Forget Munna-Bhai! Khosla-Ka-Ghosla is 2006’s best

Until a few hours ago, I would have said Lage Raho Munna Bhai was the best Hindi movie of 2006. Not anymore. Finally, a movie with both realism and positivism, in the manner of Hrishikesh Mukherjee movies, Khosla Ka Ghosla wows the audience with a simple story that strikes a universal chord.

I must admit that I was a little wary of watching the film. I’d heard that it was boring, and plus I wasn’t keen on watching a ‘low’ budget movie that aimed at limited niche audiences.

What I saw instead was a reminder that simple movie making is both possible and is fun. And wow, what a great example of the richness of Indian culture and cinema.

In fact, a poor modern-day comparison to Khosla-Ka-Ghosla is Hyderabad Blues, a film that in its own quirky way took us into Indian culture from the outsider’s perspective. Hyderbad Blues was badly acted, and slimly produced. Khosla Ka Ghosla is also insightful of culture, but now we see Middle Class India, from the insider’s perspective.

In fact, the beginning of the movie is a little too real. It’s quite uncomfortable… and even disconcerting… to watch such a movie… especially since such stories are not uncommon. If I hadn’t known that *spoiler ahead* that the movie ending was happy *spoiler ended* I would have stopped watching the movie. But somehow, like Hrishikesh Mukherjee who could make the story of a death of a cancer victim watchable (Anand!)… here too we delve into the struggles of a middle class home.

Most importantly, it’s so beautiful written, so beautifully acted (everyone, not just Anupam Kher, is good!). The tone is so subtle, and of course (like Munna Bhai) you need to understand Hindi to get some of it.

Watch this movie! Buy it! Do not be put off! For those who like the subtle growing up of Indian cinema, this movie is a treat!

The second half… where the middle class family fights back… is a fantastical fairy tale, where everything that we would want happens. Of course with a realistic and even pathos-filled touch.

Not once is there too much drama. Not once do characters extend beyond the screen and say watch me, watch me (aka Shah Rukh Khan!!!)

Not that this movie is perfect. The caricature of the ‘corrupt’ society jars a little (too comical, rather than funny), and the drinking scene is a little long and unnecessary… (at least the caught-or-not-caught suspense could have been developed better).

Ultimately, however, the movie ends with the audience (read me) smiling–not in laughing-splits like Lage Raho Munna Bhai, but certain a more richer, deeper smile.

Watch this movie! Even buy it! And do not be put off! For those who like the subtle growing up of Indian cinema, this movie is a treat!

Recent Movie Marathon (Quick Update)

There’s something about holidays… and the television. They have the ability to blur everything you watch into one long experience. That’s sort of something that I am feeling right now. And this is entirely contradictory to the “against passive viewing” motto of this site. I have found myself extremely passive… and just soaked one movie on screen/dvd/tv after another…

A quick list over the past few days (on-screen/DVD)… Happy Feet, Casino Royale, The Ant Bully, The Devil Wears Prada, Scoop, Akeelah and the Bee, Man of the Year, Superman Returns, In Her Shoes, Cars…

On-TV movies… Being Cyrus, HouseSitter, The Associate, Liar Liar…

Not to mention the countless ’selections’ of movies… like Legends of the Fall (the ending), Run  (Hindi), Bowfinger, Terminator 3 etc etc etc… most of the them just skip my mind.

While I need to comment on a few of these movies at least, … I have listed them here just so that I won’t forget… and be able to get back to commenting on them in the near future.

During this holiday season, if there’s one thing I “can” try to do… is think more about what I’m watching (man! it’s hard!)

Betting on Casino Royale

There are two comments to be made at the outset: “This Bond-movie is good” and “This movie is ok”

As a Bond movie: characterisation is good

Character of Bond is interesting. He is rustic, and under-prepared. Prone to making mistakes and acts before he thinks. As a dialogue with earlier Bond characters, even what Pierce Brosnan made of it (vulnerable yet able), this take is insightful twist.

As a (normal) movie: weak characterisation

This movie exists with certain cliches, that we are expected to make connections with. For instance, M, we’re supposed to know because of earlier movies. Even Bond, works as a ‘too fast’ thinking agent because we know who Bond is supposed to be. In the movie, however, things work too fast. We are not given any time to see character development. we’re more focussed on the action development.  Bond heals too fast, even as the action moves on too fast.  We are forced to follow the events, not the people.

As a bond movie: romantic pace is an interesting twist

I don’t think any Bond movie has ever given so much time for a romantic relationship. The dialogues are ‘deep’ and beyond the conventional, even for regular romances. Usually in Bond movies, the romance is built over an action plot, but here, the story almost stops/stands still, to develop their relationship. And as a Bond movie, it is an intriguing thing to see.

As a normal movie: romantic pace misplaced

Earlier I had said that Bond is too fast to allow character development. But in contrast, the movie suddenly becomes two-paced. Conventional movies would stick with a steady pace (either fast for action, or even-slow for romance.). Casino Royale tries both. And as a movie it makes the romance confusing, even distracting.

As a bond movie: nothing stands out as a spectacular Bondesque action sequence.

I’ve seen better action in Bond. The runner scene is good, but it’s not the kind that stands out as a Bond-action scene. The building falling down scene wasn’t that great, reminded me of Oceans 12 and Italian Job too much. Maybe this Venus thing is getting old.

As a normal movie: action scenes are… uh-ok. The runing scene is excellent

Usually, Bond movie action scenes are over-the-top (see GoldenEye as a case in point). But the runner scene stands out as a classic action scene for the popular action genre. Good stuff.

Like this, a lot of comparisons are possible… but the point is that we are not watching a normal movie, but a Bond movie. And as a Bond movie, I really enjoyed it. Of course I will not compare, because Bond’s are not to be compared, but to be liked for the time they come and when they go… to be forgotten, till the next movie comes along.

A word about the new Bond? Who cares. He’s ok. He wasn’t that bad. Ultimately the whole movie needs to work, and this one basically does.

Verdict: Watchable, as a Bond movie. Even as a normal action movie.

Cyrus and Prada

Starting today, I’m back to my movie watching days. Holidaying, you know!

Anyway, I saw ‘through’ Being Cyrus, which was a bit of a let-down, because I expected it to be a ‘family’ movie and instead it turned out to be what they call a ‘psychological thriller’. Not my kind of movie to watch on a Sunday afternoon, but more importantly, the movie was hardly ‘psychological’. Meaning, it’s pretty straightforward… and the end is sort of a give-away that is supposedly unexpected because they hardly show adequate signs of it in the first place… nor does it seem to shock either. I guess Saif’s characterisation was weak, and perhaps he was too Saif through the movie, even in the ending (unlike in Omkara). I realised too late what kind of movie it was, but that I gave it only a cursory watch helps me feel better.

The English-Hindi genre is fascinating though, and as an attempt in that kind of cinema, I think it worked. It looked pretty normal having Indian actors speak English… but I only wish they pick better story lines… why do we always choose these dysfunctional life-story plots? (There’s that dumb I-cut-hair-and-I-hear-their-thoughts movie… I forgot the name. Another weird one!).

The other movie I saw today was The Devil Wears Prada. Which wasn’t half bad, but I disagree with the person who said that it was not a chick flick… because it so is! Fine that it’s got Meryl Streep… and mature themes… but that whole obsession with character transformations, non-existent boyfriends (who appear only for certain ‘key’ lines) etc…. were so within the chick-flick genre. Still, I enjoyed the movie, and did believe that they ‘drew’ Meryl Streep quite well.

The only implausibility was the beginning, getting hired with such little experience, and yet expecting so much within the first few days… hmm. I guess the filmmakers were making a point, but it was too weird to caricatured to seem normal.

Anyway, I enjoyed getting back to watching movies, and hopefully I’ll catch up on the more recent far as well.

36 Quai des Orfèvres

This movie was a little disconcerting for an avid movie watcher like me. This was partly because I realised who I was as a watcher… I see the big-picture, I see themes, ideas, and miss many details… especially in the first viewing. And the details I realised I needed to survive French cinema was a recognition of faces; which I couldn’t easily. For a long time in the movie I was trying to make connections with the plot, because I couldn’t make visual connections between the support cast.

That said, 36 Quai des Orfèvres was quite an interesting movie. It isn’t one of those ‘greatest films of all time’ but it is certainly accessible to Hollywood movie grown individuals while pushing the cinematic envelop ever so slightly.

I partly liked the understated nature of the entire action (including the movie). The film had a lyrical feel to it… it merged well from one scene to another in such a smooth manner that often it was confusing (for a person like me) to initially realise the differences. But there are subtle textures, differences, movements that are done quite well… quite engaging.

As for the story… well… it wasn’t too surprising. Yet, it was poignantly sad.

Some parts of the movie felt forced… especially for instance why the ‘thugs’ would ask “who was with you?” while beating up the poor ex-cop in the end of the movie (you have to see it to know what I mean).

But though the movie watching experience was difficult on many levels, I enjoyed having watched it. Some scenes/ideas linger. But mostly, the result was a sad sense of tragic loss… something found in Shakespearean plays. This was achieved I think because I only knew Gerard Depardieu and so… would obviously be ‘looking out for him’.

The performances of the central two characters were quite good. The women felt stereotypical. But the entire canvass, cast, music, direction etc… made for a fascinating movie watching experience.