevertheless, is that the 100-minute film leaves you with no time to ponder over its irrationalities. If you can care less about the physical impossibilities and far-fetchedness of the storyline, it's a fun watch!