Showing posts with label Rajit Kapoor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rajit Kapoor. Show all posts

Saturday, February 14, 2015

REVIEW 317: ROY

Release date (India):
February 13, 2015
Director:
Vikramjit Singh
Cast:




Language:
Arjun Rampal, Jacqueline Fernandez, Ranbir Kapoor, Shernaz Patel, Rajit Kapoor, Anupam Kher, Kaizaad Kotwal, Asif Basra
Hindi


Fifteen minutes into Roy, the chap sitting next to me gave up on it. I was more patient. After all, what was there not to like about those expansive frames, that minimalist look, the uncluttered visuals, the mood lighting, Ranbir Kapoor’s beautifully sensitive eyes and the utter gorgeousness of both Arjun Rampal and Jacqueline Fernandez? The film is shot at stunning locations in Malaysia and cinematographer Himman Dhamija takes in the country’s roads, buildings, forests and beaches with a painterly eye, dwelling with care too on the faces of his three lovely leads.

I remember one shot of film maker Ayesha Aamir (one of two roles played by Jacqueline in Roy) where the camera is gazing up at her face in a close-up against the backdrop of a stark, nearly blank sky. Ayesha is not looking at us or the heavens. Her eyes are on fellow film maker Kabir Grewal (Arjun) who is not in the frame at first, and so we wait in anticipation for the handsome fellow before he enters the picture.

My gentleman neighbour in the theatre was not in the least bit interested in any of this. I bet he’d consider me an arty-farty type. Fifteen minutes into the film he was already irritated and busy treating his female companion to a running commentary on the proceedings on screen.

“Please, bhaisaab,” I said, about half an hour later. “You are talking too much.” He looked at me with a slightly startled expression on his face. A couple of moments of silence. Then he turned to me and said in a confiding tone we usually reserve for friends: “Actually na, yeh film buraa hai, isliye hum baat kar rahein hai.” I replied with an apologetic smile: “Par mujhe buraa nahin lag raha hai.” More silence. But a few minutes later, I heard him whisper slyly to his lady friend: “Sab log baat karne lagey toh phir kya hoga?”

Point is, I’m a patient, undemanding viewer who is easily pleased. I loved the look of this film, the soundtrack, the styling of Jacqueline’s two characters, the detailing in the sound design, that faint crackling fizz I heard when Roy (Ranbir Kapoor) lit a cigarette.

Ranbir is always always easy on the eye. Kill me if you will for saying this but ever since Don, I’ve begun enjoying watching the much-derided Arjun’s evolution on screen. Say what you will you cynics, I think Jacqueline has more potential as an actress than her films so far have cared to explore. And the chemistry between Ayesha and Kabir was enough to make me want to drag them to a bed, fling them on each other and say: “C’mon then, go ahead! What the hell are you waiting for?” When they did ultimately do it, I wanted to cheer.

Even at the concept level, Roy is interesting enough. Mumbai-based writer-director Kabir Grewal is a notorious Casanova. When he meets London-based film maker Ayesha Aamir he falls genuinely in love for the first time. She is drawn to him, but feels his selfishness is reflected in his uncaring treatment of the heroine in a script he is writing about an art thief called Roy and the wealthy art collector Tia (Jacqueline again). When Ayesha leaves Kabir, he is dealt the double whammy of heartbreak and writer’s block. On a parallel track runs Roy and Tia’s love story.       

Three things writer-director Vikramjit Singh forgot, after thinking up that basic concept though: (a) if your story has two parallel strands, you cannot over-write one and under-write the other (b) when you get an actor as fine as Ranbir playing one of your protagonists, you cannot fail to flesh out his character and unwittingly reduce him to a marginal player (c) you do not give characters glib lines that are really not as profound as they’re pretending to be and sound instead like nothing real human beings would say.

When you neglect your writing and focus on the surface gloss instead, beyond a point the result is pretentiousness, tedium and characters who deliver philosophies to each other rather than conversing naturally. The songs become one too many. And even the visual appeal gets cloying after a while, especially when Malaysia’s scenery and the actors’ lovely faces are replaced by self-indulgent lingering shots of a character on an escalator or other such images that add nothing, not even spectacle, to the film.

As the story labours on, Ayesha and Kabir’s romance becomes the dominant thread of the film. Roy, who should have taken over the post-interval portion, ends up as a distant figure spending most of his time staring into the distance waiting for something to happen while we contemplate Ranbir’s attractive profile and – you guessed right – wait for something to happen. The film is called Roy yet Roy is the character we get to know the least in the story.

Unlike my gentleman neighbour in the movie hall, I lost my patience with the film only in the second half. Even undemanding viewers cannot be taken so much for granted.

Perhaps Ranbir too felt he had been taken for granted. I can think of no other reason why the opening credits over-compensated for the neglect of his character by saying: “Ranbir Kapoor In A Very Dynamic Role.” Huh?

Rating (out of five): *1/2

CBFC Rating (India):

U/A   
Running time:
147 minutes



Sunday, November 27, 2011

REVIEW 97: DAM 999

Release date:
November 25, 2011
Director:
Sohan Roy
Cast:
Vinay Rai, Vimala Raman, Joshua Fredric Smith, Megha Burman, Linda Arsenio, Jaala Pickering, Ashish Vidyarthi, Rajit Kapoor, Jineet Rath


Oh dear, what an insult to the Mullaperiyar Dam issue! For weeks now I’ve been getting tweets from Keralite readers inquiring about Dam 999. Is the film an effective comment on an issue close to their hearts? Will it inform the world about the risk to the lives of all those living in areas surrounding Mullaperiyar? The questions are natural considering that the film’s title seems like an allusion to the Tamil Nadu government’s 999-year lease to operate the Mullaperiyar Dam located in Kerala. Now that TN has banned the film, director Sohan Roy is crying himself hoarse that it has nothing to do with Mullaperiyar. So why 999, Mr Roy? Because 09/09/2009 is a significant date in the story? Feels suspiciously like a publicity stunt deliberately designed to mislead.
But the possible deception is not the worst part of Dam 999. The worst part is that it’s a lousy film. The story set in Kerala is about a couple who’ve been kept apart by astrology. Vinay and Meera have been friends ever since his father Shankaran took her into his home as a little girl when she lost her parents. The years pass, they fall in love. But dad – a keen practitioner of both Ayurveda and astrology – matches their horoscopes and arrives at the conclusion that they are incompatible. Vinay does not care, but Meera refuses to defy Shankaran. Years of separation and heartbreak follow, until Vinay returns home to get his diabetic son treated by Shankaran. Also in the picture is Vinay’s estranged wife Sandra, a foreign TV journalist who arrives in town to cover a controversial dam in the area; an unscrupulous local politician who ignores warnings that the new dam he has built is in a precarious condition; and sundry other characters who are so irrelevant despite the screen time they get, that I don’t want to bother listing them.
The Vinay-Meera romance is the focal point of the film, but neither their love nor the satellite stories add up to much. What on earth is Dam 999 trying to say? Well, there is an attempt to use a dam-on-the-verge-of-bursting as a profound metaphor for the emotional pressure cooker that .the lead couple have been living in. It’s all quite wonderfully silly!
The choice of language too is purposeless. Dam 999 is in English with a smattering of Malayalam spoken by a few very minor characters but not by the leads. There is also a Hindi version which I have not watched, but I can tell you that the dialogues in the English original are atrocious. English is certainly not the natural tongue for that milieu – in real life, I’d imagine characters like Vinay, Meera and Shankaran perhaps blending Malayalam and English in equal parts. But even if I were to believe that these people speak only the language of our colonisers with not a touch of Malayalam, I can assure you that no Malayali – in fact, no human being at all – would utter such stodgy, contrived, bookish lines. Instead of telling her husband she wants a kid, a woman says to him one day in bed: What would it feel like to have someone between us? For a moment I thought she was suggesting a threesome! Teehee!
The actors most pathetically served by the dialogue writer are Vimala Raman and Vinay Rai playing Dam 999’s star-crossed lovers. Both do their best with the laughable lines given to them, and deserve National Awards for having kept straight faces throughout. Rai is a very attractive-looking man who is clearly too good for this amateurish film. And Raman, talented though she may be, is amusingly miscast here. You see, Meera is supposed to be a Sardarni, but casting a classical Malayali beauty like Raman as a Punjabi is akin to getting Madhuri Dixit to play a Japanese woman in a film. The actress – a former Miss India Australia – also fails to entirely camouflage her marginally foreign accent. But that faux pas is not one-tenth as entertaining as watching National Award winner Rajit Kapoor tying himself in knots trying to look and sound Malayali. The one who comes off best in Dam 999 is the pretty American actress Linda Arsenio playing Vinay’s wife Sandra. She dashes around town issuing instructions to her TV crew and to local dam experts with an earnestness that belies this film’s stupidity.
At one point in Dam 999, while fobbing off Vinay’s renewed advances, Meera reminds him that every time they’ve tried to express their love for each other, something bad has happened. With all his pretensions to grandeur and philosophising, I wonder if the film maker realises that the regressive message emerging from his film seems to be that we humans must accept what is written in the stars, that those who dare to follow their dreams are doomed!
Films like Dam 999 are the reason why I respect David Dhawan, Rohit Shetty and Anees Bazmee: they don’t promise anything more than they intend to deliver! Misleading an audience is a crime! The Mullaperiyar Dam deserves a better envoy than this damned film!
Rating (out of five): 1/2  (this half star is only for Vimala Raman, Vinay Rai & Linda Arsenio who really tried!)
Footnotes: (1) I watched the 2D version of Dam 999. It’s been released in 3D too – I’m not sure why, since the disaster sequences in the film are minimal and not particularly impressive. (2) Warner Bros is distributing this film. What were they thinking when they signed up for it?!
CBFC Rating:                       U/A without cuts
Running time:                       110 Minutes
Language:                             English with some Malayalam

Photograph courtesy: http://www.damthemovie.com/  
  

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

REVIEW 25: MONICA


Release date:
March 25, 2011
Director:
Sushen Bhatnagar
Cast:
Divya Dutta, Ashutosh Rana, Rajit Kapoor, Kitu Gidwani



This seems to be a week of films that must have looked good on paper. Monica is the story of a girl from Little Lucknow who moves to Big Bad Delhi and becomes more involved than any journalist should in the world that she’s covering as a reporter. Monica Jaitley has an affair with a powerful politician, gets too close to her sources and is ultimately murdered.

The film begins with promise. Divya Dutta comes across as very real while playing a wannabe who allows her ambitions to get ahead of her. And Ashutosh Rana shines as the politico with gray shades. He’s not all bad or all good: he’s a blend of both, which is such a rarity among Hindi film ‘villains’, so a pat on the back for the writer too. But two good performances, one well-developed character and a few other plus points can’t carry a film through.

The greatest flaw in Monica is that it shows a limited understanding of the media. Yes, there is no doubt that there are too many journalists around who are intoxicated by the false sense of power that the job can bring. So yes, the director is spot-on on that front. But it’s the little things that irritate. Firstly, how about having checked with the HR departments of major media organisations about their salary scales? Junior print journalists are not a lavishly paid lot and yet, Monica the rising scribe (whose husband, we are told, is still struggling) is shown living in a sizeable flat in Delhi that houses a spacious granite-laden bathroom with a roomy Jacuzzi. At that point in the story she has not yet been drawn into the corrupt system, so do tell me where the money came from? An editor in the film lambasts Monica for being ungrateful to him when it is he who elevated her from the post of a mere “sub reporter” to a special correspondent. What the heck is a “sub reporter”? Either he meant “cub reporter” (an informal term used to describe newcomers on the job) or a “sub-editor”. But clearly, the team of Monica hadn’t done enough research to know the difference. The least they could have done was consult Peepli Live’s Anusha Rizvi who is one of the few directors in the history of Bollywood to have got the workings of an Indian newsroom right.

What’s also wrong with Monica are the many insinuations that it makes despite being a work of fiction. The film’s pre-release publicity suggests that the story is at least partially inspired by the murder of journalist Shivani Bhatnagar. There can and should be no half measures in such matters. If Monica Jaitley in this film is the late Shivani Bhatnagar of real life, then won’t the public infer that the drunken, insecure, unsuccessful Mr Jaitley of the film is the real-life Mr Bhatnagar? Isn’t that insensitive and irresponsible considering that viewers may draw conclusions about Shivani’s family after watching this film?

Add to this the loopholes in the script, the fuzzy characterisation of the leading lady, a story that becomes terribly confusing after a point as it goes back and forth between flashbacks, and some surprisingly bad acting by the usually dependable Rajit Kapoor as Monica’s husband, and you know why there’s as little hope for this film as there is for the protagonist who digs her own grave. We witness Monica’s dramatic transformation from a diffident small-town girl in saris to a bold, hyper-Westernised, cleavage-flashing, chain-smoking, unscrupulous big-city journalist – I’m not saying this is implausible, but I wonder why we are never given the reason for this metamorphosis. Monica’s first decision to sleep with politician Chandrakant Pandit (Ashutosh Rana) is not opportunistic but emotional. But we are never given to understand when, why or how arrogance and promiscuity set in. When she sleeps with a powerful female industrialist (Kitu Gidwani) it’s unclear whether she is genuinely leaning on another woman for support or was a closet lesbian/bisexual all those years or was merely cashing in on the older woman’s attraction towards her.

But in that unexpected dalliance, I still find something to praise in Monica. Homosexuality is usually caricatured – and male – in Hindi films. Fire starring Shabana Azmi and Nandita Das was a rarity. More recently came Karan Razdan’s ridiculously bad Girlfriend. After seeing Ishaa Koppikkar and Amrita Arora hook up in that film, I must say I felt some trepidation at the prospect of icky, vulgar or laughable shots of two women between the sheets when I heard of a lesbian angle in Monica. But kudos to director Sushen Bhatnagar for shooting Divya Dutta and Kitu Gidwani in bed without making any crude effort to titillate. Wish the rest of the film had been just as deftly handled.

Rating (out of five): *1/2


CBFC Rating (India):
A
Running time:
120 Minutes
Language:
Hindi