LAW-LAW LAND
A barely believable legal thriller that just about qualifies as a guilty pleasure. Plus, a barely believable domestic thriller.
SEPT 6, 2009 – IS ARJUN RAMPAL MASALA-MOVIE MATERIAL? For those who’ve spent sleepless nights pondering this conundrum, Fox provides the answer: most certainly not. The actor plays Arjun, a criminal lawyer who, for a hefty price, saves the sinners – and the minute I heard a television reporter describe the as-yet-unseen hero as a “mujrimon ka maseeha,” I perked up. What a fabulously tawdry descriptor! However will they dream up a “hero introduction shot” that does it full justice, especially now that the true masters of that kind of cinema (say, Subhash Ghai) are left licking the wounds inflicted by our newfound multiplex mentality? Alas, the unveiling of the protagonist, in a courtroom, occurs not with a bang but an anticlimactic whimper. Forget fire and brimstone – when we first set eyes on Arjun, he defends his guilty client with a lazy drawl you’d associate with the reading of the proverbial phonebook.
Perhaps it’s because this dude-generation star had to wrap his mouth around old-Bollywood constructs like “Donon humbistar hue” (which is legalese for, you know, “they did it”), and he was trying to keep a straight face. In the next shot, in the courthouse corridors, the victim’s distraught mother grabs Arjun by his robe and shakes him hard, letting loose a volley of entirely justified abuse. That’s the one time Rampal registers an expression, and I think it’s because he was terrified his fright-wig might fall off. The true test of his masala-movie worthiness, however, doesn’t occur until much later, when his girlfriend (Sagarika Ghatge) teases him in the kitchen. She tears up a piece of roti, instructs him to open his mouth, as if to feed him, and then pops the morsel in her mouth instead. Where a Rajesh Khanna’s eyes would have twinkled with merriment and tided us over this romantic cliché, Rampal just sits there, vaguely embarrassed.
That’s what separates the single-screen men from the multiplex boys – and beneath its shiny veneer, Fox is an old-fashioned single-screen movie, sculpted out of equal parts the morality tale and the vigilante thriller. (Had the director Deepak Tijori pulled this off, and with a more empathetic protagonist, we might have witnessed the equivalent of a Shankar entertainer with existential heft – a fast-paced meditation on whether even reformed sinners should have to pay for their wrongdoings.) This, in other words, is a movie for men, he-men like the cop played by Sunny Deol (looking a little washed up; then again, he too is a casualty of our multiplex mentality), who arrests Arjun when the latter is framed for a series of murders. (Udita Goswami is also in there somewhere, as the head of a publishing house who, in a pinch, can fill in as item girl.)
With that title, with this cast, you certainly don’t expect a good movie – but even as a bad movie, you wonder if it’s going to be guilty-pleasure bad, or if it will be one of those truly awful films that leaves you squirming in your seat and cursing your choice of profession. Fortunately, Fox leans towards the former. I’ll leave you with two “touches” that delighted me endlessly. In the midst of a shootout, a corner of the screen bears the text, “Malad (W), 11:30 a.m.” (It’s priceless, this sort of nod towards “real time” in a revenge fantasy this far-fetched; the text could have read “Alpha Centauri, one million AD” and the audience wouldn’t have batted an eyelid.) Better yet, Tijori goes all arty as he shoots his hero with a handheld camera. He wants to mirror Arjun’s jittery crisis of conscience – but also, with his hero not twitching a muscle, he perhaps decided that at least the camera should be allowed to get away with a scenery-chewing masala-movie performance.
VISHAL PANDYA’S THREE – LOVE, LIES, BETRAYAL is one of those twisty, house-in-the-middle-of-nowhere thrillers, where the director doesn’t yell “Action!” so much as “One, two, three… heave!” as he labours to yank the rug from under our feet. Considering it has to do with adultery (along with the other noble emotions in the title), you expect unclad couples thrashing about like eels in an oil slick, as designer candles flicker and soothing songs play in the background. (This is from Vikram Bhatt, after all, and the music by Chirantan Bhatt certainly sparkles.) But Pandya decides that his aims are higher than just delivering a bunch of gotcha! tricks – he opts for tony understatement. He wants to make everything hushed and classy and actorly, which is certainly not the way to go when your cast consists of Akshay Kapoor, Nausheen Ali Sardar and a hysterical Ashish Chowdhry. The feeble stabs at noir come too late – the audience, by then, is well past slumber.
Copyright ©2009 The New Sunday Express. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
Bala
September 6, 2009
Caught up on some much needed sleep in the theatres did we ? :p
LikeLike
Venkatesh
September 6, 2009
Aah “Mujrimon ka maseeha” .,takes me back.. what has happened to the proper Masala movie ,
In the middle to late 80’s there was a slew of these films with outlandish titles and equally lurid posters almost always starring Dharmendra and with muuuugic by Bhappi Lahiri and advertised proudly on Vividh Bharati.
Whats happened to them ?
LikeLike
Arnav
September 6, 2009
You are cruel!
Haven’t had so much fun reading a review (or two) in ages.
LikeLike
a
September 6, 2009
this is one instance where we dont envy the throne of the critic…occupational hazard extreme…drown with some good filter kaapi,karapagambal mess kesari and valium!
cheers,
a
LikeLike
Tejas
September 7, 2009
Seven movies released on Friday, and you got to see these two!! No Mohandas or Chintu-ji?
LikeLike
brangan
September 7, 2009
Venkatesh: Reg. “what has happened to the proper Masala movie,” I think we’ll have one in “Wanted.” After all, “Pokkiri” was fun, and with Prabhu Deva behind the scenes, I think it’ll be a solid single-screen movie after what appears to be an eon.
Tejas: Mohandas, etc. not released here.
LikeLike
s
September 7, 2009
“what separates the single-screen men from the multiplex boys –”
its not as if Arjun rampal is a shining example of a multiplex actor, he sucks equally there(come on, he was a rock in rock on). Dont ever throw an allegation of acting against Arjun Rampal.
LikeLike
Muthuvel
September 7, 2009
//…I think it’ll be a solid single-screen movie after what appears to be an eon…//
eon? – then what about Ghajini?
LikeLike
Pradyumna M
September 8, 2009
Looks like we have three disasters on our hand this diwali.
Btw,thanks for the KANK review. 🙂
LikeLike
brangan
September 8, 2009
Pradyumna: Which are they, BTW? I heard “Blue” was one. Lara and Katrina cavorting around beaches in a no-brainer action film? Hmmm… doesn’t sound all that bad. At least they won’t be required to act 🙂
LikeLike
Rahul
September 8, 2009
“dude-generation star”
You nailed it.Great phrase!
I think the big difference is how the dude-generation carries itself.It prides itself on non-acting.Earlier, bad actors tried to act and they failed,ended up hamming\overacting.The dude-generation is presumably so much more sophiscated than those earlier movie stars that they would not even try.They will just show up for the 9 to 5 job.
Similarly , the expectation of viewers and critics have also changed.
“Come on!You don’t expect him to act in that kind of a movie!”
“Who acts nowadays!”
But, notwithstanding this phenomenon,and though the standards have fallen, pretty boys haven’t had stable success in the industry if they have zero histroinic ability.Though they do keep getting chances again and again.
LikeLike
Arif Attar
September 9, 2009
You have got me wondering BR if Kumar Gaurav came at the wrong time.
LikeLike
Venkatesh
September 9, 2009
BR, ah yes Pokkiri was fun , of course it was originally a Telegu movie, in that aspect nothing to beat Telugu Cinema , distilled Masala movie.
LikeLike
raj
September 9, 2009
Oh yeah, bolly makes masala stuff then it is a throwback to 80’s, tribute, single screen movie, lovingly calles old-fashioned.
Same thing in tamil is “ajith-vijay crap”, “bloody stone aged stuff”, “rehash of tired formula”, derisively called “oldfashioned”.
I am amazed at this site’s lack of comprehension of its obvious bias.
LikeLike
Godard
September 9, 2009
Off the topic 🙂 Did you by any chance watch Shekhar Kapur’s new (also his ‘only’) short film? Its called “Passage”. Music by AR Rahman is mind blowing to say the least.
LikeLike
brangan
September 9, 2009
Venkatesh: I haven’t seen too many Telugu masala movies, but based on the evidence of remakes like “Gilli” and “Pokkiri,” I’d say Tollywood has a better grasp of the masala movie than Kollywood today. Would you agree?
Godard: No. Is it available online?
LikeLike
Venkatesh
September 9, 2009
BR , i am a Tamilian hence my Telugu outings are fewer as well but based on what i have seen – yes. It looks to me that Tollywood is completely unapologetic and therefore goes for broke.
LikeLike
Venkatesh
September 9, 2009
RE Raj, Bolly vs. Kolly masala films – i think there is a difference Vijay and Ajit’s films are mostly , for want of a better word , crap, except in cases where they are not , for e.g. the aforementioned Gilli, Pokkiri, Vaali, the “new” Billa,
There is such a thing as a good masala movie , a good movie masala movie done well and seen in the right frame of mind is as they say – bilkul mast time pass.
LikeLike
Adithya
September 9, 2009
Yep, The Passage is available here: http://www.passage-experience.com/#/Passage/Soundtrack
@Raj: In addition to what Venkatesh said, I think the frequency of such movies also count. Ajit and Vijay act in nothing but masala movies. I don’t think that happens in Hindi.
LikeLike
brangan
September 9, 2009
Wrote a small edit about the National Awards for today’s paper…
There’s a nicely integrative ring to the phrase “National Awards” – as if indicative of awards that belong, collectively, to a nation. But scan the headlines and you’ll see how “Southern films” have trumped the “North,” or how “South star” Prakash Raj (in Kanchivaram) has risen over Aamir Khan (in Taare Zameen Par) and Shah Rukh Khan (Chak De India). It’s enough to make you stop in your tracks and wonder if these actors don’t all belong to the same nation, but instead, to two (cinematic) Indias – the North (represented by Bollywood) and the South (represented by Malayalam, Tamil, Telugu and Kannada cinema).
The ludicrousness of lumping the latter into one homogenous idli-munching mass is readily apparent to anyone who’s seen the films from these states. There’s perhaps a cut-across-all-demographics uniformity in the big-budget masala entertainers in Tamil and Telugu, but who in their right minds would throw in an Adoor Gopalakrishnan or a Girish Kasaravalli into this mix? But even ignoring this aspect, why not simply say that Prakash Raj won Best Actor for the Tamil film Kanchivaram? Why do we need the prefix that indicates he’s from the south? Isn’t the south a part of the nation, and therefore automatically part of the contention for the National Awards?
The bigger question is where this schism leaves the cinema of Maharashtra, Oriya and the Punjab, to name a few states that do not fall either into the “North” or the “South.” With the three big industries – Hindi, Tamil and Telugu cinema – managing to corner all the press, mere scraps are saved for cinema from the rest of the nation. Even the most devoted cinephile would find it difficult to name, say, a few recent instances of good Marathi cinema (unless, of course, they spoke Marathi or lived in Maharashtra). The other question, therefore, is how can a single jury, however populated with a representative sample from across the nation, evaluate a cross-section of films from a cross-section of the country and deem that an apple is indeed better than an orange.
Speaking specifically of Kanchivaram and the supposed glory it’s brought to “Tamil cinema,” it’s important to remember that it’s made by a Malayali director and it features an actor from Karnataka. This film is a deserving triumph for Priyadarshan and Prakash Raj, no doubt, but it’s hypocritical for the Tamil film industry to bask in the applause, having had little to do with the funding or the casting or the production or the distribution. Kanchivaram was released in theatres in Chennai and it barely managed a week’s run. The average Namitha starrer, however, plays to full houses.
LikeLike
brangan
September 9, 2009
and some feedback… I didn’t know there were people who wrote back about this section of the paper 🙂
No chauvinism in National award
The edit “A paradox called National Award ” TNIE 9 September ’09 is a telling commentary on the appraisal of National Award for films by film artistes and film journalists.
Chauvinism is demonstrated which is nauseating to a true art lover. What has the region from which an artist hails to do with his creativity or acting talent which are inborn gifts.
So headlines like ‘ South scores over North” in reporting on National Film Awards is not in good taste and betrays a lack of nation cosciousness. The norms and values on which the films are rated for awards has no orientation to regionalism.
National integration can be promoted by purposive films with strong story line. Acting talents and impactful presentation have to be judged and appreciated for what they are without being coloured by regional connation. “Kanchivaram ” is a product of multi-state talents. Kudos to the Express for a meaningful editorial.
LikeLike
vivek
September 9, 2009
Something just came up while reading this comments section. What exactly is acting in a non melodramatic movie? Is saif ali khan a better actor than imran khan? Is anjelina Jolie better than aishwarya rai? How much of it is really about having a good presence vis a vis emoting?
Random thoughts but something I have never really tried quantifying when dismissing an arjun rampal as a bad actor while thouroughly enjoying matt damon
LikeLike
brangan
September 9, 2009
vivek: Whether someone is a “better actor” than someone else is very hard to say. To take your example of Saif vs. Imran. On the basis of Saif’s early roles (where he was terrible) vs. Imran’s early roles (he was bad in those thrillers but quite nice in JTYJN), you could say Imran’s (marginally) better. But when Imran grows up, will he be able to pull off a Langda Tyagi or the breakdown scene in “Love Aaj Kal?” You never know.
I find it’s best to take these things on a per-movie basis, without getting into too much hand-wringing over who is “better.” Did the performance work in the context of the film or not? That’s about the only thing you can say. A good presence definitely helps. Plus a lot of today’s actors (like Ash or Kareena) do relatively well under strong directors, but left to their own devices, they’re quite hard to take. Maybe it’s also the lack of strong directors.
LikeLike
Rakesh
September 9, 2009
I believe the last time around you won the award for Best Movie Critic.. any idea if that Category was in contention this year ?
LikeLike
nirja
September 9, 2009
on the question of “better actor”…would you say Amir Khan pulled off a better tapori in Rangeela or Shahrukh a better romantic in DDLJ…from where I see it…I think Aamir could have easily pulled off the DDLJ role but I cant imagine Shahrukh playing a tapori with such finesse…and we havent seen S.Khan paired with Ram gopal either…
LikeLike
Rahul
September 10, 2009
“What exactly is acting in a non melodramatic movie?”
LoL!I couldn’t get past this line.Why do you even care? Shouldn’t you just watch “melodramatic movies”?
LikeLike
Pradyumna M
September 10, 2009
Blue,Main Aurr Mrs. Khanna,All the best and before that we’ll probably hav Dil bole Hadippa! Though I must add that rani is looking quite nice..
The only movie I am looking forward to is Wake up Sid! 🙂
LikeLike
Pradyumna M
September 10, 2009
And Oh,Lara sure does look RED HOT in Blue 😀
But her and Sanjay dutt? :S
LikeLike
brangan
September 10, 2009
Rakesh: I don’t know who was in contention, but here’s the list of winners over the years.
LikeLike
brangan
September 10, 2009
Speaking of the really big news this week, has anyone sprung for the remastered Beatles collection? Worth it? How much of a difference is there if you already own all the CDs?
LikeLike
a
September 10, 2009
this was good story
LikeLike
Sureshkumar
September 10, 2009
The list of nominees for Best Film Critic National Award is available
here
Click to access r2009090708.pdf
LikeLike
brangan
September 10, 2009
Sureshkumar: Hey thanks for that. I didn’t know they listed out the nominees (i.e. all those who submitted their pieces) as well. I thought they only mentioned the winners. Any idea if this is available for previous years too — especially (cough, cough) 2006? 🙂
LikeLike
Sureshkumar
September 10, 2009
Previous Year (54th)
Click to access 54th_nfa.pdf
how unfortunate, for 2006 (53rd) there is no pdf in the site
http://pib.nic.in/release/release.asp?relid=29676
LikeLike
Sureshkumar
September 10, 2009
But I remember seeing the pdf for 53rd natioal awards.. i took this http://bit.ly/2XwiNX screenshot to post in my blog
LikeLike
nirmal
September 10, 2009
speaking of masala stuff, listened to rahman in blue..? he seemed to have some fun … what boggles my mind is why they are promoting that bland chiggy wiggy when almost all other songs in the album are much much more interesting.
LikeLike
nirmal
September 10, 2009
http://rahmaniac.wordpress.com/2009/08/20/blue-music-release-on-8th-september/
here is the link in case u have not got it..
LikeLike
Vivek Mohan
September 11, 2009
From what I read
http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/album/29924194/review/29951366/the_beatles_stereo_box_set
the remastered Beatles definitely has better sounds than the original CDs which were issued way back in 87 . The great debate seems to be between mono or stereo
Waiting with bated breath for my copy Rubber Soul and Revolver .
LikeLike
Vivek Mohan
September 11, 2009
and the Beatles anthology , a documentary history of the Beatles with extensive interviews with the four and footage of their concerts is on youtube
It tells a fascinating story starting from the band’s early days touring to their eventual break up during Let it be and Abbey road , the footages of the concerts does get irritating after a whiel as you can hardly hear the music over the screams .
LikeLike
Vivek Mohan
September 11, 2009
and here’s a better review of the Remastered Beatles
http://popdose.com/cd-reviews-the-beatles-remasters/
LikeLike
brangan
September 11, 2009
nirmal: Perhaps because the other songs may be more interesting, but “Chiggy Wiggy” is instantly catchy — especially when Sonu Nigam sashays in with “khatoon ki khidmat mein…” (Incidentally, I’m trying to remember if that phrase has appeared in a Hindi song after this one in”Desh Premee.”) Anyone?
One thing that delights me endlessly is how the eighties are back. First S-E-L come out with the awesome “Rock On” tracks, and now there’s “Bhoola tujhe” which wouldn’t be out of place in a Peter Cetera album 🙂
Vivek Mohan: “Rubber Soul” and “Revolver”? Great choices, no doubt, but I’d have thought that if testing out the sounds was the point, you’d have gotten “Sgt. Pepper’s” and played “A Day in the Life.” 🙂
LikeLike
Mambazha Manidhan
September 11, 2009
brangan : Speaking of the eighties, did you happen to see the photos of the ‘Tamil actors of the 80’s’ party where Rajinikanth was the chief guest ?
LikeLike
brangan
September 11, 2009
Mambazha Manidhan: I did, in AV. I swear I didn’t recognise Suresh at all 🙂
LikeLike
Shankar
September 11, 2009
Baddy, regarding the 80s party, Mohan looked like he was trying to pass off as a 25 year old while Karthik looked like a ghost compared to the personality he displayed on screen. Yeah, Suchu had the “Sivaji” mottai look…that guy really disappeared. The only person who still looked young was Lizzy.
LikeLike
Tejas
September 11, 2009
BRangan – do you think why, when we talk about Rock, we go only as recent as 80’s and not 90’s? Is that because the genre rock (may be what’s termed ‘classic’) died after that in the wake of grunge and alternative, and disco? Or is it called classic because the generation that refers to it was born after that music slowed down!
And do you even think 80’s music was that much of a milestone? I mean look at 60’s and 70’s – you had eclecticism began, reached its peak and kept growing. Why don’t we have throw backs to 60s that much? Is it because the current crop of music directors practically didn’t grow up with that era?
Are there too many questions?
LikeLike
brangan
September 11, 2009
Tejas: This was purely a subjective, sentimental thing, because (a) I grew up with the music of the 80s (in the sense that that was the “new” music I listened to), and (b) it never got much respect then and now a lot of that sensibility is creeping back into fashion. So yay and all that, in a “Revenge of the Nerds” sense 🙂
What is generally defined as “classic rock” is from much earlier, and yes, that was a much more creative era. If you look at what the Beatles did, for instance, the jaw drops — not just because of all the experiments with sound and song-writing and all, but because this was done in the popular sphere. These are hit songs we’re talking about. Now *that* was a milestone, not the music of the 80s. (I just name-dropped Peter Cetera, for crying out loud 🙂 “Glory of love” was a favourite in the school days.)
As for why current music directors don’t go that far back, it could be because they didn’t grow up with that music, for one. Also, the 80s sound is very “easy listening” so much more easily adapted in the context of film music. Though I thought S-E-L channelled Floyd (who are typically lumped under “classic rock”) for their outstanding TZP soundtrack.
LikeLike
Adithya
September 11, 2009
@Shankar:
You totally missed Nadhiya!
LikeLike
Shankar
September 12, 2009
Adithya, that’s so true…Nadia still looks like the girl who made her debut in “Nokketha Doorathu Kannum Nattu”. 🙂 Incidentally, and you might know, her name is originally pronounced “Naadia Moidu”…and got tamilised to Nadhiya. Just as actor Rahman became Raghuman!!
LikeLike
Pradyumna M
September 13, 2009
Br,since you really seem to like Pink floyd,I suggest you listen to this band called Porcupine Tree.
Though I haven’t heard much of Pink Floyd,my friends tell me that a lot of Porcupine Tree’s earlier albums have an heavy influence of Floyd.
And do let me know what you think of the band if you do check them out.Thanks 🙂
LikeLike
Pradyumna M
September 13, 2009
An edit of a song from their new alubm.
People tell me it sounds a lot like Dogs/Sheep from Animals by Pink Floyd.
LikeLike
brangan
September 13, 2009
Pradyumna M: Actually, there was a solemn late-teen phase where I was heavily into mama-I-wanna-slit-my-wrists music (like Floyd) — kinda went hand in hand with gloom-and-doom indulgence of writers like Salinger and Ayn Rand. Now not so much, though. Bring on the rom-coms I say 🙂
Speaking of the latter, I just caught “The Ugly Truth” and it had some big laughs. Caught some the reviews subsequently and was susprised it had been panned so badly.
LikeLike
Pradyumna M
September 14, 2009
I was hoping you would review 9.
I sometimes don’t understand some crictics.
Rajeev Masand gave 4 stars to “The Hangover ” and then goes on to say “The Ugly Truth” has some very silly jokes. 😐
Btw,I went through your Drona review again and was shocked to see that people actually reacted the way they did.Feeling a li’l sheepish though that I too was angry at the review bu then thankfully I didn’t post it then to embarrass myself even more 😀
LikeLike
Sathya J
September 21, 2009
Good reviews! Long time since you did Tamil movie reviews. How about reviews on ‘Eeram’, ‘Kandasamy’ and ‘Unnaipol Oruvan’?
LikeLike