BRAIN MAN
Ajay Devgan plays a psychiatrist, and makes a solid directorial debut. Plus, yet another comedy that can’t be bothered with niceties like rhythm and timing.
APR 13, 2008 – FIRST OFF, THERE’S THAT OH-SO-CUTE, SMS-ESE TITLE: U Me Aur Hum. If that isn’t enough to send shudders down your spine as you seat yourself for Ajay Devgan’s first outing as director – he also stars as a psychiatrist named Ajay – there’re the Hallmark-card opening credits; the names of cast and crew appear alongside musings about love (from Einstein and Gandhi and Thoreau and a half-dozen other notables) that are inscribed on a clear-blue sky. Even Emily Dickinson (“That Love is all there is / Is all we know of Love”) sounds banal when quoted amidst puff-white clouds, and when scored to syrupy, angel’s-choir music. And yet, the minute the first scene begins to play out, you somehow know you’re in safe hands. I think it was the staging that sold me. The camera peeks at the goings-on at a restaurant from behind stacks of plates. It gazes at faces from interesting angles, and these faces are sometimes obscured by the fuzzy people in the foreground and in the background, just as the conversation we finally tune into is coloured by the low buzz of ambient noise. You get a complete sense of the busy-ness of the surroundings, the fact that what we’re witnessing – Ajay chatting up Piya (Kajol) – hasn’t been isolated and scrubbed clean for our viewing pleasure, but is instead being presented as it would have occurred in that place, in that time.
As selling points go, I realise this is not unlike (considering we’re in a restaurant and all) raving about a dish simply because it’s been salted right – but this sort of staging is only rarely found in our mainstream cinema. Typically, we’d have seen a cut to Ajay Devgan’s face, then a cut to Kajol’s, then a cut back to Ajay – because that’s what we’re used to, staring at star faces, full-frontal, klieg-lit. But here, Ajay and Kajol are in old-age makeup, and they’re shot in a way that almost – almost, because let’s not forget that this is, after all, a commercial film – reduces them to mere people. There she is, a dab of white in her hair, a vacant expression in her eyes, and he’s got these creases in his forehead – and as soon as he begins to flirt with her and recount a young-love story (his young-love story), you think this is going to be a straightforward rehash of The Notebook, which was about an older man reading out a love story (his love story) to an older woman afflicted with Alzheimer’s.
But Devgan surprises you again by taking from the book (or perhaps the film version) just the barebones of the narrative framework, and around this, he builds an unexpectedly mature romance – unexpected because it’s driven as much by the plot as by the people in it. U Me Aur Hum is as much the story of Ajay and Piya as it is of friendship and commitment and relationships and family, and Devgan draws out the latter aspects with the help of two couples that are friends of Ajay – Nikhil (Sumeet Raghavan) and Reena (Divya Dutta), and Vicky (Karan Khanna) and Natasha (Isha Sharwani). It’s been a while since we’ve seen such a well-adjusted, close-knit bunch on screen, and it’s entirely believable that they’ve known one another long before the film began, and will continue to hang out long after it ends. They’re loud and obnoxious and profane and they drink a lot and make stupid jokes and do all the fun things that friends do, but they’re also there for one another when it really matters. When Ajay runs into Piya wandering about in the rain – she’s forgotten where she lives, and this is her first major incident of memory loss – Devgan expectedly trains his camera on the showdown between Ajay and Piya, but he also opens his frame wide enough to show Ajay’s shoulder being squeezed supportively by Vicky. And later, when Ajay takes Piya to a colleague for diagnosis, we see Nikhil standing in a corner of the room, as if reminding us that he may not be immediate family, but he’s the next best thing to that there is.
This receptivity to the people around the people whose story drives the plot is something rare, and this appears to be an extension of the way Devgan shot that restaurant scene early on. Had he narrowed his focus to just Ajay and Piya, the story may have still worked – but only as melodrama, perhaps even a good one. But when you see the ever-bickering Nikhil and Reena sign their divorce papers and still continue to be civil in each other’s presence – with their superbly empathetic performances, Divya Dutta and Sumeet Raghavan walk away with the film in their back pockets – it’s a much more layered take on the way men and women fall in and out of love. One of the highlights of U Me Aur Hum is a rambling scene – this is not a film for people with no patience for dialogue – where Ajay admits to seeing Ek Duuje Ke Liye eleven times during his childhood, when he first fell in love, and as he keeps drinking, he becomes more honest about his feelings about the film (and about himself). He remembers loving Hum bane tum bane, and declares now that it’s the fakest song ever – because no one’s there ek duuje ke liye, for each other; everyone’s really looking out for their own interests, which is why Ajay feels he sent Piya off to a (super-palatial!) care facility. He wasn’t thinking about her, but about the problem of taking care of her. How many mainstream romantic movies have you seen where the hero confesses that he’s pushed away the woman he loves, the woman he married, because she was becoming a burden?
These dark moods bring out the best in Devgan, and it’s a good thing that a lot of U Me Aur Hum is serious stuff – for the lighter moments don’t work as well. For what’s essentially a love story, Ajay’s falling in love with Piya is oddly the weakest stretch of the film. Trite beyond belief – and especially when compared to the emotional heft of the latter portions – these scenes are hampered by the star’s discomfort with breezy romantic contrivances (none of them terribly original, in any case), though Kajol does what she can to put things back on track. (After this – and after his performances in the likes of Sunday – I think there can be no further doubt that this is one actor who’s destined to shine only in heavy-duty parts.) But both stars come into their own as the film progresses, as love gives way to marriage and mental illness – the scene where Ajay drops Piya off at the care facility is a heartbreaker – and their conviction tides you over the odd overheated bits (like the scene where their kid almost drowns), or Devgan’s general tendency to overcook his visuals. (When Piya is diagnosed with Alzheimer’s, the special effects guys helpfully highlight her symptoms by having her fiery-orange brain cells cool down to a dull grey.)
But these miscalculations are minor and easy to brush aside, considering what Devgan has accomplished, which is to take a one-dimensionally sappy story and give it shading and texture within a commercial context. You could point out that the song that Piya breaks into to cheer up her downcast husband is not really necessary, but it’s so delightfully composed (by Vishal Bhardwaj) and so delightfully written (by Munna Dhiman, whose Gulzarian wordplay results in conceits such as Piya’s wishing for a saheli jaisa saiyaan, but landing up instead with a paheli jaisa saiyaan; she wanted a lover who’d be a pal, and she got herself a puzzle instead) that you surrender effortlessly to the moment. Devgan has worked with top directors, so I wasn’t particularly surprised he transitioned so easily into a directing role, but I was taken aback by his sentimentality, for instance. I would never have put this actor down as someone who’d structure a key moment around a wall on which husband and wife have written out their cutesy things-to-do, things like having a baby boy and going on a cruise on their twenty-fifth anniversary. A bigger surprise is how interested this typically taciturn actor is in the rhythms of speech – whether alliterative (he calls himself a “smart, single, sexy, sensitive psychiatrist”) or simply allusive. “Tu ne zyaada pee li hai,” Ajay admonishes a smashed Nikhil, who replies, “Peeli nahin, neeli hai,” looking across the room at his soon-to-be ex-wife, who’s dressed in blue. How someone so attuned to language could title his film thus shall forever remain a mystery, but as another person attuned to language said, what’s in a name!
THE MINUTE RAJPAL YADAV CHARGES FRANTICALLY into an office room at a mental rehabilitation centre, distraught at the recent news that General Dyer has opened fire on hundreds of innocents, you know what you’re in for with Jaideep Sen’s Krazzy 4. An outlandish broad-stroke character delineation such as this one can only point to yet another madcap comedy. (And since it’s the hyperventilating Yadav and not, say, Anupam Kher, we can safely rule out an excursion into Maine Gandhi Ko Nahin Maara-style drama.) But thanks to Ram Sampath’s brave move of going to court, accusing composer Rajesh Roshan of stealing his tunes, and after Sampath’s vindication, it’s an air of tragedy that hovers over this film – especially for those of us who associate Roshan with Tumse mila tha pyaar and Pal bhar mein yeh kya ho gaya and those lovely Priyatama numbers. What a way to cap off a career that, if not exactly path-breaking, was – at least through the late-seventies – studded with the kind of easy-listening beauties that they rarely make anymore. Why do they do these things? Laziness? Complacency? The gradual leaking away of talent over time?
But no such angst is likely to be expended over the fact that Krazzy 4 is itself stolen from The Dream Team. Yet another Friday, yet another lazy, complacent, talentless Hollywood remake – so what’s new? The film, features, in addition to Yadav, Arshad Warsi (as a man given to violent rages), Irrfan Khan (as an obsessive-compulsive) and Suresh Menon (who’s apparently seen a few too many Marx Brothers films and has decided to channel Harpo; he won’t speak). Their psychiatrist (Juhi Chawla) takes them out for a cricket match – on a 15th of August, to teach them the value of team building (yes, really!) – and mayhem ensues when she’s kidnapped and the foursome finds itself loose on the streets of Mumbai. The timing is flat, very little of the comedy is funny, and to make things worse, the film suddenly decides to turn serious, what with sentimental love angles, patriotic proclamations, and asking us to empathise with these men who’re each a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic (and this, after prodding us to laugh at them). There’s one standout sequence – a song where our not-quite-heroes need a one-rupee coin to make a call, and they try their luck with a banker, a professor, and a beggar who bursts into an impromptu qawwali. That this inventively staged musical stretch is lost amidst the general inanity of the proceedings is the other tragedy about this comedy.
Copyright ©2008 The New Sunday Express. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
Aditya Pant
April 12, 2008
I was pleasantly surprised by U, Me Aur Hum. I had prepared myself for a run-of the-mill treatment by a first time director, but just like you I was also taken by the opening scene. I never expected Ajay Devgan’s treatment to have so much, well, heart. The second half of the film was an absolute delight to watch. And that acene you mention – the Ek Duje Ke Liye scene – was the highlight of the film. It went on for maybe 10 minutes and had just Devgan talking, but there was so much depth in that scene. That one scene was enough to make me ‘forget’ any lacunae I found in the lighter, purpotedly frothy, first half.
As for Krazzy 4, replacing the 26th letter of the alphabet by the 16th in the title, sums up the movie.
LikeLike
kk
April 13, 2008
Have you seen Away From Her?
LikeLike
Lee
April 13, 2008
In addition to The Notebook, UMAH is also copied from the popular Korean movie – A Moment to Remember – http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0428870/
LikeLike
brangan
April 13, 2008
Aditya: “pleasantly surprised” is what I’d say too. It took a while to get going, but got rock-solid after about an hour.
kk: no. been meaning to.
Lee: Oh man!
LikeLike
raj
April 13, 2008
Why didn’t the shift in tone from half to half bother you in this case as in TZP? 🙂
LikeLike
brangan
April 13, 2008
Raj: Very simple. In TZP, the first half wasn’t just good, it was *great* – and when it petered down, I began to shift in my seat. But here, the first half is generally okay, the second quite decent — nothing great, but nothing that makes you feel as if you’ve entered a different moviemaking dynamic altogether. I thought about this too, and came to the conclusion that, in general, if a film begins shakily but steadies itself and turns out good towards the end, you have less problems with it then something that begins well and the goes downhill. Sorta like the Kollywood theory that the “climax” is what’s important, and that’s all that the audience takes away from the film.
LikeLike
Jay
April 13, 2008
I think you’ve over-praised U, Me Aur Hum.
LikeLike
moonbeam
April 13, 2008
baradwaj! i was disappointed by Devgan’s debut..the acting ( besides ajay) was uneven, the directing horrendous, the editing -jumpy, too many ECU used for no purpose at all and the background score was very very intrusive.. The initial romance was gag worthy and ajay devgan is simple too old to be a romantic lead in a rom com ( which this movie initially was). What was up with hindi movies and a drunk man professing his love for an unwilling woman, do the writers think that a luch with vodha breath would have ANY appeal to any woman?? urgh!Then you has sappy and corny devices like – “my book of possibilites” and the stupid chart on the wall! Also, it seems like the writers confused Alziemers with Schizophrenia because the breakdown scenes were overblown and not realistic at all..
Kajol was v good for the most part , she is a natural but i found her over acting in the parts of the movie where she is afflicted with the disease.
The friends were cardboard cut outs.. we have no idea why the couple who were so incompatible in the first half of the movie suddenly have a change of heart? it seemed too pat and just as a plot device rather than something organic..And the long haired friend- can someone say -ANNOYING!
and the music was cacaophony with the requisite half naked russian pole dancers ( rolls eyes), the lyrics were astonishingly bad ..
The only scene that i really liked was the paakeezah song..
Overall it was a waste of time , I want my 3 hours back!!
LikeLike
Aditya Pant
April 13, 2008
moonbeam: “the lyrics were astonishingly bad”. I don’t quite agree with that. I thought the lyrics were quite good. Yes, they had a Gulzar wannabe feel to them, but they seemed very well suited to the situations.
LikeLike
Sudhir Nair
April 13, 2008
Agree with most of your thoughts on U Me aur Hum. Was a good second half by Ajay Devgan. But I felt that the supporting actors were annoyingly loud. Could have toned them down and the dialogues was mostly frivolous.
LikeLike
Sid
April 14, 2008
Away From Her deals with the same issues far more eloquently though I must admit that once you are in mainsteam territory, you have to forgive some missteps.
As far as directorial debuts go, I think this is fairly good, though I wasn’t quite sold on the first half. I think the film finds its footing only when it gets really serious — most of the jokes in the first half seem to fall flat.
Still, I think it’s better handled than a film of this subject would’ve been by most mainstream directors.
LikeLike
moonbeam
April 14, 2008
aditya- i am sorry nonsensical lyrics with no poetry in them leave me COLD! i am not a fan of gulzar’s latest avatar ( some songs in Jaan-e -mann) where he uses hinglish,, quiet a step down i must say from Ijazat et al..The man is brilliant and should retain his purity rather than come down to the level of his peers..
LikeLike
Oindri
April 14, 2008
I follow your reviews pretty religiously; and I think this was the only one where I disagreed with you quite a bit. I think the dialogues were the ones that annoyed me the most – for a movie that aims to show the realistic and non-peachy aspects of relationships, the interaction between Kajol and Devgan’s characters was so hammy. No real couple quotes heavy duty lines and treatises on love to each other in general conversations. And most of the dialogues were so over-the-top, they’d make the most determined modern day Romeo wince. Also, I don’t think the supporting cast did a good job at all. Nikhil and Reena’s subdued performances towards the end did not atone well enough for the hysterical and dramatic scenes they had in the beginning. If the movie was meant to be a realistic look at couples in different stages of love – why not show us how a couple may fall out of love simply because they stop having things in common anymore – a MUCH more realistic situation than caricaturing our divorcee couple as screaming loons who seem to mainly be at loggerheads over the oh-so-predictable saas interference. This seems more like a plot situation straight out of an Ektaa Kapoor soap rather than something that aims to be such a layered look at relationships. Also, the jokes and ribbing the guys shared were just bad, and seemed to come straight out of a Santa-Banta compiled PJs book. The moments that sought to entertain us just fell flat. And the moments that sought to dramatically hook us might have come to nought if it didn’t have Kajol to carry them off. On a side note, how does she make it all seem sooo effortless?
Overall, I was expecting a lot more sophistication from the movie after reading your review and I was pretty disappointed as a result. I guess after the recent spat of movies like Race, I got my hopes up too high.
But, still a fan! 🙂 Surprised that this was the first movie I actually ended up disagreeing with you on.
LikeLike
bart
April 14, 2008
I disagree with your review this time on U,Me aur Hum. Except for the decent opening scene and the restaurant scene (what happens inside the restaurant and not afterwards outside), the movie was painful. You could never connect with the movie or its characters right from the beginning that the second half doesn’t create any impact as you are watching the tamasha as a passerby, judging the backdrops, the acting etc. Ajay devgan & his friends, 25 yrs back, was hard to digest as they are and first half fails there. The characters too are cardboard etched for the sake of creating one-liners (silly a many) at the end of every sermonising / serious scene. (eg: the two-minute joke, holding ‘ungli’ while seeing the baby etc). Starting 1 hr into the movie, the squirming and restlessness sitting in the seats was unavoidable (Waste of Kajol in an ill-etched role).
LikeLike
Shuchi
April 14, 2008
The promos of U, Me Aur Hum looked so dull, I had decided to give it a miss. Nothing like mixed reviews to pique one’s interest; I am going to watch it now!
LikeLike
raj
April 14, 2008
btw, isnt saheli-paheli the hindi equivalent of acham-macham, meesai-aasai patented by our own algorithmist, Mr Vairamuthu? (not literally, but in the sense of first-rhyme-thought-up-by-adolescent-poet-wannabes-and-for-some-inexplicable-reason-used-extensively-by-acclaimed-lyricists-once-too-often)
LikeLike
Aditya Pant
April 14, 2008
moonbeam: so we disagree about ‘non-sensical’ lyrics. But what about the lyrics of the title song? They sum up the concept of marriage so beautifully: ‘apne rang gavanye bin, mere rang mein rang jao’. Again, I’m not gushing about the lyrics in this film, just saying that they were better than a lot we hear these days.
raj: it’s not always the rhyme but the way the rhyme is used that matters. And the Hindi equivalent of “first-rhyme-thought-up-by-adolescent-poet-wannabes-and-for-some-inexplicable-reason-used-extensively-by-acclaimed-lyricists-once-too-often” would be pyar-beqarar-intezar or deewana-parwaana. saheli-paheli is not as frequently used.
LikeLike
raj
April 14, 2008
aditya, i am not the expert here so I will go by your take.But I think I went overboard with the adjective; removing the adoloescent poet part, our acham-macham would definitely be the saheli-paheli equivalent in that it is not as everyday as other commonly used ones but it has been abused enough by Vairamuthu to make it seem omnipresent. I think saheli-paheli has been abused enough to join the ‘elite’ ranks.
pyar-beqarar-intezar would take us into Sameer domain. Lets not even go there 🙂
LikeLike
brangan
April 14, 2008
Jay: You think?
moonbeam: Wow, such bile 🙂 Was fun to read. Actually that Chalte chalte moment was one that didn’t do too much for me. It began very well, but kinda went nowhere. And call me picky, but I just couldn’t see this bunch suddenly getting into an Ghulam Mohd. number.
Sudhir Nair: Thew dialogues, most of them, worked for me.
Sid: “Still, I think it’s better handled than a film of this subject would’ve been by most mainstream directors.” That about sums it up.
Oindri: “No real couple quotes heavy duty lines and treatises on love to each other in general conversations.” Oh, but this is a movie, no? Right from the get-go, realism didn’t appear to be a huge priority here.
bart: “I disagree with your review” Join the gang 🙂
Shuchi: That’s one way of deciding to watch a film…
raj: As Aditya says, it’s the context too. Using saheli/paheli might not be new. But using saheli as a qualifier for saiyaan — mixing up the feminine/masculine, that’s not something I’ve seen a lot of people do.
LikeLike
moonbeam
April 15, 2008
aditya- i was totally emotionally disconnected with the movie after the asinine cruise romance that i switched off mentally, i am not even sure which song you are refering to? all i remember are a couple adnan sami songs which had terrible lyrics and the saiyan song which was totally the wrong time for a song like that in the movie and had totally unmemorable lyrics..
baradwaj- i thought the paakeeezah song was the one heartfelt moment in the movie, which did’nt feel scripted or by the book..and it worked cuz they had thoroughly bastardized the song with modern lyrics. i couldnt imagine that bunch knowing the words to the original for sure!
LikeLike
Vikas Bhargava
April 15, 2008
The atrocity that is U Me and Hum’s first half, doesn’t let any mental energy remain inside you to endure the second half, however good it may seem to be. It all starts off with the ill-advised cornucopia of quotable quotes, trying to butter the brain with the foundation makeup of emotional hooks even before the first scene has played out. Later the setting takes us to the Half poor CGI cooked – half real cruise liner. Its blantantly obvious how Devgan just ineptly handles the “falling into love with Kajol” angle. Devgan tries to sweep over the erratic screenplay with his directorial broom, seeped in artistic confusion, and produces scenes after scenes which induce such a catatonic slumber in my head that I couldnt even get up to fetch myself a coke in the intervals owing to debilitating mental drain. Add to it, the irritatingly cachophonic side-kick friends and you have it – A perfect realization of the cinematic torture.
Ajay tries to be a different director and maybe succeeds somewhere, fails somewhere..but he has surely done one thing to me: make me dread his next offering.
LikeLike
brangan
April 15, 2008
Vikas Bhargava: This films seems to have divided viewers into the “hated it” camp and the “not-bad, didn’t-mind-it” camp. I wonder if there’s anyone’s who’s “loved” it and put up some sort of review.
LikeLike
Aditya Pant
April 15, 2008
BR: I am somewhere between ‘not-bad, didn’t-mind-it” and “loved it”. My preoccupation with other posts on my blog has prevented me from writing a review, but might do so soon.
LikeLike
Vivek
April 16, 2008
A painful movie. First half hams and the second half was unbearable. A song at the most inoppurtune moment(saiyan), that fat kid who appears and disappears(thankfully), stale jokes(reading out an sms joke:a tacit acknowledgement of the source of all that they tried to pass off as humor?),annoying friends, a dog named after a detergent and the source of all drivel:a book of possibilities(how imaginatively named!).A decent performance by Kajol and to an extent by Ajay Devgan(whenever he doesnt start off with “U know somethin” that is).
Music would have come out far better if the lyrics hadn’t been so insipid.
Disappointed.
LikeLike
unais
April 16, 2008
i need hit this film because ilike ajay most.till 92.wish you agood luck.you want to anonce and dance in film award function.
LikeLike
vimal
April 16, 2008
I dont mind being one black sheep here.But frankly, I liked it. Now y I liked it?Realy dont know.Perhaps, I wasnt expecting much of out of this. It was a good effort (except for the inclusion of the saiyaan and the wedding song).
I agree, some of the dialogues were cheesy and hamming at times, but if the same dialogues were attempted by SRK in the same movie, there would have been appreciation. Guess, we arent used to seeing Devgan in this avatar or atleast this isnt wht we like Devgan to do. The friends were cardboards??? how many movies do we have where such side characters exist till the end of the movie(unless they are big stars)?? The friends appear when Devgan needs them and surprisingly when the viewers need them too.
Even the performances from the entire cast seemed perfect to me.
@ unais
Err…Like how Kajol puts it in the movie, ” You are drunk, Sir!”
LikeLike
raj
April 16, 2008
is Kajol really all that she is hyped to be – sort of some Jaya bahduri-madhuri dixit-smita patil rolled into one? Or even any part thereof?
LikeLike
raj
April 16, 2008
br, atleast I’m glad that you didn’t rack your brains and come up with something like ” the “choppiness” the film to an intention on the director’s part to reflect a choppy journey on the cruise” 🙂
LikeLike
tajji
April 16, 2008
I belong to the ‘hated it’ group too. Is this review actually written by you? Are you being lenient on Devgan just because he is a first timer? Also, in one of your replies to a commentor you said, “Oh, but this is [just] a movie, no”. This was not expected by a reviewer of your caliber.
LikeLike
tajji
April 16, 2008
typo – expected from*
LikeLike
brangan
April 17, 2008
Vivek: Chalk up another for the “hated it” camp. This is becoming an interesting tally.
unais: “till 92”? Um, say what?
vimal: Yes, I too liked the fact that the side characters were annoying and they were there throughout. In a way, this film, to me, is like KANK, working completely within a mainstream “relationship movie/romance” format and trying to do interesting things (or at least things that 99% of the other films don’t even go near, in terms of character and dialogue; the loser-leads of KANK didn’t go down well with the audiences either.) What these films lack in “perfection” they make up for in other little ways. The fact that Ajay and Kajol are in what is foir the most part some sort of ensemble film is itself a big departure. Sure, I wish the compromises weren’t there, but overall, except for the really bad romance bits and the odd nits here and there, I thought Devgan did manage a decent first outing.
raj: Kajol, IMO, is a good “commercial film actress.” She does pretty much the same things — i.e. you know how she’s going to handle scenes — but there’s a basic level of competency there. I don’t know that Jaya-Smita comparisons are appropriate. If you have to compare, maybe Sridevi-Juhi-Madhuri is more like it? And let me go off on a bit of rant here, but a lot of the Hindi actresses come off better than the ones in Tamil cinema for the simple reason that they know the language, and that gives them an automatic comfort level in the performance in terms of where to pause in a line of dialogue and things like that. In Tamil, other than Sneha (who’s forever doomed to “homely” roles), we insist on actresses who don’t know the language and their performances suffer. I saw Yaaradi Nee mohini and Santosh Subramaniam, and both are okay (though I preferred SS) — but both could have been so much better with heroines who didn’t need a lip-sync tutorial. Genelia has a longish monologue near the end of SS that’s damn near unwatchable because of her halt-and-go delivery.
tajji: I don’t know what a reviewer of my “caliber” is supposed to do, but all my job asks of me is that I articulate my response to a film. So I can understand if you didn’t care for the *manner* in which I laid out my responses, but I don’t see why my actual *response* has to conform to whatever “caliber” I’m slotted in.
LikeLike
raj
April 17, 2008
br, juhi-madhuri-sridevi is more like it. I would sum it up by saying she is kind of a female Sharukh Khan in acting scales, and like a miniature version of SRK in the superstar scales. A good example of a counterpart in Tamil Cinema would be Jyothika. Where I get my ulcer is when she is described as the finest actress in the country today. I mean what price Nandita Das(despite her limitations)?Tabu? Oh! Damn I forogot Konkona Sen Sharma. Meera Jasmine(ignore her jyothikan tamil movie roles), anyone? Kajol gets some additional points , as you observe, for her ‘competent commercial acting’ and somehow she is like a female SRK – like, those whom we do not criticise. You set the bar low and when comes a Chak De India, you go and like it because SRK is not his usual hamming self here, never mind that at best it is a competent performance. Because it is SRK, it becomes monumental performance from the man who was guilty of several Rahuls.
I agree 100% with your evaluation of tamil heroines – commercial or otherwise.
Like I said, I cant think of anything better to say than that Kajol is just a Bollywood Jyothika.
LikeLike
Shwetha
April 17, 2008
I almost loved it. Though its a not a great movie and has some jarring bits, I did like the loud, obnoxious friends (seemed very real), loved the title song – “apne rang gavaye bin, mere rang mein gul jao” – simple words saying such a beautiful thought… and Kajol dressed in normal clothes.
I thougt Devgan didnt focus enough on Kajol and he was on screen for longer duration. Wedding song was bad and not required.
LikeLike
Chaitanya
April 17, 2008
@raj,
Excuse me, but female Shah Rukh???
It is clear that my opinions about shahrukh do not differ from yours by reading the rest of your comment. And precisely because of that, I do not understand why you would compare an actor with a non-actor.
I would not even accept Kajol’s competent commercial actress description. If we do not compartmentalize, then Konkana, Nandita, Kajol, Tabu all are very good actors. I would include Madhuri in this list too, except that she did not get many chances to exhibit her acting skills.
As I already said, I totally agree with what you said about shahrukh. He turns in a strictly decent performance and whole world breaks in applause because he is known for dishing out s**t.
The same is not true for Kajol. She is a known good actress, viewers expect compelling performances from her.
In fact, what Shahrukh achieves in a Chak De or a Swades are merely passing-marks for Kajol.
If she has to be compared to her male counterparts, I would compare her to Ajay or Amir.
LikeLike
Tambi Dude
April 17, 2008
BR, Tamil Films do have the problem of imported heroines, but the home-grown ones are generally good, exceptions like Trisha notwithstanding. I think Priya Mani speaks tamil herself. I felt she was very good in ParuthiVeeran.
My big problem with hindi heroines is that they are so obsessed with looking good that they don’t act well, unless shaking your butt is considered as acting. Madhuri was barely OK, Juhi was rarely ok 🙂
LikeLike
raj
April 17, 2008
chaitanya, i dont know. Kajol in my mind is forever associated with that scene in Kuch Kuch Hota hai – where she meets Sharukh after years and performs some convulsions on the face to express surprise, happiness, excitement etc all rolled into one. According to some Certified Kajol fans close to me, that represents the pinnacle of acting excellence. Maybe, that biases me against her other performances.
But as far as I can see, she is a want-to-express-feelings?-will-contort-face types.(ie) Jyothika types
Maybe, point me exceptional performances by her(not involving secondary school contortions of face as substitute for acting) and if I happen to see those , maybe I will change my mind.
Tambi dude, unfortunately, hindi has a better number of actresses who can perform – tamil movies just dont give their heroines chance to perform. When they do, they inflict Mozhi and Jyothika on us (according to popular tamil movie standards, jyothika is the best actress of recent times after Simran(witness the no. of aspiring actresses say i want to be like Jyo and Sim – as if the originals werent enough) – and that should tell you) the kind of standards prevalent here.)
The other aspect of it is the definition of acting.
Simran enjoys her status in TN as an actress of substance because of her performance in movies like priyamanavalae(Yeah, right, I am not joking!). Incidentally, I think Kajol did the hindi equivalent of this and that I think is put up as a sample of her excellence by her fans.
So, Hindi or Tamil, the popular ones on acting stakes enjoy their reputation on some stupid, ordinary performances. Which is sad.
LikeLike
the mad momma
April 17, 2008
I’ve noticed that we have a tendency to call actresses who arent traditionally goodlooking (the usual fair- slim type) – good actresses.
i dont think a priyanka chopra or a preity zinta is any less of an actress than kajol.
but she will always be called a good actress because her movies are hits despite her weight, complexion and unshaped eyebrows!
almost a consolation prize because she isnt stunning.
that said, i’ve always enjoyed her movies. sorry to have hijacked the thread Brangan 🙂
LikeLike
Suchi
April 18, 2008
I didn’t have *anything* to add re the movie reviews but now that we’re on to Hindi actresses in Tamil movies and the question of looks! 🙂
I do like Baradwaj’s view of Kajol being a good “commercial film actress”. Many of our commercial movies, whether Hindi or Tamil, are simply not that demanding in the acting sense. You can easily learn the overdone hand-gestures, dramatic expressions and cliched dialog-delivery style and not have to bring it all together with something more.
I do agree that lip-syncing detracts from whatever acting ability non-Tamil actresses may have–I’ll point here to Blogeswari’s excellent rant on dubbing.
But that does not excuse Jyothika’s standard 5-expression menu and her squeaky, neurotic dubbing voice. Mozhi was an almost-there film, spoilt by the poor acting of both the leads.
Mad Momma’s point about looks versus acting is interesting. But-but-but I think there might be many examples to the contrary. For example, Shabana Azmi, Madhuri. Also, Nandita Das and Kajol have always been seen as pretty if not beautiful. Another way to look at it would be, that, in the absence of conventional looks, these actresses try that much harder.
LikeLike
brangan
April 18, 2008
Shwetha: “I did like the loud, obnoxious friends (seemed very real)” Yeah, they may not have been easy to bear, but it was nice to see some “real” friends, not just the sainty, scrubbed ones who either just provide a comedy track or a sympathetic shoulder. These guys were vulgar and loud and crude and… I know people like that, and it was nice to see a director put them up on screen.
Tambi Dude: But Paruthi Veeran was such an exception. Have you seen the films Priya Mani has done after that?
the mad momma: That’s an interesting point, though I feel Kajol’s definitely more cast-able across a range of (commercial) roles than Preity Zinta. The latter’s good in only a particular kind of role, and she’s selected her films well to showcase just that aspect. It’ll be interesting to see how she does in The Last Lear, for instance, which looks like a departure.
Suchi: Ah, that was such an excellent rant. Thanks much for the link. It’s seriously such a shame that we’re seeing Genelia being lauded so much for her peformance in SS. I mean, she looks sweet and she looks the part, sure, but if you’re not conviced that she even knows what she’s mouthing in the film, what are we taking about, really?
LikeLike
Sagarika
April 24, 2008
brangan: I liked how you’ve tried to infuse a semblance of sensitivity into your review of Krazzy4 (perhaps by tuning out every cerebral cell that screamed this is another RRKHD…yet another movie with the sensibility of a screwdriver?). I haven’t seen it yet but for the brief moment I read this review, I cared about the movie…about the implicit irony in its dual tragedy: Roshan’s reckless plagiarism gets placed up there on the pedastal while the movie’s only redeeming aspect, its “inventively staged musical stretch [gets] lost amidst the general inanity of the proceedings.” Quite sad.
Now, not only am I left feeling a bit sympathetic, I’m also more than a bit nostalgic, thanks to that Priyatama reference. If I ever wind up catching Krazzy4, I’m sure I’ll cut it (and Roshan) some slack if only coz I’ll be instantly reminded of KK’s “Koi Roko Na” (a song I used to love back in the day and haven’t heard for some years now).
LikeLike
rama
May 19, 2008
This is an excellent movie by debut director ajay devgan.
Sometimes the greatest journey is the distance between two people – the tagline of the movie itself puts me in daze. Dr. Ajay Mehra (Ajay Devgan) is a psychiatrist consultant, who when on a cruise tour, meets and falls in love at first sight with a waitress Piya (Kajol). Unfortunately for him Piya is not that easy to get. After alot of wooing, Piya finally gives in to his charm, and they settle down for a happy married life. But then Piya is diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease. It is from here that the movie becomes a special and not an ordinary run of the mill movie. What makes it different is that the movie not only shows the trials faced by an Alzheimer’s patient, but also the tribulations faced by the people around her. A beautiful and meaningful story of love is what U Me Aur Hum is all about.
Kajol has given one of her best performances till date. She always outdoes herself, and I think that is what makes her one of the finest actors in Bollywood. Ajay Devgan has played the role so realistically that it is difficult to say where Ajay Mehra (Ajay Devgan’s character) ends and Ajay Devgan starts. This movie has just made the already known fact more strong, that Ajay Devgan surely is one of the most versatile actors. The supporting actors namely Sumeet Raghavan, Karan Khanna, Divya Dutta, Isha Sharvani and Sachin Khedekar have played their roles with utmost ease and each have done justice to their roles.
Music by Vishal Bharadwaj is situational, and that makes it very special. Lyrics by Munna Dhiman is to look out for, because it is very different. The song that truly stands out is the title track, both musically and lyrically.
Ajay Devgan has made his directorial debut with U Me Aur Hum. And I must say, he has done an excellent job. For any director, it is easy to make an Art/Intellectual movie flawless, but to make a bollywood commercial movie flawless is indeed a very difficult job, and Ajay Devgan has surpassed all such expectations. Ajay Devgan has proved that he is not only a great actor, but an equally superb director.
Some might say that the movie is on similar lines as the hollywood flick THE NOTEBOOK, and that if you have seen THE NOTEBOOK, U Me Aur Hum might not be that great. But trust me, it is only after watching U Me Aur Hum will you understand that these two movies are way too different.
So even if you have watched THE NOTEBOOK, do go for this movie, because trust me, you will not regret it. All in all, I would say that this is a movie that will be remembered and will give you chills, long after you have stepped out of the cinema theatre.
LikeLike
E Garcia
April 18, 2009
thanks for this, I genuinely enjoy reading your views.
LikeLike