Quantcast
Channel: annavetticadgoes2themovies
Viewing all 572 articles
Browse latest View live

REVIEW 743: BALA

$
0
0
Release date:
November 8, 2019
Director:
Amar Kaushik 
Cast:




Language:
Ayushmann Khurrana, Bhumi Pednekar, Yami Gautam, Saurabh Shukla, Sunita Rajwar, Vijay Raaz, Seema Pahwa, Jaaved Jaaferi, Abhishek Banerjee, Dheerendra Gautam, Sumit Arora, Aparkshakti Khurana
Hindi


One of the pleasures of watching Bala comes from its use of language. The characters in this film speak Kanpuriya Hindi which is a delight in and of itself. Better still, they hardly ever substitute words in their mother tongue with English equivalents. On the rare occasions when they do opt for a spot of English, they are hilarious without the narrative taking a condescending tone towards them or getting clichéd. And the dialogues are replete with usages you are unlikely to hear on the streets of Delhi or Mumbai.

So “hasthmaithun” is “hasthmaithun” for the hero, not “masturbation”. His younger brother speaks of his family’s “loloop nazar” on him. And a man is threatened with a “kantaap”, not a slap.

While the going is good in Bala, it is very good. The first half is rip-roaringly funny, simultaneously poignant and insightful as it takes us through the protagonist Bala a.k.a. Balmukund Shukla’s journey from a luscious head of hair in his teens to premature baldness in his 20s, from vanity and arrogance to a soul-crushing complex. Director Amar Kaushik, whose calling card for now is the stupendous horror comedy Stree, never lets the pace flag pre-interval. Writer Niren Bhatt is clearly determined to make a point about a bald man’s sense of self-worth, stays true to this message and is intelligent while doing so here.

In the second half though, the humour and the intellect dip. For a start, the writing takes the easy way out in a crucial, pivotal situation. (Caution: Some people might consider the rest of this paragraph a spoiler) A woman Bala loves and who loves him back is condemned for rejecting him on discovering his baldness – condemned not merely by characters in the story, but by the film itself – by establishing her as a superficial creature for whom looks matter more than anything else and getting her to dump him solely and entirely because his appearance no longer appeals to her, never allowing her to believe what would have been a reason that might possibly have earned her some audience sympathy: that it is in fact his deception that killed their relationship, not his lack of hair. By getting Bala instead to acknowledge his lies and self-flagellate, the film uses even this opportunity to increase his likeability. This is silly, because it is a sort of ultimatum: once he apologises for lying, she had better forgive him, or else we will quietly slot her as a youknowwhat. It is all cleverly done, all the while ensuring that the judgement is subtle and the tone of the narrative never gets openly vicious towards her. From a film that until then and thereafter is honest about its hero’s character flaws and does not let him off lightly, this is disappointing. (Spoiler alert ends)


The message being driven home by Bala from the start is that we must stop caring about what others think of our looks – that once we begin valuing ourselves, the world will too. Towards this end, it has a dark-skinned heroine called Latika Trivedi who has all her life been derided for her complexion. Getting Bala to be one of those who taunted her inher childhood, and making him a fairness cream salesman in his adulthood even while he battles a bias against early onset baldness, are both nice touches. However, this aspect of the messaging fails becausethe film reveals its own prejudice against dark skin from the word go.

No one on Team Bala seems to have detected the irony in casting a light-skinned actor as Latika and painting her face black, rather than casting a black woman to play a black woman. In a film industry that favours goraapan especially for female stars despite marginal evolution on this front in recent decades, Bala’s  unwillingness to seek out an actually dark-complexioned actor for this role underlines the widespread attitude that a woman whose skin does not match a certain shade is not worthy of being a lead. It appears that Bhatt and his colleagues did not notice either that throughout the film, they treat it as a given that a dark complexion is indeed less and cannot possibly be pretty, and equate it with the side effect of a disease (namelyBala’s alopecia whichis a direct result of his diabetes).

The screenplay well and truly bares its prejudice though in Latika’s own reaction to the mythological tale of the hunchbacked woman Kubja who Lord Krishna is said to have miraculously turned into a beauty. Stage enactments of the story in Kanpur are twice shown, both times a dark-skinned woman is cast as Kubja, and Latika – a bright lawyer who had earlier been vocal about her comfort with her skin colour – says after a viewing: “Why did Lord Krishna have to make her sundar? It is possible that someone would have liked her just the way she is.”

“Someone”? Umm, but wasn’t the whole point that we must accept ourselves and not measure our worth by the acceptance of others? Note too that she does not question the casting of a dark-skinned actor as Kubja and the intrinsic assumption that her colour is equal to a lack of soundarya. This is not to say that Latika must be perfect, but that the questioning, unbiased person she has been shown to be until then does not gel with the attitude she displays here.

This inconsistent characterisation and the team’s lack of awareness of their own prejudice robs Bala of much of its value. Tragic, because when it is dealing with the hero’s baldness it is smart and sharp, the crackling dialogues are rich with cultural references, even the songs and choreography add to the comicality(watch Tequila, please, and those TikTok videos are out-and-out killers), the comedy involving Bala never crosses the line into insensitivity and the cast is absolutelyA-grade.

Ayushmann Khurrana and Bhumi Pednekar live up to expectations by delivering fine performances, and Yami Gautam as the somewhat frivolousprofessional model Pari Mishra displays a talent for comedy here that will hopefully be explored in future films. The trio are backed by a fabulous ensemble of supporting actors, each jostling with the other in the run-up to a Best Supporting Actor nomination. Every single one of them, including the lesser-known faces (Dheerendra Gautam playing Bala’s younger brother, Sumit Arora as his boss) is given space to shine and they chew up the screen in those moments.

If this film had no Latika (or she was better written and appropriately cast) and the humour of the opening half had been maintained in the second, it would have been near perfect. There isa Latika though and the humour does dip, making Bala a 50-50.

Rating (out of five stars): **1/2

CBFC Rating (India):
UA
Running time:
129 minutes

This review has also been published on Firstpost:


Photographs courtesy:





REVIEW 744: NALPATHIYONNU (41)

$
0
0

Release date:
November 8, 2019
Director:
Lal Jose
Cast:

Language:
Biju Menon, Nimisha Sajayan, Dhanya Ananya, Saran Jith, Indrans, Suresh Krishna
Malayalam


Kicking off a religion-versus-rationalism debate is a risky business at any given time, more so now when skins in India have gotten thinner than they have ever been since Partition and temperatures are on the rise. Fear of causing offence does not stop veteran director Lal Jose from selecting this theme although it does seem to hold him back from offering a full-blown critique of religion in Nalpathiyonnu (41), as he tests the atheism of a senior Communist in Kerala by sending him on a pilgrimage to Sabarimala.

Biju Menon plays that party member, Ullaaskumar, a teacher from rural Kerala where locals debate whether their place of residence, Chekkunnugot its name from Che Guevara or Lord Shiva.

Ullaas is committed to his atheism, but it is twice tested during the course of this narrative: once through his romance with his student Bhagyam whose family are devout Hindus, and later when his organisation virtually coerces him to join his party colleague Kannan on a trip to Sabarimala. That a Communist set-up would show any commitment to religion may seem unconvincing, but this one has its reasons. Getting Ullaas to accompany Kannan to the Ayyappa shrine is the party’s desperate solution to the latter’s alcoholism: they are hoping that Ullaas’ monitoring will force Kannan to stick to the gruelling 41-day vratham– no meats, no alcohol or other intoxicants, no sex and so on – demanded of those hoping to have a darshan of the deity.

Lal Jose and writer P.G. Prageesh roll out their story in slice-of-life form, weaving in everyday insights about small-town life and party politics as they go along. Some of it is humourous and endearing, some of it contrived and clichéd. Like the scene in which Ullaas is caught in a bind that can be seen coming from a mile and then becomes tongue-tied.

The treatment of the relationship between Ullaas and Bhagyam (Nimisha Sajayan) too feels dated. A young woman chasing a reluctant hero played by a much older star is a ruse many filmmakers have used to establish the attractiveness of that male star. The seemingly liberal Jose’s decision to not pair Menon with a female actor his own age is a measure of the low value attached to romantic overtures by an older woman and of the ageism in casting that women face in cinema, more so in Mollywood a.k.a. the Malayalam film industry where the average age difference between older male stars and their female romantic partners on screen is 20-30 years, as if to suggest that this is routine in real life. The Nimisha Sajayan-Suraj Venjaramoodu pairing in Dileesh Pothan’s Thondimuthalum Driksakshiyum just about passed muster on this front, but Menon, loveable as he is, looks like Sajayan’s Daddy.

That said, through Ullaas’ dilemmas, Nalpathiyonnudoes make some interesting observations about the challenge of being opposed to religion when your loved ones are culturally and socially rooted in it. It also features a far better written, far more convincing man-woman relationship: the one Kannan shares with his wife Suma.

Menon plays Ullaas with the natural ease that is his defining characteristic as an artiste. Sajayan is wasted in a marginal role that seems unworthy of an actor who already has Thondimuthalum Driksakshiyum and Eeda to her credit. The supporting cast playing their relatives and associates are competent. But the scene stealers in this film are Dhanya Ananya as Suma and Saran Jith as Kannan, the former managing to impress although she gets much less screen time than the latter.

Unlike the recent Sathyam Paranja Vishwasikkuvo?, one does not end the film wondering why on earth this woman likes this no-hoper. By the end of Nalpathiyonnu, we know.

Dhanya Ananya and Saran Jith along with S. Kumar’s cinematography – aimed not so much at showcasing Kerala’s beauty as at capturing the ruminative mood of the narrative – are the USPs of this film.

If Nalpathiyonnu does not have the fire and grit that would be expected from an exploration of such a potentially powerful theme, it is largely because of what comes across as a hesitation to truly critique the irrationality of faith. If Jose and Prageesh were afraid they would be accused of lacking objectivity, they could have additionally examined the insensitivity that some atheists direct at religionists, but both groups are spared an unsparing microscope.

This reluctance combined with loose editing results in a film that works only in parts, is thoughtful but just not enough, lacks punch and ends up being ambivalent. It makes you wonder why a filmmaker would pick such a subject in the first place if the intention was not to go the whole hog.

Rating (out of five stars): **1/2

CBFC Rating (India):
U 
Running time:
134 minutes )

This review has also been published on Firstpost:



REVIEW 745: UNDER WORLD

$
0
0

Release date:
Kerala: November 1, 2019
Delhi: November 8, 2019
Director:
Arun Kumar Aravind
Cast:

Language:
Asif Ali, Farhan Faasil, Mukesh, Lal Jr, Samyuktha Menon, Muthumani
Malayalam


Under World’s keenness to be grand and imposing screams out of every cell of its being. It manifests itself in the grandiose lines its characters utter and the angles the cinematographer favours while shooting them. In the end though, the film is as empty as the character played by Mukesh, a septuagenarian politician in jail on corruption charges and from whose words it appears that he is in control of the world he left behind: his ultimate fate proves that he is, in truth, an all-bombast-no-intelligence kind of fellow. Like Under World itself, he amounts to nothing.

Asif Ali here stars as Stalin John, a hooligan and a petty criminal with an inflated sense of self-importance. Farhaan Faasil is Majeed Abdul Rahman, a ruffian for hire. The two end up in the same jail where Mukesh’s Padmanabhan Nair is lodged. Initially, they clash but soon become unlikely allies primed for an assignment from Nair. Lal Jr is Solomon, in whose custody Nair left the Rs 500 crore he filched for which he lost his freedom.

Apart from some atmospheric background music and one slickly executed mobike chase, Under World has little going for it. Ali, Faasil and Mukesh are earnest, but the writing of their characters is too superficial for them to make a lasting impact. So sketchy are they that you deserve a prize if you can make out why Stalin’s lawyer Padmavati (played by Muthumani) cares so much for him.

For the record, Padmavati is the only woman with a notable presence in this narrative. The charismatic Samyuktha Menon from Theevandi is criminally wasted here in a minuscule role.


There are a few seconds here and there when it feels like Under World may perhaps lift itself out of its ordinariness to become something more than a waste of time. Such as when a fugitive loses his mother who he loves and realises that the mere act of attending her funeral is a risk. Or earlier when he sits negotiating with a young woman who becomes collateral damage in a cheque bouncing case against him. Or in the otherwise unscrupulous Solomon’s affection for his wife and child.

Writer Shibin Francis does not have the depth to flesh out these thoughts though. The only nice thing that can be said about the writing is that Under World is not sickening, crude and prejudiced like other recent films of this genre such as The Great Father starring Mammootty, Mikhaelstarring Nivin Pauly and Kalki starring Tovino Thomas.

Even the one instance when it tries to shock with its violence is almost laughable because of the rubbery look of the severed supposed human limb shown on camera. When Solomon chops off a man’s hand in Stalin and Majeed’s presence, we are given not one, not two, not three but four close-ups of that hand (correct me if there are more), in addition to other shots. Again in the name of realism I suppose, earlier when a companion of Majeed throws up after drinking, the camera stands bang in front of him, giving us a clear view of the puke emerging from his mouth and his vomit-covered tongue. Uff.

These instances of pretentiousness suggest that the single genuinely memorable moment in Under World happened by accident. When a policeman commits an act of unspeakable violence against an important character about half way through the film, instead of moving near plus embellishing the sound design to underline what we are witnessing, the audio chooses not to be exploitative, the camera moves away and we are given a distant overhead shot as a man steps on another’s spine and a torso caves in. It is a moment that made me freeze with horroryet did not feel voyeuristic.

The rest of Under World shows a complete lack of imagination and implies a desire on Arun Kumar Aravind’s part to join the club of masala directors to which Haneef Adeni belongs. Even the title is unimaginative, and the random splitting of the word looks like a last-ditch effort to salvage it. Call it Under World or Underworldif you will, either way it is under-done.

Rating (out of five stars): 1/2

CBFC Rating (India):
UA
Running time:
160 minutes 

This review has also been published on Firstpost:




REVIEW 746: PRANAYA MEENUKALUDE KADAL

$
0
0

Release date:
Kerala: October 4, 2019
Delhi: November 8, 2019
Director:
Kamal
Cast:


Language:
Vinayakan, Padmavati Rao, Riddhi Kumar, Gabri Jose, Sreedhanya, Saiju Kurup, Dileesh Pothan
Malayalam


A poetic title, the reins in the hands of a multiple  National Award and Kerala State Award winning director, Kammatipaadam’s Vinayakan among the leads and a divine setting... Can this film possibly go wrong? 

Yes, terribly so, as becomes evident with every unfolding moment of Pranaya Meenukalude Kadal (A Sea of Romantic Fish). Kamal directs this tale of a mainlander who comes to Lakshadweep and falls in love with a pretty local girl, much to the chagrin of her grandmother who is fiercely protective of the child. Riddhi Kumar plays Jasmine whose mother, Dr Sulfat Beevi (Sreedhanya), and her mother, Bibi Noorjehan (Padmavati Rao), belong to the Arakkal family who once held sway over the entire island. The current Arakkal matriarch has her reasons for keeping Jasmine away from outsiders.

Among those watching over the girl is Noorjehan’s loyal and unquestioning lieutenant Hyder, played by Vinayakan. Ajmal (Gabri Jose), who is smitten from the moment he sets eyes on her, is undeterred though by the intimidation tactics employed against him. 

It all sounds like a revisitation of a charming, romantic ancient folktale about the quintessential outsider who wins the heart of an innocent damsel and wins her hand against all odds. Except that there is nothing romantic or charming about Ajmal or his courtship of Jasmine. At first it seems like their love story is going down the clichéd path of boy and girl meeting, clashing, disliking each other and then falling in love, that has been recycled a zillion times by Indian cinema across languages. That line is silly, tired and over-used, but Pranaya Meenukalude Kadal is much worse.

Firstly, Ajmal is both arrogant and a troublemaker. He is an aspiring actor and Mohanlal devotee who has been forced by his family to come to Lakshadweep as part of a crew refurbishing an old boat. The local top cop Eldho Sebastian is determined to keep his island free of crime, but Ajmal and his friends seem bent on clashing with the peaceful islanders.

As soon as Ajmal spots Jasmine, he begins his pursuit of her, despite repeated rejections. He photographs her without her permission. When she objects he photographs her some more, stalks her, and in one of the film’s most disturbing scenes, molests her while she is out diving in the sea. His behaviour is not what is terrifying though, what is terrifying is that the screenplay, which Kamal has co-written with John Paul, does not portray this behaviour as assault at all. Instead, being forcibly kissed by a man underwater stirs up emotions in Jasmine, and soon, she is hopelessly in love with Ajmal. 

It is one thing for this kind of dangerous nonsense to come from directors like S.S. Rajamouli, Sandeep Reddy Vanga or one of the many filmmakers that Akshay Kumar and Salman Khan have worked with, but what is one to say of this casual legitimisation of sexual assault by a director who has publicly strongly supported the women’s rights movement in the Malayalam film industry?

If Pranaya Meenukalude Kadal’s problematic gender politics is one nail in its coffin, the other is its stilted storytelling. The first half has promise when it is unclear which way Jasmine and the story will go. The second half is made cringe-worthy not only by her decision to back a sexual predator and the sexist portrayal of her grandmother, but by a director who seems awkward around the theme of love. This awkwardness is exemplified by the portrayal of a senior gentleman who has been pining for the woman he loves and ends up coming across as pathetic. It is epitomised though by a scene in which the young couple are shown singing on a boat, a scene that seems to be aiming for cuteness but comes across as totally silly instead.

It does not help Kamal’s cause that Gabri Jose has no screen presence and has even less chemistry with Riddhi Kumar. She, on the other hand, seems like someone who could be moulded into a worthy actor.

Frankly Kumar’s potential does not matter in the larger context though, nor does Padmavati Rao’s arresting personality, Sreedhanya’s engaging screen presence or Saiju Kurup’s reliability as an actor. It does not matter that Vinayakan is formidable on screen despite playing an under-written character, Lakshwadeep is breathtaking, Vishnu Panicker shoots this pristine location beautifully and that final confrontation in the sea is chilling. 

Pranaya Meenukalude Kadal’s positives and even its other negatives fade into insignificance in the face of the position it takes that the way to a woman’s heart is to physically attack her and violate her consent. To rub salt into the wounds already inflicted by this stand, Ajmal dares to equate their relationship with Karuthamma and Pareekutty in Chemmeen in a scene that is evidently shot as an ode to that great classic. That hurts.

Kamal’s last film Aami was bogged down by its hesitation to go all out in its critique of the sensitive topics it had chosen to take up, but this one travels in the opposite direction: it is an all-out insensitive film. 

Rating (out of five stars): 0.75


CBFC Rating (India):
U 
Running time:
135 minutes 

This review has also been published on Firstpost:


Visuals courtesy:


REVIEW 747: MARJAAVAAN

$
0
0
Release date:
November 15, 2019
Director:
Milap Milan Zaveri
Cast:



Language:
Sidharth Malhotra, Riteish Deshmukh, Nassar, Rakul Preet Singh, Tara Sutaria, Ravi Kishan, Shaad Randhawa, Suhasini Mulay
Hindi


Main maaroonga toh mar jayega tu, dobaara janam lene se darr jayega tu.” This line that the hero fires at the villain in Marjaavaancomes from an arsenal of rhyming bombast that he uses from the opening minutes of this exhausting film. Thankfully, there is an arsenal of adjectives in the English language to match his weaponry. Dated, loud, cliché-ridden, preachy, unimaginative, boring, flat – that is what Marjaavaan is.

Take the slotting of the characters for one. Each comes from a checklist that Bollywood in earlier decades felt compelled to cover exhaustively in most scripts. Virtuous hero, virtuous woman who exists solely for him to fall in love with her and thus give her the requisite qualification for the post of heroine, villain without a single redeeming quality, the other woman in the ‘golden-hearted tawaif’ mould whose unrequited love for the leading man survives every trauma thrown her way – you will find them all in Marjaavaan.

As if these Neanderthal formulae are not enough, there are more. The bad guy is a dwarf in a film that clearly sees a disability as nothing but a source of drama. The hero is a “lawaaris”. A glamorous woman pops up to do that thingie called an ‘item song’ with dance moves that include spreading her legs wide, thrusting her bottom out and wiggling it, and going down on all fours to lift her bottom again and wiggle it – gosh, there is no originality even in the objectification of women in Marjaavaan.

And while it is a relief to get a break from the Islamophobiathat has been a regular feature of Hindi cinema in the last couple of years, there is no joy in returning, as Marjaavaandoes, to an era when the co-existence of religious and linguistic communities was not treated as a fact of life but as a cause for sugary sentimentality and in-your-face messaging on secularism.

Oh, and while the nice guy speaks in verse, the bad guy reels off “what is the height of (optimism, etc)?” kind of jokes and the female protagonist speaks in riddles.

Considering all this, it is appropriate that Marjaavaan’s soundtrack is dominated by remixes.

Sidharth Malhotra plays Raghu, the handsome orphaned foster child of the gangster played by Nassar. The latter’s son Vishnu (Riteish Deshmukh) has always resented his father’s love for Raghu, that resentment made worse by his crushing complex about his congenital short stature. Their life-long enmity is heightened when Raghu falls in love with the mute Zoya (Tara Sutaria) who tries to reform the children of the neighbourhood by steering them towards music and away from an otherwise inevitable life of crime. Rakul Preet Singh stars as Aarzoo, the bar dancerwho is devoted to Raghu.


Marjaavaan is written and directed by Milap Zaveri whose career has so far been built primarily on writing comedies, some of them largely harmless fun (such as the Varun Dhawan-starrer Main Tera Hero), many of them crude (case in point: Masti, Grand Masti). For this film, Zaveri ditches high-decibel sexist humour in favour of high-decibel sermonising. Perhaps in a bid to sound intelligent and relevant, at one point in Marjaavaan he has the hero yelling mandir banega aur masjid bhi blah blah blah”, but in the absence of any political depth, that pointed allusion to the Babri Masjid imbroglio makes zero sense. In a more well-thought-out film it might have meant something that Zoya is a Kashmiri Muslim girl and she is assembling a troupe for a music festival in Kashmir. Here though it means nothing.

Marjaavaan is so hackneyed that even the usually restrained Malhotra is driven to intermittent over-acting during its two-hours-plus running time. Deshmukh hams his way through playing Vishnu. Ms Sutaria is bland.

Singh does better than her colleagues with the little acting she is required to do in her limited role. Her primary job here thoughis to look hot, but she is not allowed to do that well by the photography, wardrobe and other departments who, for some reason, collude to highlight her protruding rib cage through much of the film – this inexplicable treatment meted out to an otherwise lovely-looking woman will hopefully spark off a debate on the impossible thinness required of Hindi film heroines these days. As for the great Nassar, his performance in Marjaavaan is a textbook example of how even the finest of actors can be reduced to embarrassingly strained performances by bad writing and direction.

Maybe the line Raghu should have delivered is this: Yeh film dekhega toh mar jayega tu, dobaara koi bhi film dekhne se darr jayega tu.”

Rating (out of five stars): *

CBFC Rating (India):
UA
Running time:
137 minutes

This review has also been published on Firstpost:


Photographs courtesy:




REVIEW 748: JACK & DANIEL

$
0
0
Release date:
November 15, 2019
Director:
S.L. Puram Jayasurya
Cast:


Language:
Dileep, Arjun Sarja, Anju Kurian, Saiju Kurup, Innocent, Ashokan, Suresh Krishna, Cameo: Peter Hein as himself
Malayalam with a spot of Tamil


A CBI officer is sent to Kerala to catch a thief. Daniel Alexander has a reputation for being the bete noir of the Mumbai underworld and since he is played by Tamil cinema’s action star Arjun Sarja, it goes without saying he throws a mean punch. His job is to ensnare Jack (played by Malayalam superstar Dileep), a Robin Hood-like Malayali who steals from the corrupt and wealthy to give to those suffering the consequences of their moral and financial corruption. The challenge for Daniel is that because Jack robs only black money, his victims never report their losses.

Daniel crisscrosses Kerala and Goa in pursuit of his designated prey. This journey takes us through Jack’s personal life, establishes him as a gem of a human being, shows Daniel being gradually drawn to this likeable bad guy on a mission and ultimately hints at the possibility of a sequel. 

Along that route we are given a lecture on how Indians do not treat Army veterans with respect – it is a measure of how ugly and aggressive the nationalism of Malayalam cinema’s northern counterpart Hindi cinema has become in recent years, that after overdosing on the latter’s insidious divisive effects for so long, I found this one-off sermon in a Malayalam film comparatively understated. It would be nice, for a change, to see an Indian film about the systemic mistreatment of Army veterans and their families that has nuance and does not sound like a tear-jerking preacher, but for now there is Jack & Daniel which is at least not crass and intentionally mischievous in this matter.

The title, obviously a play on the global alcohol brand, is an overstatement though. Jack & Daniel is far from intoxicating. A thief as a do-gooder and an affable thief duelling with an incorruptible cop have been done a million times before by cinema across the world, by Indian cinema at large, even specifically by Dileep himself, and this film has little by way of originality to contribute to the genres it occupies. It is neither clever enough nor pacey enough. The first half feels stretched, details of Jack’s schemes are glossed over and what little is revealed shows that his success is entirely reliant on the all-round stupidity of the public and those managing the establishments he targets. 

Apparently, cracking security systems in Kerala and Goa is a cakewalk. Sometimes, disguising yourself as a woman and either weeping or batting your eyelids before a man is all that is needed. 


The only woman with a respectable amount of screen time in Jack & Daniel is Anju Kurian’s Susmitha. At first she comes across as the staple young-woman-falling-for-a-man-played-by-a-much-older-male-actor prototype, later you realise the role has more substance than that, but in a scene of confrontation with Jack she ultimately turns out to be a lightweight whose only purpose in the film is to make the hero look smart. Mission accomplished.

Its man-centricity apart, Jack & Daniel picks up post-interval when the screenplay has the protagonists playing off each other instead of showing them operate in separate spaces as they largely do in the first half. Dileep and Sarja have decent chemistry between them and unlike Susmitha, at least Daniel is not shown to be an ass just to convince viewers that Jack is a genius. Add some above-average action and chases, and in the second half Jack & Daniel becomes tolerable fare.

Like the film itself, the actors are all okay – neither brilliant nor insufferable. With one exception. Saiju Kurup as a senior Kerala cop, DySP Phillipose, displays exceptional comic timing that overrides the silliness of some of the situations his character finds himself in. For the nth time it must be asked: why does the Malayalam film industry not see that this man is hero material? 

It must also be asked: what on earth inspired Jack & Daniel’s tacky Peter Hein cameo with its tributes to Pulimurugan, Madhuraraja and Baahubali? And why on earth did the reputed action director agree to feature in such a superfluous, truly idiotic scene?

In the hands of cinematographer Sivakumar Vijayan, Goa and Kerala look glossy in Jack & Daniel – pretty but lacking any individuality and character. Vijayan chooses to capture both states in extreme long shots, aerial and other frames that somehow paper over their distinctive features. The result: attractive visuals that could have been achieved by travelling to any of a million spots in the world and not particularly here. 

That is more or less the story of this film too: it lacks personality, it is forgettable, but in a year that has subjected us to the excruciating agony of watching Mikhael and Kalki, it at least offers some tolerable  timepass. 

Rating (out of 5 stars): 1.75

CBFC Rating (India):
U 
Running time:
155 minutes 

This review has also been published on Firstpost:




REVIEW 749: ANDROID KUNJAPPAN VERSION 5.25

$
0
0
Release date:
Kerala: November 8, 2019
Delhi: November 15, 2019
Director:
Ratheesh Balakrishnan Poduval 
Cast:



Language:
Soubin Shahir, Suraj Venjaramoodu, Kendy Zirdo, Saiju Kurup, Parvathi T, Megha Mathew, Rajesh Madhavan, Sivadas Kannur, Unni Raja
Malayalam with some English



A buffalo on a rampageteenaged  human beings and a robot in addition, of course, to adult humans – these have been the protagonists of Malayalam films in 2019 so far. Not that serious Indian cinephiles are unaware of this, but if anyone does ask, here is proof that this is a time of experimentation for one of India’s most respected film industries.

Writer-director Ratheesh Balakrishnan Poduval’s contribution to what has been a magnificent year for Malayalam cinema so far is Android Kunjappan Version 5.25, a darling film about a mechanical engineer struggling to take care of his grouchy ageing father while also building a career for himself. 

Subrahmanian, played by Soubin Shahir, dearly loves his exasperating Dad. Over the years he has quit several big-city jobs, at each instance to return to his village in Kerala because good care-givers are hard to come by and even the halfway decent ones find this rigid old man intolerable. Bhaskaran Poduval (Suraj Venjaramoodu) remains ungrateful and unmoved by his son’s evident affection. He has always wanted Subrahmanian to find a job in the vicinity of their home so that he can be available at all times. Do it not out of a sense of duty, he keeps insisting though, do it out of love. 

Now in his mid-30s, desperate for a job and a life of his own, Subrahmanian ropes in a robot to be Bhaskaran’s companion and domestic help while he is away. 

Android Kunjappan Version 5.25 raises a question that is increasingly occupying filmmakers worldwide. Can even the smartest machines experience love and fulfill the human need for it? American director Spike Jonze’s moving Oscar-nominated 2013 film Her had a lonely man (Joaquin Phoenix) falling for a virtual assistant (Scarlett Johansson’s voice). The equally moving British film Ex Machina starred Alicia Vikander as a humanoid robot being tested to see if she can match human intelligence. The far less tech-driven yet just as visually impressive Android Kunjappan explores the relationship that develops between a crotchety elderly human and a robot who never feels insulted. 

Film budgets in India are a microscopic fraction of what the West can afford. Poduval has told the press that financial constraints prompted the team to actually physically build a robot instead of conjuring one up with VFX. The result is arguably better than any illusion that could have been constructed on a computer screen. The boyish-looking machine Along with Kerala’s lush greenery and Bhaskaran’s decaying house as shot bycinematographer Sanu John Varughese make for an interesting and unique visual combination in this endearing, thoughtful story.

The people of Bhaskaran’s village nickname the robot Kunjappan. He is a loveable little fellow, but Poduval does not let the narrative get cutesy around him. The film is packed with snapshots of life in rural Kerala, its colourful characters ranging from the merely curious to the painfully intrusive, from gossips to unimaginably supportive folk. Android Kunjappan is unrelentingly funny, yet it is at all times profoundly philosophical.

Soubin Shahir is pitch perfect here as a son torn between a parent he loves and his desire for an existence beyond his village. At 43, Suraj Venjaramoodu is not the natural choice to play a 70/80-year-old. Since older men are not denied opportunities in the way women are, this is a point not related to principle as much as to the artistic challenges involved. As it happens, Venjaramoodu’s makeup and his impression of a fiery but frail old man are astonishingly good. The actor does not allow this to become the overriding aspect of his turn as Bhaskaran though – truth be told, his gait and posture are so consistent throughout, that early in the film I forgot the character is about double the age of the actor. All that is visible on screen is his sensitive performance.

Bhaskaran’s considerate nephew Prasannan is played by the gifted character artiste Saiju Kurup. It is a well-written part, and as always Kurup does full justice to it.

The other key individual in Android Kunjappan is Hitomi, Subrahmanian’s colleague of Japanese-Malayali descent played by debutant Kendy ZirdoHitomi is unusual for Malayalam cinema – a foreigner who is not exoticised or given sketchy characterisation. Beautiful though Sudani from Nigeria was, Samuel/Sudu in that film always remained an outsider being observed by the storyteller, always “the other”, whereas it is clear that once he dispenses with Hitomi’s explanation for her knowledge of Malayalam, Poduval gets down to viewing her as a person rather than a Japanese-Malayali person.

That said, unless you have never met an Indian from east of the Orissa-Bengal belt, you have to just hear Hitomi speak a few words of English to know that Zirdo is not Japanese. Sure enough a Google search reveals that she is from Arunachal Pradesh. Perfectionism would have called for coaching the young actor to sound Japanese. That should be the next step in Mollywood’s evolution. In the present context though, it is a pleasure to see Malayalam cinema looking beyond Malayalis and beyond even Indians for its stories, and writing a foreigner as a credible character with empathy. Zirdo is a sprightly ball of energy, she makes Hitomi charming and her Malayalam is a joy to hear.

The smaller satellite roles in Android Kunjappan are played by artistes who look and sound so real, it is as if they have been recruited from the local populace.

Android Kunjappan’s all-round adorability overshadows its flaws and moments of hesitation. The strand involving Saudamini, played by Parvathi T, for one, does not quite come together. (Some readers may consider the next two sentences spoilers) In a scene where we discover that Subrahmanian has been secretly observing his father in the house through a camera, the tone of the narrative suggests  that Poduval has not considered issues of privacy in the context of the elderly. And in the end, when Subrahmanian tailors his plans once again around his father, thus allowing Bhaskaran to get away with not budging from the status quo, it does seem like the script opted for a path it deemed comparatively safe in a society that tends to romanticise parenthood and demand that we deify parents irrespective of their failings. (Spoiler alert ends)

I suppose what makes Android Kunjappan special anyway is that it takes courage to even acknowledge on the Indian screen that a parent could be selfish and not a saint. What gives it nuance is the way it makes the hero’s love for his difficult father believable, and how it works to endear Bhaskaran to the audience even as we accept that he is a jerk.

This is what makes Android Kunjappan a pathbreaking film steeped in commentary about age, caste, class, religious bigotry, social and familial pressures. When Bhaskaran and Kunjappan discuss the former’s attraction for a woman in the neighbourhood, Kunjappan points out that in Japan if you love a person you openly tell them so. “That is not how it is here (in India/Kerala),” Bhaskaran replies. “Here you either rape her or pour petrol on her and set her on fire.” The scene is not designed as a joke– thankfully, Poduval is no Omar Lulu– so its matter-of-factness makes his observation a tighter slap on the face of Indian/Malayali society than any character delivering a speech on the subject of consent.

The use of technology in this film is impressive precisely because it does not overtly seek to impress with its futurism. Kunjappan is cute and looks slick, but it is clear that the story and its humanity are of paramount importance to Poduval.  It is no wonder then that despite its overall light-heartedness, Android Kunjappan Version 5.25 paints a poignant portrait of loneliness and potential human-machine equations enriched by the writer’s deep comprehension of the incomprehensibility of human love.
 
Rating (out of 5 stars): 3.5

CBFC Rating (India):
U
Running time:
140 minutes 

This review has also been published on Firstpost:


Visuals courtesyIMDB


REVIEW 750: PAGALPANTI

$
0
0
Release date:
November 22, 2019
Director:
Anees Bazmee
Cast:



Language:
Anil Kapoor, John Abraham, Ileana D’Cruz, Arshad Warsi, Pulkit Samrat, Kriti Kharbanda, Saurabh Shukla, Brijendra Kala, Urvashi Rautela, Inaamulhaq, Zakir Hussain
Hindi


Pagalpanti (Madness) is what happens when Anees Bazmee gets a couple of good ideas in the middle of a creative drought, but does not quite know what to do with them. Bazmee is not someone who can be dismissed as a mindless, crude comic in the league of Sajid Khan. He is, after all, the director who served up Anil Kapoor and Nana Patekar in top goofy form in Welcome (2007), and brought a degree of freshness to the stereotypical Bollywood representation of boisterous Punjabis in Singh Is Kinng (2008). Just two years back, he did a ripping job with the Anil Kapoor, Arjun Kapoor, Ileana D’Cruz starrer Mubarakan.

Pagalpanti is not Bazmee’s worst. Gosh no, that distinction goes to No Problem. But it is not a patch on his funnest works either.

Bazmee appears to have been struggling when he kicked off Pagalpanti. Nothing else can explain why he and his co-writers Rajiv Kaul and Praful Parekh chose to rehash for this film so many elements from successful Hindi slapstick comedies of the past decade. For a start, they picked a hero who is a ‘panauti’, just like Akshay Kumar’s character in the first Housefull. They added to that a mansion housing a beautiful female ghost, as in Great Grand Masti, going so far as to cast that film’s bhootni, Urvashi Rautela, in this one too. And if stampeding camels wreaked havoc in the climax of Welcome Back, here that job falls on the shoulders of a trio of lions.

The screenplay does nothing to any of these tropes to elevate them to the level of tributes. Even the twist in the bhootni’s tale does not serve that purpose. In between the writers do have a couple of good ideas, but those and the ensemble cast that includes some fine actors are all overshadowed by the overall lack of novelty in the story and treatment of Pagalpanti.

Raj Kishore(John Abraham), Junky(Arshad Warsi) and Chandu (Pulkit Samrat) are friends and failed business partners. Raj is supposed to be an unlucky guy who destroys the fortunes of all those around him too, but his buddies stay with him. When their paths cross with the Indian gangster brothers Raja Sahab(Saurabh Shukla) and Wi-Fi (Anil Kapoor) in London, these two dreaded men choose to hire them despite knowing that Raj Kishore’s mere presence can spell doom in their lives. No credible reason is offered for their decision.

What follows is a series of financial disasters, chases, exploding cars, the escalation of Raja and Wi-Fi’s long-running feud with fellow gangsters Tulli and Bulli, and a new-found enmity with a crook called Niraj Modi (you read the name right) who cheated Indian banks of thousands of crores before fleeing the country.

That last chap is played by Inaamulhaq, styled very precisely to look like the actualNirav Modi. The obvious allusion to a high-profile real-life fugitive is interesting at first, until the scenario wears thin once it becomes clear that the writers do not know where to go with what started out as a clever move.

There is a point at which humour unexpectedly makes way for patriotic fervour, when Wi-Fiis given a passionate lecture about love for the country (meaning, India – of course – and not the United Kingdom which he has made his home). Just when it seems like Team Pagalpanti may be getting subversive and having a giggle at the expense of Bollywood’s hyper-nationalist brigade who have been churning out loud deshbhaktifilms in the past three years or so, they chicken out, and the scene ends tamely. This particular passage is unwittingly amusing in its effort not to appear too fixated on its desh prem, especially since it is clearly fixated on the same market as those aforementioned films.

It is always nice to watch Kapoor and Warsi letting their hair down, and they do manage to extract some laughs in Pagalpanti’s best moments. Years of facing the camera have given even Abraham a certain comfort with comedy that he did not initially have, and that too is nice to see. The younger members of the cast acquit themselves reasonably well, although they have not that much to do. Besides, there is only so much that actors canachievein the face of lack of innovation.

The one effective aspect of Pagalpanti is that it continuously laughs at its genre. It does this primarily through the medium of Junky(Warsi) who rhymes words while he speaks and delivers lines rather than having normal conversations with people – each time he says something he is particularly impressed with, he expresses disbelief at his own smartness. Later, when Raj Kishorevomits out a monologue, he too responds to his own words in a similar fashion.

It is hard to be totally angry with a self-mocking film, especially considering that Bazmee manages to run through 165 minutes without a single wisecrack about rape, disability, farts and faeces, which have been favoured fodder in Hindi film comedies for some years now. But not being angry with a film, not disliking it is not the same as enjoying it. Pagalpanti is sporadically entertaining, but for the most part it feels stale and ordinary. Even the appearance of a Méhul Choksi lookalike in the end cannot lift the film out of its plainness. References to current events work if you have a take on them. Pagalpanti has none.

Rating (out of five stars): 1.5

CBFC Rating (India):
UA 
Running time:
152 minutes 

This review has also been published on Firstpost:


Poster courtesy:



REVIEW 751: HELEN

$
0
0
Release date:
Kerala: November 15, 2019
Delhi: November 22, 2019
Director:
Mathukutty Xavier 
Cast:



Language:
Anna Ben, Lal, Aju Varghese, Noble Babu Thomas, Rony David, Binu Pappu, Bonny Mary Mathew, Cameo: Vineeth Sreenivasan
Malayalam


On the face of it, Helen is a survival flick. The protagonist gets stuck in a dangerous space where no one knows she is trapped. Watching her desperate effort to stay alive is a chilling experience made all the more so by the text in the end revealing that her story is inspired by true events. But the film is so much more than just that. 

Helen Paul’s life choices and every aspect of her identity play a role in what  happens to her here. The fact that she is a woman, an independent woman, a woman whose work and social engagements often keep her out of the house late at night, a woman with a boyfriend, a Christian woman with a Muslim boyfriend – all these factors combined result in the tension that ultimately leads to her disappearance and the response to it. 

Helen is a nurse keen to migrate to Canada to improve her financial prospects. Her widowered father Paul dotes on her. Helen juggles English language classes with a job, home management, commitments in the neighbourhood and her love life. She is affable and popular, so when she vanishes, there are many people anxious on her behalf. 

This in itself distinguishes Helen from most successful survival dramas revolving around solitary figures – usually, their central characters have been individuals whose absence is not felt because they are either loners or away from their families or they had unwisely taken off without informing loved ones. The most high-profile of these in recent times, British director Danny Boyle’s Best Picture Oscar-nominated 127 Hours, was about a man who goes hiking in a treacherous canyon without intimating anyone about his plans. The spotlight in that film was inevitably on the mental strength and instincts that helped the hero get back home. Helen is as attentive to the heroine’s decisions within her prison as it is to the chauvinism that led to her plight and even affects the search for her.

Helen is written by Alfred Kurian Joseph, Noble Babu Thomas (who also plays Helen’s boyfriend Azhar) and Mathukutty Xavier. It is Xavier’s first shot at direction, a novel choice for a debut and an unusually perceptive film for its genre. (The next four paragraphs analyse an episode in the film in detail. They contain no spoilers, but please proceed at your own discretion.) Without giving anything away about the the leading lady’s exact situation, let us scrutinise a single episode that illustrates the entire narrative’s subtle but meticulous dissection of Malayali society in particular and Indian society at large. Azhar is out drinking with his male buddies one night when Helen phones to fix up an impromptu date. He is not a very responsible chap, so it is not surprising at all that he drives a two-wheeler without a helmet. This violation of traffic rules is what causes a police squad to stop them, but what makes the greasy cop Ratheesh Kumar stay fixated on them is his objection to two people of the opposite sex out together, and worse, the realisation that they belong to different religious groups. This is why he phones Paul to inform him of his daughter’s whereabouts. 

Note how Ratheesh treats the woman as a protectorate of her family. A genuinely liberal parent would be appalled at the infantilisation of his adult daughter in this manner, but Paul is furious with her instead. Helen’s reaction is just as telling: instead of questioning her father’s right to be angry, she is apologetic. But for what?

Of course none of this would have happened if Azhar had not been a jerk who rode a scooter without wearing a helmet and after consuming alcohol beyond the legally permissible limit, but the point is that Ratheesh makes those contraventions of the law his excuse to bat for gender segregation and parental supremacy, lash out at social non-conformism and intrude on people’s personal lives. 

It is unclear whether Paul is just opposed to inter-community liaisons or balks at the mere idea of his daughter picking her own partner irrespective of community. Either way, it is important that Helen chooses to feature a Christian-Muslim couple rather than a Hindu-Muslim pair, serving as a reminder that while no doubt the communal biases of the majority community ought to be condemned, minority communities too need to be called out for their biases against each other. 

All this emerges from an incident that takes only a few minutes in the film, so you can imagine how insightful Helenis in its entirety. 

Anna Ben, the charming curly-haired debutant from Kumbalangi Nights, proves here that she has the acting muscle to carry a film on her slim shoulders. Her confident turn as Helen is especially impressive since she spends half her screen time all alone and the rest mostly with a seasoned performer like Lal who plays Paul. The latter, in fact, is the only cast member who raises Helen’s pitch a notch a couple of times. For the most part though, he makes Paul believable and loveable despite his flaws. 

Among a capable team of supporting actors, the most significant performance comes from Aju Varghese playing the slimy policeman Ratheesh. The actor should give himself more such breaks in a career dominated by comic roles that are often indistinguishable from each other. His rendition of pride and prejudice in this film froze me to the bone.  

The writing of Helendips only occasionally, but these  instances do adversely affect the narrative. (Some people may consider this paragraph a spoiler) That accident in the middle of the search for Helen, for one, needlessly piles melodrama on top of already nerve-wracking melodrama. Producer Vineeth Sreenivasan’s cameo feels superfluous and gimmicky. (Spoiler alert ends) The background score needed some turning down. And hey, we understood early in the film that Helen and her Dad are a snug twosome, so there was no need to lay it on thick with a mushy flashback to her childhood and their life-long friendship, underlined with loud music. That stretch and the over-dramatised moments assigned to Paul as the film draws to a close are completely unnecessary. 

These departures in tone aside, Helen is clever in the way it never allows its socio-political inclinations to override its fundamental goal of being a survival thriller. This is a consequence of some shrewd editing by Shameer Muhammad post-interval and Anend C. Chandran’s matter-of-fact camerawork combined with a largely focused screenplay.

Helen’s real triumph though is that even when it separates the heroine from everyone else in the second half, it does not suddenly conjure up a male saviour for her in keeping with commercial cinema’s tendencies nor does it ever stray from being a film about her. I cannot vouch for whether Mathukutty Xavier and Team got their scientific and medical facts right, but I can tell you I almost chewed off my nails worrying about that young woman’s fate. In a year in which the Malayalam film industry has outdone itself, Helenis right up there with the best of 2019.
 
Rating (out of 5 stars): 3.5

CBFC Rating (India):
U 
Running time:
117 minutes 

This review has also been published on Firstpost:



REVIEW 752: COMMANDO 3

$
0
0
Release date:
November 29, 2019
Director:
Aditya Datt
Cast:

Language:
Vidyut Jammwal, Adah Sharma, Gulshan Devaiah, Angira Dhar, Rajesh Tailang
Hindi


A study of Bollywood’s Commando series could be the basis for a PhD in opportunism. Commando: A One Man Army, released in 2013, was about a loyal Armyman being abandoned by the Indian government when he is caught in enemy territory. Off screen, India got a new government in 2014 and with it arrived the Hindi film industry’s open subservience to the establishment. So Commando 2: The Black Money Trailin 2017 batted for demonetisation. And now, as Islamophobia rages across India, here comes Commando 3 with its cringe-worthy condescension towards India’s Muslims.

The third instalment of Commando, this one too starring Vidyut Jammwal, is directed by Aditya Datt whose best-known feature so far is the Emraan Hashmi-Tanushree Dutta-starrer Aashiq Banaya AapneJammwal’s Karan Singh Dogra this time is on a mission to track down a London-based terrorist running a conversion racket in India that draws innocent Hindu boys to the Islamic fold and brainwashes them into committing violence for Allah along with other Muslims. Buraq Ansari (Gulshan Devaiah) is as evil as a human can be. We first see him heavily veiled. His face is revealed in a scene in which he forces his little son to watch as he brutally murders a man.

Working alongside Karan is his sidekick Bhavna Reddy played, as she was earlier, by Adah Sharma. The mix this time is sought to be revved up by the addition of the British Intelligence agent Mallika Sood (Angira Dhar) who is based on the same prototype that has yielded the Bond franchise’s ‘Bond girl’.

The women in Commando 3 are occasionally given space to display their fighting skills and in that limited time Sharma and Dhar show us how immensely capable they are, but make no mistake about this: the primary purpose of their existence in this screenplay is to compete for Karan’s attention so that while he goes about the serious business of saving the country, we never forget that he leaves la femmes weak at the knees.

The subordination of women to the hero in Commando 3 is nothing compared to the film’s messaging about Muslims. The problem is not with the depiction of a terror network operating in the name of Islam – that such organisations exist must of course be acknowledged; the problem lies with the manner in which this film seeks to hold all Indian Muslims accountable for Buraq Ansari’s actions in a way that the public discourse has never held India’s entire majority community accountable for the wrongdoings of individual members.

Commando 3 is strategic while building its case. It is careful to prepare alibis for itself even as it lectures India’s Muslims about their duty towards the nation at large and their Hindu brethren in particular. For instance, mention is made of beef-related lynchings and other genuine grievances of the Muslim community, which can be held up to anyone who accuses the film of being one-sided. Here’s the catch though: if majoritarian fundamentalists object to the acknowledgement of these crimes by their group, the defence is no doubt a scene right at the start where a Muslim terrorist was shown instigating his flunkeys to kill a calf to stir up trouble. The insinuation is that even the lynchings of Muslims have been the fault of Muslims.

While the principal evil Muslim in Commando 3spends his time plotting against Hindus, the good Hindu hero waits for a Muslim terrorist to finish his namaz before capturing him. Oh look ye, respect!

(Minor spoilers in the next two sentences) The sermonising directed at Muslims peaks in a video appeal Karan publishes, aimed at inspiring the Muslim masses to thwart Buraq’s plan to attack the Hindu masses. The video and the subsequent scenes of Muslims rising up in response are dripping with a patronising attitude. (Spoiler alert ends) They are also amateurishly written and in your face, epitomised by that shot before the credits roll of a Hindu man and a Muslim man standing shoulder to shoulder right after they together fire a flaming arrow at an effigy of Ravan.

Those who wish to understand the difference between the mischief-mongering by Commando 3 and a factual portrayal of Islamic terrorism would be well advised to watch Anubhav Sinha’s Hindi film Mulk (2018).

Commando 3’s minuses don’t end with its troubling politics. The Indian agents in London come up trumps despite being dumb, lax, over-confident and foolhardy, because these qualities are what the writing team perceives as bravery. (Some people may deem the next sentence a spoiler) For instance, both Bhavna and Karan, despite being undercover agents, blow their own cover early in the narrative to draw the snake out of his hole: she tweets about Karan from her actual ID and he releases a video to the media revealing his identity, both of which are somehow meant to be clever moves. (Spoiler alert ends)

Jammwal, Sharma and Dhar do what is required of them well enough: she and she scrap over him, all three beat up people, they glare, they stare. I experienced a little heartache though at the sight of a fine actor like Gulshan Devaiah reduced to over-acting as Buraq Ansari.

Commando 3 is technically glossy and the fight choreography is slick. The writing though is contrived. The film is filled with lines like this one tossed at Buraq by Karan, “Pehle purdon mein chhupa karta thha, ab mardon mein?” (Earlier you hid behind a veil, now you hide behind men?) as the latter walks towards him surrounded by armed guards, but the dialoguebaazi is tiresome and soulless. Even if this were not the case, it is appalling that the populist stereotypes in the script target an already vulnerable people.

It becomes evident in the end though that none of this comes from a place of conviction. So unsure of itself is Commando 3, that after all its bloodshed and bhashans the end credits run alongside not one but two formulaic song and dance routines.

First comes this kiddish Hinglish number lip-synced by Karan:

Tere peechhe main

Mere aage tu run-run

Kabhi aage tu

Kabhi peechhe main fun-fun

Dekhega jalwa ab toh tu

With my gun-gun

Ek hi toh bachke niklega

Yeh toh done-done.

As if that is not ludicrous enough, there follows Karan dancing with the two women in skimpy, sexy attire, ending on an image of him in silhouette with a Ravan in the background.

Umm.

Let me try my hand at lyric writing:

Now that this piece is through

I’m gonna run-run

Watching Commando 3

Has been no fun-fun

This series should have stopped

With Commando One-One

Give us a break, please

Just be done-done.

Rating (out of five stars): 1

CBFC Rating (India):
UA 
Running time:
134 minutes 

This review has also been published on Firstpost:


Posters courtesy:


REVIEW 753: KETTIYOLLAANU ENTE MAALAKHA

$
0
0

Release date:
Kerala: November 22, 2019
Delhi: November 29, 2019
Director:
Nisam Basheer
Cast:

Language:
Asif Ali, Veena Nandhakumar, Manohari Joy, Basil Joseph, Jaffer Idukki, Raveendran
Malayalam


Commercial Malayalam cinema has for a while now been dominated by an ugly, toxic masculinity, with storytelling that normalises domestic violence, packs casual misogyny into comedies, portrays men as omniscient, omnipotent beings and glorifies male aggression. Kamal’s Aami in 2018 was a rare mainstream film that expressed discomfort with a man’s selfishness in his marital bed, but it avoided outrightly condemning him. In a less mainstream space, last year’s direct-to-online release Ottamuri Velicham (The Light In A Single Room) had no such qualms – while telling the story of a woman being brutalised by her husband, director Rahul Riji Nair made no bones about his belief that his hero’s sense of sexual entitlement towards his wife amounted to rape.

Kettiyollaanu Ente Maalakha (My Wife Is My Angel) examines another aspect of this social malaise. When a male child is brought up to treat women as lesser beings, it is not hard to imagine how his mindset will be shaped by an India where sex education still remains largely taboo, where very few families have open discussions on sex, and where many boys get their earliest lessons on the subject from other (twisted or equally ignorant?) boys and/or the exaggerations of pornography. Kettiyollaanu Ente Maalakha is about the effect our society has on another kind of man: a fellow who has been raised to respect women but whose interactions have been limited almost entirely to the mother and four sisters he loves.


Asif Ali plays that young man, Sleevachan, a busy 35-year-old farmer in a mountain village in Kerala who has long avoidedmarriage. When he decides to get himself a wife one fine day, it is not for himself at all but because he does not want his ageing mother to be alone at home while he is out at work. Sleeva is a hard-working chap and well-liked in the community. He soon finds a bride and thence arises his trauma. Having volunteered to walk down the aisle with Rincy (Veena Nandhakumar), he panics because he is clueless about physical intimacy with a woman and overcome by a debilitating shyness.


When Sleeva confides in a priest, he is told that once he and Rincy get close he will instinctively know what to do. Errm, but what about the...uh...mechanics of intercourse? This conservative rural community follows a don’t-ask-don’t-tell policy on sex. The crude misinformation from Sleeva’s misogynistic drinking companion serves no educational purpose though it is the most graphic that anyone gets with him.

In many ways, Kettiyollaanu Ente Maalakha is pathbreaking. It deals with a grave theme but has a light touch, features a mainstream male star and does not disguise its mainstream commercial aspirations. In a country where most people have warped ideas about consent even between strangers, and the general assumption is that marriage grants a man a life-long licence for sex with his wife whenever, wherever and in whichever way he wants it, her wishes be damned, director Nisam Basheer and writer Aji Peter Thankam have the vision to deal with the issue of a woman’s consent within marriage.

(Spoiler alert for this paragraph) Kettiyollaanu Ente Maalakha goes a step further and underlines the point that consent must be given at every instance – just because a wife is well disposed to her husband and has initiated physical contact with him on previous occasions, does not at all mean that he is allowed to force himself on her. When such force is shown to be used in the film, it is clearly called “rape”.(Spoiler alert ends)

When it starts out, Kettiyollaanu Ente Maalakha does not offer any indication that it will take such a serious turn. It is at first gently amusing and endearingly real as Basheer establishes the close bond Sleeva shares with his large extended family and the bonhomie among the villagers. When the going gets grim, the director ensures that the narrative does not trivialise the issues at hand. The reins do slip from his hands a couple of times – both instances involve a comically nosy old woman: such people of course exist in real life and such circumstances are likely to arise, but the point is the presentation itself in both cases is jarring in comparison with the sensitive tonal balance maintained in the rest of the film. That said, these shifts in tone pass off in seconds and it is clear they are not intentional.

The significance of Kettiyollaanu Ente Maalakha lies in its position on prevalent social notions of consent in perpetuity in the matter of sexual relations, the acknowledgement that marital rape is common in our society and the sight, however improbable it may be, of almost an entire community being opposed to it. Improbable the latter certainly is, but not impossible, and I will take a suspension of disbelief any day over the poisonous misogyny that big-budget men-centric Malayalam cinema has thrust on us for too long now. Remember that just weeks back the repeated impregnation of an unwilling wife by her husband in Aadya Rathriwas brushed aside jokingly as a mark of his love for her rather than what it is: marital rape.

Sleevachan’s innocence does take some time to sink in because even if his friends were unusually reticent, it requires a stretch of the imagination to believe that the couple of jerks who he also hangs out with never volunteered details of their sexual encounters. Improbablebut again not impossible. There is more ignorance out there than we realise. Look around your own social circle and ask how many seemingly knowledgeable, sexually active men are aware that condoms and birth control pills are not 100 per cent effective, ask how many couples think having unprotected sex “just once” cannot result in a pregnancy. It happens even in more sexually permissive societies than ours. A Sleevachan could, therefore, exist.

(Spoiler alert for this paragraph) The episode that requires some consideration is the one in which Sleeva behaves uncharacteristically with Rincy. Is such a dramatic momentary lapse possible? Yes, if you take into account the “manaprayasam he spoke of to his priest, the combined weight of social expectations, peer pressure and wrong guidance. (Spoiler alert ends)


Kettiyollaanu Ente Maalakha is not perfect. At one point there is talk of counselling for Sleevachan, but no sessions are shown and the screenplay seems to take the line that human instincts ultimately were indeed all that was needed. Given the circumstances, the film also opts for the safest possible ending. And it is important to point out that though its choice of theme is commendable, Kettiyollaanu too is a man-centric take on what is intrinsicallyman-woman issue. The woman here is not marginalised, but she is certainly secondary. Nothing illustrates this better than the scene in which Sleevachan sits before Rincy finally confiding in her about his confusions, and the camera focuses on him while showing her from only the forearms down. Really? Expected better from you, Team Kettiyollaanu.

Despite this, the film remains pathbreaking because it takes a stand against behaviour that Indian cinema at large and Malayalam in particular usually ignores or trivialises. Kettiyollaanu Ente Maalakha’s courage and humanity are what recommend it most, though its naturalism, bird’s eye view of local customs and top-notch acting come close.

Asif Ali is off the charts with his interpretation of a rustic, romantically awkward youngster. After Uyare, this is his career best performance. What an exceptional year for an actor who too often has wasted himself on generic, largely uninspiring films.

Veena Nandhakumar is phenomenal too as a new wife whose confusion over her husband’s initial oddness belies a quiet confidence.

My pick of the credible supporting cast is the beautifully dignified Manohari Joy who plays Sleevachan’s mother.

William Francis’ music is a bonus, smoothly kneaded as it is into the narrative. That folksy number about Sleevachan’s marriage is lovely.

DoP Abilash Sankar, whose neglect of a woman in one scene I just mentioned, plays a crucial role elsewhere in the delicate, non-exploitative handling of sexual violence. This is why Kettiyollaanu Ente Maalakha is so important – because male behaviour that is considered commonplace in our society is treated here as exactly what it is: a crime. In doing so, Nisam Basheer and Aji Peter Thankam have contributed to an essential conversation in a non-esoteric fashion, however debatable certain aspects of their storyline maybe.
 
Rating (out of 5 stars): 3.25

CBFC Rating (India):
U 
Running time:
135 minutes

This review has also been published on Firstpost:




REVIEW 754: PANIPAT

$
0
0

Release date:
December 6, 2019
Director:
Ashutosh Gowariker
Cast:


Language:
Arjun Kapoor, Kriti Sanon, Sanjay Dutt, Mantra, Mohnish Bahl, Padmini Kolhapure, Zeenat Aman, Nawab Shah
Hindi with a bit of Marathi


The bar for Hindi film historicals plunged to unprecedented depths last year when Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s Padmaavatbrazenly edited the truth to cash in on the anti-Muslim sentiment currently pervading India. Since then, Anurag Singh’s Kesari has rivalled that all-time low, distorting a 19th century battle by a Sikh regiment of the British IndianArmy against Pathan forces, demonising the Muslim Pathans and rewriting the episode as a long-term fight by the Sikhs for India’s Independence.

History has been one of the many casualties of this era of fake news.

It is a measure of the abysmal state of Bollywood that it comes as a relief that Panipat is not an Islamophobic film. The Third Battle of Panipat was fought at that historic site in north India between the Afghan ruler Ahmad Shah Abdali and the Marathas. though the writing team and director Ashutosh Gowariker (maker of Lagaan, Swades and Jodhaa Akbar) do take liberties with crucial facts here, at least they do not falsely paint this as a war between Muslim monsters and Hindu saints.

This is not to suggest that the film is bereft of caricatures. Of course not. The point simply is that the caricaturing in Panipat is not along religious lines, it is employed instead to portray the Marathas – their Muslim associates included – as a cleaner, gentler, more likeable people than Abdali and his associates. Towards this end, for instance, the opposition soldiers who attack the Peshwa’s young son Vishwas Rao and the Maratha general Ibrahim Khan Gardi on the battlefield are shown growling and contorting their faces like beasts of prey. It goes without saying that no Maratha in the film growls. No Maratha in the film is shown killing quite as viciously as Abdali either. Likewise, Abdali’s Rohilla ally Najib-ud-Daula is designed, both in terms of acting and styling, as an in-your-face slimeball. Again, no member of the Maratha side is pointedly made to look like a snake.

Still, it is important to note that this lack of nuance is not one-tenth as blatant and tacky as Padmaavat, nor dangerous and hate-filled in the way that film was.

Panipatcasts Arjun Kapoor as Sadashivrao Bhau, the commander of the Peshwa’s Army who was sent to confront Abdali’s forces advancing across north India. This is 1761, the Marathas hold sway over large parts of the Indian subcontinent, the last of the powerful Mughal emperors, Aurangzeb, has been dead for half a century, and the present occupant of the throne in Delhi is a  weakling who owes allegiance to the Marathas. The Mughal court is divided though between pro- and anti-Maratha elements, and this is one of the sparks that leads to Sadashivrao’s campaign against Abdali (played by Sanjay Dutt) which culminates in the historic Battle of Panipat on January 14, 1761.

Gowariker’s Panipat spends considerable time on how the rivals stitched together alliances with small rulers across north India, using material gain and religion as a lure. This part of the narrative – despite the melodramatic acting by the supporting cast, the narrative’s penchant for overstatement and overcrowded as it iswith new characters – remains interesting to the extent that it illustrates the impermanent, opportunistic nature of political relationships of the time, no different from the modern age.

Whether factual or fictional I cannot tell, but Sadashivrao’s wife Parvati (Kriti Sanon) is portrayed as an intelligent strategist whose advice and negotiation skills stood him in good stead. She, in fact, is the prime narrator of her husband’s story.

We know from Jodhaa Akbarthat Gowariker has a gift for mounting lavish battlefield scenes, and here too the director does not disappoint although he is thankfully less self-indulgent in these passages in Panipatthan he was in that earlier film. The actual combat and manoeuvrings at Panipat are surprisingly engaging, again, despite the amateurish acting of the bit-part players.

If Panipat remains a middlingfilm despite this, it is because of its complete lack of finesse in addition to the needless romanticisation of the Marathas. A point once made is underlined and then re-underlined by the background score and the use of close-ups, which become particularly problematic when they end up  focusing on hammy actors. Sometimes the tone of the narrative becomes ponderous while at other times tricky points are rushed over. This is especially disappointing when Abdali, angered by the Maratha takeover of one of his occupied territories, decides to cross the Yamuna although the river is in full flow. Showing how precisely he managed this despite the high and turbulent waters would have played up his smartness and determination as a leader, which Panipat obviously does not want to do, but as a consequence a potentially great scene with spiffing special effects just never happens.

Then of course there is the minor matter of facts. Contrary to what the closing text on screen says,  avoids saying and implies, in reality the loss to Abdali in the Battle of Panipat grievously affected the Marathas, stalled the spread of their empire in India and in the long run laid the ground for the establishment of most of India as a British colony.

This much laypersons knowif they paid attention to their school books. Hopefully a historian will watch this film and offer us a more detailed analysis, but until then a few hours of research even by a non-expert reveals reasons for the Marathas’ failure at Panipat that the film intentionally skips, thus robbing it of additional layers. According to the film, Sadashivrao lost due to limited resources and betrayals by four key allies, a point stressed in the choice of title, Panipat: The Great Betrayal. What it does not mention at all is what critics of the Peshwa say, that among other issues, Sadashivrao was a poor diplomat and did not know the north well, which made him a bad choice as leader for this war.

Panipat shows a large contingent of women (companions, not fellow warriors) accompanying the Maratha Army and a character in passing mentions a number of pilgrims also with them. A common sense question from even a lay viewer would be, why would an army weigh itself down in this fashion? Historians believe this too was a factor in Sadashivrao’s defeat, but Panipat is not a film to indulge in such a critique. The film’s goal is clear: to dwarf the victor (because he came from what is even now a foreign land) and idolise the vanquished (because he is our desi boy, y’know), to claim that Abdali was motivated by greed while Sadashivrao had no selfish interests. With this in mind, Sadashivrao even gets to deliver a line about how “loot” has spurred Abdali to fight for Delhi whereas he, Sadashivrao, is there to offer “raksha” (protection). Ya sure, “raksha” and not a desire to expand Maratha rule.

The lack of gray in the characterisation of Sadashivrao makes him bland and pulls down the film in its entirety. Frankly, Parvati – the medicine woman he marries despite her lower social status –is far more fascinating.

Of the main cast, Sanon’s spirited performance as Parvati proves once again that this youngster deserves more than Bollywood has been offering her so far. She is beautiful, has a commanding personality, towards the end of this film offers evidence of impressive fighting skills and can act. In Panipat she also has the benefit of a character who is better fleshed out than most of the rest. In fact, Team Gowariker seems to be making a point to Team Bhansali when Sadashivrao is shown extracting a promise from her that she will not commit Sati if he dies, in sharp contrast to Padmaavat which glorified this regressive practice and treated Rani Padmavati’sSati like a fashion parade.

Kapoor as Sadashivrao is earnest, while Dutt deadpans his way through the role of Abdali. Zeenat Aman is wasted in a cameo. And this cannot be said enough: the casting of most of the remaining actors comes across as careless.

So yes, Panipat is shorn of Padmaavat and Kesari’s insidious intent, but it is not exactly an innocent, truthful chronicler of Indian history. Add to that its lack of polish and spark, and for all its positives,it ends up as just an average affair.

CBFC Rating (India):
UA 
Running time:
173 minutes 

This review has also been published on Firstpost:


Poster courtesy:


REVIEW 755: MAMANGAM

$
0
0
Release date:
December 12, 2019
Director:
M. Padmakumar
Cast:




Language:
Mammootty, Unni Mukundan, Achuthan, Prachi Tehlan, Kaniha, Maala Parvathi, Anu Sithara, Siddique, Tarun Arora, Iniya, Kaviyoor Ponnamma, Manikandan Achari, Sudev Nair
Malayalam (Dubbed versions in Tamil, Telugu and Hindi have also been released. This is a review of the original Malayalam film.)


Art does not exist in a vacuum. The socio-political context in which it has been created lends it layers and meaning it may not have when viewed in isolation. So, as violence erupts in India’s North-east following the passage of the Citizenship Amendment Bill 2019 in Parliament, beef-related lynchings no longer provoke public outrage on the scale witnessed when Mohammed Akhlaq was murdered in Dadri in 2015, and large sections of the citizenry this month have been cheering what they consider an extra-judicial killing by the Telangana police, a pacifist film assumes great significance. It becomes especially crucial when that film casts one of India’s biggest stars as a character asking his people to give peace a chance.

This is why Mamangam: History of the Brave is impossible to ignore. Directed by M. Padmakumar, the film features Malayalam megastar Mammootty as a legendary warrior from Kerala who turns his back on violence when he becomes convinced of its pointlessness. 

Mammootty here plays Chandroth Valiya Panicker whose community is embroiled in a long-running blood feud with the ruling Saamoothiris a.k.a. Zamorins. In a bid to assassinate the incumbent monarch, these Kalari maestros have been targeting the extravagant Mamangan fair that takes place every 12 years on the banks of the Bharathappuzha river.

When the film opens, a voiceover explains the background to this enmity. The narrative then plunges into a bloody battle between Valiya Panicker’s band of fighters and the Zamorin’s forces at a Mamangam fair in the late 17th century. Cut to 24 years later when Chandroth Panicker(Unni Mukundan) informs his family that the Goddess appeared to him and instructed him to attend the upcoming Mamangam. His wife (Anu Sithara) and mother (Maala Parvathi) are just recovering from the shock when, much to their dismay, his adoloscent nephew Chanthunni (Achuthan) announces that he too has been similarly guided by the Devi.

As the two young men journey towards their fate, on a parallel track the Zamorin’s representative (played by Siddique) is shown investigating the mysterious disappearance of one of the king’s agents from the abode of the courtesan Unnimaaya (Prachi Tehlan).

The link between the two threads is Valiya Panicker.

This is a story with immense potential. As north Indian cinema increasingly celebrates violence and cashes in on the  hyper-nationalism dominating the public discourse, it reflects well on Malayalam cinema that it has not followed suit. Mamangam chooses to defy the bloodlust of the off-screen mob.

Thematic relevance, courage and sensitivity are not enough to hold up an entire film though when the writing is shallow and the storytelling style dull. These twin problem areas combined with action scenes and visual effects that are a mixed bag end up pulling down Mamangam.

It is all very well to show Valiya Panicker denouncing bloodshed, but the only way the messaging could have been effective is if we had been taken along on his inner travels. Sadly, the screenplay fails to satisfactorily explain how or why enlightenment struck him. One day he is driving swords into the Zamorin’s soldiers, and the next time we see him he is questioning the purpose of this seemingly never-ending hatred that has claimed numerous lives.


Even the conversations sound stiff. There is incessant talk about the wombs that have borne children only to give them up to this bloodletting. The women of the hero’s clan, in fact, speak of little but that. They though are better off than the courtesans who are given nothing much to do but gaze at the men with inexplicable expressions. In fact at one point in the narrative, as Valiya Panicker and Chanthunni chat while working together on a mural, Unnimaaya is present throughout their exchange but all she does is stare, then stare again, and then stare some more. I mean c’mon, Prachi Tehlan is pretty and has a curvaceous body showcased here in elegant minimal clothing, but considering that she serves little purpose in Mamangam beyond her visual appeal, the producers may as well have stuck her poster on one half of the screen during that scene instead of bothering to rope in a live human being for the role.

While on the subject of spectacle, the production design is one of the nicest technical aspects of this film. Both Unnimaaya’s residence and the Mamangam festival are bathed in a warm glow, drawing on a rich palette dominated by a tasteful blend of gold, cream and reds. The costumes share this colour scheme. Whether they are authentic to the period is for historians to say, but they are certainly easy on the eye.

The camerawork in Mamangam though is surprisingly lacklustre, and unable to capture the famed natural beauty of Kerala. This is odd since cinematography is one of contemporary Malayalam cinema’s great strengths.

The stunts, which should have been Mamangam’s USP, are unevenly executed. While wide swathes of the  action choreography are certainly impressive and had me on edge, the gravity-defying leaps taken by Valiya Panicker and Chanthunni lack fluidity, a fluidity that has been summoned up often enough in earlier depictions of Kalari on the Indian screen. When they fly, they look like images being manipulated on a computer rather than actual people.

The only characters in Mamangam that have some flesh are all men. It is unforgivable that gifted women like Anu Sithara have been cast in this film and wasted.Not that the men do much with the space they gave been given. Mammootty is the only actor who draws something out ofhis role, but given that the writing does not at all look within Valiya Panicker, there is only so much he can do. Still, it is important to note that in an avatar of his character where he is required to alter his body language and posture in favour of what is popularly considered effeminacy, he is measured and avoids caricature. Moreover, in an industry notorious for male stars who have not bothered to stay fit and maintain their physiques, he is the only one of his contemporaries who could possibly have suited this role.

Mamangam’s release has been preceded by a series of controversies more dramatic than the film itself. Director M. Padmakumar’s last film Joseph is still memorable for its ruminative air and Joju George’s career-defining performance. In Mamangam he is unable to fully exploit either his leading man’s brillianceor the large budget for which this film has made news.

Still, Mamangam is hardly the worst end Mammootty could have asked for in a year that has been elevatedby his smashing performances in Peranbu (Tamil) and Unda (Malayalam). At least he does not romance a woman young enough to be his daughter in Mamangam as he does in too many of his films, and despite the pale writing hemanages to leave his mark on the role. Most important though, at a time when many Indian male superstars are playing along with a murderous public frenzy over community and country pervading contemporary India, it means a lot to watch Mammootty head in the opposite direction.
 
Rating (out of 5 stars): 2

CBFC Rating (India):
UA
Running time:
156 minutes

This review has also been published on Firstpost:




REVIEW 756: MARDAANI 2

$
0
0

Release date:
December 13, 2019
Director:
Gopi Puthran
Cast:
Rani Mukerji, Vishal Jethwa, Prasanna Ketkar, Rajesh Sharma
Language:
Hindi


“When a woman is talented and successful, then society expects that in exchange for being allowed to go so far, she must be willing to conduct herself with humility and an unassuming demeanour,” Shivani Shivaji Roy’s boss tells her one day.

Shivani fills in the spaces he leaves blank: “...and if she does not, then in big cities she is called a bitch and in small towns a nakchadi kutiya.”

Ms Roy’s boss is not being a jerk. He is, in fact, an ally putting into words what most smart, professionally successful women face every day. This harsh reality lies at the core of writer-director Gopi Puthran’s gritty, gripping thriller Mardaani 2, a sequel to the 2014 box-office hit Mardaani. As in the first film, here too Rani Mukerji plays Shivani, a brilliant, no-nonsense policewoman who ruffles feathers with her disinterest in social niceties and indifference to the male ego.

Shivani has been assigned to Kota in Rajasthan when a local criminal hires a very young hitman called Sunny to do some work for a politician in the city. Sunny sees red when women wound his pride, and nothing wounds him more than a public takedown – either of him or of another man in his presence – by a woman. When he witnesses a girl admonishing her boyfriend for a perceived wrong one day, he rapes, tortures and murders her as punishment. This sets Shivani off on his trail. When he sees her, a female member of the police force, mocking him at a press conference, he becomes obsessed with showing her her place. Thus begins a game of thrust and parry between this murderous maniac and a sharp, tough-as-nails policewoman.

It is rare for a Hindi film to create a portrait of no-holds-barred evil without caricaturing the villain in question, at the very least giving him a weird quirk, a catchphrase or even a disability. Case in point: Riteish Deshmukh’s character in last month’s Marjaavaan. Mardaani 2 has no time for such immaturity. Sunny is cruel, his ego is fragile around women and when we discover his background, we get a clearly well-researched insight into the deep-rootedness of patriarchy in our society and the anatomy of violence.

Sunny is a frightening and extreme manifestation of the resentment that confident women face at every turn, not just in public places but also in their offices, social circles and homes, sometimes behind a mask of sophistication.In fact, when he occasionally directly addresses the audience, the device – forgotten too soon in the film – serves as an unnerving reminder of our proximity to the brutes in our midst.

As uncommon as its depiction of villainy is Mardaani 2’s portrayal of an independent woman (barring the irritating, problematic title – for more on that please click here for my review of the first Mardaani). In the past decade, as it has moved away from the cliché of the heroine as a coy, ideally home-bound virgin, Bollywood has come up with another stereotype: Hindi film writers and directors have tended to reductively equate female independence with smoking, drinking, a vocabulary packed with abuse and even obnoxiousness towards those around them, often making these the woman’s defining characteristics. Look no further than Anurag Kashyap’s Manmarziyaanin 2018 starring Taapsee Pannu. Shivani in Mardaani may or may not have habits that her doctor would object to, Gopi Puthran simply does not feel the need to point to them, and her vocabulary, while certainly not antiseptic, is not her identifying feature. What defines her is her brilliance, bravery and dedication to the job.

Although we are not left in any doubt about who is the boss in Mardaani 2, DoP Jishnu Bhatacharya does not giganticise Mukerji’s Shivani as is the norm with male superstars in action dramas. This is obviously in keeping with the director’s vision for the film. So is the sensitivity with which Bhatacharya shoots Sunny’s victims. His camera is an observer and reporter, not a voyeur, and the women are treated with utmost dignity.

Puthran – who earlier wrote Mardaani, which was directed by Pradeep Sarkar – lets Shivani and Sunny completely dominate Mardaani 2, but their characters are so detailed, the tension between them so palpable and the action so unrelenting that the plot feels never less than packed. The background is also dotted with enough characters giving us a glimpse into their respective worlds, from the hardened criminal who draws the line at the sexual abuse of random women to a supportive husband happy to be his wife’s anchor, a subordinate driven by his social conditioning and others who rise above theirs.

The use of a solitary statistic on juvenile rapists at the start of Mardaani 2 is misleading and troubling though, and the text on screen in the end is shoddily written. Another of Mardaani 2’s few faltering moments comes in a TV interview Shivani gives. While the anchor’s conservatism mirrors many real-life journalists, his silence in response to her defiance is unconvincing. Bullies do tend to be cowards, but it is just as true that when they find themselves overshadowed in a debate, chauvinists tend to camouflage a lack of substance with decibels or personal remarks, not acquiescence. For the record, like the female producer listening to their conversation, I too teared up at Shivani’s answer about the stress and scrutiny, humiliation and hurt that every woman experiences.

Aided by Monisha Baldawa’s concise editing, the tension does not let up for even a second in Mardaani 2’s economical one hour 45 minutes running time. John Stewart Eduri’s background score is perfectly compatible with the storyline and Puthran puts it to excellent use, not once raising the volume or thrusting it into crucial silences, unlike the makers of most Hindi thrillers. Sound designers Ganesh Gangadharan and Nihar Ranjan Samal too seem intent on not sensationalising the unfolding crimes.

A heroine and a bad guy unusual for Hindi cinema, cracking suspense, understated messaging that is woven into the characterisation, top-notch performances by Mukerji and Vishal Jethwa who plays Sunny, and Puthran’s no-frills storytelling style all add up to making Mardaani 2 a hugely entertaining, highly intelligent, polished thriller. In terms of cinematic quality, 2019 has been one of the worst years for Bollywood in a very long time. Mardaani 2 is a timely reminder of how good this industry can be when it chooses not to be weighed down by prejudice, market-driven compulsions and lazy formulae.

Rating (out of 5 stars): 4

CBFC Rating (India):
UA
Running time:
105 minutes 

This review has also been published on Firstpost:


Poster courtesy:


REVIEW 757: DABANGG 3

$
0
0

Release date:
December 20, 2019
Director:
Prabhudeva
Cast:
Salman Khan, Saiee Manjrekar, Sudeep, Sonakshi Sinha, Arbaaz Khan, Dimple Kapadia, Pramod Khanna, Mahesh Manjrekar, Rajesh Sharma, Sharat Saxena 
Language:
Hindi


Early in Dabangg 3, Salman Khan’s character is chatting with his subordinates when he makes what may seem like a throwaway remark, “...hum class aur mass, dono ke liye kaam karte hai” (I work for the classes and the masses). Since “class” and “mass” are words used by the Hindi film industry to informally categorise sections of the audience, this is obviously more than just a casual comment – it is an allusion to Khan’s success across social strata since he turned out the blockbuster Wanted in 2009. 

The effort to retain his cross-sectional appeal is evident throughout this dated, dull and clichéd film, which is what makes it such a mish-mash of conservatism and liberalism, almost amusing in its confusion

Dabangg 3 marks Khan’s third screen outing as Chulbul Pandey, the comic-serious policeman who has no qualms about circumventing the law to serve the common people. In keeping I suppose with Hollywood’s trend of serving us origin stories of superheroes, this Bollywood venture is about how a useless, purposeless fellow called Chulbul became the chap we now know him to be: a destroyer of evil who is ever ready with a self-deprecating joke or gesture. By Film 3, he is the ASP of Tundla, still married to Rajjo (Sonakshi Sinha), a father, and up against a human trafficking don called Bali Singh played by Kannada star Kichcha Sudeep (his name is spelt as Sudeepa here).

The writers’ please-all aim in Dabangg 3 leads to many scenes of unwitting irony. Such as when Chulbul speaks of respect for women and gets furious at men who refer to women as “maal” just moments after he is shown dancing to the song Jumme ki raat from the 2014 hit Kickin which Khan’s own character had picked up Jacqueline Fernandez’s skirt with his teeth without her knowledge and followed her while dancing. Then there is Chulbul taking a purportedly feminist stand on dowry and women’s education even as he describes himself as the “rakhwaala” (keeper) of a woman he intends to marry. The self-consciousness and duality of his liberalism become exhausting to watch after a while.

Equally exhausting are the rusty dialogues filled with rhymes, many failed shots at clever wordplay, some scenes of double entendre and others of downright crudeness. 

Sample: Chulbul saying, “Hum unhi ko tthokte hai jo zaroorat se zyaada bhokte hai” (I only bump off those who bark too much). 

Sample: Rajjo telling her husband, “hamare petticoat mein chhed mat karna” (please do not pierce a hole in my petticoat) when he snatches it away from someone who was fitting a drawstring in it, at which point hubby eyes her suggestively.

Sample: a random character who randomly enters a toilet where Chulbul’s brother is doing potty, at which point we are subjected to gurgling potty sounds.   

Sample: Chulbul impaling his butt on a nail.

Sample: a bad guy’s crotch falling on a dagger.

Sample: Chulbul dropping his pants by mistake when he takes off his belt to whip someone. 

Sample: Chulbul shooting a junior who asks how he can get a promotion. I am not kidding – Chulbul actually fires a gun at his colleague in this scene. 

All these scenes are designed to elicit laughs. 

And then there are lines like this that are no doubt meant to sound smart but do not: Chulbul saying, “Ek hota hai policewala aur ek hota hai goonda, hum kehlate hai policewala goonda” (there are policemen and there are hooligans, and then there are those like me who are police and hooligan combined).  

The story is not even worth recounting. It feels like a bunch of disparate ingredients hurriedly thrown together in a cooking pot. So does the music by Sajid-Wajid who have in the past created so many memorable tunes for Salman Khan starrers. Here they first recycle the Dabangg title track, then deliver two numbers that sound like first cousins of Tere mast mast do nain from Dabangg, one terribly boring song in which Chulbul romances Rajjo and – c’mooon, they’re not even trying – Munna badnaam hua.  

The SFX are bad. Even the choreography has nothing new to offer, which is odd since the ace choreographer-cum-dancer Prabhudeva has directed this film.  

As far as acting goes, Khan’s charm wears thin as he tries hard to resurrect that unusual blend of gravitas and humour that worked so well in Dabanggin 2010. Here he comes across as almost embarrassingly juvenile.  

Sinha has little to do but pout and look pretty. Her Rajjo is even thrown up in the air by a massive explosion that somehow leaves her makeup completely unscathed. Why is this talented women wasting herself so?  

An unimpressive newcomer called Saiee Manjrekar gets a large supporting role to which she lends nothing but her smooth complexion and lovely figure. The rest of the cast hams shamelessly. 

Anyone who has seen Sudeep in his Kannada films knows that he has the charisma to match Salman, but he does not stand a chance here in Dabangg 3 in the face of a sketchily written character which does little but showcase his towering physique. 

There is so much tomfoolery and immaturity in this film  that the climactic fight sequence comes as a shock. It is so grossly violent and in-your-face that I could barely bring myself to look at the screen. (And of course because it is a masala film by a commercially focused director with a major male star as the lead, it has been given a UA rating instead of the strict A it deserves.) 

And no guys, it is no longer entertaining when two male actors with fabulous bodies take off their shirts for no reason to engage in fisticuffs. This was a fun device when it was first introduced, especially because for decades before that, male stars had been completely careless about their bodies and it was assumed by both the industry and audiences that only women can and should be objectified. Now though, it is a boring formula. Gentlemen, we love the fact that you work out, so get your scriptwriters to find a more imaginative way now to let you display your sexy torsos, please?  

Somewhere in the middle of Dabangg 3, Rajjo tells Chulbul that she will never again force him to take a ’70s-’80s style kasam (oath). Never mind the context. I do wish Bollywood would take a kasam here and now to lay Chulbul Pandey a.k.a. Robinhood Pandey to rest.  

Rating (out of 5 stars): 1.5

CBFC Rating (India):
UA
Running time:
163 minutes

This review has also been published on Firstpost:


Posters courtesy:



REVIEW 758: DRIVING LICENCE

$
0
0
Release date:
December 20, 2019
Director:
Lal Jr
Cast:




Language:
Prithviraj Sukumaran, Suraj Venjaramoodu, Mia George, Deepti Sati, Adhish Praveen, Saiju Kurup, Suresh Krishna, Nandu, Shivaji Guruvayoor, Lalu Alex, Vijayaraghavan
Malayalam


A major star needs a driving licence. The motor vehicle inspector in charge of his application is his fan. A misunderstanding caused by a third party’s actions leads to a blazing showdown between them. Could this be the starting point of great cinema? Yes, if writer Sachy and director Lal Jr are involved. In their hands, what follows is a captivating, unexpectedly insightful examination of human nature, as a game of pride and pettiness, fandom and fury leads to a high-profile war over a tiny issue.

Prithviraj Sukumaran plays the actor Hareendran, and Suraj Venjaramoodu is the MVI, Kuruvilla J. Both are in top form in Driving Licence, a suspense-filled, fast-paced ride that belies and surpasses all expectations raised by the trailer and the film’s opening minutes. At first it appears that this will be just a David-vs-Goliath battle. Then it seems that it will be a story of how even the smallest cog in a wheel can cause massive disruptions. Then it looks like it will be about media sensationalism or Mollywood politics. Then it heads in the direction of how the bureaucracy misuses its powers. Each time you think you have cracked Driving Licence,  it takes a surprising turn. This screenplay is one of the cleverest pieces of writing to emerge from Malayalam cinema in what is already a great year for Mollywood.

Lal Jr, whose calling cards as a director so far have been Honey Bee and Honey Bee 2: Celebrations, whips up the excitement levels in his latest venture with the aid of editor Ratheesh Raj’s smooth transitions and swift cuts. What elevates Driving Licence above the average thriller and makes it almost unslottable genre-wise though is its thoughtfulness. Intelligent writing, deft editing and nuanced acting join forces to ensure that neither Hareendran nor Kuruvilla is villainised or heroised at any point. What we get instead is a plausible series of circumstances aptly illustrating how momentary bursts of temper (from both gentlemen), arrogance (Hareendran’s) and small-mindedness (Kuruvilla’s) could cause otherwise manageable incidents to spiral out of control. The film is not perfect – we are never quite given to understand why Hareendran trusts his childhood friend, the politician Johnny Peringodan played by Saiju Kurup, when it is so clear that the man is untrustworthy, and Kuruvilla’s wife (Mia George) comes across as a caricature – but it is gripping all the same. 


Though Driving Licence– perhaps intentionally – gives off a vibe of being casual fun, it is quite the opposite. Don’t get me wrong. It is lots of fun. However, it is anything but casual. In fact, it is brave in the way it highlights the control big stars in Kerala have over their fans associations (this is true of fans groups across southern India’s film industries) at a time when the aggression, criminality and toxic masculinity of such associations has come under scrutiny after the actor assault case of 2017, the formation of the Women In Cinema Collective and the attack on Parvathy for her outspokenness. 

That said, the handling of Mollywood politics is less layered than the rest of the film. The misogynistic AMMA (the Association of Malayalam Movie Artistes) which has behaved shamefully in the aftermath of the 2017 attack, has been given kid-glove treatment here, and painted simply as a bunch of supportive men who back a fellow artiste when he is treated unfairly. This, and the speech given by Hareendran in the end when he holds back from lambasting his fans shortly after they displayed horrifying mob behaviour, are the places where Driving Licence chooses to play it safe. Hareendran the superstar is very likely to be cautious in comments about his fans, but this is Team Driving Licence itself avoiding antagonising the public. 

These, no doubt, are conscious decisions. What appears unconscious and is therefore far more disturbing is the way Kuruvilla’s physical roughness towards his wife and the manner in which he trivialises her are portrayed with a such-is-life tone rather than a critical eye. 

Hopefully, Lal Jr and Sachy will rise above their social conditioning next time and will also show even more courage than they have shown here. 

The two leading men in Driving Licence are surrounded by a well-chosen supporting cast, including Deepti Sati who lends quiet dignity to the role of Hareendran’s wife despite her limited presence in the proceedings, Suresh Krishna who is hilarious as a mediocre actor and Hareendran’s jealous rival, and Adhish Praveen as Kuruvilla’s son. There is a scene in which the boy realises that his Dad is lying to avoid telling his wife about a humiliating experience – the camera rests very briefly on him, but those moments are enough for this remarkable youngster to convey a child’s internal conflict.

Venjaramoodu has already rocked the big screen with his performance as a lonely, ill-tempered old man in Android Kunjappan Version 5.25 earlier this year. In some ways Kuruvilla is a more challenging role because it gives him no crutches to lean on, like the heavy makeup of Androidor the massive age difference between him and his character. In this film as in that one, he has to earn sympathy for his character despite his misbehaviour with another character who is hard to dislike. Venjaramoodu of course pulls it off.

2019 has been a mixed bag for Prithviraj. While Brothers Daywas disgraceful and his directorial debut Luciferwas disappointing, both Nineand Driving Licence are reminders of what a fine actor he is. That he is also heartachingly handsome does not hurt, of course. In his turn as the brusque superstar who adores his wife, Prithviraj owns every frame in which he appears. He is one among the multiple reasons why Driving Licence, despite its share of potholes, remains a thoroughly entertaining experience.

Rating (out of 5 stars): 3.5

CBFC Rating (India):
U 
Running time:
135 minutes 

This review has also been published on Firstpost:




THE ANNAVETTICADGOES2THEMOVIES AWARDS: BEST BOLLYWOOD FILMS 2019

$
0
0
ARTICLE 15, GULLY BOY AND A HANDFUL THAT SHONE IN AN OTHERWISE ANNUS HORRIBILIS

2019 has been the worst year of an already problematic decade for Bollywood, the Mumbai-based (primarily) Hindi film industry that gets a disproportionate amount of attention from the so-called ‘national’ media in comparison with India’s other film industries. Islamophobia and pro-establishment messaging were the dominant trends in Bollywood this year, while quality and depth took long vacations from theatres. So few films left a lasting impact, that instead of compiling my usual annual list of best 10, this time I have stopped at nine. 


(Note: This year I have kept this list to theatrical releases, although next year I will in all likelihood expand it to cover direct-to-online releases too.) 

Here is my pick of the saving graces in this annus horribilis.

BEST BOLLYWOOD FILMS:

1: Article 15

Unlike India’s other film industries, Bollywood in recent decades has largely ignored the very existence of the caste system. The most powerful Hindi film of 2019 though put caste at the front and centre of its storyline. In Anubhav Sinha’s Article 15, Ayushmann Khurrana plays a Brahmin policeman who is schooled in this oppressive social practice when two Dalit girls are raped and murdered in a UP village where he is posted. Among a bouquet of beautifully written, beautifully acted characters, the ones whose journey ought to spawn a sequel, prequel or both are the Dalit activists Gaura and Nishad, played by Sayani Gupta and Mohammed Zeeshan Ayyub. 

Article 15 combines great courage with great storytelling. I choke up even now at the thought of Vande Mataramwoven into the narrative in a soul-stirring scene that vehemently reclaims it from today’s aggressive nationalists who have weaponised patriotism and patriotic songs. 

(For the full review of Article 15, click here)


2: Gully Boy 

A marginalised genre of the arts meets a poor man from a marginalised community in Zoya Akhtar’s stunning Gully Boyinspired by the lives of Mumbai rappers Naezy and Divine. In spite of rap’s massive popularity, many traditionalists still do not acknowledge it as literature or music. Akhtar snubs them through the medium of a Muslim driver from a Mumbai slum who dreams of being a rapper. Ranveer Singh is flawless as the shy youngster whose seething resentment towards those who seek to invisibilise him erupts in his rebellious writing. Alia Bhatt is superb as his  girlfriend who is fighting massive battles with patriarchy. The top-notch cast also includes one of the big discoveries of this year: young Siddhanth Chaturvedi. 

Gully Boy is technically slick, unapologetic about its politics and brimful of brilliant poetry. One of the joys to be derived from it comes from watching the hero’s creative process, from actually watching his songs take birth on screen. In its own unique way then, it is a procedural. At a time when most of Bollywood is bowing and scraping before the present government, it takes a special person to feature Jingostan beatbox in a mainstream commercial film. And Apna time aayega (Our time will come) is an anthem for every human being who has known what it is to be discriminated against, sidelined or ignored by a dominant social group. Gully Boy is gut-wrenching cinema from a gutsy filmmaker.  

(For the full review of Gully Boy, click here)


3: Mardaani 2

Rani Mukerji returned this year as the genius cop Shivani Shivaji Roy from 2014’s Mardaani who wastes no time on hollow politeness and bruised egos. The off-putting title notwithstanding, writer-director Gopi Puthran’s Mardaani 2 is a sharp, incisive critique of how patriarchy reacts when it encounters a questioning woman. Mukerji’s immersive performance in this suspenseful thriller makes for a potent combination with the antagonist played by TV’s Vishal Jethwa who gives us one of the eeriest, creepiest, most convincing villains seen on the Hindi screen in a long while. For a change, a genuinely feminist film from Bollywood, not a film pretending to be feminist while camouflaging a conservative core.  

(For the full review of Mardaani 2, click here)

4: Sonchiriya 

Banditry in the Hindi heartland is resurrected on the big screen in one of the most underrated, under-marketed and therefore, sadly, under-seen films of the year. Abhishek Chaubey’s Sonchiriya stars a spectacular cast – Sushant Singh Rajput, Bhumi Pednekar, Manoj Bajpayee and Ashutosh Rana among them – inhabiting a story of outlaws traversing a dusty north Indian hinterland. These are not the conventional daakus(dacoits) commonly seen in an earlier Bollywood. They are not fearsome and lionised, but instead tired of this off-the-grid existence. And baaghi (rebel) is the label they prefer for themselves.

Sonchiriya’s stark messaging is enhanced by Anuj Rakesh Dhawan’s austere cinematography. The film has the courage to speak truths that even most liberals avoid: such as the fact that women are subordinated across all castes including by the most exploited. It also reminds us of a reality that too many men fail to see while they enjoy the powers most societies bestow on them: the reality that while patriarchy marginalises all women, it also extracts a heavy price from men. 

(For the full review of Sonchiriya, click here)

5: The Sky Is Pink 

Priyanka Chopra Jonas and Farhan Akhtar show remarkable restraint playing parents of a child born with a potentially fatal disorder in Shonali Bose’s The Sky Is Pink. Despite being a saga of death foretold, the film is about hope as much as it is about despair, the value of every second we have on earth as much as it is about our inevitable ends. Grief and positivity are life-long partners in this poignant account of a couple whose relationship survives every loving parent’s worst nightmare.

(For the full review of The Sky Is Pink, click here)


6: Saand Ki Aankh 

Two women in rural north India happen to pick up guns for the first time in their 60s and end up becoming successful competitive sharpshooters. It is surprising that Bollywood took so long to chronicle the real-life story of UP’s now-octogenarian Shooter Daadis, Chandro and Prakashi Tomar, but when it finally did, the result was Tushar Hiranandani’s entertaining, uplifting, socially insightful film.

Bhumi Pednekar and Taapsee Pannu are in top form as Saand Ki Aankh’sleading ladies, and Viineet Kumar is sensational as their supportive coach. The film has drawn considerable flak for casting young female stars as the elderly leads, but even this starting-point flaw does not mar its heartening celebration of feminine fortitude. 

(For the full review of Saand Ki Aankh, click here)

7: Nakkash 

A Muslim artisan practising his craft in a temple in one of Hinduism’s holiest cities is the fulcrum of Zaigham Imam’s Nakkash. Inaamulhaq plays Allah Miyan who becomes an object of conservative Hindu wrath in Varanasi when his steadfast patron, the temple chief priest (Kumud Kumar Mishra), refuses to be influenced by bigots. Islamophobia is so rampant in today’s world that many well-meaning liberals now steer clear of addressing Muslim fundamentalism in their works. Imam, thankfully, has no such qualms. The director is as unsparing in his take on how Allah Miyan is ostracised by his fellow Muslims as he is in his indictment of fundamentalists from the majority community. Nakkash is a moving saga of love and hate, innocence and venom residing side by side in a communally charged universe. 

(For the full review of Nakkash, click here)

8: No Fathers In Kashmir 

The spotlight falls on half widows, missing men, sexually exploited women and conservatives with double standards in Ashvin Kumar’s No Fathers In Kashmir. It should surprise no one that this film came to theatres after a long battle with the Central Board of Film Certification which initially – unfairly – awarded it an A (Adults only) rating. Contrary to the current populardiscourse that demonises Muslims, or for that matter an earlier Bollywood era that tended to paint the entire community with a positive brush, this film sees Kashmiri Muslims as regular people – good and bad, evil and virtuous, and all uniformly troubled.

Despite the harshness of the reality it examines, a tenderness pervades No Fathers In Kashmir because of its decision to explore the state through the wanderings of two artless children. Their charming sweetness ends up further underlining the bitterness and hopelessness that have beset care-worn Kashmir. 

(For the full review of No Fathers In Kashmir, click here)

9: Ek Ladki Ko Dekha Toh Aisa Laga

Of the very few Hindi films made on LGBT+ persons, most have chosen to focus on men. In that sense, Shelly Chopra Dhar’s Ek Ladki Ko Dekha Toh Aisa Laga this year breaks new ground by relating the story of two women in love. It goes many steps further by staying doggedly mainstream in its format and upbeat in its tone, busting prevailing stereotypes by casting a glamorous mainstream star as the lesbian heroine, and treating her neither as a source of comedy nor tragedy. Sonam Kapoor Ahuja plays Ek Ladki’s Sweety Chaudhary, while Anil Kapoor plays her father, a man whose heart lies in a profession considered unsuitable for men. Through his presence in the plot along with characters played by Juhi Chawla and Rajkummar Rao, the film stretches its discussion beyond gender in romantic relationships and extends it to the suffocating nature of all forms of gender stereotyping, prejudice and straitjacketing.  

The title harking back to the most iconic song of Kapoor Senior’s career, is among the many factors that makes Ek Ladki Ko Dekha Toh Aisa Laga one of 2019’s most heartwarming films. 

(For the full review of Ek Ladki Ko Dekha Toh Aisa Laga, click here)

Related links:


A VERSION OF THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN PUBLISHED ON FIRSTPOST:


Photographs courtesy:






The Sky Is Pink poster: Creeshul Media



Ek Ladki Ko Dekha Toh Aisa Laga poster: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ek_Ladki_Ko_Dekha_Toh_Aisa_Laga

REVIEW 759: THRISSUR POORAM

$
0
0

Release date:
Kerala: December 20, 2019
Delhi: December 27, 2019
Director:
Rajesh Mohanan
Cast:


Language:
Jayasurya, Swathi Reddy, Mallika Sukumaran, Vijay Babu, Sudev Nair, Manikuttan, Sreejith Ravi, T.G. Ravi
Malayalam


A discussion on Thrissur Pooram is not possible without referring to other Malayalam films of this genre that were released in 2019: the Tovino Thomas starrer Kalki, Mikhael with Nivin Pauly and Under World starring Asif Ali. Thrissur Pooram is more Under World than the other two in the sense of how generic and boring it is. In terms of violence, its brutality is closer to Kalki than the rest although the bloodletting in this new film is not as unrelenting as it was in that one. And unlike Kalki, Thrissur Pooram is not viscerally misogynistic – it simply relegates women to the sidelines.

Director Rajesh Mohanan’s film places the spotlight on an aspect of Thrissur far removed from the temple festival the city is known for. In fact, at its core, sadly enough, lies a rather nice message that is completely lost: that once you enter the world of crime, you may choose to leave that life but that life is unlikely to leave you. Equally sadly, one of contemporary Malayalam cinema’s finest, most versatile actors has lent his name to Thrissur Pooram. Is it a measure of the limited choices available to him that just a year after his soul-searching performances in Njan Marykutty and Captain, Jayasurya has opted to under-act in this tedious, sometimes nauseatingly bloody enterprise?

The story of Thrissur Pooram is hard to recall because there is so little of it. Once you wade past the deafening background score, the posing around, the slow motion shots and the overall over-indulgence, what you get is a cycle of violence unleashed by a single incident at a coffee shop.

Gangster Pullu Giri (Jayasurya) has given up crime and has confined himself to mundane domesticity with his wife (Swathi Reddy) and daughter when circumstances not of his making destroy his peace. One spark sets off a full-blown inferno, and the result is an all-out war between his until-now-virtually-defunct gang and another. Giri has always had the unflinching support of a respected senior lawyer played by Mallika Sukumaran. Hovering in the background is an old roadside tea stall owner (Indrans) whose son was once mowed down by an unidentified luxury car.

Not one of these men and women is built up as a flesh and blood creature with thoughts and feelings. Ratheesh Vega’s screenplay feels like a patchwork quilt of post-it notes bearing basic descriptors such as “Jayasuryachettan’s character, known as Giriyettan to everyone”, “Giriyettan’s lawyer played by Mallika Ma’am”, “Giriyettan’s wife played by whoever we can get” and so on. Giri’s entire relationship with the latter is recounted through one song featuring the two of them with a couple of lines of conversation thrown in – that most clichéd of devices used by commercial Indian filmmakers who want to give their action heroes a woman to fall in love with and possibly protect, but don’t want to waste time on her characterisation.

The writing of the rival gang is even more skeletal. Of Giri’s enemies, only one is identifiable and distinguishable from the rest: a young criminal played by Sudev Nair whose greatest fear is not being killed but being deemed incompetent by his elder brother, the gang’s kingpin. Now there is an interesting chap, thereis someone with whom the storyline could have gone somewhere, but nothing happens. Him apart, the rest are just blurry blobs who I am already struggling to recall.

The camerawork in Thrissur Pooram is pathetic. Poorly constructed frames are set up to magnify personalities but fail miserably not just because heroes captured in repeated low-angle shots and groups of people turning corners in slow motion are done to death, but because DoP R.D. Rajasekar cannot even get his angles right. In one scene, as a man gazes down from an under-construction high-rise building at a body on the ground way below, far from seeming gigantic or intimidating, he looks comical and oddly stunted.

Just as I was consoling myself with the thought that at least the depiction of violence here is not as voyeuristic and horrifying as in Kalki, there comes a murder in Thrissur Pooram that will remain forever embedded in my mind. In a scene towards the end, a man drives a knife into another’s abdomen and the camera actually zooms in on the wound as blood gradually spreads across the victim’s shirt and the killer keeps rotating the weapon to destroy the dying man’s insides.

The cast does full justice to this vacuous script by delivering vacuous performances. Jayasurya gives himself a choice between precisely two expressions throughout: deadpan or mild grimace. Ms Sukumaran looks suitably grim. Ms Reddy looks nothing. Even Indrans, who has in the past extracted a moment or two of quality from the worst of scripts, over-acts in a couple of scenes.

2019 has largely been a great year for the Malayalam film industry a.k.a. Mollywood. Every few months though, just as we are celebrating the lyricism of a Kumbalangi Nights, the poignance of an Uyare or the audaciousness of a Jallikattu, along comes a Thrissur Pooram to remind us of how bad bad can be. The tragedy is that the year has seen even worse.

Rating (out of 5 stars): 0.75

CBFC Rating (India):
UA 
Running time:
156 minutes 

This review has also been published on Firstpost:




THE annavetticadgoes2themovies BOLLYWOOD AWARDS 2019

$
0
0
RANI OR KANGANA? RAP OR NIYAM HO? AYUSHMANN OR RANVEER? A PICK OF THE YEAR’S BEST WORK

As a sequel to my list of Best Bollywood Films 2019, here is what I like to call my Bollywood Awards 2019 (insert smiling emoji here). Meaning: this is my personal pick of the best actors, directors, songs and technicians – nominees and winners – in categories generally recognised at most film awards worldwide. 
 
Every list has parameters, here are mine. India as a whole is the largest producer of films worldwide, and Bollywood is a popular nickname for one of the country’s largest film industries, that is, the Mumbai-based industry that makes films almost entirely in the Hindi language. This article features selections from Bollywood, which means they have all been backed by a Bollywood  producer. I will shortly be publishing a selection from the Kerala-based industry a.k.a. Mollywood that makes films primarily in the Malayalam language. For practical reasons, I have made my choices from among films released in mainstream theatres, not festivals alone, and for the moment not direct-to-online releases either although next year I will probably include the latter too. 
 
There are anywhere from four to seven nominees in each category, all arranged in alphabetical order.

In terms of quality of films released, Bollywood has performed terribly in 2019. Where I could not find even four films to nominate in any particular category, I have dropped that category entirely. This is why you will not find a Best Music section here. 
 
Lists such as this onetend to be contentious. I hope mine will spawn debates, but not acrimony. More important, I hope it introduces readers to some lesser-known gems you missed during the year and prompts you to seek them out. 

BEST FILM

Nominees (all nominee lists are in alphabetical order):
 





And the award goes to…
 
Article 15
 
BEST DIRECTOR

Nominees:
 
Abhishek Chaubey (Sonchiriya)

Anubhav Sinha (Article 15)

Gopi Puthran (Mardaani 2)

Shonali Bose (The Sky Is Pink)

Zoya Akhtar (Gully Boy)

And the award goes to…

Anubhav Sinha (Article 15)
 
BEST WRITING

Nominees:

Article 15: Anubhav Sinha, Gaurav Solanki

Gully Boy: Reema Kagti, Zoya Akhtar

Mardaani 2: Gopi Puthran

Sonchiriya: Abhishek Chaubey, Sudip Sharma

The Sky Is Pink: Shonali Bose, Nilesh Maniyar

And the award goes to…
 
Article 15: Anubhav Sinha, Gaurav Solanki
 

BEST ACTOR (FEMALE)

Nominees:

Alia Bhatt(Kalank)

Kangana Ranaut (Judgementall Hai Kya)

Priyanka Chopra Jonas (The Sky Is Pink)

Rani Mukerji (Mardaani 2)

Vidya Balan (Mission Mangal)

And the award goes to…

Rani Mukerji (Mardaani 2)

BEST ACTOR (MALE) 

Nominees:

Ayushmann Khurrana (Article 15)

Rajkummar Rao (Judgementall Hai Kya)

Rajkummar Rao (Made In China)

Ranveer Singh (Gully Boy)

Sushant Singh Rajput (Sonchiriya)

And the award goes to…
 
Ranveer Singh (Gully Boy)
 
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR (FEMALE)

Nominees:

Alia Bhatt (Gully Boy)

Amrita Singh (Badla)

Bhumi Pednekar (Sonchiriya)


Sayani Gupta (Article 15)

And the award goes to…

Alia Bhatt (Gully Boy)


BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR (MALE)

Nominees:

Aparshakti Khurana (Pati Patni Aur Woh)

Kumud Mishra (Nakkash)

Manoj Pahwa (Article 15)

Mohammed Zeeshan Ayyub(Article 15)

Siddhanth Chaturvedi (Gully Boy)

Tony Luke Kocherry (Badla)

Viineet Kumar (Saand Ki Aankh)

And the award goes to…
 
Mohammed Zeeshan Ayyub(Article 15)

BEST CAST

Nominees:

Article 15:
Ayushmann Khurrana, Mohammed Zeeshan Ayyub, Sayani Gupta, Kumud Mishra, Manoj Pahwa, Sushil Pandey, Ronjini Chakraborty, Isha Talwar, Sumbul Touqeer, Ashish Verma, Nasser

Gully Boy:
Ranveer Singh, Alia Bhatt, Siddhant Chaturvedi, Kalki Koechlin, Vijay Varma, Amruta Subhash, Vijay Raaz, Sheeba Chaddha, Nakul Roshan Sahdev

Pranutan Bahl, Zaheer Iqbal, Mir Mohammed Mehroos, Mir Sarwar, Mozim Bhat, Mir Mohammed Zayan, Soliha Maqbool, Baba Hatim, Adiba Bhat, Hafsa Ashraf Katoo, Madikha Parvez Ratta, Bareen Faheem, Ahmed Rigoo, Neelofer, Hemant Kher

Sonchiriya:
Sushant Singh Rajput, Bhumi Pednekar, Manoj Bajpayee, Ashutosh Rana, Ranvir Shorey, Sampa Mandal, V.K. Sharma, Khushiya

And the award goes to…

Article 15
Ayushmann Khurrana, Mohammed Zeeshan Ayyub, Sayani Gupta, Kumud Mishra, Manoj Pahwa, Sushil Pandey, Ronjini Chakraborty, Isha Talwar, Sumbul Touqeer, Ashish Verma, Nasser

BEST SONG

Nominees:

Apna time aayega(from Gully Boy):
Composition: Dub Sharma, Divine
Lyrics: Divine, Ankur Tewari
Singing: Ranveer Singh

Bakaiti (fromMilan Talkies):
Composition: Rana Mazumder
Lyrics: Amitabh Bhattacharya
Singing: Sukhwinder Singh, Benny Dayal

Control (from Chhichhore):
Composition: Pritam
Lyrics: Amitabh Bhattacharya
Singing: Nakash Aziz, Manish J. Tipu, Geet Sagar, Sreerama Chandra, Amitabh Bhattacharya

Dil ka telephone (fromDream Girl):
Composition: Meet Bros
Lyrics: Kumaar
Singing: Meet Bros Featuring Jonita Gandhi and Nakash Aziz

Jingostan beatbox(from Gully Boy):
Composition: Dub Sharma
Lyrics: Dub Sharma
Singing: Dub Sharma

Niyam Ho (fromSuper 30):
Composition: Ajay Atul
Lyrics: Amitabh Bhattacharya
Singing: Arohi Mhatre, Aditi Prabhudesai, Pragati Joshi, Maithili Panse, Sonal Naik, Rucha Soman, Deepti Rege, Deepanshi Nagar, Ann Fernandes, Dr Pallavi Shyam Sundar, Shivika Rajesh, Riddhi Sampat, Kinjal Shah, Umesh Joshi, Vijay Dhuri, Mandar Pilvalkar, Vivek Naik, Rahul Chitnis, Saurabh Wakhare, Janardan Dhatrak, Gaurav Medatwal, Chaitanya Shinde, Abhishek Jhawar, Nimish Shah, Yash Kapoor, Mayukh Pareek

And the award goes to…

Apna time aayega(from Gully Boy)
Composition: Dub Sharma, Divine
Lyrics: Divine, Ankur Tewari
Singing: Ranveer Singh

BEST EDITING
 
Nominees:

Chandan Arora (Mission Mangal)

Devendra Murdeshwar (Saand Ki Aankh)

Monisha R. Baldawa (Badla) 
 
Nitin Baid (Gully Boy)

Shivkumar V. Panicker (Uri: The Surgical Strike)

And the award goes to…
 
Nitin Baid (Gully Boy)
 

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY

Nominees:

Anuj Rakesh Dhawan (Sonchiriya)

Hari Vedantam (Milan Talkies)

Jay Oza (Gully Boy)

Jishnu Bhatacharya (Mardaani 2)

Manoj Kumar Khatoi (Notebook)

Mitesh Mirchandani(Uri: The Surgical Strike)

Sudhakar Reddy Yakkanti (Saand Ki Aankh)

And the award goes to…
 
Jay Oza (Gully Boy)
 
BEST SOUND DESIGN

Nominees:

Ayush Ahuja (Gully Boy)

Bishwadeep Dipak Chatterjee (Uri: The Surgical Strike)

Ganesh Gangadharan, Nihar Ranjan Samal(Mardaani 2)

Kunal Sharma (Sonchiriya)

Subash Sahoo (Made In China)

And the award goes to…
 
Ganesh Gangadharan, Nihar Ranjan Samal(Mardaani 2)
 
BEST PRODUCTION DESIGN

Nominees:

Aditya Kanwar (Uri: The Surgical Strike) 

Dhananjay Mondal (Milan Talkies)

Mayur Sharma (Made In China)

Nikhil Kovale (Article 15)

Rita Ghosh (Sonchiriya)

Sukant Panigrahy (Mardaani 2)

Suzanne Caplan Merwanji(Gully Boy)

And the award goes to…

Suzanne Caplan Merwanji(Gully Boy)

MOST INTERESTING DEBUTANT IN A LEAD OR SUPPORTING ROLE
 
Nominees:
 
Mir Mohammed Mehroos (Notebook)

Pranutan Bahl (Notebook)

Shraddha Srinath (Milan Talkies)

Siddhant Chaturvedi (Gully Boy)

Vishal Jethwa (Mardaani 2)

Notes:
* Shraddha Srinath has acted in films outside Bollywood but I have included her here for two reasons: one, Milan Talkiesis her Bollywood debut, and two, she is comparatively new in the profession anyway. 
* Vishal Jethwa is a known TV actor, but he made his big screen debut with Mardaani 2.

And the award goes to…
 
Mir Mohammed Mehroos (Notebook)

ALSO READ:



Best Mollywood Films 2019: Kumbalangi Nights, Virus, Unda and more in perhaps the best year ever for God’s Own Cinema

Mollywood Awards 2019: Parvathy or Anna? Uyiril Thodum or Jaathikkathottam? A pick of the year’s best

Best Indian Films 2019: Poetry and courage across languages, from Assamese to Hindi, Khasi, Malayalam and more

Aadukalam, Andhadhun, Sairat, Kammatipaadam, Mahanati, Village Rockstars: 100 great Indian films of the 2010s


A VERSION OF THIS ARTICLE IS ALSO ON FIRSTPOST:

Photographs courtesy:





THE ANNAVETTICADGOES2THEMOVIES AWARDS: BEST MOLLYWOOD FILMS 2019

$
0
0
KUMBALANGI NIGHTS, VIRUS, UNDA AND MORE IN PERHAPS THE BEST YEAR EVER FOR GOD’S OWN CINEMA

Ever since I began compiling an annual list of Best Malayalam/Mollywood Films earlier this decade, I have received feedback from at least a couple of readers each year asking me to avoid the term “Mollywood”. I have addressed their recurring critique in a footnote to this list of best films in what has been a fabulous year for the film industry headquartered in Kerala.


BEST MOLLYWOOD FILMS:

1: Kumbalangi Nights 

Patriarchy is self-destructive insanity in director Madhu C. Narayanan’s magical Kumbalangi Nights written by Syam Pushkaran. The story of four brothers who make peace with each other despite long-standing differences is the most entertaining sociology lesson on Kerala that you could ask for.

If you put a gun to my head, I still could not tell you what I love most about this film: the incredible cast or its incredible humour, the romance of Bonny and Nylah playing in the kavaru (sea sparkle) one night, Fahadh Faasil yelling out the self-affirming line, “Shammy hero aada! Hero!” or sweet, curly-haired Anna Ben as Babymol fantasising about Bobby with this sentence spoken in her sing-song accent accompanied by a signature Malayali head tilt, “Bobby and Baby – those names would look so good on a wedding card, would they not?” But wait, there is also the sensitivity with which mental health and therapy are portrayed, Sushin Shyam’s music, Shyju Khalid’s cinematography and... And... And…

This genre-defying film rightfully earned a pan-India audience in theatres, surmounting all the hurdles placed in the path of non-Hindi cinema by the exhibition sector’s biases and inefficiencies. Kumbalangi Nights is not just the best Malayalam film of 2019, it ranks among the best Indian films ever made.

(For more on the significance of Kumbalangi Nights, click here)


2: Virus

Aashiq Abu’s Virus painstakingly chronicles Kerala’s encounter with the deadly Nipah last year. The successful containment of the outbreak had earned the state government accolades from global experts, but Abu does not confine his tribute to politicians and bureaucrats. Virus is a hosanna and a salaam to every seemingly minor cog in the wheel, every healthcare worker and ordinary citizen who stepped up in an emergency, every individual whose humanity helped curtail a tragedy. 

Abu redefined the adjective “star-studded" when he convinced Parvathy, Revathy, Tovino Thomas, Kunchacko Boban, Rima Kallingal, Asif Ali, Joju George, Indrajith Sukumaran, Soubin Shahir and Sreenath Bhasi among others to join his film without a care for the size of their respective roles. The constellation of famous faces in big, small and even tiny parts in Virus serves to underline the crucialness of the numerous known and unknown soldiers in this real-life battle against a killer disease. As much a thrilling procedural as a life-affirming socio-political commentary, the film even finds time to subtly skewer Islamophobia and a troublemaking Central government.

Virus is like nothing we have seen before in Malayalam cinema or for that matter Indian cinema at large. 

(For the full review of Virus, click here)

3: Jallikattu

If “unique” did not have synonyms, it would be repeated throughout this write-up, because uniqueness is what Mollywood turned out month after month in 2019. In Jallikattu, the beast within men surfaced as an entire village gave chase to a buffalo gone berserk. Director Lijo Jose Pellissery blended the pounding of the animal’s hooves with the bloodcurdling yells of its human predators and every breath taken by every individual in the film to create an unprecedented percussion ensemble in one of the most striking cinematic indictments of patriarchy you could possibly (not) imagine.

(For the full review of Jallikattu, click here)

4: Unda

If you grew up admiring Mammootty’s acting genius and then despaired as he began to favour a brand of loud, misogynistic, cliché-ridden Malayalam cinema, 2019 is a salve for your wounds. After a stunning performance in the heart-rending Tamil film Peranbu, acclaim for his work in Yatra (Telugu) and an endearing goofiness in the not-quite-as-bad-as-most-of-his-comedies-these-days Madhuraraja (Malayalam), Mammukka gave us Unda. In this Malayalam-Hindi film, he plays a senior policeman who is at sea when he is tasked with heading a Kerala Police squad on election duty in violence-torn regions of north India. 

There are few greater pleasures in life than watching a superstar cede his star persona to a role. Khalidh Rahman’s Unda returned our old Mammukka to us, an artiste willing to be vulnerable on screen, reminding us of the best that he has been and still can be. It is also a beautiful film.

(For the full review of Unda, click here)

5: Thanneermathan Dinangal

If Kumbalangi Nights had been the only positive thing that happened to him in 2019, this would still have been a wonderful year for debutant Mathew Thomas who played Kumbalangi’s little Franky. But young Mr Thomas learnt that when it rains great roles it often pours as he followed that up with Jaison from Thanneermathan Dinangal (Watermelon Days). Girish A.D.’s omana coming-of-age teen saga also featured Udaharanam Sujatha’s Anaswara Rajan as the friendly schoolmate Keerthy who Jaison falls for. 

Beyond its innocent charm, Thanneermathan Dinangal is a telling comment on how, despite extreme gender segregation, a decent boy might rise above his social conditioning and behave around a girl he likes. With the song Jaathikkathottam (Nutmeg Groves) picturised on the two leads, the film also gets the distinction of finally giving the world a worthy rival to the wooing skills of strawberries and roses.

(For the full review of Thanneermathan Dinangal, click here)

6: Uyare

Despite being a centre of great cinema, Mollywood continues to have very few leading roles for women. Manu Ashokan’s Uyaregave Parvathy an opportunity to seal her position as one of this industry’s finest while playing an acid-attack survivor who does not succumb to depression and despair. Tovino Thomas gets to be the heroine’s loveable ally in this film, while Asif Ali turns out a career-defining performance as a man venting his insecurities on his girlfriend. Together they weave a story of optimism snatched from the jaws of tragedy.

(For the full review of Uyare, click here)


7: Thamaasha

Vinay Forrt offers a masterclass in acting while playing a Malayalam professor with a complex about his premature baldness in Thamaasha. When Forrt’s Sreenivasan meets an overweight young woman called Chinnu (played by newcomer Chinnu Chandni) he discovers true friendship along with his own deep-seated prejudices. Director Ashraf Hamza makes no bones about the message he means to send out, but he does so through a film so pleasant and understated that you may not even notice. 

(For the full review of Thamaasha, click here)

8: Helen 

What Thanneermathan Dinangal is to Mathew Thomas, Helen is to Anna Ben: a fantastic second film for a youngster having an already fantastic year as a debutant from Kumbalangi Nights. Director Mathukutty Xavier’s Helenbelongs to the survival thriller genre, and uses the tension in its frames to highlight multiple social prejudices. When a woman goes missing, how should the police react? Now guess how they react when she happens to be our heroine, a Christian woman with a Muslim boyfriend, a working woman with an irregular schedule that keeps her out of the house at hours that are deemed unacceptable by conservatives. 

The big surprise of Helen is Aju Varghese playing a creepy policeman, a role and spot-on performance that are a sharp contrast to his track record as a comedian in both funny and crass films. Anna Ben, of course, is spotless as the titular heroine, and ends 2019 etched in the public consciousness as the admirable Helen we worry for as much as the equally admirable, fiery Babymol from Kumbalangi

(For the full review of Helen, click here)


9: Android Kunjappan Version 5.25

Kollywood, Tollywood and Bollywood operate with a fraction of the budgets available to Hollywood filmmakers. Mollywood has even less money than India’s Big Three, yet somehow this industry comes up with some of the best cinematography the country has to offer and in the case of Android Kunjappan Version 5.25, an impressive looking little robot. The machine is the Kunjappan of the title, a companion that a son builds for his father when circumstances force him to seek a job in another country leaving the old man behind in their home village. 

The robot maybe the USP of Ratheesh Balakrishnan Poduval’s film, but is never a distraction from its core concerns about children who are committed to their parents but want a life of their own too and the challenges involved in care-giving for the elderly in India. Android Kunjappan Version 5.25 does something unusual for Indian cinema and the popular public discourse: it does not romanticise the parent-child relationship, it portrays a selfish parent, and it does not demonise a child for resenting that selfishness. Yet it gets us to like both men. 

Topping the film’s many positives are solid performances by Suraj Venjaramoodu and Soubin Shahir as the Dad and son, along with the ever reliable Saiju Kurup and Arunachali newcomer Zirdo.

(For the full review of Android Kunjappan Version 5.25, click here)

10: Driving Licence

Hell hath no fury like a fan scorned, as Prithviraj Sukumaran’s Hareendran discovers when he antagonises his die-hard devotee Kuruvilla played by Suraj Venjaramoodu. Hareendran is a superstar who wants a new driver’s licence, Kuruvilla is a motor vehicle inspector, and from their clash follows a rollercoaster ride through fan and media frenzy, star arrogance and a common person’s bruised ego. Both leading men never set a foot wrong in Lal Jr’s unexpectedly rewarding film that is part thriller, part social saga and all parts lots of fun. 

(For the full review of Driving Licence, click here)


Because 10 is too small a limit in such a fabulous year:

11: Chola 



14: Luca


FOOTNOTE ABOUT THE TERM MOLLYWOOD: 

Over the years, some readers have urged me to not use the word Mollywood for the Kerala-based primarily Malayalam language industry. I would like to discuss why I persist with it. 

To those who say Mollywood is a derivative term subordinating the Malayalam film industry to Bollywood, I must point out that Mollywood is not derived from Bollywood. All the nicknames used by the press and public for India’s film industries – Mollywood, Bollywood, Kollywood, Tollywood, Sandalwood and so on – are drawn from Hollywood. A reader once told me she has no problem with “Bollywood” but objects to “Mollywood”. This I cannot understand. Either you object to all these derivative labels or none at all. If you object to all, I completely get where you are coming from, but do note my reasons for continuing to use them at least for now. 

First, “Bollywood” has served as great national and international  branding for the Indian film industry headquartered in Mumbai that makes films mostly in Hindi, with very very occasional forays into Haryanvi, English and other languages. Whenever I speak to my counterparts in the foreign press, I find a majority of them are not even aware that India makes films other than the ones coming from Shah Rukh Khan’s city. While this is primarily due to the extreme pro-Hindi, pro-Bollywood bias of India’s own supposedly ‘national’ newspapers and TV channels based in Delhi and Mumbai that amplify Bollywood’s works while largely ignoring India’s other film industries, another factor is branding. The term “Bollywood” is catchy. As long as the ‘national’ media’s bias remains, my personal choice is to do everything in my power as an individual to give high visibility to films from India’s other industries, because like most cinephiles, I am keen that the films I love get as wide a national and global audience as possible.

Second, as Indian cinema evolves, these terms have become useful in another way. Unlike Bollywood cinema whose characters almost invariably speak Hindi and at a stretch, English but no other Indian language irrespective of which part of India or the world they are situated in, Mollywood has been adventurous with language. Increasingly, I am afraid, a certain section of Mollywood has also been treating Hindi as a signifier of coolth and using it even where it is not necessary or relevant – in the way English was once viewed by Bollywood – but that is a separate discussion. Back to the subject at hand, the 2017 film Tiyaan, which revolved around a community of Malayalis living in Uttar Pradesh, was – as it would be in real life – equal parts Malayalam and Hindi with even some Sanskrit dialogues included in the mix. In this year’s lovely Mammootty-starrer Unda, when a posse from the Kerala Police travelled on election duty to Hindi belt states, what we were given was a natural mix of Malayalam, Hindi and a few other tongues. To describe either of these as “Malayalam films” would be inaccurate. Mollywood therefore is also an expedient term. (This applies to Bollywood too on the rare occasions when the quest for authenticity has spurred a director to favour a language other than Hindi.)

With no disrespect then to those who disagree, I intend to use “Mollywood” as long as there is a far bigger worry than a derivative term, that worry being the ‘national’ media barely acknowledging this industry. But the day Mohanlal and Manju Warrier, Parvathy and Fahadh Faasil become household names across India the way the Khans, Kapoors, Kaifs and Chopras of Bollywood are, I plan to invest time and energy in coining an alternative term. I promise.

A VERSION OF THIS ARTICLE IS ALSO ON FIRSTPOST:


ALSO READ: 


Mollywood Awards 2019: A selection of the year’s best in acting, music, cinematography, direction and more



Best Indian films 2019: Poetry and courage across languages, from Assamese to Hindi, Khasi, Malayalam and more

Aadukalam, Andhadhun, Sairat, Kammatipaadam, Mahanati, Village Rockstars: 100 great Indian films of the 2010s

Photographs courtesy:










Viewing all 572 articles
Browse latest View live


<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>