A tout le monde...

#272: Mujhse Fraandship Karoge

2012-01-30T09:55:00.002+05:30

Mujhse Fraandship Karoge, released in 2011, is an attempt to make a movie centered around the social networking boom in India. Something about it is so business like it makes you think the decision to make the film might've been made by a bunch of corporate biggies sitting in a boardroom saying 'Let's make a movie on Facebook. Its the in thing.' Another would've said ' Yes something for the 14-18 age group... ' A third would've pitched in saying ' Yes, we can take a bunch of newbies and the costs will be recovered quickly because the stars costs would be practically nil.' And thus a writer must've been summoned and the film put on floors. Watching it on DVD I can only speculate that this might've been the course of events because while there's nothing wrong about that kind of a process something about it is so formulaic that the fun of watching it is diminished because of these set-pieces.

So what do I mean by a formula ? It means ensuring that the mediocrity of sections of the film is shored up by amping up some of the other sections. The effort is not to make a good film but get the right elements in to make it commercially worthwhile. Let's break it down for Mujhse Fraandship Karoge - inexperienced actors give unimpressive performances but the film's peppered with a really good soundtrack. Similarly an average screenplay is helped by some heavy duty marketing. Its just the way the cookie is meant to crumble- there's enough reason for the target audience to turn up and the moment that has happened, the film has recovered its cost. But thats about the business of the film, what about the content ? Firstly a convincing turn by Saba Azad as Preity- a stuck-up college student but a talented photographer who doesn't like Vishal (Saqib Saleem), a talented writer in the same college. Their friendship is what the movie is about but the struggles are too easy to have a buy-in from the audience. A wonderful score by Raghu Dixit works well in making the audience forget all the flaws that the story comes with. The filmmakers also do well to make the film under two hours- but there's again a business sense in here. Shorter movie also means more screenings in the same theater but anyway but that's that. The bad things - some manufacturing factory type performances by the supporting cast and a screenplay that even under two hours feels longer.

I might've ranted here a bit how watching this film feels like watching a film that's driven by business decisions rather than creative choices but I will also concede here that perhaps at my age I have outgrown a movie that's made around the social media generation of 14-18 year olds. Maybe, I have not been very tolerant of the movie here because I belong to a different generation but then a good movie is always a good movie irrespective of the age of the audience right ? And on that slightly defensive note, I recommend that you guys catch the movie only if you want to know what a new-age movie meant for 14 year olds would be like.

Rating: 4.8/10

#271: Coriolanus

2012-01-26T09:18:00.002+05:30

In Coriolanus, Ralph Fiennes plays the title role of a man without fear, a brave commander for whom Rome's sovereignty is of paramount importance. His mother, Vanessa Redgrave, plays a lady frail in appearance but not in will, someone who is proud of the manner in which her son conducts himself. The bonding between her and Coriolanus serves in setting not just the tone for the film but also in defining a critical plot point in the second half. The tenor of the relationship is intense and so is the film and with that one word as his guiding light- "intensity"- Ralph Fiennes playing the role of a son, a husband and a warrior captures everything that's good about Coriolanus.

On the filmmaking end of it, John Logan, the acclaimed writer of stories such as Gladiator and The Aviator is in fine form as he weaves one of Shakespeare's relatively unknown tales with perfection. The storytelling is swift but passionate. Logan's script in the able hands of Fiennes who also directed the movie is complemented by an unflinching dedication to the character of Coriolanus. And it is this single-mindedness of the story that serves the film well. Gerard Butler as General Affidius isn't bad either though his is mostly a supporting act. An imposing background score by Ilan Ashkeri keeps reminding us that this is a film about strong values like honor.

At 124 minutes, Coriolanus is a riveting action-drama that doesn't overstay its welcome. It boils steadily but surely and leads on to a climax that is one of the strongest in recent times. All in all, its a film that deserves a watch and how !

Rating: 7.6/10

#270: Don 2

2012-01-21T16:14:00.003+05:30

I had read a review once where the phrase 'assault on your senses' had really caught my fancy. I wondered if I will ever get to use it on my own. And then Don 2 happened.

At what time Farhan Akhtar abandoned substance for hollow style, I don't know but not only is Don 2 is his poorest effort in cinema (one could say he sings better), it is supremely idiotic in its essence. Relying solely on Shahrukh's antics was a very weak strategy and it didn't pay off at any point during the film.

The good things you ask ? Well maybe the opening five minutes, Boman Irani's busy mean presence and some cheesy lines that weren't meant to be.

In two words - Stay away!

Rating: 1.9/10

#269: One Day

2012-01-18T21:21:00.004+05:30

One Day is one of those few films adapted from a book whose screenplay is written by the author himself- David Nichols. It is an interesting piece of information because most of Hollywood prefers to get a different screenwriter from the author and in Adaptation we got a good window of how that process typically works. And it is an arduous one at that. Why it must've worked particularly for One Day perhaps is because it is an unusual love story. Imagine a movie unfolding with every five-six minutes spanning events for one whole year. There is a constant churn in character motivations, sometimes smooth, sometimes with a jerk but at all times there's an in-built anticipation of 'what happened next year?' and that's where One Day derives its biggest strength from.

The he film stars Anne Hathaway, a sweet unambitious, tolerant girl who can't wait to be loved enough in life and Jim Sturgess, a good-looking, happy-go-lucky charmer. Their paths cross on graduation day in college and since then the two keep in touch over the course of very many years where destiny leads them onto different directions. One Day is a film that requires you to be patient through the first half of the film and its second half rewards you for your patience. As the two key characters evolve over time, you get drawn into each character's problems and start empathizing with each of them. There's no one right or wrong between the two and its hard to not like both.

The movie's helped with a couple of nice finishing touches towards the end that could very well leave you moist-eyed. Anne Hathaway packs in an extremely convincing portrayal of the girl-next-door and Sturgess supports her well. David Nichols' screenplay if not taut is at least not boring. Things move briskly without any apparent flaws and by the time it ends, it just about becomes a fulfilling watch. Overall,One Day isn't the kind of movie you need to give an arm and a leg for but it's the kinds that's quite likely to steal your heart.

Rating: 7.2/10

#268: Duck Soup

2012-01-16T19:27:00.002+05:30

I had said this elsewhere on this blog that as far as Marx Brothers films go, there's Duck Soup and the rest. Watching it for the third time last night in two years did everything to reaffirm the belief once again. Some lightning-paced wit, tummy-churning gags and a surfeit of funny lines make for a breeze of a watch.

There's no other point to be made here except about two gentlemen named Harry Ruby and Bert Kalmar. The duo wrote some of the songs and composed the music for the film. In an already bizarre situations-led script, the equally funny songs leave no breathing space to recover from the hilarity of the gags.

If one had to sum it up, it won't be an exaggeration to say that one hasn't lived till one has seen Duck Soup.

Rating: 8.9/10

#267: Sherlock Holmes

2012-01-14T17:15:00.002+05:30

It is a bit unfair to say so but to review the first Sherlock Holmes after the second is a bit like cuddling with your boner after the orgasm. Some might even say that such an indictment is harsh but that is a fact. So impressed I was with the second edition that I thought it was necessary for me to see the first one all over again. So the DVD was bought and the deed was done. And here are a few observations from the exercise.

Holmes is obviously shown as a master of many skills and Robert Downey Jr. does full justice to the character with his brawny avatar of Holmes. The wit is unmistakably Guy Ritchie's but the delivery by Downey is pretty much on the mark. His chemistry with his Man Friday, Dr. Watson played by Jude Law is a definite highlight but again it is this mood of 19th century London that is most impressive about the film. The horse carriages, the Tower bridge being built (an entire sequence in the DVD is focussed around this and makes for a fascinating viewing), the raw action sequences- all these set pieces have this mood, this uncanny old London mood that is seeped into the movie through its art direction and cinematography that takes the cake for me.

Mark Strong as the antagonist is a devious instrument employed by Ritchie to match Holmes' intelligence and the oneupmanship between the two makes for an interesting buildup. A disappointment however is the climax that is a very cliched 80s Bollywood style fight sequence that defies logic as much as gravity. Rachel McAdams has a substantial part that she does justice to. Another winner is a fabulous soundtrack by Hans Zimmer. Richie's Holmes is undeniably charming but quite different from his namesake as envisioned by Conan Doyle. For a few of my friends that distinction didn't work for them, for someone like me, it worked just fine. I guess its just a matter of choice. But leaving that aside, the film works like a classic thriller where the audience is keeping pace with the protagonist to solve the crime at hand.

The issue I have in reviewing Sherlock Holmes after the Game of Shadows is that I am comparing the two in reverse order. It makes the first installment look much smaller that it is. I remember when I saw Sherlock Holmes in theater in 2009, I was bowled over, thinking that it was perhaps as good a movie as any in that year. In retrospect after watching the Game of Shadows, I feel it pales significantly in comparison to the sequel. As a standalone though it is much better than your average Hollywood film and for that we owe Mr. Guy Ritchie a whole round of applause.

Rating: 7/10

#266: A Game of Shadows

2012-01-13T09:51:00.003+05:30

Where does one begin while reviewing a movie like "A Game of Shadows" ? Should it be about the classy antiquated feel of the film or the breathtaking action sequences or the precise dialogues laced in wit and comeuppance. But since all of these are equally good perhaps beginning with Guy Ritchie, the man who brings it all together in a film so good, I don't find any qualms in declaring as the film of the Year, should be a fair starting point.

When the first edition of Sherlock Holmes released in 2010, it had its fair share of detractors. They said this isn't how Sherlock behaved in the books- he wasn't all action or brawn for that matter. They said Ritchie took far too many liberties with his lead character and probably killed the essence of Sherlock with his reinvention. My take on this was that an artist should have the liberty to reinterpret classics- that's where his creative genius comes in. Not every adaptation needs to stick to the original rules of the game. There's of course a charm in that genre too but one shouldn't rule out the immense possibilities of a slight departure in the recreation of a classic. And that's where Guy Ritchie scores and scores big as he continues his bold reincarnation of Sherlock Holmes with A Game of Shadows. And this one unlike the norm of sequels if bigger, better and even bolder.

Taking a cue from the Adventure of The Final Problem, the film is a classic cat-and-mouse game between the ace sleuth and his bete-noire James Moriarty, played by the mean-looking Jared Harris. As the antagonist in the scheme of things. Jared is as evil as they come with plans to spark off a world war between nations and profit from the subsequent arms race. Moriarty's character is aptly performed by Harris who is all class and élan in his manners - both civil and criminal. Robert Downey Jr. on the other hand is his counterfoil - rugged and swift. The race of oneupmanship between the two is as good as it can get even as Dr. John Watson played by Jude Law pulls his weight with an able hand. The highlight of the film however is the excellent choreography of action. It is here that Guy Ritchie has a grammar of his own that is constantly keeps you on a razor's edge. Not since The Dark Knight has a movie had such an incredible array of stunts that are guaranteed to leave your jaw open. At the same time, Kieron Mulroney and Mitchell Mulroney's writing is soaked in brilliance and the DOP Phillipe Rouselot contributes immensely in creating some unforgettable scenes of action. The art direction is once again top notch with little or rather nothing out of place.

So what is it that doesn't work about A Game of Shadows? If anything, perhaps a background score that's not as taut or mischievous as the first edition's. That's probably the only department that didn't lift itself up compared to the first part. Its not as if we didn't know it already but the film is irrefutable proof that Ritchie must count as one of the best directors in the world at the moment. What he has given us with A Game of Shadows is much more than a film, it is an indelible footprint in the history of film.

Rating: 8.4/10

#265: Sex and the City

2012-01-05T05:13:00.002+05:30

Personally, am not so much in favor of a series being made into a movie. In its essence I think it undermines the former. Its like how a purist wants to let a book stay as a book but movies do get made and opinions do get formed. Its perhaps also not fair that yours truly who has not seen the series is reviewing the film but here I am looking only at the film as a standalone. And in that Sex and the City is a massive disappointment.

It chronicles the problems of 4 women in the city of New York. Each is dealing with different issues in their lives ranging from parenthood to the usual commitment phobia. What the film lacks most is a storyline within these four tracks that is worth your time. None of the character's problems touch you because they seem superficial. The acting is mediocre to go along with it and in the process the overall quality of output that director Michael Patrick King is able to extract is next to nothing.

I saw the film with a Sex and the City series loyalist and it seemed to me that the only people who would be interested in the film will be those very loyalists. For anyone else, there's nothing to write home about. Even if its a review.

#264: Don 2

2011-12-27T22:27:00.003+05:30

The legend of Farhan Akhtar was perhaps beginning to be too good to be true. Here is a man who could lay claim to being the modern day Gurudutt. Writer, Actor, Director and even a singer. If Luck by Chance was just chance, Rock On wasn't. And ZNMD surely wasn't. These were all films that Farhan was making a mark with just his acting and we all knew his first and foremost skills lie in being a a director. So how good was he going to be ? Better than Dil Chahta Hain ? With the slick first edition of the new Don he kept us guessing as to how good the second edition could potentially be. The key operative word there being 'potential'. Because nothing in Don 2 lives up to that potential and that is just to put it mildly.

Essentially a heist film, Don 2 is written by Farhan Akhtar and two enthusiastic fan writers as Farhan calls his team comprising Ameet Mehta and Amrish Shah. In an article on Wiki, Farhan expresses how this story is about 3 fans of Don moving the story forward and having fun doing so. Point is when you're watching the movie, there's no fun for the viewer. Meant to be a cutting-edge thriller, the film's fancy production values are not enough to keep you glued to the screens. It is also one of those movies where the different departments don't seem to have clicked in unison.

With a sloppy storyline and unimpressive performances, the Don 2 does little to capture let alone take your breath away. In hindsight, one couldn't help but feel that the trailer was so much better than the film. Where one felt sympathy for Roma (Priyanka Chopra) in the first edition, here one is stupefied to her fall in love with the same Don (Shahrukh Khan) who killed her brother not so long ago. And that was still pardonable but what flies right in your face are some glaring loopholes in a thriller film that should've been a watertight plot. While the second half is miles ahead of the first in terms of the action quotient, it still leaves a lot to be desired. The only convincing performances in the film come from Boman Irani and Shahrukh himself who seems to have put in a lot of effort towards his character. Alas, it still is not enough to save the film from being a disappointment.

Overall, Don 2 has few things going for itself. It is Farhan's weakest film as a director. There is an inherent lack of conviction that is as startling as pissing off about Don 2 and that makes this no more than a mediocre piece of cinema. And what a pity that is because there was one thing Don 2 had which very few sequels inherently do and that's 'potential'.

Rating: 4.6/10

#263: Jewel Thief

2011-12-23T23:16:00.010+05:30

I couldn't let Johnny Gaddar have it, it needed an explanation. I couldn't let The Insider have it, it demanded more. I don't remember now if I will let Jaane Bhi Do Yaaron claim it but I definitely want to place this one line review Jewel Thief.

An unshakeable, incomparable and a timeless classic- watch it before you even think of dying. It has the coolest Hindi villain ever. Just for that last scene of him sitting in a flight, I could see it everyday after waking up and before going to sleep.

Rating: 9.4/10

#262: Race

2011-12-22T19:01:00.005+05:30

The thing about an Abbas-Mustan movie is that it is going to be full of thrills. Some hot women will keep the glamor quotient high and a high-voltage or a surprise ending will make it worth your time. Sometimes they get it absolutely right like they did in Khiladi and sometimes they're all over the place like 36 China Town . But what's beyond a doubt is that owing to lack of competition in this genre, Sriram Raghavan being the sole exception, they at least push the boundaries in this genre. Race is a similar attempt in the same genre by the duo.

It stars Saif Ali Khan and Akshaye Khanna who play two rich brothers wooing two attractive women, Bipasha Basu and Katrina Kaif. A murder takes place and an investigation officer (Anil Kapoor) steps in with a dumb but glamorous assistant (Sameera Reddy). The film thereafter weaves through twist after twist towards a high-octane climax. By itself, there's nothing impressive about the film but these twists themselves carry the movie forward. Saif and Akshaye Khanna are diligent in their performances but little beyond is interesting about them. The saddest element is Sameera Reddy's role that's a caricature of a character while Anil Kapoor makes a few poor attempts at comedy. The music by Pritam is a sure shot highlight and some of the songs and action sequences are stylistically shot by Ravi Yadav.

As a whole, Race is one of the more average attempts by Abbas-Mustan that's only pepped up in parts. At 165 minutes, it is also at least 20 minutes extra long and a whirlpool of twists towards the end really make you wish the film ended sooner. What's commendable though is the fact that it has still spurred the director-duo to come up with a second instalment in 2012 titled Race2. Sometimes such an unflinching belief in a genre sees people come up with a gem. Its clear that Race wasn't it, maybe Race2 will be.

Rating: 5.8/10

#261: New Year's Eve

2011-12-20T11:34:00.001+05:30

A set of eight stories, an ensemble of actors a range as wide as perhaps the Himalayas themselves in magnitude, a festive theme and released around New Year- yes it's a formula and yes it's worked before and yes it almost works yet again in this 2011 release.

First let's dwell onto why it works. Its a compilation of eight stories so it had to move pretty quickly from one story to another. New Year's Eve does that- the stories are interwoven seamlessly and cut back and forth without causing you to strain your senses. The actors don't really have anything demanding to perform so that way the performers don't cause too much of a mayhem. Most actors don't have a screen presence of more than four to five minutes so before they get on your nerves, they're out of the way. The music's mediocre but the fast-paced editing by Michael Tronick makes up for it and director Garry Marshal's marshaling of these eight tracks is swift.

And now why I say it only almost works. First because its all predictable- to the T. It is a formula film and it works like one. Some of the surprise scenes have no punch because of that very reason and if you've seen Love Actually, this would be nothing more than a deja vu. And is there a standout performance among the multitude of actors here- well that's a resounding no. So the film ends up being like a bottle of Coca-Cola from which you know what to expect but when there's no fizz in the bottle, it only excites you that much.

All in all, this is a film that's warm but lacking in warmth, that's sweet but it's got more sucrose than necessary and most importantly a film that had a heart but little in terms of soul. You can at best watch it on DVD and buy one of those cheap roadside ones. You'll more than get your worth even if the print's a bit awry.

Rating: 5.4/10

#260: Bodyguard

2011-12-19T17:37:00.008+05:30

A
Bad
Over-the-top
Disappointing
Yawner and a
Gadfly
Ugly
Atrocious
Rotten and
Dumb

I don't even know if the above makes sense. But if they can get away with an entire film that doesn't, why can't I with a review ?

#259: Planet Terror

2011-12-18T17:41:00.003+05:30

Planet Terror written and directed by Robert Rodriguez is one half of a double-feature movie called Grindhouse that featured Death Proof (directed by Tarantino) as the second film. The two filmmakers known for their unique brand of filmmaking go back a long way as friends and this was their combined effort plugged as one. As filmmakers even in the past, the two had collaborated in various capacities on each other's films but this was the first co-production. It does sound like a dream thing to happen - two friends making one common movie and selling it together. Except that the movies themselves didn't do too well and Grindhouse till date remains one of Tarantino's least successful ventures.

Planet Terror had a good idea going for itself - with the look of an 80s film- it takes you through events in a small-town in Texas when three mutants escape from a military base and create havoc turning ordinary residents into ugly blood-thirsty zombies. But if you don't have patience to go through it, the film can become a tortuous experience to go through. For example, 281 people are killed in a movie duration of 105 minutes and as you can see from the poster- bizarre will not even begin to describe some of the events in the film. But that's what Planet Terror is all about- celebrating the ridiculous and making a parody of it. In a strange way, the very things that work for the film are the things that might irk you after a while - the over-the-top coolness quotient of the characters especially Freddy Rodriguez, the silly sequences towards the end by Rose McGowan and an overall kitschy feel of the film. This is a medley or almost a tribute of the action, slasher and horror films of the past and if none of these three appeal to you, you should steer clear of the film.

The story also written by Robert Rodriguez is simple but treated quite inventively. But even after the style and mood is set, you don't quite get absorbed into this parallel universe. Rodriguez trusts this mood to carry the film through but beyond a point it doesn't. But you must watch Planet Terror if you have a feel for movies that push the boundaries beyond the ordinary. For that, Rodriguez deserves more than just a passive applause and you can consider that my rating below here accounts for a large percentage for that leap that Rodriguez takes as a filmmaker.

Rating: 5.9/10

#258: The Manchurian Candidate

2011-12-17T18:06:00.007+05:30

So much of the premise of The Manchurian Candidate is like Courage Under Fire, it is hard to avoid a comparison. Both films are about a medal of honor that's awarded to a soldier in a tough battle fight and the film then unravels if the honor was well deserved. There had been an even earlier film based on the same 1959 Richard Condon novel of the same name. While the premise is undoubtedly intriguing and the peeling of layer by layer of what exactly happened holds viewer attention, what happens in the 2004 version of the film is definitely notches below Courage Under Fire.

Denzel Washington plays Major Ben Marco who was the leader of the troops that were surrounded by enemy fire on a night in the Kuwait War. What happens next is very sketchy in the memories of all the survivors of that attack. What emerges though is that it was Seargent Raymond Shaw (Liev Schrieber) who led the soldiers through and took on the enemy single-handedly. The episode got christened as the 'Lost Patrol' event of the war and Private Shaw went on to win the most coveted honor bestowed by the US Army - the Congressional Medal of Honor. Years later, delivering a speech at a convention, Washington is coaxed into realization by a fellow survivor that something about that event wasn't right. And there begins the central plot of The Manchurian Candidate.

The other key characters that emerge on this journey are Senator Eleanor Shaw, the power-hungry mother of Raymond Shaw, played with elan and conviction by the timeless Meryl Streep. Jon Voight plays the vice-presidential nominee against Raymond Shaw. The suspense as it unravels is tempting but only till the time the reason for the anomaly in the 'Lost Patrol' episode emerges. That hook is not something that is quite convincing and that's the first time where the film begins to lose its grip. What director Jonathan Demme, however manages inspite of that is extracting a couple of brilliant performances from Liev Schrieber. The cold steely character of Raymond Shaw being manipulated by his wily mother is the highlight of the film. The mother-son combination is brilliant and are magnetic to watch especially when together. Denzel Washington as the wronged General is purposive but not quite at his best.

Once the screenplay loses its grip somewhere in the middle, the movie struggles to justify its length at 130 minutes. Its most redeeming feature Meryl Streep can only stem the movie from becoming a bore with her electric presence. But little is achieved in terms of dramatic tension apart from her. To sum it up, The Manchurian Candidate is a promising affair that goes awry and by the time it recovers, it is of no relevance.

Rating: 6.2/10

#257: MI4 Ghost Protocol

2011-12-17T09:07:00.010+05:30

There's something called a set-piece in football. Which means that the ball will be stationary before the next action kicks in. So either a free kick or a spot kick whereby players get to choose who should be their preferred striker. This allows the team to prepare well in advance and once the strategy comes off right, it looks quite good. The thing about set pieces though is that a team cannot sorely rely on it to pull through every match. The team still has to still have a solid defence line, a midfield that wins plays at crucial stages of the match and a couple of a dynamic strikers. The thing with Ghost Protocol is that it tries to rely solely on set-pieces to see it through and in the process comes across, carrying on with the football analogy, a team that is pretty ordinary overall.

Ghost Protocol begins with an interesting premise where Agent Benji (Simon Pegg) and Agent Carter (Paula Patton) along with Ethan Hunt (Cruise) infiltrate the Kremlin. Predictably, things don't go to plan and the team is disbanded with no authorizations for future actions. This leaves Hunt and team on their own to set about a mission that could avert a possible nuclear war between US and Russia. Yes, you heard that right- the oldest cliched trick in the book- avert a nuclear war. And that's just about the start of things that's unimpressive about Ghost Protocol. The writers have nothing special to offer in terms of surprises. What comes through as a winner are those set pieces- some gravity-defying action scenes that get your pulse racing along with a sequence of mistaken identity that is crafted like a true blue espionage mission. On the performances, Simon Pegg pulls his weight through in an otherwise serious film with his comic timing. Paula Patton is a welcome visual relief in a film all about men and action and Jeremy Renner makes a solid appearance in a supporting role. Cruise is convincing once again as a blue-chip agent while Anil Kapoor does little of note playing a caricaturish rich Indian billionaire.

Director Brad Bird doesn't quite stitch all the elements well enough to keep you glued to your seats. Even if you leave the multiple cinematic liberties aside, no single scene or character touches you enough to think about the film. An action film can attempt to become a classic if the bad man is really bad, like we saw in The Dark Knight or even Terminator2 and this film's antagonist is hardly brutal. It goes back to the set-piece theory because the characters are not quite etched out well. The background score by Michael Giachino and Lalo Schifrin however is as good as any of the previous editions and is one of the redeeming features.

Overall, Ghost Protocol has little in terms of ingenuity or appeal, at best perhaps a home DVD watch. To call it anything more would be an exaggeration.

Rating: 5.3/10

#256: Man On Wire

2011-12-14T09:17:00.002+05:30

Man on Wire is a gripping documentary about one man's obsession with literally walking the thin line. Philippe Petit is a man who has over the years built a reputation from rope-walking on great heights. The film in particular deals with Petit's clandestine wire-walk between the Twin Towers of WTC and derives its source material from the book 'To Reach the Clouds' that Petit wrote capturing his adventures over the years.

There is no doubt that Man on Wire is an interesting story to tell and it must've taken some deliberation to decide whether a documentary was the best way to tell Petit's story. The movie which eventually won the best documentary honors at the Academy Awards works cinematically even in a documentary format because it is singularly and consistently about one mad pursuit. Sometimes it seems unnatural that someone would go to such great lengths to do what the protagonist does but that's exactly what makes the film an engrossing watch. The narrative is peppered with multiple interviews of Petit's friends and well-wishers interspersed with some beautiful still photographs. At little under 90 munutes, these devices work well cohesively to tell an unconventional story. The other parallel track about Man on Wire that's as interesting as the chase for the top of the summit is the personal connections and stories that gives the storytelling an added dimension. The nervous but energetic narration by Petit himself succeeds in capturing much of the drama preceding the climax.

Director James Marsh employs a Zen-like background score by Michael Nyman and a similar minimalistic photography by Igor Martinovic complements the mood of the film. But at the end of it, most of the film's life is derived from Petit himself and his incredible passion for what he loves. Released seven years after the WTC crash, the film also has a fine sub-text of the WTC towers themselves that are as much of a part of the story as the protagonist himself. All in all, Man on Wire is a dish served hot and made so well you can't help but go for a second round.

Rating: 7.6/10

#255: Cars

2011-12-12T15:23:00.003+05:30

Ka-Chow, the Lightning McQueen celebration cry sums up the experience of watching Cars- a movie about a parallel universe of men and women whose appearance resembles that of everyday cars. So whether is a Porsche or a Ferrari, each car has an accent, a mannerism, a look that sums up the identity of the person. It is sheer brilliance of imagination of the people who thought that they conjure up this parallel universe and keep us interested for a duration of close to two hours.

The more I think about it, I have reason to believe that Cars is the animation equivalent of Lord of the Rings. Here's a world that has been conjured from a concept and then blown up to the extent that it is human emotions that eventually rules the concept and the characters within it. The protagonist here is Lightning McQueen a rookie car driver aiming for the highest honors called The Piston Cup. Mcqueen voiced by Owen Wilson is a good-hearted but ambitious driver looking for his next big sponsor on the circuit. True to any sport film formula, he has his arch rival on the circuit but when a close finish pits him against two other racers in a season finale, McQueen sees it as the perfect opportunity to make that big break. Except that when he is on his way towards the finale, he loses his way and finds himself in a little known town called Radiator Springs. Radiator Springs is a cosy place with nice people and McQueen's brashness finds few takers. His impetuousness sees him grounded to the town and the time he spends there brings him close to a stern Hudson Hornet and a pretty lady called Sally who steals McQueen's heart.

Mind you these are all cars who behave like people and that's the first and foremost reason why Cars effortlessly works its way through your heart. Human emotions rule these cars and love, friendship and honor are values that are on display as much as the technical brilliance of these marvelous vehicles. The climax is deftly put together to tug at those tear glands and boy does it work. The screenplay credits belongs to six people and I can assure you this is surely not a case of too many cooks spoiling the broth. If anything, it makes the film richer. The only part that's not convincing enough in the film is the romantic angle between Sally and McQueen that seems too contrived and predictable from the word go. Having said that the animation in showing simple scenes of intimacy is top notch.

Cars is an invention of the mind that's done so well that it deserves an endless run. This year we had Cars 2 and it was as good as its predecessor. Because of the parallel universe of automobiles that the film has created this can be one timeless franchise. Its got everything in place towards that end. Most of all, a first film that sets the tone and a standard so high that its going to be a pleasure just anticipating what's coming next.

#254: Crush(Short)

2011-12-11T10:29:00.006+05:30

Crush was nominated for honors for best film in the short live action category at the Oscars in 2010. It is about a student who falls in the love with his teacher. Yes this is an oft-repeated plot but something's quite right about this one. Apart from the student and the teacher, the third character in the film is the teacher's boyfriend. This is a story well told and enacted with a thriller sort of a climax ingrained in a film about an innocent crush.

Crush didn't win the Best Film but its writer-director Michael Creagh surely makes a mark and is one to watch out for in the days to come.

#253: Om Shanti Om

2011-12-08T19:57:00.004+05:30

Om Shanti Om was made at a time when Farah Khan hadn't got the better of herself in thinking that she can do well enough without Shahrukh Khan. Starting from Main Hoon Na, Farah Khan established her name in a particular genre that can only be described as 'glorifying-the-masala-of the-Bollywood-80s'. So there's a heroic hero, a bad bad man, multiple songs, a svelte leading lady, numerous song and dance sequences and the most important element of them all - revenge.

Om Shanti Om rehashes that formula and puts together a montage of the above mentioned. The hero is Shahrukh Khan, the leading lady Deepika Padukone, the bad man Arjun Rampal and so on and so forth. In a script that's heavily borrowed from Karz, Farah lets loose her imagination in extracting multiple cinematic liberties from the script. The movie's best feature is the first half where Farah takes digs at Bollywood itself. She's obviously grown up on a diet of those stereotypical movies and she brings her treasure trove of knowledge to the fore and makes the first half an immensely entertaining watch. That apart the music from the duo of Vishal-Shekhar is quite catchy and keeps your toes on the move while you're watching the film. Deepika Padukone, a newcomer in 2007 when the movie release, shows potential with a refreshing on-screen presence.

Where the movie slithers away frame by frame is the second half where melodrama in script and acting excesses pretty much spoil the good work done in the first half of the film. Arjun Rampal does the best he can to portray evil but isn't a shade of the shady villiains we used to have back in the 80s.

All in all, Om Shanti Om still makes for a watch worth your time because of one simple reason- it doesn't take itself seriously for most of the time. The moment it does, it miserably fails. This is one of those movies that's a story of two halves- a good first half and a nearly forgettable second.

Rating: 6.1/10

#252: At The Circus

2011-12-06T19:09:00.004+05:30

Its difficult to review a Marx Brothers movie. In my book, it is always going to be about there being a Duck Soup and then the others. And among the others the first among the equals is 'A Night at The Opera.' So where does this fare ?

Suffice to say that this is as good as any of the others. Nothing more, nothing less. I mean still, how does one still review a Marx Brothers movie? I have done it before but then something doesn't seem right...

Rating: 7/10

#251: The Ides of March

2011-12-04T16:55:00.005+05:30

Do me a favor. Shut your eyes and picture these names one after the other.

Marisa Tomei. Evan Rachel Wood. Philip Seymour Hoffman. Paul Giamati. Ryan Gosling. George Clooney.

Its quite possible that everytime the name came to your mind you immediately related the particular actor with a particular movie. You know why ? Because each of them on their own are good enough to carry a movie on their shoulders. And now imagine all of them in one movie. Too much to ask ? Expect ? Well, not quite because The Ides of March combines all these actors and ekes a film that's so superior that you don't think about any of these actors individually but what the film did to you and the answer in one word is- breathtaking.

The credit for the film should actually go to the original playwright. This is a film that's all about it's story - its wicked twists and turns, power struggles and larger themes of loyalty and friendship and in many ways simply about someone being in the right place at the right time. Adapted from a Beau Wilimon play, the film was written for the screen by Grant Heslov, Wilimon and Clooney himself. We all know Clooney as a director has a nose for films. All his previous films leave you wanting for more and this is no different. What is remarkable is once again as in Good Night and Good Luck, Clooney lets someone else play the lead. And that someone in the case of The Ides of March is Ryan Gosling.

Gosling owns the character of Stephen Myers, a campaign manager for Presidential Candidate Mike Morris (Clooney) in the film. He is a bright and diligent manager with a sharp but principled boss (Hoffman). This team is contesting against a candidate named Pullman whose chief campaign manager is a wily Tom Duffy (Giamatti). The film takes place in a period of seven days in Ohio where the stakes are getting higher by the hour.

An excellent set of performances by the actors round up a tight plot. Clooney as the director seems to be simply conducting an orchestra of accomplished musicians. This is a nearly flawless film where every department makes a mark. The background score ranges from the hopeful to the haunting, the editing from slick to conventional and the cinematography from being scenic to poetic. There are those movies which are very good and yet a false note here and there sometimes jars the experience. Well, this isn't one of them. The screenplay works at a fast pace and is nothing short of electric. An case in point being the dialogue exchange between Hoffman and Gosling, that even towards the fag end is still as riveting.

To sum it up, I can only say this. I have seen The Ides of March twice in the last month and I think I am good for more. I don't think I can pay a film a bigger compliment.

Rating: 9.3/10

#250: The Dirty Picture

2011-12-04T16:26:00.006+05:30

The Dirty Picture from the house of Ekta Kapoor is a departure from the average Bollywood flick in many ways. For one, its central character is a lady. And then it's a biopic- another rarity and then there's a thorough lack of starpower- the big guns that is. And yet the theater I saw the film in seemed to be bowled over by the film. Perhaps, that's why they always say if there's a good story to tell, there's always an audience.

The film stars Vidya Balan as its lead who pays a character named Silk - an ambitious small-town girl who runs off to Chennai to become an actress. Silk takes time to warm up to the ways and methods of tinsel town but a five minute sensual appearance opens the doors of fame for her. And once she's there she doesn't hesitate to give physical favors to the number 1 star Suryakanth played brilliantly by Naseeruddin Shah to extract more roles. Surya is maried but is known to have extra-married liaisons and for sometime one can't make out who between the two is taking the other for the ride. These are the portions of the film that are most interesting for their risque but effortlessly witty dialogues. The screenplay by Rajat Arora scores point after point till the interval. Milan Luthria brings the period of the 80s alive through some masterful direction and etches out the characters of both Silk and Surya with tremendous conviction.

Enter the second act of the movie and making a mark is Emraan Hashmi who plays Abraham, an arty director who doesn't have any friends in the industry who support his kind of filmmaking. Abraham doesn't approve and openly declares his dislike for Silk. Abraham is a character that comes alive in the second half and also allows Luthria to add an interesting sub-plot of conflict between Silk and Abraham. Tushar Kapoor the third male lead, with his weak acting skills once again raises the dirty question if he would've got acting offers if not for his sister. Rajesh Sharma on the other hand delivers a key supporting part with susbtance. So far so good but where The Dirty Picture loses its plot is a melodramatic last fifteen minutes. The slow motions and the heightened depression do nothing emotionally for the audience.

That said, The Dirty Picture is one of the better Hindi films of the year. It is flamboyant filmmaking with substance. At its core lies Vidya Balan who glitters in a challenging role and almost steals the show from Naseer. The film in itself doesn't have too many moments of slack and is largely entertaining. Take a bow - Rajat Arora and Milan Luthria, you dared to be different and have clearly made a film that people won't forget in a hurry.

Rating: 7.1/10

#249: The Insider

2011-11-29T18:17:00.005+05:30

All fans of the movies have one big movie that did it for them. The Insider it is for me. I first saw the film as a part of an learning beyond academics sort of a workshop during my MBA. And for the next month, I saw it once every day and that is no exaggeration. These were days when true gritty stories meant more than fairy tales like Finding Neverland which was another hot favorite on campus. In fact in the genre of hot campus favorites, I am not sure if The Insider would ever figure in my friends' list but somehow it moved me immensely.

First, the fact that this was a true story. Then the fact that this was a whistleblower story. Then the fact that it had Al Pacino. And that it wasn't even a lead. That it even had Russell Crowe. That the cinematography in a movie seething in pessimism and wrong-doing could be so poetic. That even the music enhanced the frame every time it came on. That Mike Wallace's words pierce you even if they're directed at Gina Gershon. That it still didn't win any Oscar - the irony and ecstasy of a whistleblower film falling short of a symbol of the pinnacle of achievement in films. Isn't that in itself something ? Or am I beginning to make this up ?

As you can see, the list is endless. But enough of praise here, let me take you through what the film is about. Jeffrey Wigand (Crowe) is a research head in a big tobacco company. He has enough reason to believe that nicotine is addictive and when his seniors get to know that he might let this fact out in the media, they fire him and in a typically high-handed and predictable manner threaten his family's well-being. Enter Lowell Bergman (Pacino), producer of the high-profile CBS show 60 Minutes. Bergman senses Wigand could talk and spill some hefty beans here and he draws him out. Wigand struggles with the right thing to do as does Bergman in his role as a producer who has to convince his owners to air a potentially damning episode. So effectively, it is a story of two men in a moral war in different battlegrounds. The Insider steadily builds up momentum and before you know it takes you through a tantalising ride for 157 minutes. Superbly written by Marie Brennan, Eric Roth and Michael Mann, it takes the struggles of these two men fighting for their right to speak the truth, to an ultimate high and sustains the thrills with incredible alacrity. Michael Mann with the directorial reins doesn't have a moment in here that isn't arresting enough to keep you glued to your seat. Some stunning photography by Dante Spinotti supports the director's vision to the T. And the acting- perfect. Just perfect - there's more to say here.

There are films that intoxicate you, shake you from inside and brew inside your head for a long time. Today as I write this review 6 years after I first saw the film, I am not referencing or cross checking the names of the characters from Imdb or Wikipedia. The names, the costumes, the sets, the supporting characters- they're all fresh in my mind and every scene is well set in my imagination. I even remember the dialgoues word by word. That's what The Insider meant to me then, means to me today and will mean to me forever: an emphatically indelible impression. After all this is not a film, it is a life-changing experience.

Rating: 10/10

#248: Bodyguard.

2011-11-28T22:36:00.003+05:30

Technically, it's not correct to review a movie that one hasn't seen completely. But what if a movie was so bad during the first fifteen minutes of watching it that one considers it his/her moral obligation to caution the world that such a movie is nothing more than a garbage can filled with the a load of trash.

I am that one person and Bodyguard is that one movie.

Rating: NA

#247: Help

2011-11-27T18:33:00.003+05:30

Help is a 2011 movie based against the background of the American civil war in the 1960s. Adapted from a Kathryn Stockett novel of the same name, the movie traces the relationship between a young journalist Skeeter (Emma Stone) and her family in Mississippi. The families around her neighborhood are all used to having black maids and right after the civil war, Skeeter's thinking represents a more liberal outlook towards these helps. Her immediate society, on the other hand discriminates against these helps to the extent of having seperate baths for the maids and thereby lies the core conflict of the movie.

The focus of Help is a black maid called Abeleen (Viola Davis). When Skeeter approaches Abeleen to let her tell her side of her story for a journalistic assignment, Abeleen isn't very forthcoming. After all, in the new environment being seen as someone speaking up for the blacks might be detrimental to her safety. Skeeter though is unrelenting and gets Abeleen to open up. Seeing Abeleen's stance, her friend Minny Jackson (Olivia Spencer) too joins in and the two take Skeeter through their experiences of having served in all-white families for all these years. Some of the revelations are funny, some distressing and some utterly disgusting. By the time, Skeeter has got all her material from these two maids, she ventures to write the last chapter- the relationship between an old black maid who brought her up during her childhood. Skeeter gets very little in way of assistance from her own Mom (Allison Janey) but with her persistence eventually gets to the what actually happened. Help is a sensitive telling of a tale about these three women in an insensitive environment.

The film is written and directed by Tate Taylor, Kathryn's Stockett's close friend and together their upbringing in the Jackson area lends the story a very real touch. From the costumes to the art direction to the speech patterns and dialogues in the film, Taylor transports us to an alternate universe that is very different from the times we live in. The characters of Abeleen and Minnny are triumphant sketches of ordinary people for whom respect and acceptance in the society they live in is a luxury. And both Davis and Spencer are nothing less than brilliant. Emma Stone's zealousness in bringing their story to life is commendable but not entirely inspiring. The screenplay tends to stretch towards the end and the last 15-20 minutes could've been dealt differently. A moving background score by Thomas Newman provides a neat finishing touch.

In the end, Help is a strong effort by Tate Taylor. Although not very powerful in it's final message, it does take you back to a time when discrimination was an in-your-face part of the society. It is a film that has it's heart in the right place and does everything to stay true to that. Sometimes, you can't ask more from a movie than that.

Rating: 7/10

#246: Kidnap

2011-11-27T00:59:00.003+05:30

Kidnap is about a rich man's (Sanjay Dutt) daughter getting kidnapped by someone (Imran Khan) who nurses a grudge against that rich man. Rich man calls for a probe led by part-cop part-investigator Rahul Dev who is always missing a trick when chasing the kidnapper. I don't even want to go into how this unfolds because if you thought the above was cliched and uninteresting, the rest is history.

Let's begin with the casting. Vidya Malavade plays Minisha Lamba's mother. Now the music, there's an item kind of a number in the beginning that introduces Minisha but it is a bad song. Imran Khan coming off Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na barely fits the sinister designs of a kidnapper out for revenge. The plots for some absurd challenges set by the kidnapper for the rich man are nothing short of peaks of idiotic writing. Even a Dilip Kumar acting in a script as laden with loopholes couldn't have done anything to help.

So if you get the picture- Kidnap has bad acting, bad casting and bad music to back up a bad script. How good can it get ! Sanjay Gadhvi, you have to be kidding or napping about the movie !

Rating: 1.1/10

#245: Short Films (Vol. 1)

2011-11-25T23:06:00.003+05:30

No, this isn't a single filmed called as such. But writing today got me thinking, I have so far on this blog reviewed multiple genres, and languages. I have reviewed TV movies, documentaries, animated films and even a DVD. However, the short film category was conspicuously missing. So here's a review, actually more than a review- a recommendation perhaps on a set of few short films that make for great viewing. Also mentioned for each of the films is a one line synopsis.

10 Minutes by Ahmed Imamovic: A triumph of filmmaking technique set against the background of war. Guaranteed to have your jaw drop.

Snap: A crackerjack of a film about a man whose camera is robbed of his camera broad daylight. Edge-of-the seat stuff.

The Man Who Walked Around the World: Well, technically an advert for Johnnie Walker. But what a FILM !

#244: Paths of Glory

2011-11-25T00:37:00.005+05:30

Scathing irony, valiant soldiers, a courageous leader, an inglorious setup, a selfish general, a terse indictment, a judgement so insensitive, an ending so powerful and a film so poignant.

I need to only mention one line to sum it all up: "The men died wonderfully well..."

Thank you Humphrey Cobb, Stanley Kubrick and Kirk Douglas.

Rating: 8.8/10

#243: Reservoir Dogs

2011-11-23T21:58:00.002+05:30

Quentin Tarantino has said in quite a few interviews that the thought to make a heist movie first came to him when he was working in his DVD rental store. Looking up the column of heist movies, it occurred to him that it had been a while since anyone made a heist movie and that set him about thinking what a good screenplay in this genre might entail. I guess he first went about sketching a good set of characters, weaving a desperate angle for each of them to get motivated to be a part of the heist and then let things go horribly wrong and see if things resolve themselves. Some say, he simply copied Ringo Lam's City of Fire. Whatever that source have been, the point is, did he make it work ? The answer to that is "Oh hell fucking yeah!" ( This is a Reservoir Dogs review. Can't do without it!)

Reservoir Dogs is the story of a bunch of guys out to take out a bank. Someone comes up with idea in the group that they should be named after colors so we have Mr. White, Mr. Brown, Mr. Blue, Mr. Blonde, Mr. Pink and Mr. Blue. And while they're going about discussing who gets what color, you sitting across the other end of the screen watching these guys sip coffee think, 'What a cool bunch of guys...'. Well, Reservoir Dogs is bathed in cool from start to finish. There are cool dialogues, cool characters, cool insults and cool bosses. What's not cool is that there's a suspected mole among the men. But then that is also the trick QT has up his sleeve till the very end. The movie, practically half of which is shot in a warehouse hinges on the audience guessing who is the mole.

Apart from a slick sequence of the bank robbery, Reservoir Dogs derives most of its brilliance from the work of three key men - Steve Buscemi, Harvey Keitel and Michael Madsen. Between the rational and statemanly Keitel and the panicking Buscemi lies the calm but maniacal act by Madsen. The three jostle for the audience attention and while Keitel and Buscemi get your sympathy, Madsen provides the shock value. The editing by Sally Menke is razor-sharp in a non-linear narrative and Tarantino is not only controlling the key moments of the story but keeping the energy levels really high through the movie. Roger Avary his co-screenwriter is due his credit for making some scenes leap out of the screen with their latent intensity in this 1992 Cannes Palm D'Or winner.

Reservoir Dogs is my go-to movie in times of depression, anger and happiness. I can watch it any number of times and I know loads of people like me who think the same. Most filmmakers in their lifetime don't get to make a film as emphatically outstanding as this. Tarantino got it right with his first. That's the genius of the man.

#242: Raavan

2011-11-22T21:34:00.004+05:30

Raavan is one of those rare films in Hindi cinema that's named after the antagonist. The movie stars Abhishek Bachchan, called Beera in the movie, playing the title role based on the legend of Valmiki's Ramayana. However, if your impression of Raavana as a character from the TV serial of the 90s was that of cruel, lustful king, Mani Ratnam's is anything but. Released in 2010, Raavan tells us the story of Beera set in contemporary India.

Here Beera is a nice guy staying somewhere in the forests with his own following. He is just and if he's cruel, it is because someone else isn't letting him rest in peace. That someone else is Inspector Dev Pratap Sharma (Vikram), who is on Beera's hot trail because of a looting spree that Beera undertakes. That Beera distributes what he collects from the rich to the poor is immaterial for Dev. Knowing that Dev loves his wife dearly, Beera sees the kidnapping of Dev's wife Ragini (Aishwarya Rai) as one way to thwart Dev's advances. The plan backfires, enrages Dev even more and now with the intention of killing Beera, he unleashes his entire police force in Beera's pursuit. The story moves rapidly thereafter and brings us to the climax.

There are two clear areas that the films nails as far as cinematic delivery is concerned. First, the cinematography and art direction. The former spearheaded by none other than Ratnam loyalist Santosh Sivan and Manikandan. The visual appeal of the movie is enhanced by some utterly breathtaking locations and has many shots that could be framed for posterity. The second exceptional thing about film is its music - whether it is the wonderfully layered background score or the songs- the music adds an extra dimension to the proceedings. What ails Raavan is a a shoddy screenplay that meanders with quite a few unnecessary characters thrown in from time to time. It loosens the grip that it so badly required in a story that's well known to the average Indian audience. While Aishwarya Rai impresses, Abhishek Bachchan is blow hot blow cold in the all-important role of Raavan. The third key character Vikram barely does anything important apart from being loud. The best moment of the film however is with Priyamani who is Beera's sister. The one scene with her after a police carnage is the closest the film comes to pinching the viewer with emotional impact.

Raavan is a fairly passable attempt by Mani Ratnam. It is shot with a lot of care and the aesthetic benchmarks are set quite high by the director. It doesn't quite click yet because of a screenplay that wasn't watertight. Eventually it becomes a film that's as middle-of-the-road as it can get. Can't enjoy. Can't walk out.

Rating: 5.9/10

#241: Beneath The Waves

2011-11-21T22:25:00.003+05:30

Beneath The Waves is a gripping BBC documentary based around the dubious legend of The Bermuda Triangle. Made in 2004 by documentary specialist Nigel Patterson, it gives an account of the ill-fated Flight19 led by a commander that in 1943 after taking off from Fort Lauderdale never returned. The commander was in charge of a group of five other airborne fighter crafts and was in close contact with the base radio station at Fort Lauderdale on their way back. However, what was a routine recci turned out to be a nightmare for the five aircrafts as they soon lose contact and struggle to find their way back.

Patterson takes an interesting approach to narrating the incident as he dramatizes the incident of disappearance and simultaneously in the present takes the conventional route of interviews with naval physicists and other experts to explain the vanishing act. The documentary keeps going back and forth between these two settings and arrives at a firm conclusion. With a keen sense of intrigue, the film absorbs you with its mysterious tenor. The best thing about the film being the fact that some of the findings about Bermuda Triangle are shown to the audience as and when the experts came across them. This made the viewing experience eminently engaging.

What's a pity though is that in spite of mentioning repeatedly in the film that the Bermuda Triangle was the seat of an ominous spell of sorts, it goes little beyond explaining that one incident of 1943. Watching it one couldn't help but think how interesting it would've been to know more about the Bermuda Triangle. Nevertheless, Beneath the Waves is a brave attempt and deserves every minute of it's short running time of less than an hour.

Rating: 6.7/10

#240: Rockstar

2011-11-20T18:07:00.005+05:30

Writer-director Imtiaz Ali's story about a talented musician begins with protagonist Jordan's fascination and pursuit of his dream of being a rockstar. Jordan (Ranbir Kapoor), is introduced to us as a starry-eyed fledgling college guitarist who has his wall covered with posters of Jim Morrison and Led Zep. Studying in Delhi, he is carefree enough to sing to people waiting in a bus stand. Such is his passion that when his canteen owner tells him that Jordan must get his heart broken to create outstanding music, he attempts to woo the prettiest college Heer (Nargis Fakhri) in the campus. Except he doesn't fall in love with her but becomes good friends. That is first cinematic liberty that Imtiaz takes in the film. It is a funny scene when it happens but it is a weak moment indeed when Heer who is this prim and proper girl from Kashmir decides to take Jordan for a B-grade Hindi movie. We buy it in the flow of the movie but Imtiaz keeps stretching these liberties from time to time and what we eventually end up with is a half-baked cake with all the flavors in place but just not completely done.

From a story of Jordan's dream, Rockstar by the second half becomes a story of unrequited love. There's pain and pathos thereafter and hope that somewhere in between we will arrive at a fulfilling conclusion. The bridge that Imtiaz covers with his co-writer Muazzam Beg, to make this a story of Jordan and Heer from a story of Jordan is remarkable. It happens over a period of three years and it is a journey that has Jordan's character transformation at it's core. The narrative is peppered with flashbacks and cuts back and forth that work seamlessly in taking the story forward. But Rockstar is all about Ranbir Kapoor. If ever with his past choices of movies, there was any doubt about the man's talent, he shatters them all. His Jordan is passionate, quirky, uninhibited, sensitive and flagrant and Ranbir owns the character as much as he owns the film. The other element which works equally well for the movie is the music. These are not songs simply based around context of the movie but they're also laced around concepts and character motivations. Mohit Chauhan as the lead singer for Jordan provides a soul to the songs that make them come alive. Some stunning lyrics by Irshad round up the music wonderfully well. A supporting act by Kumud Mishra, as Jordan's manager is nothing short of a gem as is a cameo by Shammi Kapoor. To see the grandfather-grandson duo in one frame is a privilege for any one of us who grew up on Shammi Ji's films and songs. On the technical front, editor Aarti Bajaj seems to have had an open canvas to experiment and she delivers.

And now about the lacunae - films which weave around the personal journey of a character need to conclude with an impact towards the end. Imtiaz employs a finale concert as his cinematic device and it works at a certain level but doesn't really touch you. If it had, Rockstar would've been the 'wow' movie that it eventually didn't turn out to be. Nargis Fakhri, unfortunately inspite of a meaty role, doesn't connect with her stony acting skills. She's pretty and that's all there's to it. A Priyanka or a Kareena in a role like this would've enhanced Imtiaz's offering considerably.

Rockstar is surely one the year's better movies and its enigma pulls you towards a film that is Imtiaz's and Rahman's labour of love and music. The movie thrives on the individual strengths of both coupled with a virtuoso by Ranbir Kapoor. However, it lacks a punch because by the end of it, you go back thinking of the songs and Ranbir Kapoor and not about any moment that moves you. If Imtiaz had nailed that, we would've had a classic.

Rating: 6.3/10

#239: Pulp Fiction

2011-11-19T16:17:00.005+05:30

There's that spunk in Tarantino movies. I don't what else to call it. It's a bundle of latent energy just waiting to explode but waiting for that finale to happen, you know it's there and about to hit you. If you look at his filmography as a director and see the interviews he's given, he's admitted to consciously looking for that edge to infuse his movies with. In Kill Bill, it's the entire warrior piece, in Reservoir Dogs, it is the character of Michael Madsen, in Death Proof it is the car chase and so on and so forth. But no movie of his has as much of spunk as Pulp Fiction.

To begin, with Tarantino gets the name right. This movie is as pulpy-fictionally that it can get and like a true Bollywood masala movie it has everything. There's love and romance between Butch, the fighter (Bruce Willis) and his muse, there's a paternal affection angle handled delicately by Colonel Koontz (Walken), there's crime and murder perpetrated by two purposeful hitmen (John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson) and there's something that everyone else is chasing without the audience never really knowing what it really is. Nothing however beats the zig-zag storytelling of the Academy Award winning screenplay written by Roger Avary and Tarantino. Divided into three distinct stories, Pulp Fiction begins in the most sedate fashion with Tim Roth over a coffee table explaining the difference between a robbery in a bank and that in a small store. And that is the thinnest tip of the iceberg that the movie really is. Without notice, the film explodes through a mix of oddball characters that include a crime boss, his pretty wife (Uma Thurman), junkies, a boxer and those two hitmen called Vincent Vega and Jules. Tarantino gives the actors a different universe altogether to play in and with the actors with their signature understated, casual way of speaking subscribe to those rules of that universe. The only exception being the alternative brilliance of Samuel L. Jackson and a neat cameo by Harvey Keitel. Then there's also the background score of the movie, handpicked by Tarantino himself and like most of his other movies vying for the honors of best OST ever.

The special bit about Pulp Fiction is that whenever there's a wow moment, there isn't much notice for the audience to prepare. Stories interconnect seamlessly and it takes a while to tie some of those loose ends in your head. This is a film that improves with every repeat viewing because there's something in it that makes you fall in love with it every time you watch it. Clearly, this is a Tarantino special. It is his unhindered vision that makes it such a special film. If there's one part that I didn't enjoy much in the movie, it is Marsellus Wallace (Ving Rhames) ending part. Watching it even today doesn't arrest my attention. T

Oddly though, this isn't my favorite Tarantino flick and yet it is one I have seen most number of times. I guess it goes back to the spunk-quotient of this film. I love the drooly pace at which things proceed and then suddenly explode. It is something Tarantino has now made his trademark in his other films. But this is where it all began and this is special indeed.

Rating: 7.9/10

#238: Cinema16 European Short Films (U.S Version DVD)

2011-11-16T07:41:00.004+05:30

Like a lot of good things, I came across Cinema16 by a stroke of luck in a DVD parlor. In the section that hosted world films at Clixflix, my regular DVD joint, the cover of this DVD was jutting out among a pile. My first instinct was to push that back right in the slot but that something which clicks sometimes in your head with respect to a DVD clicked and I found myself holding the DVD cover in my hand. And I am mentioning a few names that I came across on the cover: Christopher Nolan, Lars Von Trier, Jon Svankmayer.. And mind you these were 'some' of the names. The decision was easy by now and by the time I returned the DVD, I had already googled all the versions of Cinema16 available online.

Cinema16 is an excellent collection of short films from the world over and to my knowledge at least 4 other such DVD's exist. Film as a medium, as the gurus tell us only need a beginning, middle and end and the duration of a particular film in that sense is secondary. Cinema16 fundamentally plays on that basic premise and offers a colorful canvas of 16 short films ranging from anywhere between a minute and a half to fifteen minutes. The publishers have got their collection spot-on with almost every film guaranteed to leave you with a 'wow'. It was hard to pick out a stand-out film because while some impressed because of their technical audacity, (you have to watch Copy Shop to know where the word audacity is coming from), some simply because of their storytelling (Election Night). Some because of the format (Wasp) and others simply because of the imagination of the filmmaker (The Man without The Head).

I never got to pick up another Cinema16 DVD because my regular joint didn't have the other DVDs in the series. For me, it represents the joy of cinema in its rawest form. And the fact it has some heavyweight names sitting on the DVD cover, doesn't hurt one bit. This is one DVD series that I am hunting for to add in my collection. What more can I say !

Rating: 8.4/10

#237: Golmaal

2011-11-14T22:13:00.004+05:30

Laugh-a-minute: the phrase should be listed in the thesaurus with name of Golmaal (1979) for nothing since or after has been funnier in Bollywood.

Yes Jaane Bhi Do Yaaron too but then that was a satire. How about a comedy ? Anything else springs to mind ?

Some people say Andaz Apna Apna. And I tell them this- even today Golmaal is still as funny as it was way back in 1979. How many films are as timeless ?

There are movies where sometimes the supporting character becomes so dominant with his performance that the rest of the cast seem like also-rans. Utpal Dutt shows us how that's done.

Amol Palekar- the earnest middle-class working male has a field day in the movie. A perfect example of perfection in casting by Hrishi Da.

Sachin Bhowmick- the versatile grand old writer's acme in a career spanning over 40 years.

R.D. Burman's musical genius at play coupled with some genuinely sweet supporting acts David, Dina Pathak, Bindiya Goswami and Deven Verma round up a perfect film.

It is a pity that for a majority of today's youth 'Golmaal' would be equated to Ajay Devgan, Rohit Shetty etc. etc. For Golmaal is one of the reasons that makes you feel good about the era you were born in because then there was only one Golmaal. And that's the way it really should be.

Rating: 8.7/10

#236: The Adventures of Tintin (3D)

2011-11-13T19:56:00.004+05:30

I don't know what forms a wishlist for an average 15-18 year old celebrating his birthday today but I can tell you for my generation, getting a Tintin as a gift used to be a big one. Herge's adventures spread from Tibet to imaginary countries like Borduria to the more conventional cities of Rome and London and these stories would captivate our impressionable minds. There was something intelligent about reading a Tintin compared to a MAD or a Phantom and that intelligence, that world-view that Tintin brought into our lives was much sought after. Now that Tintin comes alive on-screen, we can now compare notes with friends and family who have read Tintin in those days and have our answers ready to that inevitable question- What's better - the movie or the book ? We will come to that soon but first things first.

There are certain elements that one shouldn't tampered with when adapting such an epic series and Spielberg and Peter Jackson have nailed that part alright. The characters are uncannily similar to their on-screen versions to begin with- Snomy most of all- and that's a great relief. The characters sit easy on the eyes and with a delightful set of opening credits take charge of a rollercoaster of a storyline. Screenwriters Cornish, Moffat and Edgar Wright put together three stories- the core of which is The Secret of The Unicorn book and weave them seamlessly to serve an edge-of-the-seat thriller. If anything, it made me wish I didn't know what was to come because I suspect the fulfilment might've been higher. And in that sense Spielberg had a difficult task on his hands- does he put in a new spin like Guy Ritchie did for Sherlock or does he stay faithful to the original ? For most parts, Spielberg goes with the former and pulls it off with elan. The additional spin comes in the form of some nail-biting action in the second half that leaves you gasping in your seats. So much so, that you almost feel let down by a denouement that could only be described as tame or rather the only lacunae in the movie.

The tehnology of live motion capture works wonders in bringing the characters to life and there are parts that seem to leap straight out of the pages of the original comic books. The Red Rackham sequence, for example, is delectable stuff and nearly every frame is dynamically shot by longtime Spielberg collaborator DOP Janusz Kaminski.(I tried counting this bit for a sequence of 10 minutes and could point out one still shot). Some of the shot transitions swim with one another thanks to a highly skilful hand like Michael Kahn (most nominated editor ever)who seemed to be having most fun. The action stunts are choreographed with the minutest of detail and overall the movie is nothing short of a cinematic achievement.

So is it better than the comic books? A no from my side. But could anyone have made it any better on film? I seriously doubt that. So go ahead, folks, dive in and soak yourselves in this breathaking piece of film. This is as good as movies can get. With or without live action.

Rating: 8/10

#235: No Entry

2011-11-10T22:53:00.006+05:30

There are some movies that you go for that can give you a headache to the extent that you wish you weren't in the theater hall, with your head pounding like that, but somewhere outside where you could take refuge in the fact that you at that point of time only wished to see the movie when you first saw the poster outside the cinema hall because the movie had an actor of Anil Kapoor's caliber and a seed of trust seeped into your imagination that triggered you to make a mental note of wanting to watch a movie like that but then that such a movie also had another lead actor in Salman depressed you and that's exactly when a little push from your friends made you choose to go for that movie which while watching it in a dimly lit theater hall you discover, not only has the most puerile sense of humor going around for over two and a half hours but is also the most vulgar skin show on display in a film and it occurs to you that the same amount of time if utilized in making an endless sentence like this would've contributed far more to your own sense of fulfilment than watching any single frame of this garbage can called No Entry.

Rating: 0/10

#234: Wake Up Sid

2011-11-09T23:06:00.003+05:30

Wake Up Sid is a story about a lazy, desultory college teen Sid (Ranbir Kapoor) who is coming to terms with a particular phase in his life. The phase happens to be one where his parents no longer want to provide the financial backing he has had all these years because of his aimless pursuits. The first half of the movie unquestionably reminds one of Laqshya. And Ayan Mukherjee, the writer and director uses very similar narratives to show the protagonist's dilemma. The first just about manages to keep you awake but nothing in it is any different from Laqshya. For that one reason alone, Wake Up Sid had me fidgeting in my seat by the first half an hour.

I sat through the movie however because it kept promising to come good any time and that's some credit to Ayan here who does well by adopting a simplistic style of storytelling with a 'no-fuss' air about it. The bond of friendship between the supporting act of Namit Das who plays Rishi, Sid's best friend doesn't have any sense of heroic or unnecessarily dramatic element and that works for the film. The boy-next-door treatment for both these characters was a spot-on characterization that lent to simplicity of the film. Konkona Sen Sharma provides depth with her character of Aisha, a columnist writer who has newly moved to the city. Their platonic bond that sees a few swings becomes a focal point of the story along with Sid's efforts to struggle for his own identity.

The problem, however with this particular piece was the struggle that Aisha faces in her job in writing a single article for a city-based magazine. It was hard to relate to a character who was having such a huge problem in writing one simple article in a city that's bristling with talent 366 days out of 365 in a year. In terms of performances both Ranbir and Konkona's characters' earnestness is something that as an audience one could clearly see but unfortunately both fail to evoke the required empathy. Yet another character Kabir (Rahul Khanna) who for a short while has a romantic liaison with Aisha too falls short on this count. Like the film's story, the music too promised from time to time but lacked a punch in delivery. There's a new age look to the film and that perhaps qualifies it as being fresh but without much substance unfortunately.

Around the time Wake Up Sid released, there was a concerted effort by Dharma Productions to position it as a path-breaking coming-of-age film. There was nothing wrong in what they were trying to do except that the film's storyline promised much and delivered less. It has very few moments of joy or shock and ironically by itself struggled to keep me awake for the most of the second half. It is a journey that's fulfilling, if at all for only the die-hard Ranbir or Konkona fans. There's nothing more to it.

Rating: 4.7/10

#233: Sarkar

2011-11-08T23:15:00.003+05:30

To have your first screenplay directed by RGV is itself no mean achievement. And mind you, we are talking here of the RGV of 2004-2005, not yet banal, kitsch or mindless entirely. And then to write your first screenplay as an adaptation of a movie no less than The Godfather must've been outright daunting. But if anything Manish Gupta , the screenwriter of Sarkar comes out flying in all colors. For Sarkar is nothing but a fine film that's extremely well-written. Manish's next three projects with RGV turned out to be D, James and Darna Zaroori Hain but that is something should not be held against the duo.

Sarkar has Amitabh Bachcan playing Subhash, a greying patriarch of Mumbai, a dispenser of justice for masses and in his own words someone who doesn't toe anyone's line. Subhash Nagre is known to adopt extra legal means to have his way around the government and settle disputes but he never indulges in anything harmfully illegal. That distinction is not clearly defined but as an audience Gupta let's us believe that Sarkar is a good man. When Rashid, (played by the supremely menacing Zakir Hussain) a smuggling Don wants to use Subhash Nagre's goodwill to have a shipment delivered to Mumbai, Nagre refuses to partner with him. This greatly upsets his elder son Vishnu (KK) who saw this as a good business opportunity to make a commercial gain. This further strains the relationship between Vishnu and Nagre and very soon we see them both opposed to each other's means. A dinner table scene bringing out the differences in opinion between the two is bathed in searing conflict and makes for a great cinematic moment. Things turn worse when Nagre gets arrested on a false charge and is jailed. It is here that the younger son Shankar (Abhishek Bachcan) steps in to save the family from disgrace as he undertakes his own crusade to prove his father's innocence. Sarkar, the film's anatomy has the heart of a family drama with the mind of an crime thriller and it works on both counts due to the fabulous adaptation of the script.

The dark and looming sense of gloom is back in its hues through the imaginative camerawork of Amit Roy. I would even go as far as saying that this was clearly the last RGV movie that had a visual consistency and a compelling shot composition in nearly its frames. Amitabh leads the cast with a powerful performance and for once Abhishek holds his own with his father and at times even carving a space potentially on par with Amitabh. The climax scene being a case in point. KK as the volatile elder son plays his part to perfection. The other supporting cast of Tanisha, Supriya Pathak and Anupam Kher chip in with strong performances. A lacunae if anything was Katrina's stony presence in the film but then again these were early days of her career.

And finally, a word for the director. Sarkar is indelible proof that RGV at one point was among India's best directors. In terms of filmmaking craft, he combines the best of human emotions and crime in Sarkar and leaves you wanting more by the end of it. That is a rare gift for a filmmaker to have and RGV possessed it right in the palm of his hand. Even today, six years after I first saw the movie, I still stay glued to the TV screen whenever the film plays because it is soaked in brilliance. It might not be as insightful of the grimy Mumbai underworld as Black Friday Company or Satya but it still is every bit as dazzling.

Rating: 7.6/10

#232: Kiss Me Deadly

2011-11-06T21:50:00.003+05:30

Black and white frame, a lonely woman is walking on a deserted road wearing only a trenchcoat. From the distance, we see headlights and a car slows down. A handsome man, there is, and he offers the lady a lift. They begin a conversation and the lady seems to be have secretive streak about her. Soon, the couple are attacked by some goons who knock the man out cold. When the man regains consciousness, the woman is gone.

Although, this seems the plot of a brooding average 50s noir, mind you, there is something timeless about the story. And what's interesting is that when the protagonist is none other than Mike Hammer, you know there are thrills galore to be partaken. Kiss Me Deadly, is exactly that kind of a movie when you just about can guess everything that's going to go wrong and yet not fathom how is it all going to come together in the end. Screenwriter A.I. Bezzerides most famous work is adapted from a Mickey Spillane novel of the same name and the screenplay is not exactly a plain vanilla adaptation. Bezzerides adds an intriguing Cold War angle to the main plot and transforms the classic story of a detective deserted by a girl into something far more substantial. Detective Mike Hammer (Ralph Meeker) is intrepid, sarcastic and a risk-lover. His persona is nearly self-destructive but he latches onto a big clue and that becomes Hammer's motivation to find out where Christina (Cloris Leachman) that lady in the trenchcoat disappeared. Ironically, while Hammer is chasing this girl who has betrayed him, he is the apple of his own secretary's eye. This sultry lady, Velda (Maxine Cooper) is Hammer's woman-Friday with an unmistakeable physical chemistry with Hammer and that makes for some nifty exchanges between the two.

The main story, however, is thankfully much above these physical equations. Director Robert Aldrich has all those elements in place to keep the story ticking with a furious pace. Albert Dekker, Gaby Rodgers and Paul Stewart act as pivotal plot-twisting supporting characters in the main story and by themselves perform incredibly well in roles than don't stretch for more than five to ten minutes each. The star of Kiss Me Deadly is unquestionably Ralph Meeker who in his most memorable role carries the film on this shoulders. His character's dry wit, presence of mind and daredevilry entices us to root for him. Ernest Laszio's dim photography keeps the mood of suspense alive and kicking, giving us more and more reason to predict the next twist in the story.

There was an a time back in the 50s and 60s where noir as a genre had captured the imagination of the masses. It was a good time to be making films around characters with shades of grey, femme fatales and the all-important MacGuffin. Kiss Me Deadly has them all and has them in style. Ultimately, it is a Ralph Meeker and Bezzerides show at the end of it but it is a damn good one.

Rating: 7.1/10

#231: Johnny Gaddar

2011-11-05T21:06:00.008+05:30

A classic of our times. And timeless.

The best crime thriller in Bollywood since it's inception. And before.

A film for a connoisseur. And atheists.

A writer can't possibly conjure a better set of eight characters. And a storyline.

Sriram Raghavan, the genius wrote and directed. And nailed it.

Dharmendra has a cameo to die for. And so does Vinay Pathak. And Zakir Hussain.

Even an actor like Neil Nitin fits the part. And Rimi Sen.

A peach of a DOP in C.K. Muraleedharan. And 'peach-er' editing by Pooja Ladha Surti.

Loads of trivia for aficionados. And joyful references to movies past.

Inspired from a the French thrillers of the mid-50s. And yet bloody orginal !

I want to do enough good in my lifetime to able to see this movie when I am breathing my last.
And after...

Rating: 9.5/10

P.S. 1: Why is it still not a 10 on 10 you must be wondering. It merits a discussion sometime for which I would be happy to host. Johnny G deserves it. And commands it.

P.S. 2: I sat down to write a review but it reads like an ode. And I am happy about it.

#230: The Stoneman Murders

2011-11-02T22:05:00.005+05:30

The Stoneman Murders is a taut and a grippingly dramatized version of the spate of murders on the streets on Mumbai in the 1980s. Each murder was gruesomely committed in the middle of the night with a large stone and had the police confounded with no leads to follow. The film takes commences from the time the first murder takes place. Around the same time in an unrelated incident, the protagonist Inspector Shekhar Shelar (KK) gets suspended from the police force for an accidental custodial death. Shekhar, eager to regain the trust of his superior AIG Satam (Vikram Gokhale) offers to solve the killings that start recurring. Satam agrees but also wants this parallel investigation to be under the wraps because Shekhar's peer Inspector Phadke is given the official reins to lead the investigation on paper.

The Stoneman Murders is written and directed by Manish Gupta (whose previous claim to fame was the story and screenplay of Sarkar) and Manish's painstaking research of the subject pays rich dividends in the narrative. Gupta paints a grim and a stark picture of the Mumbai of the 80s and extracts extremely convincing performances from his actors. KK as the short-tempered but zealous cop soon finds himself embroiled in a Hitchcockian plot where his quest to prove his innocence becomes an attractive fulfillment for the audience even as we close on the heels of the murderer. With smoldering intensity, KK's character makes us champion for him by the end of the climax. Arbaaz Khan and Vikram Gokhale play sincere second fiddles and it's a surprise that we don't see Arbaaz in similar roles more often on-screen. The only angle that didn't work well enough in the movie is the relationship that KK shares with his wife Rukhsar. There wasn't enough depth in that relationship for it to have any impact on the storyline even if the wife's character wasn't there in the movie. A better background score could've perhaps also heightened the overall tension of the movie.

The Stoneman Murders is unique for a number of reasons. For one, this is one of Bollywood's very few whodunnits. Secondly, nearly 80% of the movie is shot at night and thirdly it is in fact a period movie set in the Mumbai of the early 80s. The second and third points here, may I add place tremendous restrictions on the technical team of the movie and the filmmaking team here didn't miss a beat on both those counts. Watching the film on DVD, I couldn't help but get the feeling that its one of those releases that didn't get its due at the box-office. An overriding solace of course being that this is undoubtedly one of the best Hindi DVD's money can buy in recent years. In other words, it is what I call a goooooood film !

Rating: 7.4/10

#229: Soundtrack

2011-10-31T11:42:00.005+05:30

I happened to meet Neerav Ghosh recently and I asked him how much of a music lover he really was because Soundtrack is very clearly a movie made from a musician's point of view. It takes us through the journey of a musician named Ronak Kaul (Rajeev Khandelwal) who comes to Bombay in the hope of proving to himself that he has got the gift to become a top class music composer. Neerav modestly said he had some formal grounding in music but that only allows him to understand what works and doesn't work from a music point of view in a film. I suspected that was only half the story because if anything Soundtrack is a musician's delight. And what's more, it is such a well made film, it will touch you even if you aren't one.

The movie begins when Ronak comes to Bombay to stay with his uncle who runs a resto-lounge. Impressed with Ronak's passion to join the music industry, his uncle (Yatin Karyekar) gives him an opportunity to become a DJ at his pub. Ronak grabs the chance with both hands and goes from strength to strength until things become too good to be true. He gets a chance to compose for an Anurag Kashyap film, lands himself a hot girlfriend and also gets a rich promoter Charlie (Mohan Kapoor) who gives him a free hand to run his own studio. But then there had to be a hitch and Ronak encounters a big one - he turns deaf. Soundtrack based on the Canadian movie called It's All Gone Pete Tong, is a riveting journey with Ronak the musician over the course of a 130 odd minutes.

What works for Soundtrack simply is the inspirational story about its protagonist. Told with conviction by Neerav Ghosh, it is helped with a very strong performance by Rajeev Khandelwal who is an eager beaver one moment, a maverick musician the next and a repentant soul all in course of the movie. For some odd reason, Neerav uses a graphic equaliser bang in the middle of scenes to convey the mood of the protagonist from time to time in the first half. Thankfully, he lets go of it in the second half and that's where some of the best scenes of the movie lie even as some memorable songs keeps the intensity alive and kicking. The scene preceding the interval, perhaps is the acme in a movie that had a frenzied pace about itself. Ably supported by Soha Ali Khan and Mohan Kapoor, the film works because of their sharp characterizations and because they gel seamlessly with the storyline. Consequently, nearly every frame takes the story forward. An interesting device employed during the narrative is that of a character named 'Johnny Joker' who is Ronak's alter ego. It is the sort of thing, if done even slightly differently, could've fallen flat but the filmmakers employ it well enough to make it stand out. The only lacunae I found was a loud character of Ronak's girlfriend Shonali (Mrinalini Sharma) who appears as easily as she disappears in the film.

2011 has more or less year of drought for Hindi cinema and the pity is that even a good movie like Soundtrack didn't earn enough money at the box office to break-even while a sub-standard flick like Rascals opened to a 20-cr weekend. I don't know how as audiences we can even begin to correct this wrong but I would seriously urge you to make a start. Buy the DVD today ! And I give you my word, it will be worth it.

Rating: 7/10

#228: You Will Meet A Tall Dark Stranger

2011-10-30T20:09:00.004+05:30

The reason why a lot of Woody Allen movies work is because of a charming symmetry that runs throughout the storyline. Something inexplicable but significant enough to amuse us as we go along, so much so that we're willing to forgive him for those recurring characters- a failed writer, nagging wife or that handsome intruder in a family that leads to a rampaging affair. Nearly all the three characters repeat themselves in Allen's 2010 offering You Will Meet A Tall Dark Stranger and yet because of a complete lack of charm, the film fails to impress.

YWMATDK is about Roy Channing (Josh Brolin), a down-on-his-luck novelist struggling to find a publisher and his wife Sally (Naomi Watts) who is empathetic but is also becoming intolerant of the instability that being a writer's wife brings to her life. Sally's mother is Helena (Gemma Jones) who has been divorced after forty years because her husband Alife (Anthony Hopkins) chose a younger woman as his partner. In terms of the narrative, the story is all over the place because the lead actors in Josh Brolin and Anthony Hopkins are poorly cast in roles that typically required vulnerability to come to the fore and neither Brolin nor Hopkins seem vulnerable at any point. These are roles tailor-made for Allen himself but in light of these poor casting choices both characters are rendered pretty much lifeless. The script consequently appears sloppy and wafer thin. What also ails the film is the absence of anything remotely funny. With the lack of that comic relief, the movie only drifts aimlessly which is a shame because Allen's forte in nearly all his previous dramas has been generous helpings witty lines and quick comebacks.

Among the other actors neither Frieda Pinto nor Antonio Banderas are able to put any soul into their characters. In fact among all the actors, only Naomi Watts and Gemma Jones could hold their own in this weak script. Shot in London, YWMATDK misses all the romantic tension that made a Match Point or even a Scoop interesting. The most interesting plot incidentally is of a theft committed by Brolin's character. That's the one part in the movie that is going to make you stand up but that too becomes a case of good things coming in small measures.

As a staunch Woody Allen fan, I have always defended the criticism leveled at Woody Allen in my friends circle. I am afraid to say, I can't find any reason to defend this film if this comes up in a discussion. All I can say is, you can give this one a miss even if you're a Woody Allen fan.

Rating: 4.2/10

#227: Pyar Ka Punchnama

2011-10-29T19:12:00.005+05:30

Pyar Ka Punchnama set the industry abuzz when earlier this year they continued to play in screens much longer that the so-called big-budget movies. At one time, I remember it had a couple of shows in Mumbai, even in its fifth week of release. If anything, it was yet another of those flickering hopes that despite no star appeal, a good movie's word-of-mouth publicity will ensure a successful run. To that, we can raise a toast because not every low-budget-no-frills movie meets the same fate.

PKP is written and directed by debutant Luv Ranjan and is a movie about three friends whose lives are turned upside down because of their girlfriends. Movies with multiple leads require sharp and precise characterization and Ranjan almost delivers with the sketches of his six key characters. Standing out among them all is Divyendu Sharma who plays the role of Liquid, a spectacled geek at work who has fallen for his co-worker Charu (Ishita Sharma). Divyendu is a show-stealer with his quick and mostly expletive-ridden wit while Ishita portrays the selfish Charu fairly well. Nishant's other friends Vikrant (Rayo Bakhirta) and Rajat (Kartik Tiwari) are at similar life-changing turns with respect to their personal lives and while Vikrant is the calmest of the three, Rajat is the simpleton who can only dance to the tunes of his girlfriend Neha (Nushrat Bharucha). In a funny monologue, Rajat encapsulates all that is wrong in relationships because of his experience of living-in with Neha. It is a long but an amusing piece of dialgoue and Ranjan's writing skills do come to the fore with this particular piece.

The movie had eight songs that slowed down the pace whenever things were getting interesting. One could relate to the three characters and in many ways the film unfolds as a middle-class man's Dil Chahta Hain. What's nice to note is that it is not a pale imitation particularly the male bonding part that has its own identity. The film had me hooked for the first thirty minutes with the jokes flying thick and fast but once the relationship angle got involved, it lost its charm. And with due respect to the work put in by the newcomers, one can't help but sense that with more experienced actors, the film would've emerged even better. Having said that, there's no doubt that there was enough promise in every scene both from a technical and a performance point of view in the movie.

There has got to some common sense involved when a new director makes a movie with 6 newcomers. My first instinct will be to think that 6 newcomers will probably not have enough spunk to last the standard Hindi film duration of 150 minutes. I would hence be wont to restrict the duration of such a movie to 120 odd minutes perhaps. But Pyar Ka Punchnama, a male bonding rom-com that begins as a breezy watch pays no heed to such logical nuances and extends to a hefty 149 minutes. That in retrospect is sad, because if it was shorter by 30 minutes, PKP would've been a good fun watch. In it's current form, it does provide the laughs but only is just about worth a watch.

Rating: 5.4/10

#226: Faust

2011-10-28T10:54:00.004+05:30

MAMI 2011 Review Series: To read the first one click here.

Year: 2011

Director: Alexander Sokurov

Gist: Based on Goethe's and Dr. Thomas Mann's interpretation of legend of Faust. Sokurov's final film in a series of three, exploring the theme of corruption.

Script: Faust's life and times beautifully captured on camera - nothing less and nothing more to it excepting a few liberties in the interpretation. The storyline has a nice rhythm built within and enough moments to surprise in between.

Acting: Stupendous by Johannes Zeiler as Faust and Anton Adasinsky as Mephistopheles. Faust's character goes from doubt to romance to conviction to redemption and Zeiler has mapped all those moods out in perfect harmony. Adasinsky as the sinister moneylender works his way through Faust and the audience alike. Can't really say, that there was anyone else who wasn't upto the mark either.

Filmmaking craft: One of the best shot movies and full credit to DOP Bruno Delbonnel ( Amelie, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince) who unleashes his full range of expertise. Some fabulous sets bring in the period touch flawlessly. About the storytelling, I am not so sure because I did think there were a few moments when the movie dragged on. The movie spoke to me from a high plane and I did wonder if a more simplistic version would've been the way around. But then again the beauty of Faust's legend was his complex character so maybe, Sokurov's version was the way to go about.

What I must confess here is that I have neither read the base material or seen the other film versions to deliver a more comprehensive verdict.

Piece de resistance moments: The opening and closing scenes. Unbeatable.

In a nutshell: Enjoyed watching it.

Rating: 6.9/10

#225: A Decent Arrangement

2011-10-27T16:39:00.006+05:30

MAMI 2011 Review Series: To read the first one click here.

Year: 2011

Director: Sarovar Banka

Gist: A Indian-born American Ashok (Adam Laupus) returns to his home town in Chandigarh. A Decent Arrangement is the story of his adventures towards the pursuit of an Indian bride in a land he is returning to after years.

Script: It takes time to establish the context of it all but once its done, the story chugs along merrily. There's more than a trace of predictability but one could say that the performances carry the movie home. Banka liberally and rightfully uses humor in serious exchanges between the characters to keep the story alive and kicking and it works.

Acting: To begin with, as an audience we don't see any jarring out-of-place characters. As a result, we gladly partake the actors as shown to us. Adam Laupus as the lead is a witless, almost boring individual who doesn't quite know what he wants out of his prospective bride. Shabani Azmi and Vikram Kapadia do leave a mark in their roles as the conservative aunt and the happy-go-lucky father of the groom. Lethia Nall who has such an uncanny resemblance to Amy Adams is passable in a cameo.

Filmmaking craft: Admirable for a first time director. Once Banka sets the premise, he takes us on a ride that is relatable in more ways than one. A particular scene of a vegetable vendor arguing with Shabana Azmi is straight out of anyone's life who has been out with their mother shopping. Such realism is abundant in A Decent Arrangement and that is the movie's core strength. The photography is simplistic and well-suited for the story. If anything, the movie could've picked up some pace and wrapped up fifteen minutes earlier.

Piece de resistance moments: None.

In a nutshell: An enjoyable watch.

Rating: 6.3/10

#224: Adaminte Makan, Abu

2011-10-26T18:15:00.005+05:30

MAMI 2011 Review Series: To read the first one click here.

Year: 2011

Director: Salim Ahamed

Gist: Adaminte Makan, Abu is a Malayalam film about an old and poor perfume seller Abu (Salim Kumar) whose last wish before dying is to visit Haj. Abu strives hard to put together the resources. Will he make it ?

Script: A touching story with a universal theme put together with a great deal of sincerity by first time filmmaker Salim Ahamed. Such single track stories sometimes have a lacunae of being too simple but Ahamed layers it well with enough interesting characters like sawmill owner (Kalabhavan Mani), village teacher (Nedumudi Venu) and a most enigmatic wise man called Ustad (Thampi Antony) . The characters provide an assured sense of depth to the story and all the while contributing to the protagonist's cause. A particular track about Ustad has a keen hint of sagely foretelling that you are not sure if is either all hogwash or enlightened wisdom and therein lies yet another impressive facet of the script.

Acting: It couldn't have got better. Salim Kumar as Abu leads a glamor-less cast with wife Aisu (Zarina Wahab). As the frail but staunch believer of Allah, Salim Kumar works into your heart with his seemingly simple but going by his financial means, audacious attempt to garner resources for going to Haj. Zarina Wahab as the empathetic wife is flawless and so are all the bit part characters. Kumar, who is otherwise a regular slapstick comedian in the Malayalam industry, very deservedly won the Best Actor at the National Awards for his role.

Filmmaking craft: The most remarkable thing about Adaminte Makan, Abu is that its a story conceived, put together and filmed by a first-time director. The emotional touch in the story overwhelms you without being overbearing or preachy. Abu is a simple, harmless and a nice man and his near idealistic portrayal doesn't bother you. His ordeals in his planning for his pilgrimage are spread evenly through the movie and no sooner than you realize, you are rooting for the protagonist. Add to that, some stunning photography by Madhu Ambat that completes this accomplished piece of filmmaking.

Piece de resistance moments: Numerous. Watch it to know them.

In a nutshell: I haven't caught much of the recent regional cinema but if this is the quality being dished out by the winners of Best Picture National Awards, kudos to the health of regional cinema in India. Shot entirely digitally, Adaminte Makan, Abu is symbolic of the zenith of independent filmmaking in India.

Rating: 7.8/10

#223: Skyskraber

2011-10-23T15:11:00.003+05:30

MAMI 2011 Review Series: To read the first one click here.

Year: 2010

Director: Rune Schiott

Gist: A teenager with an oppressive father attempts to help a blind her get rid of her virginity.

Script: In an interaction session after the movie, Schiott mentioned that the story was mostly autobiographical. And as outlandish some of the things might seem, those reel-life incidents shown were actually true. For example, the script had a premise that ranged from a teenager getting his foreskin operated upon by his mother who is a vet so that it wouldn't pain him while having sex (a supposed medical condition). These and many more such bewildering incidents keep jolting you from time to time. Once you've sat in the hall, there's no escaping the seemingly funny but seriously painful situations the protagonists find themselves in. There's a love story brewing in there too amidst all this. So overall, a weird but breezy storyline.

Acting: A very convincing portrayal of a blind girl by Marta Holm who plays Edith, a gullible sweet girl who can't wait to get rid of her virginity and an equally adept performance by the lead actor Lukas Schwartz who plays the teenager Jon. The other members of Jon's and Edith's family pull in their weight and give the movie a heightened sense of believability.

Filmmaking craft: Can't fault much. Smooth narrative, some pretty shots from time to time and a lovely background score.

Piece de resistance moments: Quite a few shocking moments that will make you cringe in your seat, the piece of cake being Jon's foreskin being operated upon by his mother and the subsequent recuperative process.

In a nutshell: If you don't get grossed out easily, you will enjoy this.

Rating: 6.7/10

#222: The Whistleblower

2011-10-22T08:54:00.005+05:30

MAMI 2011 Review Series: To read the first one click here.

Year: 2011

Director: Larysa Kondracki

Gist: A movie based on a true account of UN Peacekeeping officer Kathryn Bolkovac's (Rachel Weisz) tenure in Bosnia that led her to unearthing a sex-trafficking racket.

Script: A promising debut by Larysa Kondracki and Ellis Karwan who write the screenplay. Considering the fact that the writers didn't have a book to go by ( the script was ready by 2005, a final book was published in 2011) and had to rely on their interactions with real-life Kathryn, it is a commendable effort. A glitch is the personal side of the protagonist that somewhere in between the movie slips into oblivion. Some finishing touches there and we would have had a work of art like The Insider.

Acting: An outstanding performance by Rachel Weisz with a role that allows her to stand head and shoulders above the rest of the cast. Weisz enhances her already creditable reputation as an actress with a role that has her in police uniform through and through- not glamorous but very gritty. David Straitharn's cameo (Good Night and Good Luck) was the only other memorable performance in the movie and that's not because the others weren't good but because there wasn't a very clear antagonist standing up to Rachel Weisz. Its that whole system versus the individual bit and understandably its the individual's story that makes the connect with you.

Filmmaking craft: The filmmakers adopt a conventional storytelling approach and hold your attention. It has a predictable curve of events that keep coming at you but the execution is laced with bits of suspense that makes it all fairly gripping.

Piece de resistance moments: The climax- a luscious cherry on the cake of a good movie until then was about average. Its the kind of ending that lifts the movie by more than just a couple of notches.

In a nutshell: Watch it for Rachel's superb performance and the glittering ending.

Rating: 7.1/10

#221: Margin Call

2011-10-18T15:36:00.006+05:30

MAMI 2011 Review Series: To read the first one click here.

Year: 2011

Director: J.C. Chandor

Gist: 24 hours spent with a team from an investment banking firm just before a full-blown recession hits USA.

Script: Tight, fast-paced and gripping. One couldn't ask more from a script that's broadly based out of one single location. Such uni-locale stories require enough plot points to keep the interest of the audience going and Margin Call has them in abundance. This is Chandor's first feature length script and yet it feels like its the work of a seasoned practitioner. The swift exchanges, corporate insults and jargon fly back and forth effortlessly through the movie and have enough spunk to keep you hooked to the action in the movie.

Acting: Top-class! Kevin Spacey and Paul Bettany lead the performers with the dry portrayals of two corporate bigwigs who have made enough hay in the sunshine of the financial sector boom. Another convincing supporting act is by Simon Baker but if there's anyone who is a show stealer in the movie, it is Jeremy Irons. As the CEO of the company, he has to pull off a tough act in tough times and he nails it. The rookie analysts in the movie, played by Penn Badgeley and Zachary Quinto aren't bad either and have in fact a fair bit to contribute to the storyline. If there's anyone who looks a little out of place, it is Demi Moore.

Filmmaking craft: The best thing I loved about Margin Call is that certain mood that it encapsulates from the very first scene. That feel is kept consistent right through the movie and gives it an impending sense of doom. The cinematography backs this feel to the hilt and that surely lifts the movie by a couple of notches. The storytelling is on the ball too at all times and Chandor doesn't give a moment's respite to his audience to feel restless. In terms of a genre, it probably occupies that grey space in the middle of thriller and a drama and makes the best of both worlds.

Piece de resistance moments: Quite a few. To begin with the entire Jeremy Irons cameo, the boardroom discussions and a couple of brilliantly captured moments with Kevin Spacey.

In a nutshell: Undoubtedly, one of the best movies of the year, nothing marginal about it.

Rating: 7.5/10

#220: The Slut

2011-10-17T22:56:00.007+05:30

MAMI 2011 Review Series: To read the first one click here.

Year: 2011

Director: Hagar Ben Ashar

Gist: How far should a woman really go for her sexual needs ?

Script: Written by the director herself, The Slut is a movie about a 31-year old woman named Tamara's undying desire to express her sexuality. By the end of it, I wasn't entirely sure if such a woman necessarily should be classified as a slut but that's exactly the question the writer wants us to ask. The movie is a feature length version of Hagar's short film titled Pathways.

Acting: Like a lot of indies, Hagar the director plays the title character and does full justice to the role of a fairly young mother relentless in her pursuit of fulfilling her sexuality. Roles as bold as these require immense doses of courage and conviction and Hagar infuses her character with adequate helpings of both. A key supporting act by Ishai Golan who plays Hagar's boyfriend Shai in the movie is neatly essayed too.

Filmmaking craft: The sex scenes required to be aesthetically done and Hagar is on top of her craft in this regard. An extended scene of her love making with her boyfriend is lustfully but delicately portrayed. The editing and the cinematography by Asaf Korman and Amit Yasour are equally adept and bring the subtle charms of a small Israeli town to the fore. There's some deft usage of symbolic references that serve the storytelling well. On the flip side, the movie could've tighter in the first half an hour and the ending doesn't really end up provoking one enough to make it memorable.

Piece de resistance moments: The sex scene between Tamara and Shai- as erotic as any sex scene one can see on film.

In a nutshell: Almost a good movie.

Rating: 6.1/10

#219: Le Vendeur (The Salesman)

2011-10-16T15:31:00.005+05:30

MAMI 2011 Review Series: To read the first one click here.

Year: 2011

Director: Sebastian Pilote

Gist: Fifteen days in the life of an old but skilled car salesman in a community whose major source of employment, a paper mill is on the verge of closure.

Script: Written by Sebastian Pilote, the movie is a sensitive story with themes of old-age and corporate business motives merging in a small town. Nominated in the International Competition section this year, Le Vendeur is an empathetic tale of survival.

Acting: Two thumbs up to the lead actor Gilbert Sicotte who plays the protagonist Marcel Levesque. Marcel is a charming, witty and an expert salesman who knows his ways around selling his cars. His wealth of experience has seen him through many a season but this particular year he is tested to the hilt. Sicotte captures the essence of the character and deserves nothing less than full marks for his acting. The other bit part players seem very believable as the director gives them a small-townish touch.

Filmmaking craft: Top-notch. The story's fairly linear and simple and the editing and cinematography don't try any tricks to make you believe there's more to it. The story moves at a pace that keeps you interested. Maybe, a particularly extended scene in a bar of people singing the only excess but a moving touch towards the end might still make you forget there was such a thing.

Piece de resistance moments: These have to be the scenes when Marcel is going about impressing customers with his knowledge of cars. A particular scene has the customer asking for a blue car and Marcel's response is something that will resonate with you in an instant.

In a nutshell: Catch it !

Rating: 7.1/10

#218: Boy Meets Girl

2011-10-15T07:40:00.005+05:30

Beginning with this movie, for the next 10 days, I will attempt to review movies being screened at the MAMI fest this year. I am following a format similar to my Decalogue reviews. The ratings, however, as in the case of Decalogue are not relative of each other.

Year: 1984

Director: Leos Carax

Gist: A boy and a girl who have both been recently dumped meet each other at a party.

Script: Weak and staid. You're waiting for something to happen and by the time it does, the movie's lost you.

Acting: The lead pair of Dennis Lavant and Mirelle Perrier are convincing in their depressive manner of going about their business after being dumped. Dennis in particular who seems to be have maniacal streaks now and again has a sense of unpredictability about him that keeps you guessing.

Filmmaking craft: Leos Carax takes an awful amount of time to establish the connect between the boy and the girl and by that time, you've almost lost faith in the film's ability to hold your attention. One can't help but notice a Godard-ish touch to the whole affair especially the long conversations. Some of the frames are captured nicely by DOP Jean-Yves Escoffier and the film's black and white filming gives it that forlorn mood.

Piece de resistance moments: None.

In a nutshell: At 99 minutes, not worth your time

Rating: 3/10

#217: Moneyball

2011-10-14T08:27:00.006+05:30

It is hard to believe that Moneyball is just director Bennett Miller's second movie. But then when going through the credits one comes across the screenplay writers as Steve Zaillian (A Civil Action, Schindler's List, Gangs of New York) and Aaron Sorkin ( A Few Good Men, The American President, Social Network), you know where the crux of material for the film is coming from. It eases you into believing that while Miller has undoubtedly done a fine job of telling a true story, he had Zallian and Sorkin for company and these are people who don't miss a beat when it comes to writing.

Based on a book of the same name by Michael Lewis, Moneyball is about a baseball player Billy Beane (Brad Pitt) who in his teenage years was convinced that he should follow his dream of baseball ahead of pursuing a Stanford degree. It was a big decision influenced by a talent scout who led Beane into believing that he was a good player who could make it big in the league. After much deliberation, Beane gives up the Stanford degree only to become a shadow of the player he thought he would be in the professional league. Over a five-year term, he moves across teams only to fail everywhere and in his mid-40s finds himself managing the mid-rung league team of Oakland A's. By the end of 2001 season, Beane is losing players to higher salaries offered by other teams and the team owners won't let him have more money. A chance meeting takes him to a rookie analyst Peter Brand (Jonah Hill) who has a got a great sense of numbers in judging players. With his tight budget, Beane sees value in hiring a man who treats players like stocks of companies on the Wall Street. And there begins a change in the A's team lineup. Moneyball is a heartwarming story of that change in the setup of Oakland A's led by Billy Beane and Peter Brand in the 2002 season of MLB.

Brad Pitt's stellar performance makes Moneyball his story and over the course of two hours we start empathizing with his character's ambition to be the best in the league or to win the last game of the season as he calls it. Pitt is matured, measured and meticulous as Billy Beane and he has us hooked. His fastidious character finds in Peter Brand a merciless judge of players and that suits Billy who is looking to make the best of his limited budgets. Jonah Hill's character of Brand impresses upon Billy Beane the need to look into statistics and value-for-money players and together they embark on a cleanup act of the team that raises many eyebrows. Jonah Hill's Peter Brand act is a scene-stealer from the very first conversation he has with Brad Pitt. He is nonchalant, caricaturish and ruthless at different times and each of his scenes are sheer fun to watch. A particular scene with Brad Pitt, when the two are in the midst of trading players sitting on a deadline must rank as one of the best scenes in movies this year. Philip Seymour Hoffman as the team coach has a limited impact on the storyline and is one character whose conflicts with this new system could've been brought out sharper. Being a sports movie, Moneyball required some realistic filming and Wally Pfister's cinematography delivers with the art direction team who bring out the atmosphere of a baseball season quite effortlessly.

Moneyball is the best Hollywood movie I have seen all year and will surely get Pitt and Jonah Hill nominated for the Oscars. It's that one unmissable movie of the year that after it has ended makes you wish it was a bit longer. It is a treat for anyone who likes biographies or sport movies or underdog stories. Now, everyone out there should surely fall into one of those three categories. Or let's just say it is one hell of a home run !

Rating: 7.8/10

#216: Chandni Chowk To China

2011-10-11T22:13:00.005+05:30

You'll feel more comfortable sitting in your seat with red ants in your boxers than seeing this one from start to finish.

I came across a new term today mentioned by none other than an illustrious filmmaker about a certain genre of movies called 'brain-fucked movies' that exist not just in India but everywhere else in the world. And I am not kidding, Chandni Chowk to China is the name that came to mind.

Deepika Padukone could've been the visual relief in the movie but the filmmakers decided to make her a warrior and gave her a terribly mismatched Chinese look to spoil even that one potential good thing about the movie.

There's a potato-worship angle in the movie. (That's right!)

The ending indicated there might be a sequel. Let's hope for the greater good of humanity that we don't live to see the day.

Rating: 0/10

#215: Saheb, Biwi Aur Gangster

2011-10-09T10:58:00.004+05:30

First things first, this is not a remake of the Gurudutt film Sahib, Biwi Aur Ghulam.. At best, it takes a couple of key characters from the old classic and places them in a modern but semi-rural India. So, the haveli still makes a return as does a philandering Saheb (Jimmy Shergill). What's different is we have a morally loose wife played by Mahie Gill and instead of the earnest Ghulam, there's a new character named Bablu who plays a lovestruck Gangster (Randeep Hooda).

Written by Sanjay Chauhan and Tigmanshu Dhulia, the film's story begins with the first signs of a power struggle between Saheb and an emerging rival Gaenda Singh (Vipin Sharma) who is fighting Saheb tooth and nail for new infrastructure contracts. We see Saheb as a figure villagers fear and respect but deep inside Saheb is worried about him not having any great material fortunes left. While for Saheb, winning these contracts is a matter of finding funds for his extravagant lifestyle, for Gaenda Singh it is a matter of seeing Saheb ground to dust. We're soon introduced to Mahie Gill who very clearly is not Saheb's favorite woman because he chooses to spend his nights with another lady Mahua (Shreya Narayan). Biwi comes across as an epileptic/psychotic lady with burdens of a past that don't come to fore until the second half of the movie. Randeep Hooda, the gangster working as Gaenda Singh's mole, is assigned as Biwi's driver for a short period and that leads to a simmering romance between the two. With only her mute caretaker (Sonal Joshi) as her confidante, Biwi spends most of her time drinking. By the second half, the story moves towards resolving the romantic liaisons and the rivalry between Gaenda Singh and Saheb.

The good thing about the first half of SBAG is it's fast paced screenplay thats flits between the lives of these key characters seamlessly. The characterization is neatly established and and topped with the cherry of a powerful performance by Jimmy Shergill. He must count as one of the most credible and underrated actors of the industry today. The enigma of Biwi's character is brought out neatly by Mahie Gill and hers is the character arc that leads the story in the second half. Randeep Hooda packs in a punch with his joker-in-the-pack act and with words such as "Mauka-tarian" (opportunistic) thrown in to describe his character, he's given a free hand by the writers. Overall, the performances including those by the supporting cast of Vipin Sharma, Deep Raj Rana and Deepal Shaw don't disappoint one bit. Where SBAG misses a beat is the last fifteen minutes where too many things begin to happen too quickly. The power struggle and the romantic angle predicatbly get intertwined but don't resolve themselves satisfactorily. Dhulia's storytelling right uptil that point is top-notch. Dhulia, as is his forte, also brings in that old-world feel of verbal one-upmanship that's so missing in our movies these days and does give us his audiences some of those whistle-moments.

I have noticed that Dhulia in spite of his commendable pursuit to wean away from the ordinary somehow seems to lack that final knockout blow that makes a movie truly memorable. This is the second movie of his I saw this year after Shagird and I saw a similar lacuna with that movie too. Nonetheless, SBAG is well-worth your time and money. Just don't book the gold-class for this one though.

Rating: 6.5/10

#214: Into the Wild

2011-10-08T10:12:00.005+05:30

There have been numerous instances of literary references being used to propel a film. And while in a few movies, such digressions seem out of place, Into The Wild absorbs all these references seamlessly into its screenplay. Sometimes used as the voice of the protagonist and sometimes to describe the beauty of nature, these quotable quotes work in sync with the storyline all the time. Based on the book of the same name, Into The Wild the movie, plays out like a poem being recited on-screen by it's various players.

It gives us a sweeping glance into the life of Christopher McCandless (Emile Hirsch) who after his graduation donates his savings towards charity and sets off on a journey to explore nature. That is to put it very mildly because his journey takes him through waterfalls, flash floods, hitchhiking, trekking and culminates after two years with a sojourn in the wild world of Alaska. Christopher aces his studies but wants to lead his life without encumbrances- material or familial and embarks on this journey with inspiration derived from his favorite literary authors, the quotes of whom we hear in Christopher's voice. Sean Penn adapts the book written by Jon Krakaeur and in the process reaches his directorial zenith with the movie. There are moments of such elegance in the opening of the film that the storytelling at times gives way to the aesthetic brilliance of the visuals put into perfection by DOP Eric Gautier. Like Castaway, there were quite a few moments where nothing really happens on-screen except that as a viewer we're placed in the mind of the protagonist and we discover the thrill of nature along with him. Eddie Vedder's soulful music meanwhile works as the perfect accompaniment on this delightful journey.

While the movie has a strong supporting cast with a host of actors floating in and out during Christopher's journey, it is Emile Hirsch with whom we form an emotional connection. His rationale seems absurd at first but as we traverse along with him, we start seeing a part of our own quest for happiness in him. Hirsch is so brilliant, I wonder if he'll ever better this performance. And yet, the best of Into the Wild is its poignant ending. Into The Wild at 148 minutes might seem a tad lengthy but the ending is what nails it. It justified everything that was leading up to it and I would've no problems sitting with it over and over again in spite of it's apparent long duration.

Into the Wild is that peach of a movie you should set aside for a Sunday afternoon when you're cursing yourself for not having done enough with your life. This might just make you spring into action.

Rating: 8.1/10

#213: Death of a President

2011-10-07T08:33:00.003+05:30

I didn't so much get the point about Death of a President although in terms of the 90-odd minutes it took, it didn't bore me. Although in terms of a genre, it can be categorized as a mockumentary, there's not enough "mocking" to make you stand up and take notice.

Directed by Gabriel Range, Death of a President is a fictional account of President Bush's assassination and the administration's high-handed approach to bringing the culprits to book. There are fictional characters from groups such as the Secret Service, which is supposed to guard the President, the FBI, the suspects and the families of those involved. In terms of the look and styling, the movie scores high enough. The scenes seem very real and some great CG even shows President Bush getting shot and going down amidst a crowd of people. What's a little hard to digest is the content of those fictional interviews.

There's no doubt that the story keeps moving with a good pace but there's something ludicrous in the filmmakers wanting to make you believe something that never happened. And my conclusion of why it doesn't arrest you enough is because of a good final punch towards the end that the film sorely lacked. One can see the effort put in by screenwriters Simon Finch and Gabriel Range to keep the story interesting but it never reaches a peak and nosedives with a soft ending.

Death of a President will satisfy your anti-Bush hunger only to an extent. The movie obviously tried to capitalize on the tirade that went across the globe when Bush launched his war on Iraq and Afghanistan but falls short of really making you hate the administration like the way Michael Moore does. I thought that should've been the point of the movie but somehow that part never clicked leaving it as a half-baked potboiler, at best.

Rating: 6/10

#212: Taare Zameen Par

2011-10-05T10:48:00.002+05:30

Much of the pre-release talk about TZP was related to the rancor between the writer and supposed director Amole Gupte and Aamir Khan. It was said that Aamir saw clear differences in the way he wanted the subject treated and the way Gupte wanted the film to emerge. Being the producer, Aamir Khan eventually had his way and became a director while Gupte was credited as the writer and creative director. We don't know what was the final straw that broke the back of that relationship but what it does tell us is how these two men so dearly felt about the film and that it was a subject that neither wanted to let go off creatively. We will never know how Gupte might've treated it but we do know that he would've had a near impossible task to better what Aamir finally did with Taare Zameen Par.

TZP's story in one line can be put down to life as experienced by an 8-year old dyslexic child. It takes us through the fears, insecurities, travails and moments of happiness for a boy called Ishaan (Darsheel Safary). He lives in a world of his own where numbers and letters of the alphabet don't make any sense to him. Instead, colors and drawings have a special import to his existence. This particular characterization is brought out most convincingly in the first half and the song "Mera Jahaan" captures it most effectively. Darsheel Safary plays the innocent and everybody's butt-of-jokes Ishaan commendably. Its the kind of performance that will evoke empathy in even in a stone. In a rare occurrence, a star of Aamir Khan's stature comes billed second in the credits and makes an appearance only once half the movie is over. Aamir's act as the selfless teacher Nikumbh is typically assured and near perfect. Supporting acts by Ishaan's parents, teachers and his sole friend Tanay Chheda all merge in seamlessly within the main storyline. A cameo by Bugs Bhargava as the English teacher is the one that's most memorable.

We see a combination of good old-school photography combined with the slick by DOP Setu. Shankar Ehsaan Loy's music builds an apt mood of impending depression in the first half and the movie finds itself capitalizing on a fine musical denouement in the climax. In fact, on the director's commentary in the DVD there is a mention of how no one agreed with Aamir's point of view on the song that was to go in the final scene and yet when you see the movie, this is one scene that is guaranteed to give you a lump in your throat. I don't know anyone who said that he or she didn't get affected by that one scene. Hearing Aamir give his reasons why he went with the scene the way he did will make you respect the creative choices he made as a director. Infact, in more than a couple of scenes you will see how Aamir brings together the best of what the DOP and editor Deepa Bhatia had to offer. An example is the scene where Ishaan is seen crying all by himself in the hostel bathroom- soul-stirring stuff.

Taare Zameen Par very deservedly went on to become one of the biggest hits in Bollywood ever and won accolades all over the world and in India. I say deservedly because in India often big hits don't necessarily mean good cinema but this was nothing less than a fantastic film backed by heartfelt performances. It is also one of those rare Indian movies where everything from music to photography to editing came together and clicked. And last but the least, the two men who made it click, the very humane writing of Amole Gupte and the guiding directorial genius of Aamir Khan. This is a must-watch. To say anything less, would be demeaning the movie.

Rating: 8.2/10

#211: One, Two, Three

2011-10-02T14:33:00.005+05:30

James Cagney, the original angry young man takes a departure from his forte and jumps head-on into this Billy Wilder comedy made in 1961. Wilder teams up with I.A.L Diamond, his long standing screenwriting partner once again as the two draw a fine adaptation of a Hungarian play from the 1920s and set it against the backdrop of Cold War of the 1960s in Berlin.

Cagney plays McNamara, a crafty senior official of the Coca-Cola company, an undeniable symbol of thriving American capitalist tendencies in the Berlin of early 60s. McNamara had been passed over for promotion in the company once in spite of a clean record and all he is looking for now is to make the next appraisal count. His dream work destination is London, a place at odds with his family who want to go back to their hometown in Atlanta. While McNamara carefully plots his strategy towards his professional goal of London, his boss' teenage daughter Scarlett (Pamela Tiffin) visits Europe and McNamara gladly accepts to take care of her. His intention is to use this as yet another tool to impress his boss. It doesn't turn out to be such a smart move when Scarlett falls in love with a firebrand but a comical socialist Otto (Hurst Bucholz). And suddenly McNamara now finds himself laden with three unenviable tasks- of securing his promotion, ensuring that his family doesn't desert him and hoping that his boss' daughter gives up Otto.

Billy Wilder superbly uses the real context of the Cold War and weaves through numerous gags in his screenplay producing what to my mind is a movie far funnier than the more acclaimed Some Like It Hot. It is a delightful surprise to see Cagney pull off a role that was tailor-made for someone like a Jack Lemmon. Cagney's character doesn't take himself seriously and pulls you towards his lofty ambitions and opportunistic morals The movie revolves around McNamara even as other funny characters such as Schlemmer, McNamara's trusted secretary (Hanns Lothar) are making you laugh every time they come on-screen. The exchanges between the boss and the secretary are particularly side-splitting. Hurst Bucholz's Otto naturally comes across as a self-obssesed idealist living in his own world and while that helps his character, he is still the weakest link in the movie. That the writers struggled in this one section where McNamara is preparing Otto for meeting Scarlett's parents doesn't help matters either. That part lingers on endlessly towards the second half of the movie and could've been either presented or edited better. But barring those 10-15 minutes, One, Two, Three is one breeze of a movie.

For some reason when people talk about Wilder, One, Two, Three isn't one of the top names that springs to people's minds. The fact is it should because of its effortless wit, inventive gags and memorable characters. If anything, it is yet another testament to Wilder's genius that he could make something like this and yet it would struggle to find a place in most Wilder top three lists.

Rating: 7.7/10

#210: Drive

2011-10-02T13:19:00.004+05:30

The most creditable thing to note about the 2011 American movie Drive is that it won its director Nicholas Winding Refn the Best Director Award at Cannes. When a director makes such an elite list that features names like Bresson, Bergman, Truffaut, Scorcese and Wong Kar-Wai one can't help but be curious of what might have Winding Refn conjured to become a part of that list. The answer to my mind is 'just enough'.

Drive is essentially an action film replete with car chases, killings and money to be won at the end of the day. The lead character is an unnamed Driver played by Ryan Gosling who is a stunt double by day and a racer by night who helps burglars plan their getaway after a job. He stays alone and life is fairly listless except the presence of an elder garage owner Shannon (Bryan Cranston) at whose place the driver also works from time to time. Shannon is keen to have the Driver race in a competition and takes monetary assistance from the shady business duo of Bernie (Albert Brooks) and Nino (Ron Perlman). The Driver meanwhile finds a romantic interest in his neighbor Irene (Carey Mulligan) whose husband Standard (Oscar Issac) has just been released from prison. Irene's husband owes some money to a set of crooks who ask him to rob a pawn shop. Standard is reluctant but knowing that Irene's and their son's life maybe in danger if he says no, agrees to take the job with help from the Driver.

The job goes horribly wrong and after the boring first 40 minutes of the movie, Amein Hosseini's adapted screenplay from thr James Saliis novel takes an exciting turn. It picks up a frenetic paces as the Driver takes the reins of action in his hands. He unravels the reasons behind the mess up at the robbery and comes across one revelation after another. While Irene's character takes a backseat, it becomes clear that the motivation for the Driver's involvement in this high-stake chase of the unknown, is his own love and affection for her. Ryan Gosling does well for his steely character that was reminiscent of Luc Besson's Leon. Winding Refn does extract equally strong performances from the rest of the cast even as the purposive ruthlessness of Albert Brooks' performance gives the movie an added edge. Drive is filmed beautifully by Newton Thomas Segel (Usual Suspects, X-Men, Confessions of a Dangerous Mind) and in spite of the sporadic scenes of action and violence retains a subtext of human emotion in the shots.

Drive requires some patience to get used to its idea but it holds your attention once the plot starts unfolding. I had a miserable time sitting through it for the first half an hour but after a pivotal car chase, one sees enough potential to be wide awake for the rest of the movie. It also has a smartly filmed climax that's let down slightly by a weak ending but overall Drive indeed does enough to merit a recommend.

Rating: 6.4/10

#209: Chargesheet

2011-09-30T18:11:00.005+05:30

I have been told from reliable sources that there is a reason why Dev Anand is making one crap movie after another. It is because he loves his movies and his last wish is to die on a movie set. He doesn't have any other passion, vice or muse in life except to continue writing, directing and producing movies. So while watching this egregiously bad movie, I played that conversation over and over again in my head to understand the lengths to which people go for the love of movies.

I have been brought up on the Saturday afternoon and Sunday shows on DD1 and DD2 at a time when movies like Guide, Jewel Thief, Hum Dono, Kashmir Ki Kali, Professor, Prince, Jhuk Gaya Aasmaan, Suraj were staple diet on weekends. And if you too went through that indoctrination, someone like a Dev Anand would rank very high in your estimation. So it is indeed disheartening to see him being reduced to a pale shadow of himself on-screen and struggling to make his presence felt. And it is upsetting at some level to see a hero being so idiotic in his approach, that what he is doing now threatens to obliterate all those good memories of childhood- Johnny Mera Naam and countless other what-nots.

The stylish flick of the head of the past is no more than a weak imitation of the statement it used to be. What's worse is that Dev Anand's script is so ridiculous, it can make a nursery rhyme seem like a masterpiece and the filming so awful, I wouldn't mind putting money on a theory that either the DOP or Dev Anand himself must've been blind while filming some of the scenes. And some of those new actors that he has taken give you that horrible stinking feeling. Its inexplicable how stupid they are. But what's remarkable is that he still has actors like Naseeruddin Shah, Jackie Shroff and Yashpal Sharma playing key roles in the movie (although what Milind Gunaji was doing in the movie is anybody's guess). Naseeruddin Shah has in fact gone on record saying that the only reason why he did this movie is because he wants to give something back to the man who gave him so many moments of joy when Naseer was growing up.

There's a time in every bad movie that it becomes hilarious. Chargesheet is so bad, it doesn't even reach that level. But then there is one scene that is fatally funny which is that of Home Minister Narayan played by Amar Singh (yes the SP politician) listening to two simultaneous conversations over phone- his one ear listening to what Dev Anand is saying and his other ear focussed on what a cop is saying. The piece de resistance here is the Bharatnatyam that Amar Singh's eyes do depending on what is said being said over the phone. If that scene doesn't crack you up, nothing on planet Earth ever will. This one scene has serious potential to be ranked alongside a dying Ashok Kumar's patriotic march by his bedside in Clerk.

Overall, I know I am not telling you anything that you wouldn't already have guessed about Chargesheet but the only thing I can add is that you ought to run far far away from which ever screen Chargesheet is playing in.
Even if they put you in jail for doing so !

Rating: .5/10

#208: Maqbool

2011-09-29T22:05:00.008+05:30

There's not much to say about Maqbool's story except that it is based on Macbeth. But what's to be said on Maqbool the film in terms of praise in words might not ever be enough.

I have personally been around when Vishal Bharadwaj was giving an interview on a radio station and on being quizzed about Shakespeare, he mentioned that it wasn't till his late teens that he first came across Shakespeare. But when he did, he realized what a master of drama the Bard was. Or in Bhardwaj's words "woh cheez kya the, humein tab pata chala..". So much so that Bhardwaj immersed himself completely in his works and took months to understand the real dramatic nuances of his plays. By the time Bhardwaj finished, he had become a true worshipper of the Bard's works. For him, adapting Shakespearean plays to the Indian context wasn't a matter of a masterstroke in the context of Indian cinema, it was simply a personal tribute to Shakespeare. He would have it no other way and it was only natural that Maqbool took shape so early in Bhardwaj's career as a director.

The setting of Maqbool is Bombay where Abbaji (Pankaj Kapoor) rules the grimy underworld and his clutches stretch from Bollywood to murky dealings in real estate. His Man Friday is Maqbool (Irrfan Khan) whom Abbaji trusts blindly little realizing that Abbaji's young wife Nimmi (Tabu) has taken a liking to Maqbool himself. Abbaji is old, pot-bellied and stubborn in his own ways and these are traits that Nimmi doesn't quite take to but has to bear with. Maqbool's shadow-like presence in Abbaji's life is a pleasant distraction for her and she wants Maqbool to kill Abbaji and inherit his riches. Vishal Bharadwaj and Abbas Tyrewala's scorching screenplay takes precedence over performances in Maqbool and captivates you in the first half of the movie even as solid supporting acts by Piyush Mishra, Om Puri and Naseeruddin Shah keep your senses rooted to these characters.

Maqbool proceeds with a strong foreboding that something is going to go wrong very soon and that keeps you at the edge of your seat. Vishal Bhardwaj's handling of the adaptation is nothing short of masterful and he gets ample support in form of some immaculate performances from the lead cast. None more impressive than Tabu and Pankaj Kapoor. The former as the scheming Lady Macbeth who is always one step ahead of Macbeth and the latter as the principled criminal who has a Don Corleone air about everything he does. If it comes across as an imitation, it's because Pankaj Kapoor is as good as it gets for that role. Irrfan Khan as Macbeth is the very picture of dilemma in everything he does and becomes the foil against which Nimmi and Abbaji draw their emotional support from.

The only place where Maqbool falters is the last 15 minutes where in keeping up with the original text, the screenwriters' conviction in pulling off the climax isn't completely at its peak. And this portion seems particularly hasty and chaotic, especially after the laid back first half. But apart from that, Maqbool is a suspenseful, taut and an extremely captivating adaptation of the timeless Macbeth.

You remember all those discussions about a book or a play being better than a movie?
Well, this is one example where that argument just might not hold.

Rating: 7.4/10

#207: The General

2011-09-28T12:54:00.004+05:30

It was a bit silly that I took a long time to actually get down to watching a Buster Keaton movie. A reverential reference to Keaton in Bollywood that I came across was in Road. Movie when Satish Kaushik's character extols the magic of cinema and takes the example of Buster Keaton's movies being the kinds that moved him during his childhood. It was a glowing tribute and made me want to pick up some of his movies at the earliest but time and destiny kept us apart. And then I saw The General.

Made in 1926, The General was adapted from a novel by William Pettiger and directed by Buster Keaton and Clyde Bruckman. It plays out like a comedy but in essence is a bit more than that. Set against the backdrop of the civil war, it has a nice romantic angle of Buster Keaton who plays the title character with Annabelle Lee (Marion Mack). Keaton's character Johnnie Gray is an earnest engineer who is one of the few skilled people who know how to operate a rail engine. Consequently, the authorities deny him the chance to enlist in the war. His love interest sees this as a sign of his cowardice and ditches him. The movie presents an answer to the question if The General be able to prove his worth in the war and win his lady back.

Well, if you think you know the answer to that question and think of this as a run-of-the-mill fare, thats exactly what The General is not. Yes there's slapstick, predictability of events and the typical silent comedic timing that makes up for most of the movie. But what's special is the ingenuity, warmth and a very different brand of humor than what's seen in the Chaplin movies. You also see why some people say that Buster Keaton is better than Chaplin. Because Keaton isn't wearing oversized pants and he isn't trying to make us laugh every single moment like Chaplin's tramp. Keaton works by building up a very human story and making us laugh at his success and his misery alike. His simplicity is highly believable and his character endearing. The movie is about him and he carries it well single-handedly.

I could watch The General again and again for just those two scenes of him sitting on the wheels of his rail engine and the final ending scene. Two beautiful shots that more than made up for the time I put in. And I can assure you will be more than worth your time too.

Rating: 7.9/10

#206: New York, I Love You

2011-09-26T17:13:00.005+05:30

Emmanuel Benbihy is the producer who came up with the idea of "Cities of Love" series of movies. The idea being that each movie will be centered around a famous city and directors from across the world would be invited to make short segments with love as the core theme of each story. His first instalment Paris Je 'taime was a delectable start towards this end and it was only obvious that his next edition would be much anticipated. Especially, if it was to be based on one of the most charming cities of the world- New York.

Shot across the five burroughs of New York, NYILY has a most promising beginning that tells you that something special is about to unfold. It begins to bloom slowly but surely with a set of ten segments of roughly 10 minutes each. It also boasts of a star-studded list of filmmakers ranging from the likes of Fatih Akin to Brett Ratner to Shekhar Kapoor. And the cast isn't bad either. But just when it could've leaped from being an average movie to an exceptional one, it fades out. So by the end of it, the movie at best comes across as a middle-of-the-road decent watch. Like all anthology movies it has its good, bad, weird and ugly moments but unlike a couple of segments in Paris Je 'Taime, or that unforgettable last segment in Four Rooms, the good isn't really exceptional. There's, of course, also relief that the bad isn't deplorable either.

No anthology review is complete without two clear pointers about the best story and best performance. The former in my books would be the segment written by Jeff Nathanson and directed by Brett Ratner. If anything, this is the closest this movie comes to giving you a sharp kick. The stand out performance is in another story directed by Yvan Attal and it comes from Ethan Hawke who essays a devilishly charming writer trying to woo his way around an attractive lady. New York as a city doesn't stand out so much or even as a sub-text except its multi-ethinicity which is predictably woven by the directors in the characters portrayed.

To sum it up, New York I Love You, should be on your list if you've fallen in love with the little things that make the city so special. This one just does enough for us to reaffirm our faith in the concept of 'Cities of Love'. But at the same time, we also do hope that the next editions are a notch better.

Rating: 6.2/10

#205: The Immortals

2011-09-25T17:35:00.005+05:30

Heist movies are a personally favorite genre so if I just see a DVD cover that hints towards that genre, I don't think twice before buying it. Immortals was one such discovery. What it had going for itself apart from the DVD cover was the fairly bankable cast of Samuel L. Jackson, Tony Curtis and Chris Rock leading an ensemble set.

Immortals begins in a disoriented way where director Brian Grant tries to tell us too many things in too little time. The idea must've been to spring right into the midst of action but it doesn't quite work. In one swoop, we are introduced to the protagonist who is hatching the plot, the 8 parolees (too many to begin with) he has collected in his task and the heist itself. Typically, all good heist movies will spend sometime setting the context right and that is completely missing in this movie. Things happen so fast that by half-time, 6 out of the 8 are already shot and fighting for survival. Tony Curtis makes a decent appearance but does little to salvage the film. The wooden Eric Roberts, who leads the team, on the other hand does little for us to empathize with him.

Immortals is an example of a movie that is not only ludicrously written but also directed equally badly. To give you an example, there is a showdown between two gangs in the middle of the movie where 8 people from Robert's gang engage in a gunfight with 8 people of Curtis' gang. Remarkably after the smoke settles, we see all of Curtis' gang dead while each of Roberts' gang survives. Apart from Curtis, Chris Rock and Tia Carerre put in just about average performances and even that isn't enough for this movie to merit a watch. In other words, Immortals makes a great case for never judging a DVD by its cover.

If anyone suggests you to watch it, ask them to pay you. And then depending upon how much is being offered, you can consider it.

Rating: 2/10

#204: Brothers

2011-09-23T11:52:00.003+05:30

The backdrop of war gives a wide canvas for filmmakers to put together a story. And the beauty of it is that although war is used as a context, the stories needn't necessarily be about the glory of winning or courage or sacrifice. And in a way, the farther the story moves from the main object of war, the greater the hook for a viewer to absorb the story. Such hooks have allowed some really personal and familial stories to stand out in the midst of this big-budget genre. Brothers, a movie made in 2009 about the life of Captain Sam Cahill (Tobey Maguire) who leaves for an assignment to Afghanistan, is a similar attempt.

Sam Cahill's family is a sweet home of joy with his loving wife Grace and his two daughters. As a Marine, he has the respect and admiration of his parents and the community at large. Cahill's brother Tommy on the other hand is a small-time crook who has been known to be on the wrong side of the law for his petty crimes and is clearly the dark sheep of the family. Sam's departure to Afghanistan saddens everyone in the house but the big jolt comes when he is reported to be dead. While the Cahills struggle to get used to a life without Sam, Tommy steps in to take more responsibilities around the house. What at first surprises the family, becomes the norm and predictably Tommy and Grace start finding in each other an emotional anchor.

Written by David Benioff, Brothers moves at a steadfast pace and oscillates from the images of war and its cruelties to the more soothing environs of the Cahills without much efforts. The fluid screenplay allows for a couple of surprises that keep you interested in the plot. While Tobey Maguire was far from the best choice for a war- hardened Marine, Jake Gyllenhall and Portman fit the characters and perform creditably. The supporting act by Sam Shepard as the head of the Cahill family is particularly impressive as well. As a movie based on war, Brothers also has an engrossing hook from Sam Cahill's point of view and what really happened to him in Afghanistan. The dramatic peak achieved in that section of the story by Benioff and Sheridan is quite good.

Overall, Brothers is an emotional saga that absorbs you. If it struggles, its partly due to a fairly inept performance by Tobey Maguire who doesnt quite hit the nail and the somewhat predictable story turn towards the end. Brothers easily qualifies for that category known as "one-time watch" but I suspect the makers wanted something more out of it, something that seemed to be conspicuously absent in the movie.

Rating: 6.6/10

#203: Warrior

2011-09-21T16:36:00.002+05:30

Warrior is a 2011 action film that stars Tom Hardy, Joel Edgerton and Nick Nolte in leading roles. The movie is about these three characters, Tommy (Hardy) and Brendon (Edgerton) who are the sons of an ex-armyman and fight coach Paddy (Nick Nolte).

Warrior begins on a sombre note with a bitter conversation between Tommy, who has just returned after serving in Iraq and Paddy. There is no mistaking during that conversation that the father-son relationship is estranged because of Paddy's alcoholic ways of the past. We also learn that Tommy is fighting with a few inner demons of his own because of certain incidents in Iraq. Tommy feels weighed down by those demons and needs a reason to redeem himself. Tommy enlists himself in a high-prize money purse competition called the World Mixed Martial Arts competition and declares that if he wins the competition he would donate the prize money to the widow of his colleague who passed away in Iraq.

We are also soon introduced to Brendon, who is a respected and much-loved Physics teacher in a school. Outside of school, he also works part-time work as a bouncer and yet that is not enough for him and his wife to ward off their debts. Brendon had also been an amateur fighter in the past and in spite of much opposition from his sweet wife Tess (Jennifer Morrison) decides to participate in the competition with the help of his coach played by Frank Grillo.

Warrior builds up with simmering intensity towards the finale where predictably the two brothers meet in the final. The masterstroke by director Gavin O' Connor in the second half is the contrasting styles of the two brothers standing out in their respective fights. While Tommy is fast and furious, Brendon is persevering and pugnacious. The personal equations between the sons and their father come to the fore with every passing minute and reach a crescendo in the climax. Hardy, Edgerton, Nolte and Jennifer Morrison put in highly credible performances and a couple of scenes stand out for their minimalistic brilliance. The scene where Tess receives news of her husband's fight in a dark room where she sits alone in anticipation is beautifully done. As is the scene where Tommy comforts his drunk father. I wish though some of those really low-lit shots were done better. It is largely acceptable that a brooding emotional situation requires negligible light. I somehow think it shouldn't come at the cost of the audience straining their eyes in a closed theater.

Warrior is a touching tale of a family set against the gritty and cruel world of mixed martial arts. At its heart lies a story of emotions even though it can also comfortably posture and position itself as a high-quality action flick. If anything, it pretty much makes the best of both worlds.

Rating: 7.4/10

#202: Aag

2011-09-19T23:05:00.004+05:30

Or RGV Ki Aag.

First, the name sucks.

Then everyone and everything else.

Except those few scenes in patches that involve Mohanlal, Urmila Matondkar and Amitabh Bachchan.

Rating: 1/10

P.S. 1: Someone once told me that Masand during the review threw his shoes at the camera while reviewing this one. Isn't this review so much more reasonable ? And specific ? And to the point ?

P.S. 2: At one point of time, it used to be on Imdb's bottom 100 list. Checked again today. Rooted to the spot !

#201: Crazy Stupid Love

2011-09-18T09:24:00.002+05:30

Crazy Stupid Love is a 2011 comedy about a couple played by Steve Carrell and Julianne Moore who have been married for over 20 years with 3 children. Both of them in their mid-40s are now struggling to come to terms with their uninspiring husband-wife relationship and the breaking point comes when Emily (Moore) hooks up with a colleague. This new development leaves Weaver (Carrell) devastated and he goes about moping about his wife's infidelity in a nearby bar. It is here that he meets the smooth-talking Jacob Palmer (Ryan Gosling). Palmer takes it upon himself to get Weaver out of his misery and begins a makeover of Weaver's lifestyle.

While you see the first hour of Crazy Stupid Love unfolding, you know you've seen it all before. It is likely that Weaver will get lucky soon with a woman. He does. You know Palmer will finally find the love of his life, he does. You know that Emily will start missing Weaver soon. She does. It all goes according to the the routine storyline. Although this is meant to be a comedy, there isn't so much of a funny quotient in the dialogues or situations. However, where Crazy Stupid Love scores is its sub-plots that come together neatly in the final act of the movie. The ending though predictably sweet and happy has more than its share of surprises and redeems what would've been otherwise a dreary movie.

It also features some good performances by an ensemble cast that had names such as Julianne Moore, Emma Stone, Marisa Tomei, James Gandolfini who all play bit-part roles but leave a mark with their presence. Steve Carrell's protagonist act isn't entirely convincing because of the cliched loser character he portrays but eventually he does manage to connect with you. The stand out act for me though was Weaver's 14-year old son Jonah Bobo who has a crush on his baby-sitter. His is a near flawless act and it surely isn't the last we've heard of him in Hollywood. Ryan Gosling isn't bad either as the womanizer who turns Weaver's life upside down but when he comes into his own falling for Emma Stone, he becomes stoney-faced that leaves little emotional impact.

Overall, Crazy Stupid Love is strictly ok. And that too because of a couple of delightful surprises towards the end. It can at best be classified as a safe bet. And that too only if you have a movie like Friends with Benefits running alongside it.

Rating: 5.8/10

#200: Bobby Fisher Against The World

2011-09-16T15:15:00.005+05:30

One glance at Yahoo's list of best sports documentaries of all time listed here will make you realize how the core of most of those wonderful movies lies in a spectator sport. As a result of which, boxing, F1 and other ball sports dominate the list. It is also only fair to assume that a spectator sport will lend itself more easily for a movie than a non-spectator sport like chess. Bobby Fisher Against The World based on the American chess legend's life, in that respect is a quite deviation from convention. And yet it enthralls and intrigues you with its content.

Director Liz Garbus' in partnership with HBO Films takes you through the life and times of Bobby Fisher, the man who at one point was regarded as the best chess player in the world. The film traces his journey from his childhood, his family, the unveiling of the prodigious Fisher coming into his own in his early teens, his ascent to the peak of the world rankings and his life thereafter. Fisher who led nothing but an extremely enigmatic life is presented to us as a person with his fair share of shortcomings when it came to life beyond the chess board. His world title match with Spassky becomes an extension of the Cold War of the 1970s and garners much attention worldwide and Garbus rightfully spends considerable time educating us about the political environment of those years.

Fisher's dynamic rise in the sport is the part that fuels our interest most while watching the documentary that has a wonderful spread of interviews from people as personally close to Fisher as his personal photographer and trainer, to people like Susan Polgar and Garry Kasparov who only judge Fisher as a professional chess player. Interspersed between these interviews are abundant reels of footage from the 70s that do a wonderful job in telling the story of those yesteryears about which we had only read. The sections of the movie where we see Fisher objecting to cameras being present while his World Championship title match is in progress with Boris Spassky is rare vintage stuff. The only bone I had to pick with the movie was the limited information it provided about his wilderness years. It would've been fascinating to know what Fisher did and where he spent his time before resurfacing years later. In a documentary that chronicles his life, some more substance to that part would've been a fresh insight.

Bobby Fisher Against The World will stoke your memory and take you down an era of which if you would have only heard of. It is a fascinating journey that makes you wonder if there could've a better topic to make a documentary around the game of chess. The Karpov-Kasparov rivalry perhaps ? Or maybe not.

Rating: 7.1/10

#199: City Lights

2011-09-15T18:45:00.004+05:30

It has been often spoken about how Chaplin wasn't really happy with the advent of sound and how he went on to make silent movies even when sound was at his disposal. It is only fair that he didn't take the help of sound because as a viewer I can't imagine what watching The Kid might have been with sound. My opinion is, it is best we never got to know. Chaplin's genius lay in making us laugh with his gags, the slapstick and most importantly his myriad expressions. To add anything else to it would've been a folly and City Lights is one movie that makes you believe he was indeed right on that count.

The movie features Chaplin's favorite tramp avatar once again. This time he has a millionaire friend in Harry Myers who has an odd habit of being most affable when he is drunk. But when Myers is sober he forgets about his shabbily dressed tram friend. Chaplin meanwhile also has become friends with an attractive blind flower vendor Virginia Cheeril who believes that the tramp is a millionaire. City Lights is one of Chaplin's most famous works and touches you with the relationship that Virginia and Chaplin share in the movie. The blind Virginia has a certain image of Chaplin in mind and what her reaction to the unmasking of that image might be is a question that the movie's climax leads you to. The scenes with Myers though are most hilarious although the funny quotient in the movie is not as high as some of his other movies.

City Lights is a story with a lot of warmth. If you're the one for romantic classics, this is something you just can't miss out on. It is one of the most simple love stories on screen, nearly unspectacular and yet it doesn't fail to let you root for the tramp by the end of it. For the record, it was also voted as the best romantic comedy ever in an AFI poll where Annie Hall stood number 2. I have good reason to dispute it but I can't take away the fact that City Lights does sit comfortably on that list.

Rating: 7.3/10

#198: Breathless

2011-09-14T11:10:00.003+05:30

It is an irony of sorts that I am yet to review a Godard movie thus far on this blog. After all, any film student worth his salt has a certain amount of reverence towards Godard who has often been regarded one of the most influential filmmakers in history. Breathless, made in 1960 was his most acclaimed work and starred Jean-Paul Belmondo as a drifter whose sole purpose in life is to move to Italy and live easy with his girlfriend. Most top-100 films list are likely to have Breathless included for its path breaking content. After all, it was supposed to be Godard's definitive stamp on the French New Wave. As a film critic working for Cahiers Du Cinema, Godard had formed his own radical views on shot-taking and direction and in the company of Chabrol, Melville, Truffaut he found a set of people who encouraged him to take his own path. The result was a style of filmmaking that would resonate amongst movie lovers for years to come.

Breathless is the story of Michael (Belmondo), a petty thief who roams around the city committing crimes with no planning and no regrets. He is hanging around in Paris even after committing a murder because he needs to get back some money from a friend. His simple plan is to collect the money and move to Italy with his American girlfriend Patricia (Jean Seberg). Patricia is not entirely happy with Michael's ways but plays along with his romantic advances. Breathless, co-written by Truffaut and Godard, in terms of a genre is a mix of romantic comedy and a thriller. With the cops in hot pursuit of Michael, the screenplay does interest us in knowing if his move to Italy is going to come off as planned.

Visually filmed with a host of new techniques, none more radical than the inventive use of jump-cuts, Breathless is indeed a pretty film to watch. Belmondo as the vagabond is as desultory as the character required him to be. It seems the only thing he is concerned about is Patricia and apart from her he wouldn't care much about anything else around him. Jean Seberg's beautiful presence is a wonderful contrast to Belmondo's recklessness on the streets of Paris. She is level-headed, attractive and independent. During the course of the movie, it is her character that you don't want to come any harm to. The parts where Michael is by himself either working out his plan to escape to Italy or even going about his joblessness on the streets of Paris are slickly done. The film picks up its intent quickly in the last ten minutes and its ending is a masterstoke by Godard. My problem with Breathless however is its long portions that could've been more snappy. For instance, the exchanges between Michale and Patricia turn out to be quite tedious and boring after a while.

I had seen Le Mepris and Detective before watching Breathless and I must say that the first two movies quite deflated the faith I had placed in Godard as a director. I thought both those movies were tiresome and the only thing they had going for themselves was a style quotient. And when I say this, I know I am even taking a risk of not being considered seriously but for me Breathless just about managed to save Godard from being blacklisted in my book. If one talks about directors about the New Wave, I am a Melville loyalist and I didn't see any such brilliance in Breathless. As a matter of fact, the supposedly revolutionary usage of jump-cuts themselves were suggested by Melville. Coming back to this review, Breathless is indeed an uninhibited piece of filmmaking. It has a gay abandon about itself that I found quite charming and watchable. On whether its making into my top-100 films list, I think that would be a resounding no.

Rating: 6.4/10

#197: Annie Hall

2011-09-12T22:39:00.010+05:30

If you can make peace with the nomenclature of a genre called "serious comedy" and not see it as an oxymoron, you've a friend in Woody Allen. A clear departure from his early goofy comedies like Take the Money and Run and Love and Death , Annie Hall released in 1977 is till date acknowledged as the auteur's best work and is his first shot at this genre that I refer to as serious comedy. For this is where unlike this previous work, the hero would no longer be laughed at for his neurotic behavior, sexual clumsiness and oafish behavior. On the contrary, in Annie Hall, Woody not only sets an empathetic premise for such behavior by his protagonist very early in the movie but he also takes you on a very personal romantic journey of stand-up comic and comedy writer Alvy Singer (Woody Allen) and his relationship with Annie Hall (Diane Keaton).

I refer to Annie Hall as a serious comedy because you do get the best of both those genres in this one movie. It begins with the screenplay which is supposed to have shades of Woody Allen's own real life relationship with Diane Keaton- a speculation that Woody has more or less denied in the past. The stand out part of this non-linear script isn't so much about what the outcome of Allen-Keaton relationship in the movie would be but how are we going to get to that outcome which is bared to us in the very first couple of minutes by Alvy Singer. What seems a playful relationship isn't able to break the barriers of its own triviality and leads to a breakup. Alvy, who has been twice married before doesn't realize when his romantic liaison with Keaton become a friendly equation. And when that equation changes, it affects us because by that time we want this charming lady and her older talented writer boyfriend to work out things between them.

Both Allen and Keaton have never had it better in terms of chemistry. Their conversations, the banter, the teasing even their breakup has a touch of poetry to it. Not to mention the extremely fun screenplay and dialogues by Woody Allen. This is also one of Woody's few movies where he performs as a stand-up comic in the movie, something Woody started his career as in real life. Those parts might just've been a cakewalk for him to write and perform but as an audience, you are stupefied by the frequency and the wit of his comeback lines time and time again. Diane Keaton, won the Best Actress Oscar for her sharp performance even as Allen lost out in a stark similarity of real-life mirroring on-screen action. Tony Roberts makes yet another of those supporting appearances as Woody's successful TV actor friend who is a sucker for commercialization unlike Woody. The contrast in their character sketches makes their friendship even more unique, believable and immensely enjoyable. Woody does keep the best lines for himself because only he can deliver a line like 'Don't knock off masturbation... Its sex with someone I love...' with the most nonchalant attitude.

In the sweep of the romantic background of Alvy Singer's relationship with Annie Hall, it is quite possible to forget that Annie Hall is also a brilliant comedy. The comedy is not so much situational as conversational and it is so free flowing and abundant that even though Annie Hall is a tragic story it doesn't feel like one. It is rare that everything in a movie- from the sets to actors to the cinematography comes together to click in perfect unison (imagine Keaton designing her own clothes for the movie and the style going on to become a rage of New York in the late-70s). Annie Hall is that rare masterpiece, the Kohinoor of Allen's jewels and the Mona Lisa of romantic comedies.

Rating: 8.2/10

Confession: I saw Annie Hall for the fourth time today and for the first time felt like it was better than Manhattan. The Manhattan review I had written in August says Manhattan was better than Annie Hall. As of now I am eating humble pie for that definitive claim in September. (Incidentally, also another Woody movie reviewed on this blog.)

Contrived Coincidence: Review #197 is a 1977 movie. A little bit by design, a little by accident.

#196: 99

2011-09-10T22:19:00.005+05:30

Cricket. Match-fixing. Small-time crooks. Ensemble cast. Befitting.

Cyrus Broacha! Kunal Khemu. Soha Ali. Boman Irani. Perfect.

Backdrop: India-South Africa real series. The year: 1999.

Raj, DK wrote, directed . Sita Menon, third writer credited.

"One big score" theme. Treated street-smart. Young and fresh.

Sharp script. Deft direction. Smooth performances. Always at you.

Romantic angle. Comedy. Deceit. Twists, turns. Its got all !

Neat, dark cameos by Vinod Khanna and Mahesh Manjrekar.

Overall, brilliant. Must watch. Massively underrated. A rare gem.

This review is meant as a tribute to 99.

11 lines, 9 words each. This movie, a peach !

Rating: 7.7/10

#195: Kites

2011-09-09T21:18:00.006+05:30

Kites, released in 2010, is one more example of how inert Bollywood filmmakers are with respect to a storyline if they have a star on-board. Hrithik Roshan, is the star in this case and his dad (producer) and Anurag Basu (director) the filmmakers. It is unnerving to know that there are people out there willing to spend upto 60 crores on a script like this. If I start with the flaws in the movie, I might need a whole night. So I am just going to skip over them and come straight to the point.

Kites as a story is egregiously bad and its performers cluelessly insipid and hammy most of the time. The clincher is the lousy direction by Anurag Basu who is also one of the screenwriters along with Robin Bhatt and Akarsh Khurana. To add to it, and as irrelevant as this might seem, this has to be the most inappropriately named movie ever in Bollywood. I suspect, why its called Kites is a question even Conan Doyle would've struggled with.

Roger Ebert once said that you should never slam a movie completely in a review. Such reviews are supposed to be shallow and although such a shallow review befits a movie like Kites, I think I will give that advice some heed here. If I have to put down something nice about the movie, it would have to be Ayananka Bose's cinematography. Some of the shots are stylistically captured and the fast-paced action sequences are acceptably tight though it's still not going to take your breath away. And lastly, supporting actor Anand Tiwari. He is one lad who has impressed in every movie I have seen him in so far in and this one is no different.

Final word: Dissuade people from watching Kites. It will get you good karma points.

Rating: 1/10

#194: Kurbaan

2011-09-07T23:11:00.005+05:30

Kurbaan for me is the perfect median Bollywood movie. Or rather the symbol of filmmakers' perception that an audience will buy on-screen stupidity as long as there's a glitzy star cast and some decent music. I specifically remember at the time when Kurbaan was being promoted, the trailers showed a lot of promise and for me it wasn't just because of those two factors but because this was Rensil D'Silva's first movie as a director. Rensil over the years in Bollywood had been a part of films as memorable as Rang De Basanti and even as incredibly bad as Luck. But the RDB connection made me wrongly assume that he would at least make us stand up and take notice if he was taking on a subject as complex as international terrorism.

I sometimes don't understand the need for writers in Bollywood to start a movie by showing how romance bloomed between two people. Especially if the movie is about another subject- terrorism in this case. Consequently, there's little logic in how the Avantika (Kareena) and Ehsan (Saif) meet and fall in love in Delhi University but we have to sit through it. The director might as well have inserted a title card stating the two were in love and we would've bought it but anyway I digress. The threads of the main plot start unravelling only once we get to know that Saif is actually a terrorist who is planning a monstrous attack in US. When Avantika's job takes her to USA, Ehsan tags along and starts working with his gang. And then one day Avantika discovers the real identity of her husband. Ehsan loses no time in house-arresting her but only partially. You see he is in love with her by now. Anyway, by now things are happening at a frenetic pace- new characters get introduced, bombs explode in planes and ordinary journalists like Riyaz (Vivek Oberoi) take it upon themselves to avenge their loved ones death.

If that last line read like a hotch-potch, I think I am getting close to describing the fabric of Kurbaan. A friend once mentioned that guys from advertising sometimes get some really good scenes shot in movies because by nature they're trained to get a 30 or a 60 second commercial spot on during that time. When it comes to movies, the habit sticks with them. So they might just excel in one particular sequence but when they start stitching these scenes for a 2.5 hour movie, the quality drops considerably. It is a good point but I guess for every Rensil D'Silva, we also have a Dibakar Banerjee so the jury might still be out there. In any case, Kurbaan suffers from this lacunae in abundance. There are a few gripping action sequences, tight dialogues and picturesque cinematography at different points in Kurbaan but overall the movie barely comes together.

Saif, Kareena and Vivek - the three main actors all work well, almost convincingly but the fact is that they work with a fractured script all along. Coming on the heels of the smartly made New York, a movie also based on terrorism in the US, Kurbaan needed to leap and set the bar higher. What it accomplished was nothing more than a hop over a bar that was a couple of notches lower.

Rating: 4.8/10

#193: Play it again, Sam

2011-09-05T16:52:00.008+05:30

For all those fans of the Woody Allen-Diane Keaton chemistry, well this is where it all began. Play it Again, Sam was one of Woody's most successful plays that had the couple performing the central characters on-stage along with Tony Roberts and Jerry Lacy. When the decision to make this into a movie was taken, it was only natural that the four reprised their roles on-screen and thus began a legacy of the Allen-Keaton on-screen relationship.

Even if one rules out the reference to the immortal quote (which incidentally wasn't exactly such), it is quite obvious that Play it Again, Sam was Woody's tribute to the classic Casablanca. When protagonist Allan (Woody Allen) in the opening scene of the movie is sitting alone starry-eyed in a dim theater that's playing Casablanca, he not only speaks for himself but also sets the tone for the rest of the movie. His best friend busybody Dick (Tony Roberts) is a man eternally on the move for work and when a business trip takes him out of town, Allan starts hanging out with his wife, Linda (Keaton). At any time, we are not really sure if Allan is going to be with Linda by the end of the movie. That the movie hangs on to that single question and still retains your interest till the very end is quite remarkable. That feat is achieved primarily because of two people. The first is the brooding writer Allan, whose wife has left him and whose manic depression is the main sublet for humor in the movie. The second is the surprise character of Humphrey Bogart, essayed so very meticulously by Jerry Lacy.

Bogart is Allan's soul-mate in the movie, his favorite mentor, hero and critic. Whenever Allan is in a spot, he turns to Bogart for advise. This Calvin-Hobbes sort of a situation was weaved in seamlessly in the main love story and served as a unique instrument to evoke some laugh-out loud moments. Jerry Lacy's jaw-dropping impersonation of Bogart is the most appealing component about Play it Again, Sam even as glimpses of the sparkling chemistry between Keaton and Allen are very much on offer. Keaton slips in effortlessly as a woman who is feeling a bit short of attention from her husband played by Tony Roberts. Robert's character is consumed with work, even when he's home with Keaton and soon enough, unknown to him Keaton starts taking a liking to Allan. At 85 minutes, the movie is one of Allen's shortest and yet would rank as one of his most memorable screenplays because of its unusual on-screen character of Bogart.

Play it Again, Sam is a genuine but an unconventional ode to Casablanca. There were very few scripts that Woody Allen wrote and didn't direct beginning from the 70s. This was one of his last. It is said that Allen always wished to have complete control over the production, something he learnt the hard way with his bitter experiences on movies such as What's Up Pussycat and Casino Royale. However, it will have to be said that director Herbert Ross not only handled this quirky script adeptly but also gave us a wonderful movie to savor.

Rating: 7.5/10

#192: Chak De India

2011-09-04T15:30:00.005+05:30

Kabir Khan (Shahrukh Khan), in Chak De India, is a former Indian hockey player, who takes up the coaching reins of the Indian women's hockey team. Kabir used to be a center forward and had once missed a match-winning penalty against Pakistan in an international tournament. The defeat brought about accusations of Kabir being a traitor and the media cited his religion as motive for his betrayal of the nation. Down and out of national reckoning as a player, seven years later, Kabir is one day called by one of his best friends to become the coach of the women's hockey team. It is a post that no one is willing to touch and it is a team that the federation itself doesn't believe in. Spurred on by the objective to exorcise his ghosts of the past, Kabir takes up the challenge. Chak De India unfolds what happens therafter.

When a team sport like hockey is chosen as a subject for a movie, the first point of pressure in pre-production goes straight and foremost to the casting director because of the number of characters involved. And it is right from here that the movie begins to delight you. With a host of interesting characters thrown in from all parts of India, Kabir Khan's passage of breaking ice with the players comprises the bulk of the first half. Some neatly etched characters like Chitrashi Rawat, Shilpa Shukla, Sagarika Ghatge and Anaita Nair are not only a breath of fresh air in terms of their girl-next door looks but also for their air-tight performances as proud and egoistic members of a national team. A special mention here is due for all the women who were coached by Mir Ranjan Negi to get the right posture and action for their on-field sequences. Jaideep Sahni's script moves from one melting point to another with consummate ease and there is a lovely emotional quotient that keeps hitting you with from time to time. For example, the match between the men's and the women's team is a sequence that is bound to leave a lump in your throat. It not only goes against the grain of what you're expecting but makes you believe it couldn't have been bettered. A couple of other sub-plots involving friction between the team members add an extra layer of drama that's infused seamlessly within the main story. By the time the second half arrives, director Shimit Amin has the audience rooting for the underdog women's team.

It is near impossible, that Shahrukh is ever going to better his performance as the wronged Kabir Khan out to redeem his lost honor. His restraint and desperation as an individual pulling out all stops to prove his detractors wrong touches you. It is one of those heart-warming performances and Shahrukh delivers with elan. That he had been a player for his college team in the past might have undoubtedly helped him get the passion part of the role neatly stitched. And for once in his entire career it was nice to see him not serenading women in chiffon sarees. It is also not often that one gets to see some realistic sporting action being shot in our movies and here full marks to the technical crew for getting some of those edge-of-the-seat moments spot on. At no point does it feel like the women are playing a match for filming. It seems that a match between real players is actually filmed and that difference is there for the audience to see. The only trick that I thought was missed out in Chak De India was a clear-cut redemption for its protagonist. This after all was a story about Kabir Khan and that part fell short of hitting a nerve.

Chak De India is India's first ever sports movie that is complete in all aspects. It had a true-life ring to it, a protagonist whose story was worth watching, some gripping hockey and an excellent supporting cast whose performances would stay with you for a long while. If there's anyone out there compiling a list of Bollywood's best, Chak De India's inclusion, I would imagine, would be a foregone conclusion.

Rating: 7.8/10

#191: Le Doulos

2011-09-03T11:37:00.007+05:30

Over the years, sifting through DVD libraries, online posters and sitting through opening credits of movies, I have come to believe that the most reassuring words that exist in cinema are 'Un Film de Jean-Pierre Melville' or its English equivalent- A film by Jean-Pierre Melville. Greater reviewers before me, much more accomplished film students and more importantly, acclaimed auteurs while documenting their choices of their favorite directors of all-time, somehow don't seem to share my sentiment. The Independent, in this regard did an interesting study on a list of directors and their favorite films. The article makes for a most fascinating reading. What stuns me about that list though is that just one of Melville's movie makes it to the list. Jim Jarmusch (God bless him) included Bob Le Flambeur in a compilation that had 18 directors mentioning their top ten lists. I don't know the reason for this anomaly but it irks me to know that no one else included Melville in their list. If I haven't clarified it enough, for the record, Melville would be in my top 3 list of the best directors of all-time even in my sleep. Even when I am hungover and hence here's an attempt to spread the word about one of the many classics from Melville's repertoire- Le Doulos.

Most people would point to Le Samourai or Bob Le Flambeur as his greatest achievement. The former perhaps rightly so but there are such gems that Melville has written and/or directed that each succeeded in leaving an indelible mark on my memory. Le Doulos is one such mark. As the opening frame of the movie tells us Doulos is slang for an informer in French, someone who works with criminals but in reality sides with the police on the sly by giving them information.

Jean-Paul Belmondo, as Silien is the police informer in Le Doulos and Serge Reggiani as small-time crook Maurice ends up on the wrong end of the law due to Silien's 'fingering'. Melville takes us on a rollercoaster journey of a hide-and-seek oneupmanship between these two redoubtable characters. Belmondo is mysterious, refined and characteristically stylish as Silien who is suspected as an informer by his enemies yet trusted blindly by his friends. One of his close friends happens to be Maurice, who has just been recently released from prison and is planning yet another house robbery. What Melville establishes wonderfully in Le Doulos without any sense of melodrama is the rapport between these key characters. He puts you on the edge with that singular relationship that churns in the movie with every passing minute. You're provided with hints of how their friendship might evolve but you work out yourself what its outcome might be. Melville's screenplay, adapted from a Pierre Lasou novel, immerses you with Maurice and Silien and some excellent bit-part players that include a police commissioner, Maurice's girlfriend and Jean, a close friend of both Silien and Maurice.

Melville was a great believer in the power of the cinematic frame and that is something that came across strongly in Le Samourai. Le Doulos is no different. The minimalistic shot-taking has a tremendous impact on those moments that are meant to shock you. This is a movie that I keep going back to from time to time to understand the endless possibilities of story telling, of well-defined characters and of the power of cinema to make you numb. I can only hope that someday, the legend of Le Doulos becomes awe-inspiring enough to be included in far many more lists of the greatest movies ever made.

It is such a pity it isn't already.

Rating: 8.4/10

#190: Radio

2011-09-01T22:03:00.004+05:30

Yes, I am laughing too as I am writing this.

I never thought that even in my most grotesque nightmare I would find myself watching a Himesh Reshamiyya movie but sometimes the craving to make fun of something gets the better of your senses. Radio was one such inspired choice.

You find out a few things as you go along the movie. One of those I will illustrate through an example. Imagine you're stuck on a deserted island and you have to choose Himesh the actor or Himesh the singer as your companion to bring you back to your home far away from this island that's beset with deadly beasts of the wild, foul smell and poisonous plants.The wise thing to do even in such a scenario would be to stay put on the island and struggle for means of survival.

I consider myself fairly aware about Bollywood but writer-director Ishaan Trivedi's filmography is a veritable treasure. He has previously written 7 1/2 Phere, Bachelor Party and Stop !. Bachelor Party is not yet rated on Imdb because at least five people need to vote for such a rating to appear.

The movie is a paradox of sorts. The scenes involving Sonal Sehgal and Shenaz Treasurywala crying are stuff of legends as far as comic timing is concerned. Just like Himesh's Ronan Keating impression of sitting on a bench and crooning, 'Jaaaannneeemann'.

The opening piece of that song is such a blatant rip-off of 'When you say nothing at all', that it might just spoil Keating's version for the rest of your life.

Carrying on from that point of paradox, there is a comic gag of an unsteady dish antenna atop a TV house that Himesh keeps climbing a ladder to set it such that the reception is clear inside the house. This act might just move you to tears.

I can't begin to fathom how Ishaan Trivedi in a moment of genius must've put those words in the screenplay.
"Himesh climbs the ladder irritated and shakes the antenna irritated. He shouts irritatingly and asks if the reception is clear. It irritates him even more but since it his girlfriend's house, he sees the humor in this. The family doesn't buy another dish antenna because then there would be no humor in Himesh's busy life as a radio professional." . This happens repeatedly in the movie and each time it is supposed to becomes more humorous.
I know what it becomes but I can't put those words on this blog.

Yes, there is one nice thing about the movie, a song called ' Piya jaise laadoo, motichoor laadoo' sung by Rekha Bharadwaj. Never understood the meaning but it does have a nice ring to it even though it opens with the most annoying piece of shehnai you will ever come across in this lifetime. And as irrelevant as this point might seem right now but Sonal Sehgal is pretty.

If anything, the two just about convince me to not award Radio a negative score on the rating scale.

There is another song called 'Zindagi jaise ek radio....' I don't know anything else that can sum up the movie more than the sheer intuitive ingenuity of that analogy.

Rating: 0/10

#189: Fair Game

2011-08-30T19:51:00.003+05:30

As an outsider after watching a movie like Fair Game, one can't help but admire the liberty filmmakers in Hollywood have to base their movies around true incidents. Even if they involve the highest echelons of authority. It is near inconceivable that we would ever make a movie in India about collusion of Congress leaders during the 84 riots or for that matter the involvement of the BJP state administration during the Gujarat riots. It is as if all the controversial matters in India are perennially sub-judice or too above board to be touched by the anyone from the film industry. In the 2010 release Fair Game, questions are repeatedly asked about the intelligence follies leading up to the conclusion that Iraq possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction. The freedom with which names like Dick Cheney and President Bush are thrown around in the movie makes you really think if there'll ever be such a time a India when a filmmaker won't have to worry about his movie posters being torn outside theaters or seeing his prints burned in the public.

The protagonist of Fair Game is Naomi Watts who plays Valerie Plame, an undercover CIA operative assigned to confirm or deny the presence of WMD in Iraq. No sooner has she begun her assignment that she finds her office very regularly surrounded by men from the Bush administration. These are men from very high up in the seat of power and men who don't want to listen a 'No' to the question of whether WMD existed in Iraq. Plame, a straightforward analytical operative wouldn't take any sides until she is absolutely sure in her head about the answer. At great risks to her life, she presents a strong case that there is no proof of WMD in Iraq. Plame even enlists the help of her husband, retired diplomat Joe Wilson (Sean Penn) who becomes one of the first persons to corroborate her hypothesis, Plame's answer is not as per the tune the administration is singing to the Senate in ill-conceived moments of verbal bravado led by none other than President Bush. When they try to reason with the White House, Val and Joe become victims of a state crusade that questions their credibility. It is an attack on their very existence and hurts them deeply. How far will they go in their quest for their truth? Fair Game provides the answer.

Based on the memoirs of Valerie Plame, Fair Game brings to us the trials and tribulations that the two undergo in their fight for truth against a mighty White House. Naomi Watts is bustling with energy and spunk in her role that places her as the lead. She is forthright and a mix of pure love for her family's and passion for the work she does at Langley. It is not very often that Sean Penn plays second fiddle but the movie shows how it comes so easy to him. While the two were very good in their characterizations, what seemed missing was the husband-wife relationship chemistry that somehow never came to the fore. Director Doug Liman wants us to know that this is a time when the two nearly uprooted their family and went through some of the most difficult times. He succeeds but not so much as Rod Lurie did with Nothing but the Truth, a movie made in 2008 also based on a similar theme.

Valerie Plame had a very strong story to tell and the fact that it made it to screen unscathed is quite commendable. That it had an A-list lead cast performing, even more so. The only thing that just didn't seem to cut ice for me was the screenplay that was littered with too many characters that loosened the grip from time to time during the movie. There were too many faces that were being thrown at us as the face of the antagonist and all of them put together didn't quite have the desired telling effect that would've made us empathize fully with the Valerie Plame. It is also unlikely that any two other actors could've done a better job. It boiled down to how tight a story the writers wanted us to have. Barring that, this is very much a story told well and one that deserves to be seen.

Rating: 6.9/10

#188: TGIYB

2011-08-29T23:32:00.007+05:30

TGIYB, a story co-written by Kalki and Anurag Kashyap traverses the journey of a girl in search of her father. The girl is in her early 20s, a Britisher by origin and goes by the name of Ruth (Kalki). Her guiding compass in this journey happens to be a letter she received from her father recently that speaks of the pain of separation that he has endured ever since he left home, and Ruth, to her mother. The letter gives Ruth hope of meeting him sometime soon, a hope that acquires significance considering the strained relationship she shares with her mother. Ruth painstakingly saves up money by working as a masseuse, her work allowing her the flexibility to earn some extra dough by giving an option of a 'happy ending' to her customers. These customers range from regular strangers to fatherly figures like Diwakar (Naseeruddin Shah) and rookies who can't even comprehend what a handshake in a massage parlour could possibly mean.

The other characters in Ruth's life are her boyfriend Prashant (debutant Prashant) and a Kannadiga don Chittiyappa (Gushan Devaiah) that she ends up meeting because of her dopey boyfriend. Ruth's days revolve around chasing clues that her father has left in the letter about his address and what later turns out to be a nom de plume. She goes about making enquiries at the local post office, photographers with that last name and when all else fails even gives good old Google a shot. The movie takes time to set the premise and the simplicity of the plot posed the need to add characters like Prashant and Chittiyappa who as such do not have a direct impact on Ruth's exploration. Devaiah's Chittiyappa though leaves a memorable imprint with his Kannadiga act and comes across as a refreshing relief from the grim nature of the storyline.

After a meandering first act, TGIYB comes together in the latter half of the movie when the plot singularly starts moving in the direction of the protagonist's conquest. Kalki's Ruth is a very driven girl who derives her energy from within herself. There is a smoking intensity in her body language that tells you of her innate need to connect with her father. In a way, it is her recourse to amend what must have been a troubled childhood. With a strong and a heartfelt performance, Kalki completes her journey with you as an audience by her side. And it is only then that you stumble upon the jewel in the crown of Kashyap's latest offering. All that was making you fidget during the movie's duration is forgotten as you're stunned with a jaw-dropping denouement. By then Kashyap has left his touch as one of the finest proponents of Indian cinema around with a few strokes of brilliance. That the story took long to arrive at its climax doesn't bother you now as the end credits roll in an atmosphere of pin-drop silence in the theater.

There is no doubt though that TGIYB could've been 10-15 minutes shorter. Given the ease of accessibility to people on the internet these days, it is also surprising that Kashyap didn't set the movie in a 1990s kind of Bombay. Maybe, he was too tired of the Bombay of Black Friday and Paanch. Irrespective of how TGIYB fares in India, one thing is certain, very seldom has Hindi cinema tried to explore a plot that is as dark and bring it within the mainstream fare. It is indeed commendable that there is an uncompromising director out there who is only making movies that appeal to him turning a blind eye to all the nonsense that passes off for a 'Friday release' every week. Because the one thing TGIYB does not do is pander to any established norms as far as the story is concerned. With his stark and unflinching storytelling, Kashyap, once again shows, why he is a shining beacon for independent filmmakers in India.

Rating: 6.8/10

#187: Battle Royale

2011-08-28T12:09:00.002+05:30

Kinji Fukasaku was the director of the Japanese portion of Tora!Tora!Tora, an acclaimed war movie based on Pearl Harbor. There is an interesting story that that portion was supposed to be initially directed by Akira Kurosawa who actually fired himself from the project once he got to know that David Lean wasn't doing the American part. It is then that Fukasaku stepped in and made his name in Hollywood. His reputation as a crime and violence specialist aided him in taking up the directorial reins way back in 1970 and thirty years later he would nail that reputation with his Japanese cult offering Battle Royale. There's only so much that yours truly knows about Japanese cinema barring the holy trio of Kurosawa, Mifune and Shimura but the temptation to review a movie that is one of Tarantino's favorites was hard to resist.

The premise of Battle Royale is set in minutes into the movie and speaks of a time when Japan is in disarray with unemployment at it's peak and the youth's lawless abandon threatening the future of the country. It is then that the government passes a Battle Royale act and takes on a teacher called Kitano (Takeshi Kitano) to start playing a real-life game called Battle Royale. The game includes a bunch of students of Grade IX who are taken to a deserted island and given different weapons to kill one another. The winner is the survivor of this outrageous game. There is also a collar attached to every student that will explode either at the end of 3 days or if you tried to cut it open. Sounds gruesome ? Well, that is just the beginning. 41 students rush out of the classroom one by one where they're briefed matter-of-factly by Kitano unaware of what lies ahead over the next three days.

The beauty of the story is that not everyone wants to kill and not everyone wants to be generous either. The 41 students are a mix of scared, defiant, violent (one of the participant is there just for fun), submissive, timid and ruthless characters who are at their wits end fighting the ultimate battle for survival. Based on the 1999 novel of the same name by Koushon Takimi, Battle Royale swoops in at one go to prepare you for the violence that lies ahead. Viewers are then subjected to 40 murders over the next 100 odd minutes and yet the plot doesn't bore you because there is something novel in almost every murder. The movie has an intense pace like some of the old Kurosawa action movies and the urgency in the characters' movements and body language add to the escalating tension. In terms of performances, the sadistic Kitano stands out for being unfazed like a rock with all the violence that he has instigated. There is a chilling touch to his methods, for example, take the scene when closer to the game's finish he is seen exercising outside his base camp calmly waiting for the winner.

It is remarkable to note that none of the cast members had a stunt double during the filming of a movie that could give any other violent movie from any part of the world a run for its money. Equally noteworthy is the fact that even with such a large and a young cast, there aren't too many moments that would make you think a performer wasn't upto the mark. A significant plot point that comes closer to the end of Battle Royale elevates it to an edge-of-the-seat fare but just when the movie had the potential to become a real classic like an Oldboy, the actual climax lets you down. After the shock opening and a tightly knit second act, the closure seemed somewhat tame. It is quite likely that a situation where you have to kill your friends to survive in an isolated island will feature in your top three nightmares. Battle Royale plays out that nightmare on-screen and makes it chillingly real. It falters a bit towards the end but the experience of seeing it unfold is unforgettable.

Rating: 7.3/10

#186: Singham

2011-08-26T20:24:00.002+05:30

Jaikant Shikre, in Singham is a mafia don in Goa who has the police and the local MLA eating out of his hand. He murders and kidnaps people at will and the citizens are too scared to raise their voice against him. Jaikant is granted a conditional bail in a murder case in which he was the 'third accused'. The DCP, a spineless cop, informs him that he will have to travel to a village on the border of Maharashtra and Goa, called Shivgadh, to sign his attendance daily. Shikre is irritated but his cronies shrug it off suggesting that Shikre needn't attend in person. Except that Bajirao Singham, the hard taskmaster cop-in-charge of the Shivgadh police station would have none the proxy attendance business. Shikre has no choice and travels all the way from 'Goa city' and to nurse his bruised ego takes his whole gang along with him. A confrontation ensues between Singham (Ajay Devgan) and Shikre (Prakash Raj).

It is a sequence spread over not more than 7-8 minutes and has to be one of the most intense performances between two actors ever seen in Indian cinema. The dialogues are rabble rousing with the opposite camps of Singham and Shikre waiting in bated breath as the two have a verbal go at each other with their diatribe. It a classic protagonist versus antagonist situation and one of them prevails. The party aggrieved raises the stakes of this confrontation and the movie is about the other's response to that. If Rohit Shetty would've got this scene wrong in the way he envisioned it or if the dialogue writer went a little awry with his lines or if the DOP kept the visualization even a bit loose, I think Singham would've really struggled to sustain for a 144 minutes. But the team delivered on this particular sequence and Singham becomes quite a riveting watch from time to time after that sequence. The problem with Singham though is there really isn't any other high in the movie. Everything that is good about the movie, you get to see it in that scene- the choreography of action, the I'll-screw-you-bravado and above all the intensity of Prakash Raj and Ajay Devgan. From there on, if you expected a climax better than that sequence, you would be disappointed. Thus, ironically, in that one scene lies Singham's zenith and it's own undoing.

Given that this was a remake of the Tamil movie which starred Suriya in the lead, the casting in Hindi to begin with was spot-on with Ajay Devgan firing yet another sharp arrow from the quiver of his acting skills. Now we know along with Salman and Aamir, we will also suspend our beliefs if Ajay Devgan pulls off some logic defying stunts. In a way though, I must admit the action scenes could've been better with a daredevil like Devgan in the lead. Kajal Agarwal, the Telegu actress who makes her debut comes across rightly as the lady-next-door and plays an easy third fiddle to Devgan and Prakash Raj. There's only so much she has to do given that her most repeated scene is the part where she steps forward to take Devgan's revolver and shirt whenever he is bashing the bad guys. Prakash Raj, on the other hand, has a magnetic screen presence and his evil persona with a caricature-ish touch would make him quite a favorite with the masses.

Overall, Singham's packaging works more for itself than it's substance. Watching it without suspending reason won't make this enjoyable but try it and Rohit Shetty and team have done enough to make it worth your while.

Rating: 6.4/10

#185: Not a Love Story

2011-08-25T20:19:00.005+05:30

It is news whenever Ramgopal Verma directs a movie. After being hailed as one of the most brilliant and indigenous auteurs of Indian cinema, somehow the ill-will he generated after rehashing Sholay (to this day I am made fun of in the office for owning a DVD of RGV Ki Aag) is yet to leave him. It is not considered elite enough if one doesn't make fun of Ramgopal Verma in a cinematic discussion. The truth however is that the man loves telling stories on the silver screen and he digs in deep to make these stories. So whether it is the story of a Andhra gangster spread over two movies or the story of a crime of passion in a Mumbai suburb, he will give his heart and soul into making it happen.

Based on the now famous Neeraj Grover murder, Not a Love Story is a fairly accurate depiction of the events leading upto the murder and it's aftermath on the families of the key accused. The accused in the movie are played by Mahie Gill and Deepak Dobriyal and the movie is shot mostly on-location in the western suburb of Malad in Mumbai. Mahie Gill plays a star-struck aspiring actress who comes to Mumbai only to see her dreams vaporizing in a matter of months. She is not only subjected to casting couch but even after giving numerous auditions and doing well, somehow there is not gold to be found at the end of the rainbow. Her boyfriend Deepak plays a short-tempered possessive lover who takes time to accept the fact that his beloved wants to spread her wings in an alien city. The first half of the movie sets the context for these key characters that also include Ajay Gehi, playing an executive in a film production company, towards whom Mahie takes an apparent harmless liking to. The second half then purely takes the shape of a murder mystery being handled adroitly by Inspector Mane (Zakir Hussain).

There are two bedrocks in Not a Love Story on the basis of which the I thought the movie worked. The first is the performances that RGV extracts from his actors, right from the supporting cast that includes yet another incisive turn from the all-weather Zakir Hussain, to it's lead actors, they are all very much on the mark. Deepak is the idiotic obsessive lover who is as chilling as the ruthless schemer. Considering this is Mahie's first solo lead role, her performance would very nearly touch you with her fallibility. The second is that RGV's story has the right inflection points necessary to arrive at offering a movie that is quite complete in itself without actually closing the loop with the final court verdict. Now the one thing that puts paid to both these points is the way the movie is shot. If RGV's idea of presenting a story on camera is to put things out of focus, place camera right under Mahie Gill's skirt and do a hundred other idiotic things with it, either I am not equipped enough to understand the artistry of it or the cameraman was simply drunk. In other words, I know very few movies that have been as poorly shot.

I believe a crime of passion would always make for a good story and if it is a true-life incident, it becomes even better. And to be fair to RGV, it is a decent adaptation. The fact is that if RGV had shot the same movie with the exact storyline and identical performances with a slightly more conventional approach, we would have had a better movie. With that caveat in place, I would still recommend Not a Love Story.

Rating: 6.3/10

#184: Devil's Double

2011-08-24T09:40:00.006+05:30

Biographies are most fun when two things come together. The first is that there's an interesting character in the film. The second is if that personality has had a life or in other words a great story to tell. You look at a movie like Schindler's List and probably see both working together. On the flip side, if it is only of the two things that happen, you get a reasonable middle-of-the-road watch. I would say movies like W and Beyond the Sea fall in the category where the personality was quite interesting but either the way the story was being told didn't cut ice or they didn't have great stories in the first place. A movie like a Fair Game or Goodnight and Good Luck, though strictly not biographies, are examples where the protagonists were ordinary people but the situations that they faced made for remarkable stories. The Devil's Double released in 2009 falls in the category of the latter.

Based on the book by Latif Yahia, Uday Hussain's body double, it tells us the story of Latif's journey from being Uday's most trusted aide till the time he escaped Iraq. Set in early 1990, the story begins at a time when Saddam's reputation in Iraq was one that of a responsible nation-building leader. His son Uday meanwhile, soaked in drugs and sex all day and inebriated with power, was running amok with his lifestyle killing people at will and picking adolescent school girls off the street. In the words of Hosni Mubarak, who call him 'a psychopath', Uday was doing everything to give credence to that title. Directed by Lee Tamahori (Die Another Day), the Devil's Double is an unabashed account of those heady years of Uday's life and his relationship with Latif Yahia, an army lieutenant who is employed as Uday's body double forcefully.

Dominic Cooper who plays both Uday and Latif is irrepressible in his avatar as the former and immaculately intense as the latter. Undoubtedly, this has to be his best performance ever and it would be interesting to see if he gets a BAFTA nomination at least if not an Oscar nomination. His love interest is played by French actress Ludivine Sagnier and though I haven't seen much of her work to comment, she does come across believable as the attractive but selfish Sarrab. Michael Thomas, who has adapted the story for the screen, I suspect has taken a few liberties with the true nature of events and those at times stick out uncomfortably in an otherwise captivating account of Latif's life. While watching one couldn't help but think that there were a few Bollywood-ish elements in the movie that could've been done without. Lee Tamahori otherwise maintains a tight grip on the action and closes the movie on a high.

Devil's Double is a treat for anyone who has interest in movies with disturbing characters as their fulcrum. The movie succeeds in bringing in much of the tyranny Uday was famous for on-screen and that lends it a real shock value. It would be only fair to say that it is one of the better English movies in recent times.

Rating: 7/10

#183: A Simple Plan

2011-08-22T19:38:00.002+05:30

A Simple Plan is adapted from a Scott B. Smith novel of the same name. Normally when studios take on projects based on novels, it is quite routine to have multiple screenwriters come on-board. That Scott B.Smith wasn't attached to any other writer is as much proof of the studio's faith in the writer as much of the ability of debutant Scott B. Smith to adapt a novel to screen. Yes indeed, A Simple Plan is one of those rare occurences where not only the author of the novel is credited for the screenplay but he is also given the solo writing credit in the movie.

It is a story of greed engulfing three men in a small town in an American winter. Those three men are Hank (Bill Paxton), his brother Jacob (Billy Bob) and Lou (Brent Briscoe) who chance upon a a bag full of cash while playing the fool in the woods with Jacobs dog. Of these three men, Hank is the epitome of the modern American man who strives hard for his living and for whom his wife and their forthcoming child are all that he lives for. Jacob, the elder brother, is an anachronistic unemployed middle-aged simpleton who can barely put a sentence together coherently. The foul-mouthed Lou is his best buddy and the two seem to share a bond that goes way back and is probably thicker than what Jacob shares with his own brother. As you read this, it might occur to you that these three are completely different characters and in that lies the strength of A Simple Plan. . In any situation, the three end up having different views and that gives the impetus for the story to move forward.

The discovery of the money leads these three characters into a spiralling affair of conspiracy, betrayal and one-upmanship. And the catalyst for that spiral is Jacob's wife Sarah, played by Bridget Fonda. Sarah is the archetypical Lady Macbeth who is far more conniving than her husband Hank. In one of her finest performances, Fonda lives up to her famous last name and delivers a stirring performance. The beauty of A Simple Plan is in fact, it's inherent simplicity. Some really incredulous things happen in the movie but because the narrative is laid out so with such an easy pace, you really don't have trouble digesting it at all. The stand out performance amongst the actors comes from Billy Bob. His act as the buffoon-ish Jacob rightfully earned him an Oscar nomination. It is a performance that moves you in the end with it's integrity. Directed by maverick Sam Raimi, A Simple Plan keeps you on the edge-of-your-seat till the very end never letting up on intensity. Danny Elfman and Alar Kivilo combine their respective departments of music and photography to add various levels of on-screen aesthetic brilliance. Sam Raimi's collaboration with Coens might've helped him in giving the movie a very subtle yet strong undercurrent of tension that gives you the feeling that the story could explode any time. In fact, those explosions keep coming and yet each is more impactful than the last.

In the annals of crime thrillers, and there's only one that I went by which is the AFI's top 100 Thrills, surprisingly A Simple Plan doesn't merit a mention. Going through that list makes you think that it should've been there. It really should've been.

Rating: 7.8/10

#182: Manhattan

2011-08-21T19:45:00.007+05:30

Story goes that once Woody finished Manhattan, he disliked it so much that he offered to make another film for the producers, United Artists, if they didn't release this movie. As an audience, we ought to thank whoever it was at United Artists, who didn't take up Woody's offer and went ahead with the movie's release. For Manhattan is the best looking movie that Woody ever directed. Years later he would go on to say that he wonders how he still got away with the movie because it also turned out to be one of his most successful movies in an illustrious career spanning over forty years.

Isaac Davies (Woody Allen) is a TV serial writer who quits his job over creative differences. He now wants to write a book which he has been planning for a while. Isaac is an idealistic, twice-divorced 42-year old in a city that he thinks is suffering from decadence. 'Moral decay' is something that is mentioned more than once by Isaac and it is something that he wants to get away from. For instance, in his own life, he doesn't think it is right on his part to date a 17-year old Tracy (Mariel Hemingway), who is in high school. He wants to keep his moral integrity intact and to absolve himself from this moral decadence, he keeps exhorting Tracy to move on to better and younger men. Ironically though, his best friend Yale (Michael Murphy) is having an extra-marital affair with Mary (Diane Keaton), an independent and a strongly opinionated lady. Written by Woody Allen and Marshal Brickman, Manhattan traverses the lives of these relationships over the course of a neatly stitched 96 minutes.

Before I come to the other elements of the movie let me say this, if ever a cinematographer's work shone in a movie, it is this one. Gordon Willis should've got an Oscar for this one- no questions asked. The minimalism at times was a throwback to the Swedish and French movies of the 60s, maybe an inspiration in themselves for that soulful look Manhattan thrives on. The famous bridge scene advertised on the poster above was just one of the many breathtaking moments in the movie. Willis' black and white photography gives a fresh visual dimension to the famous Keaton-Allen chemistry. In terms of performances, Michael Murphy is very much relatable as the fickle-minded husband of the attractive Anne Byrne and full marks to Mariel Hemingway for a performance that would go on to earn her a Best Supporting Actress nomination for Oscars.

Now for the inevitable comparison with Annie Hall. Manhattan is a less-funnier version of Annie Hall spread over a shorter period of time. If you're the kinds who would like more laughs, it is Annie Hall that you should go for. Personally, Manhattan appealed to me more because as far as the theme of romantic relationships go, an area which Woody specializes and dare I say exploits on the silver screen, this comes across as his most mature offering. My guess is Woody didn't like the movie so much because there aren't too many funny moments in the movie. And as a comic writer, Woody saw it as his failing that he couldn't get those funny lines and situations going as much as he would've liked.

In 1980, there was a TV discussion between Ebert and Siskel about who between Mel Brooks and Woody Allen was the better filmmaker. One of the points Ebert mentioned was how Woody was losing his touch in 1979 with movies like Manhattan that weren't anywhere near as funny as some of his previous works. Siskel defended Allen saying that Woody had a better range and that Manhattan was an example of a movie where Woody wasn't playing his go-to character of a neurotic, goofy self. I recently saw that discussion online and with the luxurious benefit of hindsight I can say that they both missed their mark. Woody actually would not experiment beyond his romantic comedies in the years to come and Ebert probably understood Woody wrong because Woody would go on to make even funnier movies.

With Manhattan, I thought Woody took a leap that he wasn't sure of and in his self-effacing manner thought he had come a cropper. Fact is, he had a stunner on his hands.

Rating: 7.9/10

#181: The Informers

2011-08-20T16:28:00.002+05:30

The Informers is a medley of interconnected stories set in the city of Los Angeles in 1983. The characters include a middle-aged couple moving back in together, their teenage children, a rock singer, a hotel concierge and a father and a son who are on a trip to Hawaai. The Informers was written by Brett Easton Ellis and Nicolas Jarecki and directed by Gregor Jordan.

I had read once in a Syd Field book that writers always have to be conscious of the number of characters that are introduced in a movie. In the case of The Informers, the writers chose to ignore that rule completely and it is the audiences who suffer during its 94 minute duration. Incidentally, the movie had a cast that would've made any director jump for joy but rarely is such talent wasted so effortlessly. Mickey Rourke, Kim Basinger, Billy Bob Thornton, Winona Ryder are all solid names on the movie's poster that actually made me pick up the movie but unfortunately there's very little each has to do in their respective roles. In fact, I found it intriguing that these actors went even along with this script. More than a couple of storylines in The Informers could've been avoided altogether and even then I think the movie might have only just become watchable.

The characters in The Informers were too self-absorbed to make any connect with its audiences. Not to mention the stories themselves, none of which made you look forward to what their ending might be. The only one thing that impressed in The Informers was the soundtrack by the seasoned Christopher Young. For often, it was the music that kept giving you a sense of something about to happen. That eventually nothing did was the script's failing.

It is nice to be have a multi-strand narrative and make it really dark and snappy. But it takes real craft and genuine skill to make it work and to make it memorable like Snatch. In the case of The Informers, it is as forgetful as it can get.

Rating: 2.6/10

#180: Bridges of Madison County

2011-08-17T18:16:00.005+05:30

The word that occurs to me the moment I think about The Bridges of Madison County is 'serene.' Is there anything more serene on film than seeing Clint Eastwood and Meryl Streep play 50-plus year olds in love with each other against the backdrop of the beautiful American countryside ?

Based on the book of the same name written by Robert James Waller, and adapted for the screen by Richard LaGravenese, the Eastwood-directed movie plays out like a soothing composition bathed in melody. From the first frame to the last, each visual typifies a lazy American stable life that forms the crust of the characters involved. From within though, both Robert Kincaid (Clint Eastwood), a National Geographic photographer and Francesca Johnson (Meryl Streep) a reasonably happy mother of two, have a simmering desire for each other that they're too scared to pursue for fear of social pressures. Francesca has been married for 18 odd years and is suffering the proverbial itch. Everything is too settled in her humdrum daily life for her to derive any excitement out of it. Kincaid, on the other hand, is a traveling photographer who makes friends as he goes along from one corner of the globe to another. His innocent charm and knowledge of the world is too tempting for Francesca to resist. Kincaid, a dignified vagabond in Madison County finds a reason in Francesca, to stick to a place for a change. Even as their different worlds merge in a quest for love, the stakes are too high for Francesca to walk out of a well-settled marriage. The movie is a journey into the emotions of these two characters as they jostle with the ultimate decision- how far will they go for companionship.

This is a story mostly told in flashback and if memories had a color, cinematographer Jack Green nails it. Given the non-linear narrative, editor Joel Cox rightfully gives the film's pace two different rhythms- one for the flashback and another for the present both working in unison to make this a delightful journey of a little over two hours. Clint Eastwood is magical as the nature-loving photographer who is a son of the soil in every sense of the word. It is remarkable how even as a director he doesn't given into the temptation to indulge himself as an actor instead making this a movie about the female protagonist. Meryl Streep excels in one of her most challenging roles as the faithful wife but Kincaid's passionate lover. Her yearning is captured not so much in words as in her manners and this very well might've been a role where Meryl was pushed to the boundaries of her acting skills, if there is such a thing.

The Bridges of Madison County is a warm and a touching tale of love that will go best on a Sunday afternoon with the person you love the most by your side and a vintage Pinot Noir on the table.

In any case, if you can't watch it with that one person, watch it for that one person.

Rating: 7.8/10

#179: Kind Hearts and Coronets

2011-08-14T23:14:00.006+05:30

Great actors sometimes need only as much of a moment in a motion picture to leave a memorable imprint on our minds. Sometimes they get an entire canvas for themselves in a movie. It is akin to having a batsman on a first day flat batting track in Ahmedabad. And if that batsman turns out to someone like a Kallis or a Lara, they'll make you pay heavy. Now think an actor as accomplished as Sir Alec Guinness essaying eight different roles and you have a situation where if the script of this movie is tight enough, one can be assured of a most enjoyable experience. As the Kind Hearts and Coronets rightly turned out to be.

The Ealing Studio of England is one of the oldest studios of the world and since 1902 has been at the forefront of British filmmaking. Post World War II perhaps the need for audiences to levitate towards lighter subjects gave the studios the opportunity to delve in a series of production of comedies. Kind Hearts and Coronets released in 1949 was the fortuitous product of this phase. Directed by Robert Hamer, the movie is about Louis Manzinni (Dennis Price), a man who wants to go back to the splendors of the royal family of the D'Ascoynes, a family that banished his mother for marrying an ordinary Italian singer. On the death of his mother, when the D'Asocynes refuse to even bury her in the family tomb, Louis' desperation to be accepted as a part of royal lineage gives way to retribution.

Over the next few months, Louis carefully plans the murder of all those family members who would come in his path towards becoming a Duke. He gets himself close to the eldest Lord Ascoyne D'Ascoyne who is very impressed with Louis' work and keeps promoting him in the banking firm that they work for. John Dighton and Robert Hamer, the screenplay writers deftly place in a love triangle between Louis, his child hood girlfriend and Edith D'Ascoyne that makes this more than just a revenge drama. The comic elements in the Kind Hearts and Coronets are derived from the deadpan seriousness of the whole affair that at times border on the farcical. Yet as an audience one stays rooted to Louis' cause because of the empathy that the character generates with his backstory during the first act of the movie.

Alec Guinness plays all his characters, that include a lady, with such effortlessness that it is hard not to be amazed with the range of skills that go with it. Dennis Price's character arc traverses emotions of despair, animosity, love, jealousy and his composure and capability in handling these were as brilliant as they come. The narrative structure of the movie, and credit is again due to the the director-writer combination here, lends itself to a wonderful last two minutes that should rank as one of the best endings ever in cinema. Simply put, Kind Hearts and Coronets is a fabulous piece of cinema. Watch it before you die.

Rating: 8/10

#178: The Spiral Staircase

2011-08-13T22:42:00.009+05:30

Robert Siodmak was a German director who moved to Hollywood in 1939 during the time when Nazism was on the rise in Germany. Over the next 13 years, he would go on to make 23 movies in Hollywood, a prolific record by any standards before he returned to Europe. One of his most acclaimed films during his affair with Hollywood was The Spiral Staircase, a murder mystery that starred one of the first actresses of cinema-Ethel Barrymore.

The story is set in a small conservative county in America where there are only two doctors and even necessities like medical stores are spread far out and wide. Helen (Dorothy McGuire), a mute caretaker in the house of the Warrens is asked to be careful because a serial killer who attacks women with deformities is on the loose. While the killer murders a second disabled lady, the cops suspect him to strike the house of the Warrens where Helen could be an easy target. Dr. Parry a young and charming doctor who wants to cure Helen of her affliction visits the Warrens to see their ailing mother (Barrymore) and agrees to take Helen away on that very night to Boston to give her access to facilities that can cure her muteness. Professor Warren, the elder brother gives in to Dr. Parry's wish but at the same time Dr. Parry is summoned for another emergency. Whether or not Helen would survive the night till Dr. Parry returns is the crux of The Spiral Staircase.

Based on the book 'Some Must Watch' by Ethel White, the movie is a taut account of some gripping action of that stormy night where protagonist Helen unbeknownst to her must survive the killer on her trail. At 81 minutes, the fast-paced screenplay by Mel Dinelli reaches its denouement before your mind can even think of wandering anywhere. All good whodunnits should lead up to its resolution with biting tension and give its audience a gasp when the killer is revealed. And it is for this precise reason that the Spiral Staircase has been long recognized as classic in its genre. I suspect even Hitchcock might've enjoyed it.

Rating: 7.3/10

#177: Aarakshan

2011-08-12T18:12:00.004+05:30

In the mid-80s there used to be a genre of Hindi cinema that had a storyline with the breadwinner of a family as the protagonist. The hero would be a gentle soul who has got a loving family and who falls on troubled times because of an antagonist who would be plotting his downfall due to a difference in opinion about property/family business. It would be a very linear story with a happy beginning and a tumultuous middle act that would see the hero struggling with not just finances to meet ends but perhaps also contracting a heart disease or his wife would suddenly pass away due to an affliction. The ending would then bring all those ends together more often than not in a happy resolution. Swarg and Ghar Ek Mandir are examples that come to mind. This weekend's multi-starrer Aarakshan is one such nostalgic throwback to those days.

Amitabh Bachchan is Prabhakar Anand, a righteous principal of an esteemed college institution who selflessly believes in the right to equality of education. His protege whom he appoints as junior lecturer in his college is Deepak Kumar (Saif Ali Khan), a meritorious student who with Prabhakar Anand's help over the years has moulded himself into a strong and able individual. The catch is that he hails from a backward caste and a few doubting eyes around the campus see it as a clear bias towards weaker castes. In a statement to a newspaper around SC's judgement about reservations, when Anand hints at personally seeing nothing wrong with reservations, his bete noire Mithilesh Singh (Manoj Bajpayee) sees it as an opportunity to get Anand banished from the college. And thus begins Prabhakar Anand's travails that see him tested every ten minutes from thereon. Oddly, the movie promos seemed to suggest this is a movie led by Saif Ali Khan but clearly this is an Amitabh Bachchan show. He displays once again why he used to be such a master at his craft and why he can still get your tear glands going with his monologues and sheer on-screen presence.

Manoj Bajpayee has a certain malleability to his skills that allows to be cast in a rare negative role and does well in his avataar of a money-hungry professor. Prateik Babbar as the voice of the students who prefer merit as the sole of criteria for admission holds his own in this heavy duty and the same can be said of Deepika Padukone- Amitabh's daughter in the movie who is torn between the differences of opinion between those who are close to her. The screenplay by Anjum Rajabali and Prakash Jha have quite a few loopholes but what the story (by Kamlesh Pandey) singularly succeeds in achieving is making this a battle between the good guy and the bad guy and making that battle reasonably engaging. A stand-off scene between Prateik Babbar and Saif Ali Khan is one among quite a few sequences that will impress you in the movie.

What Aarakshan lacks in depth is made up by some strong performances by it's cast. Character actors such as Yashpal Sharma, Darshan Zariwala, Saurabh Shukla and the emerging Amitosh Nagpal do justice to their parts and lend a more realistic feel than Jha's last multi-starrer Rajneeti. Whether the story that uses our flawed teaching institutes to establish a point around the volatile subject of reservations can have a social impact that some of Aamir's movies have done in the recent past is doubtful but what is barely in doubt is Aarakshan's value for money and time this weekend at the box office.

Rating: 6.6/10
P.S.: Political parties / social activist organizations etc etc. please watch this movie and stop the nonsensical bans for the movie. There's not a word in the movie that should get your goat going.

#176: The Corporation

2011-08-11T09:18:00.004+05:30

A Canadian production, The Corporation is a documentary that looks at the might, pitfalls and evils of the private enterprise through a series of interviews with CEOs, authors, academicians, economists, corporate whistleblowers, social activists and consumers. The documentary went on to win several international awards and writer Joel Bakan even wrote a book on the same theme in 2003, the year of it's release. The documentary was directed by Jenniffer Abbott and Mark Achbar.

What begins as a tutorial on the origin and growth of the corporate identity soon turns into a unidimensional bashing of the private enterprise over the next two-and-a-half-hours. What the documentary does well is getting a great spread of eminent names towards this end that include Noam Chomsky and Milton Friedman amongst others. Through a series of chapters, each intended to show the ruthless profit-at-all-costs motive driving organizations, The Corporation does become a bit boring after a while. What is nice to see though is an easy going feel to the whole exercise unlike the rabble-rousing fare of Michael Moore's Capitalism: A Love Story.

To sum it up, The Corporation is a documentary that you can pick on a day when you would be tolerant to watch something that's commonplace but didactic enough to make it worthwhile. But if what you have in mind is a hard-hittting piece that will make you think of springing into action, The Corporation is barely in the same ballpark.

Rating: 6.7/10

#175: Hollywood Ending

2011-08-09T12:55:00.004+05:30

It is no secret that a lot of Woody's scripts are derived from personal experiences and apart from his most preferred topic of relationships, I would suspect his next comfort zone is around performing arts and films. One sees that comfort mould itself beautifully from the experiences as a stand-up comic into a movie such as Broadway Danny Rose and in other cases not so beautifully in a movie like Celebrity. Time and again, we've seen him use the backdrop of performing arts and movies to weave his stories in and these include names like Sweet and Lowdown, Bullets over Broadway and Stardust Memories. Hollywood Ending made in 2002 premiered at Cannes and is yet another attempt on his part in this sub-genre of his movies.

It has as it's protagonist Val Vaxman (Woody Allen), a double Oscar-winning director who has now fallen on troubled times. His ever-smiling optimistic manager Al (Mark Rydell) is pulling out all stops to get him a mainstream film project and yet the only work that's falling in Val's lap are diaper commercials. It is during this phase when out of the blue, Val's ex-wife Ellie (Tea Leoni) suggests Val's name for a project at Galaxie Studios that she thinks only Val can do justice to. The studio head Yeager (Treat Williams) is Ellie's fiance and knows Val's eccentricities too well to be confident about handing over the directorial reins. Ellie's conviction in Val's mercurial capabilities however sees Yeager giving in to his wife but not before a meeting where Yeager does see the merit of having Val as the director.

At this point Val is excited about the subject and whole-heartedly accepts the project except that he has got his conscience pricking him about working with his ex-wife who dumped him and working for the man who took away Ellie. Things take a turn for the worse when Val realizes he's become blind and his manager will not have him confess this to Ellie. In a set of a hilarious gags, Woody Allen's writing takes us through a blind Val Vaxman working on the sets of his movie with the help of a Chinese student. There's too much that goes wrong for Val and it is hard not to feel for him. In his typically neurotic manner, Woody Allen essays Val Vaxman with supreme ease for this is exactly the sort of role Woody can sleep walk through. Tea Leoni as Ellie is sweet, charming, level-headed and an apt foil to Val's idiosyncrasies and during their exchanges you also see exactly where both of them went wrong in their marriage. Treat Williams and Mark Rydell are strong pillars as far as the supporting cast is concerned. The best of the movie though is a five minute sequence where a blind Val Vaxman meets Yeager in his suite to convince him that all is well with the film. This is a side-splitting sequence with all the funny elements that we have come to love Woody Allen for.

If anything, Hollywood Ending could've been a bit shorter like Woody's standard breezy 90 minute cinematic fare. Apart from that everything else seemed right - beginning from the casting, to the performances to a storyline that is bound to leave you smiling at the end of it. Surprisingly, it didn't find too many takers for itself at the box-office. If you ask me, and again this is not something that will find too many takers, I would happily place it in a 'Best of Woody Allen' series.

Rating: 7.1/10

#174: The Secret in Their Eyes

2011-08-07T23:57:00.003+05:30

Juan Jose Campanella, a bright talent to emerge out of Latin America is best known for his being nominated twice for Best Foreign Film at the Oscars in the last ten years. His latest nomination in 2009 secured him the best foreign film with the Secret in Their Eyes, a crime thriller spanning an extensive 25 years centered around the life of an Argentine cop Benjamin Esposito (Ricardo Darin).

The movie begins with Esposito, now retired, wishing to write a memoir of the time when he was dealing with the murder of the beautiful wife of Ricardo Morales (Pablo Rago). The murder that was preceded by a brutal rape leaves Ricardo stunned and practically inert towards his daily chores. The only assurance he has from Esposito is that whenever the criminal is captured, he will be sentenced for life. Esposito's best friend, a perennially drunk colleague Sandoval (Guillermo Francella) is his best bet in an office where their boss is always out to humiliate the two. Over the course of the next twelve months, Esposito also earns a friend in Judge Irene (Soledad Vilamil) and Sandoval and he catch hold of the perpetrator of the heinous crime. All is not however hunky dory as the criminal manages to earn an official posting as a security officer within the ranks of the Argentine police.

There is no doubting that The Secret in Their Eyes has a most arresting first half an hour. As the narrative jumps back and forth from the past to the present, you are hooked to the on-screen action about to unfold. Ricardo Darin leads the top notch performances put in by the cast members and the languid air in a crime thriller is unsettling for a viewer in a good way. Where the writers (Eduardo Sacheri along with Campenella) skillfully introduce to us the first clue of the Isodoro Gomez (Javier Godino) being the criminal is not a scene that is outright convincing but something about the ease with which it is presented allows you to voluntarily forgive the transgression. The photography is nearly flawless with Felix Monti presenting a wonderful canvas of emotions on-screen in it's most delectable form and the same could be said about the haunting score. The only place where it failed to touch a chord were the parts where some of the twists in the story seemed too impractical to be true. They don't exactly jar you because these moments were few and far in between but they were liberties exercised by the writers nonetheless.

The Secret in Their Eyes is the most successful Argentine film ever and gives credence to the theory that great filmmaking is no longer the duopoly of Hollywood or Europe. Campanella nowadays spends his time working on American TV series' such as Law and Order and 30 Rock but it would be mighty surprising if we don't see him more often on the world stage in the future for his films that have a visual style and narrative that I found to be universally and unilaterally appealing. He is too precious to be wasted on American TV and the Secret in Their Eyes is an irrefutable proof of that.

Rating: 7.2/10

#173: The Fortune Cookie

2011-08-05T22:35:00.005+05:30

Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau were one of the most enduring on-screen pairings in the history of cinema and their movies ranged from the fantastic to the forgettable and it all started with The Fortune Cookie. And who better than Billy Wilder to bring them together about whom I once heard a mention on a DVD extra that the man made the most definitive movie in every genre of cinema. Whether it's Stalag17, Some Like it Hot or Double Indemnity, Billy would always leave a memorable imprint in the minds of the audience.

In The Fortune Cookie, Wilder and his long-time screenwriting partner IAL Diamond take a look at the world of personal injury lawyers and their selfish attempts to extract money from corporations. Walter Matthau in an Oscar-winning performance plays Willie Gingrich, a crooked lawyer who in the garb of giving justice to his injured brother-in-law is out to file a suit of $100,000 in damages. Jack Lemmon plays Henri Hickle, the sweet simpleton who wouldn't ride along with Gingrich in this plan but is coaxed into it because of the faint glimmer of hope of reuniting with his wife Sandy ( Judi West).

The Fortune Cookie is a light unpretentious comic tale and it has all the lines and situations in place to give you the laughs. A sub-plot of bonding between the football player Jackson (Ron Rich) who injured Hickle during a play is the only part where you might have trouble getting through with the movie. That relationship isn't crystallized well enough for it to deserve an extended climax of ten minutes that the screenwriters generously bestow it with. Walter Matthau's peformance is the star turn in the movie and dare I say even manages to steal the thunder from Jack Lemmon. As the crafty Gingrich, he delivers a flawless turn. It was no mean feat considering that during the filming of The Fortune Cookie Matthau had suffered a heart attack and yet he was able to complete the movie. Billy Wilder movies always have an interesting support cast and filling in the gap here is Perky, the aptly named insurance investigator played by yet-another Wilder favorite Cliff Osmond.

Billy Wilder could not only write, produce and direct timeless movies but also had an incredible eye for talent. That in Matthau and Lemmon he saw a duo who he could rely on for many of his future movies speaks volumes of his vision. Not to forget the fact Matthau-Lemmon pair would also go on to appear in movies of other directors. The Fortune Cookie, in that sense is a neat piece of cinema history sliced and served by Wilder like a delectable afternoon snack. In it's simplest form, it is a buoyant fun-filled comic caper that's great company for most of it's duration.

Rating: 7/10