Let me divide the discussion on the film into a few parts BACKGROUND AND ANECDOTES Ray had wanted to make a film out of this Tagore story for a long time, right from the 1960s but somehow the project kept getting delayed. Initially, Ray had casted Soumitra Chatterjee as Nikhil and wanted a young débutante to play the role of Sandip but later, in an example of inspired casting, he cast Soumitra as Sandip instead as he felt there was no one who could give the long, verbose speeches in chaste Bengali better than Soumitra (and Soumitra delivers as usual with a flawless performance but we'll come to that later). Victor Banerjee, who had earlier worked with Ray in Shatranj and Pikoo, made the grade as Nikhil THE PUBLIC OPINION ON THE FILM Even though Ghare Baire remains a strong Ray film, it does not enjoy the universal critical appreciation of the Apu Trilogy, Charulata, Aranyer Din Ratri, Kanchenjunga, Kapurush, Pikoo, Jalsaghar, Devi, Teen Kanya, Asani Sanket, etc. NOR does it enjoy the mass popularity of Goopi Gayen Bagha Bayen, Sonar Kella, Joi Baba Felunath, Abhijaan etc. It remains somewhat underrated and under discussed amongst all Ray's films- even more so than Ray's last 3 films (Ghanashatru, Shakha Proshakha and Agantuk) which even though weaker films by Ray's unusually lofty standards were at least much more accessible to the public being more recent THE FILM ****Mild spoilers ahead***** Ghare Baire is set in pre- Independence India and tells the story of a traditional but educated Bengali woman- married to a wealthy, liberal, westernized Zamindar of a Bengali village. Her daily sojourns are confined to the inner part of the house as a strange but true custom for married women in those days. Is it then just a coincidence that her state of living is also an allegory to India in those times- wanting to win freedom from its past. Hoewver, truth be told, her husband loves her and she's under no apparent stress due to her lifestyle and seems to have accepted it and thriving in it. Nikhil, her husband, is a calm, composed, pro feminist and liberal man who supports her wife's decision to learn English Classical music from a British Lady (an interesting cameo by Jeniffer Kendall whom we know as Violet Stoneham from 36 Chowringhee Lane). In their peaceful lives, enters a revolutionary named Sandip. Dark, brooding, idealist; Sandip was an old college friend of Nikhil and is now, the leader of the 'Swadeshi' movement or the 'Be Indian Buy Indian' movement and wants to extend his movement in Nikhil's village but Nikhil, being a pragmatic man, cannot allow this to happen because that would take away the livelihoods of many poor hawkers (paricularly Muslim) who get foreign made things CHEAPER than Indian substitutes and hence stand to lose their margins if forced to buy Indian raw materials for selling in the 'haat' (a village market) Another layer to this 'external' story is its 'internal' aspect that comprises Nikhil, Sandip and Bimala. Nikhil is the man of the world, Sandip represents an illusive Utopia as he is a die hard idealist and Bimala plays the woman who's torn between the two extremes- The Home (Nikhil) and the World (Sandip), Ghare and Baire. Smitten by Sandip's fiery speeches and his vision of an independent India as contrasted with her own husband Nikhil's ostensibly indifferent attitude to the freedom struggle, Bimala finds herself increasingly drawn to Sandip. Does Nikhil know or does he simply trust his wife too much and is a bit of an idealist himself? And does Sandip actually love Bimala or is he only using her as a tool to weaken Nikhil and subsequently, persuade Nikhil to let the Swadeshi movement enter his village and also to take her financial help to continue his movement? And what about Bimala? Then, when chaos erupts in the village due to the battle between the revolutionaries and the establishment, Sandip has to leave and Bimala's dreams are shattered as reality strikes. Then the small things become more apparent to her- like how Sandip always traveled by first class, how he always smoked imported cigarettes even though he was a proponent of Swadeshi himself. Then she remembers what Nikhil's first words to her about Sandip almost as a warning- "That man is better to look at from a distance". Isn't that true about mirages and ideals too? Aren't they too accompanied later by a sense of disillusionment? AFTERMATH Ultimately, 'Ghare Baire' is an extremely complex but rich story of idealism Vs. pragmatism that extends the concept to not only a Home i.e. a Bengali household (through the love triangle) but also to the World i.e. India during those times of strife and struggle (through the depiction of the revolution and the Swadeshi movement). In both cases, in the end, we did get freedom, but at what cost? Doesn't Nikhil's unfortunate death represent the millions of lives that were lost in our Freedom struggle and doesn't Sandip's escape represent the euphoria that quickly deserted us, just as we became independent Ray's mastery is evident behind every frame- Victor's monologue during dinner one night, Soumitra's several soul stirring speeches during the film and the wonderful cinematography (the last scene of Bimala morphing from a married woman to a widow is just awesome beyond words), Ghare Baire would represent the end of a phase in Ray's career as he suffered a heart attack while filming this and subsequently his output became less prolific (He only completed 3 more films and a telefilm in his last eight years). Also, this was the beginning of a change of style- from the ersthwile outdoor locations (Apu, Kanchenjunga, Aranyer Din Ratri, etc.) to the primarily 'set- driven' later films. 8/10 for me
Reviews
14 Reviews
The Home and the World
(1984)
Freedom Vs. Fortitude, Idealism Vs. Pragmatism, Lover Vs. Husband, Home Vs. The World
15 August 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Pather Panchali
(1955)
Insubordination of the human soul
15 May 2007
Exotic (Adjective)- 1. Strangely Beautiful
THE GENRE Ray developed a language of his own through the Apu trilogy- a slow, lush, languid, lyrical language reminiscent of enchanting poetry in the most maudlin and mundane circumstances. He didn't ostracize poverty nor did he glamorize it, He didn't exploit it but merely romanticized it. He found romance and beauty in the most hideous of circumstances. It was like a pain that was so severe that the agony became sweet, a sore so deep that its anguish felt sensuous. Like death- so terrifying that it's freeing, exonerating. It's the kind of erotic pain one feels in the muscles after a hard day's work. You want to laugh at the pain almost with contempt and with a condescending, patronizing attitude, never realizing that it is your own pain that you're laughing at. But you want to wallow in it all the same because you think that it'll make you more profound and hence you're thankful for it having been bestowed upon you
THE TREATMENT Ray gave an explanation to the people who have a problem with the pacing of the film by saying that the slow rambling rhythm of the film was a clue to the subject matter itself, as villages in rural Bengal do, in fact, ramble. Pather Panchali has numerous colloquial anecdotes in chaste Bengali but despite the localized context, the message of the film is universal because pain and suffering knows no boundaries- they transcend and pervade our hearts, overcoming mythical barriers of race, religion, nationality, language, time, place and other such superfluous demographic constraints. Pather Panchali is ultimately a comment on the indomitable insubordination of the human soul
THE POETRY Ray is rather unforgiving in his vision. He chooses stark landscapes sans an iota of conventional beauty and surrounds his world with equally pathetic and ugly faces but he finds a beauty amongst them that is so pristine and divine. He literally hears the beating of a heart in the throbbing of a wound. The small moments- a torn bed sheet (torn, mind you and thereby being an article that if placed in any other film, would conventionally arouse feelings of sadness but not in Pather Panchali for here that very article becomes a magnificent artifact) through which Apu's eyes can be seen for the first time when we see him as a child. It assumes an artistic expression of its own. The kaleidoscope becomes a voyeuristic instrument, enabling a glimpse into the world of fantasy albeit one that is decidedly and inexplicably, out of their reach. The simple act of following a sweetmeat seller and the hope of eventually extracting some savories from him or from the house he's selling them to, becomes a 'chase sequence', the tragic mood uplifted by the lilting Sitar music by Ravi Shankar. We feel victorious when Durga is given sweets by her young friend right under the disapproving gaze of her bitter mother.
THE TRAGEDY 'Song of the little road' is a joyous journey through a road of unbearable suffering. Tragedies are many- the death of the aunt being the first moment, Apu's first encounter with death. Whether he fully comprehends the situation or not is debatable but the indelible impression of this one incident on his nubile mind, is not. Then, the second tragedy- the death of Durga, Apu's sister and his best friend is even more heartbreaking than the earlier tragedy simply because of the higher shock value it has. Durga is in many ways the protagonist of this film. Apu is merely a bystander who observes rather than experiences most situations in this film. It is Durga- playful and protective, child and woman, innocent and naughty- so captivating is Uma Dasgupta's performance that the viewer falls in love with the character and therefore cannot quite accept her death in the film. Why she was here just a few moments ago- playing carelessly in the rain with Apu and then, suddenly, nature seems to have defeated her but isn't there a lesson in that? The lesson being that it took death to conquer her undying spirit, for she wouldn't have succumbed to her circumstances while alive. It's as if she was saying- "You may take my life away but you'll never conquer my spirit". Her presence wraps the film like a halo and she is enshrined forever in the viewer's hearts. Another exemplary sequence is the one where Durga and Apu run out of their house to watch the trains go by. The haunting look in Apu's utterly captivated eyes touch the viewer. Steam Engines, like the kaleidoscope, are again a symbol of movement and fantasy and yearning for an outside world and these symbols of change and freedom become even more evident when seen within the startling paradoxical context of their waking existence of stillness in their never changing lives that they partake everyday like bonded labor. The difference between Yesterday and Today is barely discernible in their village where life follows the hum drum of a set pattern. So set that it's almost a sacred ritual.
THE INSIGHTS Relentless in its pursuit of reality, Pather Panchali is a neo real masterpiece. I have been fortunate enough to have visited the actual location where Pather Panchali had been shot. The landscape is still the same, still as barren, the sons and daughters of the villages still look like Apu and Durga, Ray's voice still seems to resonate through the hollow tree barks and Ravi Shankar's soulful Sitar strings still peek from behind the antediluvian cobblestones. Because just like an old painting, the colors may have dried and got slightly discolored, but Ray's impeccable genius is still visible through the Gothic canvas.
THE GENRE Ray developed a language of his own through the Apu trilogy- a slow, lush, languid, lyrical language reminiscent of enchanting poetry in the most maudlin and mundane circumstances. He didn't ostracize poverty nor did he glamorize it, He didn't exploit it but merely romanticized it. He found romance and beauty in the most hideous of circumstances. It was like a pain that was so severe that the agony became sweet, a sore so deep that its anguish felt sensuous. Like death- so terrifying that it's freeing, exonerating. It's the kind of erotic pain one feels in the muscles after a hard day's work. You want to laugh at the pain almost with contempt and with a condescending, patronizing attitude, never realizing that it is your own pain that you're laughing at. But you want to wallow in it all the same because you think that it'll make you more profound and hence you're thankful for it having been bestowed upon you
THE TREATMENT Ray gave an explanation to the people who have a problem with the pacing of the film by saying that the slow rambling rhythm of the film was a clue to the subject matter itself, as villages in rural Bengal do, in fact, ramble. Pather Panchali has numerous colloquial anecdotes in chaste Bengali but despite the localized context, the message of the film is universal because pain and suffering knows no boundaries- they transcend and pervade our hearts, overcoming mythical barriers of race, religion, nationality, language, time, place and other such superfluous demographic constraints. Pather Panchali is ultimately a comment on the indomitable insubordination of the human soul
THE POETRY Ray is rather unforgiving in his vision. He chooses stark landscapes sans an iota of conventional beauty and surrounds his world with equally pathetic and ugly faces but he finds a beauty amongst them that is so pristine and divine. He literally hears the beating of a heart in the throbbing of a wound. The small moments- a torn bed sheet (torn, mind you and thereby being an article that if placed in any other film, would conventionally arouse feelings of sadness but not in Pather Panchali for here that very article becomes a magnificent artifact) through which Apu's eyes can be seen for the first time when we see him as a child. It assumes an artistic expression of its own. The kaleidoscope becomes a voyeuristic instrument, enabling a glimpse into the world of fantasy albeit one that is decidedly and inexplicably, out of their reach. The simple act of following a sweetmeat seller and the hope of eventually extracting some savories from him or from the house he's selling them to, becomes a 'chase sequence', the tragic mood uplifted by the lilting Sitar music by Ravi Shankar. We feel victorious when Durga is given sweets by her young friend right under the disapproving gaze of her bitter mother.
THE TRAGEDY 'Song of the little road' is a joyous journey through a road of unbearable suffering. Tragedies are many- the death of the aunt being the first moment, Apu's first encounter with death. Whether he fully comprehends the situation or not is debatable but the indelible impression of this one incident on his nubile mind, is not. Then, the second tragedy- the death of Durga, Apu's sister and his best friend is even more heartbreaking than the earlier tragedy simply because of the higher shock value it has. Durga is in many ways the protagonist of this film. Apu is merely a bystander who observes rather than experiences most situations in this film. It is Durga- playful and protective, child and woman, innocent and naughty- so captivating is Uma Dasgupta's performance that the viewer falls in love with the character and therefore cannot quite accept her death in the film. Why she was here just a few moments ago- playing carelessly in the rain with Apu and then, suddenly, nature seems to have defeated her but isn't there a lesson in that? The lesson being that it took death to conquer her undying spirit, for she wouldn't have succumbed to her circumstances while alive. It's as if she was saying- "You may take my life away but you'll never conquer my spirit". Her presence wraps the film like a halo and she is enshrined forever in the viewer's hearts. Another exemplary sequence is the one where Durga and Apu run out of their house to watch the trains go by. The haunting look in Apu's utterly captivated eyes touch the viewer. Steam Engines, like the kaleidoscope, are again a symbol of movement and fantasy and yearning for an outside world and these symbols of change and freedom become even more evident when seen within the startling paradoxical context of their waking existence of stillness in their never changing lives that they partake everyday like bonded labor. The difference between Yesterday and Today is barely discernible in their village where life follows the hum drum of a set pattern. So set that it's almost a sacred ritual.
THE INSIGHTS Relentless in its pursuit of reality, Pather Panchali is a neo real masterpiece. I have been fortunate enough to have visited the actual location where Pather Panchali had been shot. The landscape is still the same, still as barren, the sons and daughters of the villages still look like Apu and Durga, Ray's voice still seems to resonate through the hollow tree barks and Ravi Shankar's soulful Sitar strings still peek from behind the antediluvian cobblestones. Because just like an old painting, the colors may have dried and got slightly discolored, but Ray's impeccable genius is still visible through the Gothic canvas.
Chhoti Si Baat
(1976)
A Mini Masterpiece
7 May 2007
What we have here is a slice of the life narrative which is dominated by an exciting battle of wits between two suitors over a girl. Amol Palekar plays Arun, a diffident simpleton who likes a girl from a neighboring office but isn't able to profess his adoration for his object of affection and attention. They meet in the most mundane circumstances- on the bus while on the way to their respective offices. On some days, he follows her and on some days, she notices. Is she interested in him? Is she playing the mind games? How can one be certain? The problem of the girl's inexplicable behavior (in Arun's mind) is further increased by the entry of a third factor- a glib talking, over smart and overbearing character of Asrani who happens to be a colleague of Prabha and is therefore, ostensibly at an advantage. And yes, he is a keen enthusiast in two sports- Chess and Table Tennis, whereas Arun sucks at both those disciplines. Oh, and Asrani also has a lime green Lambretta which Arun is envious of.
In the first act itself, there ensues a battle of wits between Arun and Asrani. While Arun's motives in winning over Prabha are pretty unambiguous, Asrani's motivations are not that apparent to the audience. We are left guessing whether he is really trying to woo Prabha or is he just a compulsive flirt with a big mouth and terrible etiquettes? But those very vices seem to be helping him in the beginning. He emerges as a roadblock in Arun's journey of love and in a memorable dream sequence, several of which are used very innovatively throughout the film, Arun imagines himself murdering him and then facing the jury proudly after his belligerent deed. However, that's just one of Arun's many daydreams. In reality, he is unable to express his feelings of love for Prabha. Whener she's around, he gets tongue tied. A Beatles Song most accurately describes his psychology at that point of time
"I want to tell you. My head is filled with things to say. When you're here, all those words they seem to slip away"
That Harrison Song from 1967's legendary 'Revolver' album, perfectly captures Arun's inner torment and turmoil in the first half of the film. Disillusioned and disappointed with his repeated failures in the war of love, he turns to astrology and divine intervention but no avail God helps those who help themselves. Therefore, he decides to seek help and finds that in the form of Col. JNW Singh of Khandala, a confident, worldly wise, old man who is said to have the best advise for everyone who come to seek it and the advise is available on various topics- love, career, tax planning, etc. He takes a special interest in Arun's case, the reason for which is revealed later.
Under Col. Singh's tutelage, Arun learns the art of courtship. Through a complex training process comprising body language courses, table etiquettes, chess and table tennis apart from of course the mandatory knowledge about the birds and the bees and the wondrous art of deciphering the intentions of womankind by the wave of her hand, the curled smile on her lips, the placement of her feet, the position of her face and purse, the movements of her fingers, the contact of her eyes, her laughter, her touch, the color of her mascara, the size of her earrings, the strength of her handshake, the tone of her voice, etc. etc.
After all this, Arun returns back to Mumbai a changed man. He is accompanied by his mentor, Col. Singh, who wants to check on his progress. The new Arun has a leap in his stride, a mild confidence about his countenance and knowledge of his new craft. Slowly, he starts turning the tables on Asrani and uses his own tricks against Asrani himself much to the secret glee of Prabha, who by this time, seems to have developed an affection of her own in Arun. They enjoy spending time together. Then, one day he calls her to his place. What are his intentions? Does he really love her or can it be that .? No, Prabha decides to go and find out for herself the truth about Arun's character. What happens in the end? Does Arun trick Prabha or do we get a happy ending? And where does Asrani fit into the scheme of things? The situations are so believable and the characters are so relatable that this film is an instant favorite of mine. The technique used is brilliant. The use of voice overs, flash backs and flash forwards are innovatively used. And the songs they are mind blowing most rendered soulfully by Yesudas- 'Jaaneman- Jaaneman', ' Yeh Din' and the beautiful and haunting, 'Na Jaane Kyun'. Amol Palekar excels in a role tailor made for him. Asrani gives an effortless performance. Vidya Sinha is adequate. Ashok Kumar is brilliant in his depiction of one of the most memorable characters- Julius Nagendranath Wilfred Singh.
A thoroughly entertaining film and one that can be watched again and again, CSB is my favourite Basu Chatterjee film, followed closely by Rajanigandha- which is worthy of being hailed a classic too and is on certain levels, even more masterful than Choti Si Baat as Rajanigandha looks at the matters of love through the eyes of a woman and touches a point even deeper in our psychology.
In the first act itself, there ensues a battle of wits between Arun and Asrani. While Arun's motives in winning over Prabha are pretty unambiguous, Asrani's motivations are not that apparent to the audience. We are left guessing whether he is really trying to woo Prabha or is he just a compulsive flirt with a big mouth and terrible etiquettes? But those very vices seem to be helping him in the beginning. He emerges as a roadblock in Arun's journey of love and in a memorable dream sequence, several of which are used very innovatively throughout the film, Arun imagines himself murdering him and then facing the jury proudly after his belligerent deed. However, that's just one of Arun's many daydreams. In reality, he is unable to express his feelings of love for Prabha. Whener she's around, he gets tongue tied. A Beatles Song most accurately describes his psychology at that point of time
"I want to tell you. My head is filled with things to say. When you're here, all those words they seem to slip away"
That Harrison Song from 1967's legendary 'Revolver' album, perfectly captures Arun's inner torment and turmoil in the first half of the film. Disillusioned and disappointed with his repeated failures in the war of love, he turns to astrology and divine intervention but no avail God helps those who help themselves. Therefore, he decides to seek help and finds that in the form of Col. JNW Singh of Khandala, a confident, worldly wise, old man who is said to have the best advise for everyone who come to seek it and the advise is available on various topics- love, career, tax planning, etc. He takes a special interest in Arun's case, the reason for which is revealed later.
Under Col. Singh's tutelage, Arun learns the art of courtship. Through a complex training process comprising body language courses, table etiquettes, chess and table tennis apart from of course the mandatory knowledge about the birds and the bees and the wondrous art of deciphering the intentions of womankind by the wave of her hand, the curled smile on her lips, the placement of her feet, the position of her face and purse, the movements of her fingers, the contact of her eyes, her laughter, her touch, the color of her mascara, the size of her earrings, the strength of her handshake, the tone of her voice, etc. etc.
After all this, Arun returns back to Mumbai a changed man. He is accompanied by his mentor, Col. Singh, who wants to check on his progress. The new Arun has a leap in his stride, a mild confidence about his countenance and knowledge of his new craft. Slowly, he starts turning the tables on Asrani and uses his own tricks against Asrani himself much to the secret glee of Prabha, who by this time, seems to have developed an affection of her own in Arun. They enjoy spending time together. Then, one day he calls her to his place. What are his intentions? Does he really love her or can it be that .? No, Prabha decides to go and find out for herself the truth about Arun's character. What happens in the end? Does Arun trick Prabha or do we get a happy ending? And where does Asrani fit into the scheme of things? The situations are so believable and the characters are so relatable that this film is an instant favorite of mine. The technique used is brilliant. The use of voice overs, flash backs and flash forwards are innovatively used. And the songs they are mind blowing most rendered soulfully by Yesudas- 'Jaaneman- Jaaneman', ' Yeh Din' and the beautiful and haunting, 'Na Jaane Kyun'. Amol Palekar excels in a role tailor made for him. Asrani gives an effortless performance. Vidya Sinha is adequate. Ashok Kumar is brilliant in his depiction of one of the most memorable characters- Julius Nagendranath Wilfred Singh.
A thoroughly entertaining film and one that can be watched again and again, CSB is my favourite Basu Chatterjee film, followed closely by Rajanigandha- which is worthy of being hailed a classic too and is on certain levels, even more masterful than Choti Si Baat as Rajanigandha looks at the matters of love through the eyes of a woman and touches a point even deeper in our psychology.
Rajnigandha
(1974)
A Brilliant glimpse into a woman's mind
7 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
The protagonist this time is played by Vidya Sinha. She once again plays the love interest of two men. The shy Amol Palekar of Choti Si Baat becomes a motor mouth Asrani- like character in 'Rajanigandha' and the 'smart Alec' Asrani of that film gives way to the silent, brooding, Dilip Thakur here. The two films are linked extremely closely with each other and ideally should be seen as companion pieces to each other (using apwbd's language w.r.t MD and IE).
Here, the events are seen from Vidya's perspective. Her lover is a caring man (Amol Palekar) who is liable to be brash, callous and indifferent at times. But he is nevertheless her constant source of support. They seem to have an ideal life as a couple in Mumbai until a job interview forces her to go to Delhi where she meets a man from her past, played by Dilip Thakur. She had known him to love her secretly but since he had never confided his feelings to her, she was helpless and had had to move on. Now, she secretly and maybe even selfishly, wishes that he finally confesses his love for her. This, even while she has a loyal (well, imperfect as he may be) boyfriend back home Now, the guessing game begins and the audience gets involved. Will he tell her or won't he? Why doesn't he tell her? She's so clearly in awe of him..can't he see? But even while he gets several opportunities, he doesn't say the needful and she's once again, helpless.
In the anticlimax that follows, she goes back to Mumbai to her old life. Still, she secretly hopes for a letter from him. Finally it arrives, but to her chagrin, it is merely a letter congratulating her on her successful interview and not much else (though she can gauge that a lot has been left unsaid). Then, one day when she's waiting for another letter of his, someone delivers a bunch of Rajanigandha flowers at her door. But it is not from her secret admirer in Delhi but from her tangible suitor in Mumbai and then the truth dawns upon her. Pragmatism wins over incessant yearning. Dreams give way to reality and she gives her heart to Amol's character.
How real is this? What is our life but a series of choices and chances and when they collide, serendipity happens and love blooms and when they don't, one moves on, still trying to solve the complex equations of love and life. And we are left with a lot of questions that start with 'What if ..'. Yes, Choti Si Baat and Rajanigandha are like twin sisters and alter egos of each other. While in the former, where the tone is much more humorous, one is elated at the victory of Arun over his rival whereas in the second, where the tone is much more maudlin, one can't help but feel a deep sadness for Dilip's character. They don't have non linear narratives, they don't have weird camera angles, deep focuses, extreme close ups, long takes, violation of 180 degrees etc etc. but both films have their heart in the right place and both are masterpieces IMO because not only do they make engaging viewings out of commonplace situations and ordinariness but they touch upon such a sublime and subtle truth in our behavior and build so effortlessly on that foundation, that the resultant building is a house of hearts, built with bricks of love, the doors to which open only to the brave ones
Here, the events are seen from Vidya's perspective. Her lover is a caring man (Amol Palekar) who is liable to be brash, callous and indifferent at times. But he is nevertheless her constant source of support. They seem to have an ideal life as a couple in Mumbai until a job interview forces her to go to Delhi where she meets a man from her past, played by Dilip Thakur. She had known him to love her secretly but since he had never confided his feelings to her, she was helpless and had had to move on. Now, she secretly and maybe even selfishly, wishes that he finally confesses his love for her. This, even while she has a loyal (well, imperfect as he may be) boyfriend back home Now, the guessing game begins and the audience gets involved. Will he tell her or won't he? Why doesn't he tell her? She's so clearly in awe of him..can't he see? But even while he gets several opportunities, he doesn't say the needful and she's once again, helpless.
In the anticlimax that follows, she goes back to Mumbai to her old life. Still, she secretly hopes for a letter from him. Finally it arrives, but to her chagrin, it is merely a letter congratulating her on her successful interview and not much else (though she can gauge that a lot has been left unsaid). Then, one day when she's waiting for another letter of his, someone delivers a bunch of Rajanigandha flowers at her door. But it is not from her secret admirer in Delhi but from her tangible suitor in Mumbai and then the truth dawns upon her. Pragmatism wins over incessant yearning. Dreams give way to reality and she gives her heart to Amol's character.
How real is this? What is our life but a series of choices and chances and when they collide, serendipity happens and love blooms and when they don't, one moves on, still trying to solve the complex equations of love and life. And we are left with a lot of questions that start with 'What if ..'. Yes, Choti Si Baat and Rajanigandha are like twin sisters and alter egos of each other. While in the former, where the tone is much more humorous, one is elated at the victory of Arun over his rival whereas in the second, where the tone is much more maudlin, one can't help but feel a deep sadness for Dilip's character. They don't have non linear narratives, they don't have weird camera angles, deep focuses, extreme close ups, long takes, violation of 180 degrees etc etc. but both films have their heart in the right place and both are masterpieces IMO because not only do they make engaging viewings out of commonplace situations and ordinariness but they touch upon such a sublime and subtle truth in our behavior and build so effortlessly on that foundation, that the resultant building is a house of hearts, built with bricks of love, the doors to which open only to the brave ones
The Season
(1975)
Integration of the persistence of memory
7 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Dil Dhoondta Hai. The heart yearns. One day when we'll look back upon these days of leisure and carelessness with a great sense of nostalgia, we would find these days hazy, hidden, buried and long gone and what'd be left for us but the remains of these days. I'm getting ahead of myself but how else can I describe Mausam for what is it but an eclectic mosaic of sweet, sad, vengeful, insightful, melancholic memories, the colors of which are brought forth masterfully on the canvas, by the master painter and poet, Gulzar, who with the sweep of his magical brush, paints a kaleidoscopic landscape of lost love Now, there are many kinds of memories. Some memories are hauntingly pertinent and indelible. Funny how they keep lying- dormant, unused, in a hidden cavity inside our cache like conscience, waiting to flash psychedelic impulses of Deja- Vu into our brain, triggered by an obscure thought; the whole process reminiscent of the obsolete Oracle 8i software, marvelously retrieving data from its enigmatic records. And just reliving them makes one feel alive again. One wants to be deluged by those memories, to be drowned in them and wallow in the sweet anguish they bring along Then, some memories are unpleasant and one wishes to obliterate them but is such a thing possible? They invariably come back periodically like wind bouncing off the abandoned water facing lighthouses, to haunt us again and again and remind us of our fallibility. Then, disorientation beckons and insomnia reigns. Many nights in a row. Isn't there a thing called consecutive dreaming? It is these memories that the film in question deals with.
We meet Dr. Amarnath Gill. Though ostensibly, Dr. Gill is on a vacation to Darjeeling to take a break from his hectic schedule, his visit has a more subliminal motive too, one that is not known to his frenzied city life but is only known to his other self, which has long since become lost like an unknown face in the mirror that he doesn't recognize anymore. Dr. Gill has a past. Something he had done years ago has left his conscience pecked with a deeply embedded guilt. He tries to pick up the broken pieces and tie up the loose ends. His immaculate questions about a woman he had known many years ago, sheds ample light on the cause of his restlessness.
Then, we embark upon a journey with him along the woolen clouds and the and through a series of flashbacks, we meet our second main character- the object of Dr. Gill's affection in the past and his culpability in the present. Theirs was a fairytale story. Young, city bred, urban urbane man comes to a small hill station to study Medicine and falls in love with a local damsel. But he has to go back to the city for his exams. He promises to come back and marry her. But he doesn't. She keeps waiting, keeps his memories and a gift as an embodiment of hope- and she clings on to that hope like a flimsy rope knowing very well that if it snaps, it could also act as as a noose. What happens next? He doesn't come. Her illusion is shattered. Her innocence lost. There are even other clues that point to the fact that she may have borne his love child before her ultimate abandonment by him.
We cut back to the present where suddenly, our protagonist finds himself face to face with a stranger whose countenance has an uncanny similarity to that of his lost love. Who is this enigmatic stranger, who happens to be a prostitute, to whom he feels so mysteriously attracted? Is she the reincarnation of his lost love or could it be that....yes that must be it! He pays her pimp to take her to his guest house. There, the revelation takes place and mournful at the news that this man had walked out on her desolate mother and thereby subjecting herself and her mother to years of destituteness, she walks out on him.
In the last scene, he seeks forgiveness and she grants him that by agreeing to go with him to the city (just like her mother would've and should've many moons ago) and we leave them like that, unsure of the future facing them but sure of their intentions of facing it together
The story of the movie is fairly simple. The doctor goes back to his past that he had left behind and once there, he remembers his lost love, discovers himself and meets a mysterious stranger who would eventually change the course of his life. The pace of the movie is like the doctor's vacation- unhurried, laid back and luxurious. The camera smacks of poignant poetry in every frame, metaphorical interludes amidst the sophisticated narrative. 'Dil Dhoondta Hai' probably has some of the best use of photography- bringing together the two ends of the continuum- the past and the present, the start and the end. That one song is enough to grant this film a permanent place in my heart's graveyard. Bhupinder's vocal builds an emotional bridge between the viewer and the protagonist. You feel as if you are Dr. Gill and that you can almost touch Kajli by extending your arm through the confetti- like mist. Sanjeev Kumar is magical. Sharmila probably gives the performance of a lifetime. But with a role like hers, in a film like this, it would've been hard to falter.
But ultimately, the film belongs to its creator. Gulzar weaves a tale like a rich, exotic, Pashmina Shawl. A tale of lost love- a favorite subject with Gulzar, is probably told in three parts- Mausam, Aandhi and Ijaazat. Mausam, released in 1975, forms one installment in this wonderful trilogy. Its memory is one to cherish for a long long time just like Dali's surreal masterpiece
We meet Dr. Amarnath Gill. Though ostensibly, Dr. Gill is on a vacation to Darjeeling to take a break from his hectic schedule, his visit has a more subliminal motive too, one that is not known to his frenzied city life but is only known to his other self, which has long since become lost like an unknown face in the mirror that he doesn't recognize anymore. Dr. Gill has a past. Something he had done years ago has left his conscience pecked with a deeply embedded guilt. He tries to pick up the broken pieces and tie up the loose ends. His immaculate questions about a woman he had known many years ago, sheds ample light on the cause of his restlessness.
Then, we embark upon a journey with him along the woolen clouds and the and through a series of flashbacks, we meet our second main character- the object of Dr. Gill's affection in the past and his culpability in the present. Theirs was a fairytale story. Young, city bred, urban urbane man comes to a small hill station to study Medicine and falls in love with a local damsel. But he has to go back to the city for his exams. He promises to come back and marry her. But he doesn't. She keeps waiting, keeps his memories and a gift as an embodiment of hope- and she clings on to that hope like a flimsy rope knowing very well that if it snaps, it could also act as as a noose. What happens next? He doesn't come. Her illusion is shattered. Her innocence lost. There are even other clues that point to the fact that she may have borne his love child before her ultimate abandonment by him.
We cut back to the present where suddenly, our protagonist finds himself face to face with a stranger whose countenance has an uncanny similarity to that of his lost love. Who is this enigmatic stranger, who happens to be a prostitute, to whom he feels so mysteriously attracted? Is she the reincarnation of his lost love or could it be that....yes that must be it! He pays her pimp to take her to his guest house. There, the revelation takes place and mournful at the news that this man had walked out on her desolate mother and thereby subjecting herself and her mother to years of destituteness, she walks out on him.
In the last scene, he seeks forgiveness and she grants him that by agreeing to go with him to the city (just like her mother would've and should've many moons ago) and we leave them like that, unsure of the future facing them but sure of their intentions of facing it together
The story of the movie is fairly simple. The doctor goes back to his past that he had left behind and once there, he remembers his lost love, discovers himself and meets a mysterious stranger who would eventually change the course of his life. The pace of the movie is like the doctor's vacation- unhurried, laid back and luxurious. The camera smacks of poignant poetry in every frame, metaphorical interludes amidst the sophisticated narrative. 'Dil Dhoondta Hai' probably has some of the best use of photography- bringing together the two ends of the continuum- the past and the present, the start and the end. That one song is enough to grant this film a permanent place in my heart's graveyard. Bhupinder's vocal builds an emotional bridge between the viewer and the protagonist. You feel as if you are Dr. Gill and that you can almost touch Kajli by extending your arm through the confetti- like mist. Sanjeev Kumar is magical. Sharmila probably gives the performance of a lifetime. But with a role like hers, in a film like this, it would've been hard to falter.
But ultimately, the film belongs to its creator. Gulzar weaves a tale like a rich, exotic, Pashmina Shawl. A tale of lost love- a favorite subject with Gulzar, is probably told in three parts- Mausam, Aandhi and Ijaazat. Mausam, released in 1975, forms one installment in this wonderful trilogy. Its memory is one to cherish for a long long time just like Dali's surreal masterpiece
15 Park Avenue
(2005)
Deconstruction of the Persistence of Memory
1 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
SPOILERS AHEAD
15 PARK AVENUE: My Humble take on this film
Now, for a viewer of cinema having tastes as severely limited as mine, niche films like 15 Park Avenue ought to be palatable to my sensibilities. With this thought, and a mild sense of embarrassment that I hadn't watched the complete film earlier, I watched this film last Saturday. There are some starting similarities with other works like the legendary Mulholland Drive (David Lynch) from which, this film borrows at least 3 concepts:-
a) That (at least some) truths are relative b) The first scene of Shabana and Konkonam going around in a car as the opening credits roll, is uncannily similar to the car ride that Betty and Rita undertook in Mulholland Drive. In both cases, the object of inquiry happens to be a place which is probably mythical in both cases and perhaps more openly symbolic in Aparna's film c) The incident revolving around the mad beggar woman is again extremely reminiscent of the whole 'occurence behind Winkies' involving a bum but while that scary creature is an embodiment of something and that that 'something' as well as the character per Se is seamlessly linked to other works of Lynch (notice carefully the disheveled long hair), the effect of the beggar woman in 15 PA appears to be a tribute and therefore insignificant in the context of the film and its message
The other films from which 15 PA also borrows is Blow Up (especially the last scene is a throw back to the truth Vs. perceived truth poser presented towards the end of Antonioni's masterpiece). Of course, the professor and schizophrenia angle also bring to the mind, "A Beautiful mind". Although, admittedly the subject here is high brow physics and Shabana, who professes it, inadvertently ends up being the brilliant antithesis to the delusional hallucinations of Konkona's character through those very prophecies. In an outstanding scene in the movie, some of these elements are juxtaposed with each other and that scene cuts back and forth from the 'real' world of Shabana, where Quantum Physics and the Theory of Relativity justify the finiteness and composition of the universe, to the artificial edifice of the 'make believe' world of Mithi But for all their differences, the sisters are alike too. Both are incapable of forming long lasting relationships- one out of choice and the other out of nature. So, Mithi's pain at being rejected in love by Joydeep is in harmony with the inability of Shaban to form a special bond with either Kunal(Dhritiman) or Sanjeev (Kanwaljeet). But I'm getting ahead of myself. Viewers generally tend to view this film in one of the following two ways:-
Hypothesis 1: "It was Shabana all along" There is a certain section of the audience who think so. But that explanation is not only too far fetched but also contrived as that would mean she was dreaming up so many other characters too (i.e. all those characters whom she visualized as visualizing Mithi along with her)
Hypothesis 2: "There WAS a REAL Mithi and the ending is a metaphor" This POV says that the film's essence is summarized in one dialog in the film, when in response to a statement by Joy (Rahul Bose), that Mithi is looking for something that she will never find, his wife Laxmi (Shefali Shah) philosophizes that we all are looking indeed for that illusive utopia, the end of the rainbow wherein appears to lie the mirage of happiness and contentment
There are other more minor possibilities which have not been embraced that much by our knowledgeable audience like:-
Hypothesis 3:" Shabana and Konkona are alter egos of the same person" Hypothesis 4: "Shabana too is a figment of Mithi's imagination" Hypothesis 5: "The old, haggard, perhaps mad, beggar woman is the real protagonist of the story"
Are these hypotheses worthy of even being tested? Well, your guess is as good as mine
"Why 15 Park Avenue?" Contrary to the popular perception that she was thinking of the Park Avenue in NY, I believe that she got the name from the brand name of a semi popular bathing soap. Remember, her stating Jo Jo's profession as "Prime minister of Shikakai", which as you may be knowing is a popular ingredient used in manufacturing Shampoos. The prefix '15' is used as it was on 15th December that Mithi got engaged to Joydeep and after his walkout, she remains forever in a time warp. The film has its fair share of flaws- lack of use of a strong background score, which in films like these can really augment the narrative, some sloppy dialogs unabated by some forced dialog delivery. Inconsistent performances (Shabana and Dhritimaan are excellent though IMO) by a few of the cast members albeit many members of this ensemble cast have been wasted. Shefali Chaya's sudden insecurity about her husband seems to be an unimaginatively introduced dimension in the plot. I give it 7/10 as it made me think but not any higher than that because I can easily fathom its sources of inspiration and having experienced (and for the most part, thoroughly enjoyed) those previously, I have already thought on similar lines earlier. So, the experience post 15 PA is bound to be sans a certain degree of novelty. Where am I coming from? I gave 9.5/10 to '36 Chowringhee Lane' (though rumors still persist that one Satyajit Ray ghost directed it), 7.5 to 'Paromiter Ek Din', 7 to 'Mr and Mrs Iyer' and 5 to 'Paroma'. On an existential level, it failed to invoke my interest, not even as much as say a 'Truman Show'
15 PARK AVENUE: My Humble take on this film
Now, for a viewer of cinema having tastes as severely limited as mine, niche films like 15 Park Avenue ought to be palatable to my sensibilities. With this thought, and a mild sense of embarrassment that I hadn't watched the complete film earlier, I watched this film last Saturday. There are some starting similarities with other works like the legendary Mulholland Drive (David Lynch) from which, this film borrows at least 3 concepts:-
a) That (at least some) truths are relative b) The first scene of Shabana and Konkonam going around in a car as the opening credits roll, is uncannily similar to the car ride that Betty and Rita undertook in Mulholland Drive. In both cases, the object of inquiry happens to be a place which is probably mythical in both cases and perhaps more openly symbolic in Aparna's film c) The incident revolving around the mad beggar woman is again extremely reminiscent of the whole 'occurence behind Winkies' involving a bum but while that scary creature is an embodiment of something and that that 'something' as well as the character per Se is seamlessly linked to other works of Lynch (notice carefully the disheveled long hair), the effect of the beggar woman in 15 PA appears to be a tribute and therefore insignificant in the context of the film and its message
The other films from which 15 PA also borrows is Blow Up (especially the last scene is a throw back to the truth Vs. perceived truth poser presented towards the end of Antonioni's masterpiece). Of course, the professor and schizophrenia angle also bring to the mind, "A Beautiful mind". Although, admittedly the subject here is high brow physics and Shabana, who professes it, inadvertently ends up being the brilliant antithesis to the delusional hallucinations of Konkona's character through those very prophecies. In an outstanding scene in the movie, some of these elements are juxtaposed with each other and that scene cuts back and forth from the 'real' world of Shabana, where Quantum Physics and the Theory of Relativity justify the finiteness and composition of the universe, to the artificial edifice of the 'make believe' world of Mithi But for all their differences, the sisters are alike too. Both are incapable of forming long lasting relationships- one out of choice and the other out of nature. So, Mithi's pain at being rejected in love by Joydeep is in harmony with the inability of Shaban to form a special bond with either Kunal(Dhritiman) or Sanjeev (Kanwaljeet). But I'm getting ahead of myself. Viewers generally tend to view this film in one of the following two ways:-
Hypothesis 1: "It was Shabana all along" There is a certain section of the audience who think so. But that explanation is not only too far fetched but also contrived as that would mean she was dreaming up so many other characters too (i.e. all those characters whom she visualized as visualizing Mithi along with her)
Hypothesis 2: "There WAS a REAL Mithi and the ending is a metaphor" This POV says that the film's essence is summarized in one dialog in the film, when in response to a statement by Joy (Rahul Bose), that Mithi is looking for something that she will never find, his wife Laxmi (Shefali Shah) philosophizes that we all are looking indeed for that illusive utopia, the end of the rainbow wherein appears to lie the mirage of happiness and contentment
There are other more minor possibilities which have not been embraced that much by our knowledgeable audience like:-
Hypothesis 3:" Shabana and Konkona are alter egos of the same person" Hypothesis 4: "Shabana too is a figment of Mithi's imagination" Hypothesis 5: "The old, haggard, perhaps mad, beggar woman is the real protagonist of the story"
Are these hypotheses worthy of even being tested? Well, your guess is as good as mine
"Why 15 Park Avenue?" Contrary to the popular perception that she was thinking of the Park Avenue in NY, I believe that she got the name from the brand name of a semi popular bathing soap. Remember, her stating Jo Jo's profession as "Prime minister of Shikakai", which as you may be knowing is a popular ingredient used in manufacturing Shampoos. The prefix '15' is used as it was on 15th December that Mithi got engaged to Joydeep and after his walkout, she remains forever in a time warp. The film has its fair share of flaws- lack of use of a strong background score, which in films like these can really augment the narrative, some sloppy dialogs unabated by some forced dialog delivery. Inconsistent performances (Shabana and Dhritimaan are excellent though IMO) by a few of the cast members albeit many members of this ensemble cast have been wasted. Shefali Chaya's sudden insecurity about her husband seems to be an unimaginatively introduced dimension in the plot. I give it 7/10 as it made me think but not any higher than that because I can easily fathom its sources of inspiration and having experienced (and for the most part, thoroughly enjoyed) those previously, I have already thought on similar lines earlier. So, the experience post 15 PA is bound to be sans a certain degree of novelty. Where am I coming from? I gave 9.5/10 to '36 Chowringhee Lane' (though rumors still persist that one Satyajit Ray ghost directed it), 7.5 to 'Paromiter Ek Din', 7 to 'Mr and Mrs Iyer' and 5 to 'Paroma'. On an existential level, it failed to invoke my interest, not even as much as say a 'Truman Show'
Permission
(1987)
Gulzar's poetic masterpiece
24 April 2007
What is it about?
The story is a love triangle between Mahinder (Nasseruddin Shah), Sudha (Rekha) and Maya (Anuradha Patel). Mahinder is an ostensibly ordinary photographer. Sudha is his equally ordinary, understated and understanding wife. Maya is Mahinder's sensitive, enigmatic, complex and impetuous ex-girlfriend with an extraordinary gift of poetry.
When the film begins one night, we meet two of the three main characters- Mahinder and Sudha in the waiting room of a train station in the middle of nowhere while it rains relentlessly outside. It is immediately apparent to us that these two characters have shared something in the past as there is an unmistakable sense of familiarity and an edgy chemistry between them. Then, through a series of sporadic flashbacks, we are transported to the past where we find some answers to our questions
Mahinder was expected to marry his childhood friend Sudha but while he was away from home, he had fallen in love with Maya (titled so aptly as she would later play the 'other woman' and hence symbolizes selfish greed for the protagonist, Mahinder) and Mahinder confides in Sudha that he wants to get married to Maya. Circumstances however act against his wishes and Maya disappears and he, having thought that she had walked out on him (something which is never confirmed in the film), ends up marrying Sudha.
However his old house is where the more vivid memories of Maya can be found. Her flavor through the windows and her demons under the carpet; she is omnipresent- in the nooks, crannies, cobweb ridden closets and basements, her memories linger on and she lives on between Mahinder and Sudha like those articles of old furniture one develops a sentimental fixation for and hence, neither is ever discarded.
Long gone are the days when he used to revel in his reveries about her but some of the memories still linger on like the rain's aftermath. You know how the tumultuous waves of the capricious oceans return and bring to the shore an unmistakable sense of sweet sad Deja Vu and so, one can almost hear the patter of Maya's feet upon the antediluvian seashore of Mahi and Sudha's house. And the imprints made by the patter of her feet upon the frivolous sand of time and the echoes of which can still be heard in its corridors. They are part of a different dimension where time, space and place were of no consequence and they live on still, in the house of memories, ever so fraught with her undeniable presence
It is this state of turmoil that Mahinder finds himself to be in. He has to make a choice. Should he stay on with the sweet reality of Sudha or try to grab the beautiful, mirage like illusion of tempestual, blissful happiness in Maya? He opts for the latter and more self destructive path and then something happens which is not revealed till towards the end of the film
Why is it so good?
Ijaazat is simple, yet layered, subtle yet profound and overwhelmingly poetic. This is probably the best script/screenplay Gulzar has ever written. Every single dialog between the characters is worthy of interpretation, worthy of quiet listening. It makes you wonder, what was said, what was unsaid, what was implied, what was hidden, what was meant
I especially loved the way the characters are written and developed. Its hard not to empathize with all three of them. Everyone has given a brilliant performance. Through simple acts like hanging a towel, combing one's hair, fiddling with a light switch; character motivations are brought forth in a stunningly unique and beautifully subtle way. The dialogs are scattered with poetic verses that are both pleasant and profound. Some examples-
Sudha: "Kya Ghar Abhi Bji Wahi Hain" Mahinder: "WAHI Toh Kuch Nahin Raha Par Haan, Hai WAHEEN, Usi Jagah" & Mahinder: "Yeh Duniya Bhi Toh Ek Waiting Room Hi Hai"
Ijaazat .A remarkable story of two lovers whose love story was incomplete A movie about love- lost, found and lost again. Poignantly poetic and tremendously metaphoric with allusions of the concept of a Waiting room and the illusions of Maya, Ijaazat has a classic absorbing story, stunning performances, outstanding poetry & beautiful rhythmic music.
The passion between Rekha and Naseerudin Shah and between Naseeruddin and Anuradha has been dealt with amazing finesse and sophistication. The songs " Mera Kuch Saaman" and 'Katra Katra' are amazing in its rendition and also the perfect embodiments of the situation between the protagonists.
Someone rightly said that he film takes off from the moist surreal world of olive branches dripping with Gulzaresque poetry and goes right into the hearts of the characters. The film sees them all- the pure and serene Sudha, an unsolvable cipher like Maya and the tragic Mahinder- through a beautiful albeit maudlin prism. This is a kind of lost love in the true sense of the world. Not only was their love incomplete in the film but more broadly, this movie is also representative of a time bygone, an innocence lost. The heart just doesn't beat anymore nowadays like it used to in the environs of films like these. Back in the days when the pace was slower, the skies bluer, and there was still some magic left in the innocent charms and affairs of the resplendent heart.
Ijaazat is an unusual and ingenuous movie in the sense that it sees sophisticated poetry in the most ordinary situations, lives and events. An affair to remember . indeed!
The story is a love triangle between Mahinder (Nasseruddin Shah), Sudha (Rekha) and Maya (Anuradha Patel). Mahinder is an ostensibly ordinary photographer. Sudha is his equally ordinary, understated and understanding wife. Maya is Mahinder's sensitive, enigmatic, complex and impetuous ex-girlfriend with an extraordinary gift of poetry.
When the film begins one night, we meet two of the three main characters- Mahinder and Sudha in the waiting room of a train station in the middle of nowhere while it rains relentlessly outside. It is immediately apparent to us that these two characters have shared something in the past as there is an unmistakable sense of familiarity and an edgy chemistry between them. Then, through a series of sporadic flashbacks, we are transported to the past where we find some answers to our questions
Mahinder was expected to marry his childhood friend Sudha but while he was away from home, he had fallen in love with Maya (titled so aptly as she would later play the 'other woman' and hence symbolizes selfish greed for the protagonist, Mahinder) and Mahinder confides in Sudha that he wants to get married to Maya. Circumstances however act against his wishes and Maya disappears and he, having thought that she had walked out on him (something which is never confirmed in the film), ends up marrying Sudha.
However his old house is where the more vivid memories of Maya can be found. Her flavor through the windows and her demons under the carpet; she is omnipresent- in the nooks, crannies, cobweb ridden closets and basements, her memories linger on and she lives on between Mahinder and Sudha like those articles of old furniture one develops a sentimental fixation for and hence, neither is ever discarded.
Long gone are the days when he used to revel in his reveries about her but some of the memories still linger on like the rain's aftermath. You know how the tumultuous waves of the capricious oceans return and bring to the shore an unmistakable sense of sweet sad Deja Vu and so, one can almost hear the patter of Maya's feet upon the antediluvian seashore of Mahi and Sudha's house. And the imprints made by the patter of her feet upon the frivolous sand of time and the echoes of which can still be heard in its corridors. They are part of a different dimension where time, space and place were of no consequence and they live on still, in the house of memories, ever so fraught with her undeniable presence
It is this state of turmoil that Mahinder finds himself to be in. He has to make a choice. Should he stay on with the sweet reality of Sudha or try to grab the beautiful, mirage like illusion of tempestual, blissful happiness in Maya? He opts for the latter and more self destructive path and then something happens which is not revealed till towards the end of the film
Why is it so good?
Ijaazat is simple, yet layered, subtle yet profound and overwhelmingly poetic. This is probably the best script/screenplay Gulzar has ever written. Every single dialog between the characters is worthy of interpretation, worthy of quiet listening. It makes you wonder, what was said, what was unsaid, what was implied, what was hidden, what was meant
I especially loved the way the characters are written and developed. Its hard not to empathize with all three of them. Everyone has given a brilliant performance. Through simple acts like hanging a towel, combing one's hair, fiddling with a light switch; character motivations are brought forth in a stunningly unique and beautifully subtle way. The dialogs are scattered with poetic verses that are both pleasant and profound. Some examples-
Sudha: "Kya Ghar Abhi Bji Wahi Hain" Mahinder: "WAHI Toh Kuch Nahin Raha Par Haan, Hai WAHEEN, Usi Jagah" & Mahinder: "Yeh Duniya Bhi Toh Ek Waiting Room Hi Hai"
Ijaazat .A remarkable story of two lovers whose love story was incomplete A movie about love- lost, found and lost again. Poignantly poetic and tremendously metaphoric with allusions of the concept of a Waiting room and the illusions of Maya, Ijaazat has a classic absorbing story, stunning performances, outstanding poetry & beautiful rhythmic music.
The passion between Rekha and Naseerudin Shah and between Naseeruddin and Anuradha has been dealt with amazing finesse and sophistication. The songs " Mera Kuch Saaman" and 'Katra Katra' are amazing in its rendition and also the perfect embodiments of the situation between the protagonists.
Someone rightly said that he film takes off from the moist surreal world of olive branches dripping with Gulzaresque poetry and goes right into the hearts of the characters. The film sees them all- the pure and serene Sudha, an unsolvable cipher like Maya and the tragic Mahinder- through a beautiful albeit maudlin prism. This is a kind of lost love in the true sense of the world. Not only was their love incomplete in the film but more broadly, this movie is also representative of a time bygone, an innocence lost. The heart just doesn't beat anymore nowadays like it used to in the environs of films like these. Back in the days when the pace was slower, the skies bluer, and there was still some magic left in the innocent charms and affairs of the resplendent heart.
Ijaazat is an unusual and ingenuous movie in the sense that it sees sophisticated poetry in the most ordinary situations, lives and events. An affair to remember . indeed!
English, August
(1994)
Masterpiece
6 April 2007
It's this novel I've been reading. It's possessing me, doctoring my mind with the blasphemous and sometimes bordering on the sensational and bizarre, thoughts of Agastya Sen, the protagonist of this Indian story. I had watched the film based on this brilliant novel, around three years ago but only recently managed to acquire the novel itself. In many ways, it has made my fondness for the film even more acute. Using the tag line of the novel itself, English August is the story of of Agastya Sen, 24, an IAS officer, who is posted to the nowhere land of Madna and finds his imagination dominated by women, literature (Marcus Aurelius) and soft drugs On several levels, most of them subliminal, there is a sense of gratification and mild relief that others before me too have gone through the similar set of emotions, circumstances and turmoil that I now find myself entwined with. And it is a source of great solace that my solitude is not necessarily as desolate as I once thought it was. However, somewhere more inexplicably, the experience has also been one of disappointment. It was almost fun not knowing that someone out there has already felt all that I am feeling right now. I was passionate about my exclusivity and now I'm paranoid about the lack of it. Agastya has shattered one of my dearest illusions that my experiences were singular, rare and therefore, consequently profound. His story is unbearably relatable. The secret fantasies that I had so laboriously harbored to be only my own have now been proved beyond doubt to be pervasive and universal Coming back to the novel- it is driving me crazy. I can share his feelings, empathize with his dislocation, cringe at his pain, revel in his reveries and completely comprehend the myriad thoughts that his hectic brain emanates. He has invaded my private thoughts, encroached upon my personal space and one of these days, I'm going to sign a paper or an affidavit to change my name to Agastya. Kunal seems like a pseudonym anyway. And that for all practical purposes, I am Agastya and Agastya is me. We're like two souls in one body- like the double yolked egg. He's like my elder twin brother, a doppelganger, a mirror image of myself but I can hardly recognize the face in the mirror. Is it my own or is it the aftermath of one of several hallucinations of Agastya, brought upon by Marijuana and compounded by Marcus Aurelius and Keith Jarret? The novel has changed, amidst other things, my perspective about the film. Earlier I considered the film as a landmark mainly because it pioneered the multitude of multiplex films and made 'art', a commercially viable proposition, being the first English language film to have done so well at the box office. Now, in my current state of mind, I think that it is a masterpiece. English speaking Bong Agastya Sen (played brilliantly by an enigmatic Rahul Bose in his debut feature) is transplanted to a small town named Madna and discovers to his disillusionment that he is quite like a foreigner in his own country when taken out of his chic, urbane and shallow social milieu. "His life till than had been profoundly urban". We accompany him in his journey through another India, fraught with anti establishment innuendos, pervert anecdotes about anything remotely carnal and elaborate fabrications (akin to the compulsive liar that was Holden Caulfield in CITR), all along trying to discover Agastya and thereby realizing our own motivations in the process, through his sojourn. Benegal's direction is adequate but he's helped by the awesome material (The screenplay incidentally was also written by Upamanyu Chatterjee- the author of the novel). Annie Hall meets Charlie Kaufman- A strong 9/10 for me. An ordinary tale told extraordinarily. Indeed. Pretenders in this genre may come and go but English August stands as a true classic of our times
Jhankaar Beats
(2003)
Brilliant Film
15 March 2007
Jhankaar Beats, a film by a debut director Sujoy Ghosh is a witty, intelligent, charming and fun film about 3 couples- essentially representing 3 stages of any couple's life- Couple 1: Sanjay Suri and Juhi Chawla are this much in love couple who are expecting their second child. Couple 2: Rahul Bose (brilliant in his role of Rishi) and Rinke Khanna who play an estranged couple on the verge of divorce- much of their story is told in flashbacks. Couple 3: Shayan Munshi (a quite capable debut turn by him in the role of the bumbling, underconfident Indraneel- bordering on Saif's character of Sameer in Dil Chahta Hai with which this film draws a ready and obvious comparison almost instantaneously) and playing his love interest is a rather beautiful Riya Sen who plays the bimbette to near perfection and initially does not reciprocate Indraneel's affection for her. How he wins her over forms one of the most interesting subplots towards the middle of the movie The story is essentially of these 2 friends, Sanjay (lead vocalist) and Rahul (drummer), trying to win a rock contest named "Jhankaar Beats" having lost on previous 2 occasions. Later, in their pursuits, they're joined by Indraneel (guitarist)who also happens to be their boss' son. Apart from the contest, they have to manage their love lives, family lives, complaining neighbours, a demanding boss, an ad campaign for condoms and unscrupulous competition from corporate sharks and other rock bands. In the end, they manage to win the contest and their dream comes true. What works very well for the film is its economical storyline, fine characterisations, great music (especially Suno Na and Tu Hai Aasman Mein). The film is also an ode to RD Burman and is fraught with trivia about him and also, interesting albeit colloquial anecdotes about Sholay and condoms. Go figure!
Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna
(2006)
Underrated
9 March 2007
It's not that bad (5.4/10, I mean). I give it a 6.5 today (though tomorrow it may change) Let's dwell on the positives for a moment. SRK looks quite handsome for his 40 plus years, Abhishek gets so effortlessly into his character that one would think his real life persona is very close to his reel character. The scene when he bursts with anger at Rani is incredibly acted (I just wish he didn't break all that furniture- that's so clichéd, but still..). Rani is the weak link here. Priety acts surprisingly well and her understated character is always in control and sensible and NEVER overtly melodramatic (which in fact is a characteristic of the film too and yes, I can see the wise heads shaking with disagreement but never-mind). Amitabh Bachchan's character is superfluous. There is no justification for his presence in the film. And he comes across as quite a hypocrite when he alternates playing the counselor to his son, while at the same time, being a womanizer himself. One would feel that faithfulness to one's partner should arise spontaneously and sans the legal strains of the institution of marriage but let's not get into that as that's beyond the scope of this review. And even though, he is also shown (or at least tried to be shown) to be profound, this point comes across rather poorly in the film and Amit's lame character becomes a laughing stock IMO. His portrayal of the character is also caricaturish and basically the role is written very poorly as though as though it were the brainchild of an afterthought.
But most of these weak points are however countered by a superb SRK (and I don't say this often). His role is a difficult one- unlike the usual overgrown lover-boy role we seem to have become accustomed to watching him play- however this role is one wherein he gets scope to perform as his character is somewhat layered and he doesn't miss out on exploiting that this time around unlike KHNH where he hammed what could've potentially been a great role. Here, he is cynical, bitter, pessimistic and basically angry at the world. But for all his lashing out, there's something in his anger, which makes us think that he ends up hurting himself most through his belligerence. This role is unsympathetic yet he wins me over somehow because he manages to bring a sense of vulnerability into it. His dialog delivery, his repartee with Rani (from whom he steals most of the scenes because her role is quite clichéd and evoke an unmistakable sense of Deja Vu as you may be liable to feel that you are watching Hum Tum or Saathiya or any other of her previous films- and she acts just the same and looks even worse). But more than SRK's dialogs (he does a very competent voice over helped by some good writing), it's sometimes it's just his eyes- he speaks less in this film than say a 'Main Hoon Na' or even a 'Kal Ho Na Ho' (pathetic performances both of 'em... the latter still sporadically watchable due to Saif). I frankly can't see anyone else play the role except SRK and mind you, I've never been a fan of his. The songs- 'Mitwa' is a great song- a Qawwali rock if there is a thing like that- I just wish Karan would've put a little more 'energy' into the song- say like 'Koi Mil gaya' in KKHH. But the song still works helped by beautiful lyrics. 'Tumhi Dekho Na' is a beautiful song that is augmented by the brilliant use of vibrant colors and cinematography. The title song admittedly is too familiar to the KHNH title track. The rest of the songs just end up lengthening the narrative than forming a part of it- 'Where's the party' is the prime culprit for being conspicuously out of place. There are many standout scenes- SRK to Rani- "Hum Dono Ek Jaise Hain...Fark Bas Itna Hai Ki Mere Ghav Dikhte Hain Aur Tumhare Nahin", "Hum Alag The, Ajeeb The, Zameen Par To Chal Hi Nahin Rahe The, Aasman Mein Ud Rahe The..",the dinner scene involving the tense underlying current between SRK and Amit is compelling to watch.
But, yeah there are faults- the opening fifteen minutes were a waste- Karan could've avoided justifying his characters with their flashback scenes- character development needn't always involve spoon feeding ur audience. The scenes involving a certain serial killer 'Black beast' are out of order. Kirron Kher has nothing new to offer in an unimaginatively written role. And don't get me started about Arjun Rampal in this movie- what the hell! END WORD: Watch it with an open mind (and don't get bogged down by people constantly telling you it's boring, long winded, controversial and unrealistic- watch it for what it is, not what people want it to pretend to be and I think you MIGHT agree it deserves slightly better than 5.4). At no point am I saying that it's a classic or a very good movie- I'm just saying it's not AS bad as it sometimes is made out to be as if it has fallen in the trap where people find it fashionable to ridicule it because they WANT it to be something else instead of being more objective but then again, who am I to comment on others' opinions. I can only make my case. It's up to you but I'd coax you to give it a shot and YES, you can blame me if you don't like it.
But most of these weak points are however countered by a superb SRK (and I don't say this often). His role is a difficult one- unlike the usual overgrown lover-boy role we seem to have become accustomed to watching him play- however this role is one wherein he gets scope to perform as his character is somewhat layered and he doesn't miss out on exploiting that this time around unlike KHNH where he hammed what could've potentially been a great role. Here, he is cynical, bitter, pessimistic and basically angry at the world. But for all his lashing out, there's something in his anger, which makes us think that he ends up hurting himself most through his belligerence. This role is unsympathetic yet he wins me over somehow because he manages to bring a sense of vulnerability into it. His dialog delivery, his repartee with Rani (from whom he steals most of the scenes because her role is quite clichéd and evoke an unmistakable sense of Deja Vu as you may be liable to feel that you are watching Hum Tum or Saathiya or any other of her previous films- and she acts just the same and looks even worse). But more than SRK's dialogs (he does a very competent voice over helped by some good writing), it's sometimes it's just his eyes- he speaks less in this film than say a 'Main Hoon Na' or even a 'Kal Ho Na Ho' (pathetic performances both of 'em... the latter still sporadically watchable due to Saif). I frankly can't see anyone else play the role except SRK and mind you, I've never been a fan of his. The songs- 'Mitwa' is a great song- a Qawwali rock if there is a thing like that- I just wish Karan would've put a little more 'energy' into the song- say like 'Koi Mil gaya' in KKHH. But the song still works helped by beautiful lyrics. 'Tumhi Dekho Na' is a beautiful song that is augmented by the brilliant use of vibrant colors and cinematography. The title song admittedly is too familiar to the KHNH title track. The rest of the songs just end up lengthening the narrative than forming a part of it- 'Where's the party' is the prime culprit for being conspicuously out of place. There are many standout scenes- SRK to Rani- "Hum Dono Ek Jaise Hain...Fark Bas Itna Hai Ki Mere Ghav Dikhte Hain Aur Tumhare Nahin", "Hum Alag The, Ajeeb The, Zameen Par To Chal Hi Nahin Rahe The, Aasman Mein Ud Rahe The..",the dinner scene involving the tense underlying current between SRK and Amit is compelling to watch.
But, yeah there are faults- the opening fifteen minutes were a waste- Karan could've avoided justifying his characters with their flashback scenes- character development needn't always involve spoon feeding ur audience. The scenes involving a certain serial killer 'Black beast' are out of order. Kirron Kher has nothing new to offer in an unimaginatively written role. And don't get me started about Arjun Rampal in this movie- what the hell! END WORD: Watch it with an open mind (and don't get bogged down by people constantly telling you it's boring, long winded, controversial and unrealistic- watch it for what it is, not what people want it to pretend to be and I think you MIGHT agree it deserves slightly better than 5.4). At no point am I saying that it's a classic or a very good movie- I'm just saying it's not AS bad as it sometimes is made out to be as if it has fallen in the trap where people find it fashionable to ridicule it because they WANT it to be something else instead of being more objective but then again, who am I to comment on others' opinions. I can only make my case. It's up to you but I'd coax you to give it a shot and YES, you can blame me if you don't like it.
Kanchenjungha
(I) (1962)
Metaphorical Masterpiece
24 January 2007
This Ray film is fraught with imagery, symbolism, metaphors and weaves in a few independent stories together to culminate into an understanding of the human psyche. Ray comes out of the black and white neo real phase of his career and Kanchenjunga would mark the nascent stages in the second phase of his career- a career that had so brilliantly taken off with the bona fide masterpiece that is Pather Panchali. Coming to Kanchenjunga (the name belongs to the world's third tallest mountain peak which is said to be elusive to human eye as it's perennially clouded due to fog), the film follows a group of tourists on vacation in Darjeeling, a hill station - the first thing that comes to your mind is just how fraught the film is with metaphors- linking the human mind and attitudes to nature's marvels- thereby the dense fog which prevents our protagonist (played mesmerisingly by Chabi Biswas) from seeing Kanchenjunga clearly is symbolic of his myopic opinions and it is lifted in the last scene where after stripping himself away from all his erstwhile prejudices, he is able to view Kanchejunga for the first time. But, in the end, Kanchenjunga remains a film about human emotions which also talks about the socio- economic divide and dwells into the complex inflexible minds of some of us
Pushpaka Vimana
(1987)
India's best actor at his 'silent' best
25 May 2006
Warning: Spoilers
When a great director (eg. Singeetham) works with a great actor (eg. Kamal Hassan), the result is sometimes a masterpiece- Pushpak is a case in point.
Kamal Hassan plays the protagonist- an unemployed youth. One day (after several unsuccessful job interviews) he comes across a drunk rich man. Our hero finds a lot of cash and a hotel key in the pockets of that man who has obviously passed out and he immediately thinks of a plan. He decided to swap identities with this man. He takes this man to his rented accommodation where he binds and gags him and locks him inside. Then, he moves into that hotel and starts living a life of luxury. There he meets a magician's family and is smitten by the magician's daughter (Amla). He doesn't disclose his true identity to her and they fall in love. However, he is unaware of a plot hatched by the rich man's family to kill the rich man. They have even hired a hit-man for this purpose. The hit-man has never seen his intended victim and hence mistakes Kamal for the rich man. This is followed by several hilarious albeit unsuccessful murder attempts.
Then one day our protagonist realizes his folly and decides to return to his normal life. He tells the truth to his girlfriend (Amla) and apologises to the rich man. Consequently, the rich man is reunited with his erstwhile estranged wife. However the film ends on a beautifully ironic note for the protagonist when he loses the paper bearing the girl's address and all he's left with is a rose (Pushpak) given by her. Before the end credits roll, we find him again standing in a queue looking for a job The film rightfully belongs to Kamal Hassan, one of India's most gifted actors who beautifully underplays the role making use of sublime subtleties and body language. And oh, the film doesn't have dialogues. Hence, its place in Indian film folklore is guaranteed. Highly recommended! Definitely a 9/10 for me
Kamal Hassan plays the protagonist- an unemployed youth. One day (after several unsuccessful job interviews) he comes across a drunk rich man. Our hero finds a lot of cash and a hotel key in the pockets of that man who has obviously passed out and he immediately thinks of a plan. He decided to swap identities with this man. He takes this man to his rented accommodation where he binds and gags him and locks him inside. Then, he moves into that hotel and starts living a life of luxury. There he meets a magician's family and is smitten by the magician's daughter (Amla). He doesn't disclose his true identity to her and they fall in love. However, he is unaware of a plot hatched by the rich man's family to kill the rich man. They have even hired a hit-man for this purpose. The hit-man has never seen his intended victim and hence mistakes Kamal for the rich man. This is followed by several hilarious albeit unsuccessful murder attempts.
Then one day our protagonist realizes his folly and decides to return to his normal life. He tells the truth to his girlfriend (Amla) and apologises to the rich man. Consequently, the rich man is reunited with his erstwhile estranged wife. However the film ends on a beautifully ironic note for the protagonist when he loses the paper bearing the girl's address and all he's left with is a rose (Pushpak) given by her. Before the end credits roll, we find him again standing in a queue looking for a job The film rightfully belongs to Kamal Hassan, one of India's most gifted actors who beautifully underplays the role making use of sublime subtleties and body language. And oh, the film doesn't have dialogues. Hence, its place in Indian film folklore is guaranteed. Highly recommended! Definitely a 9/10 for me
Paper Flowers
(1959)
Wonderfully introspective and tragic- a masterpiece
25 May 2006
Why is Guru Dutt hailed as one of the all time best directors in the world? See this film and you'll get an answer. Guru Dutt never got his due from the audience or the critics when he was alive. After he died, he was suddenly hailed as this best thing to have happened to Hindi film industry. And today, he is universally regarded as one of the best Hindi film directors. This film too is resplendent with that same irony, hypocrisy and tragedy. There are films and then there is this. 'Kaagaz Ke Phool' is Guru Dutt's extremely personal and almost poetic take on the trials and tribulations of a life of fame and glamor; and especially the aftermath of it. Guru Dutt plays a successful director Ajay Sinha who is looking for a new face to cast as the leading lady in his next film. In the midst of all this, he has a strained marriage wherein his wife leaves him to live with her parents along with their daughter. On a certain rainy day, he meets a girl (Waheeda Rehman). They meet again in the studio.
Immediately,Guru Dutt realizes that Waheeda's is THE face he had been looking for and promptly casts her in his next film. Eventually he falls in love ith her but she doesn't reciprocate. Meanwhile, he isn't allowed to eet his beloved daughter too through a court order. As a last straw, his next film is a colossal failure and he suddenly finds that the ones who pretended to be his well-wishers and friends now seem to hate and ignore him. Thus Waheeda, his discovery, goes on to become a successful star while he begins his downward spiral into the deep darkness of ignominy. Subsequently and ironically, after many years, he dies on the same director's chair It is not a perfect film by any means. The screenplay is sometimes indulgent and probably isn't as good as say Guru Dutt's 'Pyaasa' (his other classic). Plus, the whole track involving Johnny Walker is somewhat irrelevant to the film and hence could have been shortened. However, it was incidentally, India's first film to be shot in Cinemascope and hence makes good use of technique but essentially KPK remains a very humane film which moves us without being preachy or overtly sentimental. SD Burman's haunting music and Kaifi Azmi's poignant lyrics add to the mood of this film
Ironically, the film was a commercial disaster upon its release (eerily similar to the protagonist Sinha's last film). So, the claims of it being an Autobiographical film also started being made. But, I think it is a case of life imitating art than vice- versa. Having said that it is a fact that Guru Dutt died shortly after making this film and thus KKP remains his last masterpiece and I think its commercial failure can be attributed to one of those rare occasions when the AUDIENCE got it wrong as the film may have been ahead of its time and has since been widely considered to be one of the best and most important films made in India The obvious comparisons with Fellini's 8 ½ are to be expected but to my mind they are unwarranted. Both were different films made for very different audiences. This is a great film in its own right- one of the best Hindi films ever- a bona-fide masterpiece by the prodigiously talented albeit flawed genius called Guru Dutt
Immediately,Guru Dutt realizes that Waheeda's is THE face he had been looking for and promptly casts her in his next film. Eventually he falls in love ith her but she doesn't reciprocate. Meanwhile, he isn't allowed to eet his beloved daughter too through a court order. As a last straw, his next film is a colossal failure and he suddenly finds that the ones who pretended to be his well-wishers and friends now seem to hate and ignore him. Thus Waheeda, his discovery, goes on to become a successful star while he begins his downward spiral into the deep darkness of ignominy. Subsequently and ironically, after many years, he dies on the same director's chair It is not a perfect film by any means. The screenplay is sometimes indulgent and probably isn't as good as say Guru Dutt's 'Pyaasa' (his other classic). Plus, the whole track involving Johnny Walker is somewhat irrelevant to the film and hence could have been shortened. However, it was incidentally, India's first film to be shot in Cinemascope and hence makes good use of technique but essentially KPK remains a very humane film which moves us without being preachy or overtly sentimental. SD Burman's haunting music and Kaifi Azmi's poignant lyrics add to the mood of this film
Ironically, the film was a commercial disaster upon its release (eerily similar to the protagonist Sinha's last film). So, the claims of it being an Autobiographical film also started being made. But, I think it is a case of life imitating art than vice- versa. Having said that it is a fact that Guru Dutt died shortly after making this film and thus KKP remains his last masterpiece and I think its commercial failure can be attributed to one of those rare occasions when the AUDIENCE got it wrong as the film may have been ahead of its time and has since been widely considered to be one of the best and most important films made in India The obvious comparisons with Fellini's 8 ½ are to be expected but to my mind they are unwarranted. Both were different films made for very different audiences. This is a great film in its own right- one of the best Hindi films ever- a bona-fide masterpiece by the prodigiously talented albeit flawed genius called Guru Dutt
Twin Peaks
(1990–1991)
An absolute must see cult classic
14 May 2006
Who said cult classics need only be movies? This is by far THE most interesting thing on TV EVER- only the master named David Lynch could have succeeded in creating such a compelling plot line and a host of griping albeit quirky characters- with a dash of surrealism. This is something of a 'Star Wars' as far as TV is concerned Now, I was born in 1984. So, I would have been 6 when the epic pilot episode was first aired. Obviously, I became a fan later. Actually, after I saw Lynch's Mullholland drive, Blue Velvet, Eraserhead etc. I came to know about this much touted series which was supposedly THE cult series of all time. Well, I got hooked, downloaded the pilot on shareware, bought the first season on DVD set and can now safely say, that they were right- this is as good as it gets. PS: The most popular serials of today- Lost,Desperate Housewives, Six feet Under all borrow either their element of surrealism or their small town settings from this very series- how's that for cultural significance! All fans of quirky humour, biting sarcasm, dark mystery, double entendres, etc. HAVE TO watch this at the earliest
Tell Your Friends