Spoilers ahead…
Bejoy Nambiar likes slo-mo songs. His most sensational use of the technique came in the Khoya khoya chand sequence in Shaitaan. Guns were blazing. People were fleeing. The sequence had all the makings of a white-knuckle thriller, but the slo-mo made it something else. The most important aspect of a chase, time, was slowed down and, suddenly, there was a new element in the mix: mood. Instead of worrying about who will live, who will die, we were now being asked to savour the stretch, marvel at how something so horrible could also be so beautiful. Nambiar’s new film, Wazir, opens with a slo-mo song. It opens with mood. The frames are snapshots from the life of a couple – Anti-Terrorist Squad officer Danish (Farhan Akhtar) and Ruhana (Aditi Rao Hydari). As is inevitable in a film that clocks in at a mere 100-something minutes, many years of togetherness are compressed into this song – their wedding, the birth of their daughter – but the slo-mo makes us savour this togetherness, which is emphasised by the lyrics. Tere bin… marna nahin… jeena nahin tere bin. You may have heard a Foreigner song along the same lines: I don’t want to live without you.
The sequence is filled with the usual happy-family images – making silly faces for the camera, for instance – but also some unusual ones. I liked the touch that Ruhana is a dancer, and that she continues being a dancer after becoming a mother. (In other words, she isn’t reduced to knotting Danish’s tie as he leaves for work and asking her daughter to hurry up for school.) The usual happy-family image we get in these situations is that of the parents watching the child in a school play, but here, Danish and his daughter watch Ruhana on stage. The touch transforms Ruhana from “wife” and “mother” back to “woman” – at some level, she’s still the person for whom Danish began to memorize poetry, everything from Ghalib to Shakespeare. But after all this sunshine, there’s bound to be a tempest – it’s a big one. The child is killed. Danish blames himself. Ruhana blames him too. The lyrics of the song take on a new meaning. Earlier, it was about them. Now, it’s about their daughter. They don’t want to live without her.
At heart, Wazir is a domestic drama – there’s even some couples therapy. It’s also a sort of Badlapur where the father is afflicted with PTSD after the death of a child and looks for ways to heal. After Ruhana moves out, Danish finds a friend in Pandit Omkarnath Dhar (Amitabh Bachchan), another father with a tragic past. With Panditji too, we get flashes of togetherness – he speaks lovingly of his wife, of the song she loved, Aao huzoor tumko sitaaron mein le chaloon. He’d accept this invitation and join her in the heavens, but he’s still got something to do. Like Danish, he wants revenge. His target is a politician named Izaad Qureshi (Manav Kaul), in whose eyes he sensed guilt. It’s clearly not evidence that will hold up in court, but when Danish goes to interrogate Qureshi, he senses something is wrong. The man, in a former life, was supposedly a pashmina craftsman – you’d think he’d have delicate hands, but his handshake is like that of a mildly mad Bruce Banner. Maybe there’s a villain hulking underneath? At least, this is how Danish buys into Panditji’s plans. Or maybe, like the Varun Dhawan character in Badlapur, he just needs an outlet for all his rage. He feels a kinship with this fellow-sufferer: Yeh ladaai aapki thi. Ab hamaari hai.
Slowly, we slip into a different zone, and a sillier movie. Panditji is a chess player and the game is all over the place – in Panditji’s garden (a big ornamental chess piece), in Panditji’s shot glasses (which have miniature chess pieces inside them), and especially in Panditji’s lines (“Shatranj hota to haathi ghode daudte, kutte nahin!”). I half-expected a scene in which Panditji, while flipping channels, stumbles into Tabu singing Rook rook rook. Now, the game makes sense in a film like Sleuth, where two men are constantly trying to out-manoeuvre each other, but here, they’re both on the same side. This certainly does not warrant the wall-to-wall chess imagery. It’s a metaphor for something – only, no one seems to know what. (Maybe someone’s addicted to pawn?) And this weighs down the thriller portions, which seem half-hearted, something to get done with so that we get back to Danish and Ruhana. (After all, the film ends with a shot of them.)
Wazir is co-written by Vidhu Vinod Chopra, who, as he did in Mission: Kashmir, paints a Kashmiri backdrop. Panditji is one of many who fled the valley, and Qureshi belongs to the People’s Party of Kashmir. (The film gets some unexpected topicality with the recent demise of Mufti Mohammad Sayeed.) But the emotional beats were stronger in Mission: Kashmir, as the whole film dealt with the effects of war on an individual. Here, it’s just flavouring – Dal Lake Tadka. The leads almost make us buy it all. Farhan Akhtar plays a more sombre variation of the guy-next-door-if-you-forget-he’s-from-a-film-family character he’s made his own, except that he may want to work on his drunken scenes – you almost hear the hic! As for Bachchan, he keeps mixing it up – one part gruff-hamminess (you feel, between chess games, he’s still teaching a visually impaired Rani Mukerji) and one part restraint (watch him gaze at nothing in particular and shed a tear for the past). These two could probably make you watch a movie in which they did nothing but… play chess.
KEY:
- Shaitaan = see here
Copyright ©2016 Baradwaj Rangan. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
ssaiprasath
January 9, 2016
Spoiler Included: Don’t you feel that the word Shatranj was used way too much? No character in the movie calls it Chess. At some places it seemed fine but I just don’t think everyone calls it Shatranj all the time. It just looked off when Ruhani says so on stage or the scene when one of the top cops while closing his daughter’s case talks to Amitabh, using it as a metaphor. Or does no one call it Chess in North India anymore? Genuinely curious.
LikeLiked by 1 person
apex
January 9, 2016
Thanx BRan for this piece. Unfortunately WONT be watchin this one ..(have a long backlog including tamasha amongst other euro stuff ..)
Have a thing for tunes n music.. Heard bits of a few tracks which are in the “NOT BAD” category …
Now didn’t like this singer’s (don’t remember the name) ashiqui ‘hits’ but he’s got this crooning lilting style that’s repetitive but works sometimes (like it did in ‘galiyaan’ surpirisngly)..
Here I like the strrrettched out
“Tuuuuuu meerrrrreee meerrrreee saath rehnaaa”..
And the faint gunshot around 1.02 & 1:06–liked the sound effect.. ha these small things …
& then there are some tracks that are made JUST for the guitar lovers/addicts like me. This one is NO GREAT SHAKES but loved bachchans vocals at the start (before Farhan messes up with his misplaced ambition)
(Courtesy google)–This ones for B-Ran & the fellow bloggers here..
Yaari.. teri yaari
Chal maana iss baari
Saari meri fikrein
Tere aage aake haari
Hoo.. lagi mujhko teri bimaari…
LikeLike
badri
January 9, 2016
wasnt Danish the name of Amitabhs co-star in his previous outing too ??
LikeLike
jaga_jaga
January 10, 2016
I kind of disagree with the review that the thriller part is silly. The only glaring loophole is (SPOILER ALERT): why did Quereshi not kill the child?? Rest of it was all well in sync with the story. The metaphor with chess was bit overdone, but again pretty much like Shutter Island, if you have seen the movie once, and see it again – it all makes perfect sense!
LikeLike
Saurabh
January 10, 2016
Brangan wrote:
Slowly, we slip into a different zone, and a sillier movie. Panditji is a chess player and the game is all over the place. Now, the game makes sense in a film like Sleuth, where two men are constantly trying to out-manoeuvre each other, but here, they’re both on the same side. This certainly does not warrant the wall-to-wall chess imagery. It’s a metaphor for something – only, no one seems to know what. (Maybe someone’s addicted to pawn?)
The metaphor here is how a pawn – weakest piece in a chess game (Amitabh) promotes himself to a Queen – strongest piece in a chess game (Farhan), to kill the opposition king (minister).
I guess this is the problem most people would have with the movie. Based on this paragraph, my assumption is you don’t follow chess much (are probably just aware of the rules)
I am a big chess follower. Now overwhelmingly chess games at the highest level are decided by whose pawn promotes to queen first at the end of the game (obviously simplifying a bit). Why? Because at the highest level the strength of players are so equal, the whole strategy throughout the game is to build slight advantage in pawn positions and then in the end promote them to queen first before the other player can do it. And voila now you have a queen while the opposition just has a pawn. So in effect the pawn defeats a king by becoming a queen. I cant emphasize the importance of pawn promoting to queen in a chess game enough. At the highest level probably this is the essence of a chess game.
Lets talk about some technicality here. A pawn moves one step at a time up the chess board and once it reaches the last step at the opposite end of the chess board, it is taken out of the game and a queen is placed in place of it (literally replacing it).
Now given the above, I feel Wazir actually manages to encapsulate this beautifully (both in terms of essence of a chess game and technicality of the game) in the script. Amitabh, the pawn takes one step at a time (leaving his wallet, throwing his shoe, attacking himself etc) and the last step is where he is literally replaced by Farhan as far as the game is concerned (Amitabh, the pawn dies, Farhan, the queen literally replaces the pawn, fully prepared to take Amitabh’s revenge in the game: taking revenge from minister).
A very well written script as far as the above is concerned. Now what does not work for me is below:
a) The setup of the game is not clear. Its not clear that the game is Amitabh’s revenge from the minister. It appears that Farhan is the protagonist, but Farhan is the hero of the film. Amitabh being the protagonist of the story. In the film, the emotions are not invested in the Amitabh’s revenge story. After all its a pawn’s story who promotes himself to a queen to beat the king.
b) The beginning of friendship between Farhan and Amitabh does not work for me. This according to me is the key. This should have been established with great emotional impact.
c) The revenge scene where Farhan kills the minister is lazily executed. This is the situation/sequence the whole film is building towards. This is the point of the whole game – taking revenge from the opposition king. The release of the buildup does not happen because of the stupid execution (insipid/uninspiring)
d) I think the director is confused that the twist (revealing that Amitabh played the game) is the climax. But i feel killing the minister should have provided the release with the twist providing the icing on the cake.
e) The last 5 minutes where everything is explained is just stupid. A quick cutting montage should have finished it with energy. I could hear everyone shuffling around to get out.
So, in short, the confusion about whose story is it lets the film down. The films start with Daanish’s daughter getting killed and ends with Amitabh telling him how he tricked him into taking his revenge which does not make much sense (the minister was also indirectly involved in Daanish’s daughter death is incidental).
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
January 10, 2016
jaga_jaga: Actually, that’s not the only glaring loophole. (SPOILERS AHEAD) I was also annoyed by how casually the murder was explained away. It’s a big reveal, and as an audience member, I want to feel something for the girl who heard something she wasn’t supposed to and was then pushed down the stairs. I felt nothing.
You know, we may laugh at the older Bollywood films, but they at least spent time letting us KNOW characters before they offed them. This way, it all seems very remote.
Saurabh: Thanks so much for that. You’re right. I don’t know much about the game, so it’s great to get an insider view.
But even if the metaphor was aptly employed (wrt the script), I felt there were way too many things in the thriller portions that were not up to the mark. And as you say, the emotional impact was missing, which — as I say in the review — was stronger in Mission: Kashmir.
LikeLike
Rahul
January 10, 2016
ssaiprasath, I am from hindi heartland in north india and an avid chess follower. “Chess” and “Shatranj” are pretty much used interchangeably. Saying either of them is not even a minor eyebrow-raiser. Having said that, Bollywood dialogues have generally been more “urduized” than the day-to-day language, and using shatranj is more dramatically evocative than chess, owing to the metaphorical weight accorded to it by its use in popular culture; hence I think its an apt usage in the film.
LikeLiked by 1 person
jaga_jaga
January 10, 2016
Brangan: I completely agree with you, that barring Amitabh, Farhan, and to a small extent Aditi, the rest of the important characters were never really developed, for us to feel them. Given that the film duration was only about a hundred minutes, perhaps they could have included a few more scenes to enhance this “connectivity factor”. But is it a loophole which affects the logic behind the movie? I don’t think so. It just reduces the quality of the movie/makes it incomplete, but the logic is still sound, per me! The movie’s incompleteness also reminds me of Shanghai. Both these movies build up the tempo enough to keep you guessing. But just when we expect an all-time classic, all we get is a significantly diluted story – but the logic is still perfect.
If making love were an analogy, its like, the guy gets all the soft-core part spot-on. Lovely cuddles, kisses in the right places, romantic touches, and teasing grabs! So just as the partner expects a love-feast, our guy pulls out, and goes “Its all done. What are you still here for”?
Also, if you ever get some time, please do see Wazir, another time. It made so much more sense the second time.
LikeLike
brangan
January 10, 2016
jaga_jaga: By silly, I did not mean there was a lack of logic. More that it entered the ludicrous/preposterous zone, with scenes like John Abraham firing on his own men so that Farhan gets a few minutes with the villain. I mean, couldn’t they devise a more coherent scenario? It was all so half-heartedly and hastily done.
But wait, your analogy has become more interesting. So you know a guy who’d rather cuddle than do the thing that comes later? Is he called Yeti Unicorn, by any chance? 😛
LikeLiked by 2 people
sanjana
January 10, 2016
Saurabh’s explanation of the pawn moves is quite interesting. Most cinemagoers will miss that nuance. Unless watch the moves carefully and why chess is given so much importance.
LikeLike
Saurabh
January 10, 2016
My apologies for another long comment. I should shut up lest people put me in the company of …
In continuation of my first comment, I was trying to see how we could have had an emotionally satisfying experience. I tried to divide the movie into sequences to see what we need and in the end I try to arrange them in different order.
A: Amitabh normalcy. Then his wife gets killed and he is amputated. Afterwards his loving rel with his daughter and finally killing of his daughter. This sequence should clearly establish Minister as villain
B: Farhan’s normalcy. And then the subsequent killing of his daughter and the fight with terrorists where the terrorist is killed. Without letting us guess that the terrorist had any rel with the minister.
C: Amitabh and Farhan meet up by pure chance. And they strike a friendship. [This sequence should appear very genuine and realistic]
D: Amitabh and Farhan form a strong bond because of their mutual pain and love for chess. Amitabh helps Farhan improve his rel with his wife. Also, despite Amitabh’s desperate attempt, his case is closed and in the end he throws the shoe scene. [Strong emotional bonding should be an aim here.]
E: Wazir comes into picture and things escalate. Farhan increasingly gets involved given his close friendship + he is an ATS officer. Amitabh is killed. Farhan vows to find Wazir and extract revenge for the killing of Amitabh
F: Farhan weaves an intricate plot to reach to the minister who can tell him about Wazir. He executes the plan but instead of getting the info kills him because of a twist which reveals that the minister is responsible for the killing of his daughter. [This sequence should be high octane action sequence and should release all the tension that has build up so far. This sequence must be done well instead of how sloppily its done]
G: Slightly disappointed Farhan because he could not find Wazir. The twist at the end which reveals that meeting with Farhan and subsequent events was a game played by Amitabh and there is no Wazir. [This sequence should try to clearly establish the metaphor]
I think we can either cross-cut A&B and then linearly follow C to G.
OR, we can have A followed by C to G with B inserted as a flashback at some point (probably during D)
The advantage of both option is that Amitabh’s story is the anchor of screenplay and Amitabh is the protagonist of the story. Also we are emotionally invested in Amitabh’s story from the beginning. I think the twist would work better this way and the “theme” – how a pawn promotes himself to queen – will come out more forcefully and clearly. If sequence F done well would probably satisfy the emotional build up of the need for revenge.
LikeLike
jaga_jaga
January 10, 2016
Brangan: Entirely agree, that was very superficial!
Yeti Unicorn – haha! More like, Quick-Gun Murugan I guess! So, my point was not that the guy prefers the cuddling part, he rather thinks, he is providing a full-blooded hard-core action (like perhaps this movie maker), But alas, after all the effort spent on the initial maneuvers, the final thrust became such a damp, and flaccid squib, which should have instead been a thunderous bolt, if I may say so!
LikeLike
Naveen
January 11, 2016
BR has been graceful to Wazir. i had a sense of “let down by the director” that i felt at the end of Shamitabh too. felt that the “querishi demolition” episode was very silly, like something out of a Sunny Deol or Vijayakanth movie against “foreign terrorist”. that part and the “recorded message from the Pandit” part did enough (irreversible and inconsolable) damage to everything else in the film.
Farhan probably desisted from reading the full screenplay in the awe of working with the Big B.
LikeLike
chenab35
January 12, 2016
More than the whole film, the film ending disappointed me a lot. I felt that they should not have revealed the suspense… left it without a closure. Apart from that I could accept whatever the film threw at me (spoilers) – the illogical scene where Danish shoots at terrorists perfectly even after having sleeping pills, him not even having an iota of doubt on Amitabh’s character etc.
But still the film had its appealing moments – wife not talking with Danish after a real life incident, Amitabh’s characterisation (the way he copes with grief) …All having “real life” structure spoiled by a so-so
screenplay.
Some ‘smart’ thrills which I liked – the little girl not being the minister’s daughter, killing of the minister by Danish (cool mix of style and thrills).
Anyways, cheers to Bejoy for his effort but agree more with your title.
LikeLike
tonks
January 13, 2016
I wanted to put up a tribute to David Bowie somewhere. Chose this post because though unrelated, it at least references another eighties group. This song where he accompanies Freddie Mercury in an Acapella version, showcases both their amazing vocals :
LikeLiked by 2 people
JPhil
January 13, 2016
Just some frothy trivia: the first song (tere bin..) you mention was written by Vinod Chopra himself. He co-wrote the script with his usual associate Abhijat Joshi. Clearly Joshi’s output with Hirani seems to be a notch better-Munnabhai, 3I and PK ,considering he also wrote Kareeb and Eklavya and Broken Horses. Wazir -for me-had some of the brooding atmospherics of Eklavya but didn’t touch me as much. Also keeping on the trivia track, I remember Aditi Hydari’s interview where she states that she was made to specifically dance for the audition by Vinod Chopra-clearly they were quite focussed on how the character should come across.
LikeLike
NeDhaPa
January 13, 2016
Tonks, that was tear jerker. No one like Freddie. True showman. True talent.
LikeLike
tonks
January 13, 2016
True. But this song is David Bowie’s too. A link to how it came about, if you are interested :
http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/brian-tells-how-david-bowie-7161073
LikeLiked by 1 person
NeDhaPa
January 14, 2016
Thats incredibly sweet of Brian. Though do read the comment below the article 😉 🙂
also ” fact it didn’t get mixed until a few weeks later in New York.
That’s a whole different story, but I wasn’t there, so all I know is that Freddie and David had different views of how the mix should be done, and the engineer didn’t completely know how the studio worked! So it ended up as a compromise … a quick rough monitor mix.”
LikeLike
Utkal
January 14, 2016
Just saw the film. I think to call it a silly thriller’ is grossly unfair. I dont think it was meant to be a ‘thriller’. It is just a ‘story’…a concept story, like something by Roald Dahl. And it was a pretty good story, very well told… one of the rare Hindi films that tells a well-rounded story without any flab , without any compromises. I normally find VV Chopra’s writing efforts bombastic and pretentious. But he redeeemed himself fabulously here. No wonder he was at pains to underscore ‘An Orginal Story by…” at many points in the credit titles.
LikeLike
Utkal
January 14, 2016
For quite some time now I have been reading short stories, listening actually, from audio recordings, and marvelling at the pleasure they offer, in terms of precision of craft, beauty of language, and a strong, concentrated impact. ‘Wazir’ is that rare Hindi film that offers such a pleasure…of a good story well told, without distraction, without flab, leaving behind a delectable aftetaste.
Director Bijoy Nambiar wastes no time in getting the story off the ground. It opens with a moody song shot in slow-mo which takes us through the marriage of Anti-Terrorist Squad officer Danish and Ruhana , the birth of their daughter Noorie and their happy life together. The family is on their way to a dance performance of Ruhana when Dansih gives a chase to a fugitive terrorist, leading to Noorie getting killed. Ruhana blames Dansih for it. Danis too is racked by guilt. Quickly enough, we encounter the next turn in the tale, when Danish meets wheel-chair bound Pandit Omkarnath Dhar who too is trying to come to terms with loss, especially the death of his daughter in the house of a minister Izaad Qureshi.
And then magic unfolds on screen.
If you want to attend a masterclass in acting, you have to watch Amitabh Bachchan slip into the role of Pandiji and watch the play of myriad expressions on his face, and listen to every line – some sad, some playful, some angry, some indulgent, some a drunken slur – delivered with precise voice control and a cadence that is his own. Frahan Akhtar is an adequate foil holding up his angst and anger-ridden persona quite consistently in a largely one-note role. The relationship that emerges between the two is the touching undercurrent that powers the film. While talking of performances, one must mention Manav Kaul and Aditya Rao Hydari who leave a mark with their performance and presence as Quershi and Ruhana respectively.
And there is the story.
I must confess here that I usually find Vidhu Vinod Chopra’s writing efforts – from Kareeb to Eklavya – quite pretentious and unbearable, containing the germ of a high concept but lacking in satisfactory execution. But here he seems to have redeemed himself fabulously, with a little help from Abhijat Joshi and Bijoy Nambiar perhaps. No wonder he insists on underscoring ‘An Original Story by…’ at many points of the credit titles.
Here is a story that is well-rounded with many threads and nuances coming together seamlessly and amply justifying the film’s title. It does not require a deep knowledge of chess to appreciate the central construct of the film’s theme – just a passing acquaintances with the basic rules of the game, which anyone who has played chess should know. The rule relevant to the film, known as ‘ Promotion’, allows a pawn ( Piada) to be exchanged for any other piece, including the most powerful Queen ( Wazir) when it reaches the last row or the 8th rank, most often changing the course of the end game. That’s how a ‘piada’ or pawn can challenge a king or ‘badshah’. Without giving anything further away, I can quote just one line by Panditji, “ Mere paas pair nahin, hathyar nahin, main kya karta? ” The whole trajectory starting from Danish finding the wallet of Panditji at the burial site of Noorie is well-etched, the only bit that does not fully convince being the recorded voice of the Wazir. The plot invention is simple and some may be able to guess it well before it is revealed, but no one being able to guess what is coming has never been a big deal for me in a story. It is about how beautifully things fit together in the end. And the simple central plot device here is enriched by my many sub-strands of relationships and moments, making it a rich enough tapestry.
Read the rrest at : http://utkaleidoscope.com/wazir/
LikeLike
Anuj
January 15, 2016
Wazir is a one time watch only & only for Amitabh Bachchan’s on screen brilliance. Read my review on :
http://thesimplemoviereviewer.blogspot.in/2016/01/wazir-movie-review-movie-does-not-match.html
LikeLike
Black Dynamite
January 18, 2016
The twist made no damn sense, couldn’t he just tell Farhan Aktar to kill the guy. It was ridiculous, don’t even put a twist in, that would be better. The marketing for this movie was also very pretentious.
LikeLike
kaavy
January 18, 2016
Well a fine plagiarized version of the English TV series … ENDGAME.
LikeLike
Utkal
January 19, 2016
Black Dyanamite: “couldn’t he just tell Farhan Aktar to kill the guy.”
And he would oblige? My my!
LikeLike
Deepak
January 20, 2016
The Wazir twist was something I guessed from the time the character was introduced so in effect, I was watching the movie for a second time as I was able to catch most of the hidden nuances. I found the movie to be quite entertaining and a good start to the year for Bollywood. The ending wasn’t as great as what was promised but the overall gains were higher I felt.
I found it quite funny that they put in John Abraham for a special appearance and then put this gymmed up hulk of a dude behind a computer for the most part.
Apart from this, I had the same feeling about Amitabh that I had while watching Harrison Ford during Force Awakens. Some actors are so magnetic that whenever they are on screen, the director could replace all other actors with sock puppets and it wouldn’t make a difference to the movie. Amitabh inhabits the character with so much heart that all the other flaws don’t seem to matter. You just want the character to get the justice he deserves. Pure magic, yaara!
LikeLike
Kayaar
January 25, 2016
It is great to read the review and all the comments. It is really enriching. I concur with the view that it had a great premise and great actors, but was a bit of a let-down in the end. I felt that some aspects needed to be strengthened such as: 1) The relationship between the chess-playing characters is critical a key element since Panditji choses to use Daanish as HIS pawn and Daanish is grateful (?) for Panditji’s entry and that he’s willing to be emotionally drawn into his battle (not withstanding his sense of duty as a member of ATS) in a very short span of time. Personally, I felt that despite whatever elements were already in the movie regarding this relationship could have been shown a bit stronger. 2) The need and use of Daanish as a pawn is explained away by Panditji’s loss of legs, but it didn’t come across that this really impaired the Panditji in any way. He seemed well-off, quite mobile with his motorized wheelchair, customized van, access to small bombs and booby traps, voice modifiers etc. AND easy access to the Minister through his daughter. And finally, he was also quite willing to blow himself up. Hence, was there such elaborate contrivance necessary? While his pain and angst is well-placed, his modus-operandi seemed silly to me. A slight modification of a not so-well to-do Panditji, truly imprisoned in his home, using Daanish as his pawn would have seemed more convincing.
LikeLike
R
February 9, 2016
Wow! read about people mentioning Freddie Mercury in two different threads…
thought this blog is only for movie buffs…
although shame that there is no nested comments option…
felt like spending time at the barber shop of the eighties in chennai…
தினத் தந்தி, ஆனந்த விகடன், குமுதம், வாராந்திரி ராணி, Sunday and occasional fashion magazines with left over pages after using to dispose off the shaving cream…
wonderful…
LikeLike