Showing posts with label movie. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movie. Show all posts

Monday, August 04, 2008

my lady..

The best thing about My Fair Lady perhaps is the way she portrays herself - its awesome. The quick wit gives life and she is nothing less than a pure joyful experience.

Damn! Damn! Damn! Damn!
I've grown accustomed to her face.
She almost makes the day begin.
I've grown accustomed to the tune that
She whistles night and noon.
Her smiles, her frowns,
Her ups, her downs
Are second nature to me now;
Like breathing out and breathing in.
I was serenely independent and content before we met;
Surely I could always be that way again-
And yet
I've grown accustomed to her look;
Accustomed to her voice;
Accustomed to her face.

Her joys, her woes,
Her highs, her lows,
Are second nature to me now;
Like breathing out and breathing in.
I'm very grateful she's a woman
And so easy to forget;
Rather like a habit
One can always break-
And yet,
I've grown accustomed to the trace
Of something in the air;
Accustomed to her face.

Friday, August 01, 2008

Milkshake..

Daydream delusion, limousine eyelash
Oh baby with your pretty face
Drop a tear in my wineglass
Look at those big eyes
See what you mean to me
Sweet-cakes and milkshakes
I am a delusion angel
I am a fantasy parade
I want you to know what I think
Don't want you to guess anymore
You have no idea where I came from
We have no idea where we're going
Lodged in life
Like branches in a river
Flowing downstream
Caught in the current
I carry you
You'll carry me
That's how it could be
Don't you know me?
Don't you know me by now?

- Before Sunrise

Thursday, July 17, 2008

Run Lola Run


As the name suggests, the movie's all about running (no, not like Tom Hanks in Forrest Gump) - The beauty of the movie is in the details - there are 1581 transitions (edits, dissolves, fades, wipes, etc) in 71 minutes of action (i.e. excluding the credits, and pre-credits sequence). This equates to an Average Shot Length of about 2.7 seconds. Interestingly, if you observe, the editing is relatively slower towards the end of the film. For most contemporary films, the opposite is the norm. This is what makes this movie so unique.

No wonder this one is quoted (arguably) as the best from German cinema till date.

Tuesday, April 15, 2008

The Mystery Girl - Rebecca..



A masterpiece of stylistic contrasts, Rebecca would likely have come apart at the seams but for the relentless intensity of producer Selznick. It is adapted from the reflective, dreamlike novel by Daphne Du Maurier, but directed by the claustrophobic “Master of Suspense” Alfred Hitchcock; it was subject to Selznick’s own uncompromising vision of sweeping grandeur and absolute fidelity to the novel. But somehow these conflicting elements fused as one, to create a first-rate epic romance with a unique, enigmatic texture of its very own.

It’s quite fitting that the central character of ‘Rebecca’ goes unnamed. Rebecca, the character, is the most talked about, admired and hated character in this film but you never see her. You guessed it, she is dead. Her presence/ghost still haunts the walls and rooms of her former home, Mandelay. Her widowed husband Maxim De Winter (Lawrence Olivier) has since remarried a younger, more naïve woman (Joan Fontaine) who goes without a name (“hey you”, ”Mrs. De Winter”). Maxim seems to be broken up over the death of Rebecca: he never seems happy, jumps into violent outrages, and almost jumps off a cliff. His young wife is constantly compared to her and constantly falls short. Rebecca was a woman of noble class, intelligent, strong, commanding, and most important breathlessly beautiful. The simple “second Mrs. De Winter” can’t even hold up her own against the brooding Mrs. Danvers, Mandelay’s chief maid. Mrs. Danver’s is a mean, spirited, and somewhat insulted that Maxim would marry under Rebecca’s standards. Her loyalty to Rebecca’s legacy creates a friction between her and the new wife.

Given that this is a Hitchcock movie, nothing is what it seems, obviously. It is a testament to the old master´s technique that the film plays like a supernatural thriller, but the film eventually evolves into a drama and a mystery.

Despite the many forces pulling “Rebecca” in all different directions, the film emerges as a coherent and intriguing whole. It manages to be both sentimental and unvarnished, both fairy tale and thriller, both faithful to the book and a compelling work in its own right. Hundreds of films fall into the “gothic” camp; this is one of the very best –an expansive, captivating classic.

Monday, April 14, 2008

October Sky

"October Sky" is a teen-years biography of a NASA scientist who got his start building rockets in his basement. It is so full of spirit and letter-perfect filmmaking that I defy anyone to watch this movie without getting a tingle in his or her heart.

Thrilling in the best sense of the word, traditional without being corny and with a script, photography and symbolism that could be the basis of a film literature textbook, "October Sky" is a classic in the making. It's just a pity it didn't get Oscar nomination.

The picture stars Jake Gyllenhaal as Homer Hickman, a coal miner's son determined to break away from his assumed destiny following in his father's bleak and dangerous subterranean footsteps. Inspired by the launch of Sputnik in 1957, Homer buddies up to his school's nerd to pick his brain about physics. They eventually garner the curiosity of whole town and get ire of his unsupportive father.

The defining moment in "October Sky" comes half way through the movie when Homer is left to fend for his family after his father is severely injured in the inevitable mine cave-in. Homer sees his dreams dashed and surrenders to the fate his father always had in mind for him. Hard hat on, pick axe on his shoulder, he's about to go down into the tunnels for the first time.

Like the opening shot of "Contact" that takes us on a three-minute tour of the universe to show us just how small we are, a brilliant 60-second sequence summarizes the entire picture in one flawless and powerfully symbolic sequence.

The director knows how to be subtle - Homer's mother spends her spare time painting a mural of a Beach on her drab kitchen wall, which goes almost unnoticed until a bullet pierces the window.

Jake's performance, while overly wide-eyed in the tradition of 1950s-style dreamers, is so easy to rally behind that every time one of his missiles sears into the sky, the audience feels the same rush he feels.

From a film theory point of view, "October Sky" is a a shining example of nearly flawless filmmaking, brilliant in script and execution. But more than that, it proves that a movie can be 100 percent traditional and still be fresh and exciting.

There is so much more I could say about this movie. It's just peppered with both understated and towering cinematic master strokes. But suffice to say, go watch it!

Thursday, April 10, 2008

Khuda Kay Liye..

If given a choice between Pakistani movies and Pakistani TV shows/serials, one would settle for the small screen any day.

Cinema in India has undergone a sea change and whether one likes it or not, the harsh fact remains that cinema here is entertainment driven. In that respect, KHUDA KAY LIYE is miles apart.

You really don't take to the film at the outset. For, it takes time to come to the point, but once it does, there's no stopping it. However, there's a flip side as well. A theme like the one depicted in the film is not everyone's cup of tea. Although one does identify with the proceedings, the film is more for the thinking viewer, for those who dissect cinema after watching it, it's a film that sparks off debates and discussions.

One cannot turn eyes away from the fact that Khuda Kay Liye is a well-made film that reaffirms a dangerous fact - the world is only getting more and more divided!

The film depicts the dilemma the well-educated, progressive-thinking and liberal Pakistanis face, post 9/11. The West looks at them as potential terrorists, while fundamentalists frown on them.

The educated and modern Muslims are in a difficult situation because of their approach towards life and their western attire. They are criticized and harassed by the fundamentalists and on the other hand, the western world sees them as potential suspects of terrorism just because of their Muslim names.

The film has two stories running concurrently. The elder brother wants to pursue music as a career and leaves for the U.S. The younger brother is so influenced by the fundamentalists that he turns into an altogether different person completely. The younger brother's story of forcibly marrying a woman, the woman wanting to flee from his clutches but can't, takes you back to the Karisma Kapoor starrer Shakti-The Power. The elder brother's story is novel and deftly executed. In fact, the elder brother's story is heart breaking.

Director knows exactly what he's talking about and has handled several portions with dexterity, especially the penultimate 20 minutes in the courtroom. Only thing is, the chaste Urdu spoken by Naseeruddin Shah is difficult to decipher. Naseeruddin Shah, as always, is awesome.

There can't be a better way to portray such sensitive things with so much ease. The sound track will surely make your emotions flow. I still have one doubt: Whether Muslim people willingly choose the way they lead their life or whether they are the victims of the society and the traditions and the culture in Pakistan.

Wednesday, April 09, 2008

Waterfront?

When I watched "Ghulam" about ten years back, I found the script amazingly refreshing, and the performances were superb. Siddhu (Aamir) could really carry the movie on his shoulders (as he quite normally does these days) - those days, he was just coming out of chocolate-y boy image, and hence to carry off such a persona was breathtaking.

However, when I saw "On The Waterfront" a couple of years later, I was shocked, to say the least. The movie was a rip off. I mean, OTW came many many years ago, and was one of the best performances of Marlon Brando (though I like him most in Godfather, for no reasons at all).

I wonder whether Brando make On the Waterfront great? Or was he just great in it? I watched it yesterday yet again, but still couldn't decide.

And Pigeons - is there something in them that I fail to see? Cinematography is just wonderful, and rightly so, the movie grabbed as many as Eight Oscars! A must watch.

Take this for the starters,
"If I spill, my life ain't worth a nickel."
"And how much is your soul worth if you don't?"

Tuesday, April 08, 2008

Casablanca

..and following Notorious, Casablanca is an obvious choice. I know I have office running in the morning, but can't really let Ingrid down by not watching her best performance ever, with Bogey also doing the tricks..

So here's something to relive the moments..

Ilsa: [laughs ironically] With the whole world crumbling, we pick this time to fall in love.
Rick: Yeah, it's pretty bad timing. Where were you, say, ten years ago?
Ilsa: [trying to be cheerful] Ten years ago? Well, let's see...
[remembers, smiles]
Ilsa: Oh, yes, I was having a brace put on my teeth. Where were you?
Rick: Looking for a job...

Notorious

Wonder why Ingrid didn't get an Oscar for playing Alicia in this awesome 1946 Hitchcock movie..and Cary Grant's brilliant, as always.

My favs:

Alicia: Don't ever leave me.
Devlin: You'll never get rid of me again.
Alicia: Never tried to.

___________________________________

Devlin: A man doesn't tell a woman what to do; she tells herself. You almost had me believing in that little hokey-pokey miracle of yours, that a woman like you could change her spots.
Alicia: Oh, you're rotten.
Devlin: That's why I didn't try to stop you. The answer had to come from you.
Alicia: I see. Some kind of love test.
Devlin: That's right.

Friday, March 14, 2008

Sleuth..

Sleuth is Kenneth Branagh's re-make, re-imagination, re-invention of the 1972 film with the same name which, in turn, was based on Anthony Shaffer's stage play. In the original, Laurence Olivier played the high-born snob Andrew Wyke and Michael Caine was the working class hairdresser Milo Tindle. This time around, Caine is Andrew and Jude Law is Milo. The general storyline remains the same, as does the cat-and-mouse dynamic between the leads, but the screenplay has been rewritten. The result is a script with more delicious lines and a shorter running length. What's lost in translation, however, is any reason to like or sympathize with either of the principals. In the film, both’re arrogant assholes, and it's not really tough to enjoy spending 90 minutes in the company of two such jerks.

Sleuth is all about revenge: Andrew's revenge against Milo for stealing his wife and Milo's need to strike back after Andrew humiliates him. The first two acts of the movie are, as explicitly stated, like sets in a tennis match. The third act acts like icing on the cake.

Sleuth can be enjoyed for its plot convolutions. For those who are aware of all the twists and turns, this is a chance to admire the performances, savor the script, and appreciate how much visual variety can add to the proceedings.

To keep things lively, the director uses all kinds of odd camera angles and mixes traditional shots with images gleaned from "security footage." Andrew's mansion is an amazing slice of Oz - a playroom for the rich and famous that's so cold and sterile that it's unfathomable how anyone but a complete narcissist could call it "home”.

If revenge is a dish best served cold, then Andrew and Milo are dining raw. It's an interesting movie - a film that works more successfully as a study of technique and writing than as a motion picture.

Trivia: In the casting, there are just three (3) names!

Sunday, January 27, 2008

..monsoon wedding..

As I write this post, I am sitting at H's home in Mumbai, who is oblivious of the fact that he is one of the protagonists of this post. I’m gonna write about the weddings in general, and the contrasting specifics of weddings in different parts of our country in particular. Generally, I am fascinated by weddings, and the pomp & show that follows.

How many here have watched "Monsoon Wedding"?

Been to a punjabi wedding?

I went over to Chandigarh about a month back for H's wedding with P, and to tell you the truth, the trip was worth in ways more than one. First, its Chandigarh (all those who have been to this place will vouch for it, that the sex-ratio and age group ratio is highly skewed to my liking). Oh no - wait wait - first things first. Let's meet the stars of the show - H & P. Both are my batchmates, and we have shared good laughs together. So obviously there was no option of not being there for the occasion; though there was a hidden agenda too (which eventually did not get much fodder; since not many of P's friends came!). Not many people I know have as much financial acumen as these two (I wonder if the kids of these two will even need to go to a B-school to get any knowledge).

So S came down from Mumbai, and A was already here in Delhi - and three of us got set on the voyage. Had a decent journey - had an excellent nap after reaching Chandigarh - and then the best part - got to see how a groom reacts to various acts and situations on his D-day from the closest quarters. Got to be a part of punjabi wedding for the first time in essence, and hence, it was very interesting. Not that it varies a lot from what I have seen in other weddings, but then there is always a charm about every occasion and way of celebrations.

The second wedding in question is that of M. He has always been the much-coveted-and-pampering friend from our group – one who would be the one to make sure that no one can complain. And yesterday, on his D-day, he was no different! Even when he was about to take the final plunge, he was concerned most about whether everyone around is having a good time! And his was a case of complete surrender – surrender to the whims & fancies of all the near-and-dear-ones in the family – someone wanted him to wear a red turban, another one wanted a pink one; someone wanting a light blue shirt, while someone else pitching in for a pitch-green-party-wear shirt. Rightly is it said, though obviously in a different connotation, “..when rape is inevitable, just lie back and enjoy!”

And the pics shall definitely help marking out the obvious difference in how things were at both the weddings.

PS: For those from DCE, who knew Harsh, from Electrical – He’s getting married next week. I talked to him today, and seems like his invitation has reached no-one! Hence, here is an all out invitation for his wedding, on his behalf.

Saturday, December 22, 2007

TZP - The Zing of Perfection!

If you have cried while watching any movie before, go and watch Taare Zameen Par (TZP). If you have not, go and watch TZP...

I don't think I have called up people and blabbered about how good the movie is, after coming out of the theatre - ever. However, this time, it is different. Many who rxed my calls will vouch for it!

TZP is not only entertainment, it is enlightenment. At some level, I'm sure we all relate to the movie; and hence, everyone is bound to enjoy it. That's why, even though a simplistic story, it ends up being an awesome watch.

TZP is about this kid Ishaan, played by Darsheel Safary (my award for the best actor for the year goes to him, hands down) who finds it difficult to match his world with kids of his age, around him. He is like Calvin, without his Hobbes. A Ross, without Rachel (I know, I know, that's a bad one!). His fish & paintings do not find any solace too. Hence, he's packed & sent to a boarding school. This is where the second half of the movie unwinds. (I won't give much of storyline here)

There are several moments in the first hour that make you moist-eyed. The bonding between the mother and son is remarkable. These moments effectively capture the special bonding, making you realize that a mother's mere touch can do wonders for a troubled soul. Tisca Chopra has done remarkably well as the mother - perfect for the role.

Aamir has directed the movie to perfection - not doubt he is the best! The screenplay does wonders, if you look at the scenes like the first one, where Ishaan is noticing the fish in the roadside sewerage drain; or the flipbook, the masterpiece which shows a family with one kid moving away, as the pages turn. A simple device that has been shown again and again, every time any character sees it, to highlight the underlying importance of the act. Or notice the scenes where Ishaan tries to cry as well as smile at the same time. I bet even you won't know whether to smile or cry at these scenes - tell me if you don't choke.

In a nutshell, TZP serves as a wake up call for every parent or parent-to-be. Also, it heralds the arrival of a magnificent storyteller, Aamir Khan. TZP is a triumph all the way from the director's point of view; and we have always known Aamir as the terrific actor.

I already have plans to watch it again - With my mom; once more with another friend. Are you in the queue!
Trivia - Did you know Abhishek Bachchan was dyslexic when a kid? Or Salman Khan had suggested the name of the movie as TZP to Aamir?

Sunday, December 16, 2007

Dus K..!

There have been many movies (like RGV’s Darna Mana hai, & Darna Zaroori hai) that are a collection of short stories, but they have been centred around a common premise, e.g. fear in case of both RGV movies. However, Dus Kahaniyaan is a different genre of aggregation – the central theme – none!

A few directors come together to showcase their flavors of disparate stories – obviously it’s not the easiest of tasks to create a cocktail that satisfies hard as well as soft drinkers – but coming to think of it, I guess the job is done satisfactorily in this case. I understand that many of the stories had an embedded cliché, but trying to project such an aggregation of stories, and that too to an Indian audience which is still maturing, is brave.

Agreed that stories like High on the highway, Sex on the Beach, Lovedale had an innate nonsensical & predictable touch, but then getting ten stories of the same punch is not the easiest of tasks!

Veterans Shabana Azmi & Naseerudin Shah (who, btw, appeared only in two scenes) prove why old is still gold – their marvelous acting should teach a lesson or two to others who have to take it as a launch pad. I personally liked Zahir & Gubbare most; Zahir because it had an unpredictable punch at the end, and Gubbare because of the mature, though predictable act put across by Nana Patekar. (I went to watch movie with C, and I could see her crying while Nana counted the Gubbare, and promised to bring more. That’s what you call a touché moment!)

Pooranmashi featuring Amrita Singh & Minnisha Lamba is another act worth a handful. Though another predictable story, Director holds together the story and ends it just in time. Strangers in the Night was a different concept, but not properly picturized. Director could have brought more life to the characters, in the end.

Let’s not even talk about the story involving Sanjay Dutt & Sunil Shetty – I understand that they are wonderful actors, but prolonging the movie to give them screen space is just not right. Arbaaz Khan & Mandira Bedi in Matrimony delivered more than what they are capable of, but still could not give it the thump to carry forward. The narrative tone in some of the stories also helps.

Net net, an interesting experiment, and worth watch for once. If nothing else, go and watch the movie, just for a change. I recommend watching it once, atleast for the brave effort.

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

The Kite Runner..

"There are a lot of children in Afghanistan, but no childhood."

This led me to think whether I should be reading anything at all on Afghanistan or not - and the opportune time came in the form of fictional "The Kite Runner", a book a friend of mine suggested as a must read. I am not a big fan of Afghan writers, nor have I read anything on Afghans (most of the info I have on Afghans comes solely from "Kabul Express"). But having finished the book now, I must say it is a gem.

The Kite Runner tells the story of Amir, a well-to-do boy from the Kabul, who is haunted by the guilt of betraying his childhood friend Hassan, the son of his father's Hazara servant. (The Hazara are an ethnic group who are predominantly Shia Muslims and speak the Hazaragi dialect of the Persian language) The story is set against a backdrop of tumultuous events, from the fall of the monarchy in Afghanistan through the Soviet invasion, the mass exodus of refugees to Pakistan and the United States, and the Taliban regime.

But political events are only a part of this story. A more personal plot, arising from Amir's close friendship with Hassan, the son of his father's servant, turns out to be the thread that ties the book together. The fragility of this relationship, symbolized by the kites the boys fly together, is tested as they watch their old way of life disappear.

Some of the plot's turns and twists may be somewhat implausible, but Hosseini has created characters that seem so real that one almost forgets that The Kite Runner is a novel and not a memoir. At a time when Afghanistan has been thrust into the forefront of America's collective consciousness ("people sipping lattes at Starbucks were talking about the battle for Kunduz"), Hosseini offers an honest, sometimes tragic, sometimes funny, but always heartfelt view of a fascinating land. Perhaps the only true flaw in this extraordinary novel is that it ends all too soon.

The Kite Runner is the first novel by Afghanistani American author. Published in 2003, it is the first novel published in English by an author from Afghanistan. The novel was the third best seller for 2005 in the United States (leaving behind works to the likes of Da Vinci Code, The World is Flat, 1776, Angels & Demons, etc.). It was also voted 2006's reading group book of the year.

Tuesday, August 07, 2007

Music and Lyrics


There's a formula for romantic comedies that one must adhere to, which is pretty much close to the guidelines Mills and Boon put out for their novels (Yes, I know what they are!). Logical too, given the size of the romance market. Your hero must be good-looking, a little tad naughty, eventually redeemable and every lady should want him. The heroine must be amiable, a little peculiar, and she must win the hero over with the force of her lovable personality, because even though all the people in these stories are inevitably drop dead gorgeous, it's never about the sex, because, well, that would be just crass.

"Music and Lyrics" - an unusually witty and intelligent romantic comedy. A Movie advised on Valentine’s day / Friendship day. Once recommended.

Thursday, July 26, 2007

And at last, 'The Devil Wears Prada'

Someone has said, "What should profit a man if he should gain the whole world but lose his soul in the process?". Countless plays, movies, novels, short stories, speeches, essays and nonfiction books have been written on the subject. Enters 'The Devil Wears Prada'. This movie is, thus, hardly original but smart, excellently acted and surprisingly fun and thoughtful.

Leaving aside the story and performance review, which I'll talk about later, I must specify upfront that if you are a 'Fashion' freak and enjoy observing, this movie is meant for you - forget about the story or anything, the fashionable traits of the movie will surely blow you over.

Andy (Anne Hathaway) is a sweet young scrubbed behind the ears young lady who moves from the countryside to the big bad city. She is so naive that she is genuinely surprised when not everyone is delighted to meet her.

She goes to work at a fashion magazine presided over by 'Miranda'. Miranda is a monsterboss, a consummate bitch. The kind of boss who inspires by fear and lives by mottos such as: "I don't have headaches, I cause them".

Andy starts her career at Runaway in awe & fear of the snazzily dressed arrogant women who work in this atmosphere of fear, stress and hostility. She thinks they are the powerful and the smart and sees herself as weak and silly. As the movie progresses, Andy learns she, by retaining her humanity, personality and principles, is the powerful and smart and her coworkers, by selling their souls and allowing themselves to be treated like garbage just for money and clothes, are the weak and silly.

The movie follows the very typical plot arc of having the protagonist be a nice person who, tempted by the dark side, acts like a jerk for a while, gets her comeuppance, sees the light and comes back to being a nice person all in about two hours. Wouldn't it be wonderful if real life worked so smoothly?

Meryl Streep is perfect as the devil-lady. She could be the best American actress alive. Miranda is a person of contradictions. She is loathesome and compelling, enviable and repulsive, powerful and vulnerable, regal and pathetic. She manages her professional world with a ruthless excellence that would make a political boss blush with modesty.

Friday, June 22, 2007

Three Walls

Yes, that's the name of a 'movie' - a good one I must say - I saw the casting, and I knew I wanted to watch it. And when I asked S, he confirmed the genre of the movie, and thus it went on.
Strong screenplay, brilliant direction.
Ishaan (Naseeruddin Shah), Jaggu (Jackie Shroff), and Nagya (Nagesh Kukunoor) are three murder convicts on death row. A struggling documentary filmmaker Chandrika (Juhi Chawla) arrives at the prison to capture the lives of these three convicts. Between this day and the 26th of January, the lives of these four people will turn like they would never have imagined. Inspired by a documentary he had viewed earlier and a tinge of Shawshank Redemption, Kukunoor takes this premise and weaves a chilling web interconnecting his characters through some brilliant writing. And a nice climax!

Tuesday, May 01, 2007

DON

"DON" has been one of the movies that has spun the wheel a lot more than most of my favorites - more so because of the hype created around it, and the discussions to follow for days to come by. And I am coming back to this post and review, just because last night I saw the original DON starring Amitabh.

Those who are saying the old don was better are uptight people who saw the old don when they were young and it reminds them of "their time" - what I say is the new one is not far behind when it comes to entertainment. I mean, when Amitabh throws the bag some dust goes in the air, but when Shahrukh throws it, it explodes and there is realistic fire. And the ending is much better as well!! I love how the movie sticks to the line, "Don ko pahkadna mushkil hi nahi, namumkin hai". People are making it into a AB vs SRK thing - AB is a better actor; SRK isn't meant for this type of movie - maybe Junior AB would have been better for this. However when you compare old Don vs new (notice I said old not "asli") new one is better - simply because of the way Don does things! AB performs better as Vijay while SRK performs better as Don, and I am much more impressed by Don than plain old Vijay. As simple as that.

Some people do say that "Don ka remake banaana mushkil hi nahi namumkin hai", but sometimes old wine in new bottle sometimes makes the day - if not directly through the movie, then through some other lateral discussions. I sure had a gala time on discussions around the movie, even long after the movie had been seen! Good fun that was.

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

"Bheja Fry"

Bheja Fry (n)

1. Chopped and scrambled goat brain, served piping hot. Goes well with most kinds of breads - Not for the queasy
2. A first-time director's attempt at remaking a great French farce. Again, not for the queasy, or those who can't appreciate cheesy.

You really don't have to be a connoisseur to check out "Bheja Fry"! Though it's much more than a gourmet dish, but it could have been named "Re-dial" or "It's Ringing". Bheja Fry may be a film about an idiot but it's so darn intelligent, it simply makes your day

No matter if it has been copied from "Le Diner de cons", it really gives two hours of non-stop eye-catchy fun, with old timers Milind Soman and Sarika also doing their bit in the movie - though the credit undoubtedly goes to Vinay Pathak a.k.a Bharat Bhushan (or Kulbhushan, or Madan Mohan, or whatever).

Quote of the movie, "Kya idiot insaan nahi hota"!

The cast keeps on irritating you to the max, but that's what "Khosla ka Ghosla" did as well - right? And that's what any enjoyable sitcom would do! This irritating pleasure is the call of the audience, and the audience gets it without fail.

This movie is worth a watch "neemboo maarke"!

Saturday, July 23, 2005

Fight Club - The Return of Hobbes

Hobbes is reborn as Tyler to save "Jack" (a grown-up Calvin) from the slough of un-comic despair.

In the film Fight Club, the real name of the protagonist (Ed Norton’s character) is never revealed. Many believe the reason behind this anonymity is to give "Jack" more of an everyman quality. Do not be deceived. "Jack" is really Calvin from the comic strip Calvin and Hobbes. It’s true. Norton portrays the grown-up version of Calvin, while Brad Pitt plays his imaginary pal, Hobbes, reincarnated as Tyler Durden.

Part I: The Hobbes-Tyler Connection

Picture this: a hyper, self-absorbed child initially concocts an imaginary friend as the ideal playmate, to whom more realistic qualities soon become attributed. This phantasm becomes a completely separate personality, with his own likes, dislikes, and temperament—and the imaginer and the imagined clash and argue constantly, though remaining fast friends. This pattern continues to the point where the child begins to perceive what was originally mere fantasy to be reality.

Just as Calvin has an imaginary jungle-animal friend named Hobbes, whom everyone else believes to be nothing but a stuffed toy, "Jack" in Fight Club has an imaginary cool-guy friend named Tyler, whom no one but Jack can see.

In both cases, the entity that began as the ideal companion soon took on a more realistic, three-dimensional quality. In other words, they became real. This is evident in that both Hobbes and Tyler also began to function as scapegoats for their creators. For instance, consider that Calvin often blames broken lamps and other assorted household mischief on Hobbes, and that Jack is inclined to believe that Fight Club and other various anti-society mischief is brought about by Tyler, not himself. Calvin claims Hobbes pounces on him every day after school; Jack believes Tyler beats him up next to 40 kilotons of nitroglycerin in a parking garage—the list goes on and on. The relationships between the two sets of friends are the exact same. Is this mere coincidence?

Filling in the time-gap between Calvin and Jack, we can imagine the story as something like this: Once Calvin reaches the hostile environment known as the seventh grade, the constant teasing from the other students and the frustrated concern of his parents finally becomes too much, and a reluctant, disillusioned Calvin is finally forced to grow up, or at least begin to. This decision is sealed by one of the hardest things young Calvin will ever have to do in his life: un-imagine Hobbes, an act which to Calvin is essentially no different from murder. After being Calvin’s best friend for over a decade, Hobbes is packed away in a box, or tossed carelessly into a garbage bag, perhaps even stuffed under the same bed that once contained so many monsters. This is all, of course, very painful for Calvin, so much so that he represses it all in shame. Little does Calvin suspect that while he is busy growing up, deciding what "dinette set defines him as a person," Hobbes is also maturing in the recesses of his mind, waiting to be unleashed at an appropriate time.

It’s worth noting that during these twenty or so years, Hobbes never bears a grudge against Calvin nor wishes any ill upon him. Hobbes, remembering the depth of their past friendship, does not hate Calvin but rather hates the society that made Calvin put him away. Hobbes, residing in Calvin’s mind, sees and experiences all that Calvin does—and truly despises all of it. He witnesses a bright, superbly imaginative kid (with a genius-level vocabulary) reduced to nothing more than another nameless cog. Fighting off the tears wept for his conventionalized pal, Hobbes resolves to set Calvin free, paying special attention when Calvin idly looks up homemade-napalm recipes on the Internet.

Flash forward to the timeframe depicted in Fight Club. Calvin/Jack has reached an all-time low. He has done everything society has told him to do but is completely void of happiness. Hobbes, newly adjusted as "Tyler Durden" (after all, grown-up Calvin would no longer accept a jungle animal walking, talking, and eating canned tuna), re-enters Calvin/Jack’s life, determined to show Calvin everything he’s done wrong, whether he likes it or not.

Tyler to Jack: "I look like you wanna look, I fuck like you wanna fuck, I’m smart, capable, and most importantly, I’m free in all the ways you wish you could be."

Calvin has always idolized Hobbes. In Weirdos From Another Planet, he dresses up like a tiger and attempts to live in the woods. Like Hobbes, Tyler is cool, collected, and incredibly cerebral. Given this evidence, one can conclude that Tyler is Hobbes, reincarnated after being trapped inside Calvin/Jack’s brain for so many years. Just as Calvin is Jack, Hobbes is Tyler.

Part II: Marla Singer—Avatar of Susie Derkins?

Somewhere between the end of high school and beginning of college, uptight, grade-obsessed Susie Derkins lost her way. The pressure to get good grades, the pressure to succeed, simply became too much for her, and she snapped.

Free from the protective bonds of her parents’ guidance and the bland safety of her suburban home, Susie loses her moral bearings entirely and sinks into a dark, seamy, grim world of sex, drugs, and eccentric Albert-Einstein-like hair. Her transformation is so complete that she no longer even remotely resembles the upright citizen that her parents and society wanted her to be: thus, she changes her name.

Like Calvin, Susie has become a misfit, one of society’s lost lambs. It is for this reason that she soon finds herself frequenting support groups such as "Remaining Men Together." Fate has brought her back to Calvin, whom she probably spurned back in junior high. But the two have changed so much that they no longer recognize each other!

The pink dress Marla wears in one scene slightly resembles something that "Binky Betsy," Susie’s favorite childhood doll, once wore: the doll that Calvin stole and attempted to ransom. While Calvin and Susie mostly teased and tortured each other, Hobbes was infatuated with the raven-haired beauty. Accordingly, Jack despises Marla, whereas Tyler takes an *ahem* sort of interest in her (definitely inappropriate for the Sunday Funnies).

When we are first introduced to Marla, she is but a tumor on Jack’s slowly deteriorating world. She is disenfranchised, morbid, socially apathetic—and Jack despises her because she is a mirror image of himself, his own female double. On the other hand, Calvin hates Susie because she is his exact opposite: Bright, obedient, demure—the unruly Calvin has every reason to hate her. However, certain strips definitely infer that Calvin has somewhat of a crush on Susie, and some even imply that Susie shares these latent feelings. But as a cootie-fearing grade-schooler, Calvin may only express these strange feelings through attention-getting antagonisms such as constant snowballs to the head, ransoming her dolls—and through his separate, conveniently more mature other personality—Hobbes.

Unlike Calvin, Hobbes has never been bashful about showing his affection for Susie. Calvin’s imaginary tiger-friend has called her a "cutie," worn swim jams to impress her ("Girls flip for guys in jams"), and even claimed he would betray their club’s secret code if she gave him a tummy rub (which is one of the key differences between Tyler and Hobbes). Naturally, all of this confuses and frustrates Calvin beyond words, even though Hobbes is really nothing more than a product of his own mind! And though Hobbes and Susie never consummated their love for each other (he’s a stuffed tiger and she’s a kid, you sicko!) this is, of course, the exact same deranged love-triangle that is shared between Jack, Tyler, and Marla, or at least a natural progression thereof. Perhaps Marla puts up with Jack/Tyler’s apparent nonsense for so long, because it’s the sort of thing she became used to as a child? And perhaps, in the end, Jack finds solace in Marla because it’s the exact same connection he should’ve made long ago, in his suburban youth. A connection that may have saved them both.

Part III: GROSS—Precursor of Fight Club

When you boil it down, the Fight Club that Jack and Tyler start is really just an odd sort of boys’ club—no ovaries allowed—where men can be men, and the so-called stronger of the sexes can take solace in the fact that, even in our politically correct times, some exclusivities of manhood still remain. (As a side note, imagine how much more controversy the movie would have generated if it involved scenes of men fighting women on equal ground!)

And clubs like this, of course, have their beginnings in backyards, tree houses, and garages all over America. Not surprisingly, Calvin started such a club when he was six years old. Little did anyone realize that he would construct another one much later in his life, again with the aid of an imaginary friend. For just as Calvin, Hobbes, and Susie have dark future versions in Jack, Tyler, and Marla respectively, G.R.O.S.S. (Get Rid Of Slimy girlS) has the same in Fight Club.

G.R.O.S.S. shares the following characteristics with Fight Club:

  • Both have catchy names (although the "slimy" part of G.R.O.S.S. is redundant, otherwise it doesn’t spell anything).
  • Both are co-run by a friendless male and his imaginary companion (Calvin is Tyrant and Dictator-for-Life; Hobbes is President and First Tiger).
  • Both are exclusively male organizations, although Fight Club’s membership is considerably larger.
  • Along with that, all members of both organizations are very loyal.
  • The leaders of both organizations constantly engage in fisticuffs (but only in G.R.O.S.S. does a member receive a demerit for biting).
  • And in said fights, in both organizations, there is only one fight at a time!
  • Both are supposedly very secretive (though Jack never tells his mother about Fight Club).
  • At least one leader of both organizations is fond of giving speeches (though Calvin never uses the term "space monkey").

G.R.O.S.S. and Fight Club both wreak havoc on their respective neighborhoods (G.R.O.S.S.’s target is considerably more focused, i.e., Susie). Clearly, the roots of Fight Club can be seen in G.R.O.S.S. Calvin shows his penchant for such male-oriented, destructive organizations. Also, just like cardboard-box-time-machines and water-gun-transmogrifiers, G.R.O.S.S. was likely created as an escape, a release—as, of course, was Fight Club.

Part IV: Moe Develops Karmic Bitch-Tits

Robert "Moe" Paulson, Calvin’s grade-school bully, becomes a six-time weight-lifting champion, and somewhere along the line develops large man-boobs as a result of testicular cancer. This of course leads him to his support group, where he is shocked to find Calvin.

Moe greatly regrets his bullying days, but, too ashamed to reveal his true identity to Calvin, he instead offers his ample bosom for him to cry on, as a measure of retribution.

Part V: The Root of Evil

Although we’ve already learned of the fates of Hobbes, Susie, and Moe, there are a couple of other people important to Calvin that are missing. People that are even more integral to his development than (arguably) Hobbes: his parents. Mr . . . uhm . . . , and Mrs . . . uh. . . . Okay, so they don’t have names. But then again, there is no need to know them. Because in the comic strip, they’re not supposed to be important characters in their own right. They only matter in regards to how Calvin is directly effected by them; an effect which, by the time of the film, doesn’t seem to have been very positive. From what "Jack" mentions, he’s not exactly close to his parents, particularly his dad, on whom he seems to pin many of his problems. And this matches perfectly with the relationship depicted in the comic, as well as with what happened afterwards (in Part I).

Calvin’s dad seems to have done quite a number on his son. As stated, it was probably at his urging that Calvin "grew up," that is, finally started to conform to society’s rules, which was the death of Hobbes. Of course, his father wasn’t without his playful side—good-naturedly teasing Calvin at every opportunity—but perhaps this is why "Jack" resents him so much. Maybe after Jack reached the end of his dutiful journey, only to find emptiness, he thought back to the day his father told him that the sun sets down somewhere in Arizona every night. "Maybe," thought Calvin, "maybe ALL of it’s been just another one of Dad’s cruel jokes."

In the "bathtub" scene of Fight Club, "Jack" and Tyler discuss their woeful parents. In this scene, crucial information is revealed, as well as some inconsistencies. "Jack" claims his father left when he was six, an age when Calvin’s dad was obviously still around, but this statement is contradicted soon after, when Tyler mentions his own dad telling him to get married when he was thirty, to which "Jack" responds, "mine said that too." The self-pitying "Jack" is most likely seeking to garner additional sympathy from his newfound friend by making his childhood sound worse than it actually was.

But even more interesting is Tyler’s hostility towards his father: when "Jack" asks him who he would fight, if he could fight anyone, he answers, "I’d fight my father." But, since Tyler is only a figment of Jack’s imagination, we can only assume he’s referring to Jack’s father. And while this hatred would only make sense given that the two are sharing the same brain, why is it that Tyler seems to hate Jack’s father even more vividly than "Jack" himself does? Maybe it’s because Tyler hasn’t forgotten who’s ultimately responsible for the un-imagining that took place years before . . . maybe he’s still not too happy about it . . . and maybe he’s got some pretty good ideas for revenge.

The role of Calvin’s father in all of this is no small one. Other than to "save" Calvin, it’s entirely possible that Tyler’s real motivation for taking down civilization is simply to get back at Calvin’s father. For by destroying the society that forced Calvin into repressing Hobbes, he’s also destroying the society that Calvin’s father, after all, epitomizes. And this of course allows Hobbes an indirect measure of revenge.

Part VI: Calvin—"I Am Jack’s Lost Youth"

Although the personality differences between Calvin in the comic strip and Calvin in the movie are pretty large, it can be explained as easily as taking Id and introducing him to Superego ("Jack" actually seems to have sort of a Super-Superego). Nearly all people go through the same thing when first confronted with the crushing grind of reality. But, as they say, the bigger they are, the harder they fall—and in terms of imagination and dreams, Calvin was a giant.

Still, it’s not as though common traits between Calvin-Calvin and Jack-Calvin can’t be identified at all. Besides a preference for imaginary friends over real ones, and an inability to express affection for girls, Calvin has never done well when forced to play by any sort of rules. Take, for instance, his utter inability in any sort of organized sport, compared to his unbridled joy while playing the make-it-up-as-you-go-along "Calvinball." Furthermore, even at age 6 Calvin never exactly thrived in stifling, authoritarian establishments (i.e., school), and he’s always had clashes with authority figures since the strip began (his parents, the doctor, his teacher, Rosalyn)—which actually may have initially planted the seeds for Tyler. Beyond that, his excellent vocabulary and way with words are still with him in the voice-over narration of Fight Club, and his rampant materialism that started with mail-order propeller-beanies ends with yin-yang shaped tables. As for the differences, they can be credited to the demoralizing effect of reality.

In the end, Calvin’s involvement with Fight Club and return of Hobbes can be boiled down to two words: "Personal Responsibility." For although Fight Club and Project Mayhem were both mostly Tyler’s doing, by the end of the movie, Jack readily accepts his own part of the blame, as Tyler is his creation. And by doing so, he also accepts responsibility for the undesirable condition of his own life—his father may have pushed him, but Calvin himself was the one who chose to obey. It is through this newfound self-accountability that Calvin/Jack is able to take control of his own life at last. As skyscrapers flash and crumble in the background, and blood oozes from the bullet hole in his head, Calvin says that he is "okay." And we are apt to believe him.

Part VII: Conclusion

Calvin’s world in the comic strip is pure, romanticized idealism, whereas in the movie, he lives in gray, bleak reality. Within the safety of the panel, Calvin is perpetually six years old, terrible things can never happen, and no matter how crazy a stunt he pulls, everything always returns to status quo. Because of this, our hero is free to do as he wishes, free to chase his dreams as wildly as he desires, never having to worry about tomorrow because there essentially will never be one—unless it’s part of a continuing storyline. This makes the reality of Fight Club all the bleaker, because it depicts what happens when you take someone weaned on dreams and limitless possibilities and jam him into a cramped cage confined by rules and regulations. It probably only took poor Calvin a few years in the adult world (or growing-up world) to fully make the sad change.

This transition from gleeful Calvin to dull "Jack" is not uncommon. Little Nemo became a banker, Peter Pan became a lawyer, and Garfield was caught and butchered by the chef of a Chinese restaurant. (One exception is Charlie Brown, who from all indications was mentally middle-aged at the time of his birth.)

The moral of the story is that reality bites, kiddies. Calvin and Hobbes in Fight Club are proof of this sad, sad truth.