Just to inform you all that we will wind up our He Says She Says column with just two more episodes as Shonali is leaving country for four months.
I do hope we come back with a new season of episodes but then it all depends on how much you guys miss us.
Have uploaded upto Episode No. 28 on the He Says She Says blog.
If you are new to the column, you can catch up on all the old episodes from the archives.
I maybe a little late to blog about our choice for the Oscars but I had been busy off late and never really found the time to put my thoughts together.
This year, Hindi cinema really seems to have come of age. Again. After nearly four decades of recycling the same old stories centred around love and revenge. And of course, family.
We had the powerful Rang De Basanti to begin the year with. One of the top 3 Khans, as mainstream as it gets in “Bollywood” (I hate the term though the Hindi film industry deserves only a tag like that), let a bunch of fresh actors share the stage with him, gracefully playing his Big Brother role in the ensemble cast. A casting triumph.
And then a breakthrough in storytelling. Two narratives, one from the past and another from the present, ran seamlessly only to merge at the most definitive conflict of our times: The youth versus the system. Since the youth of today didn’t identify with rebels, the film had an in-built crash course in history to ignite a few sparks among the current generation. So it just wasn’t compelling story-telling, it was persuasive storytelling.
The innovative structure provided the technicians and actors great scope to showcase their wares. The dual-narrative screenplay lent itself to smart editing, it gave the music director ample scope to compare and contrast the moods of the rebellion of two different eras and the canvas of the past and the present presented the cinematographer the opportunity to give it the feel of a classic. Hence, technically too, it is our most sound film this year.
The man who controls all these departments and holds the reins — the director — does that with great control. But for a moment or two when he’s got carried away with the comparison between the rebels of the past and the present … Like, the scene when Karan (Siddharth) dreams of the villains of the past morphing into the villains of the present. I really hope they snip that scene where they show an evil looking Mohan Agashe pointing towards Madhavan as his men open fire. After being shot, Madhavan looking let down asks the Defence Minister why he did that to his jacket. And suddenly the scene looks like a spoof.
That scene alone would cost us the Oscar nomination. But the journey won’t be easy even if the flawed scenes and the repetition in choreography in the songs (in Khalbali, for instance, nothing happens in the narrative of the present… They are just chilling and dancing, with someone shooting it in a camera) are done away with by tighter editing.
The presence of a neutral observer, the British character in the film, gives the issue an objective look. The fact that we see the lives of these guys through her eyes works in favour of the film because the Academy members are all outsiders.
The content is extremely relevant in a world where coups are staged and power is seized and democracy is constantly under threat and the youth look West to escape. Most countries have had a struggle for independence that has stirred the passion of the youth of those times. But all that today has come history. Today’s youth around the world are looking at America. They dig Hollywood, are in tune with American music, even consume the same junk food and want to get a visa to the United States. Their sense of belonging to their country or patriotism is near extinct. So the content is very relevant to the new generation of youth around the world. But the Academy unfortunately is predominantly made up of Americans. And patriotism is one thing that they have never lost touch with. They may not exactly relate to the idea of disconnect with the nation as youth of Pakistan, Sri Lanka or Thailand or South Korea do.
Selling the political content of the film to the anti-rebel Americans will be the film’s biggest challege. ‘Rang De’ might not make it because Americans can’t tell the difference between revolutionaries and terrorists. And RDB’s ending has enough gunpowder to provoke them into voting against the film.
So what were our other options?
Lage Raho is no doubt the most likeable and probably the most entertaining film of the year but that merely is not enough for the Academy to hand it a nomination. It will be very difficult for Americans to appreciate our sense of drama. Munna Bhai was made for us. And we identify with the localised content and drama in it. Remember the scenes where the emotional cop wipes his tears in joy or the barber hugs his customer in delight as a reaction to Munnabhai. It is impossible to capture the spirit of Bambaiyya lingo with English subtitles and minus that, there is no Munna Bhai.
Omkara too is soaked in the richness of the native language that the subtitles will do no justice to the quality of writing. Shakespeare in Hindi might sound exotic to them, but award-worthy? Na!
Dor is a super underdog film. It is a very simple tale with great emotional quotient and feel good. But Oscars are not awards for good cinema. They are awards for outstanding cinema. Besides, Dor will no way be able to whip up publicity as much as a RDB would. UTV is one of our best film production companies and among the most experienced, second only to Yashraj Films in the country. Add Aamir Khan’s already established credibility in the circle and RDB seems to be the best option we have.
But is it good enough? My guess is as good as yours.
Taking just a thread out of Perumazhakaalam…
Cast: Ayesha Takia, Gul Panag, Shreyas Talpade, Girish Karnad
Director: Nagesh Kukunoor
Genre: Drama
Storyline: An incident brings two diametrically opposite women from diverse backgrounds together.
Bottomline: World-class cinema.
Nagesh Kukunoor returns with his signature feel-good cinema. And nobody delivers the genre like him.
He always manages to make the world around his characters happy, brings out the larger than life element in their rather simple lives, no matter how much glycerine they had the potential for.
Any other Indian director would have made ‘Iqbal’ into a melodramatic ‘Black,’ by exploiting audience sympathy for the disabled protagonist. But Kukunoor empowers his characters with a strength and resolve that only life can provide.
And that honesty leaks through every frame of his films.
Nor surprising that Kukunoor has taken just a thread (Dor) out of the critically acclaimed Malayalam film ‘Perumazhakaalam’ and weaves his own tale. The plot, based on a true incident, remains the same. One woman must find another to save her husband from the gallows. She must find the widow of the man her husband has killed and seek her pardon.
‘Perumazhakaalam’ made this an effective tearjerker, laced with the drama of the moonsoon and incessant rains.
In ‘Dor,’ Kukunoor uses the premise to contrast the lives of a spirited outgoing independent Muslim woman (Zeenat) and the innocent young Hindu Rajasthani widow who lives her life behind huge doors and a black veil. And suddenly, he’s broken age-old stereotypes of the Hindu woman being the independent one and the Muslim woman being the one behind the veil.
There’s this one scene when the director cuts from Zeenat (Gul Panag) trying to fix her house literally from the outside, perched on a ladder, with a hammer in hand, to Meera (Ayesha Takia) inside the house and behind a veil. The play of visual metaphors throughout gives the film a world-class feel, the kind of stuff you usually see in Iranian cinema.
There’s not a dull moment in ‘Dor.’ Ayesha is almost unrecognisable, with no make-up and she delivers the role of her career, one of the finest performances this year, sure to fetch her at least a couple of awards. Vulnerable and child-like throughout, she saves her best for the scene when she breaks down and the transition in the end is controlled, measured and believable. Ayesha handles the inherent complexities of playing a simple girl with the ease of a veteran.
Gul Panag, well-cast as Zeenat, is brilliant too, personifying resolve and spirit. She sure comes across as the woman of steel, with her body language and kohl-lined eyes speaking volumes of her talent.
The surprise packet of the film comes in the form of Behroopiya (Shreyas Talpade), the man who takes ‘Dor’ so faraway from the soppy, sentimental world of ‘Perumazhakaalam.’ He’s brought in to entertain and he does like he’s been doing it for generations. He’s instantly likeable and fills ‘Dor’ with a lot of life, energy and smiles.
‘Dor,’ one of the finest films made on women by man, chokes you with its drama and uplifts you with its spirit. Absolutely elevating. One of the best films this year, right up there with Rang De Basanti, Lage Raho Munnabhai and Omkara.
V for Wicked
Cast: Natalie Portman, Hugo Weaving, John Hurt, Stephen Rea
Director: James McTeigue
Genre: Sci-fi/Fantasy/Drama
Storyline: A rebel with a mask takes on a fascist regime, the Guy Fawkes way.
Bottomline: Must-watch on DVD.
Movie-buffs, especially the Wachowski Brothers’ fans, will rebel against what the local distributors have done to this movie: Tastelessly cut about one-third of the 132-minute long film. It’s unfair to the vision of the filmmakers and the version to be released nearly a year after it was intended for, makes little sense in the mutilated form.
The DVD version, that runs for a little over two hours, shows you what a fine film this actually is.
Suitable only for mature audiences, this film just happened to release at the wrong time. It has released when the world sees acts of rebellion as glorified terrorism. Precisely one of the things that could go against Rang De Basanti when viewed by the members of the Academy.
But with a little open-minded approach and the in-built in-film justification that: “Artistes use lies to tell the truth while politicians tell lies to cover it,” you might see the point the W Brothers are trying to make in today’s volatile world where coups are staged, power is seized, minorities are witch-hunted and biological warfare is in the cans.
“People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of the people,” goes the mission statement of the film that uses the superhero donning the Guy Fawkes mask as a mascot of rebellion and the voice of dissent. Though loosely based on the Alan Moore’s graphic novel of the 80s, the film tries to make the setting contemporary and relevant by taking digs at America and the way news is fictionalised to back up the government.
Over 400 years after Guy Fawkes was found with 36 barrels of gunpowder in a tunnel below the Parliament, the idea returns in the form of the masked Monte Cristo who calls himself V (Hugo Weaving). V saves the meek Evey (Natalie Portman) from the corrupt cops after she breaks the curfew. And before she knows it, she’s on the run, wanted by the government.
Evey represents everybody, the common man. She wants change but is scared to do anything for it.
V for Vendetta is all about the liberation of the common man to fight for freedom.
The bit about how power dictates ideology and the Western Classical Overtures set to acts of violence in a futuristic London do remind you of Stanley Kubrick’s ‘A Clockwork Orange’ but the similarity ends there.
V for Vendetta will never be a classic in the league of Kubrick’s work but it is still a very watchable film for its well-written lines delivered flawlessly by Hugo Weaving, a first-rate Natalie Portman blowing your mind with her vulnerable intensity and the slick and stylish visual effects-enhanced action sequences.
The pace does slow down in the middle indeed but the details are essential to the narrative.
Rent out the original double-disc DVD. It’s cheaper than the ticket.
She says:
He has a snarling tiger tattooed across his gasp-worthy biceps. His hair hasn’t seen a shampoo bottle in weeks, and looks like its been chewed by his pet dog (who’s probably called Tarantula). He wears a black leather jacket that’s evidently seen happier times. And zooms about town on a wicked-looking bike.
Of course, he’s irresistible.
What is it about ‘bad boys’ that makes women go weak in the knees?
Logically, why would anyone want to date a man who knocks out people’s teeth as often as your friendly neighbourhood dentist? A man who gate crashes parties and then needs to be carried out horizontally – probably clutching a bottle of rum and singing all the way. A man who is probably as difficult to bring to heel as a puppy who’s just found the cookie jar.
Why do all romantic books and movies feature men who are arrogant, head strong and difficult?
Because men like that are exactly what make romance so interesting.
Nice boys are boring. They get up at 5 a.m. and jog, for heavens sake! That should be enough to put you off them for life! They have important, responsible jobs, like banking. Yawn! And once they manage to tear themselves away from their computers, they probably spend the evenings doing exciting things like Sudoku. Or watching reruns of Desperate Housewives. Or making new friends though Stamp Collecting communities on the Internet.
Life with tattoo man, however, will never be boring. First of all there’s the challenge of keeping him interested, which should apply to all women who ‘like the chase better than the kill.’ Good boys can be taken for granted, while bad boys keep you on your toes.
Then there’s the fact that they surprise you with delightfully impractical ideas: organise a post-party basketball match at 1 a.m. on the way home, or book tickets to Alaska and take off for a month of madness. You don’t always have to listen to them, but an impromptu bike ride at midnight can be unforgettable.
Besides, life with the Muscled One will always feel a safe, in a deliciously unsteady way. Because when one of those letches, who always seem to congregate at discos, tries his lousy lines on you, the Boy’s not going to just frown dissuadingly and complain to the manager. He’ll stand up and plaster the creep, and his friends.
And that’s why biker boys will never be short of girls.
Of course, keeping up with them in the long run can be exhausting. But, for a while at least, go ahead and date that bad boy for a while.
After all, you know the old saying: Good girls go to heaven. Bad girls go everywhere.
He says:
Now that it is official that bad boys are cool, I reproduce below the abridged confessions of the original bad boy (the actual ones had to be censored heavily for the sake of children who might come across this space).
Dear Shrink,
I know I’ve been visiting you more off late but the truth is your receptionist makes me go crazy every time I call her to fix up an appointment with you.
Yes, I’ve been seeing her for a while now. That’s given me unlimited access to her diary that has the numbers of all the other flaky chicks who visit you.
Given my obsession with being bad, I’ve dated almost all your patients, within the last few months. To tell you the truth, it doesn’t take much to get these women.
A daily trip to the gym has won me even women twice my age, so much that I completely enjoy the experience. Of gymming, of course.
The tattoo and the leather jacket I got in high school have always complemented each other. With bad girls showing great interest in tattoos, my jacket comes off too often these days.
Being a bad boy has given me the licence to drive miss Daisys, Roses, Jasmines and Lilys, all at the same time, simply because they like the challenge of keeping me interested in them.
While the first few dates used to cost me a beer to get an excuse to drop her home. These days, they invite me over for the free drink, dinner and dessert. Sometimes, it ends with breakfast on the house. Interestingly, I’ve learnt a lot about the kind of furniture they invest in, during these midnight surprise parties I gatecrash into. And my basket-ball games have never gone score-less.
It’s not like I like the street-fights. That’s pretty much for the same logic as why dogs guard their territories fiercely.
I live a dog’s life. And my day comes very often. All a dog needs is a bone. And I don’t mind making a few extra bucks doing Full Montys for the Hens having a night out.
Party animals live by the wild rules of the jungle.
I wouldn’t say I cheat, I’m just commitment-phobic and high on life. I’m just there for the ride.
Besides, it’s not like I promise them a happily-everafter ending. I’ve always been nice to her friends because I know that they are just waiting for the day I break up with her and soon enough, my web gets more Mary Janes than Spidey’s ever found hanging upside down.
With all my lunches and dinners being taken care off, all I spend on is my bike and gym subscription. My roomie sorely misses me because I’ve not gone home in days. That’s also the reason I don’t get a chance to shampoo my hair.
Oh that reminds me, I got to get home to my roomie so that she can give me a Thai massage. But the real reason is I need to check if she’s washed my clothes.
Like chick flicks have demonstrated, it pays to be a bad boy. By the way, change your receptionist dude. I’m getting bored of her. Or let me make this easier for you, I’ll get myself a new shrink who lives next street.
Apparently, she’s 24 and has a young clientele. Heard she likes cats and dogs. Time to get a new pet. Will call her Tarantula. If she’s younger, I think even a simple Pussy-Cat would do.
After all, the new saying goes: When bad girls go through hell, bad boys find heaven.
He says:
It is a big myth that chick-flicks are for girls.
Men dig the genre too. But for different reasons.
But before we get into that, what is a chick-flick really about?
There’s always this goofball, simple girl-next-door every girl can relate to. She’s down on luck because the guy who holds the torch for her is the original fruitcake, and the guy she likes happens to be the wrong guy.
She, post makeover, transforms into the hottest thing on heels and before you know it, she nails her man and after some minor misunderstanding where she catches him with another girl and takes off sobbing, he pleads with her, goes down on his knees and locks lips for a `happily ever after’ ending.
So why do the guys like these movies that show guys doing the most wuss things? Simply because, they watch these flicks for the chicks.
The girl always has a scene or two where she’s at her hottest best. Watch The Sweetest Thing and you’ll know what I mean. That one scene alone is more value for time than what they show after minutes of waiting patiently surfing FTV shows.
Besides, the things a girl wants from a guy and plausibility of the romance cracks him up.
Also, chick flicks are easy on the bad guy.
In a chick flick, you can be however bad you want, be with how-many-ever girls you want, be a total jerk too, and you can just say sorry with a long speech going down on your knees and be sure as hell that she’ll forgive you.
With that sort of moral encouragement, sex appeal, and of course, the unintended comic relief generated out of the mush and corn soup, chick flicks make for great entertainment.
But the biggest reason men tolerate these films is because they are perfect for the date. What better time for romance than when she is, Ahem Ahem, in the mood for love?
After all, romance comes alive when it’s dark.
Post Script: What do guys without dates do? They head out alone to the halls playing movies like Ek Se Mera Kya Hoga.
Psst: Do check the paper for exact show timings.
She says:
It’s a big myth that chick flicks are for girls.
After all, who wants to identify with some loser babe who never seems to wash her hair and is perpetually slobbering over a jock with great abs and a rotten attitude.
If you believe these movies, all women can be neatly divided into two categories: geeks and bimbos. Because, if you’re svelte and sassy, you can’t possibly be capable of reading a book — unless it deals with the art of eye shadow — or even adding up your shoe shopping bill without help.
If you’re a geek, you just have to display braces decorated with yesterday’s lunch and be incapable of wearing a pair of high heels without tripping over your own feet and landing unglamorously on your dowdy behind.
For heaven’s sake, they’re just high heels, and walking a straight line is hardly brain surgery.
Chick flicks assume women have no powers of judgment whosoever. Show us a hunky man in a leather jacket, and even if he’s a convicted mass murderer, we’ll dissolve into wimpy, lace-handkerchief wielding Mills and Boon heroines, according to them. And when they cheat on us — and being hunky and leather jacket clad, they must cheat — all it takes is a sad song, or a bouquet of roses to have us jumping up and down like bunny rabbits spotting carrot cake.
Smart women realise that chick-flicks are ridiculous. They also realise that the original fruitcake in huge glasses is the same guy who’ll probably pass out of MIT and run a fancy corporation.
Chick-flicks are really for guys, so I agree with him there. But it’s not just for the scenes when the loser girl dramatically manages to shed pounds, her glasses and voluminous clothes to become her `hottest best.’ (Let’s not even go into how shallow these storylines are!) But also because they let all the dumb jocks believe their fondest dreams can come true.
That there’ll come a time when all girls will look like Cameron Diaz. When mini-skirts will be the only way to dress. And all it will take to `get the girl’ is a soppy love poem read with the expression of a puppy that has just misplaced its chewy bone.
Go ahead, fill up on your two hours of cotton candy and popcorn soaked euphoria. Just remember, real life is nothing like the movies. And Bridget Jones — far from being the role model for millions of single women world over — was just a girl who ate and smoked too much.
(A fortnightly column on the battle of the sexes)
MADRAS INK. 