technicolour32

[technicolour32]

Cinemascape turned 12

[technicolour32]

October- Celebrating Stillness

Year of release: 2018

Running time: 1 hour, 55 minutes

Cast: Varun Dhawan, Banita Sandhu, Geetanjali Rao

Director: Shoojit Sircar

A powerful story that is like its colour, blue - haunting and melancholic. Blue, representing hope, love, despair, empathy - all rolled into one emotional journey.

Throughout the film, a question is asked, "Where is Dan?"

It is not only a literal question, it is symbolic of Danish Walia aka Dan's inner journey and character transformation. A cynical man who hates his job and rebels in small ways is shown to be unpopular because of his blunt ways, discovers empathy deep within himself because of Shiuli. She keeps him grounded as he discovers a sense of disquiet and stillness like the snow clad mountains.

I personally like to think of this film as a love story. Both Dan and Shiuli grow to love each other, heartbreaking as it is. Shiuli, like the flowers she once liked to smell before her accidental fall, is the center of Dan's depth of compassion. Even as she lies catatonic, she grows to depend on him. Meanwhile, Dan grows into a dependable friend and a companion to the family.

It is hard not to fall in love with this movie. Its one of those rare films that remain with you long after the moments have passed. Its a movie you want to revisit.

This film cemented my respect for Varun Dhawan. Kalank and Badlapur are films where he was absolutely wonderful. But, in October, his performance is outstanding. He has such beautiful expressive eyes that its hard not to fall for his disarming innocence. From being annoying to growing into a person of his own, Dan finds the true soul within him. Banita Sandhu as Shiuli is like October. Autumnal hues in those eyes as she speaks in silence. What a performance, particularly in scenes where she communicates and gets angry because she is aware of her dependence on Dan and her family. Geetanjali Rao as Shiuli's mother is brilliant in moments of trying to deal with the situation, of being courageous in the face of stress, and in realizing that the world moves on as she goes on with her teaching as a Professor in IIT. Even the minor characters support the main cast wonderfully.

Finally, Shoojit Sircar is one of those rare directors with an eye for the right stories that strikes a chord and leaves an impression. Juhi Chaturvedi's writing has so much soul. The balance between words and silence is not easy to achieve, and that is where she nails it. In moments where words are not necessary, the silence speaks more. In moments where you want some humour, Dan ensures cynical humour. The background score by Shantanu Moitra is like a fallen leaf on the grass, deeply moving.

October is not a film for everyone. When it was released, opinions were divided. People either loved it or found it flawed. For this is a film that is like the rain when Shiuli responds to the treatment for the first time. It is a visual treat. Soul, just so much soul.

I refuse to rate this film. Watch it if you haven't.

[technicolour32]

Paper Year, 2018

Written and directed by: Rebecca Addelman

Theme: Romancing the Desolate

"Franny: I was a bad wife

Dan: I think I was a bad wife too."

Franny (played by Eve Hewson) and Dan (played by Avan Jogia) are millennials who get impulsively "hitched" to each other because they love each other. 22, naive, sentimental and skeptical, barely making ends meet, its an "us against the world" situation. But reality dawns in the form of #adulting and soon they move away from each other. Dan- a typical lost lover boy is an aspiring actor while Franny is miss independent and an aspiring writer in a game show. Dan gets a job- that of a house husband and dog walker for 6 months staying in the apartment of an actress. Both are poles apart and this where the pair unravel. Slowly. Taking its own sweet time, differences creep in.

In an age of hashtags, nice fuckbois with impeccable tastes, we live in isolated spaces that are symbolic in cars, shots of the city, people going about their business, making new friends, eluding responsibilities, casual laidback city humour, cubicles and revolving chairs, resisting traditions, mid life crisis, the concept of 'choice', dogs, cigarette haze, smirks, arrogance, and swimming pools...this film romances with the idea of the 'desolate' and how 'alone' we are in the midst of our daily hectic social schedules. Does love mean we wear a ring on our fingers? Is it about mutual trust and allowing the other person to be? And since we live hyper urbane lives, how do we deal with loneliness? Should marriage exist and most importantly, is love enough to sustain a marriage?

Mind you, this film is different from the usual rom-coms. It looks at love from the standpoint of a fleeting moment... Always temporary. Our protagonists are left questioning and wondering about these fleeting moments. Smart, humorous, and languid in its pace while portraying relationships in the big bad city, it shows relationships keeping the idea of 'modern' love in a 'modern' city. It is not what you would call brilliant. Its charm lies in its ambient mood, yellow lights and jaded values accompanied by a mellow moody bordering on whimsical soundtrack. Also, it has one of the most beautiful breakups portrayed on the screen. My favourite is the heartbreaking ending of "Revolutionary Road" directed by Sam Mendes.

Watch this film for its relatability, and not because it tries to make some kind of a subtle sardonic intellectual statement. It may not win awards, but it remains like a sense of disquiet in your heart.

[technicolour32]

Kalank- there are no heroes in this story

Date and Year of Release: April 17, 2019. Cast: Varun Dhawan, Alia Bhatt, Aditya Roy Kapoor, Sonakshi Sinha, Madhuri Dixit, Sanjay Dutt, Kunal Khemu, Kiara Advani. Director: Abhishek Verman. Running Time: 166 minutes. When it comes to films, Bollywood or otherwise, reviews matter less. The method to my madness is more intuitive when it comes to knowing/choosing which films to watch. Cases in point- Saawariya and Guzaarish by Sanjay Leela Bhansali, Tamasha by Imtiaz Ali and Bombay Velvet by Anurag Kashyap. These were panned by audiences and critics alike. The reasons why i loved these films- the themes they attempted to explore and the impact they left on me even after considerable amount of time has passed since their release. Kalank joins this list. But before i begin my review, let me remind you of spoilers. They are inevitable. But will try to avoid them as best i can. So here goes... There are no heroes in this film in the conventional sense, only flawed characters caught in a web of fate. Would i call them antiheroes? I am not sure. The central theme is of course, love. I know what you are thinking. Obvious cliches right? Well, Bollywood is yet to fully throw ‘cliche’ out of the window...i mean, it serves a purpose and i will argue that it drives the story forward at times. Yes, the movie resorts to cliches in parts of the film...ones i hoped that the makers would avoid but it managed to leave an impact so i will willing to excuse that. I am aware that it will take many more years for Bollywood to evolve, and i would add that it is evolving. I add this because it is rare to see mainstream actors try to bring to life, a story that will leave an impression, good as well as bad. Or to put it this way, giving life to a story that has no happy ending in its conventional sense. It was interesting for me to see characters develop in the backdrop of Partition and how it changed the lives of the characters. But i digress... Zafar and Dev, portrayed by Varun Dhawan and Aditya Roy Kapoor respectively are shaped by their fate. Both have anger issues with different coping mechanisms. The film is driven by three women, Satya (Sonakshi Sinha), Roop (Alia Bhatt) and Bahar Begum (Madhuri Dixit). The dynamics between them was not one dimensional. Rather, viewers will find compassion, jealousy, love, understanding and even manipulation that seal the fate of all three women towards their individual resolution. There is reality and there is the ideal at the backdrop of the looming Direct Action Day and the subsequent Partition of erstwhile undivided India. The good- Varun Dhawan and Aditya Roy Kapoor are excellent. Varun’s kohl lined eyes reveal much of his inner anguish and helplessnes. Aditya’s restrained portrayal of melancholy was beautiful. Both characters so different, yet similar; Alia Bhatt has proven time and again that she is versatile. I judged her harshly for her first film and now she is an absolute delight to watch; Sonakshi reminded me of Lootera, the one film where she acted; Madhuri is graceful. While people rightly praise her dancing skills, they mention nothing of how she manages to up her game even after so many years; The set design is dreamy, lavish and contained and presents us the world of Husnabad; Kunal Khemu who should stop doing mindless films and focus on getting roles like Abdul. I remembered watching him in another gem called Zakhm. He does not speak much but boy do those eyes speak. Who needs dialogue when a look can say much more; The soundtrack which reminded me of some of my favourite Bollywood films. What a surprise that it is Pritam behind the scenes and Amitabh Bhattacharya whose soulful lyrics have given us some of the recent beautiful songs. I cannot stop listening to the songs; The small yet nostalgia tainted scenes between Sanjay Dutt and Madhuri Dixit who have given the tinsel town some of its memorable films in the 90’s; The costume department did a commendable job; and finally Varun and Alia together with all its beauty and tragedy. They should date in real life and make us all happy (grins). The bad- The first 15 minutes of the film felt rushed; Introduction of the characters to the audience and in each other’s lives could have been paced better. Rather, it felt too convenient; The lack of silence in the film. Not every scene required background music, particularly the emotional ones. It downplays the intensity of emotions and the scenes concerned, as if they were trivial to begin with; The backdrop of Partition remained as a prop and could have been explored more to add balance and nuance in the overall story; The obvious cliches that serve no purpose; the last 10 minutes where the message was better left unsaid; and Kiara Advani who is reduced to an arm candy. However, with its flaws, Kalank made me smile and cry. And that is saying a lot. It will remain with me. Watch it on the big screen. Rating: 3.5/5 P.S. It has cemented the fandom of Varun Dhawan for me. Maybe i will pay attention to him now. Also, his kohl lined eyes. Men should wear kajal more often and make me sigh. P.P.S: If you decide to watch this film after reading this and still do not like/hate the film, please remember impressions are subjective. What is treasure to me may just be trash for you. So please reconsider killing me for making you spend money to watch Kalank. It’s not my fault you disagree with my views or find the film unbearable. That’s all for now. I hope you enjoy the film when and if you watch it.

[technicolour32]

It: Chapter One

Disclaimer: Views are mine. Date and Year of Release: September 8, 2017 Cast: Bill Skarsgård, Jaeden Lieberher, Jackson Robert Scott, Sophia Lillis, Chosen Jacobs, Finn Wolfhard, Nicholas Hamilton, Jack Dylan Grazer, Jeremy Ray Taylor, and Wyatt Oleff. Director: Andy Muschietti Running Time: 135 minutes I had been waiting for this film ever since the first rumors and the eventual proof of the remake were splashed across media. What got me intrigued: (i) it was based on a Stephen King (Master of Horror) story and (ii) the casting of Bill Skaarsgaard as the eponymous Pennywise, the Dancing Clown. He is the member of the famed (and rightly so) Skaarsgaard acting dynasty, and got the acting chops (for reference check: TV series Hemlock Grove where he acted as the soulful and brooding outsider-vampire Roman Godfrey, unaware of his true lineage; the Swedish films- Simple Simon which is one of the best films on autism; and Simon and the Oaks where he is a working class boy trying to find his way at the peak of World War II). As a kid, I watched Tim Curry’s sadistic take on Pennywise, and it had quite the impact on me. Particularly, it shaped how I viewed clowns. I am not afraid of clowns, but am no fan either. Earlier, I used to be excited whenever a circus would wind up in my sleepy little beautiful town. Watching the antics of the clowns would leave me in splits. But Tim Curry changed that perception. If one goes by numbers, a large number of people in the USA suffer from Coulrophobia, and the media has only worked to sustain this fear of clowns. Recently, the creators- Ryan Murphy and Brad Falchuk of another favourite TV show, American Horror Story has received flak for depiction of the scary clown in the form of Twisty, the Clown in Season 5 titled Freak Show. But, in their defense, I would say that Twisty is a take on the notorious American serial killer John Wayne Gacy aka “Killer Clown” (who killed at least 33 boys in the 1970’s and who dressed as Pogo, the clown at charity events and children’s parties. He was also viewed as an upstanding member of his society). Watching the 2017 version made me remember my own experience of watching the Tim Curry version, Twisty, and my fascination with serial killers from a psychological stand point. From the go, the film set the pace right. Beginning with a moody piano at the background, the film starts with the Denbrough siblings and the pitter patter raindrops. Set in 1988, elder brother Bill makes a paper-boat for his younger brother Georgie, who proceeds to set it sail. He runs after it as it moves ahead. This sets sail the eventual unleashing of horror as the boat accidentally gets inside the sewer and we get to see the macabre Pennywise charming Georgie before eventually taking him, and worming his way in the fictional town of Derry in Maine beginning his terror on Bill and his gang of losers in 1989. Pennywise is ‘it’ and ‘it’ takes the form of Pennywise- a shapeshifter, assuming the form of individual fears of each of the children, and a trans-dimensional entity feeding on ‘fear’. Each of the children see it in the form of what they fear the most. To know what their individual fears are one has to watch the movie. The movie climaxes as the children unite to battle the demon, who promises to rise again. I had gone to watch this film alone and even though I was surrounded by girls, we collectively shuddered at every twist. This film comes at an interesting time. I say this because we live in a time where fear grips our imagination. Donald Trump in the USA is only the tip of the iceberg. Every nation now employs fear as a tactic to keep the citizens under its rule. I say fear in the context of politics and the theme of the film. Pennywise strikes when no one looks or says a word against it. The residents of Derry are aware that children are disappearing and yet pretend otherwise. The residents are also aware that these disappearances happen every 27 years. At the end it is upon the gang of “losers” to fight the demon by standing against it united and telling it, on its face, that they are unafraid of it. The central theme of this film is not Pennywise, but fear which sets the moody ambience. Of course, one has to take note of who has directed the film- Andy Muschietti (of another horror film, Mama fame). Mama had its obvious flaws, but that film too dealt with the horror of fear and what it makes one do. In the case of Mama, it was the fear of losing children, and how a Mother’s love lives on even in a supernatural dimension. I wonder if he is the Jim Jarmusch of the horror genre. Jim Jarmusch is known for his depiction of moody antiheroes (Dead Man, Only Lovers Left Alive). Andy Muschietti’s supernatural beings are not monsters themselves, but a reflection of monstrosity we see in day-to-day life. I would place him next to Guillermo del Toro’s humanizing take on monsters (The Orphanage, The Devil’s Backbone, Crimson Peak and the TV series, Strain based on the books he himself wrote). Similar to Toro’s demons, Andy too depicts ‘It’ as more human than humans themselves. Pennywise only attempts to reflect. Kudos to Andy for giving us a masterpiece. Next, I am not disappointed with Bill Skaarsgaard who takes on this challenging role with an intensity, charisma and madness that Tim Curry so generously gave to his version of Pennywise. Unlike Tim Curry though, Bill is sinister. Just like fear is. Fear is sinister and makes one commit the sinister. And what a performance. I remembered his role of Roman Godfrey in each frame. In the Netflix horror series, Bill portrayed a vampire with grace. He portrayed Pennywise with the same grace, that actors don’t often portray as titular monsters. I am sure many critics will say that he has the Skaarsgaard name, but no. His siblings and parents have made a name for themselves, and he stands out with this role of a lifetime. Interestingly, his elder brother Alexander Skaaarsgaard portrayed the character of the vampire Eric in True Blood and that had a charm, unique to Alexander. I think I will wait for Bill’s work in the years to come. And yes, the right choice for Pennywise, considering that another heavy weight Tilda Swinton was also considered for this role. Bill was considered for his build as one of the producers noted him being tall and lanky and a bit clown-like in his mannerisms, and for bringing his own take on how Pennywise should be. Further, the casting is perfect. Finn Wolfhard as Richie (of Stranger Things fame) is the adorable extroverted nerd; Jaeden Lieberher as Bill, the elder brother with a speech impediment; Jeremy Ray Taylor as Ben, the new kid in town bullied for being overweight; Sophia Lillis as Beverly, another new kid who is slut shamed for simply not fitting in; Wyatt Oleff as Stan, the Jewish kid at odds with his religious beliefs and his own coming of age pragmatism; Chosen Jacobs as Mike, the African American whose parents death haunts him; and Jack Dylan Grazer as Eddie who struggles with being a hypochondriac. They form the Losers Club- a gang who do not fit in. Opposed to this club, is the gang of violent troublemakers led by Henry Bowers (played by Nicholas Hamilton to perfection) that bullies the Losers. What an amazing performance by each one of the kids. I love watching children act precisely because it can come from a place of innocence and coming of age. Needless to say, in an environment where elders in Derry do not check bullying because often, they are bullies themselves, ‘It’ manifests. The actor who steals the show for me; however, is Jackson Robert Scott who so innocently portrayed the character of 7 year old Georgie, and later turns malevolent (for reference: the sink scene in the Basement scene). Next, themes in the film stands out- it remains true to Stephen King’s themes of anti-bullying, anti-fear, pro-acceptance and pro-outsiders. (Carrie, Misery, The Shining). That it is okay to be what you want to be. The remake celebrates these in the form of Pennywise. Finally, the soundtrack by Benjamin Wallfisch is brilliant and sets the tone of the film. There is something visceral about children singing in horror films. It is spine tingling, because it pits the innocence of children against the loss of innocence. The music does this well. Right from the first scene- the mood is set with the piano piece. As young Georgie is about to lose his childhood in the form of death, a lady (possibly his mother) plays the piano. Bill cannot accompany him because he is sick and bed ridden. We see the impending doom in the form of the continuous rain as seen dripping from the window panes while the curtains are still. Truly sets the ambience. A good background score is always important in horror movies. Guillermo del Toro uses music well. The background score of Mama was good as well. Rating: 5/5 - This is a must watch. The strength of this film is that Pennywise strikes when you expect him to. This goes against the norm (as seen in the films by M. Night Shyamalan where you know that the monster will strike but not when). Here, you know precisely when. This is vital for this film for without it, the impact is not there. You will not sit on the edge of your seat. But it will terrify you, nonetheless. Pennywise is fear after all, who ironically fears that others do not fear him enough. Like Pennywise, fear lurks everywhere. The only way to fight ‘It’ is to stand united. Much like in the world today. We need more horror movies. No other genre is subversive as this genre. Hope you watch this film after this review. Please do. Maybe we can discuss about your thoughts.

[technicolour32]

Sanju, 2018

Disclaimer: The views are mine. Feel free to agree, disagree, or hate this. Review: A movie that rests squarely on the shoulders of Ranbir Kapoor I was waiting for this film ever since the trailer was out. I am intrigued by the choices Ranbir Kapoor makes. He is a risk-taker even if he has been typecast as the quintessential "lover boy lost" of our generation. From the beautiful, unreal film-scape of Saawariya to Sanju, he is our lost boy. I know it gets tired and he has acted in bad films too. But, I make it a point to watch his films, if not always for the plot, then to check out how he internalizes the characters and gives it his best shot. I remember watching Saawariya twice in the theatre. What a lovely film! It’s not an easy watch. There is no happy ending in the film, and yet there is a happy ending as our young hero battles those demons in an alley and it snows. At that moment, he realizes he has let go and yet Sakina is always with him. It’s a clear tribute of another lost boy when our parents were younger- his grandfather Raj Kapoor. Saawariya, in my personal opinion, is Bhansali's best film to date beating even the soulful Khamoshi which came out in 1996. Pathos is something Bhansali does best. The joy tinged pathos of Hirani takes Ranbir's "lost boy" image to another level. He not only becomes Sanju, he is Sanju. I can understand why the role appealed to him. After all, a generation earlier, Sanjay Dutt was the "boy lost" in an ocean of opinions and judgements. This is a film that could have easily been messy. In parts, it does! But Kapoor handles them through a subtle look here, the trademark Munnabhai shoulders and a cheeky grin there. Let's take a look at the parts that did not work for me... First, the bad casting of two power-packed actors - Jim Sarbh and Vicky Kaushal! To me, Jim Sarbh would have worked as 'Kamlesh'. It would have brought out a side not yet seen in the films he has done so far. I mean quirky roles are fine, but it does not always work (for me). Vicky as 'Zubin' would have made this character far more interesting; Second, and the part that could have been explored, was the alleged use of drugs. Hirani could have lingered there a little longer. Instead, this part feels hurried. As if it’s an issue that needs to be addressed in one particular way. I am not saying he has not shown this, but the pace could have been better; Third, some back-story... There is the first girlfriend, Ruby. At least, I am assuming she is his first serious girlfriend. Hirani could have built their backstory. Instead, it seems, she is part of the young protagonist's life just to ensure that Sanju resorts to drugs and an eventual stint in a rehab. I was personally disappointed here because Ruby is portrayed by Sonam Kapoor. Yes, they came together after 11 years since their debut in 2007. I love their pairing and always wanted them to do another film. I would love to see them in a horror-comedy or a fantasy, for instance. Ranbir forayed into fantasy with ‘Jagga Jasoos’ which was such a joy-ride. In this film, Hirani could also have shown something about his alleged 300+ girlfriends. Since, this movie was also a judgement of sorts against media and morality by saying that both are subjective, he could have lingered on this for a while. This could have resulted in a tighter script; Fourth, wonderful actors not being amply used! Jim is under-utilised; Vicky overacts as the stereotypical 'Gujju' lad who pronounces snacks as 'sneks' and Shakespeare as 'Sexpeare'. This made me cringe. They elicited a few laughs which say a lot about the 'Indian' sense of humour. I understand that a community can sound funny when they speak, but it is high time, we (as screenwriters, directors and viewers) evolve. As a comedy device, this has been overused. The sisters of Sanju could have been given at least two lines as they seemed like mute spectators. Sayaji Shinde was a caricature of what seemed to be a Right-Wing leader of a fringe group in the form of 'Bandu Dada'. He was un-convincing and not even funny in a scene, meant to be funny. Boman Irani who played the father of the potential bride, stereotyped as a cranky Parsi father (and again, with a funny accent). What is it with accents that Indians feel the need to ridicule! Finally, Manisha Koirala as Nargis Dutt looked the part, but her dialogues seemed to be created in a hurried manner. I can understand that she battles cancer and has limited time on Earth. But the scene where Sanju goes to a rehab because he loves his mother seemed unconvincing to me. Essentially, Sanju is a father-son relationship. There was a chance this delicate balance could go wrong. Enter, Paresh Rawal. I do not agree with his political leaning, but he has grown from a 90's bald and crazy villain to a performer who delivers. Hello, Hera Pheri! That film changed the way he has been perceived as an actor. If Ranbir Kapoor is messy and chaotic, Paresh Rawal was the stillness which grounded the film. Their relationship is based on love/fear. Sanju Baba loves his father but fears to express it. Ranbir shoulders this responsibility like an actor who understands his craft well. Rawal, on the other hand, rises to the occasion and supports Ranbir. It’s chemistry, rarely seen. Each time I felt that this movie was going downhill, Rawal expertly balances it. Sanjay Dutt was the 'lover boy, lost' in the 90's… a person who was acutely sensitive to how he was being perceived as a young potential star kid… Sanjay did not always enjoy the limelight. There was this burden that he had to be like his father. Ranbir handles this well. In scenes where there is withdrawal in the rehab, Ranbir shines. He internalizes the demons that Sanjay Dutt may have felt when young. Sonam Kapoor has a small part, but she is good. In a character that has almost no dialogues, she made me smile. She seems to have a particular knack for comedy. Her comedic timing in 'Khoobsurat' left me in splits! What is it about Geminis and comic timing! In one scene, she is coy, and then the next second, she is perplexed. And all in a wink! One has to be on their toes for this! There is playfulness to Sonam that has not been tapped into yet. Truly, the way an actor performs depends on the director and the screen play. Vicky Kaushal, as the 'loyal' friend was good in parts. He is endearing in a role not written for him. I want to see him more in characters like 'ACP Raghavan Singh'. There is a soulful quality in Kaushal that I love. The acting by Ranbir, Sonam and Rawal are the parts to watch out for in this film. The other thing I loved in the film was the tribute played to the role of music in our films. Rawal references them to support his son and these songs inspire Sanju, no longer young and working on silly scripts. During this period, Sanjay Dutt acted in some strange films... Thanedaar, Tejaa, Khatarnaak, among other forgettable films. As I mention them here, I remember watching them on cable TV as a kid. The 90's were weird. However, even during this time, Sanjay Dutt acted in films like Sadak and Vaastav- two of my favourites from the 90s. Then, we see Ranbir Kapoor in the eponymous 'Munnabhai' mode, a film that features the father-son duo. I loved how the rocky relationship ends in a reference of 'Jadoo ki Jhappi' scene. The little moments of comedy work just fine. The songs of lyricists from yesteryears work because Sanju seems to learn how to be 'unaffected' by the constant media hounds. He is vulnerable but copes with it too. These are moments where a slight exaggeration can fall flat. Again, credit goes to Kapoor and Rawal as a duo. This use of the culture of 'tribute' that has become something of a trend now was relatable. Many a time, we listen to songs and try to find meaning in the lovely lyrics from the past. At times, they succeed in making us feel like we can go through another day, in one piece with our heads held high. Kudos to Hirani for incorporating this element! I say this as a viewer who loves these evergreen songs and can't get enough of them. It works because it goes hand-in-hand with the transformations and the ups and downs in Sanjay Dutt's life. (In my personal opinion, I feel that Sanjay Dutt's stint (and luck) in the film industry changed with the film 'Mission Kashmir', where he played Hrithik Roshan's father. This was another underrated film by Vidhu Vinod Chopra which tried to look at Kashmir in a different manner. It was sloppy but it remains one of my favourite film. He was soulful in a supporting role in Parineeta. Though the film is remembered for the lovely songs and the chemistry between Vidya Balan and Saif Ali Khan, it was Sanjay Dutt who stood out for me. He was far better than Hrithik Roshan as the anti-hero Kancha Cheena in Agneepath.) I loved the character of 'Manyata' played by Dia Mirza. It's a small role but Mirza gives life to her in a dignified manner. It is sad that we do not see her much. I also loved Anushka as the 'biographer'. She does not have much to convey but does a lovely job as 'Winnie Diaz'. Finally, I loved how the movie tears down 'sensational news' and the role of the media. This part is deftly handled to show how the common people are tricked into believing something, and how we, as consumers of this news, end up making judgements. None of us have lived with Dutt or have seen the happenings around him as far as his alleged role in the Mumbai blasts is concerned. We have made judgements. Yes, there is a possibility that he had a role. But, there is also a chance that he was a pawn. The point is we were not there in the immediate vicinity of Dutt and his family when it happened. Sanju makes an excellent point that sensational news is based on speculation and rumour. There are endless possibilities and one where they end up as question marks with no conviction of the claims made. Yes, the film is sloppy and could have been better. But the charm of Ranbir Kapoor lifts it up. Go for this movie to watch him and Paresh Rawal. I remember watching an interview of Kapoor with Rajeev Masand where he said that he has to show new things and have new tricks up his sleeve. In other words, evolve or perish! To be honest, I am tired of watching the 'lost boy' image, but even here, Kapoor is reinventing in the form of films like Rockstar, Barfi, risky ventures like Bombay Velvet and Tamasha, Ae Dil Hain Mushkil, and the recent Jagga Jasoos. I love these films for their individual thematic quirks even though he still played a 'lost boy' in these films, grappling with different goals and obstacles. Years from now, the next generation of fresh actors and performers will name him as one of the inspirations. Rating: 3.9/5

[technicolour32]

Summer Plans, 2018

Travel

Read

Watch cinema

Come back

To this world (albeit reluctantly)

Read, some more

Tick off the must reads in my list

Avoid facebook and instagram

Twitter does not matter

For I rarely, maybe, once-in-a-blue-moonesque

Remembrance, check it and

Immediately regret it to forget

This is what i want to do this summer

Remember what is worth

Forget the unnecessary, irrelevant everything

And focus

Like a tabby cat.

On a more serious note, here is what i plan to watch

Buster Keaton

Charlie Chaplin

Silent era swashbucklers

Musicals

Marilyn Monroe (she is a diva alright)

Audrey Hepburn

For some reason, am not ready for the intense Katharine Hepburn and the Princess of Monaco whose eyes were mesmerizing.

Maybe, Lauren Bacall

Sophia Coppola for tenderness

And maybe two or three Bollywood films- Raazi for instance.

Here is also what I plan to read

The Leo Tolstoy books that i have and one who i have evaded for years now

The Bangla books, including Shuktara.

I find myself in dystopia. The head wants to read while the heart insists on a newsfeed. How do i settle things between them, once and for all?

Like right now, i am typing this on my phone

When i have taken a vow to stay away for a few hours

Everyday

Failed so far

But no issues

Tomorrow is another day

But tomorrow is elusive

Like finding the lady on a crescent.

I want to stop

But i can't right now

Someone please tell me to stop

I tell me fingers

Almost yell

But it seems they have a mind of their own

It seems

21st century is a badly behaved toddler.

Okay now. Pause. Breathe. Stop.

[technicolour32]

Pari: Not a Fairytale

Director: Prosit Roy Cast: Anushka Sharma, Parambrata Chatterjee, Ritabhari Chakraborty, Rajat Kapoor. Year: 2018 Genre: Horror Country: India Disclaimer: This will be a long review. Kindly bear with this. I had been waiting for this movie since the first look of the film was released, followed by a teaser, and a series of screamers which made it very compelling. I watched it yesterday and I was not disappointed. The wait was worth it. The reviews though are far more rude, but this film will stand the test of time in the years to come. Why do I say this with such conviction? Because, Bollywood and horror have a strange relationship. Bollywood has made very few good horror films. And i say this because it is my favourite genre of films. Other than comedy, this is the one genre which totally subverts reality as we perceive it to be. Some would say that I am being silly but its totally my view. So feel free to disagree. This is the directorial venture of director Prosit Roy, an interesting genre to choose as a debut. Interesting because many first time directors would choose to wade through safer waters. The following interview from Firstpost answers my question: "Tell us a little bit about the background of the film. Why did you choose a subject such as this for your first film? A lot of people ask me – why did you choose a horror film for your debut feature? And I always tell them that I never chose a horror film. It was in fact the other way around. The film chose me, in a way. You see my grandparents were originally from the other part of undivided Bengal, what is now known as Bangladesh. They had come over during the Partition, and my grandmother used to tell me literally hundreds of stories — folk tales and stories of the land. Quite a few of these were stories about ghosts and apparitions. So, the love for the horror genre was always there. But then horror is a vast space, you see. Within horror, there are so many sub-genres. I never consciously decided that I am going to make a horror film. The horror element almost came as a by-product of my love for a good story. And then I came to know that there’s this production house in Mumbai which wanted to make a horror film. So, (my co-writer) Abhishek Bannerjee and I wrote a storyline and went to the production house. They said we love your story, why don’t you show us a full draft? Abhishek and I went back and fleshed out the full draft, but by that time, the production house had decided not to make a horror film anymore. By that time, I was working as an assistant director for Phillauri, and I showed the story to Karnesh. He loved the story and that’s how the journey began." Read the full interview here: [http://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/pari-director-prosit-roy-a-lot-of-people-ask-me-why-i-chose-a-horror-film-as-my-debut-4374259.html] Coming back to my earlier point that Bollywood and Horror have a strange relationship, most of them have the scare element but not a good story. The Vikram Bhatt camp of horror worked with the 2002 horror film, Raaz starring Dino Morea and Bipasha Basu, but later remakes were dull. Same with the 2008 film, 1920 whose remakes are forgettable. The central plot of both these films are about- boy-meet-girl, then fall in love and get married followed by either the themes of infidelity or reincarnation, and revenge in the final act- which makes them rather formulaic. However, not everything is that boring. Some films stand out... the 1992 Ram Gopal Varma horror flick, Raat with Revathy in the title role and the 2003 films, Bhoot starring Urmila Matondkar (the Bollywood Scream Queen) and Ajay Devgn and Darna Mana Hain which was a collection of stories narrated by a gang of friends deep in the woods (unique for that time); the 2011 found footage horror experiment titled, Ragini MMS by Pawan Kripalani; and the 2013 film, Ek Thi Daayan directed by Kannan Iyer to name a few. Pari joins that list in my opinion even if this movie has polarised opinions. Horror and Indian cinema is not new. The journey began as early as 1949 with the film, Mahal starring the veteran actor Ashok Kumar (fondly remembered as Dadamoni in the film fraternity) and our very own Marilyn Monroe, Madhubala. Interestingly, both Madhubala and Monroe passed away at 36 which for some reason struck me a curious coincidence. Directed by Kamal Amrohi and produced by Bombay Talkies studio, this was the director's directorial debut. This was probably the first film that dealt with reincarnation, but its great considering the time it was made. The lighting, the background and the eerie ambience is reminiscent of of the 1922 German silent horror film, Nosferatu by F. W. Murnau. The latter is a landmark film in the context of The Roaring Twenties. Mahal is the landmark film for a post colonial India, still a baby trying to stand strong politically and economically, conscious of its colonial legacy. The gothic element in the film is perhaps a tragic reminder of this. The editor of Mahal, Bimal Roy would later go on to make another paranormal romance called Madhumati in 1958 which dealt with reincarnation. This sadly set the tone of many films that would come out of Bombay Talkies and Bollywood in the later years. Considering all this, I would salute Prosit Roy to choose and deliver a genre courageously. Anyway, coming to Pari, here goes (without spoilers or so i tried) This film is essentially a story of love and about love. It questions morality and monstrosity. Sometimes monsters are humans and the humans are monsters. There are monsters within each one of us. We can accept this or deny it, but there is no escaping. It is easy to stereotype but then some small miracle happens and there is a shift in perspective. This is an indirect nod to the horror films made by the master of horror, Guillermo del Toro who deals with the human and the monster within us (Pan's Labyrinth, The Devil's Backbone, the TV series, Strain based on his novels, and the recent The Shape of Water). Pari is also about how women are labeled and treated as witches because of cult behaviour. Interestingly, the sub-plot dealing with a cult reminded me of the seventh season of the brilliant anthology series, American Horror Story which had placed the concept of cult in the realm of American presidential election of 2016. In the context of Pari, this cult behaviour is a reference to the 1968 Roman Polanski film, Rosemary's Baby. The film makes everyday objects sinister like a nail-cutter, a morgue in the hospital, clothes hung after wash, and a bucketful of water. Anushka Sharma's character is an emotional and a literal vampire who needs to dispose the venom by latching onto animals. This tilts vampirism on its head because a vampire sucking blood is not only cool and sexy but a moment of catharsis that we are too ashamed to admit (also the reason why vampires will never die from pop culture). In Pari, this same act is painful lest the venom kills her. It is claustrophobic. The character is also vulnerable, and there is a child-like innocence in her as she grows dependent on Arnob(portrayed beautifully by Parambrata). He is a perfect foil to her self-destructive deadly side. The character simply known as 'Professor' (played by the veteran Rajat Kapoor) is the antihero who is the ruthless slayer of demons- the one who purges the demon out of the women. I loved how Rukhsana defeats him which is a direct tribute to The Exorcist. Rukhsana (played by Anushka) is an offspring of one such woman, and she is aware of her own demons. She suffers, she fights it, she even succumbs to the tempting sweetness of the horror hidden from plain sight. She is aware that she was born for a specific purpose and there is no escaping her predicament. In one scene, she is going for a kill but a surprising twist turns what we anticipate on its head, and we are left to wonder about who is more human. There is a haunting sweetness to Rukhsana and we have no option but to empathise with her. It is given that she is terrifying but also deeply human. Considering this is Bollywood, and even though there are silly moments, the film has a freshness to it. Maybe this will take Indian horror films into braver territories in the years to come. Also, Anushka Sharma has produced this film, following NH10 and Phillauri. While I am not a huge fan, I will admit that, as a producer, she is fearless (as a sidenote, i loved her Alizeh character and look from 'Ae Dil Hain Mushkil'). My Rating: 4.5 out of 5. P.S: Go watch the film. Thank you for your patience...

[technicolour32]

I am back

So I am back after 4 long years. I have been lazy, confused and adulting... So its been a dazed and confused four years. Lots of changes... ups and downs... some full of surprises and some annoying changes. I had almost forgotten about this blog, but gosh! Better late than never. So there will reviews of films that i have loved, liked and disliked... A chutney of sorts I have changed the name of the blog... I liked the earlier name of the blog but i love this one. Feels right for some reason. So hopefully, this year will be an active year for my blog.

[technicolour32]

Enjoy the softness within. It rains. Always!

Brook Benton Rainy Night In Georgia

[technicolour32]

A band from Iceland I stumbled upon accidentally while searching for Olafur Arnalds. Liked them instantly. Hope you like this song too. Will be uploading their other songs soon. Till then, enjoy this.

[technicolour32]

Ghost World

(To begin with, this is not a proper review but rather, a note on what I felt after watching this film. Maybe, I can call this as 'my' review, which will have its flaws. So please pardon any lack of understanding. I am just an ordinary person writing this.) Directed by Terry Zwigoff in the year 2001, the film has been said to belong to the genre of comedy-drama. Though I have never watched any of his other movies, and through a rather conventional digging(on my part) in Wikipedia (ahem), I have come to know that his movies deal with misfits, anti-heroes and themes of alienation. Having watched this film today, I will watch his other films and documentaries. The film includes Thora Birch, Scarlett Johansson, Steve Buscemi, Brad Renfro among others, all of whom depict moments of alienation throughout the film, while being humorous.

The central plot of the film revolves around teenagers Enid(portrayed by Thora Birch who also acted in 'American Beauty') and Rebecca(portrayed by Scarlett Johansson) and the summer, following their high school graduation. It is indicated that the two have been friends for a long time. Both are socially awkward with Enid being more candid, rebellious and at times bluntly honest. Rebecca is more quiet and careful about what she speaks in public. Enid attends extra classes on art to pass. Once there, the art teacher dismisses her work by calling it 'comedy', rather than her work serving a higher social purpose. Enter Steve Buscemi as Seymour who is a loner and collectes music records to an obsessive degree. Enid and Rebecca play a prank on him which may seem to be plain mean. Seymour gives out an ad where he tries to contact the blond 'mysterious' girl he sees. Enid calls him up, claiming to be the woman and tells him to meet her at a restaurant. He does. But she is with Rebecca and Josh, sizing him up, judging him and later following him to find out where he lives. But, a few days later, she and Rebecca visit him and buy an old blues record, on the pretext of getting to know him better. Enid is particularly touched by one song called 'Devil Got My Woman' by Skip James and is intrigued by Seymour. Clearly, there is more to him than meets the eye. Their friendship deepens while Enid and Rebecca grow distant. As days pass by, Enid hangs out with Seymour and connects with him deeply. At this point, she sees a poster in Seymour's bedroom depicting an old cartoon of a black man and she asks him if she can keep it for a few days. She takes it to her art class which impresses her art teacher and she wins an art scholarship. Seymour is unaware of this development. Her work is selected for an art exhibition, but is later removed as it is viewed to be 'offensive'. She also loses her scholarship as a consequence and fails to get the required extra credit to pass in art. Meanwhile, newspapers publish the poster and Seymour loses his job. All this while,Rebecca is angry at her, which mounts on until they go house-hunting and end up fighting. She also constantly asks Enid if she is going to get a job. A new twist is introduced when a woman called Dana calls Seymour after seeing his ad, and they begin a relationship. Though initially supportive, Enid grows jealous and attempts to converse with Seymour. One drunken night ends up in a one night stand and Seymour realizes he may be in love with her and breaks up with Dana. Enid reacts by panicking and ignoring Seymour. Rebecca and Enid attempt to give their friendship another chance and the two decide to move in. Rebecca also ends up telling Seymour about the prank they all play on him and he reacts angrily by fighting with Josh and ending up in the hospital. Enid comes to meet him and leaves on a bus, fulfilling her childhood dream of going to a random place. Throughout the film, there is this edgy yet humorous tension between Enid and Rebecca. At the outset, you begin to judge Enid as being offensive and trying too hard to be cool for school, and Rebecca being the more level-headed of the two. However, as the film progresses, the tables turn as we see distinct sides of both the girls. Enid is inquisitive, observant and at times, subtly vengeful. She can be a trickster in that sense. She is intentionally mischievious just to see what makes someone tick. This, in my opinion, definitely makes her quirky, free-spirited and hauntingly lonely. Because, she is aware that only she understands herself and tries to hide it beneath the mask of sarcasm. Rebecca, on the other hand, transforms into this woman who is an outcast in her own way, but is more grounded and possesses the ability to adapt. This becomes clear when her relationship with Enid suffers. At one point, I began to doubt if she had merely tolerated her friend's easy-going way, rather than trying to understand her. Enid is a dreamer, a drifter, elusive and always unsure of where she stands. I wonder if Terry Zwigoff has intentionally depicted their friendship around the 'opposites attract' idea. Teenage years can be difficult and tranformations are inevitable, which is shown through the lens of their deteriorating friendship. Rebecca cannot fathom the friendship between Seymour and Enid and does not like the former. I love the part where Enid begins to unravel pieces of Seymour after listening to Skip James. At 16 or 17, we often try to find ourselves(and also do find) in music. Not only hormones and boys make up adolescence. Music helps in dealing with all the complex thought patterns, the anger, the loneliness, and the awkwardness of teenage years. It is here that we see Enid being more accepting, rather than a blunt girl who seems to be plain rude at first sight. She bonds with Seymour at a deep level. After a point, both Enid and Rebecca realize they cannot be friends, because both transform into something, both dislike and cannot understand. As I write this now, I remember my own childhood and teenage years and it makes sense. Everyone is lonely. The only person who can understand me is me, and no-one else, in the truest sense of the term. We gel with certain people but how deep can someone know someone truly? There is always that private chamber where no-one is allowed to enter and they cannot enter. Another theme this film explores is the possibility of our 'real' dreams ever coming true. Because, at some point or the other, there are moments where all of us want to tread down the path, not taken. But is it possible always? Most of us manage to hide our loneliness by saying, 'we are happy' or 'this is practical' and then go back to our cocoon. In that sense, we see Enid as being more rebellious than Rebecca who suddenly has a new found interest in clothes, and boys(which always interested her but grows more pronounced), a new house to move in, and a job to pay the rent and life. At one point, her continuous question of whether Enid aims at getting a job becomes a nagging obsession. Both depart their own ways. Terry Zwigoff has also looked at how judgemental we all are. Seymour, a man not attractive yet not unattractive can charm only a 'certain' type of woman, and he is made fun of by people he knows; Enid's awkward realization or attempts at understanding her self is influenced by Societial norms and she hates this, and it plays continuously in her confused head, like a song on a loop; the art teacher who is dismissive of Enid, speaking about art as being 'reflective' while calling Enid's sketches as being a 'comic strip'; the art exhibition where Enid's work was called 'offensive' when it was 'addressing' a social issue: that of racism and how racist we are or can be, no matter if we show it openly or hide it; Norman being called an 'old mad-man' because he dreams of boarding a bus and going off somewhere, and waits for the same, every day at the same place and at the same time; and the psychologist who listens to Seymour's problems but heaves a sigh of relief the moment he leaves. There is always this interplay between the 'genuine' and the 'fake', the 'real' and the 'unreal', sense, sensitivity and sensibility, and it is through such blending of both that we see how everyone is alienated. All of us are loners. All of us are lonely. All of us only try to fit in. A degree of awkwardness always remains. I love this film. Plus, the beginning of the film is remarkable. 'Ghost World' is not only a comedy-drama. It is a satire, a black comedy of how frail and human we are. And it deserves applause for not being cheesy or campy, but honest.

[technicolour32]

Regrets

That this blog may not live up to the expectations of what a review should be. I am not a professional reviewer. I merely write what comes to my mind, and how a particular film makes me feel. If you are reading this blog, please feel free to help me write better stuffs. Thanking You, Yours Sincerely, an Owl.

[technicolour32]

Amadeus

Originally uploaded here Just how do you define the 'genius'?And how do you defy conventions, where mannerisms are constantly put to watch; where your behaviour either makes you 'genteel' or 'uncouth'? Can you be noble and genius at the same time? To be a genius,one must break free of mediocrity, one is way ahead of the times. Is there a god? Does he choose one amongst many to be his vehicle? Where does madness come from? Can devotion and hatred haunt you? One minute you accept the genius and the next minute, all you can think of is destruction. Aren't we all patrons of mediocrity?

[technicolour32]

Jack Johnson-"Gone"

[technicolour32]

"A rupee to the temple? The thing within is no more than stone and red paint, but the heart of man we must acknowledge when and where it is good."

Rudyard Kipling- "Kim"

[technicolour32]

The Beatles-"In My Life"