Tag: Film

  • Shahrukh Khan: End of the Road?

    Shahrukh Khan: End of the Road?

    Aakshi Magazine

    ‘Shahrukh has always told me that physical abuse is the worst way to sort out a problem, and that it means the person who’s hitting has either a personal or professional crisis going on. So it saddens me to see him doing the same.’ -Farah Khan, Mumbai Jan 30, 2012.

    The lover boy of mushy Karan Johar movies seems to be becoming desperate. He resurrected himself as a larger-than-life action hero in Ra.One.

    The Rs 150 crore film was a super duper disaster, despite the last minute Rs 50 crore marketing promo blitzkrieg. Clearly, ageing superstar Shahrukh Khan, on whom billions ride in Bollywood, is beginning to get stuck in his own repetitive mediocrity.

    Towards the end of Ra.One, there is a scene in which Shahrukh is dying: he resorts to a gesture fans recognise too well from his romantic films – arms stretched, eyes crinkled, head raised. At a screening, some people started laughing” “Can a Shahrukh movie be complete without this,” they said. This moment must come in every star’s life when they start appearing as caricatures of their own manufactured self-image. What was liked once, now begins to be made fun of. Recently, Naseeruddin Shah, great actor but not a star in Bollywood language, remarked that “big stars have to be predictable”.  That seems to be both their doing as well as undoing.

    All his life, Shahrukh has played different versions of only two roles – the too-much-in-love lover, and the ordinary simpleton bordering on being a buffoon. With changing times, these characters too changed – getting tamed, altered, commercialised.

    For those of us who grew up on mid-1990s Bombay movies, Shahrukh was fundamentally Dilwale Dulhania Le Jaayenge’s (DDLJ) Raj, or Kuch Kuch Hota Hai’s (KKHH) Rahul. He seemed attractive, almost charming; there was something about him, what, exactly, we could never say.

    Prosperous Raj and Rahul were eternally well-settled with not the slightest worry about how to make a living. Their world and worries merely revolved around finding ‘love’. They were irreverent, but not far-sighted or courageous enough to question basic conventions and traditions. They were mostly happy till love made them sad, though never angry; even that sadness never lasted.

    However, the Shahrukh we did not know, occasional glimpses of whom we saw in older movies on TV, had also been other people. Look at the first two films of his career, in theearly 1990s. He was the crazed lover Raja in Deewana, ready to defy social convention for love; also, Raju in Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman, wanting to become a gentleman in the big, bad city.

    Raja and Raju were interesting. In many ways, Raja is an early version of Raj and Rahul.  Like them, he is rich and happy. But these are slightly different times and so, unlike them, he is angry at his wealth, at his father, who, for him, is the symbol of this inherited wealth: “Maine toh yeh nahi maanga tha,” he tells him.

    Raja was a heavily ‘overacted’ but interesting character who falls in love with a widow. Not caring for a thing in the world (not even for what the woman feels!), he decides to give up family wealth and works in a garage. There was a mad energy about him, as if he did not know what to do with the emotions evoked inside him. In a melodramatic scene, he carves out the initials of the woman on his wrist. Shahrukh built this obsessive behaviour as a repetitive pattern in the films that followed – Darr and Anjam. He used the same anti-hero streak for a revenge drama in Baazigar.

    Raju in Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman, however, was a different person. A remake of Raj Kapoor’s Shree 420, he was a leftover from the ‘socialist 1950s’, getting a new life in the inherited progressive legacy of Aziz Mirza’s film. Here, too, the antagonism towards wealth and big business was apparent, though there was also the desire to make it big. The city corrupts the small town simpleton, but he is redeemed by the friendships and love that the same city gives. Over the years, Mirza was to revive this character again with Shahrukh, first, in Yes Boss, and then, in Phir Bhi Dil Hai Hindustani.

    And what if Raju had not left the small town for the city? This question was imagined by Shahrukh’s third film: Kundan Shah’s Kabhi Haan Kabhi Na,which, curiously, the actor calls his “most memorable role”.

    Shahrukh won his first Filmfare award for Deewana in 1992. Brought up in Delhi, with no connection to Bollywood, this was no small feat. In the next few years, he won four diverse categories of Filmfare awards – Critics’ Best Actor, Best Villain and Best Actor, with a nomination for Best Actor in a comic role. “The only thing left now is to be nominated for Best Actress,” he remarked at an award function.

    Filmfare awards have a culture-specific place in box office Bollywood – something only an insider can understand. It is no secret that the awards have nothing to do with talent, or authentic competition. Once upon a time, they must have been about acknowledging the most popular, which is bad enough, but today they are even worse – keeping everyone happy, ensuring that they turn up for the awards night show. And yet, most aspiring actors desperately want to be a part of this world, despite the predictable dance numbers, and brazenly unfair nominations and winners.

    In the years to come, Shahrukh was to become a habitual winner of theFilmfare award, and a favourite at most award functions that propped up. Predictably, this secure position came with a tameness in the characters he played. The mad lover streak had been reigned in, the unconventionalness made conventional and ‘cool’. This was most visible in two big banner films – Aditya Chopra’s DDLJ and Karan Johar’s KKHH.

    These films made Shahrukh ‘attractive and lovable’. Playing rich again, the focus now was on playing by the rules. In DDLJ, the conservative parents of the woman he loved had to be convinced that they should accept him, their conservative values intact. Conversely, conservativeness could not be so rigid, could it? In KKHH, the conflict was the confusion between love and friendship. Its great dilemma was whether one falls in love once or twice! Everyone ultimately was won over; the world was a nice place after all.

    There was something inherently exhausting about these stories and characters. How long could he go on playing the same person? Perhaps burdened by the expectations generated by their first films, Chopra and Johar took to making too much of everything in their next films, Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Gham (KKKG) and Mohabbatain – too many people in love, too many stars and stories. Clearly, the formula had a shelf life.

    In the mythology of Shahrukh Khan built on his big banner lover roles, it is easy to overlook how the Raju persona also grew and changed. This was evident in films like Badshah, Yes Boss, Duplicate and One Two Ka Four, to name a few. Except in a film like Yes Boss, he played these ‘ordinary man’ roles by reducing himself to a comic hero, devoid of context or commentary. 

    It is interesting, then, that he attempted a return to that context when he turned producer, choosing to set up his Dreamz Unlimited Production company with Aziz Mirza and Juhi Chawla. Together they decided to make not a Chopra-Johar style movie, but a return to the themes explored in theRaju Ban Gaya Gentleman days. Directed by Mirza, this was Phir Bhi Dil Hai Hindustani where Shahrukh is a ‘sold out’ TV journalist, constantly reminded of earlier days of idealism by his father. Eventually, he comes back on the right track.

    The movie did not make money. And for Shahrukh, who sought nothing but singleminded populism (and huge commercial success) an average run at the box office meant a path not worth pursuing anymore. Perhaps his biggest problem, apart from his limited talent that restricted the roles he could do, was this obsessive desire for popularity. This inevitably meant that he would avoid making films that might challenge established cinematic idioms, but not guaranteed to be popular.

    With the lacklustre response toboth Mohabbatain and Hindustani, Shahrukh went through a vulnerable phase. Ironically, it was a return to the ‘ordinary’ which rescued him and made it possible to retain his superstar image. Swadesand ChakDe! India expanded the idea of what Shahrukh could become, surprising those who thought they knew all his moves. Mixing the ordinary with patriotism, while Swades did not do so well, Chak De! was a hit. It was Yash Raj’s response to the ‘new wave’ that was beginning to emerge in Bollywood with new directors and writers having entered the industry. Roping in Jaideep Sahani, who had written the interesting Khosla ka Ghosla,Chak De!worked where Hindustani had failed.

    Shahrukh’s speech at the Filmfare function where he got the Best Actor forChak De! is memorable because it is the last of its kind – in the next few years he was to stop making sense entirely. Perhaps Shahrukh knew exactly what his limits as an actor were: “I pray to Allah to give me the strength, courage and talent to be able to do films like Chak De!. As long as I live, I will not let you down,” he said.

    This promise did last for a while. Along with him, Karan Johar and Aditya Chopra, big money kings of mushy designer films, tried to cash in on the contemporary trend of realistic films. Thus, Chopra returned with Shahrukh to make Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi where he yet again played the almost faceless ‘ordinary’ Surinder Sahani. And Johar tackled Islamophobia in a frivolous manner in My Name is Khan. Though both films became popular, they didn’t seem to do anything for Shahrukh, the clichéd actor, or the repetitive star.

    Something was not right about these films, and the varied, smaller, intelligent films that were now being made in Bollywood made this even more apparent. Why would anyone watch Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi when they could see a more honest Bheja Fry instead? It was evident that Shahrukh was trying too hard to prove a point that no one was asking him to make in the first place, because everyone already knew the answer.

    And even this was shortlived, indicating its hollowness. Since some years now, another process had acquired momentum. Shahrukh was transformed into a brand. We were bombarded by his images, relentlessly and mindlessly selling, breathlessly making money. He became a compulsive seller of miscellaneous products. He was everywhere: IPL, ads, hoardings, TV/music/reality shows/promos, dancing in billionaire wedding parties, T-20 matches, award shows, even inside private management institutes, saying things which no one understood, probably not even himself. Like in a recent Filmfare interview, he said: “I am a feeling no one can resist.”

    It was inevitable, then, that this megalomania would get recreated on screen in the easily forgotten Ra.One and Don2. Predictability is now the undoing.

    (This article was first published in Hardnews)

  • Let us Talk About Sunny Leone!

    Let us Talk About Sunny Leone!

    Pranay Parashar for BeyondHeadlines

    Sunny Leone, a Canada based Indian origin porn star grabbed the attention of young male community of our nation from the day the news of her induction in “ Big Boss“ broke, she has been the topic of debate among male community, be it office goers or college students. She fulfilled the prime objective of the daily SOAP, for which she was inducted. The SOAP was watched anxiously by thousands of TV viewer to get a glimpse of celebrated porn star. Popularity as well as viewership of TV channel soared. She also received constant media attention. Media channels too tried to reap the fruit, introducing her to the real civilized world. Her media popularity reached all time high. She becomes one of the most searched celebrities at Google and the demand of the websites, especially devoted to her, raised as expected. Newspapers printed her photo on their front page as it was, as they say on “public demand “.

    What everyone missed was a subtle experiment that was unfolding not much conspicuously. An experiment that is engrained in ethics of human morals and dignity, even though its roots were deeply buried in narrow consideration of raising TRP of the channel itself.

    It will be better to interpret it this way, a porn star (who is supposed to be representative of the porn world) brought to the “civilized and dignified world” through the medium of a commonly watched household program “Big Boss”, where she is eagerly watched for her activities. And the conclusion drawn from her mischievous acts is that she is not different from all of us. She talks, acts, behave like all of us, what then hinders her progress in our dignified and civilized world. Now the bitter questions arise, when she is a common prototype of a woman, are not we humane enough to accommodate her in our so called “Civilized Society”, so that the chances of her falling back to flesh trade can be minimized if she wishes so. Are not there million others, who are well behaved too, but had fallen prey to the hands of compulsion and carnal desires of humans? Why then this abject apathy toward these hapless creatures, don’t they deserve a better dignified life? Why people like her fall apart from us just because of her work or job?

    It is our moral bankruptcy that we dodge these troubling questions, that see us in our faces and utters a loud, why?

    Even in the past efforts had been made to bring back people. But these efforts were too small and too localized at personal level and failed grievously. This is the opportunity that the civilized world (we) need to snatch and make a big reset in its efforts to make this world a real civilized one.

    Porn industry is a billion dolor industry and its proponents will thwart any attempt made to reform their world. But the world won’t find a better opportunity to make a start somewhere and Sunny could well play the role of brand ambassador, guiding million other unfortunate girls that had to sell their bodies to fill their bellies. She could play a role model for them who want to follow suit and seek refuge in arms of civilianization.

    Even though it will be quite difficult to hold her back in this side as her demand in porn industry has increased manifold and there is danger of impinging upon her personal wishes and desire too. To contain, control or disband the thriving porn industry is beyond the capability of institutionalized set up. A concerted proactive support of civilized society is needed to uproot the sordid degradation of human life. Morality is complaining, the civilized world needs to adopt her, or the experiment will fail, shaking the very foundation of the civilized world that itself eulogize moral principles.

     

    (The writer is a B. Tech student at Jamia Millia Islamia. His email id is pranayparashar@gmail.com. The views expressed in this article are writer’s own, and it does not necessarily reflect BH’s editorial policy)

  • Mausam: A Good Try… But Will it Work???

    Mausam: A Good Try… But Will it Work???

    Chandini Mansinghani,  BeyondHeadlines

    The much awaited directorial debut of Pankaj Kapoor, movie Mausam staring Shahid Kapoor and Sonam Kapoor released this Friday (23.09.2011) after having about four changes in dates due to reasons like delay in obtaining the No Objection Certificate from the Indian Air force or not completing the movie on time.

    After getting to see many actors like Shah Rukh Khan, Salman Khan, Hrithink Roshan playing roles of officers in uniform, it was least expected of Shahid who is generally known for his chocolate boy looks to play the same. Of course over the years he has been trying to play different characters in films like Kaminay.  In spite of not having the height and the boy next door look, Shahid truly pulled off his character to the best!

    Mausam is the love story of Harinder Singh (Harry) who later becomes Squadron leader Harinder Singh and Aayat Rasoo. Both meet in Harry’s (Shahid) hometown in Punjab. Aayat (Sonam Kapoor) being a Kashmiri refugee comes to stay with her aunty and in the course of Harry’s elder sister’s wedding the silent love story begins. Significant events from the Indian history portray the ups and downs in their love life. A lot of other characters that off Supriya Pathak ,Anupam Kher, Aditi Sharma and the entire group of Shahid’s friends make the movie complete.

    It is not surely the typical Hindi film romance but much more to just masala. The second half of the movie takes a slow pace which makes it a little difficult to hold the attention of the audience.

    The highlights of the movie could be the sets, dialogue delivery and some songs like Rabba Main Toh Mar Gaya Oye, Sajh Dhaj Ke and Mallo Malli by Pritam.

    Sonam with her ever stunning looks together with Shahid manage to give an outstanding performance that people won’t forget that easily. But the only question is after all the tries to give a perfect movie will it stay on the box office ¿

     

     

  • Celluloid ‘Cult’ure

    Celluloid ‘Cult’ure

    Rohit Vats for BeyondHeadlines

    Who does not remember the duo of Ernesto Che Guevara and Alberto Granado gliding down the valleys of South America on their beloved motorcycle!  From that moment onwards, one realizes the transformation of these two characters into the youth icons that they are deemed as today.

    The pull of cinema has always over-awed all and sundry, but the extent of its influence over the young generation has always generated much curiosity and debate. Although films began with the aim of bringing about social change, over a period of time, a sub genre began shaping up around youth-oriented movies. Some of the reasons that could be attributed to this maybe the frustration with the status quo when a need is felt to bring up certain issues.  Movies like the above mentioned The Motorcycle Diaries (2004), Rebel without a cause (1955), The Graduate (1967), Dead Poets Society (1989) and many more can be counted amongst the “cult” movies that have represented the youth over the ages.

    The Graduate (1967)

    These movies majorly begin with a sense of identification of the protagonist with the youth. For example, the figures of Che Guevara and Alberto Granado, epitomized the gay, care-free youth, in the movie entitled The Motorcycle Diaries, before its plot takes a serious turn. By connecting with the viewer first, at a personal level, the film takes one to the problem that needs to be addressed, be it injustice, corruption or social inequality.

    Further, films such as the “Rambo” series or even “Rocky” series work towards icon-building. By making icons out of ordinary characters, they not only connect with the viewer but also instill a sense of empowerment, which explains their stirring effect on the viewers.  The hero, then, becomes a tool or the driving force of the movie.

    Such movies acquire a “cult” status with time. This cult then helps bring about mass movements in the society. For example, the movie entitled The Dreamers (2003) most effectively documents the French student movement of 1968 against the government of Charles de Gaulle. Outraged after the shutting down of the Cinematheque, students from across Paris participate in mass demonstrations all over the city to protest against the impeachment of their basic rights.

    Set against this chaotic backdrop, the film touches many other issues that were breaking the old traditions of the society, whether we talk about the unconventional relationship that the three protagonists share or the constant talk about the inevitable social change, the sudden outbursts against institutions, family and even society in general.  The Dreamers by providing a backdrop of Paris in the late 1960s gives a setting of an arena going through a revolution amidst which the three characters grow.

    When we talk about films documenting a social change brought about by youth, we cannot help but talk of The Times of Harvey Milk (1984). Like The Dreamers, this film too is set against a backdrop of social change but this time in the United States of the 1980. The film is about a young gay activist and his rise in politics until he gets assassinated.

    The Times of Harvey Milk (1984)

    The 1980s were the time when major economic and educational changes were taking place, there were efforts made by individuals to break away from orthodoxy and to accept new changes (one of them being sodomy). But as is true of all such revolutions, they never go unopposed and the assassination of Harvey Milk in the film brings forth exactly that.

    On one hand such movies target the youth as a mass and bring about mass movements and on the other, some films address them individually. These films deal with the frustrations that one goes through on an individual level like Naked (2002) or even their Indian counterparts such as Maachis (1996), Lakshya (2004), Rang De Basanti (2006), and such, it deals with the individual’s personal conflict. It shows the journey of the character through various events and the change that comes about inevitably.

    Another common motif is also the one of a teacher who wants to shape the attitudes of young people in a certain way. The symbol of The Unconventional Teacher has carved a separate niche for itself. Movies such as Dead Poets Society (1989), To Sir, With Love (1967), Mona Lisa Smile (2003) have one teacher who is willing to go against social norms and adopt unconventional ways of teaching, which are often looked down upon by the society. Dead Poets Society has Robin Williams as an English teacher teaching high school students to embrace poetry to better come to terms with one’s own philosophy. Mona Lisa Smile has a young art teacher (Julia Roberts) who urges the conservative girls of a 1950s convent Wellesly College to mould their talents and be independent and self sufficient women. To Sir and With Love also have a similar theme where a Black teacher deals with the racial and social issues in an East London school, which teaches slum children and becomes an intrinsic part of their lives in due course of time.

    Throughout this process of perpetual change, there came about a difference in attitudes as well. New kinds of ideologies began seeping in as a product of this attitudinal change. Movements such as the punk movement, which has now acquired the status of being an alternative lifestyle for many, the skinhead movement in the United Kingdom to the more recent rise of street culture in the United States (not only in terms of movies but also music, art and literature) have come about as a result of a break away from existing norms. The result or effects of these movements are visible at two levels. Films like “Into the wild” tried to inculcate a more carefree sort of attitude in young audiences where they were given the glimpses of serene and content life style devoid of any materialistic pleasure like phone, vehicle or a cozy home. It was widely accepted also because the post modern society felt the need of individualistic approach towards life.

    This is England (2006)

    On the other hand, a film like “This is England” portrayed the undercurrent of color discrimination in 1980’s England. This was not a propaganda or solution giving film but it certainly contributed to form an ideology among youth. Till this point of time, films had started to mould young minds in a particular direction in Europe, where the prime subjects were dealing with inter and intra-personal clashes between ideologies. In a nut shell, the youth was getting food for thought from contemporary films.

    Interestingly, these trends were noticeable not only in Western films but also in Hindi films. “Ankush” (1986) featured four young unemployed idealists who do not have any faith in law of the land. Furthermore, they find themselves accepting the capital punishment for doing what they thought as most apt and just reaction. “Ankush” brought out the anxiety and dissatisfaction of the youth in a believable manner where their personal ideologies were completely opposite to that of the state. India was witnessing many students’ movements at that time, especially in urban areas and this film along with other films like Aakrosh, Kalyug, Prahar and Pratighat, was primarily appreciated in urban set ups only. Thus, in one way we can argue that films were actually working as a medium of socio-ideological change.

    It is true that Hindi film watching youth did not find anything so outspoken and attacking in 1990’s chiefly after the announcement of open market policy. Probably, this is the reason that the student movements and youth anger gradually died down. After one point of time, everybody seemed to embrace naked capitalism, needless to say that the youth formed a major chunk of this neo rich mass. But, then again you cannot deny the ideology forming power of films that was powerful enough to kill discontented outbursts of young minds. Maniratnam’sYuva” and a handful of films could be seen as rebel voices but basically, they are just a way of releasing individual utopian frustrations. Same is the scenario in Western entertainment industry as well, where you cannot find a film star who has appeal due to his or her youth oriented image and who is not middle aged. In fact, “American Pie” is debated as a youth film, while it’s just a showcase of shameless escapism. All Latin American states, which were once known for their charismatic youthful leaders, are still run by those “young” leaders. The society is becoming more individualistic, so are the films and so is the society again.

    Ankush (1986)

    Situation seems to be very suitable for another young outburst where the common mass will start another global movement, just to avoid their well-fed boredom. Hopefully, films would soon start to give impetus to these much awaited thoughts.

    Rang De Basanti (2006)

    (Rohit Vats is an alumnus of Jamia’s Mass Communication Centre and is currently working with a Media Company. He can be reached at vatsbirpuria@gmail.com)

  • All Sins Forgiven – On Screen

    All Sins Forgiven – On Screen

    Ektaa Malik, BeyondHeadlines

    Its young and its fearless. Bold. Not to mention shocking at times. Yes this is the face of the Indian film industry. We smoke on screen with panache. We abuse with alacrity. We have skeletons in our closets, it is high time we maybe talked about them, if not perhaps, fully disclose them. So at times, when deviant sexual practices are shown on screen, we do not look away. When a woman disrobes herself in unfulfilled desire, we do not flinch. We embrace the new found boldness. And we kill whatever we do not like!!!

    That is what Saat Khoon Maaf (Seven murders forgiven) is all about. It is about black twisted characters, and there fatal flaws. It’s about one person’s intrinsic instinct to survive and more. Susannah is Strong. She is willful. She is unabashedly sexual. And well, totally unapologetic about it. She struggles from one husband to the other with the humble belief that perhaps, this might be the one. But to her chagrin, every one of them disappoints her. She is a survivor. She believes in her own system of justice.

    Kudos to Priyanka Chopra for pulling off seven different looks and stages in one character.  Even though the look changes – from the Anglo Indian girl to the head covering Muslim wife – the personality of Susannah changes, but the main thread of her innate character remains the same.

    This is where Vishal Bharadwaj succeeds as a film maker. Although the narrative is episodic, it still keeps the audience hooked.  The time line was very smartly incorporated- with references from national and international events – showcasing the extensive research that Bhardwaj’s team had done.

    It now proved without doubt that Vishal Bhardwaj is a master of adaptations. From Shakespeare to Ruskin Bond, he has adapted every story to a new dimension and setting, and the result is always far from jarring. Saat Khoon Maaf reflects the sheer brilliance of the Director. It’s  a master’s handiwork.

    (Ektaa Malik can be reached at ektaa@beyondheadlines.com)