IMDb RATING
5.5/10
6.6K
YOUR RATING
An ordinary man goes against all odds and forges his destiny to become a 'Big Shot'.An ordinary man goes against all odds and forges his destiny to become a 'Big Shot'.An ordinary man goes against all odds and forges his destiny to become a 'Big Shot'.
- Awards
- 5 wins & 3 nominations total
Atul Srivastava
- Rao Saheb Desai
- (as Atul Shrivastava)
Ashwinder Jandu Singh
- Japaani
- (as Shaanti Ashwinder)
Featured reviews
While a lot of reviews have talked about Bombay Velvet being a disappointment (it is considering Anurag Kashyap's stellar filmography), I want to discuss what it could have done to have fared better. The biggest problem - Romance, easily the weakest aspect of the film, the story of Bombay Velvet is overambitious and tries to do a lot of things and romance spoils the entire dish. There is good in Bombay Velvet, the story of a small time crook trying to rise up the ranks to become a "bigshot" is endearing but what's irritating is that while Johnny Balraj wants to be a bigshot he is illogical, falls in love with wrong woman and doesn't realize that it's bigshot or the girl. Romance plot between the wrong woman and the young crook rising up the ranks is so clichéd and badly done it leaves a bad taste in your mouth, you can't help but think that AK could have done better because HE HAS DONE BETTER. AK has done better gangster films than this (Gangs Of Wasseypur) and even better romance films (Dev D) how can such a master of both the genres fall so flat on his face while integrating romance into the gangster genre? Crime aspect often gets clumsy too but the romance is dead weight and should have been a side story not the entire film. I liked the corporate-crime aspect of the film it was interesting, I would like to mention that Johnny Balraj's awe while watching with the classic Roaring Twenties was easily the best scene of the film, the sets are gorgeous, JB's frustration at being nothing more than a hired goon is also well done, Karan Johar's gay villain would have been better if there was no Anushka Sharma and he was more blatant towards his attraction towards Blaraj that would have made him the romantic tension and the villain which would have led to a far better film. The actors are all decent, all do well but are let down by a messy almost borderline 1980's cheesy plot which was not too bad till the interval and then it takes a big nosedive in quality. This could have been a bigshot so much failed potential because there are scenes which are well done and show the brilliance of AK but the ludicrous and predictable plot let it down, while better than most Hindi movies it's not bad but it's still a disappointment. I think AK is more suited to non commercial cinema with smaller names I think there was pressure on him to turn BV into a romantic film first and a gangster film second which ultimately led to it's demise. Second Hindi period film after Detective Byomkesh Bakshy which was a letdown as far as I am concerned. P.S.- I was very angry with how they wasted Kay Kay Menon, easily the best actor in the entire cast and one of the best actors in the country and he gets such a small role.
If I try to draw comparisons between Martin Scorsese's 1990-blockbuster Goodfellas and our very own Kashyapish Bombay Velvet, they will look like twins, though born in different eras. While the former has already proved itself a masterpiece, the latter simply looks like a wanna-be to that classic.
No wonder that Director Anurag Kashyap credits Mr. Scorsese during the initial credits. He seriously attempts to replicate the master's magic in order to weave out a rather clichéd film. The 60's era looks spectacular; the jazz music (wonderfully composed by Amit Trivedi) throws in an indispensable nostalgia; the Italian costume designs nudge us back to the good-old mobster classics -- everything looks gorgeous in this fantastical post independence Bombay.
But how long you could stare at something beautiful without being talked back to. Bombay Velvet lays itself somewhere in that category, where a beautiful art fails to form a viable communication with its spectator.
The problem lies within the screenplay, oddly written and interweaved with no complex empathy towards the characters. The First Act seems to be the only good asset, where characters are build impressively; wonderfully focusing on traits and motives that build up the next act.
But it is where the narrative loses its pace. Writers -- Vasan Bala, Anurag Kashyap, Gyan Prakash and Thani -- fails to live up to our expectations of genuine conflicts (something Kashyap spectacularly created in the Gangs of Wasseypur duo-logy). We therefore face a regular Bollywood-clichéd tale, where twins arrive out of no where, murders get overdone, songs take over the impressions, and suspenses are injected for the sake of injecting.
Even the ride seems slow and boring at places, the actors make sure to impress us whenever they are allowed to. Ranbir Kapoor (as Johnny "Big Shot" Balraj) conveys madness with style, never losing the grip of the character and giving us a memorable performance. Anushka Sharma (as Rosie) plays a perfect eye-candy amid the distasteful mafia wars. Watch her emoting a sad song with such conviction that it might have reminded Ranbir of his Jordan act in Rockstar. She owns the voice of her playback singer, literally.
Among the supporting actors, only Satyadeep Mishra (as Balraj's childhood friend Chimman) makes a long lasting impact. While other talents (Kay Kay Menon, Manish Chaudhary, and Vivaan Shah) amply justify their skills in their limited screen time. A special mention for Karan Johar for pulling out a calm and restraint act. The script however doesn't allow his Kaizad Khambatta to emote further than a relaxed homosexual mobster.
On whole, I do not want to call Bombay Velvet a bad movie; in fact it is far better than the regular nonsense we are served on most of the Fridays. But being a true Kashyap fan, I believe Bombay Velvet to be only an iota of his previous works, created to prey further on the mainstream audience, with only style but no substance.
No wonder that Director Anurag Kashyap credits Mr. Scorsese during the initial credits. He seriously attempts to replicate the master's magic in order to weave out a rather clichéd film. The 60's era looks spectacular; the jazz music (wonderfully composed by Amit Trivedi) throws in an indispensable nostalgia; the Italian costume designs nudge us back to the good-old mobster classics -- everything looks gorgeous in this fantastical post independence Bombay.
But how long you could stare at something beautiful without being talked back to. Bombay Velvet lays itself somewhere in that category, where a beautiful art fails to form a viable communication with its spectator.
The problem lies within the screenplay, oddly written and interweaved with no complex empathy towards the characters. The First Act seems to be the only good asset, where characters are build impressively; wonderfully focusing on traits and motives that build up the next act.
But it is where the narrative loses its pace. Writers -- Vasan Bala, Anurag Kashyap, Gyan Prakash and Thani -- fails to live up to our expectations of genuine conflicts (something Kashyap spectacularly created in the Gangs of Wasseypur duo-logy). We therefore face a regular Bollywood-clichéd tale, where twins arrive out of no where, murders get overdone, songs take over the impressions, and suspenses are injected for the sake of injecting.
Even the ride seems slow and boring at places, the actors make sure to impress us whenever they are allowed to. Ranbir Kapoor (as Johnny "Big Shot" Balraj) conveys madness with style, never losing the grip of the character and giving us a memorable performance. Anushka Sharma (as Rosie) plays a perfect eye-candy amid the distasteful mafia wars. Watch her emoting a sad song with such conviction that it might have reminded Ranbir of his Jordan act in Rockstar. She owns the voice of her playback singer, literally.
Among the supporting actors, only Satyadeep Mishra (as Balraj's childhood friend Chimman) makes a long lasting impact. While other talents (Kay Kay Menon, Manish Chaudhary, and Vivaan Shah) amply justify their skills in their limited screen time. A special mention for Karan Johar for pulling out a calm and restraint act. The script however doesn't allow his Kaizad Khambatta to emote further than a relaxed homosexual mobster.
On whole, I do not want to call Bombay Velvet a bad movie; in fact it is far better than the regular nonsense we are served on most of the Fridays. But being a true Kashyap fan, I believe Bombay Velvet to be only an iota of his previous works, created to prey further on the mainstream audience, with only style but no substance.
Bombay Velvet, with a whopping budged of INR 80 crore (800 million), marks a departure for Kashyap who over the last decade has succeeded in carving a niche for himself in Hindi cinema with low budget, highly unconventional and genre-transcending films like Dev D, Gulaal, and Gangs of Wasseypur. Based on historian Gyan Prakash's book "Mumbai Fables," Bombay Velvet stars Ranbir Kapoor, Anushka Sharma, Karan Johar, Kay Kay Menon, and Manish Chaudhary in major roles. The movie presents the larger-than-life tale of a small-time but ambitious gangster Johnny Balraj, who would stop at nothing in a bid to realize his dream of becoming a "big shot" in the elite social circles of the 1960s Bombay, and his lady-love Rosieâ"an aspiring Jazz singer with a heart of gold.
While it would be a bit far-fetched to describe Bombay Velvet as a cinematic success, it would also be unfair to deem it a failure. Yes, it's a mess of a film but a mess that's way more alluring than the trash that Bollywood churns out day in and day out. Then why complain? Well, because we expect better from Kashyap! This critic for one is devastated by the very thought of what it could have been had a filmmaker of Kashyap's caliber brought his a-game to the table. Kashyap's love for cinema and his ear for music are praiseworthy. The tone of Bombay Velvet is set from the word go: it opens up with some stock footage showing the early days of the city of Bombay (now Mumbai) which is immediately followed a jazz number featuring Raveena Tandon donning the '60s retro look. In the view of this critic, the movie touches it highest point during the early scene that shows a young Rosie, in Goa, hum a melodious song in Portuguese. The combined effect of the very song and the mystical background music (reminiscent of Krzysztof Kieslowski's films) created a sense of magic for a few fleeting moments that, alas, couldn't be recreated in the latter scenes.
Bombay Velvet features several exceptional shots but there are as many bad ones as well. Perhaps, Kashyap seems to have forgotten about the legendary American filmmaker Howard Hawks' saying that "a good movie is three good shots and no bad ones." In order to truly appreciate Bombay Velvet, one needs to be madly in love with movies, for it pays endless tributes to yesteryear films and stars with Film Noir and Classic Hollywood influences abound. Kashyap's fascination for all things cinema is evident in each and every frame.
Ranbir Kapoor looks daring and a bit over-the-top as Johnny Balraj. But, if it were Cagney he was trying to imitate then he certainly got it spot on. Of all the actors from the Hollywood's golden age, Cagney is the most unique mainly because of his over-the-top acting style. It's something that the great Stanley Kubrick took a note of when he made Jack Nicholson essay the role of Jack Torrance in his psychological horror masterpiece The Shining (1980). It certainly caught Kashyap's attention as well. Anushka Sharma is a natural when it comes to playing bold feministic roles and in Bombay Velvet she plays a jazz singer to a tee (she seems to have perfected the act of lip syncing). As Rosie she is a treat for the sore eyes and those responsible for her wardrobe certainly need to be commended. While Karan Johar's menacing portrayal of the business magnate Kaizad Khambatta is the movie's real highlight, Kay Kay Menon is solid as ever in the role of a no-nonsense cop.
Overall, Bombay Velvet is a sprawling period piece with an excess of style over substance. The film suffers from poor market segmentation and targeting for it may prove to be a bit too overwhelming for the masses and at the same time the aficionados may not find it too appealing to their palates, despite all its merits. The movie captures the period detail with painstaking accuracy. Kashyap's morbid obsession for the grotesque and the macabre just doesn't seem to let go of him. The movie gives us glimpses of the evolution of Bombay into the financial capital it is today and the scandalous roles bureaucrats, politicians and businessmen played in shaping up its map. Bombay Velvet is far from being a quintessential Anurag Kashyap but given its commercial scope it will certainly be able to reach a wider audience than most Kashyap films. The music, sets and costumes ooze with a hitherto unattained degree of resplendence, especially in the context of India cinema. Bombay Velvet is not an easy film to appreciate for the masses, mainly because of its excesses. It would take a die-hard cinema enthusiast to truly enjoy it. The movie is quite high on violence quotient and those with weak hearts would find certain sequences quite disturbing. Nonetheless, as a mere exercise in style, Bombay Velvet is a commendable attempt but its prospects at the box office appear to be rather bleak. Recommended only for cinema enthusiasts!
(This review was first published at A Potpourri of Vestiges)
While it would be a bit far-fetched to describe Bombay Velvet as a cinematic success, it would also be unfair to deem it a failure. Yes, it's a mess of a film but a mess that's way more alluring than the trash that Bollywood churns out day in and day out. Then why complain? Well, because we expect better from Kashyap! This critic for one is devastated by the very thought of what it could have been had a filmmaker of Kashyap's caliber brought his a-game to the table. Kashyap's love for cinema and his ear for music are praiseworthy. The tone of Bombay Velvet is set from the word go: it opens up with some stock footage showing the early days of the city of Bombay (now Mumbai) which is immediately followed a jazz number featuring Raveena Tandon donning the '60s retro look. In the view of this critic, the movie touches it highest point during the early scene that shows a young Rosie, in Goa, hum a melodious song in Portuguese. The combined effect of the very song and the mystical background music (reminiscent of Krzysztof Kieslowski's films) created a sense of magic for a few fleeting moments that, alas, couldn't be recreated in the latter scenes.
Bombay Velvet features several exceptional shots but there are as many bad ones as well. Perhaps, Kashyap seems to have forgotten about the legendary American filmmaker Howard Hawks' saying that "a good movie is three good shots and no bad ones." In order to truly appreciate Bombay Velvet, one needs to be madly in love with movies, for it pays endless tributes to yesteryear films and stars with Film Noir and Classic Hollywood influences abound. Kashyap's fascination for all things cinema is evident in each and every frame.
Ranbir Kapoor looks daring and a bit over-the-top as Johnny Balraj. But, if it were Cagney he was trying to imitate then he certainly got it spot on. Of all the actors from the Hollywood's golden age, Cagney is the most unique mainly because of his over-the-top acting style. It's something that the great Stanley Kubrick took a note of when he made Jack Nicholson essay the role of Jack Torrance in his psychological horror masterpiece The Shining (1980). It certainly caught Kashyap's attention as well. Anushka Sharma is a natural when it comes to playing bold feministic roles and in Bombay Velvet she plays a jazz singer to a tee (she seems to have perfected the act of lip syncing). As Rosie she is a treat for the sore eyes and those responsible for her wardrobe certainly need to be commended. While Karan Johar's menacing portrayal of the business magnate Kaizad Khambatta is the movie's real highlight, Kay Kay Menon is solid as ever in the role of a no-nonsense cop.
Overall, Bombay Velvet is a sprawling period piece with an excess of style over substance. The film suffers from poor market segmentation and targeting for it may prove to be a bit too overwhelming for the masses and at the same time the aficionados may not find it too appealing to their palates, despite all its merits. The movie captures the period detail with painstaking accuracy. Kashyap's morbid obsession for the grotesque and the macabre just doesn't seem to let go of him. The movie gives us glimpses of the evolution of Bombay into the financial capital it is today and the scandalous roles bureaucrats, politicians and businessmen played in shaping up its map. Bombay Velvet is far from being a quintessential Anurag Kashyap but given its commercial scope it will certainly be able to reach a wider audience than most Kashyap films. The music, sets and costumes ooze with a hitherto unattained degree of resplendence, especially in the context of India cinema. Bombay Velvet is not an easy film to appreciate for the masses, mainly because of its excesses. It would take a die-hard cinema enthusiast to truly enjoy it. The movie is quite high on violence quotient and those with weak hearts would find certain sequences quite disturbing. Nonetheless, as a mere exercise in style, Bombay Velvet is a commendable attempt but its prospects at the box office appear to be rather bleak. Recommended only for cinema enthusiasts!
(This review was first published at A Potpourri of Vestiges)
A day before watching Bombay Velvet i saw Brazil 2nd time. First time watching it was like okay something is happening on big sets and the director is trying to show me some world of his imagination and in the end i thought it is pretentious, the first time i saw it i was not exposed to much of cinema. So i was getting bored and had nothing to do so i thought lets watch it. The second time i was blown away and was like this one of the best films ever made. The same fate it had when it was released as i have heard.
Now coming to Bombay Velvet, let me be clear its not the usual narrative which is seen in Kashyap's movies. The narrative to be honest is like Brazil but its Brazil with historical contexts of Bombay the city of dreams as it is called in India, what it was, how it came to its current shape. It doesn't have dream like or dream sequences like Brazil. I mean Brazil how the characters are detailed, how the story moves forward and how the background and atmosphere plays a big role in the film With the historical contexts the film shows a person who has dreams and aspirations and how the people in his life are introduced and how in the changing shape of the city his life also changes and problems he starts facing and what he gets involved with.
Its a dream project of director and he has invested a lot of time in the film. But when it finally got released it was not able to connect with the audience as they were not ready with the sudden change and the new form of narrative which is not for everybody as Brazil cannot be liked by everyone. It has to face a lot of thrashing on the Internet.
This film is not flawless as i feel Brazil was. There are some flaws and a bit of exaggeration at the end but it's OK as rest of the film overpowers it. The performances are great but the film really gets you into the world like Brazil does and keeps you holding if you know what you are watching and have an open mind.
Right now as of 17-05-15 this film turned out to be a disaster and people wont like me for this review but in future or someone who has discovered Anurag Kashyap or will do and look at this film and maybe feels a bit let down as you have created an image of Kashyap's style or the narration, re watch it with an open mind when you get time, you will love it. I guarantee! Also who hated it and felt it bored them to death try it again but with an open mind, you will understand that you misjudged and misunderstood the film
Now coming to Bombay Velvet, let me be clear its not the usual narrative which is seen in Kashyap's movies. The narrative to be honest is like Brazil but its Brazil with historical contexts of Bombay the city of dreams as it is called in India, what it was, how it came to its current shape. It doesn't have dream like or dream sequences like Brazil. I mean Brazil how the characters are detailed, how the story moves forward and how the background and atmosphere plays a big role in the film With the historical contexts the film shows a person who has dreams and aspirations and how the people in his life are introduced and how in the changing shape of the city his life also changes and problems he starts facing and what he gets involved with.
Its a dream project of director and he has invested a lot of time in the film. But when it finally got released it was not able to connect with the audience as they were not ready with the sudden change and the new form of narrative which is not for everybody as Brazil cannot be liked by everyone. It has to face a lot of thrashing on the Internet.
This film is not flawless as i feel Brazil was. There are some flaws and a bit of exaggeration at the end but it's OK as rest of the film overpowers it. The performances are great but the film really gets you into the world like Brazil does and keeps you holding if you know what you are watching and have an open mind.
Right now as of 17-05-15 this film turned out to be a disaster and people wont like me for this review but in future or someone who has discovered Anurag Kashyap or will do and look at this film and maybe feels a bit let down as you have created an image of Kashyap's style or the narration, re watch it with an open mind when you get time, you will love it. I guarantee! Also who hated it and felt it bored them to death try it again but with an open mind, you will understand that you misjudged and misunderstood the film
I read a lot of negative reviews and jokes about this movie.Saw it just to see how bad it really is.I am shocked! This was one of the best movies I have ever watched. From the sets, cinematography to amazing performances from all actors this movie was a treat to watch.
I loved everything including Karan Johar as a badass gangster!
This movie is way better that usual brainless garbage that comes out of Bollywood and deserves to appreciated not ridiculed the way it has been.
I loved everything including Karan Johar as a badass gangster!
This movie is way better that usual brainless garbage that comes out of Bollywood and deserves to appreciated not ridiculed the way it has been.
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaThe film was planned as a trilogy in 2009. It was going to be produced by Danny Boyle. The first part would star John Abraham. This part would be the 1960's ( Ranbir Kapoor's role). The second part would star Aamir Khan. This would be the 1970's. The final part of the trilogy would star Shah Rukh Khan. This would be the 1980's. When Danny Boyle left the project, Anurag decided to scrap part 2 and 3.
- GoofsYou see a sign-board for Falkland Road in the first few minutes with the PIN code on it. Well, PIN codes did not appear in India until 1972, but the scene is of 1949.
- Quotes
Johnny Balraj: When a movie becomes housefull, then the only one who knows the manager gets a ticket...
- Alternate versionsThere was an earlier director's cut, in length of 188 minutes, which was earlier to be the theatrical version of the film...but because of producer's concern it was cut down to 149 minutes.
- ConnectionsFeatures The Roaring Twenties (1939)
- SoundtracksFifi
(a remake of the Hindi song "Jaata Kahaan Hai Deewane", from the 1956 film C.I.D. (1956))
Original Lyrics by Majrooh Sultanpuri
Original Music by O.P. Nayyar
Re-created by: Mikey McCleary
Vocals by Suman Sridhar
Details
Box office
- Budget
- ₹800,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $450,692
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $390,774
- May 17, 2015
- Gross worldwide
- $758,478
- Runtime2 hours 29 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
