Organised Medical Profession and a Few Loose Cannons

It is sometimes funny or even weird the way two films connect in your head. Recently while reading the script of Dallas Buyers Club my mind kept going back to You Don’t Know Jack, a “made for the TV” film with Al Pacino and Susan Sarandon in it that I'd seen a few months back. On the surface there is no connection between the two films, apart from the fact that they are stories inspired by real people.

While Dallas Buyers Club is about Ron Woodroof, an AIDS patient who smuggles medicines that

helped AIDS patients but weren’t approved by the FDA in the USA. There is a lot of social subtext; of how in the beginning there was a misconception that only gay people got AIDS and how Woodroof in spite of being straight gets it. The transformation of his character from being someone selfish who is trying to stretch his life beyond the thirty days that the doctors had given him, to a person who seeks larger good of people with his actions.

You Don’t Know Jack on the other hand is about Dr. Jack Kevorkian, a

pathologist and an advocate of physician-assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia. He fights for right of his patients to die with dignity. Call it a dichotomy or anything else, he chooses Gandhian way of protesting when he is arrested for his actions. First, refuses to pay the bond for his bail and then goes on hunger strike in jail to make his protest heard.

Basically, both Ron and Jack take on the Medical Bureaucracy for what they feel is right.

In India I can only of Ek Doctor Ki Maut with Pankaj Kapur in the lead in this genre of films. Please let me know if any other film made on same lines.

Heard At Last

I saw the Malayalam short film Kelkunnundo? (Are You Listening?) by  Geetu Mohan Das. It is the fulfilment of a long cherished wish, having heard and read a lot about this film since the time it was made some four years back.

It is a story of a little blind girl who lives by coalescing the world inside her head and the world outside. Yes, it does helps to have a world inside your head if you’re stifled by a disability, so, if you feel you are ignored in the real world, you can be happy inside your head. The only thing you’ve to be careful about is that you don’t end up with schizophrenia (pun intended). I remember being a cricketer to a pilot flying my own plane sitting in a corner (where there was least chance of me getting hurt), while other kids were busy playing.



The sound of this video is on the lower side. So, it would be better if you download it and play it using VLC Player with high volume.

PS: I’d messaged Geeta when the news of the  Liar’s Dice making it to the competitive section of the  Sundance film festival had started trickling in saying that I’d like to see it if there was any preview show in Kochi and even Kelkunnundo? In her reply she mentioned that Kelkunnundo? is available online.

Disabling Imagery

I had wrote this essay ages back for the British Film Institute's website about the representation of disability in Bollywood. The weblink www.bfi.org.uk/disablingimagery of this has gone missing, so, I'm posting it here:

“Movies are so rarely great art, that if we cannot appreciate great trash, we have very little reason to be interested in them”.

Pauline Kael

  This somewhat acerbic thought of long time film reviewer with the New Yorker, stands true for most - probably every film industry in the world, and specifically for the Hindi film industry or Bollywood as it is popularly called; which is famous for churning out trite formulaic stuff year after year. So, what you get at the end, is hundred odd variations of a couple of storylines with the staple Masala (i.e. ingredients) to satisfy the taste of the average film buff, like - five songs, three fight sequences, a couple of melodramatic emotional scenes that can force open the floodgates of your tear ducts and two comical interludes, which may sometime border on plain buffoonery by a couple of sidekicks. This has been passed on generation to generation, from time immemorial.

In the given scenario, it is really an onerous task to analyze the representation of disability in Hindi Cinema. Here, Bollywood proves the adage that ‘Films are merely a reflection of the society’ to be true. Since the disabled lot are marginalised in the Indian society, the same is reflected in Hindi films. So what you see is a fleeting moment where a crippled beggar extends his begging bowl into the window of a flashy imported car, or our good hearted protagonist helping a visually impaired person cross the busy city road and in return getting heart felt blessings from the less fortunate.

If we ponder over the films in the history of Hindi Cinema, where the disabled characters have got some decent footage (length of role in Bollywood parlance) or where they have got anything to do which is of consequence; we may find, not more than what we can count on our fingers and toes put together.

 Initially, directors resorted to showing physical deformity as a symbolic representation of negative traits in a character. So, in agrarian times of black and white films, one would find the lecherous land owner/money lender with an awkward gait or deformity in any other part of the body. As time passed by, the villain or character with negative traits became physically subtler. Now he/she comes with cerebral traits like paranoia or psychosis. Some films have also used disability to evoke hilarity, like a stammering sidekick or a lame supporting actor.

On the other hand directors like showman Raj Kapoor and Manoj Kumar have taken physical deformity to the other extreme. One still vividly remembers bald David who is shown using a crutch in Raj Kapoor’s ‘Boot Polish’ (a black and white film released in the early 50’s propagating the Utopian dream of post-independence India) singing to his adopted street urchins - ‘Nanhe Munne Bache Teri Muthi Me Kya Hai?’ (Little children what are you holding in your fists?); and the children reply by singing ‘Muthi Me Hai Taqdeer Humari/Humne Kismet Ko Bas Me Kiya Hai’ (We are holding our destiny in our fists /we have taken our fate under control). And, who can forget the character of the ‘Good Samaritan’ with an amputated leg, played by Pran in Manoj Kumar’s ‘Upkaar’ (Favour) released in late 60’s.The impact of the character on the audience was not due to any intrinsic qualities, but because of the shock value. This was probably the first time that Pran was portraying an out and out positive role in his long film career.

The first real attempt to make a film with disabled characters in a central role was by Gulzar in the early 70’s with ‘Koshish’ (Effort) which showed the life of a speech and hearing impaired couple played by Sanjeev Kumar and Jaya Bhachchan. In ‘Sparsh’ (Touch) Naseerudin Shah plays the part of a visually impaired principal of a special school for blind children, who falls in love with a widowed volunteer (played by Shabana Azmi) who comes to serve in the school to fill the vacuum in her life after the death of her husband. Made by a female director Sai Paranjpe, ‘Sparsh’ was the most sincere attempt to tell both sides of the story with a rare unsentimental equilibrium, dealing with the complexes embedded in the minds of both the characters. The early nineties saw the release of the most hyped film about the disabled: ‘Khamoshi-The Musical’ (Silence) directed by Sanjay Bhansali, which dealt with the trauma of a deaf - mute couple who find it difficult to come to terms with the personal aspirations of their daughter who is the pivot of their life. Though this film failed to deliver what it had promised, it is still remembered for the superb acting by the three main actors - Nana Pateker, Seema Biswas and Manisha Koirala.

In fact there are numerous other films that reinforce the stereotypes about disability - from ‘Super Crips’ to wallowing, philosophising invalids.

The liberalisation of the Indian economy over the last decade has seen the emergence of niche films in what is called ‘Hinglish’ shown in multiplexes in the metros, catering mainly to the urban westernized audience. The mainstay of these films is either spoofing the hypocrisy entrenched in traditional lifestyle or showing the angst of people marginalised because of their sexual orientation. So, we can hope that one day one of these niche filmmakers will find interesting stories from other groups of marginalised people such as the disabled.

The Untitled Kartik Krishnan Project

The term conflict of interest is being tossed around a lot in the media these days, and I too am grappling with it in my own small way after deciding to write about The Untitled Kartik Krishnan Project, a film with a title eponymous to my friend’s name and he himself being the leading man in it. That was not the only problem; I virtually knew everything about the film from reading and hearing a couple of behind the scene stories. So, after a few false starts in writing a formal review I altogether dropped the idea of writing about the film. Then it suddenly dawned on me that this is my blog so why bother about formality and who in the hell cares about conflict of interest.

The film directed by independent filmmaker Srinivas Sunderrajan, it is supposedly the first mumble core film to be made in India.

Here we get a Charlie Kaufman-ish feel with the leading man playing himself and the line between the real and fiction blurs, Kartik who works for an IT MNC and is passionate about films dying to make his first short film based on his own script, for this he meets director Srinivas  Sunderrajan (Vishwesh K), who has recently met Kartik's idol Quentin Tarantino and posted his experience on a blog.

What we get out of this film is that it looks at experimental nature of independent filmmaking (which itself has become a formula of sorts) in a tongue-in-cheek manner with terms like 'larger than life', 'larger than logic' and 'surrealism' thrown in ample doses. In addition, it also looks at the limitations in guerilla filmmaking and the obstacles one has to surmount for ones project to see the light of the day.

Now, after three of making it Srinivas has released it online:

The Untitled Kartik Krishnan Project (Full Movie) from Enter Guerrilla on Vimeo.

So, see, enjoy and encourage!

Age and wisdom: residue of a review – a strange connection between Chattakari and Run Baby Run

It happens sometimes that our brain takes on a journey of its own while watching a movie. Or is it my brain only that is wired differently?

The latest of such incidence happened while watching Chattakari, it took me back to Run Baby Run, which I'd watched a couple of weeks earlier.

It so happened that sitting in the theatre watching Chattakari, the statutory warning about the harms of smoking and drinking popping up every other minute was annoying me and at the end of this song Hemanth and Shamna begin to get cosy under a blanket, and I seriously thought that now a warning about the dangers of pre-marital or under-age sex would pop up. But, nothing like that happened.

This is when Mohanlal came into my head, he was in a similar situation with Amala  Paul at the end of this song in Run Baby Run. But, he was wise enough to jump out saying that this won't be right.

I spent some time thinking about writing about this coincidence in my review of Chattakari, but, couldn't articulate it in a way to fit in there. So, just kept this line It makes one wonder why there wasn't any warning about the dangers of pre-marital sex when the lead pair hops into bed!.

In fact, Mohanlal had handled a similar situation in Mayamayooram, where he tells Revathy to go home as the drink had started showing effect on him and he would lose control.

Interview with director Arun Kumar Aravind

I'm excited as I'll be seeing my name in the byline of a newspaper tomorrow morning after a long time. I'd submitted this interview a while back. But, it got delayed due to Newspaper Agents Strike.

Here is the unedited version:

'In the recent times', we may use this phrase in our day to day conversation but, it is different to conjure up a story depicting the contemporary society and training the camera on the social mores and bringing into open the things that are considered taboo and shooed under the carpet. This is what director Arun Kumar Aravind has done in his new film 'Ee Adutha Kaalathu'. The film depicts contemporary urban from every angle be it a child's or a septuagenarian’s, the vulnerability we all feel yet display a confident façade as if we are total control and nothing would go wrong however precarious our actions maybe.

The young director would rather like to call his film a “genre-mix” and not a multiple narrative film like last year's superhit 'Traffic'; “To start with, EAK (the abbreviation of the title) is not a multiple narrative movie. It has a straight narrative. Murali Gopy had made the detailed one-line script for this movie three years back, which means it was conceptualised in 2009. EAK, if you ask me, has a completely new narrative, which blends various story-telling techniques together. It is a genre-mix”, he says in a self assured manner. Further adding that “We never planned this movie, drawing inspiration from movies like ‘Traffic’, which were different in their own unique way. When I first heard the one-line from Murali, I was pretty sure that this movie was going to be completely different from what we have seen till now on the Indian screen”.

The script of 'Ee Adutha Kaalathu' is much discussed as it is structured as a Rubik's Cube telling the story of six people (or three couples) from different sections of the society beginning with rag picker portrayed by dependable Indrajith, his wife played by Mythili. Next come Murali Gopy as a Corporate Honcho type of guy running a multi-speciality hospital and his wife played by Tanushree Ghosh who had failed to make it big in Bollywood in her younger days. And, the oddest of them all being Anoop Menon, a modern day cop and Lena as a TV journalist, pretending to be the liberated woman of twenty first century with a host of other minor characters. At first the narrative seems to be scattered as the pieces of a cube. They start to fall in place at the end of first half. The Cube is even an intrinsic part of the story, which is solved in the end with a hurrah. The director explains the logic behind this: “We have used the Rubik’s Cube not literally but subtly in the movie. The only point where it gets literal is when we give the quote at the beginning of the movie explaining the Rubik’s Cube and how it has similarities with the lives that we lead on this planet. Beyond that, it is all subtle pointers. And if you look closely, you can see that the dramatic progression of the movie is akin to the solving of a Rubik’s Cube”.

The film also becomes a visual documentation of contemporary urban living, not only on the surface but also the psychology sketches of the characters tackling taboos like a stressed out man trying hard to hide erectile dysfunction, casual extra-marital flings and the flourishing industry of making sleazy video clips using hidden camera to feed the internet. One would be really curious find if the team was apprehensive that these things could have alienated the family audience, “We were not apprehensive but we were a bit nervous, because of the amount of repression that we, as a population, have, in this part of the world. But since this movie is all about telling our stories in a sincere way, we were pretty sure that it would have its connect with the audience”, says Arun.

Arun was a visual effect expert who then turned to editing before taking up direction, yet both his directorial ventures 'Cocktail' and 'EAK' are stories requiring minimal technical glitz, “I don’t believe in on-screen gimmicks, for the sake of it. I am very particular about this. I believe that even a small movement of the camera must be dramatically justified”.

'Ee Adutha Kaalathu' marks the second coming of Murali Gopy as a writer after a long gap. So, to end the talk on a lighter note you ask Arun how much credit should the writer get for the success of this film? “In this movie, content and narrative is the hero. So, I give full credit to the writer. I, however, would pat myself for sensing the possibility of such a subject and scripting style”, he says with a wink

In fact, the writer and the director have bonded so well during the making of this film that they have locked not one but two projects working as a team.

Paanch – not a formal review

At last I watched the full version of Paanch directed by Anurag Kashyap (a dear friend had sent a torrent link). All these days I’d seen only bits and pieces of it fearing an overdose of violence. It is the censored version with Adult certificate. I don’t understand what was the fuss all about for censors to block it all these years as more grotesque and sleazy stuff was passed without any qualms (Govinda-Karishma Kapoor were ruling the roost during that period if I’m not mistaken).

It isn’t a great film by any stretch of imagination (especially if you have seen Last Train to Mahakali and the avant-garde No Smoking). Here you feel the director seems to have begun the film with I wanna shock you attitude as you hear words daru, dum, stoned and few other synonyms of intoxication thrown in and even few expletives in Hindi and English.

The dark story of five struggling rock musicians going on killing spree in order to make money for decently recording demo album, which by the end becomes the story of a psychopathic freak Luke played by Kay Kay.

Kay Kay seems to be very frigid for the role. He is good in non performing (as a musician/stage performer) parts. But, the agility required a performer is missing (we just get a glimpse of it when he is shown climbing the flight of stairs running in the beginning).

The ultimate winner here is Abbas Tyrewala, the lyricist. I smile whenever I feel like scratching my …… Ghin Aati hai Khuja Mat :-P

Interview with Director Ranjith Sankar

I first met Ranjith on the day his debut film Passenger released in Padma theatre. He was there to see the film along with Lal Jose. After the show I requested Lal Jose to introduce me to Ranjith. To my pleasant surprise Ranjith said “Hello Paresh Palicha I read all your reviews and respect your views the most”. Since that day we have been in constant touch.

Now, he is ready with his second film Arjunan Saakshi, which is releasing on 28th of this month. I mailed him a few questions and he replied; here I'm posting them.


How has Arjunan Saakshi shaped up? Now that shooting is over and you're into post production, are you happy what you're seeing on the Avid Machine, so to speak?

I am happy with Arjunan Saakshi when I see it now. It has shaped up more or less the way it was perceived. Thanks to all my actors and technicians who made it happen. Arjunan Saakshi is a result to good team work.

This is your second film and there seem to be lot of expectations, does that make you nervous or inspire you? Or to put little differently, How was the experience of making Arjunan Saakshi different from making Passenger?

Not nervous. But excited a bit to see how people react to AS.

AS was more responsible I must say. There were actors and technicians coming into the project since they believed in me. Also AS is more a “proper” commercial film in that aspect.I got to work with a stunt master and dance master. I made passenger in 38 days. AS took us 43 days. It was worth it looking at the technical finesse we have achieved.

You had spent lot of time with the script of Passenger before you could see it being actually made, but Arjunan Shakshi obviously took lot less time to fructify (even though the idea was in your head for many years), did you do anything differently while writing it or approaching actors?

Nothing. Actually for AS it was more easy since actors were willing to work with me even before a script was discussed. So I had to make sure I got my priorities right and get the most appropriate people for the parts. What I always felt it once you are convinced of the story its easy to convince anyone for that matter.

You continue to be software engineer even after becoming a successful filmmaker, how easy or though is carrying both worlds inside you? Do these worlds overlap sometimes?

At times yes,especially during the shooting days J. I am able to manage since I have a supportive management at office. I don’t plan way ahead. So happy the way it is now.

Here is another elaborate interview done by my friend Veeyen

Trailer of the film:

Discovered John Malkovich and Reread Disgrace

I saw the film Disgrace after reading the review by Roger Ebert.

Anyone who has cared to read my blogger profile will know that Disgrace by J. M. Coetzee is one of my favourite books. I read it a few years back. It may be one of the first books that I read where the main character with negative traits is presented with empathy.

David Lurie, middle aged intellectual, teaching Romantic Poetry at the Technical University in Cape Town has a fling with one of his young students and is accused of sexual harassment by her. He accepts being guilty as charged but refuses to apologise or repent. He leaves his job and goes away to stay with his daughter Lucy who has a farm in the countryside.

The book is basically a commentary about the post-apartheid South African society in a flux represented by David, Lucy and Petrus, her help in the farm, who will soon become the co-owner of the farm according to the new arrangement.

The film starring John Malkovich feels like virtual transposing of the book onto the screen. His acting has our complete attention (before watching the movie I’d the image of Coetzee himself for David with snow-white beard, balding head, specs etc. but now it is John). Even most of the dialogues are taken from the book. Initially I was very excited seeing such a literal adaptation. But, after a while I felt something amiss in the film. So, I read the book again (this time I bought the book, the last time I’d borrowed from a library). In the film David appears to be arrogant, sinister, addicted to the pleasures of flesh, almost evil; without any remorse or regret.

The book on the other hand, has the advantage of an omnipresent third person narrator who lets us peek into the thought process, vulnerability and the sense of wrong doing, which makes him all too human. It is amazing that the writer presents the view point of someone at the extreme end of the spectrum without being judgmental (that to an utterly despicable in normal circumstances).

John Malkovich talks about working in Disgrace in this interview.

Some writers who hide away in universities only write about the arguments they have had or the students they have screwed. They stay in the universities because they want security. And you can’t be a writer if you want to be safe. You end up writing about the mortgage and the safe job.

A comment that Sir Vidia made without naming names.

An interview of Anna-Maria Monticelli who adapted the screenplay.

Review of Malayalam film Ritu

The words like different or refreshing referring to a new film give you a niggling feel in your stomach in these despondent days when every second film seems to be a recycled version of an older one. And, you swing between hope and despair, when a filmmaker like Shyamaprasad (who is in the league of his own) promises to try something thing totally different from what he has done up till now. First, he says his new film is about youth of today, but not a campus film. Secondly, he gets an original script from a new writer Joshua Newtonn. Ritu: Seasons change… Do we? cannot claim to change the gloomy weather from which Malayalam Cinema is passing through. But, the effort seems to be worth lauding.

As anyone familiar with Malayalam films will be aware by now that this movie is about youngsters working in the Information Technology sector. It tells the story of three childhood friends who drift apart as grown ups. But, one of them clings on to the memories of good old days and wishes to work on their combined juvenile aspirations. This leads to the revelations about the hidden facades of their personalities and how it changes the equations of their relationships with others forms the crux of the story.

Sarat Varma (Nishan) returns from USA (where he was looking after the IT Company owned by his brother-in-law), to join a small Company starting an ambitious new project. He coaxes two of his childhood friends Sunny (Asif Ali) and Varsha (Rima Kallingal) to join him. They both are working in Infosys, Bangaluru and, adapted to the free lifestyle there. They reluctantly join him. It does not take long for Sarat to realise how his friends have drifted apart both in their attitude as well as in lifestyle. Varsha seems to be flirting with males on her phone and Sunny showing homosexual traits.

We may remember director Kamal’s Minnaminnikkoottam released last year with mainstream star cast including Meera Jasmine, Narein, Indrajith, Jayasurya and others boasted of IT as the backdrop. But, it was only cosmetic. Here Joshua tries to give somewhat realistic feel to the proceedings. Agreed that here also we have beer guzzling and head banging parties as they are thought to be the trademark of this field. Still, they are balanced out by lifelike situations of office politics, betrayals and other such thing.

If we have to register a complain in this department, it maybe with the characterisation is handled, Sarat is shown as goody-goody fellow who internalises every humiliation (insult maybe too harsh a word) he gets from his friends (though it is evened out with his grudge against father for not allowing him to pursue literature in college), we expect him to explode or even simply ask his best friends about the reason for their aloofness. Again, it also perpetuate the myth that females working in BPO/IT sector become sex fiends. Coming to Sunny’s deviant sexuality, there are subtle references for the reason of him being a gay, having an abusive father can be one such attribute. This can also be the base of the negative aspects in his personality; from being an innocent shoplifter in his younger days to cheating his employers for millions.

The socialist tirade that sprouts in between jars. IT Parks and other such places are presented as symbols of capitalist dystopia that the poor are robbed of their land and provided menial jobs in compensation while the rich loot and milk the place dry.

The film maintains high standard as far as the look and the feel is concerned. Shamdat captures the past (mostly outdoors, a lakeside hangout of the three chums) in hazy form giving it a mushy music video feel. While the present is caught in sharp brightness as the CFL lit corridors of an IT conglomerate.

The cast consisting of newcomers succeed in doing a proficient job. The three main characters exude confidence that defies their inexperience. Nishan as the sensitive wannabe writer Sarat, the feline quality in Asif as Sunny always alert looking over his shoulder for any lurking danger and Rima prove that they are here to stay.

Ritu is a worthwhile experiment by seasoned director Shyamaprasad with a predominantly new team that does not disappoint.

An edited version of this review has appeared in Rediff.

No Smoking – In defence of Anurag Kashyap

I always feel guilty that my Accessability blog is lying waste after the three posts and this blog reduced to post whatever I write for Success & Ability. It is not that I don’t see films other than I have committed write about. It is just that lot of water may have flowed below the bridge, so to say, before I see those films so I feel I may not have anything new to write about them.

Now, I feel I have got an appropriate film in No Smoking to write about. My only interest in this film until a few weeks ago was that couple of my Net friends from this Community blog were partly involved with this film. But, when I started hearing the songs a few weeks ago I virtually started feeling aroused (ha ha ha) to see it.

The film released last Friday (just two shows here), I’d made plans to see it on Monday due to circumstances (but a friend cursed me that I’ll not see the film without her and it rained; on Tuesday I cursed her back and made it without her).

By Saturday evening the film had received royal drubbing from all and sundry, main stream media as well as blogs, even the Community blog where Anurag Kashyap himself writes has not spared him, which created doubts in me whether to take the effort to watch it in the theatre or wait for the DVD release. My Net friend didn’t help things as his reply to my sms was something like: See it in the theatre itself. I personally found it long, boring & was lost by the end.

I loved this film is to put it mildly. I found the film had lot of parallels with my life though I’m a non-smoker by limitations and not by choice (wish I could bring up a few examples while writing this).

I have no idea about homage being paid to Kafka or who Bob Fosse is as is repeatedly mentioned in the reviews or that it is inspired by a Stephen King short story.

For me the film was how a community is ostracised by the so-called politically correct society. They should be reprimanded. They should be stopped. They should be rehabilitated. It somehow succeeds in doing that by the end.

I am always being advised to sit straight, not to keep my head tilted: It makes you look retarded or you should talk properly to prove that you are intelligent. Recently only I have found the courage (at least with some people) to say that the way I do things because I find it easier do them and if the salesman at the music shop thinks that I’m a dumbo and doesn’t treat me well because I take your help to communicate with him, it is his loss not mine; somewhat like John Abraham rudely tells the old lady to take the stairs when she is irritated by his smoking in the elevator.

We all know cigarettes kill. Nicotine is addictive. Then why not bring in stringent laws so that people who have grievance and those who are feeling cheated can milk the conglomerates that make these Cancer Sticks dry by the rule of Law.

Here is an intelligent review of Baradwaj Rangan and here is why I’ve started losing respect for initial Guru in film appreciation.

And a pro-smoking post by BG.

PS. A warning to people who get dosage of advice from me to reduce the intake of nicotine: if you ever use this post as an argument against me, I’ll kick your b….s. Smoking leads to impotence. Understand Yaar!

Second take on Thanmatra

Memory is the foundation of a personality; the memories of the experiences both good and bad that we had mould our personality, our character, our hopes and our aspirations. So, what happens when we start to lose this vital ingredient called memory bit by bit from our life or to put it plainly are afflicted with Alzheimer’s disease? The slow but steady wasting away of all our mental faculties, which reduces us be mere vegetables by the end.

A scene from Thanmatra

No doubt it is a petrifying scenario when we are forced to think about it and if this scenario is compressed on celluloid in little more than two hours in a stark manner that is devoid of any outlandish flourish is bound to make you jittery. This is exactly what director Blessy achieved with his film ‘Thanmatra’ (molecule), and made the medical fraternity in Kerala take up cudgels against him, as people who watched this film feared that either they or one of their kin may be afflicted with this disease and the people who have suffered due Alzheimer’s say that the director has beautifully brought out what we went through.

So, if the director had aimed to create awareness about the disease, which can be easily misinterpreted as forgetfulness, he has succeeded at a very basic level, first in describing the illness and later in detail by showing us what a person has to suffer and what his family has to go through when this happens.

And, if the suffering person happens to be an ideal son, husband and father, then the impact on the audience will be immense.

Meet Ramesh Nair (Mohanlal) a personification of above-mentioned qualities – a middle-level employee in the State Secretariat, who in his younger days aspired to be an IAS officer in his younger days as per the wishes of his father, but has now pinned his hopes on his teenaged son Manu (Arjun).

Manu basks in the reflected glory of his father’s knowledge as he presents a project on innovative learning techniques in his school’s science club. These techniques are taught by his father. His father is also invited to PTA meet to counsel other parents on varied subjects like personality development to bringing up children to memory improvement.

Ramesh massages his father’s legs with herbal oil when he visits ancestral home in the village. He also cooks with him reminiscing the good old days.

Being an ideal husband may come easy for such a person; Ramesh dotes on his wife, his past failures and past relationship never coming in the way.

Now if such a person has this depleting disease, what he or the people around him will go through? In the beginning there will be confusion, then shock, some anger, at last acceptance and the courage to face what life has given you.

Initially we feel that the director is trying to spoon feed us about the details of Alzheimer’s as we are shown the hero elaborating the intricacies of it in voice over as if he is explaining to his son. He says it is as if the waves receding into the sea or as if the brain has started reverse counting slowly taking back all that we have learnt; taking us back to our childhood and ultimately towards death or words to that effect. This happens after Ramesh is diagnosed with pre-senile Alzheimer’s and the doctor saying that it is the caregiver who needs the treatment/support and not the patient. The docudrama style of narration even has the mention of Roland Reagan as one of the famous persons who suffered this disease.

But Blessy wins with the script (he got the State Award as the scriptwriter and for direction, in all ‘Thanmatra’ garnered five State awards). He loops it in such a way to show the complete turnaround of the character of protagonist. It begins with simple things as he cannot remember the pet name of his childhood beloved and the words of his favourite Bharathiar song. Then it moves on to frustration and anger on misplacing an important file. At last creating a scene in the office thinking that it is home, this leads to his hospitalisation and diagnosis.

The rest of the incidents in the film go on show the reverse counting of the brain; Ramesh’s condition deteriorating with him behaving as a child. The contrast in the pre-intermission and post-intermission personality of sometimes becomes unbearable; especially when we see him lying dead in a foetal position in the end with a dishevelled look on his face because once we remember him chiding his wife to wear her Sari properly telling her that his mother used say that you should be made up even if you are lying dead. It signifies that the person has lost everything he stood for in his life.

There are some points in this film where the use of cinematic licence goes overboard. One, the nuclear family is picture perfect, how come there are no differences of opinion or minor fights? Here the head of the family is an all-knowing demigod. Here the son follows his father’s diktats without slightest opposition or grudge and the daughter is too young to have an opinion.

Second, the doctor just pacifies Ramesh, (when he goes to him for the first time worried about his memory lapses), saying that he may be having an anxiety syndrome because his son is appearing for Board Exams. In this day and age when even a minor migraine is looked at with utmost seriousness by medical professionals this kind of response is least digestible (or is that they wanted to show that the doctors may also fail to notice the symptoms initially).

In conclusion we can use a quote by Nobel laureate Saul Bellow that "Everybody needs his memories. They keep the wolf of insignificance from the door." In ‘Thanmatra’ director poignantly shows what can happen if that wolf enters our home.

(A slightly edited version of this appeared in the Oct-Dec 2006 issue of Success & Ability. I had written a review of it earlier and also interviewed Blessy. Here I have tried only to focus on Alzheimer’s disease).

Review of Iqbal

(I wrote this a couple of months back. I had seen the film when it was released with my parents. I took a very long time to write the review as I did not want to be swayed by the feel good factor only. The review has appeared in the Jan-Mar 06 issue of ‘Success & Ability’).

He is the person who coined the term anti-slick for something tacky a few years ago with the sequel of ‘Hyderabad Blues’. Now Nagesh Kukunoor, with his new film ‘Iqbal’ has brought new dimensions to a much-abused Bollywood term “feel-good”, where any film connecting the elaborate North Indian wedding ceremonies fell into this genre. Here the director brings the triumphs of an underdog to underscore the true meaning of term.

The premise of the film is well known by now: that a deaf-mute teenager from a fictitious tiny hamlet in Andhra making to the Indian Cricket Team. The script is laden with incidents which you can directly associate with happenings in the real world, may it be the inner workings of the selection process or the meteoric rise of a cricketer with an underprivileged background from a minority community.

In a cricket crazy nation these things are enough to ensure success of the film. But what wins our hearts are the minor things weaved into the story; be it the dogged approach of the youngster in chasing his dreams or the incidental treatment given to the disability. The director was often quoted as saying that he didn’t want to show the family of the disabled person wake up crying every morning or words to that effect. He remains true to his words so there is subtle humour underlying throughout the film and the best part being that one cannot remember an incident where the disability of protagonist being cursed or discriminated against, which is typical of any film dealing with disability.

So far so good, but you find glitches in the proceedings when you dwell for a while on the theme i.e. cricket. A cricket enthusiast with prodigal talent in fast bowling, who practices his art with three twigs for stumps while gracing buffaloes, has never bowled to real batsman till the age of eighteen is very hard to digest. It may be true that the coverage the game gets on TV can make an armchair expert out of any lay viewer but you cannot get an international quality player out of that. Iqbal practises his game in complete solitude. It could have helped if he was shown playing gully cricket with tennis ball with boys of his age (it could have worked wonders for the cause of Inclusion). Nagesh had initially wrote the script with a Malkhamb (Maharastrian pole gymnastics) practitioner in mind, a solo sport, but had to change it to a bowler when he found that there were no buyers for the idea, so he couldn’t incorporate the team concept in the initial stages of the story.

Technically, the film sets high standards; the treatment reminds you of Iranian master Majid Majidi’s ‘Children of Heaven’. The fable like treatment gels very well with the content because we understand this is an unreal story but positively told. And, its influence can be immense on the uninitiated. I have heard of kids trying to hold the seam of the cricket ball upright while practicing after watching the film.

There may be some flaws with the characterisations, but you flow with the happenings to notice them at the first go. The central character Iqbal played by Shreyas Talpade looks earnest and eager as an aspiring cricketer. His chemistry with Shweta Prasad, who plays his young sister, is very endearing. The presence of Naseeruddin Shah as the reclusive failed cricketer with drinking problem, who agrees to coach the young lad, helps to amplify the performance of the two youngsters. Girish Karnad as the scheming coach of the local Cricket Academy brings in a sense of realism into this film, but his character doesn’t seem to fit into the whole scheme of things in this feel-good caper.

All seen and said; not really, in spite of its shortcomings, you still root for reel ‘Iqbal’ as you would for a real Irfan or a Dhoni.

Disability in South Indian Language films- A Critical Review

I presented this paper on "Disability in South Indian Language films- A Critical Review" in an Orientation cum Training programme in “Media & Disability Communication” conducted by Ali Yavar Jung institute For Hearing Handicapped, Mumbai in Collaboration with Kerala Press Academy & SOMS, Kochi in Kakkanad on 16th & 17th December 2005.

The couple of days have been the most exciting days in my life for many reasons, to be discussing my favourite subject with you people who will be deciding the shape our media will take in the coming years on the one side and on the other side there are people who have shaped our thought process for many years and in a way shaped our destinies. People like Mr. C. S. Venkiteswaran, whom I consider to be my Dronacharya, me being his Eklavya, we have never met personally before this event, but he is one person without whom I would not have been sitting here, it is his column Rumble Strip along with writings of Khalid Mohamad and T. G. Vaidyanathan that has sustained my interest in films since the days I was just a student. So, Sir, today you can ask my forefinger which I use to type or a piece of my brain as your Guru Dakshina, and I will happily oblige. Mr. P. J. Mathew Martin thanks to you for giving me this opportunity and thanks Mr. Satish Kapoor for recommending my name to him.

On the subject of South Indian Language films – I cannot claim any expertise on it. I am no better than a lay viewer who spends money for the ticket to be enlightened – entertained for nearly three hours. Maybe my reaction will be a little more amplified than the mere clapping-whistling-hooting of the next person considering the physical hardship I have to go through to get my quota of entertainment. So, I write reviews just to add value to my experience.

The general perception is that films reflect what society is going through and we also see that how films influences the minds of the viewers, it is a two way street. Filmmakers claim to be inspired by real life incidents and characters to make up their stories and mould their characters. On the other hand, we have heard people saying that how they were influenced by a scene or the film which changed their lives. So, the ‘chicken or the egg’ kind of debate continues.

Personally, I have never succeeded in analysing how a particular film has influenced me, some films are just stories for us, so; we are just concerned about how well they are told. Some other films compel us to look beyond the obvious, the technique, the characterisation and even the motives of the director behind making the film in such a way.

When a filmmaker makes a film with a disabled protagonist; the first claim he will make is being inspired by ‘triumph of the human spirit’ kind of thing. But if we dwell enough on the subject, we can see that such characters give immense dramatic scope for the director to work upon. Every basic trait required for making a good story can be magnified manifold if one or more characters happen to be handicapped.

If we take Mr. Vinayan’s three films as case in the point; Vasanthi Lakshmium Pinne Njanum, Oomapenninu Uriyada Payyan, and Meeraude Dukham Muthuvinte Swapnam, we clearly see the manipulative qualities of story telling at work.

He deserves to be congratulated for the audacity he has shown in taking up the subject with deformed protagonists. The care taken to imbibe the physical attributes in the actors is credible.

It is agreed that making films in so called commercial format requires a bit of exaggeration. The goodness, evil, virtue, vice, magnanimity and pettiness, you see all these in the some form or other in all these films. You can say they are packaged in such a way. And to top it all, a captivating climax to keep the audience glued to their seats till the very end.

As mentioned earlier, the very liberal use of cinematic license is visible in all these films. You see a much heightened volume in every emotion here. The exaggeration is very pronounced. Which may make you wonder, “Is this for real”?

In reality we don’t see anything out of the ordinary in our lives, whether we are able-bodied or disabled. It is through eyes of a third person that something becomes extraordinary in our existence.

For example, if we take the character of Kalabhavan Mani in Vasanthi…we may see all the above points very clearly. Everything about him is exaggerated (I’m not talking about the acting part here, which was a very contentious issue when this film was released), from the placement of his comb to the abusive nature of his father and brother and the love showered on him by the lead females in the film. As ordinary viewers, we may pass it off as good narration. But if we look a little minutely we see the manipulative forces of story telling at work. And, this pattern is repeated in all the above mentioned films.

The same pattern is also being used in some Bollywood films as well. Sprash (1984) directed by Sai Paranjpe is still appreciated as one of best films on disability to be made in India. Naseerudin Shah’s superlative performance helps the film to rise above the ordinary. He plays a visually impaired principal of a blind school. A very independent and proud person, the problem starts when he comes in contact with a widow played by Shabana Azmi and a romantic relationship develops between them. Somehow, it is conveyed that he is ill-equipped cope with having a relationship with a so called normal person. Then it goes on to show how he overcomes his complexes to go back to her.

It is here that the society’s attitude towards the disability is reflected in films. The notion that people with disabilities lead secluded life and bereft of any social skills.

If you look westwards where the society is more attuned to the needs of disabled community, you see revolutionary films with disabled characters. Sometimes even a passing glimpse of disabled character leaves a very positive impact. If you take Ron Howard’s Oscar nominated A Beautiful Mind starring Russle Crowe playing Nobel-laureate Mathematician John Nash who is suffering from schizophrenia, towards the end of film we are shown that Prof. Nash’s fellow faculty members at the Princeton University queuing up before him, gifting their pens to him as a token of their appreciation after he won the award, in that queue we see a person on an electronic wheelchair doing the same without any fanfare. Can we imagine a faculty member who uses a wheelchair in any of our colleges? The answer for the time being at least will be an emphatic ‘No’.

At the end; I trust that some of you will be following the footsteps of Renji Panicker and will turn to filmmaking after practicing journalism for a while, at that time if you use what you gained from this interaction; then only the efforts that went behind preparing this paper will bear fruits.

Thank you.

(The Paper was in fact read on my behalf, I just typed it. To be factually correct).

Review of ‘Bunty Aur Babli’

The only importance of ‘Bunty Aur Babli’ directed by Shaad Ali Sahgal, is that broke the jinx for Abhishek Bachchan. There are no two opinions that he was a good actor with lot of potential and fire; a fire that could leave a trail of its own. But as with an illustrious bloodline he always fell short of audiences’ unjust expectations. This film changed all that for him, it gave him the elusive hit. It proved to be a boon for the actor and, also for the audience as they got the right scale to gauge his potential. ‘Bunty Aur Bubli’ gives Abhishek ample scope to display his histrionic prowess in an entertaining way. So, this film can be termed as good on this count.

If you try to decipher the unprecedented success of ‘Bunty Aur Babli’, you are sure to be left with mixed feelings.

When you start dissecting the film, first victim will be the story. A comic book style tale with zero plausibility value; scampering on the crutches of witty dialogues, fast paced screenplay, good music and of course some good performances.

The tale of two non-violent rustic ruffians, who dream of making it big in the sleepless city of Mumbai.

The sociologists and the analysts may argue that this film depicts the mindset of the people from the small towns in the post-liberalised India. It is true that economic liberalisation has awakened the aspirations of young Indians to the western standards. But watching an amoral celluloid version of it, where the protagonists go to extent of leasing the Taj Mahal for millions of dollars to a dumb looking foreigner, in spite of the intended pun on a politician, who almost did the same in reality, is very hard to digest

There are some truly hilarious scenes like the con job pulled off by our twosome on the dubious manager of a financial company by posing as the agents a television news channel. But after the first couple of tricks, it becomes tedious and gets on your nerves. One wishes that storywriter Aditya Chopra had invested more effort in building up the situations and some solid motives for our hero and heroine to follow. The situations are haphazardly put together in an episodic manner without any cohesive progression.

Still our expectations soar when DCP Dashrath Singh played by none other than Amitabh Bachchan pops up in the middle of the story. But he cannot help in any way to give fillip to the lethargic mood already set in.

The screenplay and dialogues by Jaideep Sahni, the young writer who came into the limelight with Ram Gopal Varma’s ‘Company’ add vigour to the story in bits and pieces, but cannot sustain the momentum throughout.

The characterisation is another problem; they look very frivolous to the extent that they look superficial. There is also a psychopathic streak in the lead characters that does not gel well with the humorous intent of the story.

On the positive side, the performance of the lead pair of Abhishek Bachchan and Rani Mukerji holds the film together. It is their onscreen chemistry that livens up the proceedings. If you feel an iota of interest in the going ons in front of you, it is thanks to them.

It is very rare that we see Abhishek Bachchan a jovial and peppy youngster. He has almost been typecast as a brooding young with smouldering lava just waiting to erupt like his portrayal of Lalan in Mani Ratnam’s ‘Yuva’ or the silent reclusive business tycoon type in Sooraj Barjatya’s ‘Main Prem Ki Deewani Hoon’.

Here Abhishek is given an opportunity to break that mould and he utilises it to the full. Initially we may feel that he is same old self, but he comes into his elements as events unfold.

Rani Mukerji has her own celestial place among the Bollywood stars. This film just enhances her position further without really challenging her acting capabilities. As a Miss India aspirant she has to showoff dollops of glamour, which she does with aplomb.

We have to add with a heavy heart that Amitabh Bachchan is plainly disappointing. The sexagenarian actor is just there to increase the marketability of the film. A police officer with a beedi dangling from his lips and Ghamchha (towel) hanging around his neck. The makers have tried to blend both urban and rustic ethos through him.

The music by Shankar, Eshan and Loy is also a mixed bag. ‘Dhadak Dhadak’ deserves a special mention, for it set the tempo for the rest of the film.

The cinematography by Abhik Mukhopadhayay gives the film the feel of an old world Hindi movie.

Final words; Shaad Ali Sahgal who was under apprenticeship of Mani Ratnam before taking up independent projects with ‘Sathiya’ with Rani Mukerji and Vivek Oberoi. The poignancy that was felt in his first film is missing here.

If you are looking for a laugh-a-minute riot, then you won’t be complaining.

Review of Malayalam Film Kunjikoonan

Kunjikoonan, the latest Dileep film, which was mired in controversy at the time of its release, as some people felt it presented disabled people in an insensitive light. But when you venture in to see Kunjikoonan, you will be surprised (pleasantly or otherwise depending upon your exposure to disability as an issue).

The treatment of this film is shocking as Kunjikoonan is made in what is called the ‘Mimicry-film’ style, with ample dose of comic one-liners, slapstick situations and other such ingredients. Director Sasi Shankar successfully breaks the notion that a film with handicapped protagonists has to be a weepy tearjerker.

Kunjikoonan is the story of crippled hunchbacked youth running a telephone booth in rural area. He is shown as having normal aspirations in life, including finding a good girl to marry. Kunjikoonan is an evolved character, who has developed a defence mechanism to face the society, which sometimes belittles his physical deformity. There are sequences in the film which subtly bring out the moral courage of the hero. It is evident that lot of thought has gone into developing the psychological traits of the character. At one level he is shown as possessing high-principled moral courage, and at another level he is an uncomplicated, compromising person accepting his limitations with wry sense of humour in situations which he cannot overcome. The credit for this should go to the scriptwriter Benny P. Nayarambalam, on whose play ‘Vikalanga Varsham’ this film is based.

In spite of being a commercial pot-boiler in the truest sense of the term, Kunjikoonan maintains a fine balance with realism where the characterisation of the disabled protagonist is concerned. There are no obvious deviations in character-graph of Kunjikoonan; its progression is very consistent.

The only grudge that we can have at the end of the film is that Dileep’s double role is used as a cushion against the fear of alienating his fans from the glamorous image of the star. The character of Prasad which runs parallel with the character of Kunjikoonan throughout the film; is a college student with golden hair and blue eyes, ace basketball player who can deal with a dozen baddies single-handedly. The effort to accommodate this character in the story somehow washes out the poignancy of the film.

Kunjikoonan may not turn out to be a landmark film in terms of its longevity in the memory of the audience, considering the inherent flaws at the script level. But when you see a spontaneous smile spreading on a few faces of general public coming out of the theatre when they spot a physically challenged person amongst themselves, you feel that this film is a success.

(This write-up appeared in the Indian Express a few days after the release of the film a couple of years back).

Review of Marathi film Devrai

Schizophrenia: A kindred form of insanity. This is what I got from a dictionary of my grandfather’s time when I was in my mid-teens. The word had a certain charm and mystical ring to it. Every creative person (be it writer, poet, actor, director and even fashion designer) worth his/her salt, would casually drop this word, when describing their creative processes in interviews. And, aspiring for a career in any creative field, I felt it would be mandatory to achieve a “schizophrenic state-of-mind”, before attempting anything worthwhile.

But as realization that you don’t need anything special to write a sentence, just a little application and language skills dawned, the contentious word started loosening its grip on me. It didn’t haunt me when I read/heard that word in interviews. It was just a flossy thing to say in interviews was understood.

These thoughts came to me when I watched ‘Devrai (Sacred Grove)’ directed by Sumitra Bhave-Sunil Sukthankar combo, which deals with the disease, so tracking it down to see just how it relates to me.

Now, there was more awareness about the disease and a couple of epochal movies like Ron Howard’s ‘A Beautiful Mind’ and Adoor Gopalakrishnan’s ‘Anantharam’ (Monologues) to fall back on, so there was a confidence in me of being on a familiar terrain, but as the film started un-spooling a weariness (or should it be a sense of trepidation) crept in by the starkness of the whole thing. ‘Devrai’ brings the disease into point blank range of the viewer.

Generally, we have seen films tackling a disability or a disease as being emotionally manipulative (they simply target your tear ducts), depicting the heroism of the protagonist/s in overcoming the disability and coming out trumps, as ‘A Beautiful Mind’ was a watered down version of the true life story of Nobel Laureate Prof. John Nash, whose ‘Game Theory’ changed the way businesses functioned.

It must be said that ‘Devrai’ isn’t a conventional film showing individual heroism against odds; rather it focuses on the problem at hand. The best way to put it would be that it doesn’t show a way to solve a problem (disability), rather it shows us a way to live with it.

The story of a youth zealously concerned about depletion of the Nature around him in the countryside of Konkan. His deranged mind mixes up personal failures with the cosmic chaos and hallucinates to create an alternate reality in his mind.

To simply put it: the hero Shesh (Atul Kulkarni) is suffering from acute schizophrenia. The rest of narrative shows his younger sister Seena’s (Sonali Kulkarni) struggle to cope with her brother’s mental condition and maintain the decorum in her family life.

The complicated screenplay co-written by Sumitra Bhave juxtaposes the past and the present, and the real with the imaginary giving the viewer a real feel of mental condition of the protagonist. The technique works well; they would have lost it if they had resorted to devices such as black and white frames representing the past or fogging the borders of the frame to represent imaginary things. The credit for this should also go to the cinematographer Debu Deodhar.

Another intelligent thing we notice is the premise of the story. Deforestation is an universal concern, so the casual viewer who strays into theatre hearing big names like Atul and Sonali Kulkarni, doesn’t find the happenings on the screen to be unhinged. What he sees is the magnified manifestation of his worries, be it environmental degradation or the snapping of his umbilical bond with the verdant countryside, instantly relates to him.

That does not mean that the narrative is perfect. There are a few glitches like the unrequited love angle is very commonplace. The characterization of Shesh’s brother-in-law Sudesh played by Tushar Dalvi is cardboardish.

Films like ‘Devrai’ tend to become a performer’s paradise, so Atul Kulkarni prevails in his paradise, as Adam would have prevailed in his before biting the forbidden fruit. Sonali Kulkarni’s “the hassled sister act” is credible.

Co-produced by the Schizophrenia Awareness Association, it hits the bull’s eye as for achieving the purpose. And, winning the National Award for the Best Film on Environment is just like icing on the cake.

(Published in July - Sept 2005 issue of 'Success & Ability' with minor changes)

Disability in Hindi Films

The things that contributed towards the elevation of Amitabh Bachchan to superstardom in the mid 70s and early 80s are his smouldering anger, the baritone voice that he possessed, the angst he displayed against the redundant socialist morality of that era and, disability. Yes, you have read it correctly; disability or to put it more precisely, deformity. There is an inconspicuous link in the films of Amitabh Bachchan. From Sunil Dutt directed ‘Reshma aur Shera’ (1971), Manoj Kumar’s ‘Roti, Kapda aur Makan’ (1974), to Raj Sippy’s remake of ‘Seven brides for seven brothers’; ‘Satte pe Satta’ (1982) and Vipul Shah’s ‘Aakhen (2002), a prominent peripheral character or characters (except the first two films mentioned above, where Bachchan himself has portrayed characters with disability) are shown with deformity of some kind.

The writers and directors of that period who worked with Bachchan have used such characters to showcase the magnanimity and generosity of the protagonist. ‘Majboor’, (1974) ‘Amar, Akbar, Anthony’ (1977) and ‘Laawaris’ (1981) can be sited as best examples to back this argument. In Ravi Tandon’s ‘Majboor’, he is ready to face the gallows for the sake of his crippled sister’s (Farida Jalal) future. ‘Amar, Akbar, Anthony’ one of the most successful lost-and-found saga from the Manmohan Desai stable, has ubiquitous Nirupa Roy playing his blind mother. And in ‘Laawaris’ directed by Prakash Mehra, we see him turn the potter’s wheel singing ‘Jiska Koi Nahin Uska To Khuda Hai Yaaron’ to help his friend Suresh Oberoi, whose hands are amputated. You will find these kind of marginalized (read disabled) characters in at least one-sixth of the movies in Bachchan’s oeuvre of 120 odd films. These people helped the directors to put a compassionate halo behind the larger-than-life image of the Angry Young Man.

This phenomenon works strictly within the limits of commercial parameters. So these characters never moved beyond mere stereotypes that deserve our sympathy or pity.

The social observers and media commentators have always argued about lack of realistic representation of disability in our movies. Here the filmmakers (with few exceptions) have lacked the gumption to tackle the intricacies in the lives of people leading a physically or mentally maimed existence. The crippled are always barricaded in the periphery, like the character of ‘Kachara’ (garbage) in the microcosmic world of Oscar nominated ‘Lagaan’.

You rarely find the splash of realism, as the Hollywood is used to churning out at regular intervals in films like ‘Rain Man’, ‘My Left Foot’, ‘Scent of a Woman’, ‘Born on the Fourth of July’ and ‘A Beautiful Mind’. Here once in a while, a sensitive director like Gulzar wakes up to make a touching ‘Koshish’ (1972), Sai Paranjpe to make a poignant ‘Sprash’ (1984) or a Sanjay Leela Bhansali to make the ironically loud ‘Khamoshi – The Musical’ (1996).

These three movies portrayed life of the disabled realistically with varying degree of success. ‘Koshish’ tells a story of a deaf-mute couple played by Sanjeev Kumar and Jaya Bachchan, leading a secluded life and tackling so as to say the outside world. ‘Sprash’ on the other hand depicts the conflict between the worlds of able-bodied and the disabled. It brings out the complexes embedded in the minds of disabled as well as able-bodied with an unsentimental equilibrium. A nuanced performance from the ever dependable Naseerudin Shah playing a blind man gives an added exuberance to the film. ‘Khamoshi’ tries to give honest account of deaf-mute parents coming to terms with the musical aspirations of their grownup daughter. But somewhere you feel that the reality is eroded at the expense of aesthetic considerations. The beautiful music, an enviable star cast of Nana Patekar, Seema Biswas, Manisha Koirala and Salman Khan and the breathtaking locales of Goa somehow don’t rescue it from falling apart.

On the whole, Hindi films have always used deformity as a crutch to convey an extreme emotion, be it positive, negative, funny or sad. Remember the role played by Pran in Manoj Kumar’s ‘Upkaar’ (1967), the Good Samaritan with one leg, walking with help of a crutch. Or the vicious, tyrant, wheelchair bound husband of Zeenat Aman played by Danny in B. R. Chopra’s suspense-thriller ‘Dhund’ (1973). The comedy part is handled by the limping or stammering sidekick a la Shakti Kapoor.

One only hopes, that the emergence of the second new wave cinema aimed at the audience in the multiplexes of urban centres will find a few interesting stories about handicapped people. Who knows, in the near future we may have an Indian equivalent of Oscar winner Daniel Day-Lewis amidst us.

As appeared in Hindu Metro Plus

As appeared on British Film Institute’s website

Review of Hindi film 'Black'

Black is the colour of strength, power, courage, etc. etc. imagine every inspiring and uplifting word to interpret the colour. That is what director Sanjay Leela Bhansali tries to convey with his latest offering ‘Black’, and, we don’t question his sincerity. But when you make an operatic mess out of it, one’s heart is bound to bleed.

A king sized story of a deaf-mute-blind girl inspired by her teacher to achieve the impossible sounds good in the head when read, but when you are having an over-the-top experience of it in a darkened auditorium you just wish to curl up in your seat or even better vanish into the thin air to avoid further suffering. If you introspect on your anger against the movie for while; you understand that it is because the story somehow exposes you, your anguish, your thrills and your sufferings (maybe underscored with a bit more melodrama than you can take).

The fault lies in the director’s approach to the story. He has just used one point of view to tell the story, as if trying to say that you can make a disabled person achieve unimaginable goals if you strive sternly and stubbornly, without even once acknowledging the will, grit or the determination of the disabled person.

Bhansali seems to be overwhelmed by the prospect of directing the Amitabh Bachchan thereby forgetting to tell the story in a holistic manner. Debraj Sahai (Amitabh Bachchan) is a special teacher obsessed with the idea of bettering the lives of the less advantaged with prospect of being thrown into asylum because of their disability. He is assigned to tackle a difficult case of a deaf-mute-blind girl Michelle McNally (Ayesha Kapur/Rani Mukerji).

The premise looks promising upto this point; but what it proceeds to shatters the build-up. The first task that the teacher takes upon himself is to teach the stubborn girl some table manners. What ensues is a violent game of one-upmanship, which ultimately the teacher wins. There are a couple of such long drawn sequences signifying that you need to be cruel and stubborn to discipline a disabled child, as if you are trying to tame a wild animal.

The film then goes on take a sober tone as the unruly girl grows up to become a well-mannered and beautiful young lady, well adjusted into the family aspiring to be educated in a college. But you find it difficult to get out of the initial shock to truly appreciate the more nuanced and subdued points, which the story tries to throw up later on. Like the jealousy of the younger sibling played by Nandana Sen, because every mundane thing her sister succeeds in doing becomes a moment to rejoice for their parents.

‘Black’ belongs to Amitabh Bachchan the actor; he relishes the role tailor-made for him. Here he surpasses the superstar image, by making himself look old and fragile. Again the director is at fault for not letting us forget who he is, by making him self proclaimed magician who is total control of his surroundings.

Ayesha Kapur and Rani Mukerji are credible as the young and the older Michelle respectively. They both have worked hard to imbibe the physicality of the character and they have been successful in doing so great extent.

On the whole, one is bound feel that Bhansali has not got over his ‘Devdas’ hangover, as the same lavish theatrical quality of manipulating the audience is evident here also. And, we should not forget that he is same fellow who gave us ‘Khamoshi – The Musical’, a bit more natural story concerning the disabled. So, if put to vote ‘Khamoshi’ will always stay a few points above ‘Black’.

(Published in Jan-Mar 2005 issue of ‘Success & Ability’ with minor changes.)

Review of Devdas

Review of Million Dollar Baby

‘Tough ain’t enough’, the words in Clint Eastwood’s sonorous voice from his latest film Million Dollar Baby hum inside you hours after you have left the darkened dingy theatre with a bad back. Aware beforehand of the subject the film dealt with (due to the Oscar hype and the ensuing controversies) didn’t help to soften the blow it delivered, which made you mentally numb and dizzy.

As you start dissecting the movie, the words of the actor-director take up a new connotation, as if he was warning you that being tough won’t be enough to digest what he is going to show you, so garner your higher faculties like sensibility and pragmatism to tackle with it.

If someone says that story-telling is the art of manipulation, then Eastwood here proves to be a past master at it. He uses the technique of a boxer of exhausting the opponent (viewers) by showing some exhilarating stuff in the form of gender/colour biased friendly banter and a story of triumphing against odds, to give a knockout punch in the end.

This is the story of a grizzled boxing trainer Frankie Dunn (Eastwood) taking a lowly young woman Maggie Fitzgerald (Hilary Swank) under his wings and making her a champ. This is clichéd, you feel, and the director doesn’t do anything counter your beliefs. He simply goes with the flow of the story, thereby making it more difficult for the viewer to accept what is in store. To complicate the matter further there is a narrator, who gives a third dimension to the story. Scrap (Morgan Freeman) forms the third dimension. He is a former boxer who manages the gym where Frankie trains.

If you scratch beneath the facile surface of the premise, you will find the emotional interplay of these three characters, how they tackle their own failure and shortcomings.

Frankie is a failed father, whose daughter has distanced herself from him. His boxers leave him because he is over-protective of them and does not give them a chance to take a shot at the title. He attends the Mass everyday, because he is suffering from terrible guilt, as the priest would say.

Maggie on the other hand, is a 31 year old waitress at an eatery, eating the leftovers from the plates of the guests to save for training herself as a boxer, which she feels it is the only way she can better her life.

Scrap has resigned to his fate as a failed boxer, managing the dingy gym and helping other helpless creatures like Maggie and Danger Barch (Jay Baruchel), a mentally challenged man with delusions of a becoming a champ, feel worthy.

So everything moves forward on predictable lines till the championship match. And, everyone is in a celebratory mode.

But, then the whole hell breaks loose as Maggie is fatally injured by the brutal opponent. She is fitted with an oxygen tube in the throat. Things turn utterly depressing from this point onwards. The relationship of the lead characters comes into new focus. Frankie feels guilty for Maggie’s condition. Maggie is sorry that she could not make mentor’s dream, of making her a champ, come true.

Frankie starts thinking of alternatives for Maggie after she would be out of the rehab centre, and asks her if she wanted anything, she requests him to do the same thing to her as her dead father had did with their crippled pet, to choke her. And, he obliges after much soul-searching and deliberations with the priest who advices against it, not out of theological or spiritual reasons, but for reasons that are purely personal.

We would have whistled and clapped as the film ended only if Maggie had become a champion for cause of putting a ban on boxing or even selling the rights of her life story for a million dollar after the fatal fight, something like what Tom Cruise did in the Oliver Stone film Born on the Fourth of July.

But cinematically it is this unpredictable ending that worked in the favour of this film that helped it reap a rich harvest at the Academy Awards.

“So let the debate continue among the audience and the critics”, the septuagenarian director may be thinking reclining in his easy-chair, “but I’ve the satisfaction of being heralded as one of the greatest filmmaker ever by making this film”.

(Published in Apr - Jun 2005 issue of 'Success & Ability' with minor changes)