Best Bollywood films: 2013

I cannot do a Best Indian films of 2013 list because not many Indian films got released in my city. The majority of titles that made it to cinemas were some of the bigger Bollywood and Punjabi films. One of the biggest disappointments of 2013 is that Ship of Theseus never got a Canadian release. The much praised film premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival in 2012 but never touched Canadian shores after that. The fate of Ship of Theseus puts things in perspective. If a film praised at TIFF cannot find proper distribution, then one fears for the fate of other Indian titles who fail to travel the film festival circuit. Thankfully, there were some worthy Bollywood Films made in 2013. Here are the top 3 Bollywood films seen in 2013:

1. Aurangzeb (Atul Sabharwal)

 

Atul Sabharwal’s film smartly fuses the family-political battles from Shyam Benegal’s Kalyug (1981) with the double character element found in Kagemusha and numerous 1970-80’s Indian films. The end result is a film that feels familiar yet is still unique given the contemporary setting in Gurgaon where real estate deals are ruthless.

2. Saheb Biwi Aur Gangster Returns (Tigmanshu Dhulia)



Tigmanshu Dhulia heightens the sexual and political elements aspects from the first Saheb Biwi Aur Gangster (2011) film thereby creating a riveting follow-up chapter to the story of a man holding onto his crumbling kingdom. In comparison to the first film, Mahie Gill’s Biwi (wife) character is far more bolder and gives an assured, seductive performance while the Gangster character has more substance because of Irrfan Khan’s addition. Jimmy Shergill continues to thrive in what may be his finest on-screen role to date.

3. Lootera (Vikramaditya Motwane)

 

At first, Lootera looks like another Bollywood love story but thankfully, the love story is a facade which gives way allowing a Bengali inspired technically rich film to emerge. The sound design in Lootera is mesmerizing and allows everyday sounds to filter through the frame when needed. As a bonus, this is a rare Bollywood film that does not show snow as romantic. The first half of the film is infused with color but when the second half shifts to a colder landscape, the color is drained from the frame creating a cold sensation anticipating death.

Other Mentions

Bombay Talkies has many memorable moments in all the four shorts but overall Dibakar Banerjee’s segment steals the show.

Pankaj Kapur is at his intoxicating best in Matru Ki Bijlee Ka Mandola.

Rishi Kapoor's stand-out performances in Aurangzeb and D-Day highlights that his impressive evil character role in Agneepath was not a one time acting decision. He is still doing romantic roles but it is impressive to see how he has reinvented himself.

The wicked ending of Raj Kumar Gupta's Ghanchakkar stays long in the memory, especially since nothing in the film prepares one to expect such a dark turn of events. The ending takes a path that 99.9% of Indian films would never take. For that reason alone, the film deserves a nod.

Bejoy Nambiar's David has a calm beauty to it although that beauty does not fully get transmitted until the final moments of the film.

Remo’s ABCD (Any Body Can Dance) features some of the best choreographed dances seen in an Indian movie. A lot of the moves are inspired from shows such as American’s Best Dance Crew and So You Think You Can Dance but the film manages to incorporate Indian dances beautifully in the mix. The casting of Lauren Gottlieb from So You Think You Can Dance highlights the worthy decision to cast trained dancers in the film.

Agneepath

Agneepath (2012, India, Karan Malhotra)

Karan Malhotra’s Agneepath conveys the essence of 1980's Bollywood revenge tales in a technically sharp framework that smartly uses silence when needed and in other moments, confidently lets the heightened background score serve as an emotional guide. The end result is that Malhotra’s film is a completely different beast from Mukul Anand’s 1990 Agneepath. The 2012 film cannot be called a remake by any standards and is a true homage as noted by producer Karan Johar at the start of the film. Karan Johar’s father, Yash Johar, was the producer of the original film so understandably Karan wanted to do his father proud and that is exactly what the entire team of the 2012 film have achieved.

Of course, doing a scene-by-scene remake of the original film would have been an impossible task because the 1990 film was powered by a riveting performance by Amitabh Bachchan who channeled the voice of Marlon Brando’s Vito Corleone (Godfather) in his portrayal of Vijay Dinanath Chavan. There were many memorable characters in Mukul Anand’s film but none towered over Amitabh's character. However, in Malhotra’s film the character of Vijay (played by Hrithik Roshan) does not displace the other characters as Roshan turns the anger of the original character inward and hides his burning revenge quite nicely. Instead, it is the two villains in Malhotra’s film who manage to steal the show.

Kancha & Rauf Lala

Sanjay Dutt plays the drug lord Kancha, a behemoth monster, whose appearance terrifies those around him. In fact, he is so terrifying that even he is afraid of his own reflection. His fear has roots in his childhood when he was picked on by other kids for his ugly appearance and whenever Kancha looks at a mirror, he is transported back to his painful past. In two instances in the film, Kancha smashes a mirror which dares show him his face. A mirror is his weak point much like fire was Anna’s (Nana Patekar) in Parinda. In Vidhu Vinod Chopra’s classic 1990 film, Anna was a fierce gangster whose childhood fear of fire was his ultimate undoing. In Agneepath, Vijay is not privy to the knowledge of Kancha’s weakness and is unable to use a mirror to defeat Kancha.

Kancha quotes the Gita in a similar manner to Manoj Bhajpai’s character from Aks but overall he appears to be a cartoonish villain much like Amrish Puri’s Mogambo from Mr. India. Therefore, the responsibility of portraying pure evil falls to Rishi Kapoor, an actor not known for playing a negative character.

Rishi Kapoor’s ruthless portrayal of Rauf Lala comes as a real surprize given the warm loving characters that Kapoor has played in the past. Yet, Rishi Kapoor is able to extract enough charm from his past characters and transform it into the sinister Rauf Lala who appears to be trustworthy when needed and is ruthless when he wants to eliminate his enemies. He also does not expose his true emotions to those around him, including his own son. In a key moment in the film, Rauf's son is surprized when Lala drops a hint that one day the trusted Vijay will be bumped off. Rauf Lala delivers these lines while smiling and lovingly waving at Vijay. Many ruthless villains often compromise or grovel in their final moments but Rauf Lala is evil until his last breath and manages to unleash the violent animal inside of Vijay. Vijay does not want to resort to pure violence but Rauf Lala incites him. This incitement echoes a famous scene from Priyadarshan’s Virasat when Anil Kapoor’s character of Shakti Thakur asks his opponent to back off because Shakti does not want to become a "janwar" (animal) like his opponent. But when his opponent does not back down, Shakti has no choice but to resort to ultimate violence.

The Indian film industry has seen an incredible range of villains from Gabbar (Amjad Khan in Sholay) to Anna (Nana Patekar in Parinda) to Bhiku Mhatre (Manoj Bajpai in Satya) that it is hard to imagine that anyone could add a new dimension in portraying a gangster. Therefore, full credit to Rishi Kapoor for carving out a unique persona with his portrayal of Rauf Lala.

---

Finally....

Katrina Kaif nails the "Chikni Chameli" song.


The song is not required in the film but Kaif’s energetic & technically perfect performance ensures that the song keeps up the frenzied tempo of the film. The song itself manages to evoke elements from three other memorable Bollywood numbers -- "Beedi" (Omkara), "Humko Aajkal" (Madhuri Dixit in Sailaab) and "Jumma Chumma De De" (Hum).

Finally, an energetic supercharged trailer

In the latest Cannes roundup, David Hudson has put up a trailer for Bollywood: The Greatest Love Story Ever Told co-directed by Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra (Rang De Basanti, Aks) and Jeff Zimbalist (Favela Rising, The Two Escobars).



It is one of the best trailers I have seen in a while. In just a few minutes, it manages to capture the wild crazy energy of Bollywood complete with the sultry item numbers, hot & wet dreamy women, lavish songs, mega superstars, sinister villains (Gabbar....mouhaha) and crazy action sequences. Even though I spend a lot of time complaining about the worst that Bollywood has to offer, I cannot deny the fact that it is the cinema that I grew up with. A huge chunk of my cinematic memory is associated with it and plenty of images and moments that I cannot shake off for a long time.

There are many cinematic gems I am looking forward to from Cannes and now I can add this documentary to the top of the list purely from a guilty pleasure point of view :) If the film is half as good as the trailer, then it would be an amazing bonus.

Interestingly, the documentary is co-directed by Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra. Just a day ago I revisited parts of Mehra's Rang De Basanti, a film that impressed me for the most part but also frustrated with a few minor elements. Still, it was a truly memorable cinematic experience watching it in a theater. The title song is remarkable and even now I am moved by Daler Mehndi & Chitra's vocals and A.R Rahman's mesmerizing music:

Band Baaja Baaraat -- Dilli Delights

Band Baaja Baaraat (2010, India, Maneesh Sharma)

Maneesh Sharma makes an impressive debut with Band Baaja Baaraat, a film that does the tough job of beautifully portraying Delhi's charm while also juggling an engaging relationship tale. Now, showcasing Delhi's charm is not an easy task to pull off and traditionally the city has been underrepresented in Indian cinema. Mumbai is the home of Bollywood and amply depicted by both Indian and foreign directors, while Kolkata forms the hub of Bengali directors and often seems to catch the eye of other Indian filmmakers seeking to add a historic charm to their stories. The exotic beauty of Goa and Jaipur is also nicely captured by Indian directors while for the most part Delhi’s cinematic presence is restricted to a few token shots of India Gate, Qutab Minar, Rashtrapati Bhavan and Chandni Chowk. Of course, Delhi’s cinematic shyness can be understood to some extent as it is not a city that openly seduces any visitor on a first glance. In fact, the almost always grayish city appears to be designed to push away a first time visitor as it does not possess the vibrancy of Mumbai, the beaches of Goa or the opulent palaces of Jaipur nor does it boast a central core where the best of the city is on display. The circular Connaught Place may be a busy visiting center but it does not possess an immediate wow factor. On the other hand, the charm of Connaught Place is discovered by spending time, walking from block to block, and unearthing some precious treasure tucked away in a corner. That patient examination is required for the rest of the city as well. The true charms of Delhi are locked away in individual urban areas/colonies located hours apart and discovering the true beauty of the city requires time and energy that most visitors may not be able to afford. When one reaches a colony then one has to take time to discover a magnificent bookstore, a marvelous dhaba or a charming restaurant. On top of that, Delhi is a city that is haunted by history at almost every corner. Like Rome, Delhi’s past in the form of ruins oversee the millions traveling across the city every day. Such history is easily overlooked when one is crawling through the city’s numerous traffic packed lanes.

Thankfully over the last decade, Delhi has gotten a closer cinematic look. Mira Nair portrays a bit of the city’s beauty in Monsoon Wedding, Dibakar Banerjee’s trio of films, Khosla Ka Ghosla, Oye Lucky Lucky Oye and Love, Sex aur Dhokha are wholly rooted in Delhi’s essence, Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra’s Rang De Basanti captures some of the city’s youthful attitude and energy, Siddharth Anand Kumar & Ankur Tewari’s Let’s Enjoy perfectly depicts the farmhouse party scene in Delhi and Anand Kumar’s Jugaad puts a humorous spin on the real issue of sealing commercial shops in Delhi and accurately shows how things can still get done despite obstructions. Ofcourse, not all Delhi based films have worked out too well. Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra’s Delhi 6 did not have the authentic feel like Rang De Basanti did while Anand Kumar’s Delhii Heights could not move beyond weakly etched characters living in apartment complexes of Gurgaon. If a filmmaker has to make a good film about Delhi, then they must be willing to embrace the city's beauty and ugliness while accurately portraying characters raised in the city’s essence.

Maneesh Sharma has done his homework and as a result his Band Baaja Baaraat can now add its name to films that do Delhi justice and in a sense his film contains a tiny spirit of the above films. BBB combines the energy of Rang De Basanti, the wedding element of Monsoon Wedding, true Dilli dialogue/characters of Dibakar Banerjee’s films, the farmhouses of Let’s Enjoy and the improvisational aspect of Jugaad.

The tagline of Band Baaja Baaraat is “Shadi aapki, tension hamaari” (your wedding, our tension). Now all weddings are a tense affair but a wedding in Delhi brings an extra set of challenges. Delhi's wedding season is just a few months long and based on the auspicious dates given by a priest, only a handful of dates get the biggest number of weddings per year. For example, back on Dec 13 2006, 30,000 weddings were held in a single day and in 2010, the added lure of Valentine’s day & an auspicious date meant that 16,000 weddings were held on Feb 14 alone. Such high numbers stand out but in reality, it is quite common to find thousands of weddings taking place on a single day each wedding season. In a city of more than 13 million people, this huge number of weddings on a single day creates an extra burden on the road systems especially since the shortage of wedding venues requires people to travel from one end of the city to another, not to mention the multiple baaraats and bands also attempting to make their way across the city. On top of that, a lot of the priests and wedding bands are double or triple booked for the same time slot. It is not uncommon to find priests rushing from one wedding to another and band’s arriving late to a wedding because of their other commitments. In such scenarios, holding a wedding in Delhi is a massive challenging affair. So the story of wedding planners set in Delhi makes complete sense.

Band Baaja Baaraat highlights some of the challenges of holding shaadis in either tight alleys of Delhi or in large lavish Sainik farmhouses. With all the challenges, the only way a wedding can be successful is with a degree of improvisation and this is accurately shown in Sharma’s film. One example illustrated is when the wedding planners hit a hurdle in trying to find a caterer within a budget, they get a valid tip from Maqsood (Neeraj Sood) the flowerist. Such tips are common in Delhi where it seems a marriage cannot take place without depending on a contact’s contact. The wedding details are shown in a humorous yet accurate manner but the film really shines in its depiction of the relationship between the two lead characters of Shruti and Bittoo (played brilliantly by Anushka Sharma and Ranveer Singh respectively). There was a time in the late 1970’s and 1980’s when Yash Chopra’s films went beneath the surface to get at the core of a relationship but ever since his son Aditya Chopra entered the frame in the mid 1990’s, relationships shown in Yash Raj films are all superficial and restricted to cute infatuations. However, the ugly nasty side of relationships is remarkably shown in BBB. After Shruti & Bittoo end up sleeping together, their relationship gets naturally complicated. A difference in expectation leads to a conflict where the two end up becoming bitter enemies and end up at each other’s throats like a married couple. Yet, even in their moments of hatred, the two are able to work side by side with each other because of their strong friendship. A good friendship is essential to any successful relationship and in this regard, Shruti and Bittoo’s interactions make sense. The two are able to work so well because they are aware of each other's likes and dislikes. Throughout the film, the two characters behave according to their personalities and as a result, everything that occurs in the film is entirely believable and does not require a leap of faith.

BBB also shines on the musical front. With the exception of the Dum Dum Song, all the other musical numbers have a place in the film. The opening credit song perfectly lays the framework for the two character’s history and gives us an idea about their personalities. Most Bollywood films spend three hours covering the same ground the opening credit sequence does in a matter of minutes. The title song is perfectly used to increase the tempo of the film and Ainvayi Ainvayi is an infectious dance number.

However, Dum Dum is out of place although it is a lavish over the top number found in a Karan Johar or Aditya Chopra film. If the price of making a fine film like BBB means having a throw away song, then it is a small price to pay.

It is indeed a pleasant surprize to find a wonderful film can still be made from a first time director embedded in the current Bollywood studio model but interestingly, Yash Raj Films have previously given another new director a chance to shine. In Chak De India, partly shot in Delhi, Shimit Amin was allowed to freely move his camera around the newcomer actresses and was not required to ensure the camera stayed focused only on Shah Rukh Khan. BBB remarkably does away with any big stars, with Anushka Sharma the only recognizable face and this is only her third film, after she made her debut opposite SRK in Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi. Lastly, Band Baaja Baaraat also shows that it is entirely possible to make an entertaining film without requiring the audience to “leave their brains at the door.”

Revisiting Mumbai, RGV style

While Indian crime films has been around for a few decades, they remain relatively unknown in North America outside of the Indian community. Until the late 1980's, the crime flicks were not really considered a pure genre per say as they were mixed with other genres such as action/revenge flicks. That changed in 1989 when the genre started to take form when Vidhu Vinod Chopra’s Parinda broke new ground with its ruthless portrayal of the Mumbai underworld. The film still stands tall with its story of two brothers whose lives are under the watch of a ruthless yet emotionally fragile gangster. The memorable characters were played by Anil Kapoor, Jackie Shroff, Madhuri Dixit and ofcourse Nana Patekar whose portrayal as the gangster “Anna” stole the show. Almost a decade later in 1998, Ram Gopal Varma ushered in the next phase of gangster films, first with Satya and then followed by Company. Dozens of other Mumbai based gangster films then followed, directed either by Ram Gopal Varma’s protégés or first time directors. Yet, query an average North American film critic and he/she will not know any of these films or filmmakers. Danny Boyle probably never heard of any of these film-makers either until he started work on Slumdog Millionaire. Boyle has admitted being influenced by Ram Gopal Varma while filming Slumdog Millionaire but influenced is too light of a word because most of the slum shots in Slumdog.. are identically framed to those found either in Satya or Company. It seems that while Danny Boyle is busy getting praises for showing the "real India", the few decades of groundwork laid by talented Indian directors is being ignored. Ofcourse, there are exceptions as David Bordwell and Noel Vera noticed these similarities. Most critics in India noticed this right away and Deepa Gahlot is just one of them.

When compared to Parinda, Satya, Company and even to the marvelous Black Friday, Slumdog.. is weaker and unable to hold its own. On a positive note, Boyle's feature has a vibrant look as opposed to the darkish atmosphere of most Indian crime films, especially any RGV production. Slumdog.. can also boast to have utilized A.R Rahman’s music as most Indian gangster films don’t feature any of Rahman’s soul stirring pieces. In fact, Rahman has never composed for any of RGV’s gangster flicks.

I had wanted to take a closer at Indian crime films since last year but didn’t get around to it. So as a way of making amends, here’s a quick look at Ram Gopal Varma’s Satya and Company.

---

Satya -- darkness with a touch of morality

"Mumbai..." A city that never sleeps, a city that dreams while being awake...

One can lose track of how many Bollywood films start with words along those lines. Most films are compelled to explain how Mumbai is the place where newcomers come to to fulfill their dreams or how the city is like a ruthless animal that chews up people everyday. As such words are narrated on the screen, one can see images of the city.

One will see slums or poverty but the camera will not be obsessed with that aspect of the city but will instead use these settings as backgrounds for dissecting the lives of the characters.


We are normally introduced to the main character right at the start of the narration, which is what happens in this film as well. The title character of Satya is played by J.D. Chakravarthi. (note: this picture is from a later point in the film).


In the film's context, Satya isn't a hero. In fact, there are no heroes in this film just shades of grey and dark. In Parinda most people would cite the role of the main gangster (Anna played by Nana Patekar) as the most memorable, similarly in Satya the real show stealer is Manoj Bajpai as the gangster Bhiku Mhatre. Bhiku Mhatre is the type of role that is called career defining and amazingly a decade after playing the role, Bajpai has never been able to get away from the shadow of Bhiku Mhatre.

It doesn't take Satya too long to cross paths with the underworld. His friendship with Bhiku saves him but also makes him a marked man. The following shot is another one found in most crime films as the villains (or heroes depending on your viewpoint) overlook the wonderful city and discuss their lives or talk of conquering the city.


Vidya, the girl next door played by Urmila Matondkar.


There was a time when it was impossible to think Ram Gopal Varma could ever make a film without Urmila but he has moved on. In Satya, Urmila's character is the voice of reason, the pure uncorrupted woman who falls for Satya. But once she learns of his underworld ties, she abandons him.


The rest of the gang. Saurabh Shukla also co-wrote the film and features as Kallu mama.

Alcohol is not too far from most shots in such films and neither is the police torture room. In fact, a gangster film has yet to be made without a trip to the jail cell.


Most people would not know who Makrand Deshpande is as he usually only gets a few minutes role in most Bollywood films. But he makes each second count and his presence in a movie is always a good sign for me.

Overall, Satya was an amazing collaboration where everything clicked -- the screenplay, the technical aspects, the music which was intense when it needed to be and tender on other occasions, and the acting ofcourse. Although the weakest acting was probably the title role of Satya.

The downside of Satya's success was that every gangster film tried to imitate it and even RGV tried to use a similar template in his other gangster films.

---

Company -- Phones and Guns

While Satya had a moral compass in the form of Urmila's character who believed that crime didn't pay, Ram Gopal Varma removed any concept of morality from Company. His film showed that a life of crime is seductive not only to women who sought out gangsters but also for the police who admired the gangsters. In the film, the honest inspector played by Mohanlal

actually admires the friendship between the main gangster Mallik (Ajay Devgan),

and his friend turned rival Chandu (Vivek Oberoi).


The film shows how cell phones allow gangsters to remotely run their business via locations such as Kenya or other parts of Asia. The main gangsters, Mallik and Chandu, leave India as they are on the run but all they have to do is make a call back to Mumbai for their hunch-men to carry out the orders. Which is why the latter half of Company features shots of someone either on the phone or someone getting shot. Even while Chandu is in prison, he is handed a cell so he can talk with Mallik. And naturally the film ends with the constant ringing of phones.

The rapid fast communication via cell phones also leads to a lot of mistaken killings as the lack of face to face meetings leads to plenty of misunderstandings.

Vivek Oberoi made an impressive acting debut in Company but his character still paled compared to Bhiku Mhatre.


The following shot from Company can be found in Slumdog... In fact, the slanted camera angles from Company are seen quite a bit in some of the slum chase scenes in Slumdog..


Overall, Company is not bad but it is a lesser film compared to Satya.

---

One bothersome aspect of Ram Gopal Varma's films is that he takes real life gangsters and drafts films around them, while refusing to openly admit that but still giving enough clues as to his inspirations. For example, he directed Company in 2002 and then his production company released D. in 2005. Put the two titles together and you get D Company, the real life crime gang. Fans of RGV droll over the reality that his films show but there isn't much reality but glorification of the gangster life. I wish that RGV one day makes gangster films which have nothing do with real life criminals so that way he can finally make a true gritty film without being afraid of any consequences. Ofcourse, I am assuming the reason he portrays the gangsters as cool is because he does not want to anger the real life gangsters.

Bollywood Hype x 3

Billu Barber (2009, Priyadarshan)

So much for the controversy regarding the title. Even though the title has the word "barber" in it, the film actually utilizes barely ten minutes of the character’s profession. Sure there are scenes in a barber shop but it could easily have been set in a chai stall or a corner store. There is a warm hearted story hidden in this film but like most bollywood films the final product is ruined because of needless songs and producer intervention. In this case since the producer is Shah Rukh Khan, the film ends up being an ode to a best of SRK’s filmi moments. In Billu Barber SRK plays Sahir Khan, a mega Bollywood star. Even though SRK takes on a different first name, he still manages to insert clips and posters from most of his films in Billu Barber and uses his “King Khan”. When he is not busy promoting himself, SRK also uses the film to clarify his positions regarding the rivalries with Aamir Khan and Akshay Kumar. It is hard to know if a different director would have had the strength to prevent SRK from hijacking the film and making it into a self-promotion tool. The only recent exception seems to be Shimit Amin whose Chak De India managed to prevent SRK from hogging the camera and gave the young actresses a chance to shine but there are plenty of other directors in Bollywood like Farah Khan, Aditya Chopra or Karan Johar who pander to SRK’s every need. It is unfortunate to see Priyadarshan’s name added to that list now.

Another disappointing aspect of the film is that Priyadarshan took the easy way out and borrowed elements from his Malamal Weekly film, another comedy set in a village and tried to implement a similar style of comedy with identical themed jokes. The only saving grace of the film is Irrfan Khan and a charming Lara Dutta. Even though all the songs are quite bad, Deepika Padukone looks stunning in the opening video. Ok, stunning does not do justice. She sizzles...while the rest of the film is stuck in averageness.

Rating: 5.5/10

---

Luck, by Chance (2009, Zoya Akhtar)

Over the last decade or so there have been quite a few films made about the cut throat and ruthless nature of the Bollywood film industry such as Rangeela, Main Bhi Madhuri Dixit Banna Chahti Houn, Om Shanti Om, Khoya Khoya Chand, Superstar, Bollywood Calling and King of Bollywood. These films were either in the form of a parody or even tried to show the serious side of things. Plus there were also two very good documentaries such as Bollywood Bound and Sunset Bollywood. Was there place for one more film to be added to this list? Zoya Akhtar thought so and decided to try her luck by setting her debut film about Bollywood’s film studio system. Unfortunately, her film has nothing new to add to the existing view of tinseltown. In fact, her film verifies all the cliches and images people have about Bollywood. There are some moments of genuine delight in the film but in the end Zoya takes the easy way out and reduces her film to a tabloid gossip tale of stardom and affairs. Sure there are some inside jokes and some real life Bollywood actors play a parody of themselves such as Sanjay Kapoor and Dimple Kapadia. But overall, the film is a run of the mill effort and not something one would expect from someone whose family has been involved with some memorable efforts in Indian cinema.

Rating: 7/10

---

Chandini Chowk to China (2009, Nikhil Advani)

Akshay Kumar’s Singh is Kinng was one of the most hyped Bollywood films of 2008 and it also turned out to be one of the worst films of 2008. And Akshay Kumar’s Chandini Chowk.. kicked off Bollywood’s 2009 calendar year with as much hype but thankfully the film is not as inept as Singh is Kinng was. Even though Chandini Chowk.. is B-grade film that brings back memories of the worst of Bollywood from the 1970’s and 80’s, the film does contain a few hilarious scenes where Akshay Kumar is able to show why he is the current comedic master in Bollywood.

Rating: 4/10

Bollywood: 2008 Best Film List

Top 10 films

1) Oye Lucky Lucky Oye (Dibakar Banerjee)

Dibakar Banerjee's second feature is a rare thing -- an intelligent entertaining comedy! Plus Abhay Deol puts in a wicked performance while the little details in good old Delhi are captured perfectly.

2) Rock On (Abhishek Kapoor)

Dreams and friendships are easy to come by in one's youth but as one gets older both start to fade away when the everyday realities of job and money demands attention. Given those sentiments, Abhishek Kapoor does a fine job of capturing the essence of relationships in his second directorial feature [note: correction added. Thanks Nitesh]. Plus the excellent vocals of Farhan Akhtar and the touching performance of Arjun Rampal easily make this one of the best films of the year.

3) Mumbai Meri Jaan (Nishikant Kamat)

A heartwarming film about a few characters trying to deal with the aftermath of the Mumbai train blasts in 2006. The film starts off perfectly when a discussion over Zidane's sending off in the World Cup final turns into a debate about Muslim brotherhood and ends on a tender note with a minute of silence to the tune of Mohammed Rafi & Geeta Dutt's beautiful song yeh hai Bombay meri jaan..

4) Mithya (Rajat Kapoor)

Bollywood's talented gang of 4 (Rajat Kapoor, Saurabh Shukla, Ranvir Shorey & Vinay Pathak) rope in Naseeruddin Shah and Neha Dhupia in this highly creative adaptation of Kurosawa's Kagemusha. A dark descend into Mumbai's underworld and even the human soul.

5) Mukhbiir (Mani Shankar)

An interesting look at three hot beds of terrorism in India (North East, Hyderabad and Mumbai) through the eyes of an informer attempting to break into the gang's inner circle.

6) Welcome to Sajjanpur (Shyam Benegal)

Shyam Benegal's film is a breath of fresh air amid the congested Bollywood films set in the major cities. The films takes the story of a simplistic letter writer in an ordinary village and adds the complicated emotions of jealously yet still manages to render everything with an air of pureness and innocence hardly found in Indian cinema anymore.

7) Chamku (Kabeer Kaushik)

A Bihari revenge tale goes full circle with a stop-over in Mumbai.

8) A. Wednesday (Neeraj Pandey)

A gripping thriller about an innocent man taking revenge for the carnage that inflicted Mumbai in 2006.

9) Dasvidaniya (Shashant Shah)

The gang of 4 (Rajat Kapoor, Saurabh Shukla, Ranvir Shorey & Vinay Pathak) are back with Neha Dhupia. This time around Vinay Pathak gets to play two personas just like Ranvir Shorey did in Mithya. While Mithya was dark, Dasvidaniya is a bright shining light. The story of a man wanting to accomplish a few things before he dies may not be unique but the performances of all the secondary characters are quite strong. Plus the film maintains a pleasant tone throughout.

10) Mere Baap Pehle Aap (Priyadarshan)

A funny film about the role reversal that takes place between parents and their children as the parents age. Plus, the cute smile and expressions of Genelia D’Souza are a pleasure to watch.

Some other memorable moments:

Aamir:Raj Kumar Gupta did an excellent job in adapting the story of Cavite to the Mumbai slums in his debut feature Aamir. A worthy film which raised some excellent observances about 'victims' and 'villains'.

Priyanka Chopra turned in the best female performance of the year in Fashion. Her transformation from a cheery aspiring model to a cold hearted fashion superstar was stellar.

One of the funniest cinematic moments of the year came in the film Dostana, a story about two straight guys (Kunal & Sameer) who pretend to be gay in order to share a Miami apartment. Sameer's mother (Kiron Kher) is shocked to learn that her son is gay but Neha (Priyanka Chopra) tries to comfort the mother by saying that "pyar aandha hota hai" (love is blind). To which the mother hilariously replies that love is not so blind that it can't differentiate between a boy and a girl. The dialogue "love is blind" is one of the most over-used dialogues in Bollywood films so it was refreshing to see how the writers managed to get some more mileage out of this over-used phrase.

And finally a song....

Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na marked the debut of Aamir Khan's nephew Imran Khan. So it was fitting that Imran danced in a video that paid tribute to key aspects from three of his uncle's films over the last two decades. The song Paapu can't dance tipped a hat to the song Papa Kehte Hain from Aamir Khan's debut film Qayamat se Qayamat Tak, highlighted the spoiled rich kids shown in Jo Jeeta Wohi Sikander and had the energy of the song Koye Kahe.. from Dil Chahta Hai. The video was infectious, cute and delightful. It was probably the only Bollywood video this year that I could not resist dancing to everytime it came on.

---

Overall, it was a pretty good year in Bollywood as there were some outstanding films. Ofcourse, the disasters were much more than previous years forcing me to give zero rating for atleast 5 films and rating below 5/10 for quite a few more. But in order to enjoy the good films, one has to pass through the muddy waters of the awful ones.

The Art of the Informer

informer

1. a person who informs against another, esp. for money or other reward.
2. a person who informs or communicates information or news; informant.

spy

1. a person employed by a government to obtain secret information or intelligence about another, usually hostile, country, esp. with reference to military or naval affairs.
2. a person who keeps close and secret watch on the actions and words of another or others.
3. a person who seeks to obtain confidential information about the activities, plans, methods, etc., of an organization or person, esp. one who is employed for this purpose by a competitor: an industrial spy.

Informers and Spies are old as human civilization. For whenever a great power (be it a nation or an empire) existed, there were people who utilized informers or spies to find ways to bring down that power. While the terms spy and informer are used interchangeably quite often, there is a subtle difference between a spy and an informer. A spy might employ multiple informers at any given time but an informer is always alone on the lowest rung of the intelligence ladder. One can call an informer the tiny particle that quietly resides in the nucleus of an organization, quietly observing the dance of the electrons and those other highly charged particles. An informer gathers whatever valuable piece of information they can and then has to find a way to relay that information to others on the outside. Now this is not to say that a spy cannot become an informer. From time to time, a spy would have to go undercover on their own and embed themselves within an organization and act as an informer. In fact, some spies might even have graduated from the level of an informer. Another difference between the two would be related to the transmission of information. The informer provides concrete information, something that they have heard or seen. Whereas, spies also engage in the game of misinformation whereby they circulate some lies from time to time to either cause a reaction or to even fish out the truth. The spread of misinformation also has the danger of a "blowback" when the misinformation results in reactions that have dangerous consequences. For example, Steve Coll's book Ghost Wars hints at how misinformation might have contributed to some of the mess that resulted in the Russian occupation of Afghanistan, a mess that is still to be sorted out.

Through the years, films have been packed with plenty of worthy examples of informers. Titles such as Govind Nihalani's Drohkaal, Mike Newell's Donnie Brasco, Wai-keung Lau & Alan Mak's Infernal Affairs remade by Martin Scorsese as The Departed come to mind. In Drohkaal and Donnie Brasco, police get an informer to break through a terrorist cell and a mafia gang respectively as those are the common settings found in most informer films. But the genius of Infernal affairs was that it simultaneously showed informers existing both in the police world and the mafia gang, thus resulting in a brilliant calculated game of chess. In a way, Infernal Affairs took the complicated world of international espionage and adapted it to the street level of informers.

As different as all these above films were, they all had one thing in common -- the informer was a tough man able to withstand the rigors of living with the enemy. On the other hand, Mani Shankar has done something very unique with Mukhbiir in that his informer character is a 19 year old lad. The young age of the informer gives the film a very different complexion and gives flexibility to his character in three areas:

Innocence: Since the informer (Kailash played by Sammir Dattani) is quite young, one can believe the look of innocence on his face. In fact, it is this innocence that allows the informer to warm up to a gang leader in Hyderabad and to win the leader's sister's lustful affection. At times Kailash appears to be a little child at heart and his playful nature allows him to befriend a young boy thus easing the path to a critical victory in the end -- the young boy is in charge of a fax machine in a nearby store and Kailash comes up with a very believable agreement with the boy to fax key secrets to the police.

Lack of history: The fact that Kailash is an orphan plays a key role in him looking up to his police officer boss (Rathod played by Om Puri) as a father figure. This relationship establishes a feeling of warmth and mutual trust and is crucial to the story's development. Although, at times one gets a sense that Rathod is using Kailash for his own needs but Rathod's wife, who treats Kailash like a son, ensures that Rathod promises to lookout for the boy. Also, since Kailash has no real history of any relationships, he can easily move from one city to another.

Lack of Self: This is the most important aspect of Kailash's young age. The fact that he has not seen enough of life or truly discovered his identity ensures that he can easily live in any environment. At the film's start, we find Kailash living in North East India and he eventually moves to Hyderabad before being positioned to the underworld circle in Mumbai. Kailash is able to easily slip into another's identity and is quite comfortable no matter where he has to stay. In the film's third assignment in Mumbai, Kailash has to covert to Islam. Quite remarkably, he is able to convert without any difficulty and gives himself fully over to his new religion. This is proved useful in a key scene where he is drugged unknowingly and put through a lie detector test. Any other person might have blurted the truth out but since Kailash believes completely in his new identity, he passes the test with flying colours.

Overall, Mukhbiir is a real surprize discovery. In fact, just like the character of Kailash, the film appears to have slipped under the radar. Mani Shankar has shown some promise in his earlier films, especially in 16 December, but this time he gets it completely right by properly giving the time to develop his character and even the situations that Kailash lands himself in. There are plenty of relevant details shown on how information can be transmitted or the degree to which Kailash has to risk his life. A perfect example of the level of detail shown in the film occurs at the film's start where Kailash drops a sketch of a terrorist from the travelling bus. Rathod picks up the sketch, takes a picture of it using his cell phone and emails the picture to the police headquarters where they are able to run a match against their database to confirm the identity of the terrorist. The entire sequence takes less than a few minutes and considering that every minute counts for Kailash's safety, it is interesting to see the chain of command that allows such decisions to be made.

As good as the film is, it is not without flaws, especially considering the events that lead to the film's resolution. But this is a minor complain given the strength of everything else on display. And in one aspect, this film is a close kin of Govind Nihalani's Drohkaal given how the informer is left to fend for himself when others around him are killed.

Rating: 9/10

A Bihari revenge tale goes full cirle

Bihar and Uttar Pradesh are two Indian states where politics is brewed with more passion than one could find in most major Indian cities. In the last few years, a few Indian film-makers such as Prakash Jha & Tigmanshu Dhulia have tackled these states cinematically. Jha, who was born in Bihar and understands his home state and even neighbouring Uttar Pradesh better than most, gave us two worthy films in the form of Gangaajal, which was about rogue cops, and Apaharan, which depicted the issue of political kidnappings. Tigmanshu Dhulia's well crafted Haasil showed how political scheming can start as early as college in Uttar Pradesh before morphing into full blown corruption and violence.

Kabeer Kaushik can add his name to the list of directors who understand Bihar and Uttar Pradesh as he set his first film Sehar in the political labyrinth of Uttar Pradesh and moves to Bihar with Chamku. The battle ground in the absorbing Sehar was between corrupt politicians along with their criminal arms vs honest cops. The film's key success was setting the story in the early 1990's just as cell phones were starting to make their way across India. Baffled by the inability to tap cell phones, the local police in the film are at a loss on how to handle the new wave of criminal activities conduced by aerial waves. Sehar shows how the local police are trained on cell phone operations via a professor and how they are able to use this new knowledge to catch criminals. Even though the film was released in 2005, the film's story about the importance of cell phones in conducting criminal activities precedes Ram Gopal Varma's underworld films such as Company (released in 2002) which depicts criminals being comfortable enough to sit in far off locations such as Kenya and ordering their henchmen to do the leg work in Mumbai via cell phones. In fact, both Sehar and Company compliment each other regarding cell phones. Company only shows the criminals on one side of the phone while Sehar shows the cops listening in on the other side.

Chamku is an old fashioned revenge story which starts and ends with a barrel of a gun.



What makes the film so interesting is that the Bihari revenge element is kept on the fringes and instead the core of the story involves the murky Mumbai surroundings of modern day political assassinations. Criminal activities in modern Indian cities often have roots in the fringe states. This is something that John Matthew Matthan understood very well and highlighted in his brilliant debut film, Sarfarosh, which showed how the porous desert border between India and Pakistan could be used to smuggle weapons which then were used to inflict damage all across the country. In Chamku the danger comes from the border between Uttar Pradesh and Nepal where bomb making materials enter the country and make their way to Mumbai. These border transactions are made easier because of corrupt local politicians in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar that profit from such deals.

Chamku starts out with a battle between Naxalites and the local police forces. After the police are able to eliminate their opponents, a lone survivor Chamku (played by Bobby Deol) remains. Because of his sharp shooting skills and ability to survive, he is given a new lease of life when he is recruited by a special branch of Mumbai police to carry out killings of corrupt politicians. These covert operations take place in broad daylight amid the turf wars taking place around the city. There are plenty of characters who look out for Chamku but are tragically killed. Each time that Chamku survives, he puts it down to pure luck. But it more than just sheer luck. One can even say that it is his destiny that he will get a chance to ensure his life's story goes full circle and he is able to avenge his father's murder. Interestingly, the film's opening voice over narration points towards such a cyclic nature of ‘beginning’ and ‘end’.

The Good...
Bobby Deol is perfectly cast for this role as his stern expressions are more than enough to convey his character's feelings. There are some worthy cameos in the film (Danny Denzongpa, Ritesh Deshmukh & Rajpal Yadav) and all their characters are given relevant and interesting parts. Irfan Khan is good as usual in playing Chamku's boss.

The parallel sequences and even some of the symmetry shown in the film is a delight to watch. Examples: the gun barrel scenes and the two encounter sequences. The hunter from the first gun barrel scene becomes the prey in the finale and the prey from the first shot is firmly in power by the film's end. There are two encounter sequences in the film and in both cases, Chamku survives, the first time due to his ability to outrun the bullets and in the second case, due to some political smooth talking. The two different sequences show that encounter killing is used by police both in Bihar and even in Mumbai with both killing locations being eerily similar in their settings.




The opening sequence is quite beautifully shot. Picture perfect really! The film starts off with Chamku tied up as a prisoner in the train.

He looks towards a woman sitting across from him. Beautiful and innocent looking.

The woman turns away from Chamku and looks outside the train window. The camera then focuses on her and in her eyes one can sense nervousness and even a tinge of anticipation. It was then that I was certain that she was on a mission and was not an innocent passenger. Sure enough, that turned out to be the case. But all this was apparent because of the camera's movements and focus on the character's expressions.




The not so good...

The songs in the film are not needed and do not add anything to the story. The time wasted on songs could have been better served by more relevant scenes of the principle characters.  The film could have done with a better title as Chamku indicates a person's nickname and incorrectly presents a soft image of such a powerful film.  And finally, Priyanka Chopra is surprisingly miscast as Chamku's love interest.

Rating: 8.5/10
Overall, quite impressed with this film.

Note:
Chamku forms a cinematic bond with two other 2008 films in Mumbai Meri Jaan & A Wednesday. In Chamku before the Mumbai bomb blasts are shown, the melodious song by Mohammed Rafi & Geeta Dutt comes on.

Aye dil hai mushkil jeena yahan
Zara hat ke zara bach ke, yeh hai Bombay meri jaan


Mumbai Meri Jaan ends with this song and dealt with how the characters reacted with their loss. A Wednesday shows how one character decides to take his revenge regarding the bombings. Neither of these two films gives a true face to the criminals involved in the bombings but Chamku gives us some clues to their identities.

Spotlight on Bollywood

The democratic handshake

The media keeps reminding us that India is the world's largest democracy but that does not mean it is a successful one. In fact, modern society does not have a single successful running democracy. Why are democracies not successful? One reason that the democratic political system fails is because of the male handshake. Two men shake hands. One is a business man, the other a politician. Here lies the problem. How can a politician do good for his people when he has a man promising him a suitcase of money?

Sarkar Raj is the latest in a string of Bollywood films that examines how political decisions are drafted on the basis of these male handshakes. A power plant is supposed to boost Maharashtra’s energy needs but in order to build the plant, villages would have to be displaced. A common problem really -- land and people often seem to be in the way of big industry. So how should such a problem be solved? Easy, get some men to shake hands and make some promises. Oh and behind the scenes, in the shadows, hire some thugs to commit a few murders.

Even though the story has potential to tackle some real issues and get to the core of corruption in the political system, Sarkar Raj does not dive deep into the issues and just skims the surface by dropping a few lines here and there about responsibility and power. Ram Gopal Varma has more interest in presenting hovering camera angles or having the camera pointed towards the window to let the sunlight blind the screen, keeping the actors hidden from view while listening to their so called important dialogues. The truth is that there is nothing new in this film, just some different camera angles. Sarkar Raj promises a lot but unfortunately it does not deliver, much like the fake promises made by the politicians shown in the story.

Mall in the name of progress

On one hand, Indian land is coveted by big industries, while on the other hand, empty land is also required by developers who are eager to construct as many big malls as possible in modern day India. And in some cases, people are being displaced from existing residential areas so that a mall can be built. So Aziz Mirza takes this relevant issue of Indian land vs mall construction and transports it to Toronto. In Kismet Konnection, a big mall will displace an existing community center rendering the residents homeless. Although he takes his story to Toronto, Mirza keeps everything else Indian, including the characters, dialogues (apparently everyone in Toronto speaks Hindi) and even the situations involving the construction company. Kismet Konnection, essentially an updated version of his 1992 film Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman, features a main character Raj (Shahid Kapur) who takes on a corporation in the hopes of impressing the girl and getting his career off the ground.

Friendship and love, leaving little time for a career

A male college student in a Bollywood film certainly leads a stressful life. There is the pressure of hanging out with friends, then the added stress of impressing a girl, and then he has to dress the part, know how to sing songs and oh yeah, has to dance as well. How can one possibly have time to study after all this? And chances are when the boy graduates, his father or a friend’s father will have a job waiting for him because that is how life is in a Bollywood college universe.

Two recent romantic films Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na & De Taali show that the most stressful aspect of the character’s life is deciding to fall in love with their good friend. Although in De Taali the characters are actually college graduates, they still lead life as per a Bollywood college standard of no responsibility. Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na is a decent film although it has a serious hangover from the smashing 2001 film Dil Chahta Hai. Farhan Akhtar’s Dil Chahta Hai was a memorable film which had some excellent acting and a very good screenplay whereas Jaane Tu... features a new cast making their debut, so one cannot expect the same acting standards, and has a screenplay that is tailored to include some needless slapstick comedic elements and even makes room for songs and an intermission.

One of the brightest aspects about Jaane Tu is Genelia D’Souza who lights up the screen with her beautiful smile and cute expressions. She essentially plays the same bubbly character in Priyadarshan’s enjoyable comedy Mere Baap Pehle Aap and enhances the film with her presence. The only downside to Genelia’s acting is that she still has to master the Hindi language but other than that, she is a breath of fresh air in the film industry. Mere Baap Pehle Aap also turns the love story angle a bit on its head as the main character in love is a widower who gets lectured about chasing women by his twenty-something son.

After love, the difficulties start

So once the characters move beyond the initial love phase, then what? Then they might learn that falling in love was the easy part but finding a job or even a place to live in is far more difficult. Rajatesh Nayyar’s Sirf tackles some issues that come after most Bollywood love stories end. The film features multiple couples in different stages of their relationship who are struggling to afford a decent place to live in or even find a job. Also, a couple’s marital problems are shown as the busy work life gets in the way of their marriage.

In Jannat, Arjun (Emraan Hashmi) thinks he has found the perfect financial solution to his life amid the high stake world of cricket betting. Arjun has a knack for correctly predicting how cricket games would end and initially uses this to make some quick cash to impress his girlfriend, whom he eventually marries. But very quickly, he is sucked into a much more complicated world of gambling. His criminal ways do not go well with his wife but Arjun finds it difficult to turn away the large piles of cash.

The money trail leads to South Africa

In order to escape the Indian police and still continue to run his cricket betting service, Arjun runs off to South Africa in Jannat. In South Africa, he continues to lead a luxurious lifestyle, while building up his wealth.

In Race, two brothers (Saif Ali Khan and Akshaye Khanna) live their wealthy life in South Africa while trying to outdo each other.

Needless to say that in both films, money blinds the main characters. In Jannat, Arjun loses the respect of his wife while in Race, the two brothers plot to kill each other.

Follow the money...

Arjun is so busy making money that he never stops to think what the millions he is earning for his bosses is being used for. As it turns out, Arjun’s bosses in Jannat use that money to support terrorism in India.

In Raj Kumar Gupta’s worthy debut film Aamir, it is the money being sent by people from outside India that is supporting terrorism in the Indian cities. Aamir takes the story from Cavite, which was set in the Philippines, and completely adapts it to the Indian political landscape in Mumbai.

Ghosts

Most Bollywood ghost stories take place either in the beautiful state of Rajasthan or in some isolated mansion in the countryside. Two recent films continue this tradition as well -- Anamika has a touch of a mysterious spirit lurking amid a beautiful Rajasthani palace while Bhoothnath has a comedic ghost who refuses to leave his ancestral mansion.

2008 also marks the year that the ghost of Ed Wood made his presence felt in Bollywood as per the evidence of three films -- Mr. Black Mr. White, Mission Istaanbul and Singh is Kinng. Even by the normally average Bollywood film-making standards, all three of these films were very very poor. Although the films could have been salvaged had the directors not ignored the basic rules of film-making such as having a screenplay, proper editing and balanced background score. All three films featured scenes which were shot too quickly, slapped together without any thought and spliced with needless songs all arriving at the wrong moment.

Film Ratings out of 10

Note: All films released in 2008

Mere Baap Pehle Aap: 8.5

Aamir: 8

Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na: 7.5

Jannat : 6.5

Sirf: 6

Sarkar Raj: 5.5

Bhoothnath: 5

Anamika: 4.5

De Taali: 4

Krazzy 4: 4

Race: 3

Kismat Konnection: 2

Contract: 0

Singh is Kinng: 0

Mr. Black Mr. White: 0

Mission Istaanbul: 0

A matter of taste

Every summer it seems that North American film critics have to respond to why they did not like a certain Hollywood blockbuster film. Two years ago, A.O Scott tackled this issue when discussing the newest Pirates sequel:

But the discrepancy between what critics think and how the public behaves is of perennial interest because it throws into relief some basic questions about taste, economics and the nature of popular entertainment, as well as the more vexing issue of what, exactly, critics are for.

Are we out of touch with the audience? Why do we go sniffing after art where everyone else is looking for fun, and spoiling everybody's fun when it doesn't live up to our notion or art?

I have often read comments along the lines of why some critics cannot "lighten-up" or "loosen up" when it comes to reviewing certain commercial titles. But why is it assumed that a commercial film should be liked by everyone? And that too, why must all critics conform? For example, this summer The Dark Knight is already considered to be "the greatest film ever made" and any critic who dared to think otherwise was abused (ranging from mild words about their small brain to "you are a #$#%#$"). I often find it amusing that some people can get quite abusive when others offer a differing view on a film. Seriously, how can everyone like the same movie? For the most part, films are always perceived with a subjective lens, no matter how much a person tries to approach it in objective terms. Ofcourse that does not stop some people from trying to stamp an objective verdict on a film by calling it "the greatest film ever made" or "best film of the century", etc. If all the film going public around the world were to vote on the best film ever made, you will never get one unanimous answer. Yes, there are numerous annual "best of.. lists" and each get votes from film critics, industry personnel or film buffs. Sometimes the same titles pop up in these lists but I find it more useful to read why certain people chose a particular film – there is a possibility that they saw noticed a quality in a film where others had failed to.

Over time, if people continue to read a certain critic’s reviews, they can develop a sense of the films a reviewer likes or not. And even if someone normally agrees with a critic’s views, there will always be cases when a difference will arise. The difference should be an opportunity to exchange viewpoints and not merely a chance to slam the door with words like "if you don’t like the movie, you are an idiot".

Differing treatment of film critics in Hollywood vs Bollywood

Hollywood still has a need for movie critics even if quite a few of them are losing their jobs. Evidence can be found in how the industry still continues to hold advance press screenings of their movies. And if a critic likes a movie, then their blurbs are plastered all over the movie poster. When a film does not have an advance screening, it is immediately assumed that the movie is awful and the producers/distributors are hoping to recoup as much weekend box office money before the negative reviews hit the headlines. Now admittedly, quite a few reviews do not go into in-depth critical analysis of a film but merely present the synopsis with a movie rating. That raises another contentious topic of how many people actually read a movie review and what are they looking to get out of it. Do most people just care for a number rating? Or are they just interested in going to see a film just because of the actors or genre? The answers to these questions circles back to the start of A.O Scott's article regarding the need for a critic and of people's tastes.

On the other hand, Bollywood as an industry does not respect a film critic and as a rule ignore their verdict. There are hardly any advance film screenings and even before a movie is released, the film producers/directors/actors go out of their way to ensure their movie is critic proof. Most interviews with the film-makers involve the following chosen words about their newest Bollywood movie:

It is a juicy "masala" movie

Meaning: A typical Bollywood film with action, songs, dance, romance, emotion, etc.

"Entertaining movie", fun for the whole family

Meaning: comedy movie with good songs

"Fresh love story"

Meaning: The movie is unlike the countless other stale love stories that get released every year. Also, means a film with new actors.

People should go enjoy the movie and "leave their brain at the door"

Meaning: The film has no plot, so one should not question anything. Just laugh.

When a Bollywood film does well at the box office but gets negative reviews, the film-makers say the movie is "for the masses". When a film does poorly at the box office, then the film-makers say the movie is "for the classes", referring to the middle class and elite sections of Indian society who can apparently appreciate the mature themes shown. And when both the classes and masses reject a movie, then the film-makers say that the movie is too sophisticated for the Indian audiences and is made for the foreign crowd (Indian diaspora, film festivals, etc). When everyone rejects their movie, then the film-makers say that the world is not ready to understand their unique genius. Honestly, how can a critic be ever expected to fight against Bollywood's built in critic-proof ego?

Note: India has to be the only country in the world where people line up in millions to see a movie which they know nothing about. This is because the trailers are only clips of the film songs, sometimes spliced with few movie scenes. In most cases, even the story is never really revealed in advance. Critics only get to see a movie on the Friday afternoon opening shows along with the rest of the audience and their reviews are not available until later on Friday evening and in the weekend publications.

I left my brain at the door. So should you.

Only in India could such a film review get published. In reviewing the newest Bollywood film Singh Is Kinng Taran Adarsh begins his review thus:

Just a word of caution before you watch this film: Singh Is Kinng is not for the intellectuals or those pretending to be one. It's not for the hard-nosed critics either.

He even explains what is wrong with the audience if they do not enjoy this movie.

You know the rules when you watch a hardcore entertainer: Just don't look for logic. If you do, too bad for you, for you would never enjoy a film of this genre and more specifically, Singh Is Kinng.

And Taran goes onto praise the limited talents of the film-maker.

Anees Bazmee's films are very high on entertainment. The plotline may be paper-thin, perhaps ludicrous and farcical, but when did Bazmee ever promise a SCHINDLER'S LIST [sic] or a SAVING PRIVATE RYAN? [sic] Singh Is Kinng works because it delivers what it promises: Full on entertainment!

Hilarious. Here is a critic actually admitting a film-maker’s flaws but yet endorsing the movie because it is “Full on entertainment”. That’s right. None of this half-on or quarter-on, it FULL ON baby. He might have added India’s favourite words right now "Mind blowing".

Oh but to give credit to Taran, he does say that the film is not perfect.

But, wait, Singh Is Kinng isn't a foolproof product. It has its share of flaws, the turn of events aren't captivating at times, but Singh Is Kinng moves so fast and packs in so much, there's no time to think or analyze.

You mean the movie is “shock and awe”? Genius!

And here’s the final verdict:

The final word? Singh Is Kinng is a delicious and scrumptious pav-bhaji served in the finest cutlery. Your taste buds are sure to relish it... and ask for more!
.........
On the whole, Singh Is Kinng lives up to the hype and hoopla. Want a joyride without taxing your brains? Board the Singh Is Kinng wagon. At the box-office, the film will fetch a hurricane-like start. The paid previews, the opening weekend, the first week business, everything will be record-shattering. Notwithstanding the new oppositions in the weeks to come, Singh Is Kinng will rule the hearts of the aam junta [whose verdict matters the most] as also the box-office, proving a record holder in the final tally. Blockbuster Hit!


Come on, who does not like pav-bhaji? Actually, since I had pav-bhaji 2 nights ago, I think I might hold off getting me some cinematic version of this Mumbai dish.

But Taran is not all fun and games. He does get serious sometimes. For example, he was troubled by last year’s No Smoking

After having watched NO SMOKING, the first thing you want to do is ask Anurag Kashyap, the director of this misadventure: Now what was that? Cinema is all about three Es -- enlighten, educate and entertain. But NO SMOKING neither educates, nor enlightens. As for entertainment, forget it!

You try so hard to understand what NO SMOKING tries to say, but the film is like one big puzzle that refuses to get solved.

What ails NO SMOKING, did you ask. Simple, it’s the most complicated cinematic experience of 2007.

Errr. It was not that complicated really. Heck, I loved it. But Taran does not share my views:

NO SMOKING leaves you exasperated and disgusted. Exasperated, because till the end credits roll, you just don’t know what happened in those 2 hours.

Were we watching the same movie? I was not disgusted but rather left with a giddy sense of excitement because watching No Smoking reminded me of films like David Fincher’s The Game & Fight Club, Alejandro Amenábar's Open Your Eyes (remade as Vanilla Sky), The Devil's Advocate and one scene even reminded of David Lynch's Inland Empire.

Although I see the real source of Taran’s disappointment: There’re hardly any songs in the narrative but the one filmed on Jesse Randhawa [‘Jab Bhi Cigarette Peeta Hoon’] is imaginatively filmed. Surprisingly, the popular Bipasha Basu track, which has also been publicized extensively, is placed after the end titles.

A Bollywood movie has to have atleast 6 songs. Come on. That is the golden rule.

Taran wants people to take an Anees Bazmee film on face value and not question anything but then shouldn’t one take Anurag's film in the same manner? If an absurd film like Bazmee’s No Entry has no logic and people are asked to ignore its shortcomings, then why is there the need to understand No Smoking? Ah. But as per Taran, No Smoking does not entertain. I do not share his opinion regarding No Smoking which I thought was an extremely intelligent film packed with plenty of ideas. But thankfully I do not read Taran’s film reviews but I am sure there are plenty out there who read and listen (via his tv show) to what he has to say (scary thought that).

A matter of taste

Film fan #1: I only like comedies and stay away from action flicks.
Film fan #2: I only like action movies and cannot stand chick-flicks.
Film fan #3: Sci-fi does it for me.
Film fan #4: I only like foreign films.
Film fan #5: I like everything but foreign films.
Film fan #6: I like all kinds of movie.
Film fan #7: I like all kinds of movie, provided they are made well.

Restaurant patron #1: I only like steak.
Restaurant patron #2: I am vegetarian, which eliminates 90% of the menu items for me.
Restaurant patron #3: I only like sushi.
Restaurant patron #4: I only like spicy food.
Restaurant patron #5: French food is the best cuisine. Everything else is substandard.
Restaurant patron #6: I like all kinds of food, provided it is presented well.
Restaurant patron #7: I like all kinds of food, provided it is cooked well.
Restaurant patron #8: I like all kinds of food, provided it tastes good.
Restaurant patron #9: I like all kinds of food, provided it is presented nicely and cooked well.
Restaurant patron #10: I like all kinds of food, provided it is presented nicely, cooked well and the tastes are nice.

Patron #X shares his dining experience from the Sing-Song Multiplex Restaurant.

The entire dish was so beautifully presented that I was beside myself. I have to say, the meal was “FULL ON” value for my money because a beautiful waitress brought it to me in the most gorgeous plate I have ever seen, with the finest cutlery. I cannot criticize the meal because everything was so beautiful that I quickly swallowed the meal without having time to chew or think about the tastes. The restaurant delivered solid entertainment. What a gorgeous waitress. I would gladly eat any dish that she serves.

Owner of the Sing-Song Multiplex Restaurant:

We found out that most people coming to our establishment do not care for the food. So in order to save costs, we serve stale meat, our sauces are either too salty or too spicy depending on which ingredients are still left, and most often our vegetables are rotten. For desserts, the cherries we place on top of the cakes are always moldy. For the most part, no one complains. They keep coming back because we have the most beautiful women working in the place and we have a very vibrant atmosphere. Occasionally, a snobby food critic comes to our place and demands healthy & tasty food. But no one really cares to what he/she has to say. We keep making money. That is all that matters.