Picture courtesy: nytimes.com
MY NAME IS CORN?
Shah Rukh Khan shines in a dully earnest drama that bites off too much and chews on too little.
FEB 14, 2010 – THE RHYTHMS OF MY NAME IS KHAN aren’t at all what you’d expect from a Karan Johar extravaganza – or, for that matter, a standard-issue Indian melodrama. Take, for instance, the moment where Rizwan Khan (Shah Rukh Khan, in an endearing performance that organically showcases his natural hyper-energy) is almost flattened by a San Franciscan tram. We’re at a point in the film where we’re primed for the introduction of the heroine (the hairdresser Mandira, played by Kajol), and we expect her to charge across the street and push Rizwan out of harm’s way (especially as, by now, we’ve gotten used to the heroines in Shah Rukh-starrers being more heroic than the hero; the actor continues his charming on-screen emasculation by sporting, in a later scene, a woman’s oversized overalls) – but that’s not how things happen, and neither do we catch that long-awaited glimpse of Mandira. It’s a muted introduction. We hear her voice – that distinctive nasal screech – and we see the back of her head, and then she vanishes into the wings, waiting to resurface in dazzling, full-frontal glory.
Take this other scene where, after a few shy encounters with Mandira, Rizwan proposes marriage. At that precise instant, as if ordained by the gods of Classic Melodrama, she receives a call. It’s from someone named (gasp!) Sameer, and Mandira signs off by declaring (gasp!), “I love you.” Even if we recognise fully well that this is but the reddest of herrings, we expect a degree of emotional conflict before Rizwan (and we) discover who Sameer really is – but, again, this revelation comes through quietly, and through a completely unexpected agency. In a similar fashion, the true-love moment, the point where we know Rizwan is well and truly besotted by Mandira, is also free of fireworks. He’s an autistic (the specific condition is Asperger’s Syndrome) and he cannot bear to be touched, and yet he allows her to cut his hair, which is as close as he can probably come to clambering onto a rooftop and announcing to the world that he’s in love.
In a childhood flashback, Rizwan sees his younger brother Zakir (Jimmy Shergill) in tears and muses, “Zakir bahut khushnaseeb tha… Ro sakta tha.” Rizwan is incapable of expressing that kind – or possibly any kind – of emotion, and it’s as if Johar and his writers adopted a similar strategy, deciding not to wallow in that kind of emotion, the kind we expect from our melodramas. There are certainly passages intended to bulldoze us to tears, but My Name is Khan is unusually (and unnecessarily) restrained – even the palette is drained of the bright colours of, say, the Chandni Chowk stretches from Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham, and there’s no adrenaline-busting Rock ‘n’ Roll Soniye shot with every available Klieg light from every single Mumbai studio. (Shankar-Ehsaan-Loy, meanwhile, contribute a shockingly generic score.) You are left with the feeling that, stung by criticisms of his larger-than-larger-than-life filmmaking style, the director retreated all the way to the other end, at least to the extent possible while still retaining the must-haves of the Great Indian Melodrama.
The niggling question, inevitably, is why anyone would bother with the apparently oxymoronic conceit of a muted melodrama – but the more pressing issue is how a film could pack in so much and yet accomplish so little. There is the story thread of a mother (an effective Zarina Wahab, who makes a difference simply by virtue of not having played this part in a hundred other movies) so obsessed with her elder son that the younger child ends up neglected. Sanjay Leela Bhansali milked a similar situation for a very affecting dinner-table showdown in Black, and you’d think that such a turn of events would make Johar salivate with shiny eyes – but he isn’t interested in pursuing that path. There is the other storyline, reminiscent of Swathi Muthyam and its remake Eeshwar, about a not-quite-there man adapting to domesticity with a woman and her son (in a seriously cute moment, Rizwan prepares for his wedding night by poring over “Intercourse for Dummies,” which, he declares, has excellent pictures) – but Johar doesn’t want to go down that route either.
Either of these developments – along with a detour about a mother’s quest for justice – would have made for an entire (and altogether more fascinating) movie, but Johar relegates them to the background, as half-hearted subplots, in order to clear the stage for a bleeding-heard screed about the plight of the modern-day Muslim, after the events of 9/11 branded even innocent practitioners of the religion with the scar of suspicion. My Name is Khan is a sprawling lesson on Islam as narrated by a Gump-like holy fool, an innocent, a man-child fashioned along the lines of the child in the Capra-esque Ab Dilli Door Nahin who set out to meet the Indian Prime Minister in order to right wrongs. The crux of the film’s message is embedded in this single statement that Rizwan seeks to deliver to the American president: “My name is Khan, and I am not a terrorist.”
And with his ambition of weaving a tapestry that encompasses every imaginable stripe of humankind – an East Asian who suspects Rizwan of being a terrorist, a Latin American detective who heads a murder investigation, an African American family that offers Rizwan refuge, the white all-Americans who live next door to Rizwan and Mandira – Johar becomes slack with the threads involving the locals we could have come to care about. (Mandira, in particular, is mercilessly lopped off from the latter portions. She declares, at one point, that she cannot be a wife as she has to be, first, a mother to her child, but her role as mother is written as an apparent afterthought. She’s, first and foremost, Khan’s wife.) The intriguing complications in these lives are insultingly smoothed over – even a victim of stabbing wakes up barely a few seconds later, because we cannot stoop to bother with the petty problems of people when there’s such a Higher Noble Purpose to be served – and as a result, most characters end up being abstract manifestations of ideology, not so much personalities as pawns to hammer home a one-note agenda.
And that is the film’s undoing, at least for a certain type of viewer. Early on, Rizwan’s mother instills in him that the schism that splits people isn’t about being Hindu or Muslim but about being good or bad – and I’d venture that a similar rift exists between people outside of the movie screen. There’s one kind of moviegoer who values well-intentioned purpose over personality-driven conflict – the kind that assesses the impact of a narrative based on the heft of its neon-lit message – and then there’s the moviegoer who’d rather watch stories about people and not issues, and who doesn’t mind message-movies as long as the message is buried someplace deep below the lives of the characters. The former is the type of viewer who possibly wakes up with a broad smile and hugs everyone in the vicinity and is complacent in the belief that the ills of the world can be cured by a celluloid-strip band-aid, preferably one with tiny heart-shaped designs.
I am not that viewer, and I’m sure there are other crusty curmudgeons who feel borderline-insulted when lectured at by fat-cat filmmakers with more money than they know what to do with, so that they can ease their conscience about having made all that money in the first place. (It’s like those disaffected rock stars who make their millions and then whine, through their lyrics, about how lousy life is, how everything is just doom and gloom.) My Name is Khan is filled with this spirit of atonement. It’s a film with a single-minded purpose, and with sequence after Muslims-are-people-too sequence, I began to long for Johar to step off the podium and revert to what he’s good at, la-la land stories about The Bowled-over and the Beautiful. His idea about life elsewhere is alarmingly simplistic. One of the most embarrassing passages here involves a Southern black family right out of Gone with the Wind – they sho’ ah po’ but ah’ll be damned if dem don’t take time off their cotton-pickin’ lives to praise the Lawd. (And when disaster strikes, wouldn’t you know it, Khan is the only man in all of America who hunkers down to help.)
Other broad-strokes depictions include an incipient terrorist organisation that discusses its plans in the great wide open, a schoolteacher who instructs tiny tots that Islam is the most violent religion, and a candle-light vigil for the 9/11 departed where Rizwan sports the traditional taqiyah simply so that the camera can pull back and isolate this sole white-capped skull in the midst of hundreds of blonde heads. The compensatory aspects are equally generalised – a kindly white-American employer who doesn’t care that Mandira’s last name is Khan, the visual of Rizwan fearlessly kneeling down for namaaz in the presence of potentially hostile whites, and a clarification about the Abrahamic religion of Islam that invokes the story of Abraham himself. (A rabble rouser insists that it was God that demanded the sacrifice of Ibrahim/Abraham’s son; Rizwan counters that it was shaitaan, Satan, and that God would never demand the sacrifice of innocents for any cause.)
In the midst of all this blandly naïve ennoblement, the entertainment-seekers among us are left utterly stranded. The moments I took away were a mere handful, like Zakir comforting his wife while asking her to discard the hijab, “Allah samajh jayenge magar yeh log nahin,” that God will understand but the Americans won’t. This is an exquisitely sculpted line, like the one Rizwan delivers about his son’s soccer shoes or the rebuke a cub reporter hurls at a television producer who refuses to air Khan’s story. And there’s a smattering of scenes that hark back to our ancient narrative traditions – after Rizwan moves away from Mandira, he stops by a salon and peers in, recalling Mandira at work, and hundreds of miles away, Mandira looks outside her salon, as if sensing an emotion that has been carried to her doorstep by the wind. This is the sort of unabashedly sentimental storytelling that comes so naturally to Johar – even the death of Rizwan’s mother is due to congestive cardiomyopathy. “Dil zaroorat se zyada bada ho gaya tha,” Rizwan informs us, that her heart had swelled so much to accommodate her love for him that it eventually burst.
I worry that these traditions will vanish if filmmakers like Johar (who, along with Aditya Chopra and Sooraj Barjatya, is among the few still interested in the romantic melodrama) begin to feel ashamed about their roots – about the instincts that come so easily to them – and end up emulating the relatively naturalistic style preferred by today’s hip multiplex audiences. The envelope needs edgy pushing, surely, but we also need filmmakers harking back to times when Indian movies were still “Indian.” Subhash Ghai is a prime example of a director who lost his way when he abandoned his innate flair for vulgar showmanship and sought out “classy” ways of storytelling. My Name is Khan is extremely well crafted at a basic level, and it’ll probably do mind-boggling business, so I hope this is a one-off that will satisfy Johar that he can grow up if he wants to (as if the relationships in Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna weren’t the very definition of grown-up in a mainstream context). And I hope he returns to chronicling the lives and loves of people, leaving issue-oriented narratives to directors more suited to dour message-movies seeking to rehabilitate a world stricken with ills. Come on, Mr. Johar, be yourself. Raise a hand and repeat: “My name is Karan, and I am not a therapist.”
Copyright ©2010 The New Sunday Express. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
B.H.Harsh
February 13, 2010
Point taken, sir! Agreed to (almost) everything. Me too thinks Johar should not really try to deviate from the route where he works best.
But 2000 words of an opinion and yet not a single word about the Performances?? How How rude is that!
Atleast I don’t think this is a regular act You see everyday so as to skip mentioning it TOTALLY.
For me, Shah Rukh’s performance is of a kind that has very few parallels among those by the contemporary Star-Actors. It requires quite a transformation in terms of body language, voice modulation and everything that can be of performer’s concern. (Example in case – Hrithik in Koi Mil Gaya 🙂 If you still didn’t get what I exactly refer to)
Its remarkably restrained (and hopefully very in-the-character too; don’t know much about Autism or Asperger’s syndrome) and very very effective as a whole.
LikeLike
B.H.Harsh
February 13, 2010
I also see You refer to Subhash Ghai quite often when speaking about a ‘masses’ kinda director’s attempts to be ‘classy’.
So am just too curiosu to refrain anymore – What did ya think of Taal?
LikeLike
Sid
February 13, 2010
I was waiting for your review, BR — mostly because I was troubled by the five star reviews after watching this film. This was decidely a mixed bag — just when I was starting to get into the story post-interval, Karan Johar pulled his old manipulative tricks — SRK as the Messiah. That last stretch was TERRIBLE. Shah Rukh was good in this, although I think the performance is a bit uneven, wavering between an earnest portrayal and “look Shah Rukh is playing an autistic character! What great acting!” moments.
LikeLike
vikram
February 13, 2010
To state the obvious, a well-written review (as always) For the first time, I saw a film before reading your review… I guess Karan Johar was trying to depict the impact a larger event has on a individuals..and, he definitely isn’t the director to pull this off(which other director cn you think of?).but to his credit there are signs of growing up..
Btw, couldn’t fathom your ‘rant’ on ‘fatcat film makers’ ..and.. Dint you think SRK reminded us of Peter Sellers in ‘being there’ and Dustin Hoffman in ‘rainman’..
LikeLike
Aditya Pant
February 13, 2010
I haven’t watched the film yet, so can’t say if I agree or disagree with your view. But I found your review refreshing in that you were not taken by Karan Johar’s attempt to be un-KJo like. I love the Karan Johar brand of film making and derive great pleasure from his penchant for excesses and emotional manipulation. And that’s what I expect from his films. Still…let me watch the film first before commenting any further.
LikeLike
Ami
February 13, 2010
What Karan Johar said is true then.. the audience is never satisfied. I bet you were among the people who accused him of being a ‘bubble gum’ director a few years back. But of course that’s all forgotten now and his new endeavor is chided as being too message-bound. I can’t believe I live to see the day where I read somebody wrote so eloquently to entreat Karan Johar to go back to making “Indian” romantic melodrama. He did say he’s gonna return to making lighter cinema after this. Will you then wax soliloquy afterwards praising My Name is Khan and how Karan Johar should have stuck to that noble path rather then turning back to his ‘bubble gum’ route he’s so good at? 🙂
LikeLike
KPV balaji
February 13, 2010
Well written as usual :)..Karan johar is good at what he does for sure..and it comes so natural to him..here he is kinda confused..not to let go his trademark melodrama and yet trying to prove that he can grow up ..and push the envelope further..So we end up getting a product which cannot be classified as either of the two…
Rather than trying to dwell on serious preachy global issues, would love to see him deal a heavy romantic melodrama completely rooted to desiness sans any religious conflicts and sans any foreign backdrop…
LikeLike
Adithya
February 13, 2010
Isn’t this like your most intensely personal review ever? I haven’t seen you so openly address a director before.
I haven’t seen the movie, but where do directors like Karan, Aditya etc. find a balance, if one section of audience/critics completely dismiss their movies for the more multiplex, indie kinds, and another section suffering from nostalgia of the Indian pathos of filmmaking? It’s a tricky question for them and us.
LikeLike
Steelcityblue
February 13, 2010
Easily the most laugh out loud line to close with, Mr. Rangan…!
LikeLike
Vikas Bhargava
February 13, 2010
Haha well said, and an insightful review.
I really loved the first half of the movie, it was toned down, surprisingly so for a KJo movie but it was not bland or boring, it had its funny moments. SRK, although being eerily similar to Dustin Hoffman in Rainman (all asperger syndrome people behave like Hoffman?) was carrying it off well. Kajol appeared as if she was trying a wee bit hard but she nicely settled into her rhythm.
Going for the popcorn at the interval, I thought well, Kjo has his hold, some portions were weak but well, rest of it was enjoyable. And my what a nose dive the movie took post interval. It was embarrassingly badly written, I cringed at the whole Georgia town caught up in the cyclone thing, the President bit was “Corny”, etc etc.. yeah this was the word, “Corn” ringing in my ear all through the end.
I was eating Corn, I was watching Corn. If only I could have a corn stuffed bed!
LikeLike
Rahul Tyagi
February 13, 2010
Heh! That last line cracked me up… 🙂 therapist! 😀
LikeLike
shamoni8
February 13, 2010
my name is (not) shamoni8, and i approve this message.
LikeLike
Pradyumna M
February 13, 2010
“My name is Karan, and I am not a therapist.” Lol! 🙂 I agree with you,bites more than he can chew! And I was terribly disappointed there wasn’t much of Kajol in the latter half! But SRK was entertaining!
Btw,did you listen to the Karthik Calling Karthik soundtrack?
LikeLike
ramesh
February 13, 2010
MNIK is like when a dream goes horribly wrong and you wake up wanting to pee real bad.
LikeLike
Harry
February 13, 2010
Read 1st line…left it!!! Whats the point reading a review that is completely biased. Saw the movie, loved it!!!! There may be some hitches, but its a 1st of this kind of movie. The worldwide Friday gross of 25 crore (more than 10 crore higher than any other film) itself shows how much it is being loved. A movie for humanity…I give it 4/5 just to keep this reviewer happy, otherwise it 5/5.
LikeLike
Tehyawn
February 14, 2010
YAWN, this review is you being yourself which is an indian reviewer who pulls out complex words out of a dictionary to seem intelligent, just like a Variety.com reviewer only a notch below.
You aren’t intelligent so stop trying.
LikeLike
Harish S Ram
February 14, 2010
spot on … couldnt have been a better ans for wat was nagging behind my head after watching the movie .. but still (i wouldn’t say enjoy) i was really engaged completely in this attempt of his. couldn’t that be appreciated at equal length too? nowadays you are more into the larger picture (the directors chronology-analysis) than refraining to that particular movie alone 🙂
LikeLike
Raj Balakrishnan
February 14, 2010
Thins must be really desperate in Karan Joker’s camp that he must rely on Sonia Gandhi, her side-kick Ashok Chavan and sundry congressmen to ensure the success of his pathetic movie. For the first time in the history of the world, we had chief ministers and home ministers openly come out and endorse a movie. The winner is Balasaheb and the losers are the paki lovers, the italian mummy and her side-kicks.
LikeLike
Raj Balakrishnan
February 14, 2010
I meant things
LikeLike
Sid
February 14, 2010
Here’s my take on the film
http://morethanfilms.blogspot.com/2010/02/film-review-my-name-is-khan.html
I agree that I would like to see Karan Johar go back to his strengths as a director — which are more suited to mainstream melodramas rather than the confusing style on display here.
LikeLike
Naveen
February 14, 2010
My dear,when germans,french and allmost all part of the people can appreciate the film especially Sharukh acting,you should atleast give some courtesey as an indian.After all Sharukh is an Indian and we should be proud of him.
LikeLike
sachita
February 14, 2010
Just wanted to write what i felt after reading your review – SRK’s performance was good and may be i should catch this movie since you didnt completely diss it off.
ps: Though if he does movies like he used to I will completely stay off. There is nothing more irritating than the ‘whole wind blowing whenever Jaya and shahrukh’.
LikeLike
Venkatesh
February 14, 2010
Haven’t seen the movie so can’t comment but i liked one thing – Karan Johar, Aditya Chopra, Sooraj Barjatiya are the successors of Subash Ghai and yes its something truly gloriously and unabashedly “Indian” . The gaana-bajana melodrama movie.
But pray where is the successor to the master of them all – Manmohan Desai ?
LikeLike
Real Therapist
February 14, 2010
Thank you BR ! An unbiased review as expected. I saw the movie and laughed again and again and saw all the 5/5 reviews and wondered if I saw the same movie. Two ridiculous attempts at “serious” movies by Dharma Production. They continue to take us for granted like we don’t have a brain. Very happy to see a different take on this movie.
LikeLike
ramesh
February 14, 2010
I saw the preview of the shahid – ayesha takia-nana patekar film patshaala and thought id give it a plug here, if not the film itself, the trailer worked for me.
http://tinyurl.com/y8sxfpc
LikeLike
Raj
February 14, 2010
It’s extremely sad to see BR going the Khalid Mohamed way……a pompous critic who takes himself too seriously..
LikeLike
Tyler
February 14, 2010
I’m tired of BW having racist portrayal of African American characters in their movies – Fashion, KI and now this one. I may have to sic Al Sharpton on them.
What I find really bothersome is how the scenes you described are glossed over in most of the reviews I have read. Are viewers really this insensitive?
LikeLike
prasun
February 14, 2010
You are too charitable in your reviews 🙂
It was interesting that in Hindi movies, there’s an Indian everywhere. They even speak in Hindi to the americans 🙂
Also it was weird that he kept taking Greyhounds from California to Georgia. I don’t even think that is possible 😛
LikeLike
vijay
February 14, 2010
“by fat-cat filmmakers with more money than they know what to do with, so that they can ease their conscience about having made all that money in the first place.”
Isnt this getting a little too personal/judgemental? You are going beyond judging just the product here.
LikeLike
vijay
February 14, 2010
“It’s like those disaffected rock stars who make their millions and then whine, through their lyrics, about how lousy life is, how everything is just doom and gloom.”
ditto here.
LikeLike
brangan
February 14, 2010
B.H.Harsh: There’s something about SRK’s peformance in the first para and about Zarina Wahab’s someplace later. Kajol was just… Kajol, so I didn’t feel the need to say anything. But I wish, now, that I’d mentioned a word about Sonya Jahan, who was very good. And I didn’t think much about Taal at all.
Venkatesh: Actually, Johar-Chopra-Barjatya aren’t descendants of Subhash Ghai, IMO. The latter didn’t exactly make romantic melodramas.
And a very sweet letter to the paper, titled “YOUR NAME IS RANGAN… AND YOU ARE NOT A CONFORMIST !” I can see various permutations/combinations of this catchphrase in the future 🙂
Dear Baradwaj,
I have been a movie buff all my 56 years. In the 60’s, SJBananji’s reviews used to be the highlight of “Filmfare”. Today, Baradwajrangan is my major attraction in TNIE a paper I have been addicted to all my adult life.
I really wish there was a ticket counter for your reviews too like there are for the movies you so intelligently reivew!
Saw MNIK on Friday itself. Just read your review… you have surpassed yourself with the parting touch “My Name Is Karan. . .and I’m Not a Therapist”. I am a writer of sorts myself and must confess you make me jealous.
May God (and Bollywood & Hollywood) bless you with a long innings at TNIE for the sake of movie and English lovers like me!
Neenga Nalla Irukkaunum Naanga Magizha, Inda Naattilulla Rasikargalin Rasanai Valarchi Pera !
so long, mere azeez nawaz !
sukumar mandalika
LikeLike
Deepak Singh Thakur
February 14, 2010
Hi! It is time KJ and SRK deliver their best rather then showing a documentary style movie. The movie is a disaster as it just not following any story but trying to touch emotional cords of NRI’s, muslims, etc..etc. Add to it Kajol was left to waste, no substantial role. KJ love for SRK has left him with too much sreen presence with no value. I do not find SRK at his best as he was in Chak de India. It is time both KJ and SRK come out of their self obsession and deliver their best performance that matters. Too much marketing to fool people to watch one time…but too little to offer.
LikeLike
Venkatesh
February 14, 2010
BR: “Actually, Johar-Chopra-Barjatya aren’t descendants of Subhash Ghai, IMO. The latter didn’t exactly make romantic melodramas.”
Agreed – Ghai made what can only be called “Indian” movies , a hodgepodge of everything. I was going more for that hodge-podge and the feel that the triumvirate evoke in this day of Multiplex “realistic” movies.
Manmohan Desai took it just that one step further – i am looking at Coolie, Amar Akbar Anthony and of course Mard . I can’t see either of the 3 making a Mard type movie and that’s what i miss. :-). Where o where is the new MKD ?
LikeLike
shahin
February 14, 2010
srk has proved that no one can act like u…..love shahrukhpls sometime come in anand(gujarat)
LikeLike
shahin
February 14, 2010
now waiting for kuchi kuchi hota hai
LikeLike
Radhika
February 14, 2010
Baradwaj, excellent review. I felt so pained with the movie that I walked out halfway – something I have done so rarely in my life – and the precis of the second half that I heard only convinced me I had made the right choice. Your review pretty much summarises how I felt.
LikeLike
ramesh
February 14, 2010
BR,
suggst you move to The Hindu you’ll get many more such letters.
LikeLike
Vikas Bhargava
February 15, 2010
Seems like the your site is getting really popular now BR. Why do I foresee more Fanboy comments and Flame wars here? 😉
LikeLike
Vikas Bhargava
February 15, 2010
@ramesh : Why is my heart sinking after watching Paathshaala’s trailer. I have this cold feeling in the pit of my stomach that I know whats the story’s gonna be already.
LikeLike
brangan
February 15, 2010
Venkatesh: I wouldn’t even say hodge-podge, for their mode of storytelling doesn’t involve heroic one-against-many fights or explicit comedy tracks. It’s more an “indian” style I was going at, where the accent is more on the sensual experience of the moment than the realistic aspect.
For instance, you know you’re not a candidate for this kind of movie if you see RNBDJ and say, “Oh but how can she not recognise that he’s the same man?” From a realistic standpoint, it’s absurd — but looked at from another viewpoint, our literature (like the drag characters in Shakespeare) is full of people who pretended to be others with very little fuss, and the other kind of moviegoer is able to brush off this plot-device without a second thought.
Ghai was more hardcore masala, like the 80s AVM movies in Tamil. Yes, and he made hodgepodge movies.
Vikas Bhargava: Dude, please don’t curse me with fanboys 🙂 I may have involved readers but they’re not the unquestioning kind. Even here, you can see BH Harsh hauling me up for not talking more about the performances, Vijay’s rebuke that perhaps I got too personal, Aditya Pant’s comment that he’s not sure that he’s not sure if he’s going to agree or disagree, Harish S Ram’s view that I’m beginning to look more at the larger picture… That’s hardly fanboyish no?
As for flame wars, apparently it’s only the Rahman posts that instigate them anymore 😉
LikeLike
ramesh
February 15, 2010
@vikas who cares, Im keeping my eyes on ayesha takia from start to end,and I suggest the man friendly to do the same with shahid kapur.
others, for all those disappointed with my name is khan, here’s a consolation prize (my roadtrip pics) http://tiny.cc/O7JWJ
LikeLike
ramon
February 15, 2010
Hi Rangan, long time lurker kere. Did you see the similarities between the two movies 3 Idiots and MNIK? here are a few.
1. Catchphrase. “All is well” and “My name ….not a terrorist”
2. Both main characters have a simple and undiluted outlook towards life, and both are geniuses in engineering practical devices (birthing vacuum and the flood wheel)
3. There is a flood scene in both movies.
4. Lot of flashback scenes.
5. Climax scenes wherein the protagonist states his beliefs and everyone shakes their head and agrees.
Don’t know if I missed any.. thanks.
LikeLike
B.H.Harsh
February 15, 2010
It is strange indeed, Rangan ‘sir’ 🙂
I am accused by all my film-loving friends of being an excessive fan-boy of Yours. They are pissed off by the way I recommend your reviewss (POV included) and keep on harping about them just about everywhere 🙂
But My comments give out another picture altogether, it seems..
LikeLike
B.H.Harsh
February 15, 2010
That just makes me curious (again!) – Who exactly is a fanboy according to you? Who accepts anything You deliver? that types?
LikeLike
anamika
February 15, 2010
To the nonconformist film therapist
Your reviews are like an oasis…a sanctuary to turn to in the mindless mind numbing madness of the media overdrive and star rating for this film- a rare gift to mix an intellectualism(without having to apologise for it) and a passion for film- it is something chennai should pride itself on..it is a city that still has not become ensared in glitz but still retains an earthiness…substance over ishtyle!
cheers to both chennai and you Br..keep writing ..honestly…
a
LikeLike
Vikas Bhargava
February 15, 2010
@brangan: hehe, I was not pointing at those gentleman you named but the ones you missed (read between the lines eh? ).
btw I want Shutter Island to release now! Feb 19 is the release date worldwide, hoping to see it in Delhi. (please god)
LikeLike
Vikas Bhargava
February 15, 2010
Moments from MNIK:
(minor SPOILER ALERT)
1. “The Eagle is on foot, I repeat The Eagle is on foot” (Guffaw, spilled my coke)
2. Muscular Beefcake Asperger patient? (well anyone could hit the gym theoretically speaking..but hey SRK, sacrifice something for the role!)
3. “My Name is Khan and I am not a Terrorist”..”Terrorist did he say terrorist? Run like hell” Boom boom (another Guffaw, spilled my popcorn this time).
4. Wide eyed disciples: “Kaun tha woh ajnabi, kaun tha kaun tha bataiye” (shower of pebbles follows..)
5. SRK suddenly shedding all his austism postures in the Georgia Town Rescue and appearing as if he mistakenly stepped in the scene from the sets of Swades.
6. The Georgia Town is not a town, its infact Hotel California!. The Aid workers can reach the church, the Camera crew can reach the church, hell even an austistic patient can reach the church, but the survivors cant run like hell from that place..
“My name is Shibani Bhatija and my Jabberwocky MS Word plugin writes the second half of the movie script for me.”
LikeLike
Radhika Naidu
February 15, 2010
Baradwaj – you nailed it with your MNIK review. I actually thought MNIK was two movies in one -Movie 1 a Rainman type – which spent a long time introducing us to the various curious symptoms of Aspergers – and with its own message – Autistic people can fall in love too.
Movie-2 had its own theme – All Muslims are not terrorists. The problem? The protagonist of the first movie didnt work out here – What we needed was a role model of moderate muslim who is victimised whom we could empathise with (Aamir.) But our idiot -savant has already been victimised by the hand of Fate ( his disability) which stops us from ever stepping into his shoes.
If Karan Johar wants to step out of fairytale land – then how can he expect us to believe that Kajol a fiesty self-made single mum would pick a man who cannot meet her eyes,light her fire, manage a conversation or be a provider as her partner and a role model for her son? The whole Georgia sequence was wince-worthy. The best sub plot was the investigative students. Movie 2 – whould have started with his arrest and the story revealed along the way thought their investigations – that would have been a ‘grown up” Western style movie for KJ to make. As for Movie 1 – skip it altogether.
LikeLike
Radhika Naidu
February 15, 2010
Vikas Bhargava – I spilled my coke when I read your Moments! (giggle)
Here’s more – SRK directing roof repair ops at Georgia Church sends up bales of what looked like dry straw – (maybe he thought he was repairing a hut in Swades?
And the man who famously cant bear to be touched goes – “Can I have a hug?” at the hospital – Awww Karan! Did they then go off for a honeymoon dressed in yellow?
LikeLike
ramesh
February 15, 2010
a
disappointed you have still not added friend on facebook 😉
VB,
Moi?! (incase you missed the drama, go on google and type ramesh review of Indian critics.)
LikeLike
ramesh
February 15, 2010
Im just keeping the pride and joy of chennai honest.
LikeLike
brangan
February 15, 2010
ramon: I never made the connection, but now that you point it out, it does exist. Plus, the martyr/messiah dimension to the hero 🙂
B.H.Harsh: Yeah, someone who agreed with anything I wrote could, I guess, be called a fanboy. Not that I don’t like the compliments — any creator (writer, painter, moviemaker) who says he/she doesn’t is a bald-faced liar. But it’s equally true that a good reader can like the *way* I write and yet not be happy with *what* I write. And when that reader points it out, it’s useful. It helps me ask questions to myself about why I looked at something a certain way, and so on.
Vikas Bhargava/ Radhika Naidu: Children, behave! This is not the way to talk about a “grown up” movie 🙂
Any idea, how — during that long, long road trip — he managed to overcome the fear of crowds and yellow and so on? What did I miss, other than the handycam?
BTW, Radhika, “But our idiot -savant has already been victimised by the hand of Fate ( his disability) which stops us from ever stepping into his shoes.” was a very nice take on the problem.
LikeLike
Vikas Bhargava
February 15, 2010
A Rare informative analysis on Rizwan and Asperger syndrome:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/news-interviews/Who-did-SRK-model-himself-on/articleshow/5571727.cms
[Whoa, for a moment I felt I was reading NYTimes ]
LikeLike
Vikas Bhargava
February 15, 2010
@Radhika: That reminds me, the only “Yellow” thing Rizwan was not repulsed by were Pumpkins! Oh maybe that was just a different shade of Orange. I would presume an austistic -savant like him could also differentiate between Muave and Purple so this is no issue.
[Spammed a lot on the forum, now I should retreat]
LikeLike
ramesh
February 15, 2010
“Vikas Bhargava/ Radhika Naidu: Children, behave! This is not the way to talk about a “grown up” movie ”
BR, I sooo disagree! if there’s any film ripe for one to do a number on, it is this, with its fruity melodrama and seriously out of touch with the times attitudes.
However, “vakku kuduthutten pa velu” about its grosses, so Im desisting…
LikeLike
Ramesh
February 15, 2010
btw,all important monday is here, and reports from single screens are not good so far.
LikeLike
Vikas Bhargava
February 15, 2010
Can’t resist adding one more.
@Radhika, brangan: “But our idiot -savant has already been victimised by the hand of Fate ( his disability) which stops us from ever stepping into his shoes.” Well according to KJo, he chose Rizwan to be autistic because he wanted a grown up character that is innocent, a child in his mind, and views the world in a different light than most of the adults do.
But why choose asperger, a particular spectrum of Austism?
That calls for a discussion on perhaps the spate of “disorder oriented” movies that retro fit a particular human frailty to serve a script, which most often than not, distorts facts about the actual disability and creates a dangerous confusion. If the need was an innocent worldview, why not write a Forrest Gump character with no explicit autism? Or reverse the Rizwan – Son scenario and make his son go on a similar feel good trip? (ofcourse that would cut down SRK’s onscreen time).
Another such movie is Paa based on Progeria. How did Mr R. Balakrishnan think of the script. In his own words, he looked at Amitabh and Abhishek and thought, “It would be interesting story in which the (real life) father becomes a (reel) son and a (real life) son becomes the (reel) father.”. Then he researched as to what “disease” fitted his fantasy. Lo! Progeria!. Thus anyone can reverse engineer its entire script with this starting point.
I guess Shibani and KJo whipped up wikipedia and observed that asperger syndrome “differs from other autism spectrum disorders by its relative preservation of linguistic and cognitive development.” Voila!
Bad signs.
LikeLike
Venkatesh
February 15, 2010
BR: “It’s more an “indian” style I was going at, where the accent is more on the sensual experience of the moment than the realistic aspect.”
Aah, i see your POV now , you are looking at the honestly “Indian” movie where certain aspects of the story-telling conceits are a given , the director knows it and the audience knows it. (Of course, she can’t recognise him without his glasses in RNBDJ- why would anyone even question that. Of course when SRK gets down from the helicopter, all hair blowing stylishly his Maa will know and rush to the door) The Johar,Chopra,Barjatiya clan is very good at that.
I have been looking at it from the Mass-masala Technicolor 70mm paisa-vasool movie – Ram Lakhan type,( everytime i say Subhash Ghai i hear Dhina Dhin Dha..) and yes that’s a different ball game altogether , uniquely unrealistic and Indian but different from the sensual experience of the triumvirate.
For once , i agree with your viewpoint .. 🙂
LikeLike
ramon
February 15, 2010
Hi Rangan,
Do you think B’wood is exploiting disabilities in movies? It seems to be a recent trend. I don’t think these filmmakers know anyone personally with these diseases, I hope they choose a schizo serial killer for the next movie.. that should be fun! Awareness plus blood and gore!
Also, I thought SRK’s acting was unremarkable in the movie, but no doubt he will get a lot of awards later just for portraying a special needs person.
LikeLike
Vishal
February 15, 2010
I think the movie (inadvertently) makes the same “group-think” error that it so humbly tries to rebuke. The correct response to denounce the claims of Islam’s tendency to propagate violence is not “Hey look over here! See, Muslims are nice people too!”. You’re just trying to put them on the “right” side of the divide — while accepting that such (crude and singular) division exists.
…reminds me of the classic example of a presupposition/trick question: “Are you still beating your wife?” If the respondent answers yes or no he’s admitting that he had beaten his wife in the past. Similarly, “Are Muslims bad people?” question presupposes that the humanity can be preeminently classified into discrete and distinct groups and defined based on religion… that the world can be seen (and analyzed) not as a collection of people, but as a federation of religions and civilizations.
I think the correct message should be “My Name is Khan, and I am an individual. Treat me like one.”
LikeLike
Raj Balakrishnan
February 15, 2010
Great news! MNIK’s collection has considerably dropped since friday and in all likelihood this movie is going to be a FLOP. Victory to the patriotic Indians, defeat to the paki lovers. Shahkaran couple should now move to karachi and join D company.
LikeLike
Shalini
February 15, 2010
“In the midst of all this blandly naïve ennoblement, the entertainment-seekers among us are left utterly stranded.”
This cranky, old soul (and her doctor) thanks you for the PSA. 🙂
LikeLike
Pulkit
February 16, 2010
Very well-written review. Here’s one I wrote. We seem to agree on our reactions to this film:
http://www.the-nri.com/index.php/2010/02/film-review-my-name-is-khan/
LikeLike
Rahul
February 16, 2010
I liked the first half of your review; actually I just disagree with your last two paragraphs.The naturalistic film making style that the multiplex viewer wants to see is certainly not THIS!
K Jo is not trying to grow up or anything.Just like his other movies every sequence is primed to produce a certain kind of reaction in the viewer. Earlier it was family and love blah blah here it is Muslims are not terrorists. Just because the message or the type of the instant gratification has changed does not mean that his style his changed. This movie is just fashioned to tap into an international audience;to satiate the ever increasing ambition of the SRK -KJ duo.
LikeLike
Jasmine
February 16, 2010
Naveen said:
“My dear,when germans,french and allmost all part of the people can appreciate the film especially Sharukh acting”
++++
Naveen sahib, don’t believe the preposterous hype that NDTV and other breathless Indian media organisations spin – nobody is watching this movie in the West outside the Indian / Pakistani diaspora. It wasn’t even screened in competition in Berlin and the crowds there were mostly desi with a few middle aged German women who have a fetish for brown men and camp Bollywood melodrama. Seriously, don’t believe the hype that MNIK is smashing doors down around the world – it simply isn’t. And in a review I read from Berlin, the reviewer was so affronted by the infantilism of the film she remarked that this film would have been booed at Cannes – and its true. The French don’t fall for this kind of bullshit.
LikeLike
ramesh
February 16, 2010
Raj,
Schedefreude is all very well, but (to quote tiruvilayadal) it shouldn’t turn into hate. I am happy that the effects of marketing lasted only one weekend(and they have to spend MORE to push reluctant audiences back into the theater) and wish Khan karan and their families well.
Look at the bright side, they made a new friend because of MNIK : raj thakersay
LikeLike
Nandini
February 16, 2010
Despite rating the film a rung lower than the other reviewers did, you weren’t hard-hearted. This is a critique that left me feeling kind of sympathetic towards a film-maker i never cared for. Not that i resent it.
Weirdly, The Curious Incident Of The Dog In The Night-time has a 15-year-old with one of the autistic spectrum disorders who also dislikes yellow.
LikeLike
brangan
February 16, 2010
Venkatesh: “For once?” Hmmm… 🙂
ramon: I don’t know if I’d call it “exploitation.” It’s been a long tradition of (melo)dramatists to seek out unusual gimmicks to make their stories look “new.” It’s just that earlier — in films like Swathi Muthyam/Eeshwar (where Kamal Hassan and Anil Kapoor play a man-child), or Raat Aur Din (where Nargis is schizophrenic), or Neel Kamal (where Waheeda Rehman was a sleepwalker) — there wasn’t much hype about the name of the condition and its “medical specificity.” In the sense that the doctor didn’t diagnose Waheeda and say “somnambulism,” just the generic “neend mein chalne ki beemari.”
Today, though, people feel the need to get extraordinarily specific. That’s the only difference as far as I can see. I mean, would Sparsh have played out any differently if Naseeruddin Shah had been diagnosed as having “macular degeneration?” 🙂
Rahul: Reg. “The naturalistic film making style that the multiplex viewer wants to see is certainly not THIS!” I didn’t mean the Ishqiya style — more how a filmmaker more suited to melodrama would tone himself down. (“… at least to the extent possible while still retaining the must-haves of the Great Indian Melodrama.”)
LikeLike
Neha
February 16, 2010
The one person I expected to give me a unbiased review has also let me down.
When does this start? Writing incorrect reviews? Does it start when it stop being on a blog, but showing up on newspapers?
How much or what did KJo offer in return for a good review?
I am so disappointed. I always read your review to know if a movie is worth watching and today I realise, you are no different. You are like the Sen,Adarsh,Verma,Vijaykars of India. Just like them. 😦
LikeLike
Raj Balakrishnan
February 16, 2010
Ramesh,
I don’t hate anyone. SRK has done great harm to his career by doing this movie and by his stupid pro-paki statements. He was an all India star earlier, but now only a muslim star. It’s all going to be downhill for him from now on.
LikeLike
Tambi Dude
February 16, 2010
Just read in rediff that MNIK is heading for a flop as the BO tank after the weekend.
LikeLike
Arun
February 16, 2010
http://blogeswari.blogspot.com/ hilarious review ..read this!!! total damaging the movie!
LikeLike
Venkatesh
February 16, 2010
Raj: “I don’t hate anyone. SRK has done great harm to his career by doing this movie and by his stupid pro-paki statements. He was an all India star earlier, but now only a muslim star. It’s all going to be downhill for him from now on.”
This is just crass nonsense i try and not get into these “debates” but name-calling and ad-hominem attacks are the lowest forms of communication.
You are turning one of the best forums on Indian entertainment out there to the same generic crap that you get everywhere else on the internet.
So please do us all a favour and SHUT THE FUCK UP.
LikeLike
Jabberwock
February 16, 2010
The number “69” reads the same if you turn it upside down. This is also true of comment number 69. Does that make it an “incorrect” comment or a “correct” comment?
Baradwaj: eagerly awaiting your reply.
LikeLike
Raj Balakrishnan
February 16, 2010
Venkatesh,
Truth is always bitter. Learn to accept the truth.
LikeLike
Radhika
February 16, 2010
>>there wasn’t much hype about the name of the condition and its “medical specificity.” In the sense that the doctor didn’t diagnose Waheeda and say “somnambulism,” just the generic “neend mein chalne ki beemari.”
heh – i wonder, did that specificity start with “lymphosarcoma of the intestine”? somehow i remember Raat Aur Din having a reference to split personalities, though
LikeLike
ramesh
February 16, 2010
The real question is , how much money will the filmmakers now commit to “taking” the “ninety crore” gross to a “two hundered crore” gross.(in other words, a abt 30 crore producer share to a 80 crore producer share).
every other film critical question about this film is merely created controversy to this end.
LikeLike
Vishal
February 17, 2010
Hilarious spoof on MNIK: http://www.thevigilidiot.com/2010/02/16/my-name-is-khan/
LikeLike
Anju
February 17, 2010
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1100214/jsp/7days/story_12103801.jsp
“One of my colleagues, who is watching the film with me, mentions in the interval that the film could only have been made in India. Not because the protagonist is an Indian. But it’s because India has a liberal and nationalist tradition”
BR : what do you think of that line?
LikeLike
Kaushik
February 17, 2010
@Venkatesh – The best way is just to ignore the comment. I have a friend who wouldn’t buy at Khadim’s (Chennai)because it…well, I will leave it to be filled.
There is absolutely no way you are going to stop Raj from commenting – are you?
@rangan – Great review as usual. However, as somebody else noted – aren’t you pushing the envelope and questioning more than the product here? Why am I expecting a BR column on this – Can the reviewer go beyond judging the product as he/she has certain expectations from the film-maker?
Have you watched Asal yet? Any thoughts…I kind of liked it, as they have chopped of most of the songs except for one and the movie worked as entertainment without any expectations…but now, with Tamil Padam, the opening hero-worshipping shot makes it hard to suppress laughter!
LikeLike
Radhika Naidu
February 17, 2010
“Vikas Bhargava/ Radhika Naidu: Children, behave! This is not the way to talk about a “grown up” movie ”
Hey, I think this is exactly what this movie deserves:
I thought the most shocking anti-muslim unfair act in the movie was the FBI – arresting a muslim doctor, not because of anything he had done but on the basis ofone single rambling call anonymous call accusing the doctor of being a “Baaaad Man!”
LikeLike
Radhika Naidu
February 17, 2010
brangan – ‘My Name is Khan is extremely well crafted at a basic level, and it’ll probably do mind-boggling business” – just checked with the local multiplex and tickets are available for today’s show! Are our audiences finally growing up?
LikeLike
brangan
February 17, 2010
Radhika: Reg. “lymphosarcoma of the intestine” — possibly. That was 1971, no? Now I know what Im going to do the next few days — take a scythe and hack through the cobwebbed caverns of memory 🙂
Anju: I seriously don’t know how to reply to that line. It’s boggling on so many levels.
Kaushik: Didn’t mind Asal, but preferred Vettaikaaran. There was no meat in Asal once you got beyond the style. Didn’t get bored, though. Writing about it next week in a BR.
LikeLike
Santosh Kumar T K
February 17, 2010
For those who missed it, I thought this might make for an interesting read.
http://www.esquire.com/print-this/roger-ebert-0310
LikeLike
Santosh Kumar T K
February 17, 2010
“Lymphosarcoma of the intestine” and 1971?! and assuming you weren’t sarcy there BR, the “madras male” came from you?! 🙂
LikeLike
brangan
February 17, 2010
Santosh Kumar TK: I’m not sure I got that comment, but I just checked and it *is* 1971.
LikeLike
vijay
February 18, 2010
BR, enna kodumai sir idhu, a Between Reviews columns on Asal and Vettaikaaran? At least the previous piece shed some light on Porkalam which hardly got any press. And Thamizh padam deserved a mention too. But Asal? Watching an overweight Ajith with a Virumandi mush in the promos has me all constipated this past week. Maybe Vettaikaaran is the enema I much need.
I am slightly worried about you warming up to the likes of Silambattam and Vettaikaaran. Hope all izzz well.
LikeLike
brangan
February 18, 2010
vijay: Reg. “BR, enna kodumai sir idhu” LOL! See, but I’m NOT calling these great (or even good) movies. The point is not to compare these with Kannathil or whatever. But for a film aimed at a mass audience (and which, therefore, HAS to be constructed a certain way), Vettaikaaran does get the job done, especially in comparison to IT’s earlier disasters like Kuruvi and ATM. Ambuttu dhaan. 🙂 You’ll see when you read the piece.
LikeLike
Venkatesh
February 18, 2010
@Kaushik : You are quite right in trying to just ignore imbeciles but the downside of that is it brings down the tone of the whole forum. One of the reasons i come here is to read the article “and” the comments.
Stupid, bigoted comments like those leave a bad aftertaste.
LikeLike
brangan
February 18, 2010
Venkatesh: A lot of us would prefer it if the comments space stayed “clean” (whatever that means) — but surely you know by now that there are a lot of folks who get provoked by an actor or a language or a film industry, and say things in the heat of the moment that are quite ugly. They aren’t “imbeciles” — just someone with a very different POV and a very different way of voicing their frustrations. You or I may not like what they say, but they bloody well have the right to say it — even if only for the cheap thrill of provoking a reaction from other readers.
The reason I say this is also because earlier, I used to wonder if I should delete comments that were downright derogatory about, say, “Bollywood lovers” or “Rahman fans” or “Shah Rukh fans” or what have you. But I’ve found that letting these comments through is a very necessary part of the interaction. It puts on the page a different POV. End of mini-oration!
LikeLike
ramesh
February 18, 2010
bravo.
well said.
LikeLike
Harish S Ram
February 18, 2010
@Venkatesh,Kaushik,BR: i feel letting every comment in this (or any) forum stay more than the fact that it exhibits the guts of the owner it shows to the world(at least the part of it which reads them) what others think. i feel its an exciting thing to come across diff POV for wat was considered uni-dimensional. it diversifies the thinking of the writer. and if the writer happens to be a novelist or a person who creates characters wont being exposed to all sorts of ppl give him/her a wider picture and pushes the envelope in his thinking space … afterall ppl who visit here includes creators (budding and established) and ppl like me who are curious onlookers 🙂
LikeLike
tejas
February 19, 2010
As a matter of fact, the SRK-Shiv Sena’s alleged “collaboration” over the MNIK issue is a huge debate outside the soft-talking ‘sensitive’ readers of BR’s blog. 😛
Raj’s point of view exists largely in our society. And you can brand it “good” or “bad”, but not ignore it.
Coming to the film –
I am quite unsure what people are finding so great about SRK’s acting. Take a bit of Rainman, a bit of Cuba Gooding Jr from Radio, a bit of Simple Jack and make him speak in broad accent like Forrest – and you have SRK. Does it automatically qualify as a restrained performance because so far we’ve had a hyper-active Shah Rukh in almost each movie?
LikeLike
Padawan
February 19, 2010
Just adding my two cents to it. Like NallaSivam says “idhu jananayagam saar, inga queue, vote podarthu ellam irukkum”. Completely agree with Baradwaj – these are a necessity in itself.
@Kaushik – An office colleague of mine refused to enter Tayyabs (http://www.tayyabs.co.uk/) because it was a Bangladesi or Pakistani restaurant or something like that. And they make the best Lamb Chops ever!
So, in short, onnum panna mudiyaadhu. The only thing that would be a crime is not to listen to A R Rahman’s music because he is a Muslim. So as long as it does not stoop down to such levels, we are happy with all the bashing!
@Baradwaj – Kannathil and Vettaikaran in the same line, even if it is to say “I am not comparing”. Enna villathanam!
LikeLike
brangan
February 19, 2010
tejas: Hey, who are you calling sensitive-within-quotes? 😉
About the performance, the “great” bit is all hype, but I stand by what I said: It’s endearing, and it provides an organic channel for his innate hyper-energy.
Padawan: Your talk of lamb chops reminded me of the Kafta bel Tahini I had once in the US — the best lamb dish I’ve ever had (needless to say, the restaurant was owned by a practitioner of the religion-that-shall-not-be-named) 🙂
PS: Today’s Hindu had an article about the “rare disease” funda that was discussed above.
PPS: and a letter to the paper…
hello sir
saw my name is khan and i will become a terrorist if i see movies like this. such a terrible bulshit movie!!
– vineeth
LikeLike
ramesh
February 19, 2010
The best lamb chops in the US are to be found here (exit 8 NJ turnpike in a days inn, of all places..pick NZ lambs) http://www.basilslegends.com/
The best lamb chops in the world are in the lebenese restaurants in wellington NZ.
youre welcome.
LikeLike
Kaushik
February 19, 2010
@Padawan – Maybe our friends are related by blood!
@rangan – You too Rangan! I mean, somehow, we all thought you are this nice little TamBram boy who played cricket in the bylanes of Mylapore, went to Kapaleeswarar temple/Madhava Perumal Kovil…lined up for Sakkarai Pongal and all that and now, lamb chops!
LikeLike
Ramesh
February 19, 2010
br sound more like a alwarpet cc, motorcycle on saturdays to silversands 5000, max muller bhavan vivekananda college tambram to me..
LikeLike
B.H.Harsh
February 19, 2010
Rangan : So You don’t really think this is one of SRK’s career best ? 🙂
LikeLike
aradhana
February 19, 2010
friends,r v nt suppose to go to watch bollywood movies leaving our intellect n reasoning at homes.we go dere fr entertainment.for knowledge we hv books.its a gud entertaining movie.
LikeLike
Rangan becomes Rediff
February 20, 2010
100 comments clap clap clap
LikeLike
Raj Balakrishnan
February 20, 2010
Well said Baradwaj. Pseudo-secular pseudo-liberals like Venkatesh talk about democracy but do not allow people who do not agree with their pseudo-secular-pseudo-liberal-NDTV-page 3 types-fashion show wallahs-talk show hosts views to express their opinion.
LikeLike
Raj Balakrishnan
February 20, 2010
MNIK is the biggest flop of SRK’s career. Read this link http://www.ibosnetwork.com/newsmanager/templates/template1.aspx?a=22050&z=4
LikeLike
truthteller
February 21, 2010
i think its a totally worthless review and u’ve just come up with this point of view to get comments or something which u’ve managed (even from me) ..coz its really strange that people can accept a movie like forrest gump and they cant accept a movie like mnik…its a really good movie and buddy u need to grow out of those typical bollywood masala flicks coz the new generation wants a more meaningful cinema..i think srk and kjo have done a great job and need to be patted on their backs rather than be rebuked by some random person like u..just sucks that i ever came across ur page..
LikeLike
John
February 23, 2010
As a paediatrician ( and a person who has worked with autist children),I find some of the comments about using medical disorders to characterise lead roles intresting.
Hoffmans act in Rain Man was near perfect :savants do have the same body language .SRK isnt half as gifted and Asperger’s gives him the license to be near normal but quirky enough to get an award of some sort. His ‘perfomance ‘ though while closely mirroring an autist isnt perfect ,but did you expect him to be? It remains a screenwriting tool to affect detachment and naivity and a producer’s one to bag a few awards.
Mohanlal’s recent act in Blessy’s Thanmatra as a pre senile dementia sufferrer came under a lot of criticism too:he was -clearly -playing an amnesiac ,but his signs(the external mannerisms that typify and inform a diagnosis) didnt fit that of Alzheimers (which is the dignosis offered in the film).I happened to query the director on the inaccuracy and his only response was that it was impossible to get Lal to do any ‘home work’ ,the latter preferring to ‘act by instinct’!
LikeLike
B.H.Harsh
February 23, 2010
John : You are right perhaps about the ‘quirky enough’ part. But do elaborate on this please..
“It remains a screenwriting tool to affect detachment and naivity and a producer’s one to bag a few awards.”
Please 🙂
LikeLike
John
March 1, 2010
Easily enough Harsh,
Child like cretins(derived interestingly from ‘Christ like’)hardly ever exist in the real world .It also conterintuitive to the purpose of the film that it requires a socially retarded/’abnormal’ Muslim to be the messiah and the messenger .You dont have to be socially retarded to be noble or just or a pacifist or detached or wise ( my prime exhibit James Stewart in Mr Chips goes to Washington ).There never is any real zeal in highlighting an affliction and its impact .Also in the bargain he gets his bum chum (no pun intended)to get an award for his ‘challenging’ portrayal .
Plus I’d already watched Forrest Gump and Ab Dilli Door Nahin!!
Was that vaguely elaborate enough?
LikeLike
dhruv
March 21, 2010
u r sucker 4 shahrukh br, n ull also be 1, just admit it
LikeLike
orkut themes
April 1, 2010
Awesome movie. I think 10 out of ten is small ratings for…Hats off! SRK rocks!
LikeLike
henrik
June 20, 2010
Nicely written. Don’t agree at all, but loved the last line of course!
LikeLike
ramitbajaj01
January 30, 2017
In his biography, Karan has admitted that he was trying to please critics with this movie.
BR sir, it’s interesting that you could tell the exact intention of the filmmaker from his movie. Nice. ( or perhaps, I shouldn’t have any doubts at the first place 😊)
LikeLike