REVIEW 538: JIA AUR JIA

Release date:	October 27, 2017
Director:	Howard Rosemeyer
Cast: Language:	Richa Chadda, Kalki Koechlin, Arslan Goni, Sudhanshu Pandey, Zarina Wahab   Hindi

                                                                                                                   

Zindagi koi aaloo pyaaz nahin jiski keemat hoti hai. Zindagi jis kisi ki bhi ho, priceless hai. (Life is not like onions and potatoes that a price can be placed on it. Every life is priceless.) You can almost imagine the creator of these lines patting himself on the back after having come up with them. The speaker is Kalki Koechlin’s character in Jia Aur Jia. The second half of the film is filled with such dialogues, trying hard to impress listeners with their wisdom. They fill up the empty space in a 92 minute saga that could have added up to something if writers Mudassar Aziz (credited for story and dialogues) and Farahjaan Shiekh (screenplay) had known how to flesh out their concept: two young women with sad secrets on a road trip through Sweden. After a mildly promising start though, they struggle the rest of the way. The result is a flimsy girl bonding flick that is so vacant, it may as well have not been made.

Koechlin plays Jia Garewal, owner of a small bakery in Panchgani. Ms Garewal is on a tight budget and hooks up online with a banker called Jia Raghupati Venkatram (Richa Chadda) to split the cost of a Europe sojourn. It is clear from the word go that Ms Venkatram is nursing a tragic past. Be that as it may, she is at first exasperated and then gradually charmed by the crazy creature in her company who lives life with such abandon while she herself is so stiff-necked.  

It does not take a genius to guess that we will at some point discover that Garewal has a secret too. Jia Aur Jia is about two strangers meeting, and how one of them changes the other’s life forever.

Choreographer Howard Rosemeyer makes his directorial debut with Jia Aur Jia, featuring a lead pair with impressive credentials and an amateurish screenplay. Garewal is the film’s idea of cool and chirpy, which means she talks a lot, steals food from a café (this is not a spoiler, the scene is even in the trailer) drinks a lot, blows smoke into her roomie’s face and wakes her up in the middle of the night by chomping loudly on chips. Of course she is constantly smiling, laughing and dancing on camera.

In short, she is the standard Bollywood idea of cute, a cliché of youthful energy that we have seen in film after film over the years, the kind of person who would rightfully be considered irritating in real life, but who we are expected to fall in love with when we meet her on screen. Trite though the woman is, the screenplay leaves us guessing about her long enough and Koechlin’s natural charisma gives her just about enough likeability to keep the film floating through its first half.

Venkatram is completely boring, her past far less interesting than Team Jia Aur Jia seems to think it is, and Chadda – who was so striking in Anurag Kashyap’s Gangs of Wasseypur films and in a brief role in last year’s Sarbjit – is unable to lend her character an iota of charm. Making matters worse is the contrived male character called Vasu Krishna Bergman (played by Arslan Goni) who is forced into the narrative.

Despite Koechlin’s verve, a kinda sorta curiosity the director manages to conjure up in the first half about what may possibly come as the story moves along, and some pretty visuals of the Swedish countryside, the film fails to lift off at all.

Jia Aur Jia’s saving grace is that it resurrects Jiya o jiya, the title song of the Asha Parekh-Dev Anand classic Jab Pyar Kisise Hota Hai, for its background score. The music makes the opening scenes memorable, but when the entire remix of the song is sung along with the closing credits, the effect is completely ruined: Nisschal Zaveri’s Jiya o jiya reprise – performed by Jyotica Tangri and Rashid Ali – is flat in comparison with the original. Jia Aur Jia is flat, full stop.

Rating (out of five stars): 1/2

CBFC Rating (India):	UA
Running time:	92 minutes 39 seconds

This review has also been published on Firstpost:

http://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/jia-aur-jia-movie-review-kalki-koechlins-verve-is-wasted-in-a-flimsy-girl-bonding-flick-4179077.html

Poster courtesy: https://www.facebook.com/JiaAurJiaFilm/

REVIEW 513: JAB HARRY MET SEJAL

Release date:	August 4, 2017
Director:	Imtiaz Ali
Cast: Language:	Shah Rukh Khan, Anushka Sharma, Chandan Roy Sanyal, Aru K. Verma Hindi

                                                                                                                   

Jab Harry Met Sejal is not When Harry Met Sally. With its bow to one of the greatest Hollywood romances ever made, the title of Imtiaz Ali’s new release seemed to suggest that his film would be not a mere romance but a conversation on the very meaning of love, attraction and the whole shebang that goes with it.

Maybe instead Ali should have opted for the name Much Ado About Harry and Sejal. Because, with due apologies to Bill Shakespeare, barring the chemistry between the lead stars, this is precisely what the film amounts to: nothing. The “nothing” about which “much ado” was made in one of Shakespeare’s most famous works.

Shah Rukh Khan here plays Harry a.k.a. Harindar Singh Nehra, a Punjab-born, Canadian passport-holding tour guide in Europe who is forced to accompany Sejal Zhaveri (Anushka Sharma) on a trans-continental search for her lost engagement ring. Harry had been assigned to her group – consisting of her family and friends – as they travelled across Europe for a month, when her boyfriend Rupen proposed marriage to her, and slipped that ring on her finger. She promptly misplaced it. Rupen sees her carelessness as an indicator of her lack of commitment, so she decides to stay back, find it in the haystack that is Europe and prove to him how much she loves him.

Obviously, this gives Ali the opportunity to combine his two favourite cinematic genres, the road movie and the romance. The locations (Amsterdam, Prague, Budapest, Lisbon and Frankfurt) are picturesque, of course, and cinematographer K.U. Mohanan delivers on the visuals. The same cannot be said of Ali’s writing of his characters’ motivations.

Jab Harry Met Sejal is a lost cause from the word go. Sejal’s reasons for staying on in Europe, her pile-on behaviour, Harry’s back story, her carelessness as she wanders lonely streets and darkened nightclubs in alien lands – none of it is credible and frankly, neither Sharma nor Khan appears convinced of why Sejal and Harry do what they do.

Sejal keeps insisting she is devoted to Rupen yet also keeps pushing Harry to admit that she is f**kable (the euphemism she uses is “laayak”, the Hindi word for “worthy”, I kid you not). The pressing question that should have kept a film like this going is: do they get together in the end? The truth though is, that within about 30 minutes of Harry-Sejal’s running time, I did not give a damn.

It is hard to believe that the man who made such thinking entertainers as Jab We Met and Tamasha has created this boring film. Worse, through Sejal’s teasing ways, her stupidity and a troubling conversation she has with Harry’s ex-girlfriend Clara in Frankfurt, Ali seems to be quietly making a rather disturbing point about the meaning of consent in sexual relations, women who – as the prejudice goes – ‘ask for it’, women who cry rape after ‘asking for it’ and so on.

Perhaps this should not come as a surprise considering that, although some of his heroines have been strong women, the writer-director did, after all, come up with a very problematic man-woman relationship in Rockstar, and has casually featured rape jokes in both Rockstar and Jab We Met.

As Harry and Sejal wade through philosophical bullshit about finding oneself, finding the one you are meant to be with and so on, Jab Harry Met Sejal gets more exasperating with each passing minute. There is a fantastic Indian word for pretentious art of this kind: pakau.

I honestly wanted the film to end when just 45 minutes had passed… 

…But it did not.

…It lasted for 99 minutes thereafter.

…Yes it did.

In the midst of all this pointlessness, SRK and Sharma’s torrid chemistry is the only thing that kept me from falling off to sleep in the second half of Harry-Sejal. Although she is young enough to be his daughter (seriously SRK, why are you doing this?), in a scenario where male stars tend to want to act with women half their age, I would rather see these two together than Khan with any of the other 20- or 30-somethings in the industry.

He is getting hotter with age, she has infectious verve and the charisma to match him pop for pop, crackle for crackle, spark for spark. Harry-Sejal’s premise is beyond jaded, but the Sharma-Khan on-screen equation is so sizzling, that I cannot remember the last time I wanted to see a couple have sex in a film as much as I wanted to see this pair get down and dirty.

So do they? Well, if you are willing to subject yourself to Ali’s mind-numbing take on the definition of a soulmate (no doubt that is what Harry-Sejal fancies itself to be), then you will find the answer for yourself.

The only other positives I can think of in Jab Harry Met Sejal are Hitesh Sonik’s pretty background score and the pizzazz in Pritam’s songs, especially Main banoo teri Radha. After a while though, even that is not enough and in fact, it feels like there are just too many numbers packed into the film.

Jab Harry Met Sejal is occasionally funny, but not half as funny or cute or ruminative as it clearly thinks it is. Hats off to Shah Rukh Khan and Anushka Sharma for managing to raise the Centigrades in this otherwise pakau disaster.

Rating (out of five stars): *

CBFC Rating (India):	UA
Running time:	144 minutes

This review has also been published on Firstpost:

http://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/bollywood/jab-harry-met-sejal-movie-review-srk-anushka-sharma-raise-the-centigrades-in-an-otherwise-pakau-disaster-3893409.html

Poster courtesy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jab_Harry_Met_Sejal

IMTIAZ ALI INTERVIEW / A SHORTER VERSION APPEARED IN MAXIM

(A shorter version of this interview by Anna MM Vetticad appeared in the February 2014 issue of Maxim magazine)

HEADLINE: “Living in a society in a certain routine, is often a role you impose upon yourself”  

What is it about love and the road that repeatedly draws director Imtiaz Ali? Would one of the country’s most successful creators of romances ever consider making a film about a same-sex couple? And why does he consider rom-coms “artificial” and “chocolatey”? The answers are all in this exclusive interview with the man who gave us Socha Na Tha, Jab We Met and Love Aaj Kal.

By Anna M.M. Vetticad

Jab We Met and your latest film Highway are both road movies. What is it about the road that you find so appealing?

What I find appealing about the road is that when you’re travelling, not only is it entertaining because you see new places, but you discover things about yourself that you did not know before. Anyone on a journey becomes a more interesting person to themselves.

In what ways have you become more interesting to yourself when you have been on the road?

I used to get this feeling that sitting on the window seat of a railway train is like watching television, with new things constantly going on. So much of the time you wander away. I used to get this feeling that I’ve wandered away outside the train, into the forest, and become a different person. New thoughts would come. I would have different views. I’d have this feeling that that is who I really am. I would feel like a different person.

But often when we return home after a journey, we describe it as coming back to reality, coming back to the real world. So then could it be that what we discover about ourselves on a journey is an illusion? Are you sure that is the real us?

I often feel that living in a society in a certain routine, in a set pattern of behaviour, is often a role that you impose upon yourself. While playing that role you become that role. You become that guy in office who behaves in a certain way, that guy who lives in a house, in a society, in a colony. You become that person. But when you are out and there is no reference of who you are, no one to remind you of who you are, and you can be anything, in that situation it’s actually easier to be what you’re really meant to be.

What does the romance genre mean to you?

I don’t understand the word “genre”. I don’t even know how to pronounce it. It means nothing to me, and I don’t bother about it. I’m not scholarly as far as cinema is concerned. I’ve not studied much. I’ve not paid attention to categories. I’ve not wanted to make movies that are of any type. I just work on any thought that grabs me, and that’s the movie that comes out. It is later that a genre can be set upon it.  

How then has it come about that all your films have been romances?

That’s a pre-disposition. The kind of stories that have appealed to me are stories about a man and a woman having some sort of a thing together. It’s not as though I do it deliberately.

And why are you pre-disposed to romances?

No idea. I don’t necessarily like watching romantic films. I just like good stories. I don’t even like soft romantic comedies. I’d rather watch an action or horror film. There’s a certain chocolateyness, an artificialness to rom-coms that I find boring.

Are there any romances you have liked that didn’t seem artificial to you?

Many. What rom-coms do is that they have certain set visuals and costume design, a certain foppishness with which they show people, that I don’t like. The romantic films I like, such as Dr Zhivago or Wong Kar Wai’s Chunking Express, are romantic yet real. They are not only occupied with feelings of love but also with other practicalities or situations in life, which then allows me to enjoy the feelings the lead couple have for each other.

Chungking Express and Dr Zhivago are great films but isn’t it also true that what you are calling real is very melodramatic?

Real life can be far more extraordinary, unusual and unreal than what happens in movies like Dr Zhivago and Chungking Express. And of course a filmmaker or storywriter will pick up a story which is extraordinary, not the usual thing.

Any Indian romances that you found real and believable?

Shyam Benegal’s Junoon is symbolic of my taste in romantic films. I really enjoyed the feeling that they have for each other, but it’s in the real world.

You said that as a filmmaker you tend to think in terms of boy-girl love stories. Would you be open to making boy-boy or girl-girl romances?

Ya sure, why not? I don’t really know that much about it so such stories may not come naturally to me right now, but if I had such a story, I’ll be very happy.

You think the Hindi film industry and the Indian audience are at a stage where they could accept such a story from someone like you, considering that you are not seen as an art-house filmmaker, but as a middle-of-the-road kind of guy?

If it is sensitive, real and enjoyable, if I have a good story, for sure I think they will. You know there’s no such thing as a time for anything new. You’ve got to first do it and then figure it out. People are always going to be ready for it if it’s good.

A lot of gay rights activists feel that Hindi cinema has always mocked and stereotyped homosexual people and never shown gay people as regular people. Is that a fair criticism?

I agree with them. But keep in mind that cinema and communication are progressing in our country. There was a time when Sikhs were only shown as truck drivers, but today they are also mainline heroes in commercial Hindi films like Singh Is Kinng or my own Love Aaj Kal. So the earlier cliché used to be that homosexual people were effeminate, male and behaving like a eunuch. But people are beginning to understand. It only takes one film. Anyway, the movie has to be interesting. We always put it on the people. Will they accept it or not? Arrey, people will accept a film that’s entertaining first.

You mentioned that you tend to draw on your personal experiences while making a film but does that necessarily mean that your films all have autobiographical elements in them?  

Not strictly autobiographical, but there are extensions of thoughts, certain events and personality traits, a sort of an umbilical chord.  

For instance?

When I was younger I used to always think that I wouldn’t be able to make it because I don’t have a tragic life. You found that in the hero of Rockstar. In Jab We Met what is autobiographical is when Geet says, “Ratlam, train se dekha karti thhi yeh gali, yeh ghar. Mujhe lagta thha, pata nahin how will it be to be here. (I used to see Ratlam from the train and wonder how these houses, these streets will be. I used to wonder how it will be to be here.) But today I’m walking on this lane. Wow man!” That kind of thing of looking at something, imagining it and having the fascination of going there some day. Geet also says, “Mujhe yeh sapne aate thhey ki train miss ho jayegi (I used to dream that I would miss my train).” I used to have that. It was a recurring dream that went away after I made Jab We Met.

Because all your films have a love story at their core, do people you meet socially ask you for relationship advice?

They do. But I never kid myself that I have solutions to offer them. I tell them very clearly that although we can talk, they shouldn’t expect that I will know any better than they would. 

What’s the kind of thing people ask you?

People whose lives have something in common with my films will always begin their conversations with that. For instance, a lot of people told me that they had broken up with a girlfriend, but after two years, after watching Love Aaj Kal, they got back with her. Lots of such couples came to meet me and said, “It’s only because of that film that we’re back together now. What is it that we can do to avoid any problem in the future?” I would always say that I don’t know. After watching Rockstar it was, “I don’t know what to think of this guy. He’s not pleasant with me but I don’t think he can get me out of his system and neither can I, so do you think I should fall prey to this kind of desire?” You know that kind of thing. But I’ve never offered any advice because there is a certain responsibility and I can’t misuse this position. If I tell some poor kid some shit just to feel better about myself, they can get into trouble.

Who approaches you more for love advice? Men or women?

More women.

Why do you think that is?

I don’t know. I think men feel hesitant in asking someone who’s also their age. And women are much more comfortable talking about a love or relationship issue than men are.

But how about some advice for Maxim readers in the month of Valentine’s Day? Is there such a thing as the ideal kind of film a guy could take a girl for on a date?

A horror film. For obvious reasons. When you’re watching the film, if she gets scared she’ll hug you. Even after the film the shadows will be creeping up, so she’ll feel protected sticking to you. It’s a good start.

But if she knows already that that’s a trick, then it had better be a damn good horror film for that ploy to work, otherwise she’ll be so self-conscious.

Ya ya, but even if she knows about it, as long as she’s getting scared she doesn’t have any option but to do that.

But what about a romance? Does it make sense too?

Ya, that’s a girl thought. A girl would take a guy to a really intense romantic film on the theme of being together and all of that, then she will get him to feel that way and look at her that way. But the guy is not looking for that kind of thing, especially at the age at which they’re going for dates. (pauses) That’s not true. I’m generalising, but there is that kind of an impression perhaps falsely in society that men are looking physically and women are looking emotionally. I must qualify this by saying this is a myth but generally it’s believed to be true.

Do you find women more romantically inclined towards you as a person because you make romantic films?

(Pauses) I’m not so clear about that. That could be true. (Pauses) You know what, women have this feeling that this guy at least understands. Ya. Could be, yes. I’m not sure about that.

Footnote: I conducted this interview with Imtiaz Ali in January 2014, precisely 22 months before the release of Tamasha which is in theatres just this week. A shorter version was published in Maxim magazine’s Valentine’s Day special in February 2014, which was the same month in which his film Highway (starring Alia Bhatt and Randeep Hooda) was released. I happened to revisit the conversation after writing my review of Tamasha this week and realised that he was perhaps thinking aloud about Ved back then when he responded to my question: Could it be that what we discover about ourselves on a journey is an illusion? I wonder if he was working on Tamasha’s script back then, or it was already done, or it was just an idea in his head. Either way, that’s a question to ask in my next interview.

Related link (Tamasha review):

http://annavetticadgoes2themovies.blogspot.in/2015/11/review-357-tamasha.html

Photographs  courtesy:

(1)    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imtiaz_Ali_(director)

(2)    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_(2014_Hindi_film)

(3)    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jab_We_Met

(4)    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Zhivago_(film)

(5)    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chungking_Express

(6)    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamasha_(film)

(7)    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_Aaj_Kal

Note: These photographs were not published in Maxim