Stereotypical Screw looses : Tryst with TIFF - II

Frustrated and cowering after The loneliest planet, I looked at the lineup of the TIFF evening and saw the summary of 'the incident'. Looked promising again. 3 sane cooks at a mental asylum caught in the frenzy when the power fails! Interesting. I expected something akin to Shutter Island and given my own very recent experience with power outages in the wake of hurricane Haha, sorry Irene, the juxtaposition felt just right. So after an arbit morning, spent trying to use my intelligence to make an unimpressive movie seem nice, I persevered and made bold to go see another movie at TIFF. A friend had remarked, that Slumdog had received rave reviews at TIFF and it had gone on to become a sweeper of all awards the subsequent year. So I was on the lookout for bragging rights towards having sampled perhaps the 2012 Oscar phenomenon! 

It was a movie by music video director Alexander Courtes and the story is essentially what I just mentioned. and more than a story, the logical loopholes stare you in the face! Power outage, the criminally insane are on the loose and their only goal seems to be to catch and torture and kill the 3 cooks! Really? Motive, someone? The only thing they want to do is kill the cooks? Insane! Oh wait! They already are!!! And so am I, for sure!!!! So, there is a super storm in the year 1989, the year is perhaps a disclaimer as to why no one has cell phones, or back up power or why the police is so slow or even better, why there are no doctors in the asylum! Yes, the asylum with over 50 inmates, has 3 security guards, with no firearms, and 0 doctors. Our sane cooks take pains to feed them, all in an attempt to make money for their dysfunctional band. Again, why work in such a high risk scenario for a band when they actually hate each other?


Then comes the actual power outage. The storm knocks off power when the inmates are in the cafeteria for food. The only 'meds' they get are from this nurse and the meds they get look like M&Ms and 2 stereotypical white pills for EVERYONE! Please! Mental health covers everything from schizophrenia to psychosis and the treatment implies 3 pills across the board??? Eli Lilly might be real upset, given their extensive research into Mental Health!!! The power goes out and JB, the main, scary security guard enlists the help of our 3 cooks to take the inmates back to their rooms. Fine. And they do, in single file. Except that they take them to their rooms, and just shut the door! No electricity, somebody? So automatic locks won't work? Even a chimp would try to wriggle the door and unlocked doors open easily, even for the insane! So they're all out, they bump off all the guards at once. Clearly a bump on the head against the wall kills the guards, but it takes a lot more to power down the insane. And remember, if you are insane, all you do is staaaare! Staaaaaaaaaaare like no tomorrow, for that is all that insane guys do!


Then starts an endless cat and mouse routine, with all forms of torture being shown explicitly on screen. So battering on the head, thrusting a rod into someone's middle, skinning someone, burning someone on a burner.... the works. Ok, so the sane get tortured by the insane, and all the sane can do is yelp! Then comes the supreme gore. One of the sane cooks, who thinks one of the insane is out to get him, sees the insane guy eat his own fingers. EWWWWWWWWW! This is not horror. This is gore. And a distinction exists as per the Oxford English Dictionary! Blairwitch Project - Scary. Saw - Gory!!! So everyone is bumped off except 2 sane cooks and at the end, one sane cook turns insane. Or does he? Does he cease to exist? Or what?

Such was my last encounter with TIFF 2011. It was also the last movie to be screened this year at TIFF. While opening, the MC said that in a previous screening 2 people passed out and he wasn't sure whether it was because of the movie or the drinking and partying. I declare, it was the movie and not because it was scary, but people burst their sides laughing! At least I did!!!!!

Inception - Fabulously phenomenal to say the least

Inception. I'll be honest. The first time I saw the name and the tag line - 'Your mind is the scene of the crime', I imagined another Matrix. Zany stunts, psychedelic imagery, and a concept so abstruse that you need to keep Wikipedia open in parallel to understand what's happening. But then, there was this nagging hope that because this movie is directed by Christopher Nolan of 'The Dark Knight' fame, it might be understandable and the directorial pedigree meant that it had to be really good. In stepped IMDB and 9.6/10 with 2000+ reviews bode well and we took the plunge. And I came out calling the movie fabulously phenomenal to say the least.

The concept itself is out of the world - all to do with dreams, psychology and the sub conscious mind. A difficult premise, and decidedly very easy for anyone to lose touch with reality while making a movie on such a delicate yet arcane concept! But having seen Batman Begins, where the movie is all about Bruce Wayne's struggles with his own psychological demons and more recently the Dark Knight which was more a movie looking into the evil psyche of the Joker, one can understand that the Nolan would make a movie that has the potential to explore the intricacies of psychology, all the while keeping a strong plot in place. In a gist, as perhaps the summary itself shows, the movie is about manipulation of the sub conscious mind. It begins with a psychedelic sequence in some oriental place, and you wonder what's going on. Suddenly there are flashes of another place and a few moments later, you can link the two. Every now and then, there is this mystery lady who shows up and you are intrigued about her role in this whole charade. The movie begins in perfect Pulp Fiction style, with a standalone scene that has little semblance to anything. And once it grips you, you're there for the whole two and a half hours, glued to the screen. Part of the reason for this is that the editing is perfectly crisp, enough to make you quickly fill in the conjunctions while you watch the movie itself! Letting out more about the plot, would perhaps kill the fun in the suspense.

The Dark Knight won a lot more because of the evil portrayal of the Joker assayed by Heath Ledger. Here, though we have Leonardo di Caprio, fresh out of yet another psychological thriller Shutter Island, one can't say that the movie is awesome just because of one leading man. The whole story is very neatly woven with threads of the plot, the concept and an additional track covering a side story involving Leo's own life. Not once in the movie do you find a disconnect between any of these threads or a redundant scene. And this is what makes the movie even more interesting. If you are even a slight bit inclined towards the arcane nature of the human psyche, you will not only enjoy the two and a half hours but also the numerous hours you might spend post the movie, thinking deeper about the concept and trying to piece all the ramifications of the taut storyline. And the music - Hans Zimmer works his magic all over again. The haunting dream signal tune stays with you forever and the background score is an integral part of the story line.

All in all, a must watch. Don't let this one go. After watching this, you'll perhaps lose track of which is reality and which one's is a vivid dream.

Two movies and a thought

This week I saw two highly interesting movies and unbeknownst to me, these movies revolved around a topic seldom ever discussed - mental health. One was a Martin Scorsese beauty called Shutter Island and the other was a Steven Soderbergh wonder called the Informant. And each had a characteristic trademark of the respective directors.

Shutter Island is a story about 2 Federal Marshals sent to Shutter Island, which houses a high security facility for the criminally insane. There are 3 buildings there, Ward A for men, Ward B for women and Ward C for the most dangerous lot. The 2 marshals are called in to find an escaped convict sorry patient, for that is what the shady shrink played by Ben Kingsley repeatedly corrects the marshals for. Leo Di Caprio plays one marshal and Mark Ruffalo, the other. Several vivid images are intertwined here and that adds to the edge-of-the-seat cinematic brilliance.

For instance, Leo keeps getting flashes of his past life in a Nazi camp, where he was one of the soldiers who ruthlessly killed several German guards. And then there is the track of his wife who he claims was killed in a fire that gutted her apartment. So one track has Leo wanting to come to Shutter Island, since the pyromaniac apartment supervisor who set the fire in the apartment was there. Leo keeps seeing his dead wife who tells him what to do, adding to his confusion. Almost as in 'The Departed', there is this constant undercurrent of suspicion, since one day, the missing convict resurfaces. And how she escaped an electric fence, and sharp rocks without a shoe is a mystery. Her crime, of having drowned her kids is a mystery as well, since she maintains she didn't do it and her kids are in school. So everything is a mystery.

And then there is a lighthouse, where nefarious acts are said to be taking place. What exactly are those acts? What massive cover up is being staged? Why does Ben Kingsley act strange? Why is the escaped convict's psychiatrist on holiday a day after she mysteriously escapes? And then on one such search, Leo's partner goes missing. Where did he go? Who is the unknown woman in a cave? It really gets interesting and the end is intense, and in typical Scorsese style - it is a surprise twist.

As for The Informant, its based on a true story, with Matt Damon playing the central anti-hero in a completely believable man-next-door demeanor. He plays an insider who turns whistleblower in exposing one of corporate America's frauds in relation to price fixing. he cohorts with the FBI in exposing these crimes and also tapes conversations, endangering his career. All hell though breaks loose, when he begins to be investigated as well, for embezzlement and he comes up with a labyrinth of lies beginning from his alleged adoption! The story has everything from fraud to lies to embezzlement to bipolar disorder all shot in typical Soderbergh style with an unrelated jazz track in the background!

The fact that we have so many movies on mental health, ranging from topics around schizophrenia, insanity and depression, I guess goes on to show the trends of our times. Mental health issues are a reality. And the mind is more mysterious, since hardly anyone has been able to unlock everything about it. Celebrity suicides, bipolar disorder, numerous cases of people killing their kin and committing suicide - the list is endless. The lack of awareness makes one look down upon the mentally unstable, and not give them the help and aid they need. When in reality, diseases of the mind are just like any other ailment, only perhaps more complex. And movies like these, are certainly a step in the right direction, since if not anything else, we know about the existence of such issues!

Invictus and Forgiveness

I happened to watch the movie Invictus the other day. It was a great movie indeed. Well, not only did it have amazing performances by Matt Damon and Morgan Freeman, but it also conveyed a lot about forgiveness. And as usual, it got me thinking. I know, I can hear you say, 'temme something new'.

There were two specific instances that caught my attention. One, when the rugby team which comprises almost only whites, except for one Native African is expected to sing the newly formed South African national anthem, which is not in Afrikaans - their usual language. And the second was when Matt Damon, the rugby team's skipper (or cappie as he's called) visits Mandela's cell in Robben Island and is appalled at the tiny living enclosure. Both these instances struck me for their ideas on forgiveness.

The Native Africans had been severely oppressed by Apartheid. And then after the struggle, they were suddenly to be treated as equals. They had been severely wronged, and in no less words, deserved an apology in kind, forever. A simple beginning was just the whites relinquishing their old Afrikaans anthem and embracing the new anthem that combined stanzas in Xhosa, Zulu, Sesotho, Afrikaans and English. This many found tough to do, but interestingly, in the movie, which is supposedly based on real life events, the rugby team doesn't just mouth the words, they sing along in the World Cup! And this in effect gave the whites a chance to be the 'bigger person'. Why? Because they needed to swallow their pride, realize their folly and take steps to make amends.

Now consider the second event - Mandela was locked up in a tiny cell on Robben Island for 27 years. Matt Damon's character remarks on the evening before the final match, that he was pensive not about the match but about how one person, who was locked up in such a tiny cell, could come out and forgive those that put him there. Here, we see another aspect of forgiveness. When a person is wronged, by another and the other person comes to apologize, the wronged person has two options. One - make a big deal out of it, and make the wrong-doer feel even more small. Or graciously accept the apology, forgive and move on. And as it turns out, the latter option actually is more deserving of respect!

So in a way, in any situation, both people have a chance to prove character. The wrongdoer can step up and show that she is ready to accept her follies and apologize and make amends. A wronged person can be the 'bigger person' by simply forgiving and letting go, by proving to the transgressor that she values the relationship more than any small incident. The tradeoff though is giving up on those few seconds of garnering importance from the wrongdoer and having the wrongdoer desperately seek you out, give you importance and try to make amends. At the end of the day, it is up to each person to decide what to do. It is a tough choice to make, but the choice has to be made!

And this need not be the case only in huge communal or racial tiffs. Take a simple story - One person (Anna) has hurt another (Beth) through some action or word. The aftermath has 2 options - One, Anna comes up and of her own apologizes, or two, Beth confronts her on the same. In the latter case, it is very easy to analyze the psychological underpinnings, and say that Anna acted the way she did because of whatever reason and so, the onus is on her to ensure that the relationship is repaired. In fact, Beth would come and confront Anna with the case, if and only if she felt that their relationship was strong enough to warrant a confrontation. Usually in very strong relationships, a confrontation does indeed happen wherein Beth tells Anna why she is hurt and Anna then has to make it up.

Now take case 1, which is a bit more complex. It depends here on how much one values the other. Maybe Anna values the relationship a lot and so wants to put to rest any possible cogitations that may be bothering Beth. So she goes ahead and clears the situation. Now Beth has two options again. One, she can be the bigger person and make Anna feel comfortable, and let the issue go. Or two, Beth can perhaps act up, and make a big issue out of the whole thing, and prove her ascendancy over Anna, and make her feel small and abashed.

Now, my take is, that Anna shows character by stepping up and clearing up the situation, and Beth shows more character by letting the issue go, but not after sufficient communication. The time when Beth acts up and tries to put down Anna, is where the whole situation gets a bit dicey, since it looks like an attempt to prove an already proven point and trying to push an already pushed down person further into the earth. And this many-a-time, doesn't help Beth's image in Anna's eyes. Perhaps Anna expects a good friend to want to make her comfortable, despite the transgression and expects some 'bigger person' behavior from Beth.

So everywhere, everyone has a choice to prove character. It is up to the person always whether she wants to accept the opportunity or let it go in favor of 15 seconds of fame!

The answer is out there...

When something begins to consume you, the best option is to let it all out. If you are consumed by anger, bury your head in a pillow and scream your head out. If you are consumed by the hurt of a betrayal, you have two options, confront the person who betrayed you and let it go, or bury your head in a pillow and cry your heart out. If you are consumed by self-doubt, as I am right now, tell someone, and if there is no one around to listen, just put it out there, the cosmic energy will take it somewhere.

I saw the movie Julie and Julia last night, and I loved it. A simple story of a lady in the early 1940s, the wife of a diplomat, moving countries and continents, searching for something to do that would define her. She falls in love with Paris and French food. She wants to write a cook book, taking French cooking to the American world. Her part of the story traces her travails trying to get published. A young woman in the early 2000s, with a lackluster career and a half-written novel without a publisher, wants to find a definition of her own life, something that she can wake up to happily in the morning and decides to embark on a Julie/ Julia project. She starts a blog, that runs for a year, as she cooks every recipe in Julia Child's 'Mastering the Art of French Cooking'. Her blog is an instant success and she is covered by the NY Times, gets multiple calls from agents who want to work with her on a book. And everything ends happily ever after.

So it's got writing a book, blogging and following your dreams. And I wonder, what is the point of writing here, unless I know someone is reading it. Like Julia Child says in the movie, when her first publisher chooses not to publish her book, " 8 years of my life wasted. Of what use is writing, if no one wants to publish it". I dream of writing one day, soon enough. For me, my blog is a means of testing the waters, if I may, to see whether I do indeed have it in me to make what others may want to read. And many-a-time, the absence of any sign tells me that I don't have it in me. I try to avoid the bellowing sound that resounds in my head telling me that I am perhaps wasting my time, and I would be better off doing something else, because I do not want to hear that response.

And then I wonder, what if one's virtual writings are liked primarily by people who know and like what one is in real life, the content of what you write, notwithstanding. Is it worth changing who you are, just so that people encourage what you like doing? The fiercely independent person in me, may perhaps want to vociferously declare - NO! But the fiercely passionate about writing person inside me may squeak - maybe yes. And that, whoever is listening out there, is the gist of 'drowning in self doubt'. Do I have the right answer? No. But when consumed with the question of 'whether all of this makes sense', I just float the question out there, hoping somehow, somewhere I will find an answer, an answer either one I want to hear, or an answer for which I develop the courage to hear.....

My first tryst with Hari Puttar....

Harry Potter. Ok. Long long ago when the hoopla started, I took the stance of a die hard Enid Blyton fan. I said that I would not, under any circumstance, allow my idea of a kiddie book be changed from an Enid Blyton perspective to something else. I refused to allow Jo, Bessie and Fannie of the Enchanted Wood be dethroned by Harry Potter and his exotic name wallah friends. And thus I lived for a very long time. I read no book in the Potter series. Malvika told me scores of times that I must mussssssssssst read Harry Potter. I snobbishly repeated my stance, and she very sweetly, very patiently tried to reason with me, that the two genres were different. I refused to listen, since I was very very contented with my view. My cousins swore by Harry. My nephews never touched a Blyton, but read Harry Potter in 2 nights! My cousin, who is all of 20 years elder to me was a fan. My watchman told me about Hari Puttar, whose books his son used to read - Apparently, his son decided school books were worthless, and he needed to find his own Hogwarts! And yet, I stood my ground

Then many many years later, while I was vacationing in Mumbai, my friend in Hyd, assumed that I would be a Potter fan, and when Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince released, she booked tickets for me as well, when they were going out together as a gang. I got to know from an SMS at 3 am, that I was meeting Harry Potter on such and such date, time blah blah blah. I kept quiet. Upon reaching Hyd, I told her meekly, that I did not know the funda of Harry Potter, and I tried preaching my 'value system' - Kiddie book = Enid Blyton and none else! Sounded more like 'Moochein ho toh Natthulal jaise ho, warna na ho - from Amitabh Bachhan's Sharabi'. She responded with a look that combined one of aghast + disdain + 'Kya pagal ladki hai' etc etc. So I decided not to belabor my point and just go with the flow.

This, turned out to be the turning point in my value system life! So, I was seeing the sixth installment of the Potter franchise. I did not know the names of Harry's friends. I had a vague idea of the premise and I had 2 Potter fans on each side at the theater. The conversion was complete. I fell in love with Potter and Hogwarts, and everything Potteresque. I loved the picturisation, I loved the old old cupboards in the upper stories of Hogwarts - it kinda triggered a new wave of imagination in me. I loved the magic, the characters, the nuances, the premise. I now want to read all of the books!

And that's when I realized that there was a key positioning folly here. Potter is not in direct competition with Jo, Bessie, Fannie, Saucepan, Silky and Moonface. Potter is for another generation, another age group. So my assumptions underlying my 'value system' were flawed on account of the prevalent data then (thanks to flawed advertising... huh), and hence some minor tweaking was desired! So I was justified in holding my view and even more justified now, in changing it. So now, I have my work cut out for my next term break. Harry Potter and the Goblet of fire, Harry Potter and the chamber of secrets, Harry Potter and the order of the phoenix, Harry Potter and the prisoner of Azkaban, Harry Potter and the deathly hallows, Harry Potter and the half blood prince - HERE I COME!!!!!

Cheers to optimism

Ok, almost the whole world would be talking about the Academy awards. Almost every Indian would be going gaga over the great Indian success story. Almost every person even remotely associated with the movie / India / Mumbai, would have an opinion. Granted. Then why am I writing about the same phenomenon? Well, I wrote before on the Slumdog Phenomenon, as I'd like to call it, and I write again, since I feel very happy with the results, more so, because this whole event is an example of the power of hope.

The Slumdog victory is no tiny achievement. 80% strike rate! As though working on a checklist -
X Best Picture
X Best Director – Danny Boyle
X Best Original Score – A. R. Rahman
X Best Original Song – "Jai Ho", by A. R. Rahman (music) & Gulzar (lyrics)
X Best Adapted Screenplay – Simon Beaufoy
X Best Cinematography – Anthony Dod Mantle
X Best Film Editing – Chris Dickens
X Best Sound Mixing – Resul Pookutty, Richard Pryke, Ian Tapp
OOPS! Best Sound Editing – Tom Sayers
OOPS! Best Original Song – "O... Saya", by A. R. Rahman & M.I.A. (lyrics) (cos the other song took its place!!!)

But why is the whole world talking about the Oscars? Well, it is a dream for everyone who is even remotely related to the entertainment industry to be feted at the Oscars. Kate Winslet very cutely described this alluding to her shampoo bottle that she imagined to be an Oscar all through her childhood. A R Rahman called it a dream come true, speaking of the power of love that brought him to the Kodak theater. Why? Because the Academy and the judges are all accomplished in their own right. There's a saying in Tamil that goes as 'Vasishtar Vaayaal Brahma Rishi' which means, that being feted by the pinnacle of the field is the best compliment one can get. So when the best in the art anoint you to have given the best performance of the year, it is something to feel very very proud about.

So while everyone is talking about how Slumdog swept the Oscars, and almost everyone says that India has finally found global recognition blah blah blah, here's my POV.

First, so many 'Indians' detracted the movie saying that it was a portrayal of the filth called India, about how everyone outside our country took morbid pleasure portraying an India of nightmarish proportions! Many so called 'patriots' even went on to say that one must boycott the movie, since it portrays India in poor light. Back then in my post on My take on the Slumdog Phenomenon, I had spoken about this view held by people, and how totally parochial the view was. And now, as some people who believe that creativity is border-less and knows no language or religion got together and made a movie about the power of hope and optimism, almost everyone wants a piece of that victory pie!

When the nominations were out, I rather strongly believed that Slumdog might not make the cut. My main point of contention was that Slumdog, as a movie is much too 'happy' to win an Oscar. Take the year 2005 for instance - Million Dollar Baby. Clint Eastwood is a great guy who makes great movies. But the movie left you feeling so sad! Gladiator - saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad. Lord of the Rings - Return of the King - Confused!!! The Departed - Shaken. Slumdog Millionaire - Smiling, happy! Doesn't seem to fit, right? And then I thought - maybe since the times are so dire with the words recession, unemployment, losses, meltdown doing the rounds in all discussions, maybe at least somewhere the feeling should be good and happy, perhaps even in a movie theater for those 3 hours. Maybe?

The movie, according to me is a tribute to the spirit of Mumbai. I know it sounds cliched, but look at some aspects. This city gives you the Bindaas attitude. A life of having to fight the traffic, the crowds and the commute distances sort of gives us Mumbaikars the 'Kya Farak Padta Hai' nature that teaches you to fight all odds to survive. Mumbai teaches you to be street smart and the way the 'Slumdog' even gets a job in a call center, shows the never-say-die spirit that eventually allows almost all Mumbaikars to survive, and the hard working, fortunate ones to even make it big! This city gives people the will to fight to reach a goal. Like how Jamal has the strong wish to find Latika, and the reason why he participates in WWTBAM was because she sees the show. And at the end, the movie leaves you with a tangy happy happy feeling - much like how a hard core Mumbaikar eventually feels about his city - No matter how much one might crib about this city, when the time comes to pit Mumbai against another city, a Mumbaikar is ferociously in love with Maximum city - the taste of the city can never turn bitter for a Mumbaikar.

Some may argue that the city has nothing to do with these attitudes. I say, what is a city without the component people???

For me, this movie symbolizes Mumbai and the spirit of hope and optimism. Hoping to meet the love of one's life, hoping to survive, hoping to make something of one's life. And so, I guess the best way to sign off from this rather long post would be to quote another one of my favorite movies, multiple Oscar winner again - The Shawshank Redemption. "Hope is a good thing, maybe one of the best things, and a good thing never dies." Jai Ho!

India consciousness - taking a dig in the name of patriotism

This whole India - consciousness is at an all time high. Late last year, we had the Olympic Gold, and bronze medals - firsts for India, a brilliant test series win in cricket, Vishwanathan Anand becoming the World Champion, Chandrayaan. Add to that, the fact that India has been impacted much less by the global economic downturn. Granted, there is a slowdown, but not as much a slump as is seen in the global market. At least the effect is seeping in much slowly.

And at the start of this year, came the Slumdog phenomenon. A bunch of Golden Globes, and 10 Oscar nominations. All of a sudden, everyone had an opinion. Some said Slumdog was a slight on Indianness. Some said Slumdog was a true portrayal of the Indian underbelly. Some commented on some others' opinions. Basically suddenly, everyone was getting very patriotic and very touchy about India's image.

And now, the Australian Open, has given Indians a lot more to feel proud about. Boys singles champion - Yuki Bhambri and Mixed doubles - Mahesh Bhupathi and Sania Mirza. But as is always the case, there have been rumblings about Sania Mirza, her attitudes blah blah blah. And then again, there are some who say that doubles achievements are not really all that praiseworthy. I for one, disagree vehemently on these views. One, Ms Mirza plays. All said and done, with almost no support in India, in terms of tennis infrastructure, the small time Hyderabad gal has made a mark for India in the tennis arena. Breaking into championship tennis, into the top 50 ranks is extreeeeeeeeeeeemely difficult. But she relentlessly plays, and thanks to her, and Indian woman at least has a presence in world class tennis. Second, look at doubles matches. They are full of energy and players have to be agile, alert and brilliant in team work. When Federer won the Olympic gold in doubles, no one discounted his victory. So there really isn't any reason why anyone must discount the achievements of our doubles victors.

So this whole India - consciousness, is more of India - criticism, that is very rarely, if ever, constructive.

The next bout of patriotism, hopefully, will come up when the Oscar awards are given out. But then again, there will be talks of how a western portrayal of poverty and sadness won accolades for a firangi, at India's cost. But by then, I am sure most of us would be used to such comments and views and would know better than to take such thoughts seriously.

My take on the Slumdog phenomenon

First things first. This is not my review of Slumdog. This has been an opinion I have been wanting to write for a very long time. I saw Slumdog Millionaire a while back, and I must say it is a brilliant movie. When it won a slew of Golden Globes, I was highly impressed, as were a whole bunch of people. I felt the music, the screenplay, why the movie itself was brilliant, and the kudos it received, was amazing.

One of my friends pointed out a blog by an Indian, who had slammed the movie and called it a typical western movie. My friend guessed that I might agree with what that blogger had to say. And my take is this. On an absolute scale, this movie is brilliant. The way it has been taken, of every question's correct answer being related in some way or the other to Jamal's life is cinematographic excellence. The 'Rama's weapon' question, is blunt. The hard hit behind the knowledge of the correct answer takes your breath away. At some places the string binding the boy's life to the question's answer goes slack. Like the 'Cambridge Circus' question. However, as a concept, I must say that the movie is gripping and decidedly well taken.

Now the things I didn't like. India is really not a shitty place. And no one is such a huge fan of a filmstar to want to jump into his own poo, just to see the star and get an autograph. The extreme portrayal of filth and dirt in Mumbai, does not do justice to Maximum city. Second, the love story was insipid. According to me, the two looked more like thick friends than anything else. Never once was a look of love visible in either of the two protagonists.

That said, I have mainly two comments. One, if Indians feel that this is a gross affront to Indianness, I'd say, personally I think, NO. Begging cartels are a reality, and it takes a hard hitting reality check to actually get the wheels of action moving. And the bias of the 'pseudo-affluent' towards the humble chaiwallahs, is an undercurrent, not just in India, but the world over. Marie Antoinette is a phenomenon everywhere. But the one thing that really irks me is the fact that almost everyone wants to dwell upon the dirty, awful part of India, which according to me, and I must agree with the Slumdog slammers here, is a little over the top. I feel, and this has been my take for a very long time now, that between every 10 'India dirty' movies and books, let us have at least one book or movie that can portray the India as we see it - vibrant, lively, brimming with hope and progress as well. Face it. I live in India, and I see not just slums and filth, but a lot more - Democracy, safety on streets, festivity, cultural vibrancy and so much more. And I feel that once the media, and the ones that fete art begin to like and applaud Hopeful, Happy India with the same zeal that meets Dirty India, me and also a whole bunch of those who felt that Slumdog was crappy because it was anti Indian, will feel that India is being given her rightful due.

Yippee for India at the Golden Globes....

Yay! Slumdog Millionnaire was a huge winner at the Golden Globes. At last something is looking up for India.

This movie was shot by a foreigner, but starred an Indian crew. It was shot in Mumbai, but won accolades outside. It was a foreign film with an Indian soundtrack. A foreign director with Indian actors.

The win is in line with the storyline, in line with Indian cinema as well. Sweet dreams bordered by destiny, fighting odds, but leading to happy endings. The movie is essentially Indian. We fight, we fight the system, the enemies, the corruption, the sorrow, the poverty, but we win. We win in terms of happiness, culture quotient, hope and survival. This movie is that spirit captured on celluloid.

And a win for the music score (completely Indian with Mr Rahman making desi music - Thank you sir, you have made India truly proud), the director and the best movie of 2008, is a promising ray of hope for Indian cinema, and definitely India. After all, this is an Indian story of an Indian dream, shot in India with Indian actors, Indian music, and based on a book written by an Indian. This was one highly deserved victory, and one highly celebrated one as well. Cheers to India.

Just an afterthought - If Danny Boyle could manage to make a movie that was Indian in all respects, couldn't we Indians make a 100% Desi movie, complete with an Indian director? I mean I am happy about this win, but that kind of a win, might make a billion Indians ecstatic!

These awards truly feted talent - Kate Winslet for the Reader and Revolutionary road - a highly talented actress, who has always been eluded by golden statuettes, Slumdog Millionaire, and of course the man with the Golden Touch - Steven Spielberg who was given the Cecil B Demille award.

And finally - one thing caught my eye at the end of the ceremony - the Golden Globes are 'audited' by E&Y - a Big 4 accounting firm. So wow! The Big 4 cover everything - from fraud to the Golden Globes - Inspiring stuff indeed.........

This was one happy way to write my hundredth post at The Lilac Avenue!!!

Dasaavatharam - Heeeeeeeeeeeellllllllpppppppp S.O.S

Once upon a time, not so long ago, in the feud of the superstars of the South, one Mr. Rajnikant made a movie called Sivaji. This was an out and out masala movie, received extremely well by audiences the world over. So, our other Mr. Movie star had to make another movie to prove he was better – or wadever! So he walked up to Mr. K S Ravikumar – a director, who is better known to have directed movies like Padayappa and Muthu, all huge BO successes – and using all his might (a lot of which can also be seen on screen, as he splits at his seams – someone tell Mr. Kamal Haasan to go to the gym!) – said, “Dude, I want a movie made for me.”

So the meek director says, “y…y…yessir.. b..b..but…. s..sss…story… ssssir?”
“Oh hell, does it matter? I need to be in every frame. That is it! Give it some nice historic name… Shivaji… oh na na… that is taken… how is Haider Ali? Nah, then I cannot have a string of women around…. So no… umm… mythological…. Adonis? Well… that is too much of a giveaway, (sniggling to himself ). No… Dasaavatharam!! Yes!!! 10 roles! Great….. Get on with it now…”

“Y… Y…Yessir.”

This is how the magnum FLOPus Dasaavatharam, it appears, was made. (At least that is the only logical explanation to this highly illogical torture.

Now, many people have trashed this movie. No doubt. Everyone has been expecting something out of the world from this movie, because the last time Kamal Haasan made a movie with more than 2 roles, the movie was a runaway laugh riot (remember Michael Madana Kama Rajan?). 4 roles – awesome movie. 10 roles – you do the math. That was the logic.

But unfortunately, this movie has been made with the express interest of being added to the actor’s resume. Why? 20 years down the line, if he is remembered while his statue is being unveiled, the people can count this movie as being one where he has displayed his acting prowess, by starring in a bizarre piece of so-called creative cinema. But hey – why grate on our nerves to add on to your resume? Plus, the only thing true in the above line is ‘bizarre’!

So why is this movie so faaltoo? (sorry for being so blunt, but we never trashed haal-e-dil, because we never knew it had already been released! Has it?? Hell, who’s bothered?!!) Anyway, the plot – basically revolves around the travails of a troubled Indian scientist, a victim of different circumstances, as he desperately chases a vial of the most deadly virus to date– a product of synthetic biochemistry. The movie begins with a scene depicting a 12th century fight between Shivites and Vasihnavites. ‘What on earth is the relation to the plot’, you ask? Hey remember, we need 10 roles? Our friend had been back-role-creating (as in backward integration), and he thought all those who like mythological movies, may come to see that aspect! And, he now has to worry about only 9 more roles – Tadaaaa.

Ok so where does the plot start? Our protagonist is a scientist in USA. He begins by realizing the head honchos of his team have sold their consciences to the terrorists, and as usual, he is the one man army who needs to recover the vial. So, a friend by mistake sends the vial (now if the virus was so deadly, why was it callously tossed into the back seat?), by courier to India. So he somehow sneaks into the hold of a cargo plane and lands mysteriously in Chennai airport.

So 2 roles dikhe.

Now we need 8 more. So what do we do? Hey we need a bad guy. Who should you call??? ‘Kamal haasan’ (To be sung in the Ghost busters tune please. All his faces look like ghosts anyway.) So the villain of the movie Mr. Christian Fletcher, who seems to have landed from Krypton - because just like Superman, he never seems to get hurt, even if hit a billion times, or if he jumps off a tall building - is also……. Yeappp Kamal Haasan.

3 down 7 to go.

Protagonist (lets call him P) lands in India, and he is taken for questioning. Now every chor needs a pulees right? Again….. no prizes for guessing. Pulees is Kamal again, in a dorky getup.

6 more, guys… that’s all.

So how do we create more roles? Ok the recipient of the courier containing the vial is an old granny (highly annoying old woman), who, again is… I am not completing the sentence. Our dumb old granny decides to submit the vial to the Lord, and this she does by deftly walking over half a dozen shoulders (hey grandma could also have been from Krypton!) and kerplunk…. Into the Lord’s Idol goes the vial. And by now, I have lost my patience.

Oh did I mention the fact that Mallika Sherawat is in the movie too? She is just made to play the role of the moll, and nothing else, and she is bumped off pretty early on. So… go figure! A highly irritating, dumb, mad, annoying Asin grates on your nerves as she goes screaming, ranting, bellowing, shrieking – you get it right? So much for the female saviors of the movie.

Oh I forgot, we are just at panchavtar!! What about the rest? So also thought the director. So what did he decide to do? Well, give the scientist a turncoat friend, and make his wife a Japanese. Tadaaa we have a Karate master who wants to avenge his student’s death – role number 6!

Neeext – A huge Muslim guy who apparently is encountered in a freak accident between his vehicle and that of P. Role – nothing or should I say role number 7.

Oh then we have a Sardarji singer, who again has no role, save for being role number 8. He did look a lot like Gulshan Grover though!

Two more roles, two more roles!! Ok pick up an issue in Tamil Nadu - Sale of river sands - and give that issue an activist and you have role number…. 9!!! Relevance to the plot at hand? Oh shut up! Don’t ask stupid questions.

The final role – the icing on the cake – none other than oh yeah – Dubyaman!!! Old man Bush is role number 10! And of course, how can anyone resist taking pot shots at the US Prez? Yeah, so they show him as someone who doesn’t know that NaCl is common salt! NoComments!

I must say – Bush, the Sardarji, the tall Muslim guy, the villain – Fletcher and the Supergranny – all look the same – like ghosts or aliens or whatever you wanna call em!

The weirdest thing is that in all of these 10 roles, no one is the hero, and no one is the villain? Surprised? Dumbstruck? Of course man! The hero and the villain are both ‘circumstances beyond your control’. P just makes an attempt at following the vial wherever ‘circumstance’ (lets call it circy) takes it. So Circy is the villain here. And then finally a Tsunami apparently saves the day. How???? Hey don’t say I am mad. Did you know that the virus could have killed all of Tamil Nadu? Tsunami killed only a few thousands. It’s all relative mate, right Mr. Einstein?? So here Circy is the hero! Get it??? And the real domescrew is where our meek director performs a charged up, enthusiastic dance at the end of the movie praising the protagonist. Why? I don't know... If you figure it out, please lemme know.....

Sometime in the early 60s, the then superstar Sivaji Ganesan acted in a movie called Navaratri. Here he portrayed 9 roles. One of a leper, one of a doctor, one of a thief and so on. The story traces the journey of a woman from the first day of Navaratri to the 9th, as she encounters a different character each day. Compare that with Dasaavatharam. Need I say more? Mr. Kamal Haasan, you can’t be said to portray 10 roles by playing all the roles in a movie. If that were the case, what if Amitabh Bachchan had played all the roles in Satte Pe Satta including his double role, his six brothers, Amjad Khan and Hema Malini? We could also have had Dashavtar!!! But we in Bollywood would have preferred to call it ‘cost-cutting’ instead. Was this the motive? Hmmmm food for thought – what with inflation, food crisis and so on. Highly commendable. One last comparison. MI:2 also dealt with a stolen virus – Chimera. But I must say that movie was more tastefully taken, less over the top, highly interesting (in comparison, highly is an understatement), and Tom Cruise as Ethan Hunt was a billion times better. Annnnnd the plot had a clearly defined hero and villain. Not Circy.

All in all, this movie was a waste of time, money, energy. And all you ardent fans, who remember Kamal best as Nayagan, or the quadruplet in Michael Madana Kama Rajan, DON’T SEE THIS, OR THE REMAINING RESPECT FOR HIS ART WILL BE LOST.

My 2 virtual trysts with Islamic terrorism

What do the book ‘The Afghan’ and the movie ‘Aamir’ have in common? Islamic terrorism as a backdrop. What do they not have in common? Sorry for being blunt, but the sheer substance of both plots. Since I had the chance of encountering both over the past week, I just thought I’d share my two-pence-worth thoughts.

Let us start with the Afghan. The plot, as is always the case, revolves around an AQ threat to the US. All the allied intelligence forces of the US and the UK have as evidence are, a laptop belonging to a financial wizard belonging to the higher echelons of the AQ and a rather ambiguous phrase ‘Al-Isra’, that literally translates to the mythical journey from earth to Allah undertaken by Prophet Muhammed. It is up to the ‘smart’ guys of the CIA and MI5 to try to figure out what major catastrophe awaits the US or the UK or some other part of the world.

The solution, they soon realize, is to send a Para brought up in Iraq into the proverbial ‘inner circle’. What happens thereafter is the story. Or at least that is what the build-up of the story betrayed.

Unfortunately, as happens with all major projects, the distance between the goal and the end result is too much. Although the terror plot as professed to have been hatched by the AQ looks truly formidable, the whole story which is supposed to trace how the Intelligence forces of the world uncover this deadly plot, just seems to pull on, describing inch by inch the mountainous terrain of the Tora Bora! Secondly, no achievements of the deadly/feared Afghan, as he is many-a-time referred to, which in turn give him the epithet are described. Other than being a true son of the soil, and displaying true Pashtun characteristics of being a daredevil, brave-heart fighter, typical characteristics which unfortunately do not warrant a real reverence from the side of the AQ, no other great behavioral or leadership milestones are described. Alright, so he is accepted as one of the clan for some reason not known to us. But then he is directly sent by Osama himself to be a part of their most shocking event to date. Why? Because of an old rendezvous in a cave wherein the then 14 year old Afghan had clumsily mumbled that he wanted to fight for Allah! Oh well, Go figure!!! Alright!!!! So he is sent to the most ambitious AQ attack to date. And what does he do there? Acts like a silent observer. As if he has been put into the book, just because they need a firangi protagonist! All in all, everything happens like clockwork. All pieces fall into place as if the whole plot – both sides – have been orchestrated by the intelligence forces. And, surprisingly no former friends of the Afghan, including his inmates at Gitmo, who ironically had ratified the Afghan’s story try to make contact with the Afghan, even by chance. Plus, you seem to discern the actual plot pretty early in the story.

So the high points – Highly picturesque descriptions of Afghanistan and Waziristan which have more than amplified my desire to go look at these beautiful geographical blessings of nature and a truly formidable, deadly idea of the AQ.

This puts in mind another book on terrorism that I read a few months ago – The Bourne Betrayal. The plot – very well conceived, embedding a personal vendetta into the greater milieu of terrorism. The modus operandi – a tad fantastic – a la Face/Off. The suspense – brilliant. The protagonist’s operation – very believable. He does not have situations and opportune events presented to him on a platter. So, the resulting book is quite interesting, fast-paced and a real page turner all the way.

Now we go to the second topic – the movie called Aamir. The plot – simple yet believable. A Muslim doctor lands from the UK and is shocked to realize that there is no one there to pick him up outside the airport. He is given a cell phone, where an faceless voice tells him what to do. He is told that his family has been kidnapped and he needs to follow the instructions in order to see them alive. The viewer then travels with Aamir through his day tying to figure out the labyrinthine plot that the villain has in mind. As said before, the plot is plain simple.

The magic lies in the way the movie has been taken. Indian media has been rather vocal about the way in which the movie was taken, using hidden cameras to provide the ‘realism’, so to say. And I am afraid the ploy has delivered. Over and above imparting a real feel to the goings on, you view the movie as if you are a by-stander watching Aamir as he follows the guidelines provided by the caller. A second high point is the characterization of the protagonist. He is an average middle class youth, who is keen on carving a niche for himself in his life and supporting his younger siblings. This is a true projection of the urban youth of today, who play no part in the fundamentalist manifestations of the terrorists of today, but that of the hapless victim. So you can actually experience his vexation at being the chosen one, his frustration at not being able to understand why things happen the way they happen and also his vacillation as the plot draws to a close, wherein he is torn between his personal loss and a humanitarian loss. Finally, one must applaud the acting capabilities of the lead actor – Rajeev Khandelwal. He has definitely entered the skin of the character and portrayed the complex emotions, with aplomb. Not a mean achievement for a first movie.

So although a simple premise, the juxtaposition of the plot, the characterization and the acting capabilities of the protagonist make this movie a must-see.