GOAL MINER
Shah Rukh Khan plays a womenâs team coach in an entertaining, if not entirely satisfying hockey saga.
AUG 12, 2007 – IâM NOT SURE this is entirely intentional, but the first time Kabir Khan (played by that other Khan, Shah Rukh) steps into a hockey stadium and strolls through its expanse, we note that the plastic bucket-seats are a shade of orange, that the walls are painted white, and that thereâs nothing but the green of the playing field beyond â and this image beautifully sets up the crux of Shimit Aminâs Chak De India, which is about the national sport meeting the national spirit. Kabir is a former hockey player who takes on the only-in-the-movies task of making World Championship winners (in a mere three months) out of a disparate bunch of âchakla-belan chalaane wali Bharatiya nariyan.â? (Desi homemakers: thatâs how Anjan Shrivastava, hamming it up as the oily sports authority whoâs the mandatory villain-figure, dismisses the women making up the team.)
Chak De India is ostensibly the story of real-life Indian goalie Mir Ranjan Negi, but weâve seen these events unfold so many times on screen that the film slots itself instantly as A League of Their Own meets Prakash Jhaâs Hip Hip Hurray. This is a similarly â and expertly â well-oiled compilation of sporting clichés that, on paper, make you groan but never fail to get you each time on screen: the underdog aiming for the million-to-one shot at glory, the team being a microcosm of India (with each player from a different state), the rebel who comes around in the end for the common cause, the infighting, the outsize egos, and, perhaps the biggest cliché of them all, the washed-up coach seeking redemption. But the way the latter comes through is anything but cliché. As was the case with the mopey loser he played in Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna, Kabir Khan is another gutsy character choice for our biggest star, and whatâs gutsier is the way he appears to have surrendered to the directorâs vision of this character.
Amitabh Bachchan played a character with a similar arc â a once-successful man who goes underground after being disgraced, only to return and redeem himself as some sort of savior â in Kaala Paththar (Yash Chopraâs underrated retooling of Joseph Conradâs Lord Jim), but where Amitabh roiled with angst, Shah Rukh approaches his destiny with almost Zen calm. Thereâs, of course, that trademark shot of Shah Rukhâs â the one where a close-up reveals a face almost entirely immobile save for the region around the mouth, the ever-so-slight tremors around the thinly-pursed lips suggesting that the actor forgot to spit out the gum he was chewing before the director yelled âAction!â? But otherwise, this is a remarkably restrained performance.
He rarely raises his voice except on the odd occasion where he breaks up a catfight between the girls, and even his rah-rah, pre-match inspiration speeches come across as extraordinarily rehearsed; his measured tones make it appear that he isnât addressing a group of would-be giant killers so much as a bunch of little old ladies bent over their embroidery. Another movie â one that went for easy melodrama (not that thereâs anything wrong with easy melodrama) â may have had him break down before his team about his infamy, an incident that would have spurred them to avenge their father-figure, but all Kabir does here is spur them to play for their country, and for each other. This is a film about team spirit in its truest sense.
But as wonderful it is to see the biggest name in our cinema today sharing equal time with a group of no-names â and as wonderful as Shah Rukh is â this performance (rather, the conception of this character) throws the movie off a bit. Chak De India canât resist giving its hero a back story, but itâs also extremely coy about filling us in on this back story. I loved that the years Kabir Khan spent in self-imposed exile, after being disgraced, are a mystery to us. Late in the film, we see him fingering the silver medal he won after his flub cost his team the gold, and itâs not easy to read him. Itâs a private moment that stays private; only he knows why he chose to come back as the coach of the flailing womenâs team, that too after seven long â and surely agonising â years away from the game.
But is Chak De India really the kind of film where we want unspoken internal monologues? Somewhere along the line, I began to get the feeling that this is one time Shah Rukh really needed to have played to the gallery â for almost everyone else plays the broadest of caricatures, and the narrative itself is the broadest of contrivances. Scene for scene, I could sense the director trying to break away from filmmaking cliché â and yet, his story, his very format is a giant cliché. What is Javed Khanâs part if not an updated version of the benevolent Ramu kaka that was once AK Hangalâs stock-in-trade? What is it if not a lazy stereotype that the actress who plays the Punjabi team member has the kind of build that instantly qualifies her as a potential lead in a Hunterwali remake? What is it if not an easy potshot that a playerâs cricket-star fiancé is a chauvinistic boor who all-too-expectedly sneers at her hockey-star aspirations? And what is it if not pathetic-fallacy melodrama that a key moment of conflict â okay, internal conflict â occurs during a major downpour, the skies weeping for our heroâs plight?
Kabir Khan seems to belong in a different movie than one containing these beloved elements of our popular cinema, one whose eardrum-busting background score all but holds up cue cards about the emotions youâre meant to register at any point. And yet, thereâs no denying that part of the attraction of Chak De India is watching it flip-flop between what it could have easily been (a flat-out pump-your-fist-in-the-air sporting flick) and what it strives nobly to be (a more grounded, more textured pump-your-fist-in-the-air sporting flick) â and even outside the handful of beautifully conceived sequences (like the one where the coach deftly deflects a sexual proposition from one of his girls), the film is never less than watchable.
One reason is surely the foolproof-ness of the rooting-for-the-underdog-team genre, the underdog nature of this team emphasised brilliantly by a group of non-actors. (The standouts for me were Chitrashi Rawat, the pint-sized small-town girl with a huge chip on her shoulder about big-city méms, and Shilpa Shukla, as the teamâs rebel without a cause.) But more importantly, there are slivers of reality amid all the sporting fantasy, touching reminders that we may be watching a fairy tale but one thatâs set in our own backyard. A lot of heads in the southern part of our country will be nodding at the scene where a Telugu-speaker goes to register for training camp and sheâs referred to as a Tamil. âTamil aur Telugu mein kitna faraq hai?â? the man at the desk mumbles, not as a question so much as a rhetorical statement. The girl doesnât take affront; she merely replies, with the not-again weariness probably identifiable only by people from below the Vindhyas, âUtna hi, jitna Punjabi aur Bihari mein hai.â?
Copyright ©2007 The New Sunday Express
Raj
August 11, 2007
Great review boss….and the mention of Bachchan’s angst in Kala Patthar reminded me of one of his performances I loved the most….Waiting to watch this one..
LikeLike
Thilak pratap selva kumar
August 11, 2007
“this is a remarkably restrained performance.”
Surprising, I hate SRK’s expressions and hackneyed gimmicks in his high profile films, Swades, and Dil Se.
Forget that, one can’t expect a quality product from the potboiler king, Yash chopra, who has this habit of serving crap.
“A lot of heads in the southern part of our country will be nodding at the scene where a Telugu-speaker goes to register for training camp and she’s referred to as a Tamil.”
Haha, non-hindi speakers by default must be either a madrasi or Tamilian (not Thamizhian), and not even Zouthie :))
BTW, from all the reviews, especially your’s, PFC authors, and many others, I think I should check it out.
LikeLike
rks
August 11, 2007
Nice review. Different.
LikeLike
Santosh
August 11, 2007
Another great review. Thanks!
The direction, specifically the director’s restraint, was admirable. It must have been really tempting for him to use the BIG STAR to drum up more ‘drama’. Also, to me, Shahrukh Khan has managed to redeem himself and got over the full-of-mannerisms performance of Kabhi Alvida Na Kahna.
LikeLike
Karthik
August 11, 2007
“well-oiled compilation of sporting clichés that, on paper, make you groan but never fail to get you each time on screen…” – beautifully said 🙂
But, Kaala patthar and Lord Jim? Besides the ‘disgraced navy captain’ part in Lord Jim that matches Amitabh’s role, the rest of the film was a blatant rip-off of the 1974 Roger Moore starrer, ‘Gold’. In fact there are so many scenes – right from the initial long scenes of Shashi Kapoor biking et all that have been lifted LSB.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071566/
LikeLike
rads
August 11, 2007
The girl doesnât take affront; she merely replies, with the not-again weariness probably identifiable only by people from below the Vindhyas, âUtna hi, jitna Punjabi aur Bihari mein hai.â?
hehe, good one! Shall be used henceforth 🙂
Nice 🙂
LikeLike
pinaki de
August 11, 2007
Look i know it is a cliched story but most of the films are… even the masterpieces. It is the execution that counts. I am surprised that there is no mention of stunning technicalities involved in this type of films, not really the humdrum type, at least in context of Indian films. Also the review is ultimately a cliched one, although it apparently tries to veer out of it. The expectation from Shahrukh is really stereotypical: as the reviewer says, “Somewhere along the line, I began to get the feeling that this is one time Shah Rukh really needed to have played to the gallery – for almost everyone else plays the broadest of caricatures, and the narrative itself is the broadest of contrivances.” Whenever it comes to the skills of Shahrukh as an actor, we simply (along with the reviewer) are trapped within the dilemma of seeing him unfurl his melodramatic skill or playing it with restraint. We simply don’t know which is a better bargain? When he plays it straight we cringe when he does his stuff we cringe again. That is because our reaction to our stars are very typecast. We simply fail to view it with objectivity. I personally thought if you set aside this dilemma it is one of the finest performance of the year. Also I have seen reviewers finding cliches in popular films more often than say films by auteurs. I can give an example. For example in Ray’s Nayak, the dreams are really cliched… but as it crops up in a film by a master I have rarely heard anyone cringing on those. But when popular films dwell on the same parameter reviewers damn them as stereotypical. We need to correct this and judge films on other parameters other than “stereptype”.
And remember most of the national teams are full of so called “typecasts”…just look at our Indian cricket team for example. The reviewer fails to move beyond the iron casts of his own making… He reads the film more like a degree course text fitting in with fillers that fits his own mould. It is very clever of him to find “pure coincidences”… too clever I must say…
LikeLike
Tambi Dude
August 11, 2007
Rangan,
Little bit of trivia. This is the first movie of SRK as a *hero* where he plays a muslim character. He did so in Hey Ram but he was not a hero in that movie.
LikeLike
Vishal
August 12, 2007
Great review as usual, Baradwaj. Am interested in knowing your take on Blue Umbrella. Vishal has become The Indian director whose movies I look forward to the most (when they get a release :)) Or have you already reviewed it?
LikeLike
brangan
August 12, 2007
Raj: Thanks – and yes, that *is* one of his great performances. It’s as if he could do no wrong then, isn’t it? 🙂
Thilak: SRK was gimmicky in Swades? This is the first time I’m hearing of it. And you should check out CDI.
rks: Thanks.
Santosh: Thanks! Yes, I admired the restraint, but also came away conflicted about whether such a film couldn’t have used a slightly “less restrained” approach.
Karthik: AB”s character there is almost entirely from Lord Jim, IIRC. The entire arc, I mean…
rads: Yup, that was one of the really good moments. Shoiudl probably be adopted by those from the southern states 🙂
pinaki de: Reg. “When he plays it straight we cringe when he does his stuff we cringe again.” I’m not cringing – just questioning if thic characterisation was right for the film. The performance, as I have pointed out, is fine. It’s the character I’m talking about.
Tambi Dude: Nice. Someone preparing a cinema quiz should use this 🙂
Vishal: Thanks. Blue Umbrella unfortunately not out in Chennai. Waiting for it, though.
LikeLike
Preethi
August 12, 2007
Eppidi ayya ippidi ezhudureeenga?
🙂
LikeLike
Thilak pratap selva kumar
August 12, 2007
Pinaki de,
“Whenever it comes to the skills of Shahrukh as an actor, we simply (along with the reviewer) are trapped within the dilemma of seeing him unfurl his melodramatic skill or playing it with restraint. We simply don’t know which is a better bargain? When he plays it straight we cringe when he does his stuff we cringe again. That is because our reaction to our stars are very typecast.”
totally agree. I couldn’t applaud SRK, be it Dil Se or Devdas! Why is that? I have no such issues with N’shah, Puri or Lal! Care to explain with their range of expressions, and their respective ways of doing it? Yeah, objectively that is.
Baddy,
I’m sorry. My bad English, missed “respectively” in the end. Should have been for “Dil se”. Expressions in “Swades”, or any other SRK films, looks as if he is uncomfortable. Something wrong with his eyebrows, look, expression – even in the variations. His eye coordination, voice modulation and dialogue delivery is not even in the picture yet. Does that mean Something is wrong with me or what? Or subjective? I’ve actually discussed this with my friends, and most of ’em agree. SRK is an actor who doesn’t fill the character, but the character takes shape from him. An objective critique should evaluate how flexible, realistic, and unpretentious the expressions are 😛
BTW do you always wait for the film to release in theaters? When would you watch films like “The host” or “Perfume: the story of a murderer” – recent films (06-07) which may not release in our theaters at all, or might be dubbed predominantly. For example, “The host” is bad in English-dubbed version, it’s better watched with subtitles. So, Tamil-a kekkuren, idellam eppo paapinga?
LikeLike
Cine Boy
August 12, 2007
Well, I tend to agree with Pinaki De. I certainly believe, no underdog story can’t be an undergog one if it doesn’t have a dose of cliché/ predicatabilty. If it weren’t it couldn’t possibly called an underdog movie. I abhor YRF anyday and am a not a hardcore SRK fan. But this movie rocked! Best film of the year so far and SRK’s performance is the best of 2007.
Cheers!
LikeLike
sowmya
August 12, 2007
Non-actors or non-stars??
LikeLike
Ravi
August 12, 2007
Expected you to mention a few more of ur memorable moments from the movie. The Komal character was great! My two cents up on my blog!
LikeLike
brangan
August 12, 2007
Preethi: eppidiyo… 🙂
Thilak: “SRK is an actor who doesn’t fill the character, but the character takes shape from him.” That’s why he’s a star first, an actor later. You’ve just defined what makes a star a star.
Cine Boy: The way directors handle clichés is what sets them apart. What I found here was a bit of a tug of war between a Yash Raj audience-pleaser and a more niche Shimit Amin movie. I enjoyed the former but one part of me also kept wondering how it would have been with the latter.
Sowmya: Huh?
Ravi: Checked your piece and glad you liked it. I liked it too, you know – only that almost everyone else is settling on “Great” and for me it comes under a solid “Good”
LikeLike
Thilak pratap selva kumar
August 12, 2007
Baradwaj,
I know. I have issues with Stars becoming the characters 😦
And as I had asked, When would you watch films like âThe hostâ? or âPerfume: the story of a murdererâ? ?
LikeLike
RizwanaShahrukh
August 12, 2007
SRK was simply mind-blowing without being in your face. I love him, he definitely deserves all th best actors awards for CDI!!!!!!!!!! And inshaAllah He WILL win!!!
LikeLike
Karthik
August 12, 2007
Yes Bharadwaj, I’d really like you to see ‘The Host’, as Thilak mentions. Please, for heaven’s sake, do not watch the dubbed Tamil version – I read recently that some producer is planning this, besides a Hindi dubbed version. I’m sure you’d get the original Korean DVD in 70mm or Cinema Paradiso.
For inspiration, you could read here what I think of the film!
http://itwofs.com/milliblog/2007/07/08/gwoemul-korean-joon-ho-bong/
Or NYT’s review.
http://movies2.nytimes.com/2007/03/09/movies/09host.html
LikeLike
sowmya
August 12, 2007
“One reason is surely the foolproof-ness of the rooting-for-the-underdog-team genre, the underdog nature of this team emphasised brilliantly by a group of non-actors”
Was just wondering, if u meant non-stars (instead of non-actors)
LikeLike
Apun Ka Desh
August 12, 2007
This is a classic movie. The understated manner in which the movie unfolds – no chest beating – is its strength.
LikeLike
J.U
August 13, 2007
For me, this is one of Shah Rukhs best performances since Swades and Devdas. Only in these three films has he shown a mature attitude to acting. Very calm and very personal style. Sorry, comparing him to AB in Kaala Pathar is not fair. And hey, yes KANK was wet – but no where near as awful and discgusting as AB in Nishabd and Cheeni Kum where he is shown as a 60 yr old s*x maniac. Excuse the truth, but it has to be told.
Lets hope Shah Rukh bows out gracefully at the age of 65 he doesnt feel the need to show his face in every film just to end up making a complete fool of himself as is AB. Shah Rukh is going about it the right way. This film was about Kabir Khan proving himself, and seems very close to Shah Rukh who had to prove himself as an actor when his parents passed away.
Lets face it, AB came into the industry thanks to Jaya, and parental support. What did Shah Rukh have? Just his courage, passion for success and an undying energy for hard work.
He is the ONLY King Khan. He is the only King.
LikeLike
arr_fan
August 13, 2007
Brilliant review man !!!
I hope people see this film for what it is – a well made sports film with all the associated cliches – and not start calling it the next Lagaan. Believe it or not, there are people who have started clamoring about this film being India’s Oscar entry for next year …. WHOA !!!
LikeLike
d-day
August 13, 2007
J.U…hahaha…Amitji’s role in Don should be haunting SRK fans after his f*ckup in the remake.
LikeLike
Toron Sen
August 13, 2007
Jaideep Sahni`s script is actually inspired from the unsung Commonwealth triumph that had mustered only a tiny footage in one of the national dailies.
What made me like this movie was that it was a far cry from the recent pop-patriotic films and sports flicks that failed to break away from the regular ambit of `over the top`cinema.
It is true that SRK drew us to the cinema halls, but more importantly it was the Shimit`s treatment that had us glued for 152 minutes.
For once after Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa the character overshadowed the star- hallmark of a great performer.
I believe its a must watch for e`one.
LikeLike
shruti
August 13, 2007
Hey Baddy! Congrats on the award! I cant think of someone who deserves it better, or writes as intelligently and entertainingly as you do!
LikeLike
Zero
August 13, 2007
>>”The standouts for me were Chitrashi Rawat, the pint-sized small-town girl with a huge chip on her shoulder about big-city méms, and Shilpa Shukla, as the team’s rebel without a cause.”
Ditto, ditto! Both these girls were brilliant (Komal Chautala is a riot!) and stood out for me too in superbly conceived roles. The role of Bindiya Naik (played out like the stock role of all-too-familiar, corrupt-smart cop in cop movies), especially, is brilliant.
Fantastic read, as always.
LikeLike
brangan
August 13, 2007
Thilak: I’d watch those films, yes, but if you’re talking about reviews, it’s only those that are released commercially.
RizwanaShahrukh: “SRK was simply mind-blowing” – that seems to be the general consensus.
Karthik: I think the Host is coming out next week over here. So I *will* get to review that.
sowmya: Sorry I wasn’t clear enough. I meant a bit of both.
Apun Ka Desh: Classy, yes, but “classic” – let’s wait a while before the pronouncement 🙂
J.U: Is the problem with my writing or are SRK fans always sensitive when someoneis leaa-than-gushy about their hero? All I’ve said is that AB and SRK played similar characters in different ways, so how is this “comparing” them? And from this, you’ve gone on to Jaya and parental support? Sheesh!
arr_fan: Thanks man. Seriously – it’s not as if I’ve hated the film. I’ve liked it, with a few reservations. And that’s apparently not the done thing 🙂
d-day: I’m not even going there…
Toron Sen: “Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa” is one of my favourite SRK films too.
shruti: Thanks 🙂
Zero: Thanks man. oing a post on this? What’s the dope on Arya, BTW? I’ve heard a couple of terrible things about it 🙂
LikeLike
Prashant Sharma
August 13, 2007
I think now a days most of the times we dont get to read the actual stuff about a movie released and I feek the critics here is done differently and written in co relation and shows the author has good and indepth knowledge of our cinema……. The movie I believe is the best movie made in recent times and Shahrukh Khan again proved that he is the greatest of his time…
LikeLike
Satyam
August 13, 2007
I posted this link earlier. Not sure where it disappeared..
http://www.naachgaana.com/2007/08/12/in-defense-of-baradwaj-rangan/#comment-47968
LikeLike
hoops (a foreign bollywood lover)
August 13, 2007
Ok since the Naachgaana website is not working, i will put my words here. I’m a big SRK fan, but i don’t understand why being a fan in India means also being “fanatic”.
I mean… too much tension, insult, almost hatred. Man… if brangan don’t say it’s the best movie of the year… what’s the problem ? Most of the reactions are “extreme”.
You have the right to criticise his views (he won an award, but it’s ok. That’s what i call “a dialogue”). But to say the writer is bias, has an agenda etc… com’on !
One question : what does it mean : “to have an agenda mean” ?
(and for those who don’t understand what i’m saying, go to http://www.naachgaana.com . It’s a fu**ing mess)
(Waiting for an answer… peace out 🙂
LikeLike
hoops (a foreign bollywood lover)
August 13, 2007
Sorry, i mean “To have an agenda” (because everyone seems to have one on Internet. Where can i find it ?
🙂 )
LikeLike
prakash
August 13, 2007
despite being cliched and predictable, i just loved watching this movie. The first instance when the girls display their team spirit – the action block at macdonalds – is the moment i enjoyed most. Even Bindiya Naik, shown as a villi till the semifinals lends a helping hand, surprisingly. The sound track was apt. [thank god they chose NOT to engage ARR :-)]. Definetly watch-atleast-once kinda movie.
//What’s the dope on Arya, BTW? I’ve heard a couple of terrible things about it//
Complete the sequence :
Q : Tik-20, Cynaide, oru muzham kayiRu, railway dhandavALam
A : Arya.
Rangan, If your paper insist that you have a dekko and do a review of that uvvek.. movie, pls give kAl kaduthasi. I’m serious.
LikeLike
brangan
August 14, 2007
Prashant: Thanks…
Prakash: Got the message. Will stay away from Arya 🙂
Satyam/hoops: I’m quite surprised that those discussions are centred around this being a (sopmewhat) negative review. I thought this was a positive review that expressed some questions about certain choices made in the film.) I’ve liked this film, and those points about SRK’s character aren’t nitpicks. They’re more like musings on the lines of “hmmm… now having made a commercial film, what could have been running through their minds by keeping this man such a mystery that even after the win at the end, he doesn’t celebrate with the girls”. That’s all. Those parts of the review are more like me trying to grapple with that one aspect of the film, in relation to the rest. Otherwise, I found this an entertaining, engaging movie. I also find it strange that my liking JBJ has been interpreted as “according to me, JBJ is better than CDI.” They are completely different kettles of fish, and I had a good time with both – just that JBJ was a relatively “simpler” film to experience, and hence I didn’t have many questions about, say, a characterisation, the way I have with CDI. But again, these are just questions, and hardly negative judgements.
LikeLike
Rishi
August 14, 2007
Unfairly critical, bring out the positives man!
All the cliches you mention are well executed, all performances are convincing and SRK is honest.
Its a hard film to make and an even harder subject to tackle. Its done very well. Its an engaging story and a fun watch!
LikeLike
Ravi
August 14, 2007
Glad u mentioned the ‘celebrating with girls’ in a comment atleast…I was waiting to see the girls throw him up in the air or probably douse him with ice cold gatorade – never happened, its almost like they forget him after the win.
LikeLike
Satyam
August 14, 2007
Baradwaj, this was one of my points in the piece. That a ‘fascism’ comes into play with certain SRK fans so that unless you praise the film in absolute terms it’s not good enough.
LikeLike
das
August 15, 2007
this movie rocks
LikeLike
Cine Boy
August 15, 2007
Thanks for your reply, Rangan!
But I didn’t feel that the clichéd sequences were handled ineptly. The director’s skill was evident at every frame. That’s why the movie left a mark on me. At least, I felt so.
I think, SRK is doing quite an impressive job in his last few films (you people know what I mean) barring comical parts of KANK. But, CDI is his best. Then again, it’s not necessary for everyone to agree with me. So, no hate-mails from any hater-club in my favour, please!
Thanks!
P.S. I request everyone who reads this blog not to get extremist. This is a blog where a healthy discussion can go on. If you don’t like the review please mention the points the review’s missing out (the way I did). A critic should not be rated upon his/her judgements; but rather on his/ her REVIEW. I hope, you get my point.
LikeLike
Rishi
August 16, 2007
Nice review, nice movie. I honestly dislike Shahrukh Khan, but he did well in this film.
What I really liked is the way they pulled off the last game. It’s cliche in that the underdog wins. It’s quite uncliche in how it treats it. It was very Boise State-esque (if you don’t know what I’m talking about, Wikipedia the “2007 Fiesta Bowl”) in having the underdog hit the ground running, then Goliath comes roaring back and pulls ahead towards the end of the game, then David exploits Goliath’s quickness to react. Then there’s overtime.
What else was none-cliche about the end? It didn’t end with a big score. It ended exactly the opposite. It would have been all to easy for the director to take the last penalty shot and have the last shooter for Team India make it, in a sense redeeming Khan’s mistake from seven years ago. But the director chose not to do it and instead adapt it differently – subtle, but I felt it was a very brilliant move.
As you can see, I’m slightly fond of sports.
LikeLike
sri
August 16, 2007
good
LikeLike
Anshumali
August 17, 2007
Chak De, inspite of all it’s cliche, can best be appreciated by someone who would have participated in team sports. All of the catharitic points in the film are about bonding : a spirit that is generated when you develop faith in other person’s ability & intentions.
Chak De is Director’s baby : what conception & what beautiful delivery. The director has suppressed Shahrukh the star but let loose Shahrukh the actor. He took a batch of nonactors and made them perform as credibly in front of camera as he made them appear to perform on turf.The director also gave enough independence to Mir Ranjan Negi that the game moments are wholly credible yet lack the technical verbosity which would have been boring for general audience.
All in all a film that is uplifting, inspiring and hard to copy.
LikeLike
Dharu
August 19, 2007
Baddy, I went to see the movie after reading your review as a dutiful fan of the website. I was well set-up by the review to question the movie. But I actually enjoyed the movie. Yes there were cliches (the end for starters!) and yes there were those moments that could have been avoided. But there were some wonderful moments too. May be I am a sucker, but I thought moments like the Male vs Female hockey game was well executed. The ladies did not set the Astroturf on fire, but they did not look like KR Vijaya playing tennis either! The movie pretty much followed the rules of team formation -Forming, Storming, Norming and Performing. The best thing about this movie was that I could not find Sharukh. He blended in. I don’t know when, but sometime during the movie I decided to put the magnifying glass aside and enjoy the ride. And I must say it was a good one!
LikeLike
Toe Knee
August 20, 2007
The fight scene at McDonalds was a bit over the top, don’t you think?
LikeLike
Anirban
August 22, 2007
Loved it … if a commercial film refuses to wipe out GADDAR etched on the walls for seven years,granted …. More than once have sensible directors made a hash of a typical hollywood formula that are otherwise perfected by repetition out west … the humour isn’t slapstick and isn’t limited to its time slot…
people were not leaving the hall even when the credits rolled,squeezing the story till the last drop and that was great …
it was also perhaps the cause of this slight dissapointment,and ‘what ifs ..’.I wouldn’t have minded if the story fleshed out a tad more … or if the games hadn’t seemed being played at 1.5x …and for a dicttorial coach to have his forwards not passing till the finals ,well ….
Nonetheless,fabulous .. I hadn’t gone to the theatre expecting the Indian team to get knocked out in the league stages for god’s sake!!
product placements,loud music,cliched agendas,’coincidences’ad inf ..granted … granted .. granted …
LikeLike
Raj
August 23, 2007
Baradwaj,
Just read “the mess” on naachgana. Hilarious…..if people interpret this as a “negative” review, then…. I really don’t know what to say. I think it should be understood that you would not have had those “what if….”questions you mentioned had you not been a true lover of cinema. Being one, I can understand that totally, despite having loved the movie enough to watch it twice in a day 🙂
LikeLike
MeAstro
August 24, 2007
Everyone has inside of him a piece of good news. The good news is that you don’t know how great you can be! How much you can love! What you can accomplish! And what your potential is!
CHAK DE INDIA
http://meastroindia.com/offer.html
Peace & Light
MeAstro
LikeLike
Mrunalini
August 25, 2007
Hi
This is the first time I have read a review by you. I knew about you from the news recently.
Agree with your review. I saw it on the first day of the release! I thought the movie was entertaining but not something that would stay with you after coming out of the theatre
Hoping to catch up on the other reviews as well now
LikeLike
MAYANK KUSH
August 26, 2007
I DONT GO FOR EVERY FILM, ADVERTISE WAS IMPRESSIVE SO I WENT THERE AND SAW THE FILM IT WAS GOOD ONE . ITHINK INDIAN CRICKET TEAM MUST SEE THIS FILM THEY WILL GET SOMETHING OUT OF IT BECAUSE GAME KE LIYE TAKAT KI NAHI NIYAT KI ZARURAT HOTI HAI
LikeLike
mona
August 27, 2007
checkde pas une belle hestoir mais comme même bon film contunier shahrukh khan
LikeLike
g
September 4, 2007
> Anjan Shrivastava, hamming it up as the oily sports authority
WTF is wrong with you? He was wonderful, thank you very much. 🙂
LikeLike
g
September 4, 2007
I think the big difference between your opinion and mine is, you see “cliche”. I see quite honest attempt at peeling back the cliche to reveal afresh the reality behind the cliche. Ever seen that wonderful Kishore Kumar -Vjanthimala starrer, “New Delhi”?
Can you honestly sneer at a “Main apni pagadi aapke paroin main raktha hoon” scene once you have seen it? 🙂
LikeLike
Sunny
September 5, 2007
Excellent writing..although I can smell the occassional bias here. I would have taken the review very seriously if you hadn;t used the word ‘cliche’. If you even found an ounce of ‘cliche’ in Chak De, then I don’t know what your definition of a clihe is(in the world if cinema i.e.). Critic’s slap this world so often these days that it has lost its meaning completely. Tell me honestly..what were u expecting…the girls to lose? Kabir Khan never salvaging his reputation? Well Shimit Amin might have just ended the movie where the girls loose to the Indian Men’s team then..yeah..that would have been so authentic? THE END..credits rolling:). Let’s all watch Pather Panchali, Aakrosh, Ardh Satya all our lives coz everything else is so cliche. Critique a movie as a story and not a social/political commentary. If a story delivers, i.e. in impact and entertainment value..I don’t see a point in nitpicking. As for SRK..well..I don’t wanna get into a debate here..as someone before me said…no matter what he does…some people will always cringe.
LikeLike
suchita b
September 10, 2007
A good story full of cliches, but it works..
LikeLike
Arijit
September 30, 2007
a classic sports movie formula executed almost to perfection, something hollywood has become very good at.
LikeLike
Henrik
July 25, 2009
Hi, thanks, very nice review, again making me see new aspects of the movie. Will sure come back here (and to the movie).
Personally i liked the movie in spite of all the clichés. Maybe that’s because SRK acted against all clichés.
LikeLike
ravi kumar gupta
January 29, 2010
i am an MBA student and i am very thankful to u and to the persons whosoever helped u bcoz these are the small little things that goes on to make a case study for students like us.
Hope u come up with more interesting movies reviews that can help us improve our develop our case solving strategy.
LikeLike
shashwat203442461
April 24, 2019
Well, I love your criticism, but Chak De! India was a fascinating and satisfying watch entirely.
LikeLike