Chandni Chowk to China

Po, an overweight panda and extreme kung fu fanatic, is anxious to see a tournament, but instead is forced to help his goose father to vend their famous noodle soup. After finally climbing the mountain where the tournament is being held, Po accidentally lands up in the tournament and is selected to be the next Dragon Warrior who will save the ‘Valley of Peace’ from the Snow Leopard Tai Lung. Po then is trained by a Master Shifu and finally becomes expert in Kung Fu and kills Tai Lung.

Sidhu, an overweight vegetable cutter of Chandni Chowk is desperate to become rich and famous is forced by his step-father to work in his Paratha house. Sidhu is accidentally misunderstood as incarnation of a famous Kung fu fighter and is asked to visit China. After finally convincing his father Sidhu lands in a Chinese village. Here is learns that he has to fight and kill Hojo who in return defeats him and kills his step-father. Sidhu is saved by one kung fu master and further is trained by him. At the end Sidhu kills Hojo and brings peace to the village in China.

The main plot of 2008’s Golden Globe nominated Animation movie ‘Kung Fu Panda’ is similar to Nikhil Advani’s ‘Chandni Chowk to China’. Except the later is a disappointment. The director has tried to make it too big by adding various sub plots, lot of action sequences and too much of mindless song and dances. There are very less funny sequences which you can remember long after moving out of the cinema hall. One of which, my personal favorite, is the aircraft sequence, where Sidhu tries repeatedly to shut the overhead locker but fails to. Why, is a surprise! This is one of the most beautifully crafted situational comedy with less (or no) dialogues and right amount of time for the audience to absorb the scene and laugh long. Rests are hardly enjoyable.

The Sita-Geeta plot of twin sisters lost on the Great Wall of China is completely sad. This diversion from the central plot takes the movie nowhere further. Even the characters like Chopstick and his double-minds, are mindlessly represented in the film. The main villain Hojo is unnecessary given more of screen presence rather he could have been given appropriate dialogues to bring out a ‘Gabber-effect in a Chinese Ramgarh’.

Ranvir Shorey as Chopstick was of no use in the film. Even Deepika Padukone in double role has nothing to do in the film; at least she could have run around the trees. Actor Gordon Liu playing Hojo is effective at certain times. Mithunda as Sidhu’s father brings some emotions and feelings to the mindless drama. He has good lines to speak but the director spoiled it by repeating it a lot, which in result lost its punch. At last it is Sidhu who is worth a watch. Akshay Kumar doesn’t mind in making fool of himself. Even though the film fails to make a mark it is Sidhu who virtually is best in every frame.

‘Chandni Chowk to China’ is a senseless attempt to show too much of everything. The worth watch is some nicely choreographed fight sequences but they cannot handle the pressure alone. The music and dance are ordinary, but their placement in the film looks as if they are cut and pasted for the sake of it. Screenplay is very week. Repetitions of scenes from the sub plots unnecessarily drag the film nowhere.

Not writing much, ‘Chandni Chowk to China’ turns out to be worn out comedy. An appropriate subject, a proper plot and well crafted story, are must for a film to appeal audience at large. No Singh has muscle to rule over them. Cause at the end, Content is King.

Ghajini

Question:
What should a typical Bollywood paisa vasool masala film be like?

Answer:
a. it has a length of around 3 hours plus screen time
b. the hero of the film can do everything and anything, irrespective of his shortcomings
c. the bad guy is dressed in white pants, white shirt & white shoes, has a golden tooth and wears gold chains (trademark Bollywood Bad Guy)
d. the film has ample logical loopholes (generally seen in the early eighties movies)
e. decent music (1 or 2 good songs)
f. love story (a necessity)
g. good emotions
h. and finally lot of dishum dishoom

Or

The answer in one word would be - Ghajini.

Sanjay Singhania (Aamir Khan) suffers from a short term memory when he is hit on head by a metal rod by Ghajini (Pradeep Rawat) who also kills his girlfriend Kalpana (Asin). Kalpana was able to give a clue of her murder to Sanjay by whispering his name in Sanjay’s ear – “Ghajini”. And thus the hunt begins for Sanjay who can’t remember Ghajini’s face but knows the name. [Exactly opposite to the Tamil version where Sanjay (Surya) remembers the face but doesn’t know the name] Sunita (Jiah Khan), is a medical student who screws up Sanjay’s hunt and realizing her mistake, later helps him. And in the end Sanjay finds the villain and kills him for good. The end. Though the plot is basically good but the story has a lot of ambiguity. The only thing that’s interesting is the flashback love story between Sanjay and Kalpana. The romantic angle has freshness. The dialogues between Sanjay and Kalpana have mature humor worth enjoying and the feel of the love story is also innovative.

80 percent of the movie is a cut to cut remake of the Tamil version. Right from the opening titles of the film or Kalpana helping blind man to bus-stop, or Sanjay expressing his love in double-decker bus, everything is the same, shot to shot. Certain sets like Kalpana’s makeup room and her old house are also very similar. It is the last 30 minutes that the films are completely different from each other, both in terms of treatment and the story. The Tamil version has ended with Pradeep Rawat playing a double role as villain Lakshman and his twin brother, and with confusion arising between Sanjay and Chithra (Nayantara, the medical student). Interesting to note is that the Tamil version is titled Ghajini because the behavior of the protagonist is similar to that of Mohammed Ghajini. Whereas the Hindi version title is made simpler to understand by just naming the villain Ghajini.

The stark difference observed is in the character of Sanjay. Surya manages to be calm and steady while handling situations, whereas Aamir appears very aggressive- this would especially be true for those who have seen Guy Pearce as Leonard Shelby in Memento. The character of Leonard is very well treated through out the film, and it’s easy for the viewer to believe he has a short term memory problem. Whereas in the case of Sanjay, the director A. R. Murugadoss has used the sound (of a camera alarm ringing) as a reminder (and to be in sync with the story). Check out the last chase sequence; it seems that the hero is very focused on his targets and kicks off everyone coming on the way. Well that’s what our typical Bollywood hero is capable of!

Both Aamir and Asin have carried their respective responsibility dedicatedly. Aamir fulfills the audience’s expectation as Sanjay who is completely opposite to TZP’s Nikumbh Sir. Asin did a wonderful job. She is the true surprise discovery of Ghajini. The irony is that she performed equally well in Tamil version but was not noticed as much. Rest of the cast does not have much to perform and remains unnoticed. Same goes for Jiah Khan and Pradeep Rawat.

Screenplay is ok but if we weigh it against Memento, comparison is out of question. Memento was critically acclaimed because of its innovative screenplay and non-linear editing. Ghajini falls short in every domain of filmmaking to Memento, which had brilliant storytelling by director Christopher Nolan, who reveals only the necessary and relevant incidents- keeping the plot and suspense unyielding and shocking. Even characterization is thought provoking; character of Natalie (Carrie-Anne Moss) is shown in various shades which holds the viewer presumption entirely in dispute. So if I start measuring Memento against Ghajini (Tamil and Hindi both), Ghajini falls flat on floor. To me, it will be only be memorable for its publicity and profits earned.

All in all, Ghajini is not a good movie. I agree with critic Rajeev Masand that it’s a dumb movie which celebrates its dumbness. It is similar to Govinda – David Dhawan movies. You leave your brains and laugh when it is Govinda onscreen whereas in this case you leave your brains and enjoy Aamir. Yes, there is a difference between laughing and enjoying.. Or is there?

6 > 7 > 8

2006 > 2007 > 2008

At the end of the year 2007, I wrote an article titled '6 > 7' (read 2006 greater than 2007) focusing on the quality of cinema being far better in year 2006 then seen in year 2007. Today at the end of year 2008 I am adding one more digit to the right – '6 > 7 > 8'.

Yes, year 2008 is without doubt the worst of three. I agree with film critic Anupama Chopra that this year there is no best film, but some good films can compete for the runner up award. Memorable films of 2008 can be counted on fingers. To pick the best 10 is also a tough job. Here are my personal 6 best movies of year 2008.

Jhodha Akbar

History is mystery. And the director very wisely fills the gap by entering into the personal discourse of a royal couple’s life. The conversations between the Rajput Princess and the Mughal Emperor are engaging. The love story captures your attention. It the extras and the sub plot which actually makes the film little hooch-pooch. I have only one complain with Ashutosh Gowariker – that is with respect to editing. Laagan, Swades or Jhodha Akbar, all length in traditional 3 hours plus. Get a good cutter Sir; we really want to see you more, but in less (length).

Jaane Tu… ya Jaane Na

A commercial brilliance! And a perfect launch for Imraan Khan. A superb film! Everything works for the movie, the love story between the protagonists (who are unaware that they are in love), the parental conversation through a photo-frame, three rituals of being a Rajput Mard, Bhaloobhaiya and Bhagirabhaiya, the narration in form of a story within story and, very young and funny dialogues. The films also scores high on lyrics and music making every pappu dance.

Oye Lucky! Lucky Oye!

Welcome to Delhi. Director Dibakar Banerjee's second film is on a chor's life. This movie has one of the finest and innovative dialogues seen in year 2008 – 'jiska paata nahi hota uska koi paata nahi lag sakta' or describing the police-chor relationship ' usne maara, maine kah liya, asie hi to relation banta hai'. The film is full of north Indian lingoes, worth appealing and enjoying. The innovation in terms of having one actor playing three roles and still conveying the message is a superb idea. Definitely an intelligent and a brilliant movie.

Rock On!

The brilliance of the movie is its sharp editing, fine acting, and solid camera work with decent music as added advantage. This film highlights on presentation compared to its plot. The story of four friends and their relationship is common and predictable, though it has the power to glue you to your seat. Farhan Akthar not only shines in acting but also successfully intones the film. But to me the film has discovered a new Arjun Rampal. I will definably declare him the best supporting actor of year 2008.

A Wednesday

When a common man takes responsibility to clean his house (read it as metaphor to city, state or country at large), the administration has nowhere to hide. The film is the 2008’s surprise blockbuster. Without any songs or dance or superstars, the film has appreciated by masses and classes, declaring it to be the best film of year 2008 by all the major movie critics and popular news channels. Naseeruddin Shah and Anupam Kher handle the subject exceptionally maturely to their age. The film gives you no space to move out to Tuesdays or Fridays. It has a very clear message to communicate and has everything a thriller requires. In all A Wednesday is a perfect film and just right in time.

Welcome to Sajjanpur

Of the whole lot, this is my personal favorite. Why? Because it made me laugh, made me aware of the social issues and most important it has refreshing feel. It is an easygoing ride. The film has interesting small plots revolving around a letter reader cum writer. The intermingled stories are very nicely handled (by the director) with all the characters seem believable and enjoyable. The worried mousi, her determined daughter, the gangster cum politician, a male nurse, retired army soldier, etc., plotted in various issues like widow remarriage, caste politics, superstition, etc. makes the movie witty as well as wise. Shreyas Talpade, as the letter writer/reader - the sutradhaar of the film gives his career best performance as Mahadev. As Rajeev Masand comments, Shyam Benegal's Welcome to Sajjanpur is a sweet, simple story of life in a village and a bitter-sweet tale of human frailties. It is a small film with a very big heart.

The above mention six movies, for me, comprises of year 2008. But they are not great movies in comparison with 2006's classic Rang de Basanti, Lage Raho Munnabhai and Omkar or 2007's Taare Zameen Par and Chak De! India. These movies are now considered to be classics in India cinema. But in year 2008 not a single movie has surpass the boundary created by these movies. We still are great audience ready to appreciate and spend on quality cinema waiting for great movies to happen. Welcome 2009.

Ghajini (coming soon)

Tremendous publicity – 15 days before the release of the film, Aamir Khan was on every chat show to publicize Ghajini. The film was a news-sort on every news channel. No second thought that Ghajini got adequate and sufficient popularity through media. Be it through discussion on why the film is titled Ghajini or how did Aamir managed to build eight-pack physic or what is its story? Everything worked for Ghajini and Aamir. Today Ghajini is a sure shot hit. It created history in the first 15 minutes of its release (14 minutes and 52 seconds to be précised) and did business of around Rs. 170 crores in first 10 days of its release. In Mumbai first week bookings were sold out. No tickets were available on the year end (31^st Dec 08) and New Year Eve (1^st Jan 09). CNN IBN declared Aamir Khan as the most popular Bollywood personality of the year 2008. And further don’t be surprised if Filmfare includes him to their Power list with Shahrukh Khan and Yash Chopra.

I known that everyone (or say mostly everyone) has seen Ghajini by now. So What is taking me so long to publish the review? That is because I want this article to be more comparative analysis between Memento (English, 2000), Ghajini (Tamil, 2005) and Ghajini (Hindi, 2008) rather then focusing on the Hindi version alone. As for the matter of fact this review will focus on relative study that will help the reader to get a broader perspective towards:

how cinema is changing in due course of time?

how language and audience matters in consideration of remake?

how a same plot can be scripted differently?

and how much other aspect apart from filmmaking influence a popularity of film?

So wait and watch. Enlightenment is on the way.

Rab ne Bana di Jodi

Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge (1995) deal with a love story where lovers realize their love when they are apart, Mohabbatein (2000) has conflict between the younger and older generation as main plot. And in 2008 Aditya Chopra’s third directorial piece deals with a love story between newly wedded couple, married through parent wishes (popularly known as arranged marriage). The film has a base line of - Love is when you can see and feel God like divinity in your partner.

The best part of the film is the initial piece which introduces Mr. Surinder Suri – definitely one of the best crafted and performed character in the recent time. The film has a gripping start where the protagonists and the plot are well introduced. Both Suri (Shahrukh Khan) and his wife Tani (newcomer Anushka Sharma) depict a middle class newly married couple effortlessly. Everything is fine till the time Suri converts to Raj to gain Taani’s love. It is form this point the audience starts wondering how Taani can fails to recognize her own husband. Just because he has shaved off his moustache, lost thick glasses and combs spiky hairstyle! This is hard to digest and the film looses all what it earned in the opening 15 - 30 minutes.

Suri is not an expressive enough towards Tani. And so he converts himself to Raj, a filmy hero like character who can be a friend and can cheer her up. The film fails to bring out this personality-switch issue and suffers to identity crisis. The overall feel seems that Suri enjoys being Raj, where as it should be other way round – the love towards Tani made Suri to do something out of his box, which makes him talkative, sing and dance, as suppose in his real life being quiet and simple. Secondly the film also fails to provide a valid reason on why Suri expresses his love to Tani being Raj and not being himself? Third, why is just one visit to Golden Temple and one dialogue makes Tani feel all the goodness in her husband, whereas she has already decided to run away with Raj. Forth… and I can go on. What I am trying to discuss out here is that the problem of persona. Rab ne has not convincingly shown the paradigm-shift and fails in handling the sensitivity of personalities.

I personally feel it an opportunity lost for the director who started the film with a gripping mark and left it half way. The film has some light comic moments with Suri and his yellow tiffin box, Tani and Raj in bike race and gool-gapaa competition, Vinay Pathak as Bobby Singh, but they aren’t sufficient for the audience to cheer up. In all the film fails to make a mark.

Debutante Anushka Sharma has performed perfectly well, check her out serving snacks and juices to Suri’s friend at their marriage party and her bike ride with Raj. Vinay Pathak has not much to perform, but he surely reminds us of a typical Punjabi friend in need and deed. And finally it is Shahrukh Khan who is a clear winner. Though Raj is not very different and might not be difficult for him to perform, it is Suri who is the show-stiller. Watch him doing his daily work like bathing under a tap, preparing breakfast, washing and cleaning dishes, he is worth watch when he is happy and excited. The dialogues go with his personality even when the end credits are rolling.

The music as well as background score is ok. The use of traditional instruments like harmonium complements the character like Suri perfectly. Whereas the (needless, tiresome, unexciting and ineffective) item number song with some Bollywood beauties is a waste of time - both in music and chorography. The song with kids shot in three locations - temple, mosque and church is decent enough to view and hum. The screenplay could have been tighter. As far as camera is concern, a special mention could be in the Golden Temple scene, where the camera wobble is seen very obvious. The sets are easily noticed fake. The script and dialogue needed some consistency. An unnecessary repeat and focus shift to topic like ‘what women want’ was not needed. In all the loose ends are so obvious to catch that Rab ne turn into a messy film.

This is without a doubt the poorest film in Aditya Chopra’s career as a filmmaker. The story had a substance and could have been one of the finest film dealing with mature love story. But it failed. It is only the initial piece in film that had a lasting impression on me. Thank you, Mr. Surinder Suri.