DÉJÀ VIEW
If you’ve seen the Tamil version (and if you don’t suffer from short-term memory loss), this remake has little to offer.
DEC 28, 2008 – AFTER TAARE ZAMEEN PAR, WHERE AAMIR KHAN concealed himself admirably in the shadows until interval point, it wasn’t surprising that, for his next starring role, he’d choose something that would allow the camera to gaze adoringly at him from start to finish. That’s surely a reason for the actor’s interest in playing Sanjay, in the remake of AR Murugadoss’ Tamil potboiler-blockbuster Ghajini. (The latter, in turn, took its cues from Memento, retaining the short-term memory loss gimmick as the basis for a fairly linear revenge thriller and jettisoning the rest – not just the ellipses and the narrative circumlocutions but also the nagging enquiries into the fundamental human desire to get even.)
But there’s more to this decision than just a star’s vanity. There’s also an actor’s opportunity to play the kind of hero practically no one, with the possible exception of Mohit Ahlawat in James, plays anymore. Sanjay is the sort of morally uncomplicated superbeing from what Hindi masala movies used to be (and what Tamil masala movies still are) – a deva, so to speak, to the villain’s asura. (Pradeep Rawat endows this villain with a suitably demonic disposition.) It’s the whole retro thing, but done straight, without the safety net of ironic detachment – and for a Hindi film audience weaned increasingly on overly civilised leading men, more at home with emotions than explosions, you can sense the attraction of the noble savage.
And Sanjay isn’t just a metaphorical savage. He’s a business tycoon who, thanks to a sound-effects enhanced battering on the skull with an iron pipe, lives life in frustrating snatches of fifteen minutes – his mental slate is wiped clean every sixteenth minute – and there are times he appears, quite literally, inhuman. At the film’s beginning, when facing a mirror that reflects merely a physical presence but not a fully formed existential reality, Sanjay’s anguish finds release in a yell that invokes a werewolf serenading a full moon, and towards the end, when he finally locks eyes with the villain who reduced him to this state, his lips part in a feral snarl, held together by little more than flecks of anticipatory foam.
Sanjay is a savage whose brute force can twist a man’s neck so it turns a clean 180 degrees, and perhaps fittingly, the first time we catch a glimpse of this hero, in an action sequence, the feline camera flips a clean 180 degrees and lands lightly on its feet to worship his awesomeness. And yet, he won’t employ force to obtain the woman he loves, and even in these gentler moments – detailed in a charming romantic track with Kalpana (Asin) – Sanjay is someone far removed from the present day. The first time the couple clasps hands, it’s almost by accident, and in anticipation of a happy domesticity as man and woman enter the house they hope to make their home. Sanjay’s savagery is rivalled only by his chivalry.
So, on one level, you can see why the prospect of playing this old-world hero would leave a modern-day chameleon like Aamir Khan salivating – and my initial expectation was that this famously fastidious actor would put his fastidiousness to good use in overhauling the original thrill machine into a vehicle worthy of him. From what we’ve heard about him and his obsession with his craft, I figured he’d turn the world’s libraries inside out – or, at the very least, cause Google to crash – while researching anterograde amnesia (the fancy-pants term for Sanjay’s condition).
I thought he’d figure out a way to explain away the niggling discrepancy of, say, the protagonist apparently thinking in English (which is why the numerous tattoos on his body, which remind him to kill the villain, are all in English), but penning unending journal entries in Hindi. I wondered if, along the way, he’d also tweak the conceit of the hero wielding a Polaroid camera – he takes pictures of people and places so he can recall them after the sixteenth minute, thus giving a new dimension to the term “photographic memory” – to accommodate the infinitely less cumbersome (and mega-memory possessing) digital cameras of today.
But more importantly, I was curious if he’d understand that Memento was about short-term memory loss only so much as The Man in the Iron Mask, to invoke another classically themed revenge saga, was about a fellow whose mug was encased in metal – and that the real point of the film was underscored in an early scene at a café where the protagonist is asked what good his avenging is if he won’t remember, fifteen minutes later, that he has avenged himself. We lower ourselves to the level of animals to do the things we cannot do as humans, but what if this debasement couldn’t provide the closure we needed to resume life as humans again?
But by the end, only a pale shadow of this latter aspect appears to have trickled into the Hindi version (though, to be fair, Murugadoss didn’t address this at all during his first grapple with the material). Finally in the lion’s den, Sanjay cracks his knuckles and breaks the bones of a horde of henchmen, but soon after his exertions leave his opponents in the dust, he stops cold. He’s forgotten what he was doing there in the first place, and the sight of the heap of bodies around him does nothing to remind him. He’s physiologically possessed by a raging fury but psychologically unable to make shape or sense of it – and this is one of the few moments you see what this film could have become had it been driven by Aamir Khan, the actor.
Because mostly otherwise, Ghajini is simply a sleek showcase for Aamir Khan, the star. There is, of course, nothing wrong in a big star wanting to give his faithful audiences the full blast of his big star power – and, quite frankly, that’s the sort of thing that often attracts us to the movies in the first place – but watching the film, I couldn’t help thinking: All this effort, and for this? Had Aamir done Ghajini as a lark, the way he did Fanaa (which, for a while, allowed us bask in the warm wattage of effortless star power, till it turned completely ludicrous), we could have indulgently dismissed it as the kind of trifle even the best of performers has to peddle in order to save himself a seat at the marketplace.
The problem with Ghajini, though, is that it takes itself far too seriously for something so fundamentally silly. It’s not content being a big, trashy B-movie (or perhaps a more truthful way of putting it would be that those of us who expect consistently great things from Aamir Khan are unable to look at it as just a big, trashy B-movie). It wants to make us believe we’re watching something better, something greater, something cleverer than what it actually is – and this inflated sense of its own proportion seeps right through to its protagonist’s frame. Sanjay is so strikingly, so aesthetically bulked up, it’s as if he were jointly conceived by Michelangelo and Talwalkars.
When it’s just another he-man hero flexing the biceps, when it’s a Mithun Chakraborty or Sunny Deol, this would barely register. But when it’s Aamir Khan, you ask if the short-term memory loss somehow managed to leave untouched the brain cells containing the information about his incredible, multi-machine exercise regime, which would surely span several stretches of fifteen minutes. It’s not that Aamir Khan is beyond masala movies today – if anything, a good actor should be able to do anything while still in his prime – but through his choice of roles and films, he’s become one of our few star-actors of whom we demand more, and when we sense something missing, when the actor adds to the flaws in the film instead of helping us gloss over these gaping holes, we transform into crotchety nitpickers.
I suppose those who haven’t seen the Tamil version (or those who have, but are afflicted by, well, you-know-what) would at least have the machinations of the plot or the occasional surprise in a performance to cling on to – but for the rest of us, Ghajini is, scene for scene, moment for moment, practically the same movie, with the same pluses (the romantic portions) and the same minuses (pretty much everything else, including a drearily manipulative subplot about exploited teenage girls).
Aamir Khan plays Sanjay almost exactly the way Suriya played this character. Asin may speak a different language here, but otherwise she imports wholesale every single expression from her earlier portrayal of the same part. Jiah Khan, as the medical student who first hinders and later helps Sanjay, is as infuriating a character as her predecessor was. The background score, as in the Tamil version, is so deafening, there are times you wonder if it’s your skull over which an iron pipe has been brought down hard. Even AR Rahman’s best song here (Behka) is positioned at the same point in the story that Harris Jayaraj’s best song (Oru maalai ilaveyil neram) was positioned back there – how’s that for eerily wholesome symmetry?
One significant departure from the Tamil version is the climax – they’ve thankfully streamlined it (in other words, the villain has no equally evil twin) and they’ve also shaped the Jiah Khan character to function as an agent of closure. By replicating an earlier moment of loss, Murugadoss is able to squeeze in a couple of effective emotional beats into a segment which was earlier just about choreographed fisticuffs.
But the kind of fix there needed to be more of is the replacement of the generic dance item in the second half of the older film with the far more situational (and therefore, far more relevant) Kaise mujhe tum mil gayi, just after Sanjay takes leave of Kalpana and just before you sense something terrible is about to happen. The aching sense of separation – virah, if you want to look at it in old-world terms – is one those things you didn’t know needed to be there till you actually see it there, and the way the song is staged glazes the central love story with a layer of heartfelt sentiment. A few more touches like this one, and this violent tale of revenge might have actually stuck around in some corner of the mind fifteen minutes after stepping out of the theatre.
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
December 27, 2008
Couldn’t agree with you more! I haven’t seen the Tamil remake so at least I could enjoy the pleasantly played out romance, but the rest of the movie was mostly terrible. Sanjay was essentially a bollywood version of the Hulk, which is sad considering the promise in the character _and_ the actor.
LikeLike
masoomrooney
December 27, 2008
well will indeed agree mr rangan that movie cant stay in mind after 15 minutes of leaving… but will give u two words that i found in movie which i fail to find in anyother hyped movies ie PAISA VASOOL entertainment….
and also will credit the director for moving the movie with such speed in narration that u never remember flaws while watching though there are thousands…
yup agree again it more belongs to aamir the star than actor as he says often to do more pathbreaking or progressive cinema he needs a fanaa…. a crowd pleaser so there will comes his next about engineering students inspired from five point someone book of chetan bhagat by Raju hirani….
LikeLike
masoomrooney
December 27, 2008
my only regretc in movie was i didnt find ghajini(..the movie is titled on him…) a terrible menacing villain… ala i think he could have made this role a legend…
also i will say one thing may be i enjoyed this movie more so because nowadays they dont make action violent hindi movies….( may be because of sensitive multiplex audience ) but i definitely wantmore action dramas than stupid love stories ala yrf..
LikeLike
anantha
December 27, 2008
Sanjay is the sort of morally uncomplicated superbeing from what Hindi masala movies used to be (and what Tamil masala movies still are)
Oh come on. That line is such a sellout gimmick 🙂 Are you turning into a Hindi movie reviewer? That’s a statement that will instantly catch the eye, at least it caught mine till I read it twice to figure out you are not slapping around the concept of a quintessential tamil blockbuster. But now, I agree with that statement, only because I don’t watch that many Hindi movies anyways.
LikeLike
chhote saab
December 27, 2008
This is the worst Aamir Khan movie since ‘Mela’. When I came out of the movie, I was hoping I had short-term memory loss so that I could forget the entire movie in 15 minutes. Big letdowm from AK after ‘Taare Zameen Par’
LikeLike
Anand
December 27, 2008
“THE FIGHT SEQUENCE AT THE CLIMAX of a Tamil masala movie is truly the gladiatorial combat of our age – you know the movie has worked when the inevitable good-guy-bad-guy fistathon happens and you’re baying for the bad guy’s blood. You’ve been appalled by all the bad things that have happened to the good guy – think Kaakha Kaakha, to name a recent example – and you don’t want the bad guy to merely die, you want him to die after being ground to pulp, bloody pulp.
By that yardstick, Ghajini just didn’t do it for me.”
Just curious..was it effective in Hindi?
LikeLike
Qalandar
December 27, 2008
Superb write-up here Baradwaj — although I found the film a lot more palatable than you did, to an extent because of aamir khan, but to perhaps an even greater extent because I actually don’t mind the Masala film (Tamil or Hindi) at all 🙂
Where I would disagree is the notion that this film takes itself too seriously: I would argue that the better way to put it would be that this film does not take itself for a lark — precisely in keeping with the conventions of masala cinema, which does not engage with its own “excess” via the mode of spoof; or even “hey this is crazy but let’s go along with it anyway.” The master Manmohan Desai had a bit of the latter, and perhaps Shankar does too in Sivaji; and the former is how most contemporary filmmakers can engage with it. But I would argue that is not the default mode. Quite the contrary: the “mythic” cannot be harnessed (as “masala” routinely does) unless and until the cosmic significance of the proceedings is appreciated (both by the audience and within the film). I think the fundamental problem with the Ghajini script is that the script is simply not as good as the central conceit. I wrote in my review that this is a script where things “happen” rather than one where events are propelled forward, with the result that a script that could have been a great and engrossing tale is destined to become, instead, “about” the star at its core…
LikeLike
Zero
December 27, 2008
Ah, I was feeling all alone until I read this piece. Couldn’t agree with you more, Baradwaj. Just like in the Tamil original, the romantic track is pretty much the only thing that I found quite enjoyable. (Yet, I can’t believe that many have found this to be the emotional core of the film that resonates through and overarches the rest of the film. Seriously?)
On another note, I’m still trying to figure out (not a snide remark, it truly beats me) how all this — the explicitly stylized violence, the snazzily done action sequences, the music video-style songs, the deafeningly loud background score, the lead hero’s 8-pack abs makeover — is but an all-out throwback to good old Indian film masala.
LikeLike
brangan
December 27, 2008
anantha: I’m just saying those kind of masala movies are extinct in Hindi, while they’re still around in Tamil, and as a corollary, those superbeing heroes aren’t there in Hindi cinema while they’re still there in Tamil. Where’s the diss in that? It’s true, isn’t it?
chhote saab: Ouch! Coming from you, that must hurt 🙂 Didn’t we suffer through Mela together, BTW?
LikeLike
Manish
December 27, 2008
Brangan, great review. I thought the movie was average too. Other reviewers and the media hype would make me believe that I had watched a different movie. ARR score was more of a hindrance than an asset.
LikeLike
chhote saab
December 27, 2008
No, But I wish I had (also ‘Ghajini’) – we suffered thru’ movies like ‘Salaakhen’ and ‘Major Saab’ but we had a lot of laughs along the way. In the end in ‘Ghajini’ when AK is opening the gift he gets from Sunita, the comments in the movie hall ranged from “it is gonna be SRK’s photo” to “maybe it’s Memento’s dvd” – that can tell you how pakaoed the audience was.
LikeLike
brangan
December 27, 2008
Anand: I was bored out of my wits by the fight sequence in the Tamil film. The dishoom-dishoom bits in the Hindi climax are equally silly, but the climax itself is much better. There’s more of an emotional involvement here.
Qalandar: But this isn’t about liking masala films. I gave Family one of the few sympathetic reviews because I genuinely like how Santoshi mines masala territory. And he’s DEAD SERIOUS about it. This, here, is more or less an action thriller hybrid of the masala tradition — but far too stylized and sanitised to be taken for the original, as Zero rightly points out.
LikeLike
chhote saab
December 27, 2008
obviously very high expectations was the reason I was so disappointed (I had not seen the tamil original)
LikeLike
Arun
December 27, 2008
heh ! an old Elvis country song comes to mind… “I forgot to remember to forget her” 😉 apt eh?!
LikeLike
brangan
December 27, 2008
Zero: Just went back to check my Family review, and I think I’ve said pretty much the same thing about masala as you did 🙂
LikeLike
Satyam
December 27, 2008
Good piece as always Baradwaj. My somewhat different take here:
http://www.naachgaana.com/2008/12/27/the-memory-palace-of-ghajini/
LikeLike
Qalandar
December 27, 2008
Re: “I’m still trying to figure out (not a snide remark, it truly beats me) how all this — the explicitly stylized violence, the snazzily done action sequences, the music video-style songs, the deafeningly loud background score, the lead hero’s 8-pack abs makeover — is but an all-out throwback to good old Indian film masala.”
“Explicitly stylized violence” is a hallmark of the Hindi masala tradition — we are, after all, talking about films where the fights were as lovingly choreographed as the songs! I’m a bit puzzled that THIS of all things should be taken as an example of “inauthenticity”; some of the choreography has been updated to pass the 2008 audience’s cringe-test, and the style is undoubtedly inflected with the Tamil cinema over the past decade, but there is anothing un-masala about that.
To answer your broader question, what allies this film to popular cinema of an earlier age is the conviction that the love story at its core matters enough to fuel a crazy outsized revenge saga; the middle-class ethos mostly banished from contemporary Hindi cinema, and so on (I’ve explained at greater length on this in my review,, but Asin’s character is not the sort of thing one ever finds in a mainstream Hindi film any more — one continues to find her in Tamil cinema — be it Yashraj, Dharma, Bhansali, or anyone else’s films; and I completely agree with you on the six pack — that was the sort of thing that made Ghajini an unlikely candidate for such a throwback film, that it stubbornly is)…
There is no doubt in my mind that at his best Santoshi is a far superior interpreter of the tradition than Murugadoss (Khakee remains the best attempt to re-invigorate the paradigm I’ve seen); my disagreement was not with the notion that this is not the highest quality masala, but with the notion that it is somehow “fake” and inauthentic and takes itself too seriously, in a way that the real deal would not. There I disagree.
LikeLike
Qalandar
December 27, 2008
PS– “deafeningly loud background score”?! I must have slept through the entire decade of the 1980s: baba this was practically a hallmark of the masala films! Not to mention the crazy overuse of the close-up (which we see today only in JP Dutta’s films, and, of course, in Ghajini) 🙂
To a certain extent the problem might be that people often take (e.g.) the best Bachchan films — e.g. Deewar, Trishul — as representative of an entire tradition. These were of course the best films, hence their status as ever-relevant classics, but these were NOT representative of the bread-and-butter film. Certainly part of the tradition, but at the apex of it, whereas Ghajini hearkens to the middle bulge of the pyramid as I see it.
LikeLike
Qalandar
December 27, 2008
Oops. meant to post this link in my previous comment:
http://qalandari.blogspot.com/2008/12/ghajini-hindi-2008.html
LikeLike
brangan
December 27, 2008
Satyam: Memory Palace, eh? Very nice 🙂
Qalandar: Nice set of thoughts. And yes, the mythical element is a huge component of the good-versus-evil masala movie. But I’m not sure Trishul and Deewar are “masala” movies, exactly (at least the way I look at them).
These are modern-day versions of mythical tales (“modern” in the sense that Deewar, for instance, adds psychological dimensions to the moral ones). They (along with the great Khakee) are more along the lines of “dramas” — great, classical-tradition dramas that borrow certain elements like “one-versus-many fights” from the “masala” movies.
I think I use “masala” in the sense of our equivalent of “grindhouse.” (And I think Zero does too; correct me if I am wrong, though.) I wouldn’t label Arjun, for instance, as “masala” as the element of cockeyed, cheesy disreputability isn’t there (which was there in Family, courtesy that scene with the lion on the screen).
That’s why I agree with Zero (not on the background score, though) when he says this is too polished. And that’s why I said this takes itself too seriously for something so fundamentally silly. As a hardcore “masala” movie (and with another hero, say, the 80s Rajini or Mithun), this might have been great. Aamir just doesn’t convince me as a “masala” film hero, at least the way I define the term.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ravi K
December 28, 2008
The opening that established Sanjay’s environment was well-done. It throws us into the action and we see Sanjay’s daily routine and his systematic way of remembering things. We see how he wakes up everyday as a blank slate. All conveyed visually without dialogue.
Then we get into the overly contrived romance where Asin never finds out who “Sachin” really is and he falls for her because she is apparently everyone’s savior. The train-car full of cops at the end was the deus ex machina working overtime.
The thriller portions of the film would have been more intriguing if there were a couple of twists. But nope. The Ghajini that Sanjay is looking for is exactly who he should be looking for. These scenes are merely a checklist towards killing Ghajini, with no false positives or red herrings on the way. The film never explores what it must be like to have STML, nor does it ever even get close to exploring what revenge will do to a person.
BTW, the scene of Kalpana walking the blind man across the street and describing everything to him is a direct lift from Amelie. I wish Indian filmmakers would watch international cinema as an inspiration to create better work instead of using it as a smorgasbord from which to transplant things into their own films.
LikeLike
Satyam
December 28, 2008
Baradwaj: I will agree that Deewar and possibly Trishul are not masala.
LikeLike
Satyam
December 28, 2008
My own thoughts on masala in the context of Om Shanti Om:
http://www.naachgaana.com/2008/11/03/om-shanti-om-and-the-masala-wrestle/
LikeLike
Qalandar
December 28, 2008
RaviK: you might be right re: Amelie, although I can’t help shake the feeling that I’ve been seeing actresses in Tamil films help blind folks, physically challenged kids, all while scoring great grades and falling for hooligans, for years now 🙂
[BTW: Asin’s rant at the hospital when confronted with Ghajini about how women aren’t safe, that struck me as very distinctly Tamil filmi…quite unexpected].
Baradwaj: your clarification helps. Some of the santization is undoubtedly due to commercial considerations: in the first place Aamir’s credibility is IMO needed to get people to come watch something like this in the multiplexes. But it would have been a bridge too far even for aamir if some of the trappings of more contemporary uselessness (think Dhoom 2) hadn’t been imported.
Aside: the interesting thing to ponder is this: back in the old days, and even perhaps to this day in tamil cinema, when one incorporated various formulaisc elements, the sense was that this had been done for commercial considerations, because the audience was used to a certain kind of formula. Here, however, we are at a pass where this sort of film is the opposite — i.e. its formula is precisely what the audience does NOT expect, making this in an odd way a dicier proposition than a Taare Zameen Par. The point I am trying to make (and that Aamir had very clearly spelled out on his blog a long time ago in connection with a discussion on Fanaa) is that Aamir seems to have deliberately approached this film as a project, as an ideologicaly project to try and do a self-consciously masala film (had he just wanted to do a ‘safe” film that can’t fail to be a hit, he would have done what he is going to do next: “three idiots” is about as safe as can be in these times; as the fate of Sunny Deol’s and Salman Khan’s careers show, the pricing out of a certain demographic from movie theaters, combined with changing tastes (not only in the audience but in the Mubai-centric star kids and industry-family scions who make so many Hindi films these days) makes Murugadoss’ “paisa vasool” been there/done that far more new than Hirani’s films! I watched this film with a friend whose reaction was telling: he loved it, and added that it was like nothing he’d seen in years… One might well have different views on the extent to which the attempt has succeeded (in a sense Satyam’s account of the memory palaced itself recognizes that it is too late, that we are at a funeral as it were), but the commitment is fascinating to me…
LikeLike
Qalandar
December 28, 2008
PS– On further reflection I do agree with you on Deewar and Trishul. They are popular cinema, perhaps even populist cinema, but they possess a single-minded focus that is at odds with the delightful, teeming multiplicity I associate with the term “masala.”
LikeLike
Zero
December 28, 2008
Hey Qalandar,
Long time no see. 🙂
I suspect I might not have conveyed my thoughts clearly. I mean to draw a distinction between the “explicitly stylized” and “lovingly choreographed” actually (even if it’s fallacious because of wrong choice of words). What I was trying to say is, with respect to depiction of violence/action, this film is closer to a ‘Sin City’ than a good old Indian masala film. The stylization here is not as raw and complacent as most Indian film stunts are. I also mean to emphasise on the “explicit” part. The gratuitous violence here is meant to make you shrink, it’s played in a mode most masala dishoom-dishoom aren’t.
On the background score again, my point would have been clearer if one looks at the “kind” of score in Ghajini rather than just at how loud it is. What I find “unrooted” about the score is not the high level of decibel per se, but the whole style — the kind of sound, how painfully incessant it is and so on. If you look at the works of Harris Jayaraj over the last few years, this would be apparent. The sound is often (barring a few cases) too modern to sound masala to begin with. Surely the hollers of a chorus running through the film (I must say here that the Tamil version was even worse) is not vintage Indian masala? And then the incessancy. (One tends to assimilate the music score in continuum with the film, so it’s natural for one to call the score “loud” because it never stops. So, you should pardon me for using the wrong adjective there. :)) To put it shortly, I think the background score in Ghajini is quite far from something that represents the archetypal masala filmi background score. The lineage here is that of Rahman, except that Harris Jayaraj is a poor Rahman. (It’s also somewhat disappointing to see Rahman himself do something on the lines of Harris.)
P.S.: I must of course admit that my consciousness of (and perceptiveness towards) Bollywood masala traditions isn’t is far less spontaneous than yours (and probably most of the commenters here!). So, the problem might indeed be that I’m unwittingly taking some specific kind of films (though, I must say, not the best of Bachchan films) as representative of an entire tradition. And I think it’d also be only fair to look at it from the “Indian” masala perspective because many of these traditions are indeed shared across the films of different languages.
LikeLike
Satyam
December 28, 2008
While I have forever been indulging in elegy with respect to the Bombay film tradition of the 70s I do think that one must account for the different contexts within which the Tamil Ghajini comes about as opposed to its Hindi ‘remake’. When I saw the former I didn’t like it very much, I could think of many better films in Tamil along ‘masala’ lines. But in Hindi this tradition is more or less dead. And so Aamir’s attempt at such a genre becomes not just a ‘film’ but a larger exercise in summoning up dead ghosts. But why does Aamir select Ghajini as opposed to say a Vikram film or something like Kaakka Kaakka? My surmise is that Aamir realizes that the animus Hindi multiplex audiences have for action-masala can only be overcome by in a sense hood-winking the audience. The Memento element in Ghajini therefore provides him the perfect opportunity to do not just masala but ‘different’ masala. Again within Tamil cinema there are very many films offer such ‘edginess’ within genre conventions (not only action but also romance and so forth.. and this for a few decades now). But for Hindi the ‘conceit’ works. One cannot make a Saamy in Hindi. Because the media establishment and the most economically empowered audiences would desribe is as ‘regressive’ in the most unthinking way. So Aamir in my view displays a certain intelligence in choosing just this project.
LikeLike
anantha
December 28, 2008
Saar: No, I understood it was not a diss after all. On first glance, it did sound that way, but once I re-read that line, i figured what you meant. And I agree with you 🙂
LikeLike
Zero
December 28, 2008
God! I meant to say “my consciousness of (and perceptiveness towards) Bollywood masala traditions is far less spontaneous than yours (and probably most of the commenters here!).” Damn typos.
Baradwaj,
We (commenters) need a preview option, I say!
LikeLike
sudha
December 28, 2008
I am one of Aamir Khan’s relentless fans and i am desperately trying to like this movie! I can’t agree with u more about how this one is trying to be more than wat it is. even linking it to Memento has to be some sort of a marketing gimmick.
I wudn’t have cared for any of the many logical flaws (he reads a whole 2 diaries and then goes to the villian’s den and beats up a whole gang in 15 mins??) if this were a regular masala bollywood movie with a demi-god hero and larger than life villian. i like that stuff. i like believing that a business magnate actually cares about what is written about him in a trashy magazine and goes out to meet the girl(not the journalist or the magazine editor) in person. i like believing that the same guy drives around town in a fleet of no less than 5 cars.
But why r u trying to make me feel more intelligent becoz i am listening to some fancy ass brain disease? why tout memento when this one is not even in the same genre?
lol! can u sense my desperation? i am desperately trying to like it for wat it is 😛
LikeLike
Zero
December 28, 2008
Re: “I think I use “masala” in the sense of our equivalent of “grindhouse.” (And I think Zero does too; correct me if I am wrong, though.)”
Yes, that’s what I was trying to say, Baradwaj. I think it might be useful to elaborate on your point that “those kind of masala movies are extinct in Hindi, while they’re still around in Tamil.” If one looks at the original from the world of Tamil cinema, I guess it’d be more apparent that the film is seen as something “different” from a proper masala film like those of Dharani’s, how even the action/violence is not simply pure masala and crosses with that of a bloody action thriller. (This is not to suggest that the dishoom-dishoom sequences in the film are themselves not in the “six fight scenes” tradition. Their very existence is in keeping with the tradition, but not really the mode in which they operate.) This is probably why I’m unable to see it as vintage masala, while Qalandar reacts to the same differently because these sort of masala heroes are all but extinct in Hindi cinema.
Re: “To answer your broader question, what allies this film to popular cinema of an earlier age is the conviction that the love story at its core matters enough to fuel a crazy outsized revenge saga; the middle-class ethos mostly banished from contemporary Hindi cinema, and so on (I’ve explained at greater length on this in my review,, but Asin’s character is not the sort of thing one ever finds in a mainstream Hindi film any more — one continues to find her in Tamil cinema — be it Yashraj, Dharma, Bhansali, or anyone else’s films;”
Qalandar,
Well put. (I’ve already read your review, will revisit it again in the wake of this discussion.) I do see your point. It’s just that the deus ex machina is glaring for me. Let’s just say I completely missed the emotional resonance here. Completely agree with you that one can’t find characters like Asin’s often in Hindi cinema any more. But here again I’d bring up the overall context. Not only would one find that sort characters in every other film in Tamil, but nowadays one would also see them getting killed quite often!
P.S.: Baradwaj, sorry for the ill-formatted comment submitted before this. Please delete it.
LikeLike
aarkayne
December 28, 2008
completely agree that this AK’s worst film since MELA or RH. No dearth of viewers however that wont make it a hit though.
Though i winced originally on hearing AK was working in a remake of a remake, but thought he was smart enough to bring intelligence to the script. Alas that has not happened. Its a mindless and mind numbing gore fest that did absolutely nothing for me except push me to re-visit some of his better movies from the past within 15 minutes of getting out of the auditorium. While they say an hangover needs to be treated with more drinking, its my belief a bad movie experience certainly has to be dealt with by a good movie…..here i come SARFAROSH or GHULAM or DIL CHAHTA HAI….rescue me!
LikeLike
brangan
December 28, 2008
Qalandar/Satyam: Oh, I do agree that this “old” style of filmmaking is so dead in the Hindi context that it’s practically “new” again. That’s why I spent the entire first half of the review building up to why I thought it’s “interesting” for Aamir to do this role, in the context of current (multiplex) Hindi cinema.
But that said, I don’t think this film can be “fresh” for anyone (like me or Zero) who continues to see a large number of Tamil masala films, and who’s already seen the Tamil Ghajini. It’s like what I said in my review of Dostana — the casual treatment of homosexuality is fascinating in an Indian film context, but eventually, that’s just a sociocultural consideration. Finally, the FILM has to work (for me).
Zero: “I think the background score in Ghajini is quite far from something that represents the archetypal masala filmi background score.” I agree with that to an extent, especially with the “archetypal” bit, because the BGM in the “masala” movies was often the same from film to film, with the same emotional cues being conveyed by the same combinations of instruments.
sudha: “But why r u trying to make me feel more intelligent becoz i am listening to some fancy ass brain disease? why tout memento when this one is not even in the same genre?” Precisely. Why was this even needed, even if only as a gimmick? Because when not used properly, this 15-minute thingee throws up far too many logical loopholes, which we’d have happily ignored in a film that wasn’t trying so hard to be “smart”
Zero: “Not only would one find that sort characters in every other film in Tamil, but nowadays one would also see them getting killed quite often!” LOL. For some reason, that totally cracked me up.
LikeLike
brangan
December 28, 2008
Zero: And did you notice that the Tamil version dug into its masala roots a tad more comfortably (i.e. unembarrassedly) in the fight sequences? When Suriya plunges that tap into the villain’s stomach, there’s a cheeky payoff shot with blood dripping out of the faucet. Here, that’s not there. Maybe Aamir drew the line at *that* level of fealty to masala traditions 😉
LikeLike
Alpesh
December 28, 2008
i have seen the tamil version and just got back from seeing the hindi version. i have to say i am a little underwhelmed by the hindi version.
i have major issues with the tamil version, namely nayantara (her character was awful, and her acting was worse) and the last 30-40 minutes (the reasons behind the death, evil twin just seemed pointless) but the reason i liked the tamil version was because of Asin and the way she portrayed her character, and Surya’s dancing in the film which always brings a smile to my face whenever i watch the songs.
Although the hindi version has a different climax i think it’s still pretty poor and the action is more boring. Jiah Khan is ok, but in the context of how bad Nayantara was, that’s not saying much.
I agree with Qalandar that Pradeep Rawat is a poor choice for a villian (probably as poor a choice as the guy who plays the cop who is also another bad actor)
Asin was good again, but there was something about her scenes which I found lacking, the dialogue didn’t seem as witty enough (which is funny, because I don’t understand tamil and rely on subtitles when watching tamil films, where as my understanding of hindi is pretty good)
I’ve always thought Aamir was the wrong guy to play Sanjay. Physically he was never suited for that role, and while his transformation is pretty amazing, I think the cameraman thought the same also, and as a result the film was bordering on homo-eroticism with all the focusing on the abs and the muscles.
Compared to Surya, I’d say to Aamir “close but no cigar”
But I guess what I am really trying to say is, I agree with your review and that I prefer the tamil version
LikeLike
Anand
December 28, 2008
BR: That scene got chopped off by Censors. Unfortunately, it is not an Aamir film – it is a Murugadoss film with Aamir in it. Therefore, the credit and blame must go entirely to Murugadoss.
Just digressing a bit – The films of actors who are also filmmakers do not get a fair judgement IMO. Take the example of Kamal or Aamir -Ghajini or Dasavatharam is bound be to be lesser than what we expect – purely because of the competence of the filmmakers handling these projects – but we continue to expect more because we somehow feel the actors would take responsibility for the eventual quality of the films!
This, of course, does not hold good, when you know the competence of the director handling the project. Tomorrow, if God forbid, 3 idiots does not work, we know whom to blame.
LikeLike
Qalandar
December 28, 2008
Baradwaj: if media reports are to be believed, the tap scene was there in the Hindi version as well — but the censor board refused to allow it (pretty hypocritical given the same scene was allowed in the Tamil version).
Check this out:
http://www.mumbaimirror.com/article/30/2008121320081213021544531d7a2549c/Nonviolent-movement?pageno=1
LikeLike
Qalandar
December 28, 2008
Yeah Baradwaj, I wish we could have a preview option — no opportunity for me to correct typos here…
LikeLike
Qalandar
December 28, 2008
Re: “I don’t think this film can be “fresh” for anyone (like me or Zero) who continues to see a large number of Tamil masala films, and who’s already seen the Tamil Ghajini.”
A fair point perhaps: someone like me appreciates Tamil masala because it testifies to the survival of something that no longer exists in Hindi cinema (i.e. my default is Hindi cinema, and as you know I am a “latecomer” to Tamil cinema). By contrast, perhaps to a “native” (recognizing how loaded and problematic that concept itself is), that same paradigm represents the “prison” that isn’t being transcended…
[Aside: for all their flaws, I would take the Vel, Paruthiveeran, and Subramaniapuram re-imagining of what Tamil cinema can mean; any day over the analogous “new
Bollywood of Rock On and what not. Seems more “organic” to me]…
LikeLike
sudha
December 28, 2008
lol! i didn’t watch the tamil version, but i remember expecting some blood from the faucet in that scene!!! ha ha ha!
was almost disappointed. indicates my diet of pure-bred south Indian cinema.
LikeLike
Aditya Pant
December 28, 2008
BR: I completely agree with your assessment of the film. The reason why Ghajini was such a big disappointment for me is that one has come to expect a certain level of intelligence in an Aamir Khan film. He had a golden opportunity of showing that an “intelligent masala film” is not really an oxymoron. Makes me wonder if this meticulously crafted image of a ‘thinking actor’ is anything but a facade. How else can one explain choices like Fanaa and Ghajini (I’m not counting Mela or Raja Hindustani because those films came before this ‘image’ had grown to succh gargantuan size!!).
Bere’s my take on this hugely disappointing film:
http://urgetofly.blogspirit.com/archive/2008/12/26/ghajini-review.html
LikeLike
brangan
December 28, 2008
Anand: Typically, a director is ALWAYS responsible for everything in a film — from the writing to the acting to the sets to the you-name-it. But with Kamal and Aamir, you can’t help feeling otherwise. Maybe it’s because the same directors haven’t been able to deliver with other actors, maybe it’s because these two have a rumoured tendency to ghost-direct… I heard that the person giving jimmy jib instructions on the sets of Dasa wasn’t KSR but Kamal.
Aditya Pant: I thought the very first comment was yours 🙂
LikeLike
Aditya Pant
December 28, 2008
BR: It’s been a while since mine used to be the first comment on your reviews (thanks due to a variety of reasons) ….I guess I have a reputation to keep 🙂
LikeLike
Ravi K
December 28, 2008
Qalandar
“If media reports are to be believed, the tap scene was there in the Hindi version as well — but the censor board refused to allow it (pretty hypocritical given the same scene was allowed in the Tamil version).”
The Tamil censor board must be more forgiving of violence than the Hindi board.
“RaviK: you might be right re: Amelie, although I can’t help shake the feeling that I’ve been seeing actresses in Tamil films help blind folks, physically challenged kids, all while scoring great grades and falling for hooligans, for years now :-)”
The idea of helping the blind man is not new but the describing of the street to the blind man is a notable scene from Amelie:
LikeLike
danny
December 28, 2008
Ghajini is not MEMENTO… ‘memento’ is non-linear and is for the intelluct movie buffs, its hard to understand whats really happening, need to watch the movie atleast 3 times to finally figure out what its all about… Ghajini is definitely for the indian folks… seeing the filled movie halls and never ending queue for the next show its evident that the film is enjoyable and the director and crew has done it right..
LikeLike
Qalandar
December 28, 2008
Re: “Makes me wonder if this meticulously crafted image of a ‘thinking actor’ is anything but a facade. How else can one explain choices like Fanaa and Ghajini”
Aditya: Aamir has said on his blog that he really believes in films like Fanaa; I don’t think there’s any facade, since he has always been rather above board in his conviction as far as popular cinema in this register is concerned. In fact whether or not his roles are in Fanaa or elsewhere, Aamir always has a weakness for “populist” roles: check out Lagaan, Rang De Basanti, Fanaa, Rangeela, Raja Hindustani; even in Dil Chahta Hai he had the most overtly populist role. And the way he has structured his career he certainly likes to return to the “site” of older tropes every few films. This has been a pretty constant theme with him: Raja Hindustani, Ishq, Mann, Mela, Fanaa, Ghajini…no matter how “big” Aamir has become, he never has shown any sign of abandoning the paradigm. He doesn’t ONLY do one kind of film, but this is definitely one of the strands he seems to want to hold on to. The notion that the “thinking actor” means that Taare Zameen Par or Rang De Basanti is the “norm” is not something one can fairly read into his career — I think that reflects more the projection of some in the audience embarrassed by “masala” cinema than anything Khan has ever “promised” his viewers.
LikeLike
santhosh kottayi
December 28, 2008
For me it is a wonderful movie. Was really pleasing to watch Amir Khan getting back to the commercial formula – that too with a vengeance! What a ‘powerful’ performance by the shortest Khan! We should salute this guy’s amazing skill in effortlessly shifting from a Taare Zameen Par frame to Mr. Sanjay Singhania in Ghajini! Amazing versatility! Another example of his uncompromising commitment to bring out the best in every role he plays and that too in every shot! No wonder he is called the perfectionist of Indian Cinema!
Was pleased to see the director making the right changes from his own Tamil version and presenting the story n a better way! The final stunt scene which was a real ‘show spoiler’ in the Tamil version was corrected and made more synchronized with the basic theme of the movie.
Our own Asin, made a good impression….but i think she was not able to grasp the BIG opportunity which came in her way by way of getting an entry to Bollywood as an Amir Khan heroine! Her performance was better in the Tamil version…with not much over acting in that. I will not be surprised, if she still struggles in Bollywood even after getting one of the best entries!
Great music by A R Rahman and the picturisation was superb… Overall a great movie to watch..Pls don’t miss it!
LikeLike
Qalandar
December 28, 2008
RaviK: my understanding is that the censor board is a central body. Obviously different sub-groups must review films in different languages, but it would be nice to have some semblance of uniform standards…
LikeLike
Raj Balakrishnan
December 28, 2008
‘Ghajini’ is a big backward step both for aamir khan and the Indian film industry. After ‘Taare Zameen Par’, much was expected from him but he has let down his fans badly.
LikeLike
Elizabeth
December 28, 2008
I’m almost afraid to say this (please don’t hate me), since Aamir Khan seems to have been put on a pedestal, but here goes.
What exactly has Aamir Khan done that justifies his reputation? Which film of his proves that he is somehow a cut above the rest in terms of his sensibilities? Lagaan, for example. I personally found Lagaan to be utterly ridiculous.
It was just another masala movie and I probably wouldn’t have minded it (in fact I would’ve enjoyed it) if it hadn’t been built up to be more than it was. But no, it couldn’t just be an entertaining movie. It had to be some sort of monumental cinematic achievement (it’s the same thing that bothered me about Dark Knight).
I’m one who enjoys ridiculous, but entertaining movies as long as they don’t pretend to be more than they are. What I get from Aamir Khan is that he’s someone who is seen by others as better than the rest, takes himself incredibly seriously and yet more often than not comes up with movies that aren’t particularly amazing or unique or atypical to Bollywood.
I’m just puzzled by people expecting “intelligence” or “perfectionism” from AK only to be disappointed when he does something like Ghajini because, to me, the bulk (not all) of his supposedly great films have just been typical Bollywood movies with an inflated sense of self importance and grandiosity.
I’ve always liked Aamir Khan as an actor. Loved him in Dil Chahta Hai, especially, but this whole “we expect better from Aamir Khan” thing throws me. Why exactly do people expect better? I don’t get it.
To me, he’s a very good actor, nothing more, nothing less. Ghajini isn’t going to turn into a work of genius just by virtue of AK being in it. The Tamil version bordered on absurd and so does this one, Aaamir Khan or no Aamir Khan.
*ducks the flying knives and pitchforks*
LikeLike
v
December 28, 2008
“Sanjay is so strikingly, so aesthetically bulked up,it’s as if he were jointly conceived by Michelangelo and Talwalkars. ”
ROTFL……….
LikeLike
harish
December 28, 2008
though i agree wid ur anguish tht Aamir as an intelligent person disappointed you i feel having seen the tamil version and having known from all the marketing thats been done the movie was literally unchanged except few tweaks. i feel you expected a radical change is the script which they weren’t promising at all. i feel it is just another movie you go watch enjoy the comedy feel some anger in the action seen and then wid out complaining come out… its more of an attempt by Aamir to be Akshay and SRK to give engaging movie will not move you after u come out of the hall….
LikeLike
harish
December 28, 2008
my take on the movie is in this link
http://www.harishfilmviews.blogspot.com
LikeLike
Aditya Pant
December 28, 2008
Qalandar & Elizabeth: Just needed to clarify one thing. I have no problems with populist films. Also, I have no problems in owning up my taste for masala. Where I think a Fanaa or a Ghajini differs from other populist fares like Lagaan and RDB is in terms of the writing. A populist (or masala) film need not necessarily be brainless or ridden with gaping loopholes. By ‘intelligence’ I don’t mean a mindbender or something like that. All I’m expecting from Aamir is a film where (using BR’s by-now-cliched phrase) ‘some thought has gone into the writing’ and t. Take Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na for instance, a film Aamir chose to associate with as a producer. It was a routine rom-com, but there was a certain level of ‘intelligence’ in the way it was written.
This expectation from Aamir is simply because of the kind of image he projects in interviews, etc.
LikeLike
Rahul
December 28, 2008
Elizabeth: Agree with you…I don’t understand why even thinking people are taken in by the hype popular media creates about Aamir Khan being something he certainly is not. He is just another ordinary actor who is good occasionally good, for example Dil Chahta Hai. And please…TZP being good movie…surely it must be meant as a joke.
Aamir also must be taken in by this adulation by the lowest common denominator that is represented by mainstream electronic media now.
As for Ghajini..what can I say. Crap masquerading as something it is not…and considering Aamir Khan believes in his projects, he must also take the blame here.
Cheers,
Rahul
LikeLike
oops
December 28, 2008
Wow this is the first time i’ve seen Aamir being for once victim of his intellectual image. I agree with Qualandar Lagaan when he says that he’s more into populist roles than in “intellectual” characters and films. In that, he’s somehow not so far away from SRK. The big difference between them is that Aamir crosses all the spectrum of hindi cinema to show what a mass hero can possibly be. The romantic hero in DCH or Fanaa, the old style savior in Lagaan, the historical legend in Mangal Pandey, even the soul savior in TZP and so on. People have been “fooled” (not a good word though) by movies like RDB and TZP.
For me Abhay Deol is doing intellectual, “autheurist” risky flick for a niche audience. Aamir is not, which is not a bad thing. Actually he makes me think of Harrison Ford. I’ve only seen him once playing the bad guy (in What Lies Beneath with Michel Pfeiffer very late in his career). But earlier, he was Indiana Jones (mythic hero), Jack Ryan (the patriot), or David Kimble (the underdog hero trying to prove his innocence). Aamir career is shaping up this way more than another, and seeing him in a movie like Ghajni should not be surprising. Movies like RDB, TZP and 3 Idiots are (good) exceptions to the rule.
I can’t say anything about the movie yet ‘cause like always we are one or two movies late where I live…
LikeLike
Satyam
December 28, 2008
“Qalandar/Satyam: Oh, I do agree that this “old” style of filmmaking is so dead in the Hindi context that it’s practically “new” again. That’s why I spent the entire first half of the review building up to why I thought it’s “interesting” for Aamir to do this role, in the context of current (multiplex) Hindi cinema.
But that said, I don’t think this film can be “fresh” for anyone (like me or Zero) who continues to see a large number of Tamil masala films, and who’s already seen the Tamil Ghajini. It’s like what I said in my review of Dostana — the casual treatment of homosexuality is fascinating in an Indian film context, but eventually, that’s just a sociocultural consideration. Finally, the FILM has to work (for me).”
That’s a fair point Baradwaj except that I would perhaps be a bit more alert to the process of ‘translation’. I am unsure if a film can be neatly split into ‘pure narrative’ on the one hand and the ‘socio-cultural’ on the other. That the film didn’t work for you (or Zero) is not at all what I’m quarreling with.
To reiterate what I’ve said earlier I think that this particular masala effort works very well as a trope for ‘de-masala-fied’ Bollywood. I would not suggest the same if Aamir had for example remade a Mahesh Babu film!
LikeLike
bart
December 28, 2008
I liked the hindi version too. I stop here.
LikeLike
ideaunique
December 28, 2008
Dear Mr. Rangan,
I always read your reviews with lot of interest because in my opinion, you are one of the finest critics/reviewer of India.
I, honestly, respect your views on Ghajini if not agree because I loved the movie very much…
The question is – millions of people are liking the movie very much (BO nos. are saying it all) – so what does that mean? either those millions don’t know what is good cinema? or they are fooling themselves by watching such movies and still feeling entertained? No Mr. Rangan NO! Recently, aamir said in one of the talk show with Farhaan Aktar that the primary responsibility of Cinema is to entertain people – so true!
at the end of the day – those millions who got entertained and more millions who will still get entertained in coming few days by watching Ghajini – they are the real audience sir – they go to find few moments in that dark cinema halls – those few moments which touch their emotions no matter in what form those moments come….hardly 5-10% people take movie-going experience as seriously as your write-up…..
LikeLike
Qalandar
December 28, 2008
santosh: I will say that my friends all seem to have been smitten by Asin (unlike me, none of them had ever seen her work before and certainly hadn’t seen the Tamil film). How far she’ll go is a different issue (I suspect she doesn’t have the sort of persona that’ll work in films like Dostana), but I think her down home vibe combined with an undeniable sexiness will have takers, particularly for those who might fancy Amrita Rao’s wholesomeness but in a less schoolgirl, more womanly avatar.
LikeLike
Sameer
December 28, 2008
Excellent review Baradwaj!
As I’ve already seen Tamil version couple of times, this one was (with over 3 hours length) was difficult to sit through. Aamir was less impressive than Surya as he doesn’t add anything else which Surya missed out(infact does less), Asin’s expression didn’t change a bit even though her language did. First half has 3 songs and all of them were bad, 2nd half 2 songs were lovely though(Guzarish and that sad song). Moreover, usually these kind of movies are good watch if it happens to be a ‘filler’ project and not when you wait the audience wait for 2 years showing all kinds of Body building videos, Hair style demos, so on. Most importantly, it’s just a typical revenge drama – and no Lagaan – that audience shouldn’t complain about its over 3-3.5 hour length!
LikeLike
Sameer
December 28, 2008
Baradwaj:”When Suriya plunges that tap into the villain’s stomach, there’s a cheeky payoff shot with blood dripping out of the faucet. Here, that’s not there. Maybe Aamir drew the line at *that* level of fealty to masala traditions”
Baradwaj, I think that one has gotta to do with Hindi Censor board. Remember the recent media article, they had 3 cuts. I would like to assume this was one of them and mostly I don’t see that such a scene would be passed in a Hindi movie!
LikeLike
brangan
December 28, 2008
Elizabeth: “Which film of his proves that he is somehow a cut above the rest in terms of his sensibilities?” Dil Chahta Hai for one. Sarfarosh (which is an intelligent action movie). Can you imagine any other actor making TZP? Or conceding large chunks of screen space to younger faces as in Rang De Basanti? I don’t think (his bad films notwithstanding) Aamir is mere hype. Sure, he has his fair share of duds, but then which actor doesn’t? If people are calling him a genius, then perhaps you could question it, but given his films post Lagaan, he’s easily the best guarantor of a “quality” mainstream film among the current crop of actors.
ideaunique: “hardly 5-10% people take movie-going experience as seriously as your write-up” – but of course. And these reviews are written with the assumption that at least those 5-10% might like to engage with the film (as you put it) “seriously”
LikeLike
Zero
December 29, 2008
Qalandar/RaviK,
There’s no semblance of uniform standards as far as I see. Actually, one can’t quite say that the Tamil censor board is more forgiving either. For example, a piece of dialogue (Kamal’s explanation as to why he doesn’t drink milk) was cut in the Tamil version of Hey! Ram, but found a place in the Hindi version. (And we’re not even talking about a remake here!) It’s arbitrary depending on the then board members I suppose. In general, perhaps one can say that the Tamil censor board is by and large more forgiving of viscerally “objectionable” stuff (very violent films bagging U certificates is not very uncommon) than their Hindi counterparts, but much more prudish when it comes to “objectionable” dialogue. (I think it’s fair to say that the Hindi censors have almost given up on the latter which is a very good sign.)
[Trivia-monger alert.] By the way, in addition to the lift from Amelie, the title sequence traversing a path in the neural network of a human brain is lifted from Fight Club.
LikeLike
Lee
December 29, 2008
oops, I agree with your comparison of Aamir to Harrison Ford. Someone who is not a really good actor but knows how to play to his strengths and push the right buttons for the audience to love him. As a non-Indian, I’m always puzzled by the cult of Aamir – genius, perfectionist, etc. I have yet to see anything unique and pathbreaking from him yet this mystique exists. Very puzzling.
LikeLike
Elizabeth
December 29, 2008
Well, BR, I guess we differ on this then.
I love Dil Chahta Hai. Loved Aamir in it (as I’ve already mentioned), but why does he get credit for the movie? Shouldn’t the credit go to Farhan Akhtar? Or if one makes the argument for the actors getting part of the credit for a good movie or getting credit for merely recognizing a good script and choosing to act in it, then what about Saif Ali Khan and Akshay Khanna who were also excellent in the movie? What about all the other actors in the movie?
Haven’t seen Sarfarosh, so I’ll take your word on that one, but again, does the credit go to AK or the director? And if your giving AK credit for merely choosing to act in such a movie, then shouldn’t the other actors in the movie be lauded as well?
I think my main point of contention with what you said is that AK’s films post-Lagaan have been an indication that AK is the best guarantor of quality.
I just don’t think his post-Lagaan films have been particularly good and that includes RDB (way overrated IMO) and TZP (which I liked until half way).
Yes, he has done a few good films, but so have a lot of others. I don’t think the reputation for intelligence and excellence is justified by a few good films.
Peace.
LikeLike
ideaunique
December 29, 2008
thanks Mr. Rangan for replying…but won’t it would be nice if your reviews also include few lines for those 90-95% entertainment seeking people? also how many people would have seen memento or tamil ghajini? this movie is getting released in 23 countries including india….pl. publish a second review with a title “Ghajini review no. 2: for those who are looking for entertainment” 🙂
LikeLike
brangan
December 29, 2008
Elizabeth: “Shouldn’t the credit go to Farhan Akhtar?” Of course it should. But it also speaks of an actor’s sense of a script that he chose to act in this film. Just like Rang De. (And we’re talking big, commercial actor.) Why does Kamal have such a reputation for quality today? Because he chose to act in a Sagara Sangamam or a Nayakan, when he could have done a dozen other films guaranteed to work at the box office. An actor isn’t responsible for how a film turns out, but an audience’s expectation of an actor certainly depends on his choices.
LikeLike
Jabberwock
December 29, 2008
won’t it would be nice if your reviews also include few lines for those 90-95% entertainment seeking people?
Here we go again. Ideaunique, if Baradwaj is to write an honest review, he has to express his own perspective on the film, not someone else’s (even if that someone else is “90-95 percent” of the viewing audience). You want a safe, sterile write-up that provides a summary of the story and speculates on what the mass-audience reaction to the film will be? Go to IMDB, or Wikipedia, or Taran Adarsh, or the dozens of other box-office commenters/trade-journal reviewers.
Also, just curious: if someone doesn’t like Ghajini (and likes Memento), does that mean he doesn’t seek “entertainment” in the films he watches?
P.S. Baradwaj, sorry for butting in like this, but after years of seeing comments asking you to be “objective”, and your repeated clarifications that any review is one person’s necessarily subjective take on a film, I feel like I should lend a small hand!
LikeLike
Ravi K
December 29, 2008
If you read “The Spirit of Lagaan” you will see what kind of dedication Aamir Khan put towards that film. He not only acted in, but also produced a strange film combining cricket and colonialism, shot in a remote location.
Aamir is not a genius, but he is a very good actor who does a variety of films and roles fairly well. At the very least, he is a few notches above SRK.
LikeLike
Shiv
December 29, 2008
The DVD will explain all the loopholes. For example, it will feature a close-up of his elbows – “100 push ups, 50 pull ups” and a stick figure drawing of Arnold
LikeLike
ideaunique
December 29, 2008
ooops…sorry rangan sir, i didn’t know ur blog has people who can’t stand comments against ur reviews….pl. write what u feel sir and forget about those 90-95% people, many of whom might be reading reviews and then deciding to watch the movie…
LikeLike
Aditya Pant
December 29, 2008
Ideaunique: Just curious – On what basis have you formed the “opinion” that BR is the “one of the finest critics/reviewer of India”?
LikeLike
harish
December 29, 2008
Mr. BR
though i agree wid ur anguish tht Aamir as an intelligent person disappointed you i feel having seen the tamil version and having known from all the marketing thats been done the movie will be literally unchanged except few tweaks. i feel you expected a radical change in the script which they weren’t promising at all. i feel it is just another movie you go watch and enjoy the comedy, feel some anger in the action scenes and then wid out complaining come out… its more of an attempt by Aamir to be Akshay and SRK
LikeLike
harish
December 29, 2008
Mr.BR
as a curious person i would be glad if you tell us what you found missing or damaged or disturbed in the hindi version when compared to the tamil version which made you dislike the movie?
LikeLike
Shashi
December 29, 2008
BR, like your review – I havent seen the Tamil version of Ghajini and hence could not appreciate the related comments. Did you have any specific reason to present this review as a comparison with the Tamil version. I guess the majority of the audience for this movie across India would not have seen the Tamil version, and perhaps that’s true for a majority of your review readers too (again my guess)!!!
Or, perhaps having seen the Tamil version, it was difficult for you not to compare, just like it is for people who have seen Memento??
LikeLike
oops
December 29, 2008
lol Lee i did not try to compare both actor’s talent.
You could be true though, but i like Aamir’s style and his conviction. The classes should stop pretending that he’s not made to please the masses when he’s trying to reunite the A and C centers crowd in front of the same screen ! I like that about him. A BB is a movie that can please everyone irrespective of his social background, the real summer pop corn flick. Forget about intelligence and all. I guess Aamir did it too for Ghajni lol (but it doesn’t mean that the movie cannot be bad… let’s remember Pearl Hardor, a painful Blockbuster only interesting during battles when some very angry japanese guy tries to kill a very bad and annoying Ben Affleck 🙂 )
My only grudge against Aamir : he should loosen up, and throw this image of a very serious, pretentious actor away. I thought acting should be enjoyed, no need to show that it’s so hard and deadly serious! I’d prefer to see him for once say that he did Ghajni because it feels cool to beat 10 guy with one hand, that it reminds him of the movies that he watched when he was young, just because of that feeling of being free to be a super hero. Even if it’s not true ! Please lie to us, instead of showing how you worked one year to build 8 packs. BRangan says that the movie taked itself too seriously. I haven’t seen it but it’s something that you can feel during the promotion campaign.
Lol Harish good remark. But i don’t think he would like to hear a journalist ask “how does it feel to be Akshaye or SRK .” 🙂
LikeLike
Arif Attar
December 29, 2008
Elizabeth, one needs to keep in mind that many of these films you mention have been the only successes of the directors of these movies. Many of them have been first-timers. And this is where the genius of Aamir is visible (Yes I have no qualms about calling him a genius). He worked with Ashutosh Gowariker at a time when everyone had given up on him. You may not like Lagaan but no serious list of the top 5 Bollywood movies can ever omit Lagaan. It still is Gowariker’s only success, even though I thought Swades was an outstanding movie. It’s the same with Mehra and Rang De Basanti. Rangeela was Verma’s first real commercial success and I think it still is his biggest grosser. And I am not belittling these directors. All of them have gone on to make some of the greatest movies over the last decade or so. Like for example Farhan Akhtar. Even though he is such a ridiculously talented man, he still needed a break. We all do.
And hence Aamir is given a huge part of the credit, which is his due, for the success of these movies.
Peace,
Arif
LikeLike
Elizabeth
December 29, 2008
BR, I guess all it comes down to is that you think most of his recent films have been good, while I do not.I feel most of his films of late have been standrad, mainstream commercial films masquerading as something more than what they are. Basically my point is that Aamir Khan is a good actor, but his reputation for being more than that is based on thin evidence and blown out of proportion.
Anyway, just wanted to address this point you made BR: “But it also speaks of an actor’s sense of a script that he chose to act in this film.”
Yeah, I talked about that in my last comment, I think. He’s not the only actor who chose to be in that film. What about Saif and Akshay and Priety and heck even Sonali Kulkarni? Or do they not get as much credit for good judgement because none of them were (at the time) a big commercial actor?
I’m not saying Aamir Khan’s acting ability is all hype. Not at all. But, Aamir Khan as some sort of excellent judge of good scripts and a meticulous producer/director whose films will be more intelligent than others? That, I believe, is not so much “hype” as an image partly thrust upon him and partly due to the way he comes across in interviews (pretentious, I often feel, but I guess many see him as intelligent).
BR, you once wrote about how The Dark Knight was a movie where its “greatness” was pre-determined. It was “great” on arrival even before anybody had seen it. That’s what I see happening with Aamir Khan in terms of his image.
His films are expected to be great even before anyone sees them. Then when it turns out not so great or not so different from a typical commercial film, people say they expected better from him and I can’t for the life of me figure out why anyone expects that.
Anyway, I guess I’m just going around in a circle here, lol (I’m not great at articulating what I feel) and I’m probably doing a bad job of arguing my point, so I’ll stop debating, heh.
LikeLike
raj
December 29, 2008
“Maybe Aamir drew the line at *that* level of fealty to masala traditions
”
Okay, so I’ll start my rant here.
I’ll have to help you with placing your over-rating of Aamir Khan in cotnext for you, though I suppose you dont care to hear it. It seems like you went in imagining that Aamir Khan, that great thinking actor and the cinematic genius that he is in your mind would bring in some nuances of that said fancy disease int he movie. He didnt. How did you explain it? Not that Aamir couldnt think of it or couldnt bring those nuances – you interpret that as Aamir didnt care to interpret. Let that pass.
I quoted that sentence in the top of this comment for one purpose – this is another instance of your ability to give some film makers far more credit than they deserve 0 and this time I have a good reason to say so.
Because that tap scene was retained in the Hindi version and cut down by the Censor board. Apparently, the alternative was to keep the scene and get an A certificate because you see, the sensitive bollywood audience is not expected to stomach it.This was a major news item before the release of the movie.
So there. I appreciate your excellent ability to see the good things in a movie and give credit to filmmakers but here’s another spin you are giving which is not deserved by the said film maker
I suppose if Sunil Darshan ha
LikeLike
brangan
December 29, 2008
Shashi: “Or, perhaps having seen the Tamil version, it was difficult for you not to compare, just like it is for people who have seen Memento??”
That’s exactly it. How can you un-see a film once you’ve seen it? And once that other film is already lodged in your mind, it becomes a reference point that cannot be prised out. So you’ll never really see a “fresh” film. Another thing is that the changes from there to her genuinely interested me, and I wanted to talk about them.
raj: There’s a wink at the end of that line. I think the emoticon means that what preceded is meant as a joke. I’m sure you’ll find a dozen other things about me and my reviews to rant about, but this line is just that — a joke 🙂 (That’s a smiley, by the way.)
But even if the comment was meant seriously, so what? If you’re going to keep reading my reviews, you’re going to have to get used to the fact that I club Aamir, Kamal, Mani Ratnam and so on in a group that I have expectations from. And when they fail me, perhaps I try to find reasons that will help me sleep better at night. It’s very simple, really. It’s basic human nature. If Mani Ratnam makes what I consider a mistake and if Sunil Darshan makes that same mistake, then OF COURSE I’ll give Mani Ratnam the benefit of the doubt. If that makes me a lesser critic, then so be it. I don’t see why this is reason to go on a seething rant.
LikeLike
oops
December 29, 2008
(woooo guys Brangan is upset now… )
LikeLike
oops
December 29, 2008
To release stress, Dostana bloopers 🙂
LikeLike
raj
December 29, 2008
Yes, that makes you a lesser critic. Now, here’s the deal. I don’t have the level of your imagination powers. So, give me a reason to rationalise this – just like you have rationalised the unrationalisable for your favourite aamir khan 🙂
You get it don’t you -give me a reason to sleep better at night :u)
LikeLike
raj
December 29, 2008
Elizabeth, on the contrary, you are making the same point as me but much more articulately 🙂
I have this question – now that aamir has made ghajin- and that without adding any intelligence to it, admittedly a difficult task – will the expectations of him reduce?
In other words, I’d his credit as intelligent actor went up after Lagaan, will it go downa notch now?
Will people for instance say of 3 idiots, “I expected worse from someone who did ghajini but it is not that bad,eh?”
LikeLike
s
December 29, 2008
Look guys, it isn’t just the script sense alone(which is something of a phenomena by itself), i feel he kind of has pushed the commercial cinema a wee bit more by making the movies successful on subjects that were considered suicidal for box office. RDB and Lagaan had patriotism in core, TZP with dyslexia.
I have read a particular director saying that it will be marvelous to use the crowd drawing power of star like Vijay to make unusual movies rather than run of the mill movies. I think Aamir, not exactly by plan but rather by conviction in a script has done that.
His blog posts indicate he likes movies like fanaa, may be coz of that he is able to figure out which unusual scripts are more palpable for larger audiences. This is just my guess work. But this fact cannot be ignored that he has made hits out of subjects that were still consdiered taboo for the commercial success. For that I can afford not to care about a Fanaa or Ghajini(is a lot less boring than fanaa).
And Saif was also treated well with Omkara and so but is losing some of the respect with his poster boy for yrf practice. Saif wasn’t the same star to start with as Aamir.
Raj, There is something called credibility that gets built over time.
LikeLike
Lakshmi
December 29, 2008
I think I spilt the beans on Ghajini in your last review itself… so will save my breath now.
Was thinking about writing a post on how some of my favorite films this year have been the off-beat ones. Aamir, Dusvidaniya, Mithya, Johny Gaddaar (honestly, I didn’t see this one but my hubby and his friend really liked it), Wednesday, Oye Lucky Lucky Oye…
LikeLike
oops
December 30, 2008
Ok i know it’s totally off topic but does anyone know if the story of Dany Boyle’s Slumdog Millionaire is true ? And if it is, what happened to the main character (Jamal) after that ?
LikeLike
hari ohm
December 30, 2008
BR, did they repeat the line “it is a 10 digit number, then it must be a mobile number” dialog in the hindi version as well 🙂
LikeLike
Footydoc
December 30, 2008
After reading BR’s review and all the comments here, I think the majority are being a bit too harsh on Aamir and his Ghajini. The majority of Indian public would not have heard of, leave alone watched, the Tamil Ghajini. That is not a reflection upon the movie, just the smaller reach of Tamil cinema. (I have wanted to watch it for the past 2 years but had not gotten around to it.) So all comparisons are really academic to every first-time viewer of Ghajini who does not have the Tamil version, or even Memento, to reference it to.
Sure, Aamir’s Ghajini is no classic cinematic extravaganza, but it’s a bloody good entertainer nevertheless. Rather than compare it to classic movies of yore, or even Aamir’s earlier better efforts, I think it would be better to view it through the prism of classic hollywood action-entertainers. Bruce Willis’ “Die Hard” was the film that came to mind – fabulous action, quite unbelievable feats of single-handed daring by the protagonist who reveled in the action, some cheesy yet unforgettable lines, a memorable villain – it was great entertainment, and a popular classic although by no means classic cinema. Ghajini goes one better than Die Hard by having a pretty sensitive and enchanting romantic track, a n assuredly brilliant music score by ARR, as well as much better and more plausible “acting” by Aamir and Asin. The anterograde amnesia and the romance are only pegs to justify the revenge-action, and so be it. We might have hoped for Aamir to explore the anterograde amnesia bit more realistically, and certainly to be a lot more logical and believable than others when it came to portraying it. But then again, this was a action-romantic-vengeance potboiler and not a psychological thriller.
So let’s just stop the carping and enjoy it for what it is. And like Die Hard, I believe that in time Ghajini too will be viewed as a popular classic worthy of repeated viewings for the sheer enjoyment it gives you.
LikeLike
Footydoc
December 30, 2008
Elizabeth, I agree with you that Aamir is a prisoner of his own sincerity and has been slotted by the media as a serious discerning actor, and now tries hard to fit into that image.
Every one of Aamir’s movies has been commercially oriented. In every movie he has played a heroic role. The only experimentation was the setting and milieu in which this heroism was displayed – whether it be a village setting with cricket and the Raj as the backdrop in Lagaan, or the wastrel/failed student in RDB, Aamir was always the hero. Unlike Kamal Hassan, he has never really experimented with the kind of roles he plays, just their setting. Which is the reason why Kamal is a great actor whilst Aamir is only a good actor.
What is creditable is the amount of screenspace and time he cedes to co-actors in Aamir Khan starrers, almost as if he has recognised post-Lagaan that the final product is what matters and he can bask in it’s success not just as the main star-hero but also as the magnanimous shadow-director/producer who has ensured the success of the product as the cost of personal screen time. But then so be it, for that is his choice. It is his fans and the media/public who have burdened him with this almost mythical larger-than-life image of Aamir Khan the perfectionist, Aamir Khan the thinking man’s bollywood star and shadow-director.
What I like about Aamir is that with Ghajini, he has broken out of these shackles imposed upon him and reiterated his vision of living by his rules and not those of the media, yet not sacrificing his commercial instincts. Rather perversely, he perhaps has the biggest bollywood hit of all times on his hands (going by initial collections) with a sheer potboiler as Ghajini, which does not pretend to have a “message” or a “higher reason” other then the base emotion of vengeance, whilst reinforcing his myth of churning out hits. And yet he has not lost his die-hard fans amongst the discerning viewers, who look upon Ghajini as an aberration!
Truly Aamir is a very intelligent man, actor and filmmaker, perhaps India’s answer to Clint Eastwood, in the continuous manner in which he carves space for himself and HIS kind of creative ventures. And since I do not expect too much of him, and am quite happy with the flourishes of originality that he imbues Bollywood with, certainly in terms of the context and setting of his films and the characters he introduces, which tread new paths for Bollywood while not really being radical classic cinema, I continue to look forward to his movies with a more understanding attitude.
More power to him.
LikeLike
brangan
December 30, 2008
hari ohm: No they didn’t 🙂
Footydoc: “whether it be a village setting with cricket and the Raj as the backdrop in Lagaan, or the wastrel/failed student in RDB, Aamir was always the hero.” I don’t think so. Aamir was more of an enabler/facilitator in RDB, the class clown who suddenly woke up and had a moment of conscience. This is very different from the very overt heroism of Lagaan.
LikeLike
raj
December 30, 2008
1. Ghajini in tamil was a pretty bad movie saved only by Surya’s sincerity and conviction
2. Aamir Khan couldnt replicate even Surya’s act with conviction so that speaks for his ability as a star and an actor. Let’s not even go to Kamal territory when talking about Khan, then.
3. Aamir Khan is an average actor – like everyone commented a great script sense and a carefully built image gives him his undeserved credibility as a ‘thinking’ actor and film maker.
4. I would like to see at Ghajni as reflective of Aamir Khan’s true ability – it is easy to diss Akthar, Gowariker and Mehra as first-time or inexperienced directors who benefitted from Khan’s insight but it is equally true that when you talk of the real good movies of Aamir, you only quote these 3 movies. What does it say of Aamir Khan then? Did he not benefit from the intelligence of these directors, then? Ghajni with the ordinary Murugadoss and Aamir’s inability to add anything intelligent to it is proof to me of Aamir’s lack of any creative genius. Maybe the best you could say is he is good at extracting the best out of already-good directors like the above 3. That means yes he has a good script sense and he is a good manager at handling creative people. To extrapolate that to “so Aamir is a creative genius” is laughable and reeks of fandom and even fanaticity.
5. He is a decent bollywood star and has box-office power no doubt.
LikeLike
raj
December 30, 2008
Also, it seems Aamir Khan is allowed self-indlugence and ego-farting. For, what was Ghajni but an exercise in indulgence to ‘prove’ that he has the same if not better box office power as Shahrukh?
And the 8-pack? Is it unreasonable to imagine that if Shahrukh hadnt pumped up 6-pack in OSO, Aamir wouldnt have even dreamed about 8-pack for Ghajini.
It seems with 3-4 good films Aamir has earned the right to ego-fart and indulge while Kamalhassan is not entitled to a Dasavatharam after years of passionate service to indian cinema.
LikeLike
FR
December 30, 2008
Raj is back.
“it is easy to diss Akthar, Gowariker and Mehra as first-time or inexperienced directors who benefitted from Khan’s insight but it is equally true that when you talk of the real good movies of Aamir, you only quote these 3 movies. What does it say of Aamir Khan then? ”
I’d add Amole Gupte too. Nice bit of spotlight stealing. Aamir written his own script yet?
All said, I’d say he has an eclectic script sense.
LikeLike
RS
December 30, 2008
It only shows that Bharadwah is a serious Amir fan and forgets that he is just watching a movie. I would rather watch Amir the star rather than a few other superstars chasing one lady or the other all their life. For a moment just forget the flaws pointed out in this review and just enjoy the action and drama. It is one of the entertaining movies of this year and simply brings out the muscles out of Amir, after a long time. And for those who worry out their hair in looking for comparisons with the tamil version or Memento, just remember that 99% of all movies are just copies from the earlier filmy world either local or imported…..
LikeLike
Dylan
December 30, 2008
aamir’s ghajini is definitely a few notches up on surya’s and this remake is, still, pretty ordinary. that doesn’t speak much of the original, does it? surya’s conviction is fine but was that enough to pass his assortment of scowls and that hilariously gimmicky twist-neck mannerism as acting? i disagree.
LikeLike
brangan
December 30, 2008
Just saw this…
LikeLike
Arif Attar
December 30, 2008
What odds are the bookies giving on 3 Idiots not turning out to be a hit?
Aamir, reportedly, can solve the Rubik’s Cube in under 10 minutes. Is that ‘intelligent’ enough?
LikeLike
raj
December 30, 2008
murugadoss is sucking up because he has another interview where he says he wants to direct Aamir again.
Fine, it is a question of what you want to believe.
LikeLike
Anand
December 30, 2008
raj: I believe Murugadoss… he is such a powerful position today, anybody would be interested in working with him, so I donot think he needs to suck up. It is a question of what one wants to believe, right? 🙂
Also, I saw an interview of Aamir and Murugadoss together, the cameraderie they share is fantastic, Murugadoss comes across as a genuinely level headed person. Raj, If you really believe that Murugadoss is sucking up, then its OK. But I get a feeling that you are deriding him only for the sake of one-up-manship, which is sad.
LikeLike
Shalini
December 30, 2008
Wow! Much ado about Aamir. While I dither over whether to see Ghajini or not, I’m having a great time reading through all the comments. Please continue.
LikeLike
Ravi K
December 31, 2008
Re: Kamal. I think Aamir is genuinely interested in making cinema that is good and entertaining. I’m not saying he makes masterpieces, but there’s always something unique about his film. And, like has been mentioned, he is perfectly willing to share the screen with other, lesser-known actors.
Compare this to Kamal, who does make unique films, but he seems to care more about projecting himself as a great actor who can play ten roles in one film (which, in America, would be considered Eddie Murphy territory) and is more concerned with physical transformations and having 95% screen time than making good films. Kamal has given some wonderful performances, but I detect a whiff of arrogance while watching films he writes and/or directs that I find off-putting…
LikeLike
Dipali
December 31, 2008
Great review..I havnt seen memento..neither the Tamil one..and saw this one only for Aamir ..believing he would bring his quest for perfection to this too…but am hugely disappointed..
Its just a pot-boiler movie..that too from 80s…I didnt like the script ,the characters, romance is lame, girls are irritating…Aamir is not to fault in his acting..though there is nothing to act..
I feel even his fitness regime deserved a better movie…Dont know whom to blame..Aamir , for trying to prove in a masala movie..or his director/producer for not exploiting his potential !
LikeLike
brangan
December 31, 2008
Happy New Year, all. Borrowing from Tennyson:
Ring out the want, the care, the sin,
The faithless coldness of the times;
Ring out, ring out my mournful rhymes,
But ring the fuller minstrel in.
LikeLike
Anand
December 31, 2008
Happy New year to all of you!! Tomorrow is a special day, not only because it is the beginning of a new year, but also because the audio of Naan Kadavul is getting released!
LikeLike
KPV Balaji
December 31, 2008
@Ravi K
Just on your note on Kamal being throught the screen for about 95% of his movies, i think its just one of those myths that always surrounds his movies. I can quote several examples where he has taken the back seat or been happy to share equal screen space and has been happy to see others perform..Madhavan in anbe sivam is a classic example..
LikeLike
Anonymous
December 31, 2008
Kpv, loosela vidu ma.kamal is a narcissist and aamir is indian cinema’s saviour – anyone who questions this is regonal, non-cosmopolitan, uncool
LikeLike
Anand
December 31, 2008
Ravi K: Sivaji Ganesan won his first National Award in Thevar Magan. Revathi won the best supporting actress for the same film. Nagesh won the best supporting actor in Nammavar. Atul Kulkarni won it for Hey Ram. I have tried to list some of the sparkling performances of certain actors in Kamal Hassan films:
Virumandi – Pasupathy / Abirami
Mumbai Xpress – Pasupathy / Ramesh Arvind
Anbe Sivam – Madhavan
Pammal K Sambandham – Simran / Abbas
Panchathanthiram – Yugisethu / Jayaram / Ramesh Arvind / Sriman
Tenali – Jayaram
Chachi 420 – Om puri
Avvai Shanmugi – Gemini Ganesan / Nasser
Kurudhi Punal – Nasser / Arjun
Nammavar – Gouthami / Karan
Mahanadhi – Poornam Viswanathan
Guna – Roshini / S Varalakshmi/ Ajay Ratnam
Thevar Magan – Nasser / Kaka Radhakrishnan
Michael Madana Kama Rajan – This movie is like Sholay – you remember all characters!
So there! People like Revathi and Nagesh have owed their National Awards to Kamal as he has taught them how to emote..For instance, Revathi covered her face and cried in Thevar Magan when her marriage stops due to circuamsatances. Kamal advised her not to cover her face as it is not in sync with her character. Nagesh has said on record that Kamal showed him how to act in his daughter’s death sequence in Nammavar – and he simply copied Kamal.
Contrary to what you said the acting / characterization of all the main characters in films directed by him is impeccable – Virumandi, Hey Ram, Chachi 420.
LikeLike
brangan
December 31, 2008
Anand: I would probably disagree with the merits of a few choices on your list (Roshni in Guna? Abbas in PKS?) but your point is well taken. Another actor I would add is SN Lakshmi, who always gets a meaty character role in Kamal’s films.
LikeLike
Anand
December 31, 2008
BR: Thats the advantage of being an unapologetic fan!! 🙂
LikeLike
KPV Balaji
December 31, 2008
Anand : you stole my words !! Bingo. Nice summary.
LikeLike
KPV Balaji
December 31, 2008
Even the smallest charecter in Kamals movie will would be well etched out and have an impact even though on the screen for a single shot. Remember the drunkard in Anbe sivam who Kamal bumps in beofre meeting Madhan and visiting Nassers house. Thalaivasal vijay in mahanadhi, TTR in anbe sivam and there are several more cameos in Kamals movie that are very good ones.
I always find even the side actors performing notably well only in Kamal and Maniratnam movies.
LikeLike
sundar
December 31, 2008
At the end of the day, Aamir much like Kamal is a Star-Actor.
They have a position to Consolidate in the Industry and we just have to accept the fact that they are entitled to dish out a Masala Potboiler every now and then.
Surya was more Blank playing the Killing Machine and Aamir was mused about his Blankness. Definitely Aamir improvised the Role and to me was a tad more convincing than Surya.
@Raj: Nobody comes here to do service to Cinema. Aamir is entitled to his Ghajini as much as Kamal is entitled to his 10 Avatarams.
The important thing for Critics and Audiences is to watch for GAP where a TZP or Anbe Sivam Blooms.
LikeLiked by 1 person
B.H.Harsh
December 31, 2008
Another great review there.
I wish everyone realised like you that Ghajini took itself far it seriously. It was a fine entertainer, but thats all there is to it.
Some people even calling this one as Aamir’s best ever. Unbelievable !!
By the way, How did you find Asin ?? 🙂
LikeLike
raj
December 31, 2008
Anand, that was not oneupmanship. On teh same day taht BR gave his link, I saw an interview on print where Murugadoss says something like QUOTE I made these changes. I am glad that I could rectify the mistakes in the tamil version..” and so on where he didnt give any credit to Aamir Khan. He even said Aamir was happy with these changes, which means that he, ARM, amde those changes in the first place – Aamir was just happy with the changes. But when someone asks “What do you think of Aamir’s contribution”, what other choice does he have than to give all credit to Aamir? Can he say Aamir just did what I told him to?
Some of us, you know, are not that independent. I give my manager a lot more credit than he deserves because that makes life easier for me you know…yeah, we are not the ultra independent, self-reliant people you know but we know which side of our bread is buttered…ARM sure does!
LikeLike
Navin J. Antony
December 31, 2008
I more or less agree with you about the conclusion you reached about the movie Ghajini. But i think you were dead wrong about the reasons. You reviewed it for what the film wasn’t; rather than what it really was (as you said, a b-grade movie). Shouldn’t b-grade films be analysed by the scale b-grade films deserve? Musing about what it would have been had Aamir Khan the actor made the film must’ve aroused from your film fest hangover. Wake up, sir; If Khan wants to prove he can do masala, then so be it. I, for one, would’ve liked a lot more spicy review (than the comparative anatomical study that you offered). And it wasn’t such a bad show altogether, was it? It was cetainly more polished than the Tamil version; and much worse films have released this year. You could’ve given haf a star more atleast.
LikeLike
Anand
December 31, 2008
Raj: Let us believe what we choose to believe – if it not oneupmanship, I stand corrected!
Happy New year to you – post your views on Naan Kadavul Music, thats the first thing that I am going to do this new year, buy the CD and listen to the songs!
LikeLike
Aditya Pant
December 31, 2008
BR: As an aside – Just the fact that you finally had to change your 5 point rating scale to a quasi-7 point one shows how irrelevant (and difficult) star ratings are. No offence, just an observation!
LikeLike
Shankar
December 31, 2008
NK is getting a lot of hype…I hope it delivers. As for the music, I’m sincerely hoping it was mixed and mastered in Mumbai or someplace else (other than Prasad Studios). With IR, I tend to find the ones done in Chennai to be of very poor quality (from a mix perspective) compared to the albums finished up in Mumbai or so (Cheeni Kum, Shiva etc).
LikeLike
Qalandar
December 31, 2008
WHOA Didn’t know naan kadavul music was out…thanks for this, will track it down…
LikeLike
raj
December 31, 2008
Anand, I said that it is what you want to believe in the earlier comment. The second one was just to say that it has got nothing to do with OUMS
LikeLike
raj
December 31, 2008
And I dont have high expectations of Naan Kadavul!
LikeLike
brangan
January 1, 2009
Aditya: This is the part of the job I hate the most, having to reduce an abstract experience into concrete numerical evaluation. But a lot of people pointed out that it made no sense to club, say, Mumbai Meri Jaan with Phoonk (even if they all, to me, came under the various categories of “average”), so I split the category in three. I think it makes a little more sense now (at least to the extent these things can). BTW, you’re the last person I expected to go digging into these star ratings 🙂
Shankar: Also, do check out the simply spectacular soundtrack of Dev D, by Amit Trivedi. (I think you pointed him out to me a long time back.) A wide range of musical influences, and there’s so much “feel” in the music…
LikeLike
Navin J. Antony
January 1, 2009
Why should a film, which celebrates being dumb, be criticised for its very dumbness? Triviality deserves triviality, I think. Aamir Khan’s ego have finally found its way into his films? May be not, but there is a sharp sense of rivalry evident throughout. What about Aamir showing of his body in the bathroom scene? When compared to Shahrukh’s show in OSO, this is quite a way to celebrate the physique-hype. if things like these were the scale used to review, it might have been worthy (at least in a queer worthless way?. BS=BS!!
LikeLike
Vijay
January 1, 2009
Not surprised at the outcome of this film. I remember saying in this very blog space that Ghajni would probably be another Fanaa. Working with an obscure Thamizh director(ARM is no Mani or even Shankar) in a remake of a ripoff in an ordinary masala movie was an uninspiring choice.But his fans love it apparently and Aamir is having the last laugh all the way to the bank. So maybe commercially Aamir stands vindicated.
But as Raj said , Aamir is an above-average actor at best with good script sense and a strong hold on the pulse of the mainstream audience. Not to forget, some impressive marketing skills too.
LikeLike
Zero
January 2, 2009
Raj,
What! Personally speaking, that’s the film I’ve been looking forward to since like forever! Bala to my mind is one filmmaker whose accomplishments are not yet fully reflected on in the Tamil film critique world.
By the way, have you guys checked out the trailer? It’s definitely promising, but it also looks quite a bit like a sequel to ‘pithAmagan’ thematically speaking. But I trust Bala not to repeat himself. Leap of faith and stuff like that, you know.
LikeLike
Ravi K
January 2, 2009
Anand, I didn’t say that others in Kamal’s film weren’t good or that he didn’t pick good actors, but his films do seem to me to be exercises in bolstering Kamal’s image. He’s a fine actor, but could he direct a film that features himself in a supporting role, or even not at all?
LikeLike
KPV Balaji
January 2, 2009
Ravi K, Nala thamayanthi was his script and from his production house and had maddy in the lead. He also produced a movie satyaraj in the lead in Kadamai kanniyam kattupaadu. He played the side role in Sathileelavathy.
LikeLike
raj
January 2, 2009
Ravi K, you dont know nary a thing about Kamal. Leave it man to people who have actually ‘seen’ his movies. Anyway, not that you will see sense but we are talking about a man who made a off-beat movie with Satyaraj who was no more than a bit of a ripple at that time in the tamil film market when Kamal himself was at the peak commercially. Never mind, you dont want to understand.
Zero thambi, I was talking about the “Songs” of NK. Having said that, it was also a coping mechanism to reduce my expectations so that if it is really good, that would be a pleasant surprise.( I am talking about IR’s part not Bala’s).
I also feel that Bala might have lost his edge – I mean the mental edginess now that he is happily married and settled. Without that, he would be half teh film maker he is. I hope I am wrong with this hopelessly outlandish theory not based on an iota of fact!
LikeLike
raj
January 2, 2009
vijay, saw Aamir and Murugadoss’s session with “critiques” and”fans” yesterday on TV.
It vindicates many points
1) Clearly, ARM is the boss as for as writing goes – when the interviewer questions in Hindi to ARM about Aamir’s contribution as story writer, screenplay writer and director to this film, Aamir translated the question in english to ARM as “he is asking how much interference I did”. ARM’s reply was this: “I dont understand a word of Hindi and I needed an handle on the dialogues and Aamir did this for me, We sat for nearly 20 days poring through the dialogues before the shooting and Aamir helped me whet those with his translation. During the shooting, whenever I got ideas, he wsa the man who h elped me translate my thoughts to Hindi and execute it. I used to think in Tamil ,translate to English and tell to Aamir. Aamir translated that to English”
This in the presence of Aamir.
2. The difference between ARM and AAmir as marketing agent for the movie was evident – when a viewer questioned how come Sanjay Singhania was not a known face despite being a big industrialist, ARM hemmed and hawed while Aamir came up with a very convincing explanation. Simiarly, asked to explain why the menacing villain didnt use a single weapon in the climax, all Murugadoss could offer was “we wanted a tense climax and use of guns would dissipate that”. Look at what Aamir came up with:
“Aap ki baat sahi hai, lekin what we were looking for was, the director wanted a chakravuyh like feel – the feeling that yeh kaise chaal mein phas gaya kaise niklega type of feel”
The conviction he brought to that was quite impressive so Aamir the marketing agent surely gets two thumbs up from me. Also, note that Aamir stresses that it was the director who wanted the climax the way it was.
On the evidence of this, all we can says is Aamir has his hand on mainstream audience pulse and is an extra-ordinary marketing agent – much unlike Shahrukh whose idea of marketing is to proclaim himself #1 and take potshots at Aamir or Amitabh.
LikeLike
Shankar
January 2, 2009
Baddy, I will check out Dev D…yeah, Amit Trivedi was one of the members of the band “Om”…who put out a really awesome debut album a few years ago.
LikeLike
Shankar
January 2, 2009
Baddy, on a sidenote, I just found that the guys who formed the band “Agam” (Harish, Ganesh), which ended up as one of the winners of the “Ooh la la” competition conducted by ARR, are from our alma mater!! I thought that was pretty cool… 🙂
LikeLike
Deepauk M
January 3, 2009
brangan: Happy New Year
Shankar: Happy New year. Agam has lovely songs on their myspace page. I quite enjoyed “Mystical Abheri”.
LikeLike
Ankur
January 3, 2009
One thing that bothered me was that it was never very clear why Kalpana was in love with Sanjay.
LikeLike
Rashmi
January 3, 2009
The reviewer is right. I too couldn’t tolerate the movie except for my young cousin who wanted to catch a glimpse of Aamir’s body. These girls today are just too much. They tolerate any crap for such views! 🙂 I’m more choosy… 🙂
Btw, this also brings to light some media frenzy about Ghajini being a superhit… It couldn’t have been otherwise as Aamir has mastered the art of creating hype in the last few years and hence the response. However, it’s now becoming clear that the hype was an empty one as theatres running Ghajini today are running it half empty. The word of mouth too hasn’t been good and hence people are shunning the movie. My friends opted out where as i was coaxed and bribed by my cousin to have a dekko…
With this movie, Aamir has once again proved that he’s not in a class of his own which he keeps trying to harp about. He’s just another mediocre actor who struggles with his scenes and does ‘n’ number of retakes to make up for his incompetence. And tries to tag that as perfection! Phew! OK, enough writing about this guy as i’ve got many better things to do.. Ciao
LikeLike
brangan
January 3, 2009
A piece by Jai. Thanks S, for the link.
LikeLike
shakester
January 5, 2009
Interesting read. Not in the last because you set up the first half threatening to like the film 9which would have been very tragic), then go about rather chramingly dissing it. I’ve been far more vehement in my dislike of the film, and with no Tamil movie baggage to carry.
I think some things like the movie being a throwback to Hindi movies of the 80s which were black/white and good/evil and full of muscle and masala; are by products not intentions. The villains are dated, the acting stiff at worst and hammy at best, the characters cardboard cutouts. It was almost a pardoy of itself, the film.
And no, there wasn’t even an iota of thrill from what is possibly a brilliant and engaging premise- the short term memory loss, which was reduced to a cheesy one-liner for the villain.
LikeLike
shakester
January 5, 2009
sorry for all the typos!
LikeLike
yuvi
January 17, 2009
this is worst review i’ve ever read….
LikeLiked by 1 person
kiran
January 21, 2009
It’s become pretty standard that when an actor like amir khan does a movie we expect great things since he doesn’t do very many movies and when he does from past experience he does pretty well. But sadly to say Ghajini is one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Alot of people feel the romance or love story was the only positive thing in the whole movie (what love story?) the girl never even came to know who he was and they barely even started a relationship when everything just fell apart within minutes. Ghajini had such a flat story line and the story wasn’t in too much detail like after the accident how did amir khan come to be treated and who found him and asin, and all that how amir khan came to even write all those tattoos on himself and well the list just goes on and on. I mean looks like the director was just rushing to show the end result instead of entertaining the audience and keeping them in suspense and all that. I thought the diologues were pretty mediocre and all that, I thought asin’s scenes where she pretends pretends to be amir khan’s girfriend were pretty rediculous because how can you not know what the ceo of such a huge company looks like its very common for their faces to appear on tv and newspapers and stuff. So I wasn’t convinced. Amir khan instead of looking angry and vengeful looks scary. In short I don’t see how a nonconvincing short term memory loss hero, and a pre-stage love story and one guy after his injuries goes afters a bunch of thugs all on his own killing everyone in sight (without ever being legally punished for it) and a dream sequence song and some others can add up to a great movie. Truly a terrible movie.
LikeLike
Saranya
February 1, 2009
Have you seen this? http://bmukhtiar.blogspot.com/2009/01/copy-chris-paste-ghajini.html
LikeLike
B.H.Harsh
February 17, 2010
Was just watching this film, and wondering – Whats wrong with a ‘Polished’ no-brainer masala entertainer afterall? 🙂
LikeLike
Ritesh
October 19, 2010
A perfect recipe to write chetan bhagat Novel Check this http://ritesh.us/2010/10/18/lets-write-a-novel-chetan-bhagat%E2%80%99s-way/
LikeLike