Oh, I'm in love!

Diwali Night. I take the fast train from Churchgate on my way to Andheri. Two gentlemen sit before me. I greet them ‘Happy Diwali’ and the train leaves. Sitting in my window seat, I look at the city that I have made the home of my being and my dreams. And soon I find small slum-like dwellings not good enough to be called houses, but yet decorated in their limited capacity and shining in the spirit of the festival.

I smile.

At Dadar, more people join in. Men making way for more men. Four sit on the seat meant for three, something the gentleman before me calls ‘Bombay adjustment.’ I smile again. ‘You from Bombay?’- he asks. I tell him that I’m from Bihar, living here for the last fifteen months. And then I add that this ‘adjustment’ is one of those things that make Bombay a beautiful city. He smiles back in approval. And I turn my gaze back to my love- this city of dreams, of hope, of life. We, in this short conversation of ours, had shared our love for this city. And all three times when we took its name, we said ‘Bombay’ and not necessarily ‘Mumbai’.

It was sad to know that Karan Johar had to apologise to Raj Thackrey for using ‘Bombay’ instead of ‘Mumbai’ in his production ‘Wake Up Sid’. As Shobha De wrote in her column the next day, Raj Thackrey has clearly missed the point. Couldn’t he see the love this film showed for this great city? I like to call my beloved with names more than one. And does it really matter what name I use as long as I love her enough.

I loved ‘Wake Up Sid.’ And I have an extremely personal reason for it. The film had its warm and emotional moments. But those that choked me the most and brought tears in my eyes most easily were not the scenes of interpersonal relations or joy or sorrow. It was the mention of ‘Bombay’ and the palpable love the writer-director has for this city that affected me the most. As I came out of the theatre, I knew one thing for sure – I’m in love.

Thanks Ayan, thanks Karan, and the wonderful cast and crew of ‘Sid’. Thanks for making me realize that I am madly in love with Mumbai. And I love to call it Bombay. Somebody’s got some problem with that?

“Mohabbat ka naam aaj bhi mohabbat hai bete!”

For almost fourteen years now, Maratha Mandir, the single-screen theatre near Mumbai Central station begins its day with a show of this great saga of love. Every single day in all these years the imposing personality of ‘Bauji’ feeds the pigeons at Trafalgar Square with his famous and familiar chant of “Aao”. And almost involuntarily receives his wife’s call on reaching his shop. Chhutki is still ‘Chhutki’, and Simran’s world of dreams still raises curtains, every single day, over the face of arguably the best romantic hero in Hindi film history. A film that is, in every sense, Indian, and a great example of what Hindi cinema stands for, DDLJ has always been an important movie. But you have not seen it until you do it at Maratha Mandir.

We were waiting for a special day. And this 30^th of August, being my brother’s birthday, was chosen for this special show. For those who think (even I did till that day) that this continuous run at the theatre is a fluke, it is even more important to go and take a first-hand experience. There were not less than 600 of us in the theatre for that show, the balcony being houseful. Would you believe that we actually got the balcony seats for black- ‘bees ka tees’. It only added value to our trip to, what my brother called, this museum, without adding any trouble to our pockets. Getting a black ticket for Rs 30! And then the ambience, all decorated with mirrors and glasses of all colours, we actually felt transported to the 90s, when the standards of Hindi films had reached a shameful low and when this Aditya Chopra love story had kick-started a new movement altogether. Carrying on with the Rajshri formula of wholesome family entertainment, DDLJ opened the floodgates of the huge NRI market. Setting of a Hindi film in a foreign land, with an essentially desi heart, as an important story tool became a trend of the decade, something that in the days to come would turn into a cliché, along with a mom-friend for the girl and a cool Pops for the boy, and the climactic ‘Ja beti’ or something like that.

But the impact that these now regular stuff have during the three-hour run of this beautiful, heart-warming, musical romantic-comedy-of-sorts is unparalleled. As the film began with the tunes of ‘Ghar aa ja pardesi’, I could feel goose bumps all over me, a strange thrill, close to a shiver and eyes blurred with a tear-film of unbelievable joy. It was not the emotion of the story that touched me; it was the pure magic of cinema, testimony to which is this unique theatre, where every morning that sound of Raj’s mandolin triggers a reaction among the crowd that is hardly there in the films released these Fridays. As Simran sits sulkily in her Punjab home, having accepted her fate, the tune haunts her incessantly, only to finally get real into the celebrated return of the prince for the rescue of the princess, marked by a London bell on an Indian cow. One of the most loved romantic songs of all time follows and the audience roars in approval. “Ise kehte hain reaction”, my brother added. And it was the only film where we didn’t feel irritated at people mouthing lines along with their acquaintances on screen, (not really) predicting the resounding slap Raj is about to receive and adding that touch of “To kya hua agar….”. We didn’t mind all this, because all of us in there were celebrating cinema and this magical film which, like all great love stories, seems to live forever. As ‘Pops’ corrects Raj (when he says ‘Wo zamana aur tha Pops’) – “Mohabbat ka naam aaj bhi mohabbat hai bete! Ye na kabhi badli hai, aur na kabhi badlegi.”

Greatest Directors: Stanley Kubrick (1928-Forever)

-->

Best Rated Works

• 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968): Arguably the greatest sci-fi film ever made, it had no dialogues for about two-thirds of its running time. A film experience that goes beyond comprehension, it was a precursor to the great sci-fi era to follow. Spielberg called it the ‘Big Bang’ of his generation.
• Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964): Regarded by many as the greatest satirical film ever made, this cult classic defines dark-comedy in cinema. A big highlight being Peter Sellers playing three different characters so well that audience could hardly realize.
• Barry Lyndon (1975): A period costume-drama with an epic storytelling. Special lenses were used to shoot some of the indoor scenes that were lit only with candlelight, creating two-dimensional diffused-light images reminiscent of 18th-century paintings.
• A Clockwork Orange (1971): An extremely controversial futuristic film with explicit depiction of teenage crime. I personally was deeply affected by its language. It was removed from circulation in the UK after Kubrick received death threats and was not available until his death in 1999. In one scene, Kubrick threw the camera off a rooftop to achieve the effect he desired.
• The Shining (1980): It was received unfavourably by critics in the beginning, but eventually has earned the reputation of one of the best-made horror films. However, this film earned Kubrick the reputation of a megalomaniac perfectionist; he demanded, reportedly, hundreds of takes of certain scenes. This film was one of the pioneers of the Steadicam, and the first to use it in the improvised low mode position, extremely close to the ground.

What makes him a genius?

• From film noir to sci-fi, period drama, war, horror, crime, mystery and satire, the versatility that he exhibited as a storyteller is unparalleled. He made thirteen feature films and at least eleven of them are considered as among the greatest. I daresay, no other filmmaker in cinema history can boast of such a record.
• His ‘The Killing’ (1956) is perhaps the first popular film with parallel tracks, an innovation used in ‘Mystery Train’, ‘Pulp Fiction’, ‘Amores Perros’ etc. Add to this the huge transitions in storyline, as in ‘2001: A Space Oyssey’ and ‘Full Metal Jacket’ (1987), parts of the same story working as chapters, and various other significant technical innovations and perfectionism make Kubrick a complete school of cinema by himself.
• Extreme varied opinions about many of his films like ‘Lolita’ (1962), ‘A Clockwork Orange’, ‘Full Metal Jacket’ and ‘Eyes Wide Shut’ (1999) can be attributed to his own take on morality and ethics. His non-sentimental, non-judgmental and hence controversial view-point made him a ruthless storyteller. I remember how while watching ‘Full Metal Jacket’ my opinion kept changing whether it is an anti-war film or pro-war film. In fact, it was none. It just stated things as they were.
• He is one of those finest of filmmakers whose ‘open narrative’ style combined surrealism and expressionism and left things for audience’s interpretation. When I finished watching ‘2001’, I didn’t care a bit about what it meant; the sheer experience was mind-blowing. In his own words, “A film is - or should be - more like music than like fiction. It should be a progression of moods and feelings. The theme, what's behind the emotion, the meaning, all that comes later.”

Facts that add to his legacy

• Almost all of his films were adapted from literary works and many used a voice-over narration, sometimes taken verbatim from the source.
• Some of his other trademarks include: using pre-recorded classical music rather than an original score, the (in)famous ‘Kubrick stare’, a scene in or just outside a bathroom in all his movies, and extensive use of point-of view shots, wide angle shots, character tracking shots, zoom shots and shots down tall parallel walls.
• He was one of those great English-language filmmakers who never received due recognition from the Academy. The only Oscar he won was for supervising the special effects of ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’
• His last three films were made over a period of decades – ‘The Shining’ (1980). ‘Full Metal Jacket’ (1987) and ‘Eyes Wide Shut’ (1999). Four days after screening the final cut of ‘Eyes Wide Shut’, a 70-year old Stanley Kubrick died of a heart attack in his sleep.

I realized his merit as late as March 2009. But I can not explain what joy it was to discover such unparalleled body of work. Today, Stanley Kubrick is one of my most favourite directors, right up there with Krzysztof Kieslowski.

“If it can be written, or thought, it can be filmed.” – Stanley Kubrick

One of the Best Poems You'll Find on Celluloid

Chakravyuh mein ghusne se pehle,
Kaun tha main aur kaisa tha,
Ye mujhe yaad hi na rahega.

Chakravyuh mein ghusne ke baad,
Mere aur chakravyuh ke beech,
Sirf ek jaanleva nikat-ta thi,
Iska mujhe pata hi na chalega.

Chakravyuh se nikalne ke baad,
Main mukt ho jaoon bhale hi,
Phir bhi chakravyuh ki rachna mein
Farq hi na padega.

Marun ya maaroon,
Maara jaoon ya jaan se maar doon,
Iska faisla kabhi na ho paayega.

Soya hua aadmi jab neend se uthkar
Chalna shuru karta hai,
Tab sapnon ka sansar use
Dobara dikh hi na paayega.

Us roshni mein, jo nirnay ki roshni hai,
Sab kuchh samaan hoga kya?

Ek palde mein napunsakta,
Ek palde mein paurush,
Aur theek taraazu ke kaante par
Ardh satya.

by Dilip Chitre for the Govind Nihalani film 'Ardh Satya' (1983)

More Hindi Movies....Some New, Some Not So New

Watching lots of Hindi movies these days, for a change. An earlier post talks about 'Barah Aana'. Following and preceding it were the following, in no necessary order:

• Mumbai Meri Jaan: Definitely worth a watch. But to be honest, I felt the theme and the performances were bigger than the movie. The theme and the sub-plots are so powerful, it leaves you moist-eyed more than once. And some great performances by some of the best in business. Just felt the post-climax was a little too stretched out and pretty much predictible. But my heartfelt thanks to UTV for backing such a project.
• Tahaan: It began too good. But gradually lost its grip. Children are so wonderful to look at. And it is sad to try to save a deficient script with the help of some great kids. It is not possible, well, most of the times.
• Oh My God!: It was a good one. Keeps you smiling throughout. And at times it gets pretty much serious. Good piece of cinema. Reminds you of the Hrishida-Basuda period.
• Maharathi: When you have acting giants like Paresh Rawal, Naseeruddin Shah, Boman Irani and Om Puri in each of your frame, do you care for more. I can't. I can keep watching them forever. And the movie was quite decent. Felt good after watching it. But soon got to know that it is based on a James Hadley Chase novel. Felt sad. Not because it is not original. But for the fact that the makers didn't acknowledge it. I don't think I would be able to respect this otherwise fine film any more.
• Oye Lucky! Lucky Oye!: Only on my second viewing could I realize what this film is. It is just too good, among the best made films in recent times. I would like to talk separately about it as there is so much to talk. Just one thing - although 'Khosla ka Ghosla' might appear as a better film, Dibakar Bannerjee has matured even more in his second venture. Looking forward to his entire film career. Insha Allah!

Now small takes each on the recent releases:

• New York: Barring a couple of scenes, I felt it was amateurish. Sorry to say, as many people seem to have liked it. It is a certified hit. Good for the industry. But I felt it is a perfect illustration of the theory of EDR. (Will go into its detail in a separate post later.)
• Kambakkht Ishq: They say it has made 100 crores in its first week worldwide. I cached it in the cheapest single-screen theater you can find in Mumbai. The crowd was roaring most of the time. I was feeling tortured, almost. But thanks to this film, for opening the floodgates for a desperately starved industry.
• Short Kut: Perhaps the publicity-wallahs need to be thrashed. It was marketed as a laugh riot. And it was an unbearable, emotional experience. This time even the crowd was with me, at the receiving end of this torture. Just wanted to confess something. I went for Amrita Rao. Indulging in guilty pleasures once a while is OK, I suppose.

And now I conclude by talking about two films by Govind Nihalani that I watched recently:

• Droh Kaal(1994): Perhaps it could have been better written. And there were some portions that demanded a better take and editing, esp. those involving the extras. Otherwise the film was fine. I am being so critical because I know what Nihalani is capable of. I rate his 'Drishti'(1990) as among the most perfect films in Hindi cinema. His trademark style of characters indulging in long dialogue is always a pleasure. But somehow it wasn't as magical in 'Droh Kaal'.
• Aakrosh(1980): I was so happy to know that this film bagged six Filmfare awards. One of the best acting performances by Naseer Sa'ab. One of the best films from Hindi Parallel Cinema. One of the best films anyway. In fact, this film is so good that I would like to dedicate my next post to Govind Nihalani. It is the title poem of his 'Ardh Satya'(1983). This along with 'Hazaar Chaurasi ki Maa'(1994) are other Nihalani movies that I can watch forever. And I am thrilled to realize that about 5-6 of his movies are yet to be seen by me!

So, these are the films that I viewed recently. Looking forward to 'Sankat City' and 'Morning Walk'. And dying to catch 'Harry Potter 6' FDFS. Signing off...

Highly Recommended!

Let me apologize for not watching this in the theater. But it released with three other films - 'Straight', 'Aloo Chaat' and 'Firaaq'. And I could not afford more than one film per weekend. So I chose to go for 'Firaaq'. And it was tonight, just an hour ago that I watched 'Barah Aana'.

I strongly believe in independent cinema and hope that small films can actually help in bringing about a much-needed change in the film-making temperaments of the Hindi Film Industry. But on most occasions, these films are not as good as they promise. And they hardly make money, even if they are among the better lot.

'Barah Aana' is definitely well-made. If you believe in this kind of entertainment, it actually manages to do that. I thoroughly enjoyed it. And it enlightens. It is deep. It has layers. And it makes you think. I had heard people were not sure about the ending. A leading film-critic mentions in his review that there are surreal elements in the film. Not sure what they are talking about. It is just smart storytelling, with a sense of purpose and economy of words.

My heartiest congratulations and thanks to the makers - the gutsy producers, the director and his crew and the fabulous actors. One word for Naseeruddin Shah, not about his acting, which everyone is talking about, but for his nod to act in this film. Films like these need the support of veterans like him and it is exceptionally pleasant to find him gracing this brave attempt with his charming presence. And thumbs up for the dialogues by Raj Kumar Gupta. Wish I could write like him.

I highly recommend this 95 minute venture to those who want to spend a quality time smiling. And sorry once again for watching a pirated version. Hoping this article helps me in making up for that.

Why I couldn't hate Saawariya

I must admit that I am not a die-hard Sanjay Leela Bhansali fan. I didn't like 'Devdas'. And even after 'Black', that i loved, wasn't too sure with my expectations from 'Saawariya'. Although I have always worshiped the music of his films, and by the time this movie was released on Diwali 2007, its music had already murdered me! Felt I could listen to its 'Daras bina nahi chain' forever...
Catched the evening show on the first day itself. By then, there were news already from different sources that it is a 'terrible' film and people are leaving the theatres mid-way. Within the first fifteen minutes into the film, it was clear why. I was watching it in a single-screen theatre in Pune and my fellow audience were generous in their use of adjectives to complain about it. Some screamed as if it were a horror film. And for the next two hours I was trying hard to survive their hatred directed towards the screen. But as the end credits rolled and I came out of the theatre, I was smiling. I could easily understand why people are hating it, but I could not.

In the next few days, the Indian media ripped it off. Critics and common men, all hated it. And I have this feeling that the Hindi film industry people, those not associated with this Columbia Pictures presentation, silently approved. It appeared, we had just witnessed one of the worst films in cinema history. I was not too comfortable with it. And waited for atleast someone to come forwards in defence of this film, any one critic, or someone with the knowledge of cinema. Sadly, I am still waiting.

Not that I can't see the flaws in the film. Not that there weren't moments that I actually found difficult to accept, both logically and cinematically. Not that I was so mesmerized by the music that I loved the film. No, I didn't love it. But I thought that it didn't deserve the hatred it received.

Filmmakers keep trying, throughout their careers to refine and define their expression. Some are gifted with unique cinematic language, many learn by emulating others and many more can not do it at all. It is indeed rare, for a filmmaker, Indian or otherwise to have an expression of his own, something that is seen only in his films, something that becomes a genre in itself. And in Hindi film industry, with all due respects to the filmmakers here, I truely don't find makers with their own personal flavour apparent from their work. Even the best of our films have not necessarily been original in their content and treatment. For those who disagree, I won't cite examples from successful trend-setting films, that actually borrowed ideas from the west, but I would rather name a filmmaker, who in my opinion, did have an expression of his own. He had his personal flavour in all his movies and could achieve the finest balance of heart and head and of art and technique. He was V. Shantaram. Watching his movies will make it clear what unique expression I am talking about. And, in this generation, I find Bhansali as the one who has the unique voice of his own, and the conviction to stick by it.

Please do not think that I am comparing him to Shantaram. That would be unfair, indeed. I just wanted to make this point and stand for this man. In fact, after 'Saawariya' I feel he should stick to this kind of cinema, because this is 'his' cinema - deeply personal and strange. And whether he makes a good or a not-so-good film, Bhansali actually succeeds in creating an atmosphere, a mood that, I suppose, has never been portrayed on screen. If he devotes his entire life doing this, I am sure, he will leave behind him some works that will be known by his name. And yes, it will include some flawed films.

'Saawariya' was a flawed piece of art. But it was definitely a piece of art. I am sorry to say this, but most of the films made in our industry do not even qualify as a work of art. And for its conviction, its madness, its defiance and its effect on me- that lasted even after that Diwali night, I fail to hate 'Saawariya'.

Persepolis, Metropolis and other Cities

Finally I caught 'Persepolis'. Had heard so many good things about the film and it still managed to surpass all my expectations. It has taken me years to realize the importance of animation movies. I have never found myself fascinated by the idea. As a result I never opened myself to this genre. Deciding to watch an animation was difficult. But whenever I went for it, I was satisfied, and impressed. It was only after 'WALL-E' although, and then 'Ratatouille' that I realized the importance of these films. Animation empowers you with the ability to tell stories that you could never imagine otherwise. It empowers the storyteller in you to go beyond all conventions and create a world nobody would have thought of. And then I saw 'Persepolis', an animation all right, but more than that, a political film, close to a social satire, semi-autobiographical and a treat for any lover of meaningful cinema. It is an important film, not just because of its political statement, but also for the future of cinema in general, and the animation genre in particular. Soon, I hope, the already diminishing line of divide between films will end. And instead of labeling a film as 'art' or 'commercial' or into a genre, we will all accept films as just good or not-so-good films. It is high time, an animation film gets nominated in the 'Best Picture' category as well, apart from the less celebrated 'Best Animation Feature' category.
By the way, 'Waltz with Bashir' is already with me, and I should be watching it soon.

Also saw Wim Wenders' 'Alice in the Cities'. Beautiful movie. It is one of those movies that make your day. It was sad to know that Yella Rottlander, who plays the little Alice in this 1974 film did not have much of a career as an actor afterwards. But in this film she was more than wonderful, one of the performances you are not likely to forget.

Finally, just today, I saw 'Metropolis'. I never had the guts to decide on a 2-hr long silent film made in 1927. But somehow, I managed to play it this morning. And man, it didn't let me bat an eyelid. It is more than 80 years old now. Perhaps my grandfather would have been a baby when it was released. And it still manages to connect. The performances are obviously melodramatic, but within a few minutes you are so well settled for it that it does not affect you at all. In fact, a film that finds a place in almost all 'Best Movies of All Time' lists, this German movie is a challenge for filmmakers of each era. Just go through the following facts about it:

• Among the first Sci-Fi films of cinema history.
• It would have cost more than Rs 1000 crores, if it were made today. (considering the inflation)
• Inspite of being a silent film, it took two years to shoot.
• It used more than 35,000 extras. (perhaps the most scary thing in its making- I remember shooting with 10,000 extras for one day in 'Lagaan' was such a pain for the crew)

Thankfully, this gem has been restored and we now have a version close to the original. I wish something like that could be done for our very own 'Neecha Nagar' (1946).

So, some great films have come my way these days. Or a better statement would be - I have found my way to some of the great works. The journey continues, Insha Allah....

P.S. Reportedly, 'Metropolis' was one of Hitler's favourite films. See, the power of cinema- one thing that both we and these historic personalities could share!

The Cook, the Thief, His Wife, Her Lover, Their Film and My Nightmare

Years ago, when I wasn't used to this class of cinema, I experienced 'Pink Floyd: the Wall' in the TV room of my hostel. A group of seniors had brought the DVD and I fail to reason how I could survive that visual exercise. Those were the days when I was not an avid cine buff and didn't even know that things that can be disgusting for us is acclaimed world over as art. And I still remember that nauseated feeling I had had watching the man licking his fingers straight from the shitpot.

As I discovered the beautiful, varied colours of world cinema, from all ages and across all continents, I got used to stuff which I had never imagined I would see on screen, or otherwise. After the inevitable 'Eraserhead', things became easier still. Tarantino's 'Grindhouse' followed. I grew comfortable watching transvestites acting strange (Polanski's 'The Tenant'), men making love to men (Wong Kar Wai's 'Happy Together'), old men out there to teach the world with some brutal 'games' (the 'Saw' series), someone eating a live octopus ('Old Boy'), twelve-year olds sucking human blood ('Let the Right One In'), and outrageous, psychopathic young adults with a terrible sense of humour ('A Clockwork Orange'). I remember when I narrated some scenes from 'Erasehead' to my mother, she was offended and blamed 'such' movies to have 'freaked' my mind. I can't even imagine what her reaction will be when she finds out these are the films I watch. (Although these are not the only movies I watch and the only reason of watching these is that I try to watch all kinds of films.)

But still. Last night I was shocked beyond anything. I always knew it was among the most controversial movies. I also remembered that the movie shows the cooking of a human body, in all its entirety. And yet, the experience it was! It just kept building up, till that final moment when our Mr Thief takes a bite of Mr Lover's body, a delicacy served to him by his Wife and cooked, obviously, by the Cook, a passionate French artist.

It was beautiful. The entire film. Very well shot. The colour scheme was a treat in itself. And I was amazed at how the director could manage this balance between a disgusting, disturbing content in this beautifully designed and packaged bottle. But I should admit that I had to go through what they say on the net about this film. I tried my best to understand why this film is celebrated. And I should admit even more honestly that I could not find a reason strong enough, apart from the shock value.

I do not know whether I am going to consider this movie among the good ones I have seen in my life, most probably not. But when they talk about those must-watch-before-you-die list of movies, I am sure this English film will find its way.

P.S. Statutory Warning: If you decide upon watching it, do not plan to eat during or around your movie experience.

Finally, Hindi Kaavya in Hindi Cinema

Aarambh hai prachand, bole mastakon ke jhund

Aaj jung ki ghadi ki tum guhaar do,
Aan, baan, shaan ya ki jaan ka ho daan,
Aaj ek dhanush ke baan pe utaar do...

Mann kare so praan de jo mann kare so praan le
Wahi to ek sarvashaktimaan hai.
Krishna ki pukaar hai, ye Bhagvat ka saar hai
Ki yuddh hi to veer ka pramaan hai.
Kauravon ki bheed ho ya paandavon ka need ho
Jo lad saka hai wo hi to mahaan hai.

Jeet ki hawas nahin kisi pe koi vash nahin,
Kya zindagi hai thokaron pe maar do,
Maut anth hai nahin to maut se bhi kyun daren,
Ye ja ke aasmaan mein dahaad do...

Ho dayaa ka bhaav ya ki shaurya ka chunaav
Ya ki haar ka wo ghaav tum ye soch lo,
Ya ki poore bhaal par jala rahe vijay ka
Laal laal ye gulaal tum ye soch lo,
Rang kesari ho ya mridang kesari ho
Ya ki kesari ho kaal tum ye soch lo.

Jis kavi ki kalpana mein zindagi ho prem geet,
Us kavi ko aaj tum nakaar do,
Bheegti nason mein aaj, phoolti ragon mein aaj,
Aag ki lapat ka tum baghaar do...

- written by Piyush Mishra

Salutations to you, Sir....

Stanley, Oh Dear!

Had heard that he is considered the most versatile filmmaker we have had. And today I realize he has surprised me every time I have watched one of his films; every single time. Never expected 'Eyes Wide Shut' to be what it was. And meeting 'Dr Strangelove' was close to insane. Perhaps it was stupid of me to expect something from his films after watching the first two. What should you expect from a Stanley Kubrick film? Nothing. Because it is not easy to face outrageous surprises time and again. There is one thing, just one, that you can expect however. Some rules of cinema are going to be shattered with each of his films. And considering his range of work, seems he has actually torn the conventional book of filmmaking to insignificant bits and pieces. For those who have not yet discovered him, there is this example - the first and last twenty minutes of one of his films have no spoken word at all!

My past three days have been Kubrick's. 'Full Metal Jacket' was the last, preceded by 'The Shining'. And the first of the three was '2001: A Space Odyssey'. Why I am mentioning the first movie last is because of the sheer hypnotic spell it has cast over me. I can not write about it any more at this moment. I want to roam about in that subjective world he took me to, without objectively analysing the details. It has been indeed one of the most amazing cinematic experiences of my life. And I know what I am talking about. Thanks Stanley, for everything. And thanks forever for the 'Odyssey'.....

Excuse Me, Mr Critic...

As I was coming out of the exit door this Sunday, deeply moved by another brave attempt on the Hindi Cinema screen, I was reminded of something Oscar Wilde had said. He said, “The critic has to educate the public; the artist has to educate the critic.” I know I might very well trigger an unhealthy debate through my words to come. But I would request the reader to go through this article in the most neutral way possible.
I believe most of us filmwallahs are mediocre people. Most of us do not know what we are here for. We do not know what we want to express. And those who know, hardly have the conviction to stick to their main motive. In this trade, convictions question themselves every Friday. Cinema, in our country is more than art, and being so it does not remain much of an art form anyway. Our cinema does not have much to educate the critic. But this is not what I intend to say. What I intend to will come as I talk about the first half of Wilde's quote.

The problem our cinema is facing is that of being caught in an unforunate viscious cycle. The public blames the makers for not making good quality films. The filmmakers accuse the public for being unintelligent and defend their work by shamelessly stating - "This is what they want!" In a country where most ordinary of Shah Rukh Khan films turn blockbusters, one genuine Swades fails miserably. I am sorry for taking the name, but I thought it was necessary to prove my point. And it is not just the problem I am talking about. I have a solution!
The solution is - the Critics. I do not have a problem with Trade Analysts calling themselves Film Critics or with Critics who have delivered bad films when they turned film makers themselves or even with Critics appearing to have more command over their language than their film sense. And I do not have much of a problem with Critics sounding pseudointellectual, self-obsessed, opinionated and egotistical. But yes, I do have a problem with them failing to do what they are also expected to do. The critic should take this responsibility to actually make way for art that is difficult to appreciate, but is impressive anyways. They should actually educate the public about expressions that are genuine, perhaps a bit abstract but honest and original. I do not expect yet that Critics in India actually defend No Smoking, and inform people about this genre of surreal films made so popular by Bergman and Lynch and Polanski et al. That would be demanding too much. But I actually expect that some among the lot comes up to encourage the most novel of attemps that filmmakers of today are daring to make. Instead of calling the new breed of filmmakers as arrogant, pseudointellectual portrayers of esoteric art, they should explain to people what good this film had, and why it is necessary to encourage and appreciate these attempts.
I believe, had the reviews for Swades carried four stars, the film would have made money. I very well remember the critics who did not find the film worthy enough. And I am sure, as with time that film has earned a unanimous appreciation, the same critics would find it difficult to defend their own views. We need critics who can foresee, who can predict that a certain film that has failed at the box-office will earn its due as the years roll.

We are soon going to witness a great revolution in the Indian Cinema scene. The beginning has already been made. Just keep counting the number of small-budget, independent but meaningful (or atleast 'different') films releasing this year. Many more are being scripted. Each year we are going to have more of those. They have arrived, filmmakers who have this 'go to hell' attitude in telling the stories they believe in. And although I am sure this new breed of filmmakers will eventually succeed in attaining what they want (they are such a ruthless force), a little help from others would make things easier and fast. Excuse me, Mr Critic, you just got some serious work to do!