Midnight In Paris

I just watched Midnight In Paris - a movie written and directed by Woody Allen. It just reinforces my respect for the guy's creative genius. I had seen his Annie Hall, and though that movie didn't have a 'story' per se, it had clicked big time because of the character detailing (including their eccentricities), dialogues, realism and goofyness of the protagonist. 

Midnight In Paris is like a second installment in many ways. The themes and details of both the films are totally different. But within first ten minutes of the film itself you start seeing glimpses of Annie Hall 'isque characters, eccentricities, subtle shades of each characters, and you immediately appreciate that it's not a usual movie with loud hints and mannerisms, but a classy one with subtle treatment and a Woody Allen stamp on it. And I don't mean it in a cliched way. 

The movie uses time-travel, but that's not the point of the movie. Real thing is the fantasy of what would happpen after such a time travel. It's not about time-travel, but it's about what happens when a wannabe author, who likes to engage in nostalgia, finds himself in the middle of the age in the past which he likes to think of as the golden age. 

Don't we all have the tendancy to indulge in the bouts of such nostalgia? Don't we think of the 50s and 60's and 70's when the world was a simple place to live, when there were not much vehicles on the street, when there were no overloaded communication devices to attend to, when there used to be gifted authors, gifted musicians, singers, when one could attend to those Maifils/Katha-kathans/Sabhas when legends like Atre, Savarkar, P L Deshpande were around? Don't we think the golden age was when the Indian Freedom Movement was gaining momentum? when you could intermingle and get inspired by the like of Chaphekar brothers, Savarkars, Bhagatsinghs, Sukhdevs, Bose, Azads, etc? 

The movie is not about time-travel, it's not about a love story between characters of different era either, though there is subtle one going on. It's actually and really about the craving desire that we all have about how the current era we are living in, sucks, in comparison with some era in the past. 

The crux of the movie comes when this girl from past (1920s), with whom our protagonist is in love with, goes to some era in her past (1850s), which she thinks of as a golden age, and the guys from that era think some other era in their past (rennaissance) was the actual golden age! An intriguing reminder to us all that the grass can be greener on our side as well, from the perspective of some other side. The strength of the movie is how subtly this very message is conveyed. No preachings, no pedantics, no in-your-face dialogues. Just a subtle transition and it makes one think. 

There was this one scene I really liked in the movie. Gil, the protagonists, asks a lady guide in a theme park, if it's possible for one person to love two women at the same time. He gives a reference to some artist in the 1920s, and she says "well, he loves both of those women differently!". He startles, gathers himself, and says - "well, yeah, I forgot you people (the french) are more evolved in this department." That was bang on! Exactly how I perceive them to be. Going by the French movies I have watched so far, or the French characters I have seen so far, I have come to have similar opinions about those people. 

The movie is a gem. I especially like the goofy yet intellectual treatment of the topic, which, probably because I have come to like Annie Hall so much, seems like having a Woody Allen signature on it. I somehow manage to relate to both these characters (Woody Allen's from Annie Hall, and Owen Wilson's from this Midnight In Paris) a lot. 

Aside from this, I feel, had Woody Allen been not as old as he is, he would have acted in it himself instead of Owel Wilson. Like he did in Annie Hall. And he would have done even more justice to the character, not because Owel Wilson was bad, oh no, but because I think he made that character for himself (or keeping his character from Annie Hall in mind)

This one will sit there along with Annie Hall as one of my all time favourites, for sure.

Movie Review - Inglorious Basterds

Quentin Tarantino is a genius. And though I can't resist to count him among the likes of Spielberg and Polansky and Coppola; he unmistakably has a thoroughly different and somewhat whacky style of film direction. The guy just throws the conventional film making norms out of the door. He creates his own norms and however unorthodox they seem, they actually turn out to be quite effective. An example would be the character introductions that he gives, like the ones in Kill Bill (which even had a animated strip as Gogo's intro, if I remember her name correctly) and the Stiglitz's character intro in Inglorious Basterds. His style is refreshingly different and I have high regards for him especially because he dares to swim against the tide and makes it successfully more often than not.

The kind of violence he shows in his movies, would drive the public aways ouf of disgust; but he takes the risk. The kind of non-linear story-lines he chooses for his movies, would confuse the masses; but he takes the risk. His movies are violent, but they bear hallmarks of great direction despite the violence. High-speed artistic photography, pacy action, puking-point violence, lively screenplay, intriguing dialogues - all bear the hallmark of a genius director. And now with Inglorious Basterds, one more Tarantino special - fictional storyline which twists the world history involving high-profile characters like Hitler himself!

The Inglorious Basterds story is about an anti-nazi Jewish-American gorilla group that existed in real-life history; but Tarantino takes it from there, and depicts a fictional plot to kill the higher echelons of Nazi political circle, including Hitler himself. The story and the screenplay is very intense and would catch and keep your full attention till the end. All the interrogation scenes are so well-thought out that you can actually feel the tention building up in the air. The direction, photography and acting, especially the facial expressions, are just remarkable. The opening scene of the interrogation of the farmer who is hiding jews; or the one in randezevous basement where the gestapo officer catches the bluff of the undercover british agent; are masterpieces.

Apart from Tarantino, the credit for the extra-ordinary appeal of Inglorious Basterds, also goes to Christoph Waltz for his powerful depiction of Colonel Hans Landa. The character is so intense and powerful, that in my opinion it's next only to Heath Ledger's surreal Joker from The Dark Knight. Given my not-so-good knowledge about hollywood actors and films, I haven't seen Waltz' any other film, so I didn't know him before the movie. But I am going to remember his performance for a long time for sure. The character depiction is just as good as it gets.

So all in all, Inglorious Basterds is a Tarantino classic, and a must watch. If you aren't familiar with Tarantino's style or haven't seen his other movies like Kill Bill, I would recommend to watch his movies on an empty stomach. His movies contain puking-point graphic violence. To his credit though, Tarantino knows to stop just before the public would start puking! So if you can digest that, you are in for a treat.

Movie Review - 3 Idiots

If you have seen Dil Chahta Hai and Rang De Basanti (which you should have, if you understand Hindi and appreciate even a bit of quality cinema), you are in for a dissapointment with this one.

When it comes to an Amir Khan movie, the expectations are always sky high. I guess, this weight of expectation might compare with what Sachin Tendulkar would have felt in the 90s when he would come in to bat. Due to Amir's past of Lagaan, Dil Chahta Hai, Rang De Basanti, Taare Zameen Par, it's but natural to expect 3 Idiots to be of the same calibre. Unfortunately, in my frank opinion, 3 Idiots doesnt fit in that same league. In fact, in comparison, it's quite bad.

Throughout the movie, Amir Khan's body language doesnt seem that natural; he looks rather concious of his appearance or his acting, than he should have while carrying off that character of a 20-something. And contrary to what people are saying, I felt Amir, at ~45yrs, didn't look a 20-something at all. He looked a bit too mature and reserved for his age and character.

Worn Out Jokes

3 Idiots being a movie about engineering college students, being based on the amazing 5-Point-Someone book, obvious expectations were a laughter riot with quality jokes. But even on that front, the film doesnt deliver much. There was no novelty in most of the jokes, as they were heard/read/seen before. Like, for example, the space pen or the induction motor startup and many other.

Way too Much Masala

The thing that surprised me most was the amount of masala scenes that defy logic and sensibilities in order to appeal to the mass public. This movie is full of such blatantly masala scenes. Something that people hardly expect from an Amir Khan movie. Time and again, you are reminded that you are watching a Hindi movie; like when Amir Khan drives the moped right into the hospital, or when baby is delived using a vaccum cleaner running on an inverter which in turn is running on car batteries or when the delivered baby doesnt cry but kicks on 'hearing' "all is well"!! Even a Mithun Chakravarty movie would have made more sense. Another thing I remember in the last scene, when the newborn baby doesnt cry for a long time, everybody thinks the baby is dead on delivery and then, this guy tells the mother to keep her hands on her heart and say 'all is well'!! I mean, there lies this lady whose newborn baby is supposedly not alive. Imagine the trauma she would have been going through. And in such a situation, how insensitive it is to tell her to say 'all is well'...?? What nonsense!!

Brownie Points

Though the overall impression of the movie is pretty bad, there are few scenes which are really hillarious. First scene that comes to mind is the chamatkar-balatkar-dhan-stan scene, which though seemingly little manipulated, generates huge laughter. Another would be one when both Rancho and director Virus throw the keys to director's office for fetching some instruments. Boman Irani, as usual, creates a masterpiece of character as Director Viru Sahastrabuddhe aka Virus.

Conclusion

All in all, I would say the movie is definitely a one-time-watch, but at the same time, dont expect too much from it. To reiterate, it's not in the league of DCH or RDB, as one would like to expect. This time, surprisingly, Amir slips on the high standard that he has set for himself.

Rating?? If I were a film critic, I would have given it 3 stars out of 5.

Movie Review - James Cameron's Avatar

Actually it's quite a long time, almost couple of week, since I saw Avatar, but had quite a few opinions about it, which I very much felt like putting into a blog.

First things first. I saw Avatar in probably the best location in India - the IMAX Dome in Wadala, Mumbai. The screen there, was monstrous, in comparison with what I had seen till date - 3 to 4 times larger than normal screen I guess. We were almost in the first row. I dont know how it was from the back rows, but I actually felt myself in an advantageous position when the 3D promos of animation films started.

First time in my life, I experienced 3D. Before IMAX, I had a really horrendous experience in E-square Pune, with almost non-existent 3D for Ice Age 3. So this time, when I learnt that Avatar was being tipped as the best 3D film of the decade, I realised it was time to 'experience' 3D in the best location possible. IMAX dome has been touted as the biggest screen in Asia, and when you step in, you realise, that's not mere marketing. The screen is really huge.

The 3D promos themselves knocked us out, with the objects being thrown in our face, and we literally ducking under to avoid it hitting the face!! When you do that while watching a promo, with full knowledge of the virtualism involved, you know you are in for a treat with the main movie.

On that count, Avatar was mind-blowing. The experience was superb. The feel was awesome. The meeting places, the science labs they were all rendered 3D, and it felt like we were sitting right in the midst of it, and things were happening around us. We were blown away with respect to 3D and the highly detailed graphics. As has been said around the world, graphics in the film is amazing, with attention to tiniest of the details. It inspires awe. It was so good that, coupled with the 3D effects and the huge IMAX screen, we didnt realise that the film hardly had anything else to offer!!!

Poor storyline, bad acting, horrendous technial mistakes, all make the impressive graphics look excessive, in the hindsight. So much so, that you start wondering, if it's the same James Cameron who created Titanic. Also, few of the key concepts, are not novel either. The concept of donning an Avatar by connecting to the scientific cube, immediately reminds you of Matrix. The alien objects shown, bear so much resemblance with the humans and creatures on the earth that, you end up feeling like the Na'vi are living somewhere in the Amazons, untouched by humanity till date. The horses, the trees, the wild animals (resembling wolves and monkies), the social setup of the Na'vi all remind you of the similar things on Earth. So no novelty there either. Only the concepts of suspended mountains and Eiwa, with upload download of ages of knowledge, using their hair-connectors, seemed really cool and a very techie thing.

The abundant technical mistakes and logic defying, unbelievable scenes really dissapoint. Biggest one being - when Jack gets trapped in the jungle, alone, for the first time, what does he do to scare away wild animals? He uses a matchbox to light fire!! Now correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't pandora supposed to be an oxygen-deficient area? There are many such occasions, when you can't help but feel cheated(!).

Conclusion

Avatar is all about graphical effects and 3D. Don't expect too much from the storyline or try to apply logic. Hollywood class remains limited to graphics. It doesnt spill over into acting, story or even direction. To reiterate, given the poor storyline, bad acting, hasty screenplay and lack of conceptual novelty (which you come to expect with every movie dealing with aliens), the impressive graphical and 3D effects in the film, start looking excessive in the hindsight.

It's about 3D, so experience it in the best 3D location possible. I would definitely recommend IMAX Dome in Wadala, Mumbai.

If I were a film critic, I would not rate it more that 2 stars out of 5. And both stars exclusively for the graphics and 3D experience. Technorati Tags: avatar

Sex and the City

I have become a fan of Sarah Jessica Parker after I saw this movie. I haven't seen any of her other movies. Neither had I seen the original soap which aired on HBO by the same name. So the movie was a complete surprise for me … a pleasant one at that. Everything about this movie clicks. The movie doesn't have a 'strong' storyline viz-a-viz a Bond movie or a Batman movie. It's a story about four New York women, who happen to be close friends, and their intermingled lives; the lead story being that of Carrie Bradshaw (Sarah Jessica Parker) and her boyfriend (or manfriend as she calls him) Mr Big, and what happens in their lives when they decide to marry on Carrie's insistence as she wants to be a smart girl and have home for herself.

One can very much relate to the movie and it appears to be very realistic at many points. One would be when she throws her cellphone into the sea out of anger, and comes back to New York, the movie shows her disgusted about having a new New York extension for her new cell, as opposed to her older one which happens to be a central New York extension. Another would be when the marriage is over in a shocking manner, and she is at her friend's house, when it dawns on her that she no more has any clothes to wear apart from her wedding gown as she had moved into her new apartment (her after-wedding love-nest) and filled the (superb) closet (prepared for her by Big as promised) there with her clothes. Any other director wouldn't have given a damn about these 'trivial' things, but this is where this movie stands out.

Smart, humorous, touching dialogues is yet another reason one remains glued to the movie. The chemistry between Big and Carrie is very graceful. Add to that the scintillating smile of Sarah Jessica and the innocence that exudes from that effortless expression, and it becomes a treat to watch this movie.

The scenes that I liked a lot from the movie are when Carrie and Big are discussing about a possible marriage when Big says that he wants Carrie, and if marriage is the way that will make her happy then he won't mind it either. Or when in the final sequences, she goes to pick her $450 shoes from the apartment closet (because the new owners are due), finds Big standing there, runs into his arms narrating it as love taking over logic, and then explains to him the 'fun' part in their ordeal as – 'all the sorrows and agonies in their life started when they decided to live happily ever after!'

All in all, a fantastic movie. Must watch, especially for those who love watching romantic movies with scintillating dialogues and fantastic chemistry between lead characters.