Day 3, Sept 21
Two films seen:
Used Parts (2007, Mexico, Aarón Fernández): 9/10
Let the Right One in (2008, Sweden, Tomas Alfredson): 8.5/10
The Slovenian film Spare Parts was about illegal border crossing and focused mainly on the drivers who transported the people seeking a better life. The theme of border crossing also exists in the Mexican film Used Parts but the film instead focuses on the people who want to cross the border. The majority of the film looks at the lives of two teenagers (Ivan & Efraín) who work at odd jobs in order to make ends meet. Working with his uncle, Ivan eventually resorts to stealing car parts (hub caps, mirrors, etc) to make some fast cash to pay for their border crossing payments. The early part of the film spends time laying out all the characters and situations properly, so when things do go wrong, we know exactly the different paths that the characters would end up taking. In fact, one can say the ending could be seen coming for a long while, but still when it does arrive, it does not feel manipulated. If the options in front of people are limited, then there are only a few paths they can take.
The Swedish film Let the Right One In could be described as a coming of age tale spliced with a vampire story. But that generalization does not do justice to the fact that the film beautifully takes components from each genre and seamlessly integrates them into an original story. 12 year Oskar meets 12 year old Eli. But as Eli mentions, she is "more or less" 12. In fact, her real age is unknown as a vampire is trapped within 12 year old Eli's body. And the vampire may not even be female. The film highlights their innocent friendship, while depicting the blood lust that gargles within Eli's body. The thirst drives her to kill. Initially, an accomplice helps fetch human blood for Eli in a method akin to animal slaughter -- slitting of the throat and letting the blood drip out. But when the frailty of the accomplice takes him out of the equation, Eli is left all alone. Which is where her friendship with Oskar takes on more meaning -- two lonely people in a cold, snowy landscape.
The cinematography is very good and the best part of the film is that it does not descend into any end of the world scenarios but simply focuses on the solitary vampire's friendship with a human. Also, the film does a good job of making full usage of the screen. For example, in a scene where Oskar is being submerged into a swimming pool by a bully, the camera stays on Oskar's face but in the far end of the screen, we can see that help is on the way.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Sunday, September 21, 2008
CIFF notes -- Day 1 & 2
While the opening CIFF gala was on Thursday night with Blindness, the festival proper kicked off on Friday, Sept 19. In the past few years, it is usually around the middle of the 10 day festival that I finally start getting a bit tired after juggling a day job along with the evening weekday screenings. A few years ago, I even had to take a day off right in the middle of the festival (Wed) to rest up for the final few days. But this time around, I was exhausted even before the festival truly started.
Day 1: Friday, Sept 19
5 am. I woke up awfully early so I could put in a full day’s work before resting up for two possible screenings in the evening. But despite two coffees, I was already tired by mid-afternoon. Still I made it out to the festival expecting my first choice to wake me up. If the film did just that, then I would have classified it a success, otherwise it wouldn’t have been not worth it. And Aleksandr Sokurov’s Alexandra proved to be a perfect cinematic tonic for my tired self.
The film follows a grandmother (who plays the title character of Alexandra) who goes to visit her grandson in a Russian military base in Chechnya. She hasn’t seen him in seven years but goes to visit him because she is lonely. For the first hour, we only see her on the base, wandering around and interacting with the soldiers, most of whom are not happy at being stationed there. The film truly comes to life when Alexandra leaves the base and wanders the local market. There she meets a local Chechnyan woman, Malika, who befriends her. As the two walk back to Malika’s place, a few shots of the neighbouring buildings tell us all we need to know about the region -- some buildings are marked by bullet holes while others are heavily bombed. Malika lives in a building on the verge of collapse and her causal remark to Alexandra that there are always men aimlessly hanging outside the building points to the state of unemployment in the region.
There is a shared bond of suffering and understanding that comes across when Alexandra and Malika talk. But when a local Chechnyan boy takes Alexandra back to the base, we get a glimpse that Alexandra is not very understanding after all. When the boy asks her why can’t the Russians just give the Chechnyans freedom, Alexandra remarks that weapons won’t accomplish anything but intelligence is required. Later during the night when she is talking with her grandson, her real views come into focus. She accuses the genes of the Chechnyans for the acts they commit regarding kidnapping and torture.
Sokurov has managed to tenderly weave political sentiments into the film without any melodrama or bloodshed. And the camera stays on each character’s face for the just right time for us to gauge their true feelings, be it insecurities or anger, without having them utter needless dialogue. A wonderful film.
Alexandra (2007, Russia/France, Aleksandr Sokurov): 9/10
I decided to skip watching a second film later in the night.
Day 2: Saturday, Sept 20
An Icelandic double
It was a real treat to watch Ragnar Bragason’s double features
Children & Parents. I had never heard of either film or even the film-maker previously but I had a good feeling about both movies and I was lucky to have been proved right. The two films are part of CIFF’s Iceland Series this year.
Ragnar was present at both screenings and I was able to ask him a few questions in between the movies and he answered further audience questions at the end of Parents. Both films are shot in black and white and as per Ragnar the reasons for B&W and his filming style were the following:
Ragnar was inspired by the early films & style of John Cassavetes. Like Cassavetes, Ragnar got together with a group of actors and flushed out their characters over a period of 6 months. The actors were given a rough skeleton of the film, with just some situations, but were required to improvise their own dialogues.
The lack of budget was a big reason for Ragnar’s choice of B&W. Since he didn’t have money for art design, make-up, etc, Ragnar decided to shoot the films in B&W to give them a consistent look.
One cannot tell that the films are improvised. Such is the strength of the acting and the characters portrayed. The two films stand separately on their own, with some characters making a brief appearance in the other film. Both films are a gritty look at the chaotic lives of humans, with the parents trying to juggle their jobs & family while the children face enough pressures of their own to keep sanity.
I will say a bit more about the films in a future post, after the festival is over. But both films were a real find and such gems truly make attending a film festival a real joy.
Children (2006, Iceland, Ragnar Bragason): 10/10
Parents (2007, Iceland, Ragnar Bragason): 10/10
Day 1: Friday, Sept 19
5 am. I woke up awfully early so I could put in a full day’s work before resting up for two possible screenings in the evening. But despite two coffees, I was already tired by mid-afternoon. Still I made it out to the festival expecting my first choice to wake me up. If the film did just that, then I would have classified it a success, otherwise it wouldn’t have been not worth it. And Aleksandr Sokurov’s Alexandra proved to be a perfect cinematic tonic for my tired self.
The film follows a grandmother (who plays the title character of Alexandra) who goes to visit her grandson in a Russian military base in Chechnya. She hasn’t seen him in seven years but goes to visit him because she is lonely. For the first hour, we only see her on the base, wandering around and interacting with the soldiers, most of whom are not happy at being stationed there. The film truly comes to life when Alexandra leaves the base and wanders the local market. There she meets a local Chechnyan woman, Malika, who befriends her. As the two walk back to Malika’s place, a few shots of the neighbouring buildings tell us all we need to know about the region -- some buildings are marked by bullet holes while others are heavily bombed. Malika lives in a building on the verge of collapse and her causal remark to Alexandra that there are always men aimlessly hanging outside the building points to the state of unemployment in the region.
There is a shared bond of suffering and understanding that comes across when Alexandra and Malika talk. But when a local Chechnyan boy takes Alexandra back to the base, we get a glimpse that Alexandra is not very understanding after all. When the boy asks her why can’t the Russians just give the Chechnyans freedom, Alexandra remarks that weapons won’t accomplish anything but intelligence is required. Later during the night when she is talking with her grandson, her real views come into focus. She accuses the genes of the Chechnyans for the acts they commit regarding kidnapping and torture.
Sokurov has managed to tenderly weave political sentiments into the film without any melodrama or bloodshed. And the camera stays on each character’s face for the just right time for us to gauge their true feelings, be it insecurities or anger, without having them utter needless dialogue. A wonderful film.
Alexandra (2007, Russia/France, Aleksandr Sokurov): 9/10
I decided to skip watching a second film later in the night.
Day 2: Saturday, Sept 20
An Icelandic double
It was a real treat to watch Ragnar Bragason’s double features
Children & Parents. I had never heard of either film or even the film-maker previously but I had a good feeling about both movies and I was lucky to have been proved right. The two films are part of CIFF’s Iceland Series this year.
Ragnar was present at both screenings and I was able to ask him a few questions in between the movies and he answered further audience questions at the end of Parents. Both films are shot in black and white and as per Ragnar the reasons for B&W and his filming style were the following:
One cannot tell that the films are improvised. Such is the strength of the acting and the characters portrayed. The two films stand separately on their own, with some characters making a brief appearance in the other film. Both films are a gritty look at the chaotic lives of humans, with the parents trying to juggle their jobs & family while the children face enough pressures of their own to keep sanity.
I will say a bit more about the films in a future post, after the festival is over. But both films were a real find and such gems truly make attending a film festival a real joy.
Children (2006, Iceland, Ragnar Bragason): 10/10
Parents (2007, Iceland, Ragnar Bragason): 10/10
Friday, September 19, 2008
Scotty, beam me the new Cannes title!
A few years ago, Canadian multiplexes started showing operas beamed live from the Met. I have no idea what the attendance figures are like for these opera screenings but I have seen people easily plunk down more than $40 for two tickets. I have often thought if they can do this for opera, then why not for film festival flicks? Why can't we have the Cannes Film festival beam its screenings to movie theaters around the world allowing thousands of film fans to enjoy the feature film screenings?
Beaming films -- Technical aspect
I remember seeing an article last year about Hollywood wanting to beam films to cinemas directly. I can't remember the exact article I read, but I found this one. Also, I heard the same noise in Bollywood as well about beaming films to theaters around India.
When I first heard that, I thought that would be great. But then could this idea not be taken one step further and people could actually watch beamed movies directly at home, sort of like the satellite model? It seems that even this idea exists.
While both the above methods would improve the delivery methods of movies, I still think the content of the films shown would still be a problem because these methods would still be geared towards Hollywood films. I think back to May 2007 as an issue. Most multiplexes across Canada were only showing three films -- Spider Man 3, Pirates 3 & Shrek 3. I am pretty sure almost all the shows were sold out. Such a beamed delivery method might ensure that more screenings of Spider Man 3 could be booked as opposed to Pirates.. because there might be more demand of good old Spidey in a certain location. But what about those Cannes titles that demand to be seen? Would they get beamed up? Probably not.
Beam me something I want
A lot of has been debated in print over the last year about the relevance of film critics. But for me, the question of film distribution is far more important -- how can we distribute better film content to markets around the world in a faster manner? As it stands, after films premier at Cannes, a select number end up making the rounds around film festivals for more than a year. And maybe after 15 months or so, an even smaller selection of titles open in North America, with a DVD release taking anywhere from 18 - 24 months. This filtering process does not ensure that every single Cannes Competition title would ever get distribution.
Who do I trust more? A Cannes film programmer or a North American distributor?
Easy answer. The Cannes Film Programmer. Now that does not mean that I agree with every single selection choice that the Cannes film programmers make. But in a way, I am glad that they have worked hard to select a few titles to showcase. Still I rather see all the Cannes competition films and be able to judge their merit for myself.
And I do believe that if more international films are easily available around North America, the value of critics would go up. Critics would not have to waste time debating why people must not go see the new popcorn flick and could spend more time talking about that relevant title from [insert country of choice] that is also playing at the local multiplex.
Open the taps, please!!
As much as I want Cannes film titles to be beamed up, I don't think the film industry would ever allow it. Too much has been invested in the current distribution model, a model which I don't think works as well as it should. Sure, more and more foreign films are washing up on the shores of North America but they are still going through a small filter. But why we can't we fully open the taps and allow North American markets to be flooded freely with international films?
But will it make money?
I can already see the first argument against opening up the cinematic taps. Since film production and distribution is a serious business, driven by profit margins, will those beamed up Cannes title make money? I do not know. But are there more people willing to spend $20 to watch an opera in a theater than wanting to spend $10 on an international film? Once again, I don't have numbers to prove any one side but I like to think that international films would hold their own.
Beaming films -- Technical aspect
I remember seeing an article last year about Hollywood wanting to beam films to cinemas directly. I can't remember the exact article I read, but I found this one. Also, I heard the same noise in Bollywood as well about beaming films to theaters around India.
When I first heard that, I thought that would be great. But then could this idea not be taken one step further and people could actually watch beamed movies directly at home, sort of like the satellite model? It seems that even this idea exists.
While both the above methods would improve the delivery methods of movies, I still think the content of the films shown would still be a problem because these methods would still be geared towards Hollywood films. I think back to May 2007 as an issue. Most multiplexes across Canada were only showing three films -- Spider Man 3, Pirates 3 & Shrek 3. I am pretty sure almost all the shows were sold out. Such a beamed delivery method might ensure that more screenings of Spider Man 3 could be booked as opposed to Pirates.. because there might be more demand of good old Spidey in a certain location. But what about those Cannes titles that demand to be seen? Would they get beamed up? Probably not.
Beam me something I want
A lot of has been debated in print over the last year about the relevance of film critics. But for me, the question of film distribution is far more important -- how can we distribute better film content to markets around the world in a faster manner? As it stands, after films premier at Cannes, a select number end up making the rounds around film festivals for more than a year. And maybe after 15 months or so, an even smaller selection of titles open in North America, with a DVD release taking anywhere from 18 - 24 months. This filtering process does not ensure that every single Cannes Competition title would ever get distribution.
Who do I trust more? A Cannes film programmer or a North American distributor?
Easy answer. The Cannes Film Programmer. Now that does not mean that I agree with every single selection choice that the Cannes film programmers make. But in a way, I am glad that they have worked hard to select a few titles to showcase. Still I rather see all the Cannes competition films and be able to judge their merit for myself.
And I do believe that if more international films are easily available around North America, the value of critics would go up. Critics would not have to waste time debating why people must not go see the new popcorn flick and could spend more time talking about that relevant title from [insert country of choice] that is also playing at the local multiplex.
Open the taps, please!!
As much as I want Cannes film titles to be beamed up, I don't think the film industry would ever allow it. Too much has been invested in the current distribution model, a model which I don't think works as well as it should. Sure, more and more foreign films are washing up on the shores of North America but they are still going through a small filter. But why we can't we fully open the taps and allow North American markets to be flooded freely with international films?
But will it make money?
I can already see the first argument against opening up the cinematic taps. Since film production and distribution is a serious business, driven by profit margins, will those beamed up Cannes title make money? I do not know. But are there more people willing to spend $20 to watch an opera in a theater than wanting to spend $10 on an international film? Once again, I don't have numbers to prove any one side but I like to think that international films would hold their own.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Foreign film candidates
Oct 1 is the deadline for all the 96 countries to submit their entry for the foreign film category for next year's Academy Awards.
Here are the confirmed entries so far:
Canada: Benoît Pilon's The Necessities of Life
Germany: Uli Edel’s The Baader Meinhof Complex
Sweden: Jan Troell’s Everlasting Moments
Belgium: Bouli Lanners’s Eldorado
Finland: Dome Karukoski’s The Home of Dark Butterflies
Hungary: Csaba Bollók’s Iska’s Journey
Austria: Gotz Spielmann's Revanche
Japan: Yojiro Takita's Departures
Korea: Kim Tae-gyun's Crossing
Philippines: Dante Nico Garcia's Ploning
Taiwan: Wei Te-sheng's Cape No. 7
Brazil: Bruno Barreto's Last Stop 174
Sources: Globe and Mail, Reuters and Cine Europa
Of the above, I have only see the Hungarian entry, Iska’s Journey. So far, I have not heard anything about the Indian entry but I think Aamir Khan's Taare Zameen Par would be a good choice. But then again with the Indian entries, films are not always chosen on merit.
Here are the confirmed entries so far:
Canada: Benoît Pilon's The Necessities of Life
Germany: Uli Edel’s The Baader Meinhof Complex
Sweden: Jan Troell’s Everlasting Moments
Belgium: Bouli Lanners’s Eldorado
Finland: Dome Karukoski’s The Home of Dark Butterflies
Hungary: Csaba Bollók’s Iska’s Journey
Austria: Gotz Spielmann's Revanche
Japan: Yojiro Takita's Departures
Korea: Kim Tae-gyun's Crossing
Philippines: Dante Nico Garcia's Ploning
Taiwan: Wei Te-sheng's Cape No. 7
Brazil: Bruno Barreto's Last Stop 174
Sources: Globe and Mail, Reuters and Cine Europa
Of the above, I have only see the Hungarian entry, Iska’s Journey. So far, I have not heard anything about the Indian entry but I think Aamir Khan's Taare Zameen Par would be a good choice. But then again with the Indian entries, films are not always chosen on merit.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Imaginative Beauty
Long before cinema and literature existed, folk stories and myths were the common form of entertainment. Such stories involved the story teller holding the audience’s attention by mysterious tales of adventure, romance and even battle of good vs evil. The story teller would describe the events in good detail but once his/her words were uttered, the audience would use their imagination to turn the words into images and store them in their mind. From that point on, they would replay the images in their head and as a result, their thoughts would expand. They would question things around them and even long for some travel to far away lands.
Tarsem’s beautiful second feature, The Fall, taps into this age old charm of story telling and crafts a mesmerizing world of adventure. Tarsem’s first feature, The Cell, featured some stunning visuals but unfortunately, the story was a bit of a let-down. This time around, he has found a framework which perfectly accommodates the beautiful visuals.
Shot around the world over multiple years, the film is a story within a story. The outer layer involves a hospital patient narrating a myth to a young girl and the images we see are through the eyes of the young girl. The first hour has a playful tone but in the last 40 minutes, the story takes a dark turn. This is because the narrator is contemplating suicide and prefers to spin nothing but negativity. But since the young girl wants a happy ending, the narrator finds himself struggling to keep his demons in check.
In a way, stories (both novel and cinematic ones) take the personality of its creator. If a creator is in a certain frame of mind, those thoughts and feelings make their way into their work. The Fall shows how the narrator’s story is altered by events around him. Audiences also judge a work through a subjective lens via their conscious and subconscious ideas. And in the film, the young girl also perceives the story through her experiences.
The film is produced by Tarsem and it is easy to see why he funded it himself. No Hollywood studio would ever permit such a film to be made and allow a director to have such free reign over the material. In a way, I am glad that he produced the film himself because The Fall is easily one of the most beautiful films to be made in the last few years. In many cases, a single frame of the movie contains more beauty and imagination than entire Hollywood studio films. It is unfortunate that this film was not released widely in theatres as it deserves to be seen on the big screen.
Rating: 10/10
Tarsem’s beautiful second feature, The Fall, taps into this age old charm of story telling and crafts a mesmerizing world of adventure. Tarsem’s first feature, The Cell, featured some stunning visuals but unfortunately, the story was a bit of a let-down. This time around, he has found a framework which perfectly accommodates the beautiful visuals.
Shot around the world over multiple years, the film is a story within a story. The outer layer involves a hospital patient narrating a myth to a young girl and the images we see are through the eyes of the young girl. The first hour has a playful tone but in the last 40 minutes, the story takes a dark turn. This is because the narrator is contemplating suicide and prefers to spin nothing but negativity. But since the young girl wants a happy ending, the narrator finds himself struggling to keep his demons in check.
In a way, stories (both novel and cinematic ones) take the personality of its creator. If a creator is in a certain frame of mind, those thoughts and feelings make their way into their work. The Fall shows how the narrator’s story is altered by events around him. Audiences also judge a work through a subjective lens via their conscious and subconscious ideas. And in the film, the young girl also perceives the story through her experiences.
The film is produced by Tarsem and it is easy to see why he funded it himself. No Hollywood studio would ever permit such a film to be made and allow a director to have such free reign over the material. In a way, I am glad that he produced the film himself because The Fall is easily one of the most beautiful films to be made in the last few years. In many cases, a single frame of the movie contains more beauty and imagination than entire Hollywood studio films. It is unfortunate that this film was not released widely in theatres as it deserves to be seen on the big screen.
Rating: 10/10
Childhood Memories
I grew up watching and loving the Speed Racer cartoons. Every week, I used to eagerly await the show and enjoyed the adventures of Speed and the mysterious Racer X.
But when I saw the cartoons on tv a few years ago, I was amazed at how bad they were – all the shows had the same old story of car crashes and needless slapstick humour. However, I still cherished my pleasant memories of the cartoon.
When I first learned that the Wachowski brothers were going to make a Speed Racer movie, I was not too keen on the idea. And the trailers just confirmed my idea that the movie might be a mess. So I was pleasantly surprised to discover today that the movie is not as bad as I had expected. In fact, I enjoyed watching it. Essentially, the movie is an updated version of the cartoon, complete with car chases, explosions and similar characters. The one interesting aspect in the movie is how the story of a lone speed racer against the big evil corporation can be likened to a battle between independent films & big Hollywood studios. In the movie, talented drivers who are not allowed in the Grand Prix are left to risk their lives in an underground race circuit. But the big corporations still keep an eye on the underground tracks in the hopes of finding a talented driver. This is similar to the situation where indie films are left to play at underground film festivals and if a movie is a hit, then the big studio distributors swoop in like vultures to release the movie to multiplexes.
Rating: 7.5/10
But when I saw the cartoons on tv a few years ago, I was amazed at how bad they were – all the shows had the same old story of car crashes and needless slapstick humour. However, I still cherished my pleasant memories of the cartoon.
When I first learned that the Wachowski brothers were going to make a Speed Racer movie, I was not too keen on the idea. And the trailers just confirmed my idea that the movie might be a mess. So I was pleasantly surprised to discover today that the movie is not as bad as I had expected. In fact, I enjoyed watching it. Essentially, the movie is an updated version of the cartoon, complete with car chases, explosions and similar characters. The one interesting aspect in the movie is how the story of a lone speed racer against the big evil corporation can be likened to a battle between independent films & big Hollywood studios. In the movie, talented drivers who are not allowed in the Grand Prix are left to risk their lives in an underground race circuit. But the big corporations still keep an eye on the underground tracks in the hopes of finding a talented driver. This is similar to the situation where indie films are left to play at underground film festivals and if a movie is a hit, then the big studio distributors swoop in like vultures to release the movie to multiplexes.
Rating: 7.5/10
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
The Amazing London Film Festival, 2008 edition
The London Film Festival will always have a special place in my heart. My only visit to it back in 2005 was part of an amazing 5 day trip to London. The trip was about seeing two Arsenal games in the final year of their historic 93 year old stadium Highbury. After seeing Arsenal's win in the Champions League game on Wed night, the next day I found myself with the chance to catch films on the final day of the London film Festival. I saw three very interesting films in Factotum, Cinema, Aspirins and Vultures and Sangre. I could have seen a fourth film, Citizen Dog, but instead opted for a relaxing night of shopping (London has some of the best bookstores). Personally, Cinema, Aspirins and Vultures was not only the best of the three but easily my favourite film of 2005.
So every year, when the line-up for the London film festival is announced, I can't help but look at the new titles and think back to that magical rainy day in Thursday when I scrambled in between the venues taking the tube, having a coffee or two and observing the well heeled stylish women. Heck, even if the women were not in heels, they were still stylish.
This year, there are plenty of intriguing and mouth-watering titles in the different categories. However, it is in the World Cinema category that I came across the following names. I had not heard of any of these films previously but I am now more than willing to view them, if given the chance.
Welcome to Sajjanpur: The new film from Shyam Benegal.
Teza: Having never seen a film from Ethiopia, this would get my vote.
The Sky, the Earth and the Rain
The Secret: I enjoyed portions of Joko Anwar's previous film (Joni's Promise) so I am curious about his new film and Tony Rayns' comments add to my interest:
Second-time director Anwar (his debut was a hit rom-com) traverses genres as confidently and unpredictably as Hong Kong movies once did, here evoking Costa-Gavras, there evoking Highlander. Recklessly entertaining, superbly cast and underpinned by a combative anger.
Praise indeed!
Salt of this sea: One of the two films from Palestine in this category. This one re-visits events of 1948, that crucial year when "the people of one country gave the people of another country the land of the people of a third country".
Ramchand Pakistani
Quick Gun Murugan: This one sounds like an over the top Rajnikant Tamil film packed with CGI effects. But could be worth a few laughs.
Last Thakur: A Western themed film from Bangladesh.
Jay
Beirut Open City
Colours of Passion: I admit that the only thing that attracts me about Ketan Mehta's latest film is the presence of Nandana Sen!!! But Mehta does make interesting films, with 2005's Mangal Pandey being an exception (not interesting, just bad). Maya Memsaab was his seductive Indian take on Madame Bovary and even a thriller like Aar Ya Paar had some edge to it. Although I have yet to see Mehta's 1995 film Oh Darling Yeh Hai India, a film that my local video store owner refused to rent out to me. He said the film was terrible but I had loved the music and was curious about seeing it. Almost a few months went by and he still kept refusing. In the end, I forgot about the film.
Plus plenty of other titles.....
So every year, when the line-up for the London film festival is announced, I can't help but look at the new titles and think back to that magical rainy day in Thursday when I scrambled in between the venues taking the tube, having a coffee or two and observing the well heeled stylish women. Heck, even if the women were not in heels, they were still stylish.
This year, there are plenty of intriguing and mouth-watering titles in the different categories. However, it is in the World Cinema category that I came across the following names. I had not heard of any of these films previously but I am now more than willing to view them, if given the chance.
Second-time director Anwar (his debut was a hit rom-com) traverses genres as confidently and unpredictably as Hong Kong movies once did, here evoking Costa-Gavras, there evoking Highlander. Recklessly entertaining, superbly cast and underpinned by a combative anger.
Praise indeed!
Plus plenty of other titles.....
Sunday, September 07, 2008
Spotlight on South America
Machuca: Chile, 1973
Early on in the film, two friends, one rich (Gonzalo) and the other poor (Pedro Machuca), cross a soccer field packed with local kids playing the beautiful game.
Near the film's end, Gonzalo is seen cycling through the same soccer field but it is empty. We know from the political events outlined earlier in the film that there is a reason there are no kids playing in the field.
In the scene immediately after Gonzalo hurriedly cycles past the empty soccer field, we see poor people rounded up at gunpoint and taken away. A solider mistakenly tries to take away Gonzalo but he shouts that he is not one of ‘them’ and points towards his imported German sneakers. The solider looks at Gonzalo’s white shoes and backs off. Meanwhile, the two friends eyes meet. Machuca knows the fate that awaits him and so does Gonzalo.
Final Scene: Gonzalo is standing in front of an empty soccer field, looking at the sun setting over the mountains in the background. We know that this soccer field will never have kids or even adults play on it. Not for a while at least.
In a way the four scenes highlight how people disappeared in Chile. Did the rest of the world know? Even if they did, would they have cared?
1973. A dictator comes into power. Who helped him? Look closely. You will see men lurking in the shadows. And among these men are some economists who offered advice in 'helping' the Chilean economy.
The Year My Parents Went on Vacation: Brazil, 1970
A boy standing with a soccer ball in his hands. The image is taken from the backseat of a car driving away. The car contains his parents who are apparently going on "vacation". But his parents are not going on "vacation". Unfortunately, 1970’s in South America saw a different form of vacation. People normally plan their vacations, inform their loved ones where they are going and when they will come back. But in 1970's South America, certain people believed that they were privileged enough to offer free vacations to their nation’s citizens. The citizens went on vacation, never to return back.
The world did not know of this vacation policy until much later. In the meantime, Brazil danced to the 1970 World Cup victory in some style, playing possibly the best football the world has seen. In 1978, Argentina won their first ever World Cup title, although the rumours about their 6-0 victory over Peru will never go away. Were the Peruvians bribed? Or did the Peruvian players have one look at the government in charge of Argentina and decide that losing 6-0 was better than getting a free unlimited vacation?
Men sitting in offices. Talking with dictators, discussing economic reforms. Privatize everything, open the country up. All will be well. Oh and while you are at it, hand out some free vacations. Things will eventually work out.
Have things worked out yet? The playgrounds are not empty anymore. But if one stands on those grounds, one can hear voices in the distance. Voices that cry out, wanting the world to listen. But the world cannot listen. It has moved on. Yet those voices continue to haunt soccer fields, not only across South America, but Asia and Africa as well.
Bolivia: Argentina, present day
At the start of the film Bolivia, we see a televised match between Argentina and Bolivia. After Argentina jump to an early lead, the Argentinean commentator remarks that Argentina were more alert. After the third goal goes in, he mentions that the Bolivian defense is terrible, just terrible. A few harmless words mask the hidden superiority of Argentine football.
If one had any doubts to the intention of those words, then the rest of the film just confirms the idea of a supposed superior Argentinean identity, an identity that exists even when the soccer game is over. An illegal Bolivian works in a local cafe/pub. Some of the local patrons include taxi drivers, including one who dislikes the Bolivian. Everything the Bolivian does is wrong. For example, when he brings a bottle of beer from the freezer, he is scolded for not bringing a cold bottle, even though he returns and brings a second bottle from the exact same freezer. When someone dislikes another person, no matter what the other person does is wrong. Simple fact of life. It is equally true in any part of the world.
It appears to be only a matter of time when emotions will boil over and they eventually do. Beautifully shot in black and white, Bolivia gives a glimpse of the frictions that exist in daily life. While the Clashes are started by government decisions regarding employment and immigration, the prices are always paid by ordinary citizens. If a poor nation shares a border with a richer nation, then illegal border crossing will occur. But if the apparently rich nation does not have enough jobs for its own citizens, then anger is directed at the newly arrived persons. The newcomer is always blamed for the misfortunes of a nation. Amazingly, one can walk the streets of Canada or USA and hear similar sentiments.
Bolivia is shot in Argentina but it may take place in any part of the world.
Adios Momo: Uruguay, 40 day Carnival
Obdulio just wants to play soccer but he does not have time as he has a daytime job delivering papers. One night he encounters a man who promises to educate him. Inspired by the man’s writing, Obdulio spends his nights witnessing the magic of a carnival where artists entertain the audience. As a result, he is often tired in his daytime job.
The charm of the carnival is flushed out in detail but the story also maintains a dream like nature of the events shown. And near the film’s end, clues are provided which indicate that the carnival is a happier mask over the sinister events of disappearance of children from the city, a la Pied Piper.
A Titan in the Ring: Ecuador, 2001
The film takes place in a small town where religion and wrestling are the equal source of people's interests. Both events are not compatible and some locals are caught between both. A local priest comes up with an interesting solution in the hopes of reaching out to the people. But his choice is at odds with what he preaches.
A man quietly sits listening to his radio on a bench while around him the complicated lives of the characters revolves. As it turns out, the man is mostly listening to soccer games. And just before the screen fades to black, the radio commentator is busy celebrating Ecuador’s first ever qualification to the Soccer World Cup (2002). The joyous message is meant to soothe over the not so happy events that the town has had to face depicted in the film.
Making ends meet
In A Titan in the Ring, we are given a glimpse into how unemployment can lead to certain youth heading down the criminal path.
In Pizza, Beer and Smokes, a few young kids go from one criminal activity to another just to gather some cash. The problem with such activities is that a person can be roped into believing that all they need is just one big job to ensure financial freedom. After that one big job, people believe they can easily walk away from crime. But as one knows, it is never that easy. So the tragedy that eventually takes place in Pizza, Beer and Smokes can be seen from the first few frames.
A few friends enjoy hanging out and pulling off pranks on their neighbours in Montevideo in 25 Watts. Shot in Black and white, the film evokes shades of Clerks in certain segments but unfortunately lacks the energy that made Clerks such a joy to watch.
The favelas of Rio once again form the background in the well shot City of Men which explores the tale of two friends who dodge bullets as the gang turf war wages on around them. Juggling between their jobs and women, the two find their friendships stretched as they unravel past events which pits them on opposite sides of the warring gangs.
Sao Paulo is the venue for the Brazilian pic Antonia which features four women hoping to make it big with their hip-hop routines in order to etch out a better life.
A job interview
Even when one has a job, the need arises to find a better job. But switching jobs is not often an easy task. An interview is a key part of the job hunting process and sometimes when people spend a long time working in one company, they may be out of touch with the challenges required out in the industry.
The Method shows a cut-throat interview process designed to weed out any unwanted candidates. After a series of 2-3 interviews, the short listed candidates are all put together in one room. They are all surprized to learn that their final interview will require them to face off against each other in the board-room while the hiring manager is hidden among one of the candidates. Each person has to guess who the hiring manager is and one by one, a candidate will be eliminated based on a series of ethical and technical exercises. As the interview progresses, the real personality traits of the candidates are exposed. Based on a play, the film is a fascinating watch.
Colombia -- A myth retold in a modern setting
Oedipus Mayor cleverly resets the ancient Greek tale of Oedipus Rex into a modern day Colombian town setting. Not having read the short story (by Gabriel Garcia Marquez) that the film is adapted from, I cannot comment on how faithful the adaptation is but overall the film does a very good job at unfolding the mythical tale of murder and incest one layer at a time.
Passing the time away by watching tv or just staring at the clock
The hilarious Peruvian film El destino no tiene favoritos shows the obsession that day time tv commands while poking fun at the cliched story-lines of most soaps.
El Nomindo takes the concept of reality tv shows such as Survivor and Big Brother to extremes. Contests are locked up in a bunker underneath the snow-capped Andes mountains, completely cut-off from civilization. Cameras record all their movements with the contestants voted out by viewers. But things go horribly wrong when a contestant is murdered. Instead of stopping the show, the cameras continues rolling as the game is tailored to guess who will be killed next. A decent idea is wasted as the film ends up being yet another slasher film.
In La Espera, Sonja looks after her elder bed-ridden mother. But she is frustrated by her mother’s constants demands which eliminates any chance of a social life that Sonja may have. So all she can do is wait, patiently wait for her mother to pass away.
The River as a means to escape and explore
Los Muertos
Forests, empty landscape, rivers. Observing nature up close, far from the chaotic Buenos Aries city life. This is not the Argentina often seen in films.
I thought about Carlos Reygadas while watching Lisandro Alonso’s Los Muertos. A beautiful film which features haunting shots of the surroundings. A man on a boat, drifting effortlessly through the backwaters. The man has just been released from prison after serving his murder conviction. He heads to the river to track his past and even to escape.
1888 el extraordinario viaje de Jules Verne
A journey to track down a hidden treasure with a fictional Jules Verne. Along the way, a love triangle is explored while an adventure unfolds by the banks of the Amazon.
Ratings out of 10
Bolivia (2001, Argentina, Adrián Caetano): 9
The Year My Parents Went on Vacation (2006, Brazil, Cao Hamburger): 9
Machuca (2004, Chile, Andrés Wood): 9
The Method (2005, Argentina co-production, Marcelo Piñeyro): 8.5
Los Muertos (2004, Argentina, Lisandro Alonso): 8.5
City of Men (2007, Brazil, Paulo Morelli): 8
Oedipus Mayor (1996, Colombia, Jorge Alí Triana): 8
El destino no tiene favoritos (2003, Peru, Alvaro Velarde): 8
Antonia (2006, Brazil, Tata Amaral): 7
Don't Tell Anyone (1998, Peru, Francisco J. Lombardi): 7
La Espera (2002, Uruguay, Aldo Garay): 7
Pizza, birra, faso (1998, Argentina, Adrián Caetano/Bruno Stagnaro): 6.5
Adios Momo (2006, Uruguay, Leonardo Ricagni): 6
Un titán en el rincón (2002, Ecuador, Viviana Cordero): 5
25 Watts (2001, Uruguay, Juan Pablo Rebella/Pablo Stoll): 5
1888 el extraordinario viaje de Jules Verne (2005, Venezuela, Alfredo Anzola): 3
El Nominado (2003, Peru, Nacho Argiro/Gabriel Lopez): 3
Early on in the film, two friends, one rich (Gonzalo) and the other poor (Pedro Machuca), cross a soccer field packed with local kids playing the beautiful game.
Near the film's end, Gonzalo is seen cycling through the same soccer field but it is empty. We know from the political events outlined earlier in the film that there is a reason there are no kids playing in the field.
In the scene immediately after Gonzalo hurriedly cycles past the empty soccer field, we see poor people rounded up at gunpoint and taken away. A solider mistakenly tries to take away Gonzalo but he shouts that he is not one of ‘them’ and points towards his imported German sneakers. The solider looks at Gonzalo’s white shoes and backs off. Meanwhile, the two friends eyes meet. Machuca knows the fate that awaits him and so does Gonzalo.
Final Scene: Gonzalo is standing in front of an empty soccer field, looking at the sun setting over the mountains in the background. We know that this soccer field will never have kids or even adults play on it. Not for a while at least.
In a way the four scenes highlight how people disappeared in Chile. Did the rest of the world know? Even if they did, would they have cared?
1973. A dictator comes into power. Who helped him? Look closely. You will see men lurking in the shadows. And among these men are some economists who offered advice in 'helping' the Chilean economy.
The Year My Parents Went on Vacation: Brazil, 1970
A boy standing with a soccer ball in his hands. The image is taken from the backseat of a car driving away. The car contains his parents who are apparently going on "vacation". But his parents are not going on "vacation". Unfortunately, 1970’s in South America saw a different form of vacation. People normally plan their vacations, inform their loved ones where they are going and when they will come back. But in 1970's South America, certain people believed that they were privileged enough to offer free vacations to their nation’s citizens. The citizens went on vacation, never to return back.
The world did not know of this vacation policy until much later. In the meantime, Brazil danced to the 1970 World Cup victory in some style, playing possibly the best football the world has seen. In 1978, Argentina won their first ever World Cup title, although the rumours about their 6-0 victory over Peru will never go away. Were the Peruvians bribed? Or did the Peruvian players have one look at the government in charge of Argentina and decide that losing 6-0 was better than getting a free unlimited vacation?
Men sitting in offices. Talking with dictators, discussing economic reforms. Privatize everything, open the country up. All will be well. Oh and while you are at it, hand out some free vacations. Things will eventually work out.
Have things worked out yet? The playgrounds are not empty anymore. But if one stands on those grounds, one can hear voices in the distance. Voices that cry out, wanting the world to listen. But the world cannot listen. It has moved on. Yet those voices continue to haunt soccer fields, not only across South America, but Asia and Africa as well.
Bolivia: Argentina, present day
At the start of the film Bolivia, we see a televised match between Argentina and Bolivia. After Argentina jump to an early lead, the Argentinean commentator remarks that Argentina were more alert. After the third goal goes in, he mentions that the Bolivian defense is terrible, just terrible. A few harmless words mask the hidden superiority of Argentine football.
If one had any doubts to the intention of those words, then the rest of the film just confirms the idea of a supposed superior Argentinean identity, an identity that exists even when the soccer game is over. An illegal Bolivian works in a local cafe/pub. Some of the local patrons include taxi drivers, including one who dislikes the Bolivian. Everything the Bolivian does is wrong. For example, when he brings a bottle of beer from the freezer, he is scolded for not bringing a cold bottle, even though he returns and brings a second bottle from the exact same freezer. When someone dislikes another person, no matter what the other person does is wrong. Simple fact of life. It is equally true in any part of the world.
It appears to be only a matter of time when emotions will boil over and they eventually do. Beautifully shot in black and white, Bolivia gives a glimpse of the frictions that exist in daily life. While the Clashes are started by government decisions regarding employment and immigration, the prices are always paid by ordinary citizens. If a poor nation shares a border with a richer nation, then illegal border crossing will occur. But if the apparently rich nation does not have enough jobs for its own citizens, then anger is directed at the newly arrived persons. The newcomer is always blamed for the misfortunes of a nation. Amazingly, one can walk the streets of Canada or USA and hear similar sentiments.
Bolivia is shot in Argentina but it may take place in any part of the world.
Adios Momo: Uruguay, 40 day Carnival
Obdulio just wants to play soccer but he does not have time as he has a daytime job delivering papers. One night he encounters a man who promises to educate him. Inspired by the man’s writing, Obdulio spends his nights witnessing the magic of a carnival where artists entertain the audience. As a result, he is often tired in his daytime job.
The charm of the carnival is flushed out in detail but the story also maintains a dream like nature of the events shown. And near the film’s end, clues are provided which indicate that the carnival is a happier mask over the sinister events of disappearance of children from the city, a la Pied Piper.
A Titan in the Ring: Ecuador, 2001
The film takes place in a small town where religion and wrestling are the equal source of people's interests. Both events are not compatible and some locals are caught between both. A local priest comes up with an interesting solution in the hopes of reaching out to the people. But his choice is at odds with what he preaches.
A man quietly sits listening to his radio on a bench while around him the complicated lives of the characters revolves. As it turns out, the man is mostly listening to soccer games. And just before the screen fades to black, the radio commentator is busy celebrating Ecuador’s first ever qualification to the Soccer World Cup (2002). The joyous message is meant to soothe over the not so happy events that the town has had to face depicted in the film.
Making ends meet
In A Titan in the Ring, we are given a glimpse into how unemployment can lead to certain youth heading down the criminal path.
In Pizza, Beer and Smokes, a few young kids go from one criminal activity to another just to gather some cash. The problem with such activities is that a person can be roped into believing that all they need is just one big job to ensure financial freedom. After that one big job, people believe they can easily walk away from crime. But as one knows, it is never that easy. So the tragedy that eventually takes place in Pizza, Beer and Smokes can be seen from the first few frames.
A few friends enjoy hanging out and pulling off pranks on their neighbours in Montevideo in 25 Watts. Shot in Black and white, the film evokes shades of Clerks in certain segments but unfortunately lacks the energy that made Clerks such a joy to watch.
The favelas of Rio once again form the background in the well shot City of Men which explores the tale of two friends who dodge bullets as the gang turf war wages on around them. Juggling between their jobs and women, the two find their friendships stretched as they unravel past events which pits them on opposite sides of the warring gangs.
Sao Paulo is the venue for the Brazilian pic Antonia which features four women hoping to make it big with their hip-hop routines in order to etch out a better life.
A job interview
Even when one has a job, the need arises to find a better job. But switching jobs is not often an easy task. An interview is a key part of the job hunting process and sometimes when people spend a long time working in one company, they may be out of touch with the challenges required out in the industry.
The Method shows a cut-throat interview process designed to weed out any unwanted candidates. After a series of 2-3 interviews, the short listed candidates are all put together in one room. They are all surprized to learn that their final interview will require them to face off against each other in the board-room while the hiring manager is hidden among one of the candidates. Each person has to guess who the hiring manager is and one by one, a candidate will be eliminated based on a series of ethical and technical exercises. As the interview progresses, the real personality traits of the candidates are exposed. Based on a play, the film is a fascinating watch.
Colombia -- A myth retold in a modern setting
Oedipus Mayor cleverly resets the ancient Greek tale of Oedipus Rex into a modern day Colombian town setting. Not having read the short story (by Gabriel Garcia Marquez) that the film is adapted from, I cannot comment on how faithful the adaptation is but overall the film does a very good job at unfolding the mythical tale of murder and incest one layer at a time.
Passing the time away by watching tv or just staring at the clock
The hilarious Peruvian film El destino no tiene favoritos shows the obsession that day time tv commands while poking fun at the cliched story-lines of most soaps.
El Nomindo takes the concept of reality tv shows such as Survivor and Big Brother to extremes. Contests are locked up in a bunker underneath the snow-capped Andes mountains, completely cut-off from civilization. Cameras record all their movements with the contestants voted out by viewers. But things go horribly wrong when a contestant is murdered. Instead of stopping the show, the cameras continues rolling as the game is tailored to guess who will be killed next. A decent idea is wasted as the film ends up being yet another slasher film.
In La Espera, Sonja looks after her elder bed-ridden mother. But she is frustrated by her mother’s constants demands which eliminates any chance of a social life that Sonja may have. So all she can do is wait, patiently wait for her mother to pass away.
The River as a means to escape and explore
Los Muertos
Forests, empty landscape, rivers. Observing nature up close, far from the chaotic Buenos Aries city life. This is not the Argentina often seen in films.
I thought about Carlos Reygadas while watching Lisandro Alonso’s Los Muertos. A beautiful film which features haunting shots of the surroundings. A man on a boat, drifting effortlessly through the backwaters. The man has just been released from prison after serving his murder conviction. He heads to the river to track his past and even to escape.
1888 el extraordinario viaje de Jules Verne
A journey to track down a hidden treasure with a fictional Jules Verne. Along the way, a love triangle is explored while an adventure unfolds by the banks of the Amazon.
Ratings out of 10
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
VIFF 2008: more titles come out of the shadows
The full list of VIFF titles is still yet to be released. But even if the festival went ahead with just the sneak preview titles, then that would still be enough for it to maintain its status as probably the best film festival in the world just for film fans. Cannes has to be the best overall film festival but unfortunately that is not open for ordinary film fans.
In addition to the popular Cannes titles showing at VIFF, here are some others which catch the eye:
Night and Day -- For some reason Hong Sang-soo's latest film is not playing at TIFF but thankfully VIFF is showing it. The danger is that if Hong Sang-soo's films do not show in a major film festival, then it is hard to expect his films to make it to DVD anytime soon.
Revue -- Last year, I came across Sergei Loznitsa's Blockade which was an absorbing edited account of archived newsreel footage showing the siege of Leningrad during WWII. It was amazing to see how so much old news footage outlining the damage caused by war existed and it was even more remarkable that Loznitsa skilfully put it together. In Revue, he once again revisits archived newsreel material to document some of the Cold War situations in the Soviet Union. This should be worth the watch.
War, Love, God and Madness -- Mohamed Al Daradji documents the danger he and his crew faced while filming Ahlaam, the Iraqi feature he made after the 2003 invasion. I had seen Ahlaam two years ago and it was a bit shocking to see such a bleak atmosphere portrayed. But given how things in Iraq have unfolded since the film was shot in 2004, the events in Ahlaam pale in comparison to the chaos that has taken place since then. Still, I am curious to hear how Al Daradji actually managed to film a feature given the constant danger that lurked around every street corner.
Years When I was a Child Outside -- The new feature from John Torres. I was present in the theatre when Torres was awarded the 2006 Dragons & Tigers Award for his impressive debut feature Todo Todo Teros which skilfully moulds personal video footage along with scripted film. I was eager for his new feature and as expected VIFF is showing it.
If the stars line up properly, then maybe I might be able to visit VIFF again. But as it stands, I am left to drool remotely...argh...have to be careful not to let the saliva fall onto the keyboard.
In addition to the popular Cannes titles showing at VIFF, here are some others which catch the eye:
If the stars line up properly, then maybe I might be able to visit VIFF again. But as it stands, I am left to drool remotely...argh...have to be careful not to let the saliva fall onto the keyboard.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
CIFF 2008 Schedule
The full schedule for the 2008 Calgary Film Festival is out!. There are some excellent titles, including:
Three Monkeys (Director: Nuri Bilge Ceylan) Gomorrah (Director: Matteo Garrone) Silent Light (Director: Carlos Reygadas) In The City of Sylvia (Director: José Luis Guerín)
I saw José Luis Guerín's beautiful In The City of Sylvia last year at VIFF but I might try to see it a second time because I am not sure if it will make it to DVD anytime soon. Also, it is nice to see Jia Zhang-ke's Useless have a showing as well. This was another title I was fortunate to have seen at VIFF.
I saw José Luis Guerín's beautiful In The City of Sylvia last year at VIFF but I might try to see it a second time because I am not sure if it will make it to DVD anytime soon. Also, it is nice to see Jia Zhang-ke's Useless have a showing as well. This was another title I was fortunate to have seen at VIFF.
Sunday, August 24, 2008
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
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
Friday, August 22, 2008
Seasonal Changes
The days are getting shorter. There is a chill in the air and Canadian film festival line-ups are being released. So that can mean only one thing -- Fall must be lurking around the corner.
The complete Vancouver Film festival line-up is about two weeks away but yesterday's preview gives a teasing look at a few titles to grace one of the best film festivals in the World.
Three Monkeys
Il Divo
Hunger
A Christmas Tale
Ballast
Revanche
Happy-Go-Lucky
The Dragons and Tigers category is back which means there will be some mouth watering new Asian films as Tony Rayns does an amazing job in picking out new cinematic talent.
The Spotlight on France is also back along with a new Environmental based series called The Ark : Elements and Animals.
The complete Vancouver Film festival line-up is about two weeks away but yesterday's preview gives a teasing look at a few titles to grace one of the best film festivals in the World.
Three Monkeys
Il Divo
Hunger
A Christmas Tale
Ballast
Revanche
Happy-Go-Lucky
The Dragons and Tigers category is back which means there will be some mouth watering new Asian films as Tony Rayns does an amazing job in picking out new cinematic talent.
The Spotlight on France is also back along with a new Environmental based series called The Ark : Elements and Animals.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
TIFF 2008 Lineup
The full TIFF 2008 lineup is now out.
As usual, plenty to see!!! On a quick scan, I picked the following titles that I would love to see, leaving out the big Hollywood films (such as Che and Burn After Reading) which I know would get released shortly after the festival.
Return to Hansala (Chus Gutiérrez)
Three Monkeys (Nuri Bilge Ceylan)
24 City (Jia Zhang-ke)
Birdsong (Albert Serra)
Liverpool (Lisandro Alonso)
Serbis (Brillante Mendoza)
PA-RA-DA (Marco Pontecorvo)
Gomorra (Matteo Garrone)
Waltz with Bashir (Ari Folman)
Slumdog Millionaire (Danny Boyle)
Revanche (Götz Spielmann)
Hopefully I will be catching the films in tiny dosages over the next year or so, as the films trickle down to a wider distribution.
As usual, plenty to see!!! On a quick scan, I picked the following titles that I would love to see, leaving out the big Hollywood films (such as Che and Burn After Reading) which I know would get released shortly after the festival.
Return to Hansala (Chus Gutiérrez)
Three Monkeys (Nuri Bilge Ceylan)
24 City (Jia Zhang-ke)
Birdsong (Albert Serra)
Liverpool (Lisandro Alonso)
Serbis (Brillante Mendoza)
PA-RA-DA (Marco Pontecorvo)
Gomorra (Matteo Garrone)
Waltz with Bashir (Ari Folman)
Slumdog Millionaire (Danny Boyle)
Revanche (Götz Spielmann)
Hopefully I will be catching the films in tiny dosages over the next year or so, as the films trickle down to a wider distribution.
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Actor + Director = Seeking Repeat Success
In last weekend's Globe and Mail, Rick Groen raised an interesting point about the powerful collaborations between actors and directors.
But what of the relationship between directors and their favourite, frequently employed actors? This is pivotal, this has yielded some of the great pictures in cinema's history, but it tends to be examined only in passing, only within the separate contexts of individual careers. And that misses the obvious point. After all, if good directors are the sculptors of film, then good actors are their clay. Okay, maybe their granite (John Ford with John Wayne), or their wood (George Lucas with Harrison Ford). At any rate, the crucial raw material.
He mentions that if the combination works quite well, then the result is two-fold: (1) a worthy film and (2) a wish to repeat the experience and be worthy again. .
Although this collaboration does depend on how a director approaches his or her film. Rick Groen differentiates the two different styles used by Martin Scorsese & Hitchcock.
Consider, for instance, Martin Scorsese, whose finest movies are character-driven and who, by his own admission, gets “bored” directing plot. Well, if your goal is to delve deeply into character, then a great actor, flexible and nuanced, is an essential tool. Luckily for him, and us, Robert De Niro may be the greatest of his generation. In Mean Streets, Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, especially Raging Bull, Scorsese's camera gives the work its wings, but it's De Niro's brilliance that finds, and illuminates, the riven heart of the film. This director relies absolutely on the symbiosis with his star – one is unthinkable without the other. And when the actor, his implement, gets too old for the protagonist's job, the director is obliged to find another. Which explains why, in The Aviator and Gangs of New York and The Departed, Scorsese has a new best friend in Leonardo DiCaprio.
By contrast, Alfred Hitchcock had scant interest in character and an abiding love for plot, along with the suspense that plot can generate. Consequently, he cultivated a reputation for regarding performers as little more than human props, set-dressing for his carefully planned story-boards – here insert Actress X in shower, there put Actor Y in cornfield. But shrewd ol' Hitch also had a keen eye for solid human props with commercial appeal, employing James Stewart in four of his classics (including Rear Window and Vertigo) and Cary Grant in another four (among them Suspicion and North by Northwest). These two stars are completely different actors, with different styles and mannerisms, and yet Hitchcock used them to equally strong effect. Still, while their performances enhance these pictures, they're not, like De Niro's, the essence of them. Hitchcock never really made actors' films.
The article is centered around Hollywood combinations with a line dropped in for Ingmar Bergman. So I decided to come up with a separate list of non-Hollywood films where an actor worked with the same director on multiple occasions.
Lee Kang-sheng & Tsai Ming-liang
Lee Kang-sheng has acted in all of Tsai Ming-liang's feature films, playing the same character in all the films, except in Goodbye, Dragon Inn where Lee Kang-sheng had a minor role. The two first worked together in Tsai Ming-liang's 1991 short film Youngsters after which they both ventured into their first feature in 1992's Rebels of the Neon God. Tsai Ming-liang's films contain a loose framework where the real beauty and charm lies in observing the character of Lee Kang-sheng growing up from a teenager to a young man, drifting from job to job and even indulging in few affairs. So naturally it makes sense for Tsai Ming-liang to continue to use Lee Kang-sheng repeatedly as he can count on his favourite actor to ease into any situation or location the screenplay requires. And the result is evident as their films have a consistent feel and have created their own universe set in Taiwan where all the films were shot except 2006's I Don't Want to Sleep Alone which was set in Kuala Lumpur.
In fact, I cannot imagine how the two will ever work without each other. Last year Tsai Ming-liang produced Lee Kang-sheng's directorial effort Help me Eros. The film was supposed to be a standalone effort, separate from the Tsai Ming-Liang films, yet Lee Kang-sheng plays a slight variation of the same character he normally plays in Tsai Ming-liang's films. And since Lee Kang-sheng has worked so closely with one director, it is not a surprize to see that his own directorial effort contains shades of Tsai Ming-liang.
Films and Shorts worked together:
I Don't Want to Sleep Alone (2006)
The Wayward Cloud (2005)
Good Bye, Dragon Inn (2003)
The Skywalk Is Gone (short film, 2002)
What Time Is It Over There? (2001)
The Hole (1998)
The River (1997)
Vive L'Amour (1994)
Rebels of the Neon God (1992)
Note: Of all the films, only Good Bye, Dragon Inn did not have Lee Kang-sheng in a starring role.
Jean-Pierre Léaud & François Truffaut
François Truffaut announced his arrival in an outstanding manner with 400 Blows, his directorial feature film debut in which a young 14 year old Jean-Pierre Léaud stole the show with his raw portrayal of Antoine Doinel. And almost a decade after the two first worked together, Truffaut revived the character of Antoine Doinel by using Jean-Pierre Léaud in Stolen Kisses, followed by two more films. It was a fascinating cinematic series where one could see the continuing adventures of a single character through his teenage years to adulthood.
Films worked together:
Love on the Run (1979)
Bed and Board (1970)
Stolen Kisses (1968)
The 400 Blows (1959)
The practice of using the same character in multiple films inspired Tsai Ming-liang who gives a hint of this in What Time Is It There? when Lee Kang-sheng's character is shown watching The 400 Blows. Also, near the end of What Time Is It There?, Jean-Pierre Léaud makes an appearance, tying a gigantic cinematic loop between France and Taiwan.
Interestingly, Tsai Ming-liang's next feature Visages stars both Lee Kang-sheng & Jean-Pierre Léaud.
Amitabh Bachchan with multiple directors
From the mid 1970's to late 1980's Amitabh Bachchan was the undisputed leading Indian actor who could easily mould himself to any director's need. He could play the street smart Jai for Ramesh Sippy's legendary Sholay, be the icy cold fearless coal miner for Yash Chopra's Kaala Patthar or shift gears and portray sensitive characters such as in Yash Chopra's Silsila or act in hilarious slapstick comedic roles such as in Prakash Mehra's Namak Halaal. There were multiple directors with whom Amitabh regularly worked and there were roles specifically written for Amitabh, especially to harness his portrayal of the "angry man". One director who forged a real partnership with Amitabh was Manmohan Desai. After working with Amitabh for Parvarish in 1977, Desai always found a place for his leading man in all his films until his last directorial feature Gangaa Jamunaa Saraswathi in 1988.
Just some of the major collaborations between Amitabh and his directors from the 1970's-80's.
with Manmohan Desai:
Gangaa Jamunaa Saraswathi (1988)
Mard (1985)
Coolie (1983)
Desh Premee (1982)
Naseeb (1981)
Suhaag (1979)
Amar Akbar Anthony (1977)
Parvarish (1977)
with Yash Chopra:
Silsila (1981)
Kaala Patthar (1979)
Trishul (1978)
Kabhi Kabhie (1976)
Deewaar (1975)
with Prakash Mehra:
Jaadugar (1989)
Sharaabi (1984)
Namak Halaal (1982)
Laawaris (1981)
Muqaddar Ka Sikandar (1978)
Klaus Kinski with Werner Herzog
Even though I have only seen two of the five features that Kinski worked with Herzog on, both these features left such an impression that I cannot imagine that any other director would have allowed Kinski to freedom to act out his demons so brilliantly like in Aguirre, the Wrath of God & Cobra Verde. There is a priceless scene near the end of Aguirre where Kinski is left on a raft with a few hundred monkeys; Kinski grabs a monkey in his hand, examines it and then throws away the animal in disgust. A simple scene but very effective. Herzog revealed that he did not instruct Kinski to toss the money away but was simply present on the raft with his cinematographer filming Kinski silently. So whatever unfolded on the raft was Kinski's improvisation. In a way, Herzog provided the intelligent spells of silence where Kinski would dive deep into his character and unleash raw emotions.
Films worked together:
Cobra Verde (1987)
Fitzcarraldo (1982)
Woyzeck (1979)
Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979)
Aguirre, the Wrath of God (1972)
Shah Rukh Khan with Aziz Mirza, Aditya Chopra and Karan Johar
Long before he became the famous international superstar that he is today, Shah Rukh Khan started his career by working in tv serials such as Circus and Fauji. One of the directors of Circus was Aziz Mirza. When Mirza decided to direct his first feature film (Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman), he naturally turned to Shah Rukh, one of the tv serial's impressive actors. Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman was a sweet charming film about an everyday working class hero and did well enough to allow both actor and director to get a foothold in the industry. Shah Rukh Khan moved onto a variety of projects both from small budget works such as Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa and Maya (Ketan Mehta's loose adaptation of Madame Bovary) to big budget films such as Subhash Ghai's Trimurti. Shah Rukh also played an assorted set of characters from an action hero to even negative roles such as in Daar (an Indian version of Cape Fear) & Anjaam. However, all that changed when Shah Rukh Khan starred in Aditya Chopra's debut film Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge released in 1995.
Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge marked the arrival of Yash Chopra's son, Aditya, and its immense box office success established Shah Rukh Khan as a bankable leading man. But the most important consequence of that film's success was that Shah Rukh Khan would become the poster boy for romantic roles in Yash Raj films (production company of Yash and Aditya Chopra), starring in endless love stories and love triangles. Since 1995 Shah Rukh has hardly ventured into any serious acting roles. Even in a historic period film such as Asoka, Shah Rukh Khan's character is busy chasing a girl around trees and waterfalls. Shah Rukh has starred not only in Aditya's films such as the mammoth Mohabbatein, a 4 hour long sugary film which featured 4 love stories, but also played the romantic lead in films which Aditya penned for his father Yash to direct (Dil To Pagal Hai and Veer-Zaara ). On top of that, Shah Rukh Khan has become a critical component of Karan Johar's love sagas, featuring in all of Karan's movies. It is not a surprize to learn that Shah Rukh Khan will star in both Karan and Aditya's next ventures.
Aziz Mirza only used Shah Rukh Khan as his leading man for his first four features. This year's Kismat Konnection was supposed to be the first time that Aziz took on a new leading man in Shahid Kapoor. However, the presence of Shah Rukh is evident as he is the film's narrator and Shahid's character is just an extension of the role that Shah Rukh played in Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman. On top of that Shahid copies Shah Rukh's antics in quite a few scenes. So even though Aziz has not taken Shah Rukh in his new movie, he cannot help break free his association with his main leading man.
Films with Aziz Mirza:
Chalte Chalte (2003)
Phir Bhi Dil Hai Hindustani (2000)
Yes Boss (1997)
Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman (1992)
with Aditya Chopra:
Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi (2008), to be released later this year
Mohabbatein (2000)
Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge (1995)
with Karan Johar:
Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna (2006)
Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham (2001)
Kuch Kuch Hota Hai (1998)
Govinda with David Dhawan
David Dhawan is known in Bollywood for his crude and vulgar comedies filled with double meaning dialogues laced with sexual innuendo and raunchy songs. Ofcourse, the success of David Dhawan would not have been possible without Govinda's presence. Govinda was the only actor who could have effortlessly carried out the rapid fire dialogues required by Dhawan and could wear the most bizarre wardrobe (including brightly coloured tight t-shirts despite Govinda having a round figure) while dancing some of the silliest moves to ever grace the Bollywood screen.
It was Aankhen in 1993 that set both Govinda & David Dhawan on the crude comedy path and it also marked the first time Dhawan's movie would feature two leading men chasing two women. This pattern was repeated by Dhawan in other Govinda films such as Partner, Jodi No.1, Ek Aur Ek Gyarah and Haseena Maan Jaayegi. A slight variation of this theme was where Dhawan's films (both with Govinda and without him) would have two men chasing one woman (Deewana Mastana, Mujse Shaadi Karogi) or would have one man courting two women (Saajan Chale Sasural, Gharwali Baharwali).
Govinda's films with Dhawan:
Partner (2007)
Ek Aur Ek Gyarah (2003)
Kyo Kii... Main Jhuth Nahin Bolta (2001)
Jodi No.1 (2001)
Kunwara (2000)
Haseena Maan Jaayegi (1999)
Bade Miyan Chote Miyan (1998)
Deewana Mastana (1997)
Hero No. 1 (1997)
Banarasi Babu (1997)
Saajan Chale Sasural (1996)
Coolie No. 1 (1995)
Raja Babu (1994)
Aankhen (1993)
Shola Aur Shabnam (1992)
Swarg (1990)
Not leading men but still vital collaborations
Paresh Rawal with Priyadarshan
Priyadarshan's Hera Pheri showed that it is possible to make an entertaining commercial Bollywood film with an intelligent script. In a way, Hera Pheri marked a distinct change in Priyadarshan's commercial film direction. After the success of that comedy, he favoured making light hearted entertaining films, unlike some of his earlier serious efforts such as the brilliant Virasat. Hera Pheri also shone the light brightly on Paresh Rawal, who stole the film with his excellent comedic timing. Rawal was at his best in Hera Pheri and since then Priyadarshan has ensured he gets Paresh involved in all his comedic ventures, albeit in small roles. And in virtually all their joined efforts, Paresh has lit up the screen with his unique comedic take.
Rawal's efforts with Priyadarshan:
Mere Baap Pehle Aap (2008)
Bhool Bhulaiyaa (2007)
Bhagam Bhag (2006)
Malamaal Weekly (2006)
Garam Masala (2005)
Hulchul (2004)
Hungama (2003)
Yeh Teraa Ghar Yeh Meraa Ghar (2001)
Hera Pheri (2000)
Suet Lam with Johnny To
Johnny To has used quite a few familiar faces in his films (such as Simon Yam) but Suet Lam occupies a special place in Johnny To's trademark gangster films. Sometimes Suet Lam has a key role, such as in P.T.U where his character's misplaced gun kick-starts an entire night of events in the film, while in other films he provides a short cameo. In 2007's Triangle, three directors directed a single film with no clear marking where one director's work ends. However, one can identify when Johnny To's portion started as soon as Suet Lam's character arrived on the screen. Indeed shortly after the arrival of Suet Lam, Triangle moves into a climatic gun shoot sequence, which is beautifully filmed Johnny To style.
Films worked together:
Cultured Bird (2008)
Flying Butterfly (2008)
Mad Detective (2007)
Triangle (2007)
Exiled (2006)
Election 2 (2006)
Election (2005)
Breaking News (2004)
Turn Left, Turn Right (2003)
PTU (2003)
Love for All Seasons (2003)
But what of the relationship between directors and their favourite, frequently employed actors? This is pivotal, this has yielded some of the great pictures in cinema's history, but it tends to be examined only in passing, only within the separate contexts of individual careers. And that misses the obvious point. After all, if good directors are the sculptors of film, then good actors are their clay. Okay, maybe their granite (John Ford with John Wayne), or their wood (George Lucas with Harrison Ford). At any rate, the crucial raw material.
He mentions that if the combination works quite well, then the result is two-fold: (1) a worthy film and (2) a wish to repeat the experience and be worthy again. .
Although this collaboration does depend on how a director approaches his or her film. Rick Groen differentiates the two different styles used by Martin Scorsese & Hitchcock.
Consider, for instance, Martin Scorsese, whose finest movies are character-driven and who, by his own admission, gets “bored” directing plot. Well, if your goal is to delve deeply into character, then a great actor, flexible and nuanced, is an essential tool. Luckily for him, and us, Robert De Niro may be the greatest of his generation. In Mean Streets, Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, especially Raging Bull, Scorsese's camera gives the work its wings, but it's De Niro's brilliance that finds, and illuminates, the riven heart of the film. This director relies absolutely on the symbiosis with his star – one is unthinkable without the other. And when the actor, his implement, gets too old for the protagonist's job, the director is obliged to find another. Which explains why, in The Aviator and Gangs of New York and The Departed, Scorsese has a new best friend in Leonardo DiCaprio.
By contrast, Alfred Hitchcock had scant interest in character and an abiding love for plot, along with the suspense that plot can generate. Consequently, he cultivated a reputation for regarding performers as little more than human props, set-dressing for his carefully planned story-boards – here insert Actress X in shower, there put Actor Y in cornfield. But shrewd ol' Hitch also had a keen eye for solid human props with commercial appeal, employing James Stewart in four of his classics (including Rear Window and Vertigo) and Cary Grant in another four (among them Suspicion and North by Northwest). These two stars are completely different actors, with different styles and mannerisms, and yet Hitchcock used them to equally strong effect. Still, while their performances enhance these pictures, they're not, like De Niro's, the essence of them. Hitchcock never really made actors' films.
The article is centered around Hollywood combinations with a line dropped in for Ingmar Bergman. So I decided to come up with a separate list of non-Hollywood films where an actor worked with the same director on multiple occasions.
Lee Kang-sheng & Tsai Ming-liang
Lee Kang-sheng has acted in all of Tsai Ming-liang's feature films, playing the same character in all the films, except in Goodbye, Dragon Inn where Lee Kang-sheng had a minor role. The two first worked together in Tsai Ming-liang's 1991 short film Youngsters after which they both ventured into their first feature in 1992's Rebels of the Neon God. Tsai Ming-liang's films contain a loose framework where the real beauty and charm lies in observing the character of Lee Kang-sheng growing up from a teenager to a young man, drifting from job to job and even indulging in few affairs. So naturally it makes sense for Tsai Ming-liang to continue to use Lee Kang-sheng repeatedly as he can count on his favourite actor to ease into any situation or location the screenplay requires. And the result is evident as their films have a consistent feel and have created their own universe set in Taiwan where all the films were shot except 2006's I Don't Want to Sleep Alone which was set in Kuala Lumpur.
In fact, I cannot imagine how the two will ever work without each other. Last year Tsai Ming-liang produced Lee Kang-sheng's directorial effort Help me Eros. The film was supposed to be a standalone effort, separate from the Tsai Ming-Liang films, yet Lee Kang-sheng plays a slight variation of the same character he normally plays in Tsai Ming-liang's films. And since Lee Kang-sheng has worked so closely with one director, it is not a surprize to see that his own directorial effort contains shades of Tsai Ming-liang.
Films and Shorts worked together:
I Don't Want to Sleep Alone (2006)
The Wayward Cloud (2005)
Good Bye, Dragon Inn (2003)
The Skywalk Is Gone (short film, 2002)
What Time Is It Over There? (2001)
The Hole (1998)
The River (1997)
Vive L'Amour (1994)
Rebels of the Neon God (1992)
Note: Of all the films, only Good Bye, Dragon Inn did not have Lee Kang-sheng in a starring role.
Jean-Pierre Léaud & François Truffaut
François Truffaut announced his arrival in an outstanding manner with 400 Blows, his directorial feature film debut in which a young 14 year old Jean-Pierre Léaud stole the show with his raw portrayal of Antoine Doinel. And almost a decade after the two first worked together, Truffaut revived the character of Antoine Doinel by using Jean-Pierre Léaud in Stolen Kisses, followed by two more films. It was a fascinating cinematic series where one could see the continuing adventures of a single character through his teenage years to adulthood.
Films worked together:
Love on the Run (1979)
Bed and Board (1970)
Stolen Kisses (1968)
The 400 Blows (1959)
The practice of using the same character in multiple films inspired Tsai Ming-liang who gives a hint of this in What Time Is It There? when Lee Kang-sheng's character is shown watching The 400 Blows. Also, near the end of What Time Is It There?, Jean-Pierre Léaud makes an appearance, tying a gigantic cinematic loop between France and Taiwan.
Interestingly, Tsai Ming-liang's next feature Visages stars both Lee Kang-sheng & Jean-Pierre Léaud.
Amitabh Bachchan with multiple directors
From the mid 1970's to late 1980's Amitabh Bachchan was the undisputed leading Indian actor who could easily mould himself to any director's need. He could play the street smart Jai for Ramesh Sippy's legendary Sholay, be the icy cold fearless coal miner for Yash Chopra's Kaala Patthar or shift gears and portray sensitive characters such as in Yash Chopra's Silsila or act in hilarious slapstick comedic roles such as in Prakash Mehra's Namak Halaal. There were multiple directors with whom Amitabh regularly worked and there were roles specifically written for Amitabh, especially to harness his portrayal of the "angry man". One director who forged a real partnership with Amitabh was Manmohan Desai. After working with Amitabh for Parvarish in 1977, Desai always found a place for his leading man in all his films until his last directorial feature Gangaa Jamunaa Saraswathi in 1988.
Just some of the major collaborations between Amitabh and his directors from the 1970's-80's.
with Manmohan Desai:
Gangaa Jamunaa Saraswathi (1988)
Mard (1985)
Coolie (1983)
Desh Premee (1982)
Naseeb (1981)
Suhaag (1979)
Amar Akbar Anthony (1977)
Parvarish (1977)
with Yash Chopra:
Silsila (1981)
Kaala Patthar (1979)
Trishul (1978)
Kabhi Kabhie (1976)
Deewaar (1975)
with Prakash Mehra:
Jaadugar (1989)
Sharaabi (1984)
Namak Halaal (1982)
Laawaris (1981)
Muqaddar Ka Sikandar (1978)
Klaus Kinski with Werner Herzog
Even though I have only seen two of the five features that Kinski worked with Herzog on, both these features left such an impression that I cannot imagine that any other director would have allowed Kinski to freedom to act out his demons so brilliantly like in Aguirre, the Wrath of God & Cobra Verde. There is a priceless scene near the end of Aguirre where Kinski is left on a raft with a few hundred monkeys; Kinski grabs a monkey in his hand, examines it and then throws away the animal in disgust. A simple scene but very effective. Herzog revealed that he did not instruct Kinski to toss the money away but was simply present on the raft with his cinematographer filming Kinski silently. So whatever unfolded on the raft was Kinski's improvisation. In a way, Herzog provided the intelligent spells of silence where Kinski would dive deep into his character and unleash raw emotions.
Films worked together:
Cobra Verde (1987)
Fitzcarraldo (1982)
Woyzeck (1979)
Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979)
Aguirre, the Wrath of God (1972)
Shah Rukh Khan with Aziz Mirza, Aditya Chopra and Karan Johar
Long before he became the famous international superstar that he is today, Shah Rukh Khan started his career by working in tv serials such as Circus and Fauji. One of the directors of Circus was Aziz Mirza. When Mirza decided to direct his first feature film (Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman), he naturally turned to Shah Rukh, one of the tv serial's impressive actors. Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman was a sweet charming film about an everyday working class hero and did well enough to allow both actor and director to get a foothold in the industry. Shah Rukh Khan moved onto a variety of projects both from small budget works such as Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa and Maya (Ketan Mehta's loose adaptation of Madame Bovary) to big budget films such as Subhash Ghai's Trimurti. Shah Rukh also played an assorted set of characters from an action hero to even negative roles such as in Daar (an Indian version of Cape Fear) & Anjaam. However, all that changed when Shah Rukh Khan starred in Aditya Chopra's debut film Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge released in 1995.
Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge marked the arrival of Yash Chopra's son, Aditya, and its immense box office success established Shah Rukh Khan as a bankable leading man. But the most important consequence of that film's success was that Shah Rukh Khan would become the poster boy for romantic roles in Yash Raj films (production company of Yash and Aditya Chopra), starring in endless love stories and love triangles. Since 1995 Shah Rukh has hardly ventured into any serious acting roles. Even in a historic period film such as Asoka, Shah Rukh Khan's character is busy chasing a girl around trees and waterfalls. Shah Rukh has starred not only in Aditya's films such as the mammoth Mohabbatein, a 4 hour long sugary film which featured 4 love stories, but also played the romantic lead in films which Aditya penned for his father Yash to direct (Dil To Pagal Hai and Veer-Zaara ). On top of that, Shah Rukh Khan has become a critical component of Karan Johar's love sagas, featuring in all of Karan's movies. It is not a surprize to learn that Shah Rukh Khan will star in both Karan and Aditya's next ventures.
Aziz Mirza only used Shah Rukh Khan as his leading man for his first four features. This year's Kismat Konnection was supposed to be the first time that Aziz took on a new leading man in Shahid Kapoor. However, the presence of Shah Rukh is evident as he is the film's narrator and Shahid's character is just an extension of the role that Shah Rukh played in Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman. On top of that Shahid copies Shah Rukh's antics in quite a few scenes. So even though Aziz has not taken Shah Rukh in his new movie, he cannot help break free his association with his main leading man.
Films with Aziz Mirza:
Chalte Chalte (2003)
Phir Bhi Dil Hai Hindustani (2000)
Yes Boss (1997)
Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman (1992)
with Aditya Chopra:
Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi (2008), to be released later this year
Mohabbatein (2000)
Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge (1995)
with Karan Johar:
Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna (2006)
Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham (2001)
Kuch Kuch Hota Hai (1998)
Govinda with David Dhawan
David Dhawan is known in Bollywood for his crude and vulgar comedies filled with double meaning dialogues laced with sexual innuendo and raunchy songs. Ofcourse, the success of David Dhawan would not have been possible without Govinda's presence. Govinda was the only actor who could have effortlessly carried out the rapid fire dialogues required by Dhawan and could wear the most bizarre wardrobe (including brightly coloured tight t-shirts despite Govinda having a round figure) while dancing some of the silliest moves to ever grace the Bollywood screen.
It was Aankhen in 1993 that set both Govinda & David Dhawan on the crude comedy path and it also marked the first time Dhawan's movie would feature two leading men chasing two women. This pattern was repeated by Dhawan in other Govinda films such as Partner, Jodi No.1, Ek Aur Ek Gyarah and Haseena Maan Jaayegi. A slight variation of this theme was where Dhawan's films (both with Govinda and without him) would have two men chasing one woman (Deewana Mastana, Mujse Shaadi Karogi) or would have one man courting two women (Saajan Chale Sasural, Gharwali Baharwali).
Govinda's films with Dhawan:
Partner (2007)
Ek Aur Ek Gyarah (2003)
Kyo Kii... Main Jhuth Nahin Bolta (2001)
Jodi No.1 (2001)
Kunwara (2000)
Haseena Maan Jaayegi (1999)
Bade Miyan Chote Miyan (1998)
Deewana Mastana (1997)
Hero No. 1 (1997)
Banarasi Babu (1997)
Saajan Chale Sasural (1996)
Coolie No. 1 (1995)
Raja Babu (1994)
Aankhen (1993)
Shola Aur Shabnam (1992)
Swarg (1990)
Not leading men but still vital collaborations
Priyadarshan's Hera Pheri showed that it is possible to make an entertaining commercial Bollywood film with an intelligent script. In a way, Hera Pheri marked a distinct change in Priyadarshan's commercial film direction. After the success of that comedy, he favoured making light hearted entertaining films, unlike some of his earlier serious efforts such as the brilliant Virasat. Hera Pheri also shone the light brightly on Paresh Rawal, who stole the film with his excellent comedic timing. Rawal was at his best in Hera Pheri and since then Priyadarshan has ensured he gets Paresh involved in all his comedic ventures, albeit in small roles. And in virtually all their joined efforts, Paresh has lit up the screen with his unique comedic take.
Rawal's efforts with Priyadarshan:
Mere Baap Pehle Aap (2008)
Bhool Bhulaiyaa (2007)
Bhagam Bhag (2006)
Malamaal Weekly (2006)
Garam Masala (2005)
Hulchul (2004)
Hungama (2003)
Yeh Teraa Ghar Yeh Meraa Ghar (2001)
Hera Pheri (2000)
Johnny To has used quite a few familiar faces in his films (such as Simon Yam) but Suet Lam occupies a special place in Johnny To's trademark gangster films. Sometimes Suet Lam has a key role, such as in P.T.U where his character's misplaced gun kick-starts an entire night of events in the film, while in other films he provides a short cameo. In 2007's Triangle, three directors directed a single film with no clear marking where one director's work ends. However, one can identify when Johnny To's portion started as soon as Suet Lam's character arrived on the screen. Indeed shortly after the arrival of Suet Lam, Triangle moves into a climatic gun shoot sequence, which is beautifully filmed Johnny To style.
Films worked together:
Cultured Bird (2008)
Flying Butterfly (2008)
Mad Detective (2007)
Triangle (2007)
Exiled (2006)
Election 2 (2006)
Election (2005)
Breaking News (2004)
Turn Left, Turn Right (2003)
PTU (2003)
Love for All Seasons (2003)
Friday, August 08, 2008
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.
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:
Meaning: A typical Bollywood film with action, songs, dance, romance, emotion, etc.
Meaning: comedy movie with good songs
Meaning: The movie is unlike the countless other stale love stories that get released every year. Also, means a film with new actors.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)