I have something to add to the post I uploaded a couple of posts back, where I wrote extensively about the expectations and recoveries from this film. I need to speak once more about Dr. Moriarty (quite till the point till I am obsessed between watching the Holmes–Moriarty face-off) and I need to talk about the actor playing the part.
As I have made quite clear already, Jared Harris is indeed quite exceptional and matches Holmes brilliantly at every step, there is one thing that must say, could have been done better. On second thoughts now, I believe that Brad Pitt could have just been a better choice. Because Jared Harris is good, but he doesn’t match up to the celebrity status of Robert Downey Jr., the man who plays Sherlock Holmes. However, Brad Pitt would have. And that would have been the more ideal face-off. Pity it was not to be so, and yes, giving true credit to Jared Harris for doing the unthinkable… thought I’d just put down the reassessment of my own thoughts though once.
Overall, Ladies vs Ricky Bahl could have been a much, much better film. But surprisingly, it has more to do with the casting for the movie than the actual process of film making (I guess we’d be too naive going looking for a “story” in here).
Don’t get me wrong. The actors don’t do too much wrong themselves — I am just talking from a point of marketing. In the sense, the movie doesn’t have much to offer, its just been made with the sole intention to entertain, and I can respect that. It doesn’t try to be pretentious, it does not attempt to define reality. It is a grand gala show, put up just to help you spend some quality relaxation time.
And therefore, I say, the key to making this movie really hit the niche it was trying to was by getting super celebrities to star in it. Because when you want to rely on simply the polish, the brand of polish you use should be considered more note-worthy.
Let us take a look at the actors one by one and see if we could have replaced them with someone else:
Anushka Sharma: She has done complete justice to the dignity and honor she has been accorded in this current line up. She comes right at the end, as the anti-thesis, and in a movie where there are three female victims, playing the sabotaging fourth required a certain extent of skill. And Anushka Sharma lives up to that challenge. She brings in a joie de vivre in her character and yet shows the subtle female vulnerabilities that are required in a movie of this nature.
Maybe a Kareena Kapoor? Who is to say… Though heart of hearts, I definitely would have gone with Anushka Sharma. She has the right audience share too to matter.
Parineeti Chopra: This one is a revelation. No, she isn’t “hot” as the word would define, she is also far from docile as the other extreme merits, but she is a girl with amazing talent. She lives and breathes into her character, she makes it all worth it. She is the finest findBollywood has found in recent times, however, she does have the perfect foil in Anushka Sharma. Consider this — after watching Ladies vs Ricky Bahl, don’t you think Parineeti Chopra could have done an equally good job in Band Baaja Baaraat? What? She wouldn’t have the look? Tsk, tsk… But no, she was amazing in the movie, simply the finest actor of them all… She just sailed into it and caused the shipwreck she was intended to.
Aditi Sharma: Another pleasant to peaches surprise from the other end. And while it does seem that she suits blissfully into the character that she was chosen to display, the thing is that Aditi Sharma could have been replaced with no threat to the character. Meaning, she could have been replaced for a little more serious celebrity and that would bring some extra mileage to the table. She was perfect, but perfection of this kind can be easily manipulated. Look forward to this actress though, she has the metal to do some very good work.
Dipannita Sharma: Clearly, the weakest actor of them all. Dipannita Sharma should never have even accepted doing this film. I know that she wouldn’t have had any conception about how good Parineeti Chopra and Aditi Sharma were going to be, but this is plain ridiculous. In the sense, Dipannita never looks like she is in this entire film. It’s not that her character could be done away with, but this woman surely needs lessons on how to get her act in order. If she’s expecting to live off it, all the more so.
Ranveer Kapoor: I do like him very much, and I do believe in him to rise up very soon. But no, FAIL. Why? Because he was too middle-class all through the movie. In the sense, he doesn’t look the part of a conman. At the most, I’d just give him being to standards in the first con with Parineeti Chopra. Otherwise, no no no ways! Does he for once look like the art dealer, or the zardozi seller… or least of all, Beach King?? In the last segment when he goes up to order a Single Malt, who else thought that it just didn’t make any sense?
No, this one belonged to Hrithik Roshan. He would lit this one, hamming intact!
Even then, see the movie. At the most you will end up not caring, but it won’t feel that bad. It’s fun till it lasts, and sometimes all you need to see are these movies. And more often than not, most of the times you want to…
Guy Ritchie has actually been successful in bringing quality literature down through the road of pulp fiction. And I guess the question will still be — is that a good thing or bad? The question, as always, is which way we intend to look down the system of mayhem. The answers, as always too, will always remain two fold.
The first, and most obvious anomaly, is the shriek of the purists against an act that cannot be tagged as more blasphemous. Sherlock Holmes, the brooding, sombre, stiff and charismatic private eye, the generic name of an entire genre over nationalities and languages, completely debased by a portrayal of an aggressive, slapstick, loud and eccentric buffoon on screen — yes, there is reason enough to lament.
However, like I mentioned earlier, there can be found a method of looking through the other end of the looking glass, and giving a more sincere appraisal of the fact at hand. And all I suggest in this matter, is to look at the entire Holmes–Watson build up in the terms of the current decade, the present social structure, again wrapped in the scoffer’s terms of “base”, the “Bro Code“. Of that, Sherlock Holmes and the Game of Shadows, is flawless.
When I did hear that the villain will be coming to light in the sequel to Guy Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes movie of 2009, I did believe that the director was attempting to be a tad bit ambitious. Knowing by what had already been shown to us, I wasn’t sure how this classic battle of wits and stratagems would be dealt with by the director. I knew that the two protagonists were going to come face to face more sooner than expected, that I respect as the flaw of the celluloid — she has her limitations — but then how deep was the impact going to be on the principal source?
Now that I have seen it, I can breathe a sigh of relief. For with this movie I was not going to dissect the stylistic misinterpretation of the original, but rather work within than network to find a more intrinsic value that a sequel is always intended to bring. And I must say once again, I was indeed quite satisfied.
Jared Harris as Professor Moriarty in Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows
So how does it feel to see a living breathing interpretation of Doctor Moriarty, clearly the most charismatic and ruthless of villains ever created, one that may still be quite unsurpassed (because mental deviousness cloaked in ordinary superiority is a something that cannot be created with general ease). When the rumor mills were buzz with Brad Pitt perhaps gearing up to take that mantle, excitement was strife I am sure. I did question myself once on the subject when I first saw the conversation between Holmes and the Doctor. But then I was silenced quite beautifully by Jared Harris, a wonderfully composed and vibrant Dr. Moriarty. And I must also confess with all my heart, Jared Harris may just have been able to do a much better job than perhaps Brad Pitt could ever have done. The challenges to Holmes’ intuition and levels of deduction were masterfully choreographed through the script, lending their intellectual skirmishes a more raw vigor. No, Dr. Moriarty was well-developed, and you could make that out even more perfectly in the fist fight that culminated the climax. Hewas Holmes, perhaps slightly better or slightly worse, but he was one who could match up in wits, in intellectual accumen, not just physically.
And where does that leave us then? Of course, with Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson, the eternal duo and also one of the first brothers I presume. The novels by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle certainly did establish the fond respect and adoration that both Holmes and Watson had for each other, but the principal focus has always been the case of intrigue on hand. However, the movie spelt it out, albeit in a bit too loud a method. The strong bond, the protective love that Holmes has always had for Watson was displayed only too categorically in the film — how Holmes cannot save the woman he loves and has to bury her last physical memory, but he goes out of his way, absurdly too, to save Dr. Watson‘s newly-wed wife, how he does not relish the idea of parting ways with the good doctor, but yet he personally makes sure that he reaches the alter on time. What this movie has done, more than any other, is perhaps cement till eternity the chords of affection between Holmes and Watson — and truth be told, it didn’t hurt to be spelt right across our faces.
Still from the movie
In The Game of Shadows, Robert Downey Jr. does show more potent signs of the Sherlock Holmes charisma, quite like in the scene at the opera (I am not saying he was perfect, I am just defending that he was closer this time to the real thing), but the only thing that he can never do anything about in getting into the skin is his appearance. He can play it differently, but it was have meant a lot more if he had actually looked the part. That is somewhere, I believe, Guy Ritchie has completely failed when he decided to cast Downey in this franchise. I don’t know, what if it were Johnny Depp instead of Downey? I’d put my money on that (girls should love me).
Jude Law sinks his teeth into being Dr. Watson effortlessly once again. He, like I was saying in the case of Robert Downey Jr., looks the part — and that’s half the battle won right there at the beginning. His actions this time were more voluntary, something that even made the viewers warm up to Dr. Watson perhaps… Overall, he was aces.
Over all, Sherlock Holmes and the Game of Shadows was a way more toned down interpretation of the original, and a lot more fun at the same time.
The Indian film industry is a cruel place to be in. Mostly because of the illiterati that we call “producers” and also because one section of the audience will always be compelled to sit outside in the light, because reel time belongs to the money churner alone. No, a break even won’t do — rich people need to be richer!
Ashton Kutcher at Time 100 Gala (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
This one has been getting into lengthy debates of late all over the web — Two and a Half Menstar, Ashton Kutcher stars in this new commercial for PopChips, where he plays different kinds of characters, all charging after their packet of PopChips. It’s the Bollywood producer Raj who has faced trouble in this series — for catering to stereotypes about Indians and their ways. PopChips have already pulled down “Raj” from the air, but thanks to the internet, it still survives.
Now what do you think people? Really? Are we that naive to bother about a stereotypical notion, when we all know how things stand in the global sphere? Doesn’t it seem more like general knowledge to them, than an actual insult. Hey, economically speaking, I’m sure the Yanks want PopChips to sell in India some day. That’ll be a huge market for them. Like what could he do but paint his face brown if he was playing an Indian. The ads are pretty useless by themselves, but I guess that was the whole idea. Of having one man play different roles and characters! Timesies, people!
Or then again, am I being too naive? And was it really an underhanded insult to a race by portraying them in a particular misnomered method? I don’t know… You say!
The problem with Agent Vinod is a sad one indeed. Because this was one Bollywood movie that I had seen in a long, long time that really showed a lot of promise. And therefore, the end it came to makes it all the more sad.
Sriram Raghavan has been one of the high toasted directors that the Bollywood New Wave has produced and propped up in recent times. And with movies like Ek Hasina Thhi and Johnny Gaddar, the accolades that he had received till date were truly justified. And therefore also, equally justified, was the hype around his latest cinemascope, Agent Vinod. And with Agent Vinod, he was once again teaming up with Saif Ali Khan — no one really has still come to grips with the fist fight scene from Ek Hasina Thhi. It’s true.
Bottom Line: Agent Vinod did not do as well as expected at the box office.
After having watched Agent Vinod twice, I think I can take a shot at the cause — amalgamation of genres. That alone could have been the only reason why the movie couldn’t be well received by the audiences.
With Ek Hasina Thhi, Sriram Raghavan took us on a seldom walked path, that of the noir thriller genre. And everything in that movie fit like the perfect shoe. Like I already mentioned, the fist fight sequence, the actual act, the boyfriend bait, the betrayal, the friendships, the metamorphosis, the strategy, the trap and the redemption, everything seemed to just come on like a sequential train already pre-destined by fate.
Johnny Gaddar travelled a different path completely. We were now back to the retro thriller, made even more emphatic by the director in the two people he dedicates the movie to — James Hadley Chase and Vijay Anand. The key word here was “style”. Once again, everything ran through like a well-wound clock. Tick-tock, tick-tock, that I believe has been the key to all of Sriram Raghavan’s movies.
And boom! Face to face with Agent Vinod. What bitter disappointment. And why? Because Sriram Raghavan has gone down the same path that he had rightfully chosen to avoid earlier. He had attempted to make a blockbuster, Bollywood ishtyle!
Catastrophe!
Let me illustrate my point better with an example from the first few minutes of the movie. We are shown a Tuco quote from The Good, the Bad and the Ugly and then the movie starts to play. We are all excited and waiting, when what seems like an almost straight life from Once Upon a Time in the West starts materializing in the background — the harmonica is quite the same, but the movement far too laborious, unlike the magnificent original. And then from there, we are taken right into a Pierce Brosnan-ish James Bond film where the Pakistanis try to make Saif Ali Khan (name unknown) talk. And then, moments later, when Saif tries to make a break for it, along with his “partner” Ravi Kishen, starts the meaningless banter between the two, ala Main Hoon Nastyle. And finally, borrowing from the theater of the absurd (and I am being as polite and sarcastic that I can possibly be at the same time), a sexy woman tossing inside a sack is uncovered — her name? Farah Faquesh. (I may have gotten her first name wrong, but then… do you blame me?)
And now rolls the credit titles.
This I believe is the principal problem with Agent Vinod, and it is sad to see Sriram Raghavan go down this road. The same held true for Anurag Basu earlier, who met with the same fate with Kites. But I have noticed that whenever such directors go on a budget spree, they start to lose focus. Perhaps they become to ridden with the guilt that they need to get the producer back all their money and start including item numbers which make no sense — Sriram Raghavan’s sheer genius is evident from the action sequences he develops through bits and portions of the movie. Bourne Supremacy be damned, Agent Vinod is a clear winner.
This wasn’t a review exactly, but more of an inquisition into the causes of Agent Vinod’s failure. But give it some thought, and do let me know if I missed out more than just this.
Directed by: Sriram Raghavan
Produced by: Saif Ali Khan, Dinesh Vijan
Screenplay by: Sriram Raghavan and Arijit Biswas
Starring: Saif Ali Khan, Kareena Kapoor, Prem Chopra, Dhritiman Chatterjee, Ram Kapoor, Maryam Zakaria, Gulshan Grover, Ravi Kishen
Before I write even one single word, I first need to paste this from Wikipedia:
Paan Singh Tomar (1932 - October 1, 1981) was an Indianathlete and a seven-time national steeplechase champion during the 1950s and 1960s. He represented India at the 1958 Asian Games in Tokyo, Japan. Tomar also served in the Indian Army, and it was in the army where his talent was first recognized. After premature retirement from the army he settled back in his native village. Later he gained notoriety as a Chambal Valleydacoit when he resorted to banditry after a land feud in his village.
He was killed on October 1st, 1981 in a police ambush. A biopic, Paan Singh Tomar, was released in 2012 to much critical acclaim. It was written by Sanjay Chouhan, directed by Tigmanshu Dhulia and starred Irrfan Khan as Paan Singh Tomar and Mahie Gill as his wife.
He is survived by his second son Souram Singh, a 53-year-old retired Army Subedar and his 75-year-old wife Indira who lives far from Chambal Valley for fear of being killed by Paan Singh Tomar's old enemies or the police.
Because sometimes, the mere absurdity of the setting just goes on to heighten our very sense and sensibility about matters. That by pasting this little excerpt from Wikipedia, I have reinforced that whatever we are about to see, whatever we are about to witness, is something that actually happened in reality. And I think Tigmanshu Dhulia and Irrfan Khan (well, he’s stopped using the “Khan” with his name anymore, but this is just for some kind of continuation reference before the new name really, really kicks in), have done an amazing, amazing job. Very honestly, in my books, more Irrfan than Tigmanshu — but I’ll be getting to that shortly.
So as we already have established, the story is real. And therefore perhaps, the story is miserably sad. But it is a movie that just has to be seen to be believed. I have no idea how many times I have used that phrase till date, because I really can’t seem to ever get enough of human courage, but this movie is something else. Maybe because of something to do with the movie per se, but it completely swept me away.
And this movie also serves as a loud resounding slap across all our faces. Because it strips everything bare to the very bone and serves it on one ugly plate for us to visualize it. Because Paan Singh Tomar’s story is real, we cannot dust this one under the carpet. To now know about his records is a shame and we should all hang our heads in shame. Paan Singh Tomarwas right. He needed to become a dacoit, a rebel in the Chambal hills for us to know his name. Else what respect does a sportsman have in this country?
And this movie would never have been what it is, had it not been for Irrfan. True, the script was solid and the story extremely well written with the right flow of the narrative, but this could have been so much better at the director’s table. But again, we’ll come to that later because right now we just need to talk of Irrfan. Paan Singh Tomar is clearly an actor’s movie. Sure, each and every actor breathes his all into the movie, but Irrfan clearly takes the entire art of acting to a different level. Had it not been for him, this movie would have fallen through. Because he simply rests himself against the story line and he just runs along through it, completely making obsolete the dividing line between Paan Singh Tomar and himself. I know this is just the beginning of the year and there are scores of movies that are still to be released, but I’d like to go out on a limb here and clearly state that Irrfan deserves every single award that the film fraternity can dole out to him this year. Because we shouldn’t be making the same mistake once again. Paan Singh Tomar died without his due from the whole nation, Irrfan should not meet with the same fate.
Now the only sore point that I have been deflecting till this point — the direction. Don’t get me wrong, this is an amazingly well directed film. But the only thing that I continued to wish for all through the movie was that it was shot with some kind of purpose, that is shouldn’t have looked so ordinary. Neither did it have a more documentary feel to it and neither did it have an stylistic finesse to it. It was too plain, too retro plain (in the negative way). This movie, with its entire story and setting, had a lot of scope to offer visually, thematically, and it was not dealt with properly. Not like a Dev D, or a Kahaani. But then again, this never even begins to take anything away from the film. It remains top notch.
Watch Paan Singh Tomar, watch it because we owe it to him. And to Irrfan. This is magic, an actual sombre, harsh magic that we need to see to make ourselves evolve.
I must admit that I always felt that the Mission Impossible franchise needed to move out of its standard I, II, III titles and move into a part by part naming process for its movies. Because two movies in this series do not normally follow each other, or even have any kind of story progression from past to present to future.
And therefore, I was pleasantly surprised when the fourth installment of the franchise was not called Mission Impossible IV, but Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol. It now made a lot more sense, and it allowed the audience to prepare itself for a Ghost Protocolpremise. And yet, this is the one where references are made — past to present!
Does that bother me? Not one bit. After all, this served two principles at once. I got a movie which I knew was going to be a single story, and I also got some kind of a background check. And yes, I feel a little evil right now and I want to burst your bubble right now, but Ving Rhames is not there in this installment. Luther Stickell makes a small little out-of-plot cameo at the very end — that part did upset me a little, why to tell lies.
But that point taken care of, I must admit that Mission: Impossible — Ghost Protocol is clearly perhaps my favorite choice of the entire Mission Impossible series. The first part was literally good, but it lacked most of the hair raising actions sequences that this franchise is known to bring to the table, part twowas mind numbing with some kick ass moments strewn all over, and the third part was Zzzzz. But then Ghost Protocol does bring in quite a punch.
For starters, it was glad to see the Russians back in on the scene. No longer where we dealing with traitors and iconic bad guys, we were now talking governments and ideologies. And the villain in this film, Kurt Hendricks (played by a cool as ice Michael Nyqvist) brings a lot more to the table than just villainy. Its a vision gone wrong in its very inception, and this time we get to deal with a more real crisis that a remote one, of which we at least give some thought to the principal antagonist’s motives. It’s not an open and shut case (if you think real hard about it) and there is a sense of doom. Its not one where you know what’s going to happen. That does not mean to say that Ghost Protocol is all about the intellectual stuff… heck no, its all popcorn and entertainment.
Tom Cruise has literally grown up essaying the character of Ethan Hunt, and even with age completely on his side (face too), he still walks through the role, showing signs of maturity and even physical shortfalls. He is cool, he is classy and yet he brings a certain vulnerability to the role this time. Sure, he also takes it to the other extreme (yes, we all know what we are talking about. The Burj Khalifa hanging stunts were all performed by Cruise himself, and that is quite literally something). And while we are on that topic, the action pieces in this particular film is completely awe-inspiring. Oh the action, the action, the action. Sure, its no Jason Bourne, but one thing is true — that it is quite something all by itself.
And like also every other film, this movie too has some shortfalls. First and foremost, while I am certain that we all love Simon Pegg, he can’t do a Luther. No sir, that role should never have been taken away from Ving Rhames. He too had grown with that role like Tom Cruise and there was no need to replace him. If there were date issues, it should have been sorted by production, but there was no call in this entire movie to replace Rhames. Not cool, not cool at all.
And the Paula Patton character was nearly killed by Jane Carter. No, not acceptable. Not to mention Indian actor, Anil Kapoor. What a ham! Seriously, there are a million more Indian actors who could have played Brij Nath, and Anil Kapoor was a hopeless mess. Shame! And one more word for the film makers — when showing scenes in Mumbai, please show the city and not Canada. It’s not that hard to make out which is what today anymore.
Jeremy Renner, playing William Brandt was a bonus though, and Renner did not disappoint. He lived up to his standards and he brought in quite a punch — particularly in the scene where his past is brought to light. Renner excels, and how!
Overall, this was one heck of a joy ride and I’d put in all your money to go and see this movie movie. It’s worth every bit of it.
Directed by: Brad Bird
Produced by: Tom Cruise, J J Abrams and Bryan Burk
Screenplay by: Andre Nemec and Josh Applebaum
Starring: Tom Cruise, Jeremy Renner, Simon Pegg, Paula Patton, Michael Nyqvist, Vladimir Mashkov, Anil Kapoor and Lea Seydoux
After a long, long time, all I could do was sit and stare while I felt a smile gently crease my lips, and then felt the warm tear drop run down my cheeks. And right at that very point, there was only one thought that went through my head. Welcome back, Cameron Crowe!
It has been, what, five years, since Crowe last directed anything? And finally when you see We Bought a Zoo, you do feel that the long wait had yielded high dividends.
And let me point it out that I am writing about this movie not five minutes since the closing titles rolled out, so perhaps I cannot bring myself to recount every minuscule detail, every point that I carefully thought out before hand. No, this is going to be nothing like that, because this is just a simple testimony of words that have jumbled themselves through my brain even as the movie came to an end.
Because this is not a very everyday story. Sure, there have been tons and tons of movies made on humans and animals, but there has seldom been one where all of it becomes one — and man, quite literally, becomes a true symbol of the animal kingdom. The reliance between man and animals, the way they turn out to be metaphors for one and another, than is a facet of such man-animal movies that has perhaps never been caught on camera before.
Benjamin Mee (Matt Damon), an adventure enthusiast who works as a reporter who quite literally goes into the eye of a hurricane to write about it, has now a new adventure in hand as his son puts it. And its one adventure that he is completely unprepared for. His wife (Stephanie Szostak) has passed away and he is now in charge of his two kids — fourteen year old Dylan (Colin Ford) and seven year old Rosie (Maggie Elizabeth Jones).
Naturally, with their mother passing away, the kids, in particular Dylan, have developed some deep-seated psychological insecurities. And it starts to reflect in his artwork, in his every daily life. The growing rift between father and son starts getting showcased at Dylan’s school. After four strikes in one semester, the school can do no better, than expel him. And that is when Benjamin starts to realize that things need to be changed for the better.
And in a quest to find everything new, he ends up buying a zoo… a zoo that was being run by the state in the interim and it was state stipulation that whoever buys the house, compulsorily had to buy the zoo along with it. Seeing his daughter smile again, Benjamin feels that perhaps the zoo would be the true healer of all their wounds.
However much his financial advisor brother Duncan (Thomas Hayden Church) advises him against making such a stupid decision, considering the fact that Benjamin knows nothing about maintaining and running a zoo, the deal is done and the Mee family moves into their knew zoo-house.
And then begins, as Benjamin puts it himself, an adventure with the animals, the zoo staff (Scarlett Johansson, Angus MacFadyen, Elle Fanning, Patrick Fugit and Carlo Gallo) and his own family. It takes time for it to all sink in, but slowly and steadily, they start to put together the place, making it more and more likely to be opened to the public once again.
I have just explained the basic premise of the movie, but what happens from this point onwards is something that one clearly needs to see, and not read. Cameron Crewe, like old times, weaves a fascinating tale of courage (“all you need is twenty seconds of insane courage”) and human dependency on animals and vice-versa. And the movie peters out in the only way that Cameron Crowe can do it — with insane amount of love and affection, with more than just twenty seconds of insane courage.
The thing is that whenever I see a Matt Damon film, my first thought is of Jason Bourne. And yet when you see him playing a Benjamin Mee, you can’t help it but feel your heart fill with joy. It’s like watching poetry moving all around you. That is the sign of a terrific actor — one who is comfortable playing anything and in any way possible, one who can make you believe that he is tailor made for each and every role. And of course, with that said and done comes the very natural ability to make such a decision to play something as diverse as Jason Bourne and Benjamin Mee in the same breath. I am fascinated by such actors, and perhaps it is because of this that I like Matt Damon so much.
Over all, the movie is a splendid watch. Cameron Crowe, like we all know him to be, infuses some mind blowing musical tracks in the background, with Cat Stevens and Bob Dylan adding the much cherished color in the entire movie. The animals play their part too, particularly the aged Bengal tiger, Spar, whose character is perhaps is the most metaphorical amongst all the animals at the zoo.
And oh, do watch that scene where the pictures of the past come alive. The sheer choreography, music, the moment, that elusive moment where everything becomes magical… that scene alone is worth the price of your ticket.
I’ll be closing here with the same words that I had started this article with. All I need to say here is Cameron Crowe, welcome back!
Movie Facts
Directed by: Cameron Crowe
Produced by: Cameron Crowe, Marc Gordon, Julie Yorn
To be very honest, I never really understood what the entire hullaballoo was about 500 Days of Summer. As in the movie was a visual spectacle, with the actors doing all that they possibly could, but that beyond, even for a pop-fic movie, I couldn’t really get the pulse. My bad, I guessed!
And therefore, when Ekk Main Aur Ekk Tu released and there was pressure from all quarters to go and see it, I was like quoting Plato all through — twice removed, twice removed.
But I was contracting for no real reason. And I knew that. So I decided to see it. I haven’t been much in my car, therefore I have really no idea about which song these days is from which film. So I must declare right at the beginning that when I saw Amit Trivedi’s name as the music man for the film, I was reasonably excited. And neither he, nor did the movie let me down even for one bit.
Sure, it did get to its usual productivity stagnation phase, but thankfully it was towards the end and did not last for a long time. That I must say is something that they played out much better than you get to see in the usual Hindi films of the same genre. Sure, here too we had to go into sad depressive song (yes, no plural) and all that fore lone looks took place from all angles, but I am just saying that now since I was to get over with the ugly part of this piece. And from this point onwards, we are all good to go.
And in which case, I must need mention whether this movie is different from 500 Days of Summer at all, or is it just another blatant Bollywood language change copy… Yes, and no. Doesn’t make sense? Yes, it does…
For the first time, Bollywood robbed the style content from a Hollywood movie and while retaining the flavor of the west they corroborated everything with their own factory settings. And they made a swell entertaining film. And I must also mention that in all this commotion they did not break back into their usual stereotypical plots at any point. In short, with Ekk Main Aur Ekk Tu, Bollywood tried to experiment from within their boundaries. And I guess that is exactly what worked for the movie.
Imraan Khanis slowly started to find his groove in different kinds of movies that he takes his time in doing. Variation without substance is a horribly wrong attempt to take, and this he must have learnt from attempting Kidnap and Luck. But he finally realized that he has an extremely urban face and social context and therefore, breaking into unbelievable roles would never work for him. Ergo, Delhi Bellyand now Ekk Main Aur Ekk Tu.
Kareena Kapoor seems to have finally shed ambitions for a size zero or whatever that crap was, and now she has finally put on some much needed weight. RESULT: She has never looked more desirable, more ravishing, in a look that is surely going to go with her for life now. She has never looked prettier, and I must perhaps also add, that she has never acted better. Kareena too seems to have finally found her place in the world of celluloid. You fall in love with her character, not with Kareena, who you almost kind of forget while watching this movie. Its called Good Acting.
Over all, I must admit that this was one hell of a joy ride and thankfully, there is a serious attempt to tailor make films for the postcolonial subaltern cineplex going audience. We have been on twin sharing for quite some time, and its not our fault if our historiographies and social idealism force us to a more occidental mindset. We are more at home with Ekk Main Aur Ekk Tu, and we thank Dharma Productions for helping us out.
Watch Ekk Main Aur Ekk Tu for the sheer fun of it. You won’t regret the time spent.
