End of an Era of Romance for Film Industry and me, an ardent fan of Cinema and Dev Saab remembers

I can’t think of any song to dedicate to him and his memory...every song he did was as if a part of his personality and attitude to life.

'Main zindagi ka saath nibhata chala gay....' something that the actor truly lived by. 'Abhi na jaao chodd ke ki dil abhi bhara nahi....' something that every one always said for him. 'yaad kiya dil nein kahaan ho tum...' something we would say for him from now on. 'Jeevan ke safar mein rahi milte hain bichhar jaane ko....' is something the heart knows is the truth of life but the heart still refuses to believe...the list is never ending, as is the understanding of him and his life and work.

I can’t believe he is no more.....of two people I truly ever fell in love with...I thought I still had chance to meet at lest one of them in this lifetime. But no that dream too is now all packed up and has a quite place in my heart, for now. 

Its still a truth, that will take time to dawn on me....for when I met him for 5 mins, about four years back, as a chance encounter at a film screening, I had a chance to see someone I loved in front of my eyes for real. But sadly the event that he was going for was only for invitees and media, so I it was just 5 mintues of ogling from my end, as he said ‘hello’ to me. That time I had thought that one day I will meet you with my name, but not just 5 minutes; and who knows maybe even work with you or be interviewing you....I lost my path in the way thereon...and now I have lost him...No, We have lost him.

A salute to the undying spirit and undying and forever young heart....Dev Saab


When I understood the mean of cinema and the place it went on to hold in my heart...I understood true love. This true love was not just for Cinema, but for two personalities. Two extremely different dynamic Indian or shall I say specifically Bollywood Personalities. These two were not just contemporaries of each other but also shared an exemplary friendship that however didn't last long. These were Guru Dutt and Dev Anand.

Guru Dutt and Dev Anand met when Dev Saab was shooting for his first film, Hum Ek Hain, and from there on a chance meeting turned into a sweet friendship, that sadly didn’t lost long, as the focus of film career and life in general drifted the two apart.

I feel in love with Guru Dutt after I understood Pyaasa and Kaaghaz Ke Phool. I fell in love with the brooding image of the poet that he portrayed. The hurt and pained expressions, a man troubled by life's ups and downs, I fell in love with it all. I feel in love with his sensibility in films, which arose out of his own personal experiences, understanding and thought. I feel in love with the man he portrayed on screen and feel in love with the man off screen. The more I saw, the more I read, the more I felt an intense emotion of connection with him, which was beyond any comprehension, even my own. Guru Dutt died at a fairly early age, after 2 unsuccessful attempts to end his life, sadly the third time it was unlucky strike for all those who loved him and wished him to recover out of his depression and don back his place in the film industry.

Dev Anand was an exact opposite of all that that Guru Dutt was. Dev Anand had a boyish charm about him always. He always donned a smiling face, whether you see it in his films, or in the stories of his friends. All his images on screen and off screen presented a young man full of life, for which age was just about increasing numbers to liveliness and a few wrinkled lines on face. Dev Anand was the romantic hero, who made hearts of everyone swoon, and had a bounciness of spirit and heart always.

I don't know, rather I don't remember, when I fell in love with Dev Anand. It must have started when I was 13-14 years old and saw a number of his films, and when I compared them to the romantic films by other actors, whether his contemporaries or newbie, I realized the romantic image of Dev Anand was more appealing due to the gentleman side that I saw in his characters. There was a gentle calming effect of seeing Dev Saab on screen, which bought a slight smile on lips and always stars in eyes.

Dev Anand took failures and success with same strife, an attitude that nothing changes as he moved on effortlessly from one role to another and climbing a steady ladder of success and love. Dev Anand was known for his smile and friendship. Whenever I heard any celebrity, his contemporaries especially, always talked about his dying attitude in life and his young at heart image.

It is now truly an end of era, a romantic era. Earlier on in the year another star of Romance and joviality had passed away, Shammi Kapoor; and now Dev Saab. The hero who belonged to the youthful times of our grandparents and parents, but his stories and film transcended every sense of time for me. For me he will be the ‘hero’ from my ‘romantic love stories’, something akin to what adolescent youngsters feel for the ‘heroes’ of Mills & Boon; maybe that is bad allegory to explain it, but ya will get the point bit across.

Yes, I do have my own array of heroes, on which I grew up. There are the Khans and Kapoors and more of my time as well. And yes definitely the star of all SRK. But what I feel for Guru Dutt and Dev Anand and their timelessness, surpasses any excitement I would ever feel for seeing any these on any screen.

And now even though the memories and the art of both dynamic personalities (Dutt and Dev Saab) survive, they both have now taken a departure from the physical existence. I had made a list of people whom I would like to meet for sure after I die, and that list was topped by Guru Dutt's name, and now even Dev Saab joins him there.

Two such different people, such different life, such different body of work, such different approaches to life. But for me, my love for their on-screen and off-screen personas, and dedication to never stop in my attempts to get to know them and understand them as much as possible; shall never exist.

RIP Dev Saab :(

Puss In Boots (2011): Watch it for swashbuckling charm of Puss, seductive voices of Banderas and Hayek, the innocence of script and chaotic mix of characters.

Well I personally love the character of 'Puss In Boots' from Shrek franchise. A spunky feline voiced by Antonio Banderas...is a lovable yet feisty outlaw. He is a lover and a leaver. The movie 'Puss In Boots' takes a look into the origin and story of this cheerful feline outlaw, before he is introduced in the second of the Shrek franchise.

Movie is somewhat a chaotic mix of a number of nursery rhyme characters in an old feel Spanish village setting, yet it is an enjoyable film. But the film mixes up too much too follow at times. You have the story of how innocent lovable Puss becomes Swashbuckler outlaw Puss in Boots, and goes on his ways of crime with characteristics of Zorro. And the story begins to bring in an array of familiar names such as Humpty Dumpty, Jack and Jill (who are a married couple here, and here I was thinking always they were brother and sister), and Jack and the bean stalk, and then Golden Goose and Mother Goose. Then there is the love angle with the seductive and sassy Kitty Softpaws (voiced by Salma Hayek).

The plot is interesting as well, it is about Puss's quest for the magic beanstalk, in order to reach the magic castle beyond clouds and steal the Golden Goose that lays golden eggs. He is joined in his plan by two sidekicks; an estranged friend Humpty and Kitty Softpaws; and pursued by villionous duo Jack and Jill. But as it turns out eventually not everyone as what they seem to be. But I won’t reveal this part much as the movie has just released and is for sure worth catching atlest once, if for nothing else then sexy voices of Antonio Bandares and Salma Hayek.

It is a story of adventure, friendship, love, betrayal, revenge and reunion. But yes I found the film lacking the charm of Shrek films and the usual suaveness of Puss. The film on the whole becomes a bit complex, with a whole array of Spanish folks and Folklore characters being mashed up together, and there are too many ‘change of heart’ moments in the story, which make it not so smooth. As a character Puss has just one angle, the swashbuckling, charming, sword dueling, with self delusional Spanish vainglory; and well after a few starting scene that charm seems to be loosing interest for me. For me I think the character of Humpty Dumpty (the egghead, voiced by Zach Galifianakis) was much more interesting and multi dimensional. Yet I really did enjoy those particular bits in the story where sword handling swashbuckling Puss uses big innocent cat eyes to disarm his enemies. And the Spanish dance of Puss and Kitty Softpaws.

The film is wonderful in terms of colorful visuals, and 3D works well in adding on to the spectacular animation. Puss as character and Antonio as its voice is a match made in heaven. And so Salma’s voice to the suave Kitty Soft paws.

I would rate the film as a good 3 out of 5. Even though often at times the mix of characters becomes chaotic, yet the child-like innocence of the story makes me smile even though on the most lamest and silliest of jokes and clichés. And yes the film is thankfully no sequel or prequel or anywhere attached to the memory of Shrek (which I’m sorry but has totally lost all appeal to me after so many sequels of its own). The Puss did took a share of my attention away from Shrek and the Donkey when it was introduced in the second Shrek series, but here, on its own, the Puss in Boots stands tall for itself.

Puss In Boots 3D (2011)

Director: Chris Miller;

Voices Of: Antonio Banderas (Puss in Boots), Salma Hayek (Kitty Softpaws), Zach Galifianakis (Humpty Dumpty), Billy Bob Thornton (Jack) and Amy Sedaris (Jill).

Writer: Tom Wheeler,

Based on a story by Brian Lynch, Will Davies and Mr. Wheeler;

Editor: Eric Dapkewicz;

Producer: Joe M. Aguilar and Latifa Ouaou;

Released by DreamWorks Animation.

Running time: 1 hour 30 minutes.

Imtiaz Ali's Rockstar (2011): Raises the bar of expression for it's actor and director

I know it’s too late to write this review, but in my case it is always like 'jab jaago tab saavera'...jab dekhoge toh hi toh express kar paaoge. 

A lot of constraints often stop me from watching a film in the very first week of its release. And I’m not someone who goes to a movie because of other’s perceptions…I know that would be a wiser decision…but when it comes to movies I just listen to myself and no wiser decisions come to me then.

Anyways coming back to the film Rockstar, I thoroughly enjoyed the film. The themes, the emotion, the cinematography and yes the music, for sure, all made it a wonderful experience. I want to say I had heard a lot of mixed reviews about the film, somewhat more permuting to the negative side. But after watching the film all I can say is that those negative reviews would have been more so based by those who took the movie’s director’s earlier ventures as a pre-notion in their mind to watch this film as well.

I don’t usually judge audience sensibilities, everyone has their own perceptions and I respect that. I don’t judge your judgment; you don’t judge mine…is what I go by. Anyways, I think that most people, who went to watch this film, had to pre-conceived notions about it before they entered the hall.

Firstly, after looking at the film’s posters and its name, they were expecting an artistic and brilliant look into the world of music and the image of a ‘rockstar’. They were expecting a film based on ‘rockstar’.

Secondly, most people went in holding a pre-conceived image of Imtiaz Ali’s earlier venture. Love breakup reunion drama sort of image, with candy floss romance and diversions.

Now these two notions were in themselves so contradictory in the mind of the audience that a few failed to understand and view the film objectively.

I’m not saying Rockstar is in any way a brilliant cinematic experience, or top notch of the lot, no. The film has its own fault lines. Some casting decisions, certain predictably dramatic portions, a bit of slope downwards in unraveling the plot that slowed it to a snail’s pace; this was all there too. But then again the film’s themes and cinematography and music just fills up your senses so well that you can over look certain parts of that.

One of my friends, Neelakshi, aptly commented on the film by saying; “The main (and only) problem with Rockstar is that the director was unsure whether to pitch his movie for the masala- loving audience who laps up movies like Bodyguard and Ra-One or whether to pitch it for the art critics. In the process, he might have ended up pleasing neither. However for me who falls into neither category the movie was thoroughly enjoyable.”

I too felt the same, Imtiaz Ali wanted to make film that was different to his earlier style, but he might have been unsure of how his traditional followers will respond to the sudden change of his direction, hence the visible fault lines in the plot.

For me the film is ruled by its themes. Themes of a tragic love story, theme of artistic expression and angst, and the theme of self destruction. Yes it might be true that Ranbir’s rise as a ‘rockstar’ starts after pain and heart break enters his life; but it is also true that this pain and heartbreak is not reason of his rise, these emotions unleash the creative expression in his heart and voice, that was otherwise resting as comfortably within him as his own life of comfort. The theme of self destruction is more prominent than all the other.

Ranbir Kapoor’s acting is just brilliant. After Ranjneeti, he has again proved his mettle as an actor very successfully as a Rockstar as well. Anyone anywhere who has watched the film has not stopped praising his acting skills and his constant upward growth as a performer. Nargis Fakhri is just a beautiful face, who shouldn’t have opened her mouth or moved a bit. She reminds me a lot of Katrina Kaif, just a face but moment you open your mouth it just shuns you off totally. Aditi Rao has a small role yet her remarkable performance in that too doesn’t let her get shadowed out. Piyush Mishra delivers a great performance as ‘Dhingra’. Shammi Kapoor’s short appearance is more about his expression through eyes, which are beautifully conveyed, and they just make you nostalgic about his presences in film industry and recent demise.

Music of the film had been a hit even before the film was released, after the film’s release audiences started loving the lesser played numbers as well. I enjoyed the songs ‘Nadaan Parindey’ and ‘Jo bhi main….’ And loved the musical bit with the jugalbandi between Shammi Kapoor on shehnai and Ranbir Kapoor on guitar. In the album it is called ‘dichotomy of fame’, an instrumental piece that I’m sure everyone would love.

I feel somewhere down the line the whole music team themselves enjoyed making the music of this film, and that is what is conveyed in its lyrics, music and vocals. Everything, I know a bit over rated, but for sure was a musical ecstasy for me.

                                        

I don’t want to get too much into the storyline here, because for that wiki is there. Also those who have seen it know what it is about and those who haven’t should definitely see it to know what it is about.

The film is, well everyone knows by now, not about ‘rockstars’. It is more closely related to ‘Devdas’ and ‘Dev D’. It is about an artist’s personal journey to self discovery and realizing that getting your ‘heartbroken’ is not just about refusal of a proposal; it is deeper than that, it is about blindly falling for someone and then realizing that you can never really hold on to them.

I loved the narrative style, the non-linear narration, was a good break from the few recent films I have seen. Also the open-ending is an interesting addition to Imtiaz Ali’s style of filming. It leaves a lot to audience’s imagination and intellect.  Cinematographer Anil Mehta provides a beautiful edge to the film, with his lens realistically and artistically capturing the beauty of Delhi, Kashmir and Prague. No doubt in that I would say he has a remarkable record of work with films such as Khamoshi: the Musical, Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam, Lagaan, Saathiya, Kal Ho Na Ho, Veer Zaara and Wake Up Sid; in his kitty.

I would give Rockstar 4 out of 5. This is all for three reason’s; one being Ranbir Kapoor’s performance, two being its music that is just mesmerizing, and three for Imtiaz Ali for attempting something like Rockstar.

  

Directed By: Imtiaz Ali

Produced By: Shree Ashtavinayak Cine Vision Ltd; Eros International

Starring: Ranbir Kapoor, Shammi Kapoor, Piyush Mishra, Nargis Fakhri, Aditi Rao.

Story By: Imtiaz Ali

Music Director: A.R. Rehman

Cinematographer: Anil Mehta

Bimal Roy’s ‘Do Bigha Zameen’ (1953): a socialistic realistic cinematic portrayal

THERE IS a great Indian director considered a master with his realistic portrayal of society, including its all bitter truths. A director who had a strong command over the narrative and his films were a true look into the era they were set in.

Leave all his other films aside; one of his most acclaimed works is Do Bigha Zameen (DBZ), a socialistic realistic cinematic portrayal. It is a story of an agrarian society slowly been taken over by industrialization and commercialization and vices that accompany it.

As author BD Garga remarks in his book on cinema, “His (Bimal Roy) indignation arises out of one man’s exploitation of the other, lack of human decency and social decay. He questions not so much the political structure as the moral base of the society…in “Udayer Pathey” and DBZ, he despises the deception of the rich…He was a romantic and an idealist to whom exploitation in any form - social, economic or religious- was unacceptable.”

In DBZ, Balraj Sahni showed a vast emotional range. He portrays the role of the peasant Shambhu convincingly that you can feel moved with every emotion that the character goes through. It was perhaps his best-known role as the peasant Shambhu and gives a performance of a lifetime. His realistic portrayal stands out all the more particularly when one considers him in real life being well educated and westernized. It is said he actually rehearsed for the role by pushing a rickshaw on the streets of Calcutta and interacting with other rickshaw pullers who were convinced he was one of them. Nirupa Roy and Rattan Kumar as his wife and son respectively compliment Sahni perfectly.

Every character in the film is a representation of a class, be it a poor farmer who considers his piece of land to be his mother, a lecherous and greedy landlord, a scared and protective wife and mother, a child who travels to a city and sees the trials his father goes through and tries to become a part of it. Other than these there are a lot of distinct characters- like a dying father who only wishes to see his son save his land or characters in the city; like a crude landlady who is soft in the core of the heart.

What is also attractive in the film is the composition of the frame that makes every shot almost as if a work of photographic art. Roy never looses the sense of realism from the narration of the story. The film is beautifully photographed by Kamal Bose.

The story of the dispossessed peasant and the landlord had been told many times before but in DBZ, Bimal Roy with his innate reserve and good taste chooses a much wider context in which to place his narrative thus looking at rural poverty at one end and the brutalizing effects of city life at the other end. DBZ is a sad and moving tale which Roy projects with much sympathy, understatement and simplicity and gives us a film that is very human and has great emotional depth.

The film is strongly influenced by the Italian neo-realist Cinema and particularly evokes De Sica’s masterpiece Bicycle Thief (1949) particularly in the scenes of the father and son in the city.

The film also has a high dosage of metaphors as images like the idea of a man running as fast a horse to support his living. Something that hits me while watching this particular scene is a similar type of metaphor from a different film. I am reminded of Naya Daur (1957), a film too based on the ideas of change in the society. There it’s the negatives of industrialization and modernization and machine culture that displaces human labour. In that film it’s the horse-cart driving labourer as against the machine cars.

A moderate commercial success, the film won Roy much critical acclaim and awards at the Cannes and Karlovy Vary festivals. To quote the News Chronicle on August 17, 1956. The film also went on to win Best Film and Best Director awards at the inaugural Filmfare Awards. But perhaps the biggest compliment for the film was a comment made by Raj Kapoor. On seeing DBZ and being much moved by the film he had exclaimed, “How I wished I had made this film!

Here is a scene from the film that is particularly the start of it all...especially should be seen by those who haven't seen the film so far....

There are a lot of excellent dialogues in this movie, but this scene has one of my favorite dialogues so far:

Sambhu: zameen toh kissan ki Maa hai hazoor....Maa ko baich doon?

Zamindar: Arre rehne de. Zameen par mill lagg jaane se Maa Baap bann jayegi....

Do Bigha Zameen (1953)

Director: Bimal Roy

Starring: Balraj Sahni, Nirupa Roy, Ratan Kumar, Jagdeep, Murad, Nana Palsikar

Producer: Bimal Roy

Writers: Salil Choudhury (story), Paul Mahendra(dialogue), Hrishikesh Mukherjee(scenario)

Music Director: Salil Choudhury

Cinematography: Kamal Bose

Editing: Hrishikesh Mukherjee

Hema Malini’s “Tell Me O Kkhuda” (2011) - Tell me kyun khuda?

When Hema Malini announced that she is going to re-launch her daughter, it was tented to be a magnum opus vehicle, but there were just 3 things that I was sure what that film won't have:
1. Esha Deol's old childish acting
2. Esha Deol crying; and

3. Esha Deol's real parents playing her reel parents.

But well voila! As luck would have it, the last one was actually there in the film. Yes the film had both Dharmendar and Hema in it. And well voila! Again it had the first two as well.

I took my chances with the film with quite some interest mainly due to two reasons; one because of the magnificent stars it boosted of as its cast and two because it was Hema Malini's directorial venture.
There was a magnificent array of stars casted indeed but what I found to be, far too predictable characters and roles. And sensitive subjects were taken up in the plot but their handling showed an immaturity of mind and time.

TMOK is reminiscent of Hema Malini’s debut directorial venture ‘Dil Aashna Hai’, similar central story, somewhat similar characters, and well same upper-handed take on feminism. The movie is filled with predictable story lines and immature handling of a sensitive subject.

The only difference is that there the protagonist searched for her biological mother, in particular, and here the protagonist went out looking for her biological father. Also I believe Divya Bharati was really a good actor of her time. Comparing that to anything that Esha Deol did on screen in TMOK is no less of a shame for the film.

At least after you know about ‘Dil Aashna Hai’ you feel relaxed that as to why throughout you felt the film’s story line to be outdated and something hurriedly rehashed.

So the story is about young author Tanya, she is hip modern and a girl who lives her life on her own terms; yet at the same time she is still grounded, a loving daughter and a great friend. But Tanya’s world comes collapsing all at once, when she gets to know that she is an adopted child; and so begins her search for her real parents. All she has as a start is a hospital bracelet that has just a visible letter ‘A’ on it. Her quest leads her to Rajasthan to Abhay Pratap Singh (Vinod Khanna), to Turkey to meet Altaf Zardari (Rishi Kapoor); and finally to Goa to meet Anthony/Tony Costelo (Dharmendar). In tow are her best friends Kuki (Chandan Roy Sanyal), and boyfriend Jai (Arjan Bajwa).

Now the deal with the story I would say is that how a girl who is a young writer, with a great deal of passion for life and a strong head on her shoulder; suddenly falls totally downwards once she gets to know that she is adopted. And the journey that was should have been an emotional one just became about a girl and her friends going on extensive vacations/ adventures.

Another thing is how is it that if the hospital records shows Dharmendar’s screen name as ‘Tony Costelo’ then how come the bracelet on the baby wrist as letter ‘A’ in it. Does the Hospital staff assume by itself that ‘Tony’ is always short for ‘Anthony’?

Another point is that story becomes far too predictable for me at the time when I realize that there is a slight scope of the girl achieving a happy ending even before the first half ends. When does that ever happen in our typical Indian Bollywood films?

I think the director and producer’s main concern was just one; the film’s supposed to be a Deol re-launcher, so let’s forget everything and just makes sure there is no frame left without her being present there. There is no space for audience to miss her even a bit, at lest I believe separation makes you grow fonder, but this movie proves me all wrong there. Esha Deol’s earlier absence from film industry made no one fonder, but yes her come-back did make everyone sure that there are something’s you can never mend. And yes, also that at times parent’s are ready to do anything for their kids, even though it might be spend their money and time on some tasteless talented offspring, and demeaning their own self and close friends for the sake of same.

You ask me why I’m so overtly irritated by this film.

1. the most basic response-waste of my money and time
2. the waste of good supporting cast, that was over all definitely much better than the one who got all the screen time and space.
3. Talented parents have given birth to such an amateurish offspring and then they are ready to support her even though they too very well know that it is all a waste in the end.
4. The film is just a proof of what extend parents are ready to go to  support their most wasteful progeny, which irritates me, especially if I earlier in the day get a lecture from my parents about my recent credit card bills and shopping expenses.

What irritates me even more Dharmendar’s excessive hamming as the Don Tony Costelo, and listening to Esha Deol as the narrator (I’m telling you there was no escape from her face and sound in this film).

Well other than the star cast and all, even the music and songs of the film are quite. There is no song that catches your attention, both in terms of listening and vision. I just felt that there was just one love track being dragged all throughout, vaguely and weirdly in between at random times.

The story has too many flaws. Not only does it reek of being a rehashed version of ‘Dil Aashna Hai’ and ‘Mamma Mia’, but it is also about loosely integrating unnecessary social issue all in one, just for the heck of it.

So all in all I would rate the film as 1.5 out of 5. One mark for the supporting cast, and seeing Vinod Khanna, Rishi Kapoor, and Dharmendar all together once again in one frame. And rest of the marks for the loving and doting parents, wish mine could learn something from them, and please let me say I’m definitely more talented in my own field that than chick in the film.  

Tell Me O Kkhuda (2011)

Director: Hema Malini & Mayur Puri

Starring: Esha Deol (rest is all the cast that shouldn’t be mentioned in the same line as of her, I believe)

Producer: Hema Malini

Writer: Hema Malini & Mayur Puri

Music Director: Pritam

No One Killed Jessica (2011): A strong women-centric subject and performances

No One Killed Jessica (Nokj) is a strong women centric commercial Bollywood film. For long I have held a soft spot for Rani Mukherjee and Vidya Balan in my heart when it comes to Bollywood actresses. They are so much different than other plastic faced Barbie-look alike size zero heroines. These 2 actresses seem so comfortable in their skins and different roles. But their recent career decisions and movie choices had shaken up that opinion a lot. It had made me feel that their acting talent too had succumbed to the money making commercial Bollywood masala films. Vidya Balan proved me wrong in Ishqiya but Rani was no where to be found still. But then NOKJ came along and my faith in both d stars as actresses was reaffirmed.

The film is based on the sensitive issue and news of Jessica Lal murder case. Vidya Balan essays the role of Sabrina Lal, Jessica's sister who fights till her last strand of strength to get justice for her sister and to see her murderers behind bars.

Rani Mukherjee plays the role of journalist Meera, who is hard core and crude. Meera refuses to pick the news story of Jessica Lal’s murder as she feels it is an open and shut case and justice will soon be delivered to the Lal family. But still when court after court and session after session it becomes apparent that justice is not just being delayed but also being denied, that is what jolts Meera out of her peaceful belief in the legal system of the country.

She then does everything in her power and with the power of the country’s 4th estate, media, behind her; she is in fact able to garner a large public movement in support of the reopening of Jessica's murder case and see to it that the justice is indeed served.

It is after a long time you see such powerful women protagonist at the forefront of a Bollywood film. Bollywood films are usually driven by male characters; well that is what has been happening in last few decades. NOKJ brings to forefront that it is not the gender of actors that is to be blamed for their stereotypical viewing in cinema. It is rather d characters that are written in a script by the writers; and offered to them by directors and producers.

NOKJ is a powerful and emotional crime-thriller based on a real life situation and most of the characters have drawn inspiration from those real life situations that surrounded the event. But one problem I found was in the pace of the film. For such a lengthy film the pace of the plot fluctuated a lot from too slow to too fast. And yes at times Rani does become too loud, but that fits well with her character as well, I guess.

The film has a lot of subtle and not-so-subtle symbols. Like the scene when Sabrina is walking on the road consumed by her mental thoughts she doesn’t see the approaching elephant. And the smart integrations of Rang De Basanti in the plot, which actually acted as a catalyst in lending a spark of fresh activism in the Jessica Lal murder case.

The film went on to be a huge hit at the box office and was able to garner positive reviews as well, and that most of it was due to the leading ladies of the film. The magic that these talented actresses exude on screen is very captivating. Also the way the narration takes an active turn with number of symbols and a steady movement between past and present.

The film is a sensitive handling of a delicate and controversial issue. It is an exploration of a person's struggle for justice against a corrupt power lobby system. It is a true story, about Sabrina Lal and her struggle for justice for her sister Jessica Lal, who was murder by son of a powerful minister. And what follows is a story of justice being denied at the hands of corrupt officials, sold out witnesses, and well plain simple delay in the country's legal system.

Vidya Balan plays the sensitive soft yet strong character of Sabrina Lal who fights to her last strand of courage to get justice to her sister's murder. And then there is the hard brash and muhfat character of journalist Meera Gaity, played by Rani Mukherjee. Rani did actually go on to win Dadasaheb Phalke Award for her role in the film later on.
Two different women but both want to fight for same thing Justice. One wants to get justice for her dead sister while other wants justice from a dead system.

Even the performance of side characters is quite exemplary. Every actor in the film carried out their roles well be it Rajesh Sharma in the serious role of the inspector in charge of the case, or Neil Bhoopalam as the prime witness of the case who later turns hostile; or Mohammed Zeeshan Ayyub who essays the role of Manish Bharadwaj, based on Manu Sharma. And the most remarable is the new comer Myra in the role of Jessica; she sensitively and skillfully fits in the character. The film boosts of a well balanced and well placed cast.

The music and the background score of the film plays a strong role in complementing the plot well. Songs are not something that you feel as being meaninglessly introduced. Every song well accompanies the emotion and sentiment of the plot. I feel the song 'dilli dilli', from this film, is a far better tribute to Delhi than the song 'yeh Delhi hai meri jaan', from the movie Delhi 6. The music composed by Amit Trivedi, is both sharp and edgy.

The dialogues of the film are sharp as well as straight forward, there is nothing flowery or over idealistic about them. Dialogues seem something as if a part of real slice of life.


A taste of film, its subject, characters, music, and dialogues can be experienced through this trailer of the film.

No One Killed Jessica (2011)

Director: Raj Kumar Gupta

Starring: Rani Mukerji, Vidya Balan

Producer: Ronnie Screwvala

Writer: Raj Kumar Gupta

Cinematographer: Anay Goswamy

Editor: Aarti Bajaj

Music Director: Amit Trivedi
Favorite Dialogue: "aggar ek goli aur ek crore mein chunna ho toh aap kya choose kareinge. Mujhe ek crore nahi chaiye, lekin mujhe ek goli bhi nahi chahiye...."; 
Best Song: Dilli Dilli...., Aale re....

Zookeeper: a cliché of all elements it boosts of; and predictable.

Zookeeper is a film with predictable story and flat characters. It is a movie about talking animals and a lovable yet totally loser slob, who is a caretaker at a city zoo (such an unpredictable profession I would say after the name of the film makes it more than clear). He takes relationship advice from talking animals and learns the ways of the wild to woo back his hot girlfriend who dumped him on the day he proposed her.

The movie begins with zookeeper Griffin Keyes, played by Kevin James, proposing his girlfriend with a romantic sunset setting but well just to get dumped then and there. Fast forward to 5 years ahead where Keyes is still working as a zookeeper. There we see him working with an attractive veterinarian and there are a lot of signals going around, but as luck would have (or lets say the predicable plot lines), re-enters the plastic girl who had dumped Keyes. Well Keyes is still like a love-sick puppy around her, and it is clear until and unless he woos her in any other way the last option would be to leave his job as a zookeeper and join his brother as a salesman.

So here come the animals to the rescue, the talking animals, who don’t wish to loose kind hearted zookeeper. The animals then take the task on themselves to help Keyes woo the lady love, with their ways of wild, in order to keep him from quitting his job as their care taker. What begins then on is a tale where Kevin James plays his best always....a lot of falling, a lot of stupidity and a lot of stooping as well.

Nearing the end, Keyes does leave the job at the zoo to become a salesman and uses his 'ways of the wild' training in actually succeeding at that. Well what happens in the end is too early for me to reveal, as the film has just released in India. And I don’t want to be a spoiler.

But yes it is actually true that film is even far more disappointing than its trailer. The trailer is the blatant cliché of a slapstick comedy movie and it shows that movie has all elements, which the movie actually does but the order is well not so coherent overall.

I do like Kevin James, and agree he has been stereotyped far too many no. of times as the good at heart yet loser in life kind of roles. Well the ultimate underdog for the romantic comedies. He falls yet again perfectly into the character of Keyes, you know it’s all so predictable.

For me the real talents of the film were those who were voicing the animals. Sylvester Stallone as the gusty lion; Cher is his lioness. Adam Sandler plays a chattering little monkey, Jon Favreau and Faizon Love are the bickering bears, Maya Rudolph voices a giraffe, and writer-director-producer Judd Apatow does an overeating elephant. And well the most prominent the lonely gorilla voiced by Nick Nolte.

I do like one bit in particular in the movie that is the part where Keyes takes out the gorilla for a night in town, where he pretends to be a man dressed as King Kong. This one is too much out right blatant humor, yet in the entire movie this is the only bit that made me laugh a bit.

The film has everything that is predictable and cliché. There are talking animals who teach the real lessons of life, there is a lovable soft underdog who is otherwise in no sense the Alpha male, and there is a hot attractive bitch who wishes he would change for her rather than for being himself.

The movie is directed by Frank Coraci, who has also directed movies such as Wedding Singer, Around the World in 80 Days and Click. I think after I knew the name of the director and his earlier credits my interest in watching Zookeeper increased further, after all he was donning the director’s hat after a hiatus of 5 years. I feel a bit sorry for both the director and the movie, because even a successful director of good comedies and five screenplay writers (yes the film has 5 writers) couldn’t salvage the film, and then I guess nothing could have.

Out of 5 I would rate the movie as a 1 n ½. All the marks go to Kevin James for once again essaying a role where there is abundance of falling and lowering of self respect; and the talent that lends its voice to the animals in the movie.

One last word to all western filmmakers of romantic comedies, can we please get a small break from these predictable stories that revolve around animals. Until and unless there is something truly different, I guess we will always know what the movie holds even by seeing its trailers.

Bad Teacher (2011): It is bad but fails to be good in that.

Bad Teacher is a Bad movie about a teacher who is Bad...... that is it. That's the whole plot and review.

Well yes that is pretty much what I felt, after I finished watching the movie and sitting down to write the review. That was the only line that flowed best on the page. But well allow me to dwell further.

Elizabeth Halsey, played by Cameron Diaz, is a Chicago middle school teacher at the John Adams Middle School who curses at her students, consumes lots of alcohol, smokes marijuana, and only shows movies while she sleeps through class.

When the movie starts she is shown quitting her teaching job so as to get married to a wealthy fool and enjoy a carefree life of luxury. But when in a movie, have you ever seen any ‘happily ever after' in the beginning. The wedding fails to materialize and Elizabeth is back at her old teaching job and teaching methods.

At the school Diaz meets Scott Delacorte, played by Justin Timberlake, a new substitute teacher who is also an heir to a multi-dollar watch empire. In him, she sees her old dreams of marrying rich and luxurious life begin to rekindle. But this time she is not alone. Competing with her at the school, in teaching and in love, is another teacher Amy Squirrel (Lucy Punch), who is as irritating for the staff as for the students.

What follows is an ugly battle of competition between the two teachers to gain the attention of the rich heir, who believes in simulated sex with clothes on as a way to search ones true mate.

The ugliness is further fueled by the rich prince charming's fantasy for big boobs, or so Elizabeth seems to believe is the only reason he overlooks her and chooses Ms. Squirrel. And so begins her journey to get money for breast implants and series of raunchy jokes and gags.

This is a movie about good v/s evil, but surprisingly I didn't find myself picking any side. For if evil is represented by Diaz and her drugging and movie screening ways of teaching; the good side is equally appalling by screechy, irritating Squirrel; whimpering Timberlake; and a lovesick underdog like the Basketball Coach, Russell Gettis (Jason Segel), who makes every possible attempt to make his feelings loud and clear for Elizabeth all to get his advances rejected.

I think it was the supporting cast that did the only good job in the film, while rest were just put to the place where they fitted the best. Diaz is used to act sexy and put an edge in all the raunchy jokes. Timberlake is used as a man piece for girls, but he is totally damp and a waste for any screen time whatsoever given to him in the film. Jason Segel’s act, as the underdog puppy eyed loser basketball coach, I would say is good casting as that clearly goes with his characters from his earlier films such as Forgetting Sarah Marshall.
And Ms irritating Squirrel is well cast as she irritates the crap out of u with her excessive goody good two shoes act and irritating dialogue delivery.

I think the only place in the plot or script where the film works a bit for me was the place when Diaz is fighting tooth n nail to get the money for her boob job. And esp. the part where she cons the state examiner to get the test papers from him, and how she claws her way out of d whole allegation later. I really enjoyed that part, as that was the only part that kept me engaged in watching the film.

This film is the classic case of good, bad and ugly. Nothing is good, every one is equally bad, and Timberlake acts ugly.

Other than that the film is pretty predictable as you always know that in the end anti- heroine will turn into a heroine. You know she will revise her old ways and the underdog love stuck puppy would win her with his goodness.

Out of 5 I would rate the movie as 1n1/2. All the marks, just for all d raunchy jokes and the only part of the plot that managed to make me laugh. What I expected was a shocking movie; I got that but not totally in a positive sense. I thought the film did have a promising concept and I did enjoy the brazen performance by Cameron Diaz, as she did manage to keep me engaged in the scenes where action was lacking. But still the overall after taste of the movie was as if it lacked not something but almost everything that I expected.

In the recent Teen Choice Movie Awards the movie did won quite a few accolades for itself, such as Choice Movie- Comedy, Choice Movie Actor- Comedy for Timberlake and Choice Movie Actress- Comedy for Diaz. I just agree with the last category for winning, but then ‘to each his own’. Nonetheless I would say my usual line that ‘do watch it once’ because no matter how good or bad a film is every audience member should make their own opinions.

Bad Teacher (2011)

Director: Jake Kasden

Starring: Cameron Diaz, Justin Timberlake, Jason Segal, Lucy Punch

Producer: Jimmy Miller, David Householter

Writer: Lee Eisenberg, Gene Stupnitsky

Cinematographer: Alar Kivilo

Editor: Tara Timpone

Running Time: 92 minutes

Favorite Scene: the car wash scene, and the whole episode where she seduces the state examiner and gets the tests and the whole cover up.....

Deepa Mehta’s Fire (1996): Keep it burning

There has always been a reason in my heart why I haven’t ever written about the movie Fire. It was Deepa Mehta’s first movie that I watched and fell in love with the director and her handling of sensitive topics.
This one was too sensitive for me to ever write about. But now I really wish to share my understanding of this film.

It is a bold and sensitive handling of an equally bold and sensitive subject. The film throws up a lot of issues such as boredom in marriage, patriarchal society as a core of Indian families, joint family system, and relationships and bonds shared by people amongst all these. 

Film is surely a brave and bold attempt, esp. for the year in which it was released i.e. 1996. It was in true sense a coming-of-age- film at that time. It also sparked of a debate on the freedom of speech and expression and the custodians of the traditional and patriarchal Hindu culture.

My first memory of watching this film was during a school trip to Manali when I was in 11th class, sorry for my generation or let's say me and my classmates’ somewhat late social blooming, for at that time watching this film was for us very close to watching something forbidden or well in crude terms slightly pornographic in nature.
With growing years my understanding of the topics, social issues and well in course to the film changed immensely.

Many believe that the central theme of the film is just the lesbian relationship shared by the two woman protagonist in the family. I really respect the way in which the director has portrayed it, the beginning of the bond between the two, social threat they face due to it, being marked a destruction to family and social beliefs and then being scarred as a mark of scar themselves on the society. It is truly a moving build up to exploration of this alternative love that the two find.

But there is something that has always troubled me about calling it lesbian relationship; I just prefer it to call it a bond. Because this relationship doesn't begin by feelings towards each other but rather is born out of their social situation n their boredom.  It is more like the frustrations of their marriage and the yearning to break from bondages of social and sexual frustrations that lead both Radha and Sita to discover the bond of physical and emotional love within each other.

I truly wish to agree with Deepa Mehta’s own stance that lesbianism is just one of the aspects of this film, and not its central theme. I feel that the central theme of the film is the frustrating traditional and cultural clutches of patriarchal society. I think the film is made to break this very concept and idea of patriarchal society by exposing its suffocating threads to naked eyes and in the utmost clear words and visuals. It is not a film just about the homosexual relationships, which is just one of its themes.

The film is about a middle-class joint family in the urban setting of Delhi. Sita (Nandita Das) has just entered her new household as the youngest daughter-in-law of the family. She has had an arranged marriage with Jatin (Javed Jaffrey), who is in love with a Chinese Girl. He agrees to go for the arranged marriage to Sita, to get his nagging elder brother, Ashok (Kulbhushan Kharbanda), off his back. He is not able to commit to Sita in any way, neither physically or emotionally, only bond between them is social bond of marriage. And same is the case with her elder sister-in-law, Radha (Shabana Azmi). She holds and goes through all the responsibilities of being a dutiful daughter-in-law to her invalid mother-in-law, and equally devoted to her husband, who for long has just been using her as a part of his exercises of testing his own resolve of abandoning all bodily desires. He does all this under the influence of a Swami who tells him that desires are reasons for all human sufferings and all desires should be curbed.

Similarity of situations and familiarity of each other’s suffering and desires bond these two women, Radha and Sita, in discovering physical and emotional solace amongst each other and thus aiming for freedom from their social shackles that have just been suffocating them. In company of each other the women become brave and vocal and are also ready top move out of their home in order to just be with each other away from the patriarchal household and society that would never be able to understand them.

Also there is the servant, Mundu (Ranjit Chowdhry), who is aware of the growing closeness between the two and reality of their bond, but he too has his own dirty secret. He secretly masturbates in the living room of the house, on the pretense of looking after the sick biji (mother-in-law), when other family members are busy in running their food takeaway joint below their house itself, and watching porn. These I found were some most disturbing scenes as you find the servant masturbating in full view of an old sick woman and watching porn in front of her, all on pretense of taking care of her. These were the most disturbing scenes of the film for me.

The most wonderfully etched out scene is the finale the confrontation between Ashok and Radha. Those scenes are like the part that make you shout out on the victory of the women against the patriarchal society, that does everything possible to curb their desires of freedom and expression, even letting them burn as well.

In the end you feel that it is not the patriarch (represented by Ashok and his family) but the matriarch (represented by Sita) in whose arms the burnt Radha finds her life.

In the film Radha was shunned out of her home by her husband, just like the Sita was shunned out of her home by King Rama from Mythology. Both the women (the one from mythology and one from the film) had to go through the ritual of fire, (former to prove her innocence, while latter to assert her freedom). And she too bears the fruits of her relationship, like Sita did when she had left King Rama’s house. The only difference, there the fruits of relationship were offspring’s of the Sita and King Rama (their two sons’); over here in the film the fruits were burns that Radha got in the end.

I would like to share is my praise for the casting in the film. The cast ensemble is very good; every role is well-cast. It is a talented array of actors. I often believe that Actors are truly director’s mouth piece and the way they portray their character can either make or break the director’s point of view attached to that character. It is not who is playing the role but rather how they are playing it. A talented character understands very well what the director is expecting and wishes to get across to their audiences.

Another important point of my understanding of the film is my view of the male characters in the film. You always feel sympathy and empathy towards the oppressed and bonded characters, but well these emotions are arisen only when there is an oppressor and an element that brings out so much hatred in you towards its actions that you in turn feel the sense of sympathy towards the one being oppressed. In the film the male actors portray their characters so well that even though you feel such deep sense of hatred at their patriarchal ideas and beliefs but in the end you feel that the actors who played those parts did a fab job in understanding their characters and presenting it so well to the audiences.

I wouldn’t be writing much about the music other than mentioning the name of the Music Director, Mr. A. R. Rehman. That’s it leave the rest to your understanding of the music that this man creates and all the movies that he has lend his music to, and fab job done in that. Music is very soulful, moving, and has a rhythmic and important movement along with the narrative.

I feel that for a film it should be more important to raise a sense of sympathy or empathy in their audiences rather than just thinking of box-office nos. And well by sympathy I don’t mean you sympathize with actors and directors on committing creative murder….Nope. Audience should feel sympathy or empathy with the subject of the film and its character. If the audience feels that in any film, believe me for them that film and its director is surely successful.

I feel anyone who watches this film will feel either sense of sympathy or empathy to its protagonists and if they do well that means it is a success for you, but don’t let me tell you that. Watch it to understand it.

Fire (1996)

Director and Writer: Deepa Mehta

Starring: Nandita Das, Shabana Azmi, Kulbhushan Kharbanda, Javed Jaffrey, Ranjit Chowdhry

Producer: Bobby Bedi and Deepa Mehta

Cinematographer: Giles Nuttgens

Music By: A.R. Rehman

Most Memorable Scenes: entire movie, particularly the final confrontation scene, also the scene in the family picnic when Sita is caressing Radha's feet and Ashok tells him that it is her duty to take care of her elder sister-in-law without knowing the bond the two already share; and also the scene where Ashok after having found out the relation between Radha and Sita finds himself getting an arousal with images of their love making which makes him realize that his resolve of 13 years has after all not worked at all in abandoning of physical desire......

Mahesh Bhatt’s Arth- Too Many Meanings

Ok so yesterday I had decided to write a review of Arth and look at the chance happening, the movie came on d TV. That is one reason why I still love DD, movies there are not just for entertainment n advertisements.

So Arth is a moving and heart warming 1982 film. The film like many of Mahesh Bhatt film's draws quite closely from his own personal life. it is a semi-autobiographical film, often touted to be Bhatt's own confession of his extramarital affair to actress Praveen Babi. 

Arth is a movie about an orphan girl Pooja, who grew up with a dream of owning a house, and is married to Inder who is a film director. Inder and Pooja have bought a new house, but it is soon revealed that Inder bought this house out of his own guilt due to the on going affair he is having with an actress Kavita. The time when Inder comes clean to Pooja about his affair and leaves her to go and stay with Kavita, Pooja's life falls apart. She is guided in her journey out of the faulty marriage and to independence by singer Raj, and her friend and her husband.

The best thing is that all d characters of d film are well defined and beautifully etched out both artistically and realistically. 
The three central characters are so complex and beautifully portrayed- Shabana Azmi as Pooja, Kulbhusan Kharbanda as Inder and Smita Patil as Kavita.

What I like most about the character of Kavita is that that even though she is the ‘other woman’ in the story, you don’t feel any negative emotions towards her. You feel a sense of sympathy for her at every point. She is a woman suffering from schizophrenia, a woman who teeters on an edge all the time.

Even when she has got what she wanted, the man she loves, her guilt and her illness don't allow her to be free in enjoying that as well. She is a woman who loves a man with so much of passion that even she herself is unable to control.

I think the most beautiful portrayal of this character comes out in the scene where she in one of her moment of illness, blames Pooja for scattering her mangalsutra beads all over the house in bid to hurt Kavita. This scene best exemplifies the edge on which the character is walking, and her guilt. Also worth mentioning, is the final scene between Kavita and Inder, where she decides to leave him forever. All this comes after Pooja has met her an d even forgiven her for wreaking her marriage, but maybe that real interaction is enough to push Kavita out of her guilt and in realization of what is right and what is wrong.

Next is the character of Inder. A man trapped in his own feelings for two women. He is a character trapped in his own ego issues. Inder is a character that can't hear rejection. When the client rejects his ad film he gets into physical fight with him, when his secretary rejects him by handing over his resignation letter he shouts at him and tears the letter, when Kavita rejects him he gets mad at her and makes his last attempt to return to Pooja.

There are two most defining moment of this character. One is the scene where he confesses his illicit relationship with Kavita to his wife Pooja. During the scene you see his main concern is to prove that he is not the one who is wrong, he is the one who is stuck between two women. And second scene is one where he comes to meet Pooja at her hostel with divorce papers. Here also we see how hard Inder tries to tell Pooja that he is getting a divorce just for Kavita’s sake and no other reason.

And Shabana Azmi plays Pooja, a woman whose life is torn apart by her husband's affair. She tries to be strong but her emotions take over her every now and then during her journey from moving out of the safety of her breaking home to the world of independence outside it.
A character governed by realistic highs and lows. Often what happens is that at times directors make their female characters unrealistically strong and surrealistic.

Another good part of the film is its side characters, esp. the character played by Raj Kiran and by Rohini Hattangadi as the bai.
Raj plays a happy go lucky singer, who strives by just with a good voice and luck. It is he who helps Pooja in her journey; he becomes his friend and confidante in d outside world. He is a silent admirer, who loves Pooja even after she has dismissed him after he openly declares his feelings for her.

Another important side character in the film is that of the Bai. She is one who represents a story like Pooja's only but within a different class structure. She is someone who too faces troubles in her life mainly due to her drunkered and unfaithful husband. She is a strong woman, even being from a very low background, she is quite independent and her only aim is that her daughter sud receive a good education and a claim to a better future than her own. 

I think it is when the bai kills her husband is in fact quite a moving scene. When she sees her husband threatening her daughters future she retaliates by killing him. I think it is the jolt of physical killing of one unfaithful threatening husband that leads to Pooja's actually freedom in mind.

Music is a wonderful and very expressive part of the film. Every song represents the state of mind of characters present in it. Every song has an identity of its own. It is as of if the words fail to express what the characters are going thru that is where the songs come in. All 3 beautiful songs in d film have been picturized on Raj and have been sung by Jagjit Singh. Jagjit Singh's voice is so encapsulation and engrossing that it just reaches your heart and strike a chord with emotions directly.
Jagjit Singh, even despite attaining a status of being a gazhal exponent, never attained any significant mark in the mainstream bollywood industry.

This is undoubtedly one of the finest performances ever by Shabana Azmi. She perfects the character of Pooja with her marvelous acting. No doubt that she won many accolades for her performance in Arth, and her second Nation Award for the same.

Also I feel Smita Patil played the character of Kavita, the ‘other woman’, really well. She understood and embodied all the complexities of the character perfectly in her portrayal. Her performance moves you with so many emotions at the same time. You want to dislike her as a home wreaker, but you also sympathize with her to be a passionate woman in love who is suffering from schizophrenia.

Arth is a story about a woman's journey to independence and freedom. Freedom of mind and soul. And as the last words of the film point out 'palat ke matt dekho pooja. Palat ke matt dekho. Jao'. It is about a journey forward into a new beginning for the character.

Arth (1982)

Director: Mahesh Bhatt

Starring: Shabana Azmi, Samita Patil, Kulbhushan Kharbanda, Raj Kiran, Rohini Hattangadi

Producer: Kuljit Pal

Music by: Jagjit Singh, Chitra Singh

Cinematography: Pravin Bhatt

 Favorite Songs: Koi yeh kaise bataaye...., Tum itna jo muskura rahe ho...., Jhuki-jhuki si nazar.....

Clint Eastwood's 'Invictus' (2009)- Cliche yet inspiring

Invictus is a bio-pic based on Nelson Mandela's life during the 1995 Rugby World Cup in South Africa. Directed by Clint Eastwood; the film stars Morgan Freeman as South African President Mandela and Matt Damon as François Pienaar, the South African team captain.

Predictable movie…yet what work in its favour is Clint Eastwood’s perceptive direction.

Though the movie might not be rousing enough for certain audiences due to its predictable flow, yet what it has working for it is Freeman’s & Damon’s portrayal of real life characters that is admirably convincing.

Invictus tells the true story of how Nelson Mandela joined forces with the captain of South Africa's rugby team, Francois Pienaar, to help unite their country. As newly elected president, Mandela believed that the universal language of sport could bring people together in the wake of apartheid. As a result, the nation's underdog rugby team made an unlikely challenge on the 1995 World Cup Championship – a tournament where very few expected them to do well in.

The film is based on a book by John Carlin “Playing the Enemy: Nelson Mandela and the Game That Changed a Nation”. The film draws its title from a short poem of the same name, by the English poet William Ernest Henley.

Morgan Freeman plays a newly-elected Nelson Mandela, who wants to use his power for reconciliation, rather than just continuing his predecessors’ oppression of the opposition and perpetuating the cycle. The blacks hate the Springboks because the racist Afrikaners love them and that’s what Mandela wants to change.

As a theme the film seems somewhat repetitive of using sports as a unifying medium for an Apartheid torn nation; what appeals most, to me in particular are a few scenes in the film. The most alluring being the one where Pienaar visits the prison cell where Mandela was held for 27 years, on Robben Island. What is most interesting about this scene is the way in which Pienaar imagines Mandela & his life in that cell & prison, as you hear the poem ‘Invictus’ being played in the background. You feel the same emotion that Damon’s character portrays on screen, that it is the same place where a great man waited for a future that made him an inspiration & motivation to an entire nation. It is as the last lines of the poem ‘Invictus’ states

“I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul”.

I also liked the scene where Mandela invites Pienaar to have tea with him to make a personal appeal to him about lifting the team as a national team rather than a symbol of the past bigotry. Mandela speaks of leading by example and exceeding expectations, and leaves Pienaar astonished at the idea that they can dare to dream about winning the World Cup. As well as the scenes of interaction between the black & white officers assigned to Mandela’s security, in the film.

If the award nomination of a film makes it any benchmark to view a film’s credibility & success of a film, then I guess this film makes great strides due to its actors solely. Even the Academy Awards (Oscars), 2010 have nominated both Freeman & Damon in the Best Actor & Best Supporting Actor categories, respectively.  The Film also went on to win many critical awards and accolades in many award circuits around the globe.

The thing that is most appealing, and also probably the best fit for the film, is Freeman’s portrayal of Nelson Mandela. Many characters in past have attempted to portray Mandela’s character on screen, yet no one has come so much close to it as Freeman.

So my final word on the film is that even though the themes of racial discrimination & sports film might be clichés to some, what appeals in Eastwood’s ‘Invictus’ is its strong emotions and its actors.

Invictus (2009)

Dir: Clint Eastwood

Starring: Morgan Freeman, Matt Damon

Producers: Clint Eastwood, Lori McCreary, Robert Lorenz, Mace Neufeld, Morgan Freeman

Screenplay by: Anthony Peckham

Cinematographer: Tom Stern