Dor

Could you forgive the murderer of your spouse ? I think thats the key question being asked here, not 'How far would you go to save the one you love?', which i feel is a more obvious question and is what is splashed across the movie posters.

I love movies that take you out of your comfort zone, present a new facet of life and are completely focused on their central premise ie don’t get distracted by songs / stars / sub-plots etc. And you are unlikely to find a movie which sets up the situation or resolves it as beautifully as Dor, a magnificient film by Nagesh Kukunoor.

Meera (Ayesha Takia) is married to Shankar (Anirudh Jaykar), a worker in Saudi and a loving husband, but from a very strict and orthodox Rajasthani family. Over in Himachal, Zeenat (Gul Panag) finally weds Amir (Rushad Rana), after a long courtship, just a day before he too leaves for Saudi Arabia for work. Soon, a couple of phone calls change their lives completely. Shankar is dead and Amir is accused of the murder, likely to be sentenced to death in a few days. We see none of this, are informed about this only by the dry monotone of an officer from the ministry of external affairs, who comes to tell Zeenat about this. He also does say, just before leaving, that there could be one way to get Amir spared. As per Saudi law, if the widow pardons her husband’s killer, then he can be freed. Only hitch is that no one knows where Shankar is from, apart from the fact that he is a Rajasthani. The address on his passport is false and there are no more leads.

All the above happens very quickly – takes no more than 15 minutes. The rest of the movie is a study in the differing forms of strength of the two lead women. Zeenat is overtly strong, a woman used to fighting to get her right and she seizes on this small chance and decides to go search the state of Rajasthan to find the widow. She soon meets a bahrupiya (Shreyas Talpade, a small town con-man and a man of many faces / accents), who decides to help her.

Meera has a more quiet kind of strength, more stoic, accepting of her terrible fate. I don’t think there is likely to be any country so unforgiving in its treatment of widows as India, particularly certain parts like Rajasthan. Not a facet of my country that I’m very proud of, I can assure you. And of course, this is interlaced with the typical bullshit talk of honour (maryada) and principles etc from the elders.

She hardly utters a murmur as she goes through the rituals of widowhood - her clothes are packed away, her bangles broken, her bindi rubbed off. She now needs permission to even step out of the house and is now forced to spend her time shut in a room, in solitary confinement, with minimal food and water. In one poignant scene, when the dadi (grandmother) comes to console her and hugs her, she softly whispers to her that this is the first time in 2 months that anyone has touched her. And all this while her father in law is more preoccupied with how the loss of his son means that he may now never get his ancestral home free of debt.

The movie though would have been ordinary had it not managed to intersperse the tragedy of the story with the beauty of the landscape, the humour (particularly from Shreyas Talpade, the bahrupiya) and some brilliant, realistic, rustic touches. I don’t think the song Kajra Re was ever danced to with more gusto than shown in the movie. Also, the acting is outstanding – both Ayesha and Gul do full justice to their very meaty roles. The supporting cast including Shreyas Talpade as the bahrupiya and even Girish Karnad as the father in law are equally solid in their portrayals. The songs enhance the movie, blend in beautifully. And the end is uplifting, making you smile, forget the tragedy of the previous reels.

For some reason or the other I kept postponing watching the movie – I would urge you not to make the same mistake. They say women are mentally stronger than men, able to go through much more versus the physically stronger gender. On the basis of this movie, you know, I would have to agree completely…I cannot comprehend or find the strength to go through the kind of existence that Meera and many millions like her go through without a murmur. This movie, a bit like Water and very unlike Baabul, helps bring this point to life.

Jhoom Barabar Jhoom

The director and crew were probably on ecstasy, the current recreational drug of choice of the A-list celebs, through most of the making of the movie. There is a sequence during the title song, for example, where they have different characters join a dance competition, including someone dressed as a chef, another dressed as Elvis and a third (my favourite) who was dressed as Dharam (as in Dharam-Veer, the Dharmendra / Jeetendra classic ‘kitsch’ film). They dress Amitabh up as a vagabond with a jacket that’s brighter than a rainbow and grey dreadlocks. They have Abhishek and Bobby Deol ride a motorcycle with a side-car, wearing police helmets, singing ‘Yeh Dosti’ (from Sholay) through the streets of Southall, a rather unique way of following their respective Dad’s footsteps.

However, sadly, apart from a few brief moments, the ecstasy doesn’t translate to the audience. A fairly tortuous first half drags interminably and even though it makes way for a fairly interesting second half, by then the movie is doomed, most viewers including yours truly have lost patience.

Basically its about two people meeting at a railway station, both are waiting for the same train, they start chatting, share their respective ‘love-story’s’ (as it turns out both are waiting for their fiancee’s) and then takes us through some very predictable and other slightly predictable developments. Sounds interesting ? It really could have been…

Somewhere within the storyline, there is the seed of a great film, but unfortunately the director picked style vs content, focused more on the stars vs the characters, inserted too many useless songs, too many sub-plots (the India vs Pakistan angle is one example of a completely unnecessary sub-plot) to really sustain the movie. In fact he also gave the characters too many quirks – like Abhishek’s accent / demeanour - which makes them unrealistic.

There is an effort to be fantastical, have larger than life, over the top characters but the director is not able to pull it off, make the whole film gel. And apart from the title song, none of the others help – they really pull the movie down, break even the limited interest in the story.

Abhishek and Preity still walk away with some credit for me – they do their best, show us glimpses of why they’re superstars (and Preity really should patent her dimples – unbelievably cute !). Bobby Deol and Lara Dutta are wasted, even though towards the end they get a chance to strut their stuff. Amitabh is reduced to mouthing the lines of the title song on railway platforms. Apparently the director or producer is a close friend. That, though, only partially explains it. I would have expected all of stars to have shown more discernment. I would love to hear what they truly think of the finished product.

I predict another flop as we still await the first superhit of 2007.

Shrek 3

Another great film – I’ve liked all 3 in this series and they still continue to find ways to make you laugh really loud…

The story here is not the strong point – I think the first one excelled here & the second one was also a notch higher. However, you still have a very lovable ogre accompanied as always by the annoyingly lovable Donkey and the suave Puss in Boots. And the jokes are still exceedingly funny…

What I find amazing (in Disney cartoons and Pixar films) is the way they are able to layer the films – the way a 6 year old and a 36 year old are able to watch the film together yet find different parts funny, relate to different jokes. Jungle Book, Finding Nemo, Antz and Shrek have all had this uncanny ability and I continue to be in awe of them.

I’ve met people who tell me quite disdainfully that they don’t watch cartoons. And then they give you a superior, once over look, which says ‘its for kids’. I wish they would watch an animated movie like Shrek 3. It’s a great movie and I would have to be reminded that its a cartoon.

Pirates Of the Caribbean 3 (At World's End)

I think they’ve lost sight of what really made the first one successful. In the original one, there were a few, extremely endearing characters, a simple but gripping storyline and some brilliant one-liners.

This has now been replaced by a very complicated yet predictable story, a plethora of characters, none of whom are developed, and an almost obsessive focus on special effects – they fly in thick and fast, and for me, they become boring after a while. Oh ! and they forgot the one-liners. Even Jack Sparrow becomes boring, they dress up Keira Knightley in weird costumes and Orlando Bloom – well, you can't figure out whether he is a good good guy or a bad good guy.

I know i'm likely to be in a minority but I never saw part2 and I wish I hadn’t seen part 3.

Fool N Final

A terrible, slapstick version of Snatch, Guy Ritchie’s brilliant second film. They’ve taken the broad elements of the film, mangled them almost beyond recognition, added some unnecessary love interests (ie cute young things like Ayesha Takia and Sameera Reddy), some even more unnecessary melodramatic situations, some very terrible last year jokes (mostly between Paresh Rawal and Johnny Lever) and worse of all, inserted 4-5 ‘desperately trying to be cool’ songs.

However, there is a set of people who were enjoying this film thoroughly in the audience.
They say you can Fool all of the people some of the time, and for three hours the producer / director maNaged in this apology of a movie. Unfortunately they’re having the Final laugh, all the way to the bank.

Shootout at Lokhandwalla

Its gritty, realistic but completely pointless. I hate being misled or ripped off and this feeling was highly prominent as I was walking out of the cinema hall.

The name should’ve been ‘all shoot-outs in Mumbai’ or ‘every encounter in Mumbai from 1990-93’. The opening scene shows a PYT somberly telling us about the shoot-out at Lokhandwala – how 3000 rounds were fired, 112 people endangered, 6 gangsters killed etc. Bunkum, bakwaas ! We witnessed about 5000 rounds being fired, about 20 chase sequences through the slums of Mumbai, about 50 quick deaths and 20 really gruesome ones. And you know what ? I felt nothing for anyone, for any character on the screen. I felt no sympathy or trepidation or any other emotion as I watched one human being kill or maim each other. Because no character is developed, even for the main characters, we have no clue what they are like, what drives them, what makes them do the things they do. The movie just stumbles from one killing / one incident to another with item numbers (4 very boring tuneless songs) used in place of punctuation marks.

There is no story in the first place – and whatever little is there is completely ruined by the directors choice of narrative style – which is flashbacks intermingled with the present day scenario. This takes the suspense out completely (as you know how it ends / who lives and who dies etc) and also makes the story very disjointed / fragmented – you struggle to follow one sub-plot before the other one kicks off. We’re told about the set-up of the ATS (anti-terrorist squad) led by Sanjay Dutt (and how he recruited only the best of the best etc, based on the Los Angeles SWAT teams) and how they became a judge, jury and executioner (or in Page 3 terms, encounter specialists). We first see them battle sikh terrorists and then move on to the Mumbai underworld without warning (why would the underworld be in the domain of ATS beggars belief, but then I think the director assumed a brainless audience). Through 80% of the movie we follow the ATS chase an underworld gang led by Vivek Oberoi, who used to be a trusty lieutenant of you-know-who (he lives in dubai, has a moustache and wears goggles all the time) but is now trying to establish his own gang. This gang kills / robs / kidnaps just for fun. Plus they act terribly – Vivek Oberoi and Tusshar Kapoor have yet to learn that to be menacing, you don’t have to scowl fiercely or look constipated, you can do this quite naturally. Yet when the time comes, we’re expected to weep for them / forgive them ? Abhishek is present only in a blink and you miss him role and Amitabh in a five minute longer version of the same.

There is not one new thought or narrative style in the film and you struggle to the see point of it all. Why was it made ? What was the director / script-writer trying to say ? Why did they subject us to 3 hours of torture ? And why did good actors (the Bachchan’s, Sanjay baba, Suneil Shetty etc) agree to act in this movie. I guess some things, like the Bermuda Triangle or women’s love for shopping are never meant to be answered. Avoid this one like the plague !

Cheeni Kum

What do you say about a two and a half hour movie that just got over ? That it was beautiful ? Brilliant ? Exquisite ? Or that it reminded me of Four Weddings and a Funeral or When Harry Met Sally or even the conversational brilliance of Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, though not necessarily in that order ?

This movie is a novelty for India, a movie comprising mostly of intelligent, dialogue based humour rather than on situations (like Khosla ka Ghosla) or slapstick (most of the other Hindi movies that pretend to be comedies). Amitabh Bachchan is a crabby 64 year old chef / owner of an Indian restaurant in London. The first half depicts the growing relationship between himself and Tabu, a 34 year old woman from Delhi in London on a holiday. The second half primarily depicts Tabu’s 58 year old father, Paresh Rawal’s viewpoint on the relationship. There – that’s it as far as the story goes…nothing more, nothing less…

The true brilliance of the movie lies in the life / spark infused in even the simplest of situations or the simplest of characters. Whether it’s the interaction amongst the chef’s in the restaurant, the waiter hilariously nicknamed Colgate because of his protruding teeth and the jokes at their expense (‘iske liye dimaag ki zaroorat hai, daant ki nahin’, he is gently admonished on one occasion), the sardarji pharmacist and Amitabh’s interactions with him, Amitabh’s mom’s fascination with the gym in the face of her sons obvious reluctance to go anywhere near it, his acerbic comments on his mom’s cooking (‘yeh Tihar Jail waali daal ?’), Paresh Rawal’s love of cricket and Gandhism. I can go on and on. I was in near-hysterical splits on no less than 10 occasions. I’m still laughing as I remember some of the jokes….

And I haven’t even mentioned Amitabh and Tabu – their running joke around the umbrella, the ruthless way she teases him the first time he tries to ask her out, their almost every conversation was beautifully constructed. The movie also captures amazingly well the highs and lows of falling in love. Will she come or wont she ? Will she say yes ? The mood swings, the heartache and the sheer exhilaration and joy when its all ok, when you’re with your newfound love.

I think one of the casting coup’s of the movie was Tabu. I watched this movie with a school friend of mine (Prashant) and we discussed her at length after the movie. The parts of the conversation I can print here involved her sheer beauty, her classic features (high cheekbones, eyes) and her subtleness…her understated yet enigmatic presence. She brings reality and a certain mystique to her character, makes acting seem so easy. I don’t think there is another Bollywood actress who could have done justice to her role.

However, this doesn’t detract in any way from any of the other performances in the movie. Everyone was excellent – from Amitabh to Paresh Rawal to each chef / waiter in the restaurant, Amitabh’s neighbour and his daughter (a nice sub-plot here and at last we get a real child who talks like today’s kids actually do, unlike the saccharine mumblings of the girl in TaraRumPum). The music, with the title song playing constantly in the background, the settings (even Qutab Minar looks beautiful in the movie), everything, like spices, enhance the brilliance of the dialogue.

Take a bow, Mr Balki (an admaker and first time director). The entire audience gave a standing ovation when the movie ended. Is movie main kuch bhi kum nahin tha !

Ek Chaalis Ki Last Local

This is a movie which makes you smile quite often but very rarely does it manage to convert that smile into laughter. It tries very hard to be a comedy, to be quirky, to push the boundaries, has liberal doses of Mumbai humour and even creates a series of potentially funny situations, but it still doesn’t manage to elicit the belly-moving laughter.

Its about Abhay Deol, who misses the last local (train) at night from Kurla to Vikhroli (in Mumbai), tries to take an auto-rickshaw and meets Neha Dhupia, who is also co-incidentally trying to get to Vikhroli. The auto’s are on strike, so they decide to start walking together till they find an auto willing to go. They then encounter different situations – rain, some charsi’s (druggies), a bar, some more rain, an old friend, a card game, corrupt cops, denizens of the underworld among others. These don’t come thick and fast, its not a non-stop action movie, and while some situations stretch the realms of possibility, none are completely impossible.

So while this assures you of some good entertainment, and some good moments, I don’t think its one for the DVD collection. I think Abhay Deol overacts, doesn’t have the flair to pull off his role. You can see why they chose him – his seedha boy innocent looks – but then this doesn’t help when they want to show him ogling at Neha’s plunging neckline or dying for a beer – doesn’t fit with his dimpled smile and shy demeanour. Everyone else was ok in the movie, I think some of characters were deliberately over the top. There was this Eunuch / Pimp who was good and a character named Mangesh Bhai had his moments but most turned in average performances. The script is a bit forced, uses too much Mumbai language for my liking. The songs are ok, nothing stands out. The situations, though, are interesting for sure. You do wonder whats coming next. But even here I think the director missed a trick by showing the movie in flashback form – the opening sequence shows Abhay talking to us about what he has just been through and for me that spoilt to a degree the suspense of what lay ahead.

So, what are we left with ? As with most of the movies these days it’s a bit different. It doesn’t make you think too much, the grey cells can safely be left at home. I think a few people will go home smacking their forehead and thinking ‘what crap !’ and about the same number, probably younger profile people will go away thinking ‘wow, that was brilliant !’. But most, I think, like me will go home thinking it was ok, it was a movie that tried too hard to be funny.

Metro (Life in a Metro)

I think love is a fascinating topic if handled well. There is something amazing about all of us and our universal quest for love. Maybe its that we’re never sure when we find true love ? Or maybe, as we’re never content (true to the human spirit of progress etc), even when we’ve found our life partner / are married, we still find ways to make ourselves unhappy and search for something else. Or maybe its even that we often confuse lust with love ?

The title could easily be ‘The hunt for love in a big city’. It showcases 3 / 4 different yet interlinked storylines showing how different characters search for this elusive, missing commodity in their lives. Some are even married – but as any married couple knows, that doesn’t necessarily mean that love is still alive.

What I liked in the movie

• The depiction is very realistic. Very. When one character starts shouting at her husband, he just turns around and says ‘you must be having you periods’.



• The storyline is very crisp – the pace never flags, you don’t feel bored and it lasts only 130/140 mts



• They show a very nice mix of characters – from the BPO crowd to assistants to a housewife. The dialogues were very well written, very true to life



• The music is very good – the song ‘in dino’ is exceptional



• The performances are outstanding – Sharman Joshi, Kay Kay Menon, Shilpa Shetty, Konkona Sen, Kangana Raut were all terrific. However the one who stole the show was Irfaan Khan – he was simply brilliant. For one sequence, when he and Konkana are sitting on some rocks by the sea, towards the end, the audience literally got up and started applauding.



• All three leading ladies looked very good. I'll be nice and wont make anymore politically insensitive remarks



• The movie, despite the serious nature of the topic, doesn’t get too ‘heavy’. There are enough light moments, especially driven by Irfaan’s character (and Sharman’s in the initial part).



• Even though, one of the storylines is blatantly copied from one of my favourite classic movies (The Apartment, starring Jack Lemmon and Shirley Maclaine, directed by Billy Wilder), they copy it / adapt to the current Indian milieu well

What I didn’t like

• I think the Dharmendra / Nafisa Ali storyline didn’t really add much to the movie. I also thought both (especially Dharmendra) overacted a bit.



• All the songs were picturised on the singers while showing the movie / characters in the background – pretty much like a music video. For me, that made the songs more like a break in the film, rather than a part of it.



• I wish they had made Shilpa Shetty’s character a bit stronger / more independent. She cried too much / was too forgiving for my liking.

As an aside, I saw this movie in Priya PVR (in Vasant Vihar, Delhi) and I thanked my stars that multiplexes are now so common in India. They’re just so much more convenient for the consumer and the screen, even if you’re in the front, is so much easier to see.

I’ve always been a fan of interlinked stories and this one is executed very well. Unlike Salaam-E-Ishq, for example, which is just about the concept / big stars, this one has more meat, more substance. And what do you know, it may make you understand / appreciate the love of your life just that little bit more.

Bheja Fry

I saw this movie at 2200 hours in Bangalore, where I saw about 150 sullen, tired, mentally exhausted people come in and leave 2 hours later happy, smiling and refreshed.

Its definitely funny, relying more on dialogue, situations and the sheer screen personality of Bharat Bhushan (brilliantly played by Vinay Pathak – who also excelled in the other great comedy, Khosla ka Ghosla). The story is truly about Bharat Bhushan’s interactions with Ranjeet Thadani (very well played by Rajat Kapoor – remember Mahesh from Dil Chahta Hai). Ranjeet is a music talent agent, married to Sheetal (Sarika) and his main stress buster is his Friday night dinner with some friends – where they usually get an idiot / non-talented person, get him to perform and amuse themselves making fun of him (without hurting his feelings, if Ranjeet is to be believed). Based on an acquaintances recommendation, Ranjeet invites Bharat to come along to his dinner. Bharat works in the income tax department, is a very sincere self-styled singer and has some, lets just say ‘unique’ habits. He comes over to meet Ranjeet at his place before the dinner and that’s when things start to go wrong.

This is not a laugh a minute movie – it takes time to build but soon you start smiling and then suddenly, almost inspite yourself, you begin to laugh. You laugh at Ranjeet’s helplessness (his back gives way), at Bharat’s well-intentioned but usually misfiring attempts to help and most of all the amazing character of Bharat himself – they don’t make them like him anymore !

Among the unique habits Bharat possesses is his desire to show his ‘album’ to everyone he meets, the way the album is wrapped in a shaadi ki mithai wala polythene, the way he shuts his suitcase, the way he calls people up (the glee with which he always informs Ramesh ‘its ringing’ is contagious), his vocabulary (shudh Hindi), his repeated references to his Dad, his forgetfulness and the way he just never loses faith / never stops trying to help…And Ranjeet, despite desperately wanting to get rid of him, just has to keep on approaching him for help as one problem gives way to another !

I think we all identify with bits of Mr Bharat Bhushan – we’ve all probably encountered people who’ve got some traits of his. Also, and I don’t know if its just me, but the one thing that for me makes this movie just reach ‘Very Good’ and not ‘Great’ is that I do not like laughing too much at someone else’s expense…I cannot make fun of idiots like Ranjeet and so there were some moments where I did squirm / did not identify at all with him.

The rest though, was pure fun. Its apparently a remake of a French movie ‘Le Dinner de cons’ but that doesn’t matter. It was almost a shame when the movie ended !

Spiderman 3

I think this is one sequel too many and wish they had not made it all. It probes no new territory in terms of the personal life of Peter Parker (he has the same personal dilemma’s as in 2 – can he have a sustaining relationship with MJ / can he and Harry be friends). And there is nothing special in terms of the villains on offer, in fact there are too many of them and that is one of the key contributors towards its bloated 150 minute length.

There are one or two great humorous sequences – the one that sticks out involves the editor of the Daily Bugle, his secretary and some pills. However, there is not enough in the movie to keep the interest sustained – its too gory / introspective in parts to keep the kids involved and not deep enough (a la ‘Batman Begins’) to interest the adults.

I wish they had stopped at 2.

Darwaza Bandh Rakho

Just saw this movie – a decent comedy that slipped into oblivion for some reason or the other. It’s a 2006 production by RGV Film Factory, directed by Chekravarthy.

It has a very interesting plot where a gang of four kidnap a rich heiress, seek shelter in a Gujju bhai’s house and are forced to keep him and his whole family hostage as well. One complication follows another (the father of the heiress has gone to America and so is not contactable for a start) and slowly the number of people being held hostage increases….

It’s very nicely done with great performances by a mostly ‘no big name’ cast – though it includes Chunky Pandey / Manisha Koirala / Aftab Shivdasani. The first hour has several very good one-liners (Ishrat Ali is fantastic as the Gujju bhai) but the movie does plod a little towards the end. I think they dragged it a little too long + the end does not really live up to the great start. Nice watch though if you’re in the mood for something different, especially if you’re in a group.

Tara RumPum

It’s a clichéd movie with several good moments.

It’s about RV – short for Raj Vir Singh (played by Saif), a NASCAR racing driver in the USA, who after winning 50 races on the trot, suffers an accident and then cannot stop losing. He’s married to Radhika (Rani Mukherjee), with two ultra sweet kids Champ and Princess. Money dries up, there are several problems – school fees to be paid, they lose their perfect upstate New York house, no money for food, no jobs etc. Will RV be able to race again ? Will the good times return to this once picture perfect family ? What do you think ? C’mon, take a guess…you may even be right…

There are several parallel stories – RV is a live for today / who cares about tomorrow kind of guy – buys everything on instalments, blows money on nice cars / fancy rings etc. Radhika, even though she is the daughter of a very successful businessman, is stingy (maybe ‘value-obsessed’ would be more politically correct ?), the planning type of person – for ex: was planning to be a pianist since she was ten. Also, the father (the rich businessman) strictly disapproves of RV – he has no degree, has the wrong attitude, cannot plan for the future etc. Who do you think is right ? Which way of life is better ?

There are some other niggles I had but the main one was that the kids (Champ & Princess, aged about 4 and 8 approximately) are completely from another planet – they are too saccharine / too understanding / too doll-like, so nice that you feel like shaking them up. Both have that ‘kuch kuch hota hai’ type halting way of speaking with the exaggerated gestures and it’s just too fake !

The good moments

• Jaaved Jaafri (he’s changed his spelling) was very good at least initially, with several very good one-liners as a Gujju taxi-driver / team manager.
• A couple of the car races were real adrenalin pumping, high-voltage sequences.
• They touched on several valid issues – the importance of having a degree / planning for the future / ensuring you have things like insurance (especially medical) / not over-extending yourself on credit cards & loans, even though it was in passing.
  

Saif does what he does best, playing a lovable ruffian as only he can, the man with several flaws but with a heart of gold. Rani turns in a good performance but the mini-skirts in the initial bits really did not suit her. Also, her character was not developed properly, I mean what was she doing when her hubby was racing / winning all those years – where were her planning / her saving instincts ? Why wasn’t she completing her piano degree, paying off the bills, forcing Saif to also save something / invest in insurance etc ? The music was a disappointment as well – nothing that hummable and nothing that will survive a couple of months. There are too many other logical flaws but I cannot give those away without disclosing the whole movie / story (what I’ve given away above may seem like too much but you would get as much by even watching the trailer).

It’s a movie which I think couldn’t make its mind up – it should have either tried to be an out and out action-filled thriller a la Dhoom2 / Don or a family drama about the clash of life-styles between Saif / Rani a la Hum Tum. It tries to be both and so doesn’t succeed in either.

One last point – in the final race, the whole Saif team is sporting the Indian tri-colour in their uniform ? Are they allowed to do that ? They also kissed each other in the movie - now surely thats not allowed as well ? Shouldn’t we be burning some effigies here ? Whats the world coming to if people can display their patriotism for India / their affections for each other so openly ?

Good Bye Lenin

This is one of the movies which makes you wish you knew its original language (German), since it was so good even through the English sub-titles, that you can only imagine how good it must be in its native German…

Its about a single-parent family in East Germany a few months before the collapse of communism. The mother, an idealistic socialist / party worker, goes into coma when she watches her teen-age son get arrested. Her coma lasts eight months during which time the world as she knows changes completely – the Berlin wall is broken down, Germany is reunited, communism is replaced by capitalism etc. Doctors warn her children that any further shock can be fatal, so her son decides to protect her from all the recent developments and recreates her old world for her in her room at home. One thing leads to another, the deception soon acquires a life of its own with hilarious consequences and keeps getting bigger as the mother becomes more active (she wants to watch TV / starts to walk).

The sub-titles are brilliantly written – dripping with sarcasm and one-liners. The plot is outstanding – there are situations like the Coca cola banner which is unfurled over a nearby building / the Spreewald pickles / the mom’s birthday which are superbly tackled. You really admire the son’s determination to protect his mother at all costs and his ingenuity in coming up with solutions to all the problems – even as his sister and his girlfriend want him to tell her the truth.

Its simply compulsive watching and leaves you marveling at the creative idea behind the film… hats off to Wolfgang Becker for co-writing and directing this masterpiece.

The Namesake

I know which book I’m going to read next – I haven’t read more than three in the last decade, succumbing to the more shallow pleasures of the audio-visual media (tv / movies) instead – but this one I will definitely read.

It’s a beautiful movie, very well made by Mira Nair. Its a simple, touching account of how Ashok Ganguli (Irfan Khan), meets his wife, Ashima (Tabu), takes her to New York and then, as their children, Gogol and Sonya grow up, how all of them cope with their dual identities (are they American or Indian ?). The tale is told very simply, almost like a salad without garnishing, but that only enhances the story, makes us more aware of the ripeness and flavour of the vegetables on offer.

It was very refreshing to watch this movie as opposed to the normal Bollywood potboiler. There are actual ‘pauses’, interludes when no one is doing anything dramatic, just living / being normal. It really helps us understand the central characters, but it does so effortlessly, almost without spending too much time with them. It moves quite seamlessly from one chapter to another in the lives of the Ganguli’s. It shows us a glimpse of what they are going through – whether its childbirth, the loss of a loved one or even a holiday to India - and then it moves on. It doesn’t try to dramatise the situations or try to force us to feel the emotions the characters are going through – however, the tears or laughter from those around me in the audience showed that they got through !

There are lovely little touches throughout the movie – when Tabu is in hospital to give birth (has recently shifted to USA and is still not used to their culture), she asks the nurse if she can have a longer hospital maternity dress as their standard issue is only knee length. There was the realistic depiction of the trauma that all NRI’s go through when we have to endlessly spell our names over the phone. There was the hilarious episode when a teen-aged Gogol, while on a holiday to Kolkatta, decides to go for a jog on the streets. And there was the authentic portryal of Kolkatta – complete with dilapidated buildings, the sea of eccentric humanity that infests it and its quirky highlights including the tram, the boats on the Hooghly, the brightly coloured sari’s hung to dry from the buildings, Durga Pooja etc. Also, I could easily relate to the ‘dinner with other Indian families’ where the conversation is all about India and after a few drinks, everyone starts singing (quite terribly, in most cases), very old songs.



Tabu and Irfan Khan were exceptional in the movie. Irfan makes for an extremely convincing Bengali academic, a bit lost / measured, living life his way / at his own pace and showing a remarkable ability to do or say the right thing at the right time. He may not always understand his children but he knows when to step in or let go. Tabu is the quintessential, good Bengali girl (very good-looking / she cooks / knits / is a trained classical singer etc) who maintains her own identity even while living in America. She is enigmatic (as in the above photo), yet very pragmatic. When asked by her prospective father in law, whether she won't mind moving to USA, being in the freezing / very cold winters of New York and whether she won't mind being lonely, her eyes at first betray her alarm / her fear of the unknown life ahead, but then she smiles and shyly says ‘Why, wont he be there ?’. Kal Penn, as Gogol, was very good as well, making us understand the dilemma’s that his character faced. And a special mention of Zuleikha Robinson, who as Moushumi Mazumdar, played an Americanised version of the stereotypical sultry Bengali siren with great aplomb !

I think this movie will bear several viewings quite easily – there will be new little details / many layers revealing themselves everytime we watch the movie. It raises several questions about life, the choices we make, our roots, how we bring up our kids. Yet quite amazingly, for a movie dealing in such heavy topics, it doesn’t feel ‘heavy’, it doesn’t burden you with the questions. And while it does tug at our heartstrings as we experience the Ganguli’s journey through life, it doesn’t try to take you through an emotional rollercoaster. You leave the cinema hall with a strange calm, a nice, warm, happy, peaceful feeling.

Sarkar

In case you didn’t know, this is Ram Gopal Verma’s tribute to Godfather. Its gripping, its intense (no songs), it transfers quite masterfully the Italian tour-de-force to Indian (Mumbai’s) shores. Amitabh was good in the lead role, the supporting cast (specially KK Menon) were excellent, but for me Abhishek stole the show – he was outstanding in his rendition of Michael Coreleone, impish and relaxed on one hand and serious, very much the ‘its business, not personal’ kind of guy on the other.

However, unlike the book and to an extent even the English movie, somethings are not explained that well – for example the rise of Sarkar, how / why, his style of working and why he is a darling of the masses, Abhishek’s entry into the business / his thought process. And of course the end – in Godfather, there is a neatness about the end which is lacking here…its kind of there but not quite….The direction / cinematography is very good, the movie is a bit too dark though…its deliberate and I guess helps maintain the intensity of the movie, but it does also not make you feel you know any of the characters well enough, gives the movie a claustrophobic air. I also lamented how unrecognizable Supriya Pathak had become – from being the doe-eyed sultry siren of my adolescent years, she really does seem to have let go, I couldn’t believe it was her !

If you haven’t seen Godfather or read the book, you’re going to love it. If you have, you’ll probably just settle for ‘it’s a very good movie’.

Delhi Heights

This is a movie where, in corporate parlance, the product fails to meet expectations or deliver on the concept. The idea was nice – show a modern society, the type which are increasingly dotting the landscape of NCR, show the lives of a few of its inhabitants and how they interconnect (that actually still does happen in Delhi / Gurgaon / Noida, unlike in Mumbai where you can live for 10 years without really knowing your neighbours).

However, the execution was flat, marred by a weak script and very ordinary acting. The jokes didn’t really make you laugh that loud, in some cases not even chuckle. There were too many stereotypes (the jovial sikh, the flirty advertising guy etc), too many predictable events (a Punjabi wedding, senti speeches) and nothing much really happens in the movie – the whole movie was basically one storm in a teacup after another. They touch on some very valid issues which most working couples will appreciate but then fail to tackle them / depict them realistically and end up resorting to ‘filmi’ dialogue, the “mujhe maaf kardo (sob sob…)” or even the “bas, mujhe ek mauka aur do” type, which is followed yet again by the (sob, sob !). Also, there are some movies where the supporting cast look natural, fit into their characters and it almost seems like you are watching everyone being who they really are (as in Omkara, for example). And there are some, like Delhi Heights, where every supporting cast member looks like he’s posing for the camera, is playing a prescribed part….

Jimmy Sheirgill – check out the extra ‘i’ in the name, I’m all ‘i’s for him now (sorry – couldn’t resist…) – plays the same old sensitive, good boy role (in Punjabi we say ‘biba munda’) that he’s played in all his successful movies so far (Munnabhai, Hum Tum etc). Its boring now, he needs to do something different, add a new dimension. Neha Dhupia was good – not excellent but good, maybe even very good – seriously, there is an actress in her behind that cleavage. Om Puri tried to do the best he could – there could possibly be two or three other honourable mentions but nothing really that stood out. Rabbi’s music was also a disappointment overall – one very nice song (tere bin, o soniya) but the others were quite forced and also, its true not just for this movie, but have Bollywood directors given up in general on trying to make the playback singers voice match the actors voice who are depicted doing the actual singing ?

It could have been so much better. In its current shape though, it was like drinking champagne without bubbles or a very flat beer. And trust me, neither is a very attractive proposition…

Vir Sanghvi's ill-informed article

I read an article in HT, written by Vir Sanghvi, via cricinfo blog - which made my blood boil. its ill-informed, ill-intentioned and runs down my countrymen without rhyme nor reason...

you can read the article at

http://epaper.hindustantimes.com/artMailDisp.aspx?article=01_04_2007_012_001&typ=1&pub=47

i was sufficiently moved to sit down and write a reply which is published in full below

"Rarely have I read an article which is so flawed as your article about cricket !!!!

All your points are incorrect and rubbish the very people who actually comprise your audience….

Let me take the easy idiocies you’re making first
a)the French example you gave about being magnanimous – the president inviting the team over despite their having lost in the finals. First, they had reached the finals so clearly had done well. The Indians were also treated very well – same presidential invites / awards when they came back having being creamed in the final in ’03. Second, the same French public had headlines like ‘Scandal’ / ‘Pardon’ when the French team (the defending champions) had crashed out in the group stage in the ’02 world cup in japan / korea. They were not at all so magnanimous then and there were wholesale calls for most of the team to be axed / fingers pointed at the system / the coach was sacked etc. Not too dissimilar to what is happening here, perhaps ?
b) We weren’t no-hopers in the cup : contrary to what you’re saying India was actually second-favourites for most of the last year and at the start of the tournament was joint second favourite with south Africa. The odds on India to be eliminated at group stage were 1:23 on bet365. So, the Indian audience wasn’t dreaming – the team did underperform spectacularly. Even to quote you – the base expectation was being a semi-finalist (even the chairman of selectors, Vengsarkar had said the same) – so to be eliminated at group stage is a huge come-down !
c) Indian gullibility : I hate pseudo-intellectuals like you who run down your own countrymen. Tarot cards / Faith healers / séances / God-men exist in the west. The very birth of religion is attributed to lack of knowledge – as our knowledge grows religion occupies a lesser role in life. For example- before there used to be a sun-god / a wind god, a god of the sea / the moon – almost anything that we could not understand. Now most such ‘elemental’ Gods have disappeared globally. As India’s literacy develops, Gods / religions will reduce… if you compare the metros and the rural villages, the point is proven as it is if you compare the west say 100 years ago when illiteracy was rampant there as well. So, to label Indians as gullible because of poverty / illiteracy betrays a lack of human nature / process of evolution
d) Western Gullibility : I have lived in UK / Holland for the last 7 years – come soccer world cup time, the same hysteria develops there. In Britain last few tournaments (the Euro ’04 and WC ’06 & ’02) they ran out of flags – every car / home was bedecked with 6-8, people were buying union jack underwear etc. And the odds on either country to lift the cup were significantly lower – they have a disastrous record in cups (have never gone beyond the semi’s apart fm ’66) but each time if you look at the papers / the ads its almost like they just have to turn up and win / the whole tournament is almost a formality. You’re welcome to browse through the archives – you wont find the hysteria / the ‘gullibility’ as you call it – any less than what we see with Indian cricket.
e) I don’t think there is anything wrong in blaming the players / coach for the debacle and not the BCCI : the team was pretty much what most people would’ve selected – most people (including ex-cricketers) till today feel the team was right – at most you can carp on 1 or 2 slots, not more. So why blame the BCCI ? at the end, net net, the players / coach did not perform. Simple. Yes – there are some over-reactions – however – if you look at the English press, you will see that it is not as extreme as you’re making it out to be. Right now their coach is under extreme pressure despite having won his last match against Andorra and drawn the previous two. When there was a referee (a swiss gentleman, I think his name was Merk) who was perceived by the English to have given a couple of decisions against them in Euro’04, his phone number was published in the newspapers and he received several calls full of abuse/ death threats etc and chose to retire immediately. In spain, for their club soccer matches – especially those involving Barcelona and Real Madrid – people have thrown a pigs head against people perceived to have wronged the club / burnt their uniforms etc. Again, this is not too far removed from indians

i'm not for one second condoning the destruction of dhoni's house / targetting the players or their kin physically but honestly, i'm not against the odd rotten egg or tomato being thrown at them when they arrive at their next PR event. And i'm definitely against an article like yours which blames the passionate indian public for showing their passion when the team fails !
You’re being unfair / unkind to your fellow countrymen and are sitting in an ivory tower…get real !!!!
You can read some of my other thoughts about cricket / movies at www.apurvbollywood.blogspot.com

Apurv"

The Great Tragedy of Indian Cricket and its Suffering Supporters

I’m writing about this here as for sheer drama this is no less than an Othello or even your average Bollywood family drama – cant decide though, whether it should be classified as a thriller or a tear-jerker…

The early exit of the second-favourite’s for the tournament (odds ranged between 5.5 to 7.5 on most betting sites at different points in time over the last year), the side with the most experience (the Indian squad had over 2258 ODI’s between them – about 700 more than Australia and about 11 more than Sri Lanka), the side with the most money through endorsements (don’t think any stats are needed to prove this one) and for sure the side with the most (fanatical) supporters, has shocked one and all

Theories abound as to why this has happened – was it the coach, was it the captain, was it too many commercials. Was it the format ? Unlike the 2003 edition, where India played terribly for the first 2 games, but was still able to recover and reach the finals, this time if you got 2 games wrong, you were out…

I don’t think it was any one player/coach or even the format but more systemic (almost strategic) issues. I’ve boiled it down to a few simple ones - I’m going to look at a few factors which are not what most analysts / columns have been looking at.

Reason 1 : We had too many players who were past their prime
We were carrying a few stars who shouldn’t have been in the side if we looked at performance alone (and why shouldn’t we ?). I have a simple statistical method to prove this point, its something we often look at in business and is pretty eye-opening when you apply it to cricket / the Indian team. The principle is to compare your career average (whether batsman or bowler) to your more recent performances – for ease of comparison I have picked the last 15 matches and the last 50 matches. Since most of the persons I’m including in the analysis have played at least 150 matches, it does give a startling picture.
Now the ideal picture, of course, is that the Last 15 match average should be greater than the Last 50 match average which in turn should be greater than the Career average. This would imply that over the last year or so, the player is doing quite well and over the last couple of months has been in blistering form. Dravid and Ponting for example have such figures, where the pink line (last 15 matches average) is higher than the yellow line (last 50 matches) which is higher than the blue line (career average)(in case you're having problems viewing the graph, pls right click and open in a new window).

Sachin and Sehwag though make for somber reading – no sane, non-starstruck, performance oriented selection committee would have picked either of them. Their last 50 match average is below their career average and their last 15 match average is comfortably below even that ! In Sachin’s case, his last15 average is lower than his career average by 10 runs ! And, I’ve put them side by side, to demonstrate another more damning point – his 15 match average is lower than anyone else on the list except his clone and buddy, Sehwag’s. Also, because I’m sick of arguments in defense of Sehwag like ‘but he plays so aggressively’, ‘he’s a match-winner’, I’ve put in another player os Sehwag’s ilk, the man who is the oldest player in the list, Sanath Jayasuriya. While their career averages are somewhat similar, Sanath’s Last 15 or Last 50 average is higher than Sehwag’s by 10 runs !!! So, it is possible to be aggressive, yet consistent when it matters !

If you thought this was bad, wait till we do the bowling ! I looked at the same indicators for two measures – the bowling average (ie runs conceded per wickets taken) and economy rate (ie runs conceded per over bowled).
So, both Bhajji and Kumble are leaking more runs per over than they used to and also, the miserly Kumble turns out to be not so miserly after all, conceding almost 2 runs per over more than either Murali or Pollock. This equates to almost 20 runs more per match (assuming they bowl their full quota of 10 overs) for the batting side. Also, as an aside, both Murali and Pollock have their last 15 match econ rate well below their career econ rates…


Of course, this wouldn’t matter if either of our spin twins were taking more wickets – or taking more wickets per runs conceded to be more precise. But that is not the case either. Harbhajan has actually doubled !!!! His every wicket now (last 15 average) costs a mind-boggling 60 runs vs his career average of 30 (Murali or Pollock cost approx 17 runs each, last 15). The contrast for both Bhajji and Kumble in terms of either the numbers (the actual averages) or the trends (the last 15 average being well below the career average) cannot be more stark vs Murali or Pollock. I know whom I would prefer in my team….

So – if players like Tendulkar or Harbhajan are being picked, where their last 15 match averages are worse than their last 50 match averages and they are in turn worse than their career averages…plus the actual number (last 15) is much worse than that of their peer group (either in the Indian team or outside), then clearly, they are being picked on the basis of their proud past / their star billing, without paying heed to their pathetic present !

Reason 2 : Joie de Vivre
It’s a soft factor but I feel an important one. I think a French phrase which means ‘Hearty or carefree enjoyment of life’ best sums up how all of us should live life. I’m paid a decent amount for actually doing what I enjoy (marketing/innovating). Cricketers, especially the Indian ones, are actually paid obscene amounts to do what is supposed to be their passion (play cricket). Yet, especially compared to other cricketers, there was/is a complete lack of Joie De Vivre !! I loved watching the Bermudan’s and Bangladeshi’s play – their enthusiasm and joy was infectious. The way they used to celebrate each opposition wicket, they way they were smiling / laughing / joking on the field – even when the chips were down…it was a lesson to the superstars of the Indian team on how to play. And it wasn’t just them – battle hardened teams like Sri Lanka and Australia still seem to be enjoying the game. The Sri Lankan’s in the match against us clearly wanted to win more than us, were jumping / bouncing / loving every minute on the field while the Indians seemed to have the weight of the world / the burden of a billion people on their shoulders.

I know that the pressure on the Indian team is probably the most – but that’s always been the case / its nothing new and each player in their past must have developed a way of coping with this. They’ve forgotten the old principle of ‘Laughter is the Best Medicine’ and also the fact that keeping their sense of humour intact could be a fantastic way of releasing that very pressure.

I can’t even remember when I last saw an Indian player actually laugh heartily during a post match interview. I recently was watching Hayden being interviewed just before a key game, the South Africa group match, and in response to a question he was actually laughing for a full minute before he was able to resume the interview. I think the Indian players have forgotten how to laugh, how to enjoy themselves while playing what is supposed to be their first love…they’ve forgotten why they took up this game in the first place and behave more like 9-5’ers rather than a group which is having fun doing what they do best !

Reason 3 : Too many Dot Balls / Over-reliance on boundaries
I wasn’t able to pull up the stats for this one but over the last year or so, I noticed this dangerous tendency once again. We used to have this long ago – when Kapil / Gavaskar were still around – when most batsman would ignore the singles / two’s and deal mainly in 4’s and 6’s. God alone knows how many matches this has lost us…keeping the scoreboard moving eliminates risk, keeps most run rates within touching distance, transfers the pressure back on the fielding side…I could go on here. For a while – I think it was in 2005 – we’d actually started becoming good at this. Kaif / Yuvraj / Dravid were all pretty lethal at this and nicely counterbalanced the all out attack of the three S’s - Sachin / Saurav / Sehwag. Neither of the first three suffered from poor strike rates either and each of them (especially Dravid) had developed a knack of reaching his 50 in about 50/60 balls, having hit just 1-2 boundaries, without offering any chance whatsoever to the opposition of giving his wicket away.

Recently, this has been replaced by either of two extreme’s – either attack or solid defense. Attack implying either a four or six – and this has an inherent danger of giving your wicket away if you try to do this consistently (ask Sehwag / Dhoni, they know this all too well first hand). Defense, unfortunately, has started to imply dead bats and dot balls. The moment the batting is under pressure due to an eary loss of a wicket (and thanks to Sehwag, we’ve become pretty accustomed to this), we’ll have different people (Sachin / Saurav / Dravid) coming in and just stone-wall the bowlers. They seem to be waiting for the loose ball to punish, without realizing that most professional teams have made this commodity as rare as the Bengal Tiger.

I’ve witnessed live matches like the Champion’s Trophy clash against the West Indies in Ahmedabad where we had something like 180 dot balls. That’s in a game where the total balls received (50 overs) is 300 !!! How can we expect to win if we do this ? Imagine the pressure to score off the remaining 120 deliveries – even if we say a par score is approx 250 runs, then if we let 30 overs (180 balls) go by without scoring, we have to score at more than 12 runs per over to reach the par score. The situation, of course, becomes worse if we are chasing as then there is the additional pressure of having a definite target to reach / a sort of a do or die mode.

Reason 4 : Fielding
If I was leading the Indian board, I would offer Jonty Rhodes a blank cheque and ask him to takeover as fielding coach. Lord knows we need him. Again, too many players who are content to be ordinary when excellence is the need / minimum requirement of the day. I could break this down in terms of any stat – throws which hit the wicket / run-outs / half chances dropped / boundaries stopped etc etc and I think the answer would be crystal clear. India and Pakistan are probably the two worst fielding sides in the tournament. Is it a coincidence that these are the two that are on the early flight home ?

In a perverse, a bit self-centered kind of way, the tournament is poorer without India and Pakistan. Cricket is not evolved as football - there the defending champions / hot favourites can exit in the group stage (happened in 2002 with France and Argentina getting knocked out early) without making the tournament poorer. The Indian supporters provide much of the colour and atmosphere in cricket events. I was there for the famous Natwest Series final at Lord’s where all the sound / support (even when India was 5 down) was coming from the Indian section. India also provides the bums on the seat – the Windies super 8 match against Australia in Antigua had vast stretches of empty seats / it wasn’t even half full. This is unimaginable for an India match – we could be playing a super 8 match on the moon and it would still have full attendance.

I as a cricket fan, have suffered as much or probably more than most others. For the last year, I / my family have been planning our trip to the Caribbean for the world cup. Call it arrogance or short sightedness, I bought tickets almost as soon as they went on sale for all of India’s (team B2’s) Super 8 matches and the semi-final and final. I bought four such tickets and planned to take my family along, including my wife, parents and two kids. For the last three months hardly a day has gone by when we were not in some way or form searching the internet / calling up travel agents for flights or accommodation in the Windies. All of this is now down the drain…there is only a certain feeling of loss, an emptiness, a sense of surreal-ness as I watch a super 8 contest sans India. And, oh !, there are some huge cancellation bills !

Here’s to the vain hope that the Board / the captain and the coach get it right next time….

Being Cyrus

This is an interesting movie but not for those with a queasy, nervous disposition nor those looking for something conventional or a light hearted film for a few laughs.

I saw this at home, with my family, who were squirming / shifting uneasily as the movie progressed, on a DVD kindly sent by Munish Puri (one of the producers, met him through work and we discovered a common passion).

This is an English movie with a fantastic line-up of character actors, starring Saif Ali Khan as Cyrus, an orphan, who along with his sister, has grown up painfully in a series of foster homes. He is now a grown-up drifter and lands up unannounced at the residence of Dinshaw Sethna (Naseeruddin Shah), a once famous, internationally renowned Parsi potter, who now leads the life of a weed-smoking recluse in Panchgani. Cyrus begins to take lessons from him and also befriends his acerbic, frustrated wife, Katy (Dimple Kapadia) who longs for better days and a more social life (preferably in Mumbai). They had seen better days, and Dinshaw’s father used to own a whole building in Mumbai, but now the father is a prisoner of his ultra-aggressive younger son, Farokh Sethna (Boman Irani), who has taken over the property, confined the father to a claustrophobic, dilapidated room and bullies all those around him, including his meek, pretty young wife Tina (Simone Singh).

The movie throughout seems to suggest something going on beyond the superficial. And in the second half, the sinister undertone / motives take over and come to life. It certainly made my family sit up and converted the movie from a less than ordinary movie to something more interesting. And while a combination of having seen too many movies and a hyperactive imagination meant that I was able to predict the end, I enjoyed watching something different, something a little macabre, a little quirky.

One area where I definitely would have done something differently vs Homi Adajania (the first time director of the movie) would have been in the overall mood of the film – I would have opted for a more light hearted approach, especially in the first half. There are quite a few chuckles in the movie but there is still a somber, almost menacing undercurrent which you’re unable to shake-off. I think the audience would have been better entertained by a Jekyll & Hyde movie of two contrasting halves – a brighter, racier first half, followed by the dramatic events of the second.

I wouldn’t have been so impressed by Saif’s Langda Tyagi in Omkara if I’d seen this before. The witty, light-hearted, rascally Saif of movies like Hum Tum and Salaam Namaste is suddenly an unrecognizable, brooding, introspective Cyrus Mistry. I thought he was excellent. Everyone else fulfils their / their characters potential while a special mention must be made of a delightful cameo by Manoj Pahwa as Inspector Maninder Lovely.

If I scan through all the reviews, it is rated as a must watch. I wouldn’t go that far, especially if you’ve seen a few English film noir’s (Maltese Falcon / Body Heat etc) or even some classic Hitchcock’s (Rope / Psycho spring to mind). However, if you’re a pre-dominantly Hindi movie watcher, I would tend to agree. Its not something that’s going to make you go ‘Wow !’, but more like ‘Hmmm, where did that come from…’