Spoilers ahead…
Abhishek Chaubey’s Udta Punjab opens with trees swaying in the breeze at night, topped by a handful of stars. The calm composition is held for a while, but soon, light from a motorcycle pierces this idyll. The sound too. Three men are on the bike. “Packet nikaal,” someone says. You think they’re going to do drugs, but a man who’s gotten off the bike begins to limber up, like an athlete. Just what is going on? The background, so far filled with sounds of nature, begins to throb with a high-pitched electronic squeak. And then, the man on the ground takes the packet and, in the style of a discus thrower, launches it into the sky. I laughed at the near-surrealism – the packet freezes in mid-air, and the film’s title appears on it. It’s a literal image of “udta Punjab,” even though the scene lends itself to metaphors. For instance, a serene paradise invaded, desecrated. The electronic squeaks grow louder and form a sonic bridge to a very different scene. Night gives way to eye-blinding light. Silence gives way to ear-splitting sound. We land at the venue of a concert by Tommy (Shahid Kapoor) – he’s high on drugs, and he’s singing about getting high on drugs. Over the song, we see rich kids snorting up in posh nightclubs, we see poor men in shacks shooting up, we meet the cop Sartaj (Diljit Dosanjh), we meet the rehab doctor Preet (Kareena Kapoor). In just about five minutes, various departments of cinema – sound, cinematography, music, writing, editing – have nutshelled the premise, the characters from various social classes (the fourth, a Bihari migrant worker played by a tanned Alia Bhatt, picks up the packet as it lands). The audience needs no drugs. The filmmaking is its own high.
Nothing in the rest of the film lives up to the inventiveness and economy of this opening stretch, but the closing half-hour is impressive too. A victim of the drug trade, being held prisoner, attempts to escape. A metal rod – used as a clothes hanger, probably – is yanked off a wall and plunged into the captor. Over the jab-jab-jab of this violence, Amit Trivedi stabs us with staccato bursts of sound – the music does to us what’s being done to the man. (Trivedi’s songs are beautifully integrated into the story, but it’s the background score that stands out, forsaking musicality for mood, melodic passages for ambient sound.) In another magnificent scene, Tommy finds himself in a police lockup, in front of a man who has some information he needs. Small catch: the man has recognised him, and he won’t spill unless Tommy sings. Outside, cops have discovered that the door is latched from the inside, and they begin to push. Over the sound of the rattling latch, Tommy begins to sing. He sings like he’s never sung before. The man is transfixed. And we note that the cops outside are too – the rattling has stopped. It restarts only when Tommy finishes and flees.
Between the magical five minutes that open the film and the lyrical half-hour that closes it, we’re left wondering: “What happened to all the magic and poetry?” We form expectations about a film based on who’s making it, who’s producing it, who’s in it – and I expected something with a strong indie vibe, something like the gravely affecting Miss Lovely, which took us into a strange and seedy world (soft-porn filmmaking) through offbeat characters and situations, making us feel for these unfortunates even as we felt repelled by them and thanked heaven we weren’t them. It’s not Chaubey’s job to deliver on my expectations, of course, but he heads off in a bafflingly mainstream direction. The punishingly long Udta Punjab is the equivalent of a self-important IAS candidate’s over-earnest essay, Punjab’s Children: Victims of Narco Trade. (I didn’t make this title up. We see this essay being typed up on Preet’s computer screen.)
I suppose the intent was to make something like Traffic, with multiple storylines laying out the magnitude of a malaise, but a majority of Udta Punjab comes across like an information dump. Punjab will soon become like Mexico, where there are no cops, only druglords. The cops in Punjab are complicit, taking commissions and letting through trucks carrying drugs. If you’re an addict, you take to wearing sunglasses even at home. Every scene screams, “We did all this research and we’re going to share it all with you.” Everything is spelt out in dialogues. It isn’t enough that the Alia Bhatt character (in a gimmicky conceit, she remains unnamed) looks longingly at a billboard that positions Goa as an exotic holiday destination – she also gets a scene where she talks to Tommy about this billboard, about her dream of going to Goa. It isn’t enough that Tommy brandishes a gun at his uncle (Satish Kaushik, who’s terrific), and we register that withdrawal from drugs can induce as much bizarre behaviour as taking them – we also get the follow-up, with the uncle explaining that such bizarre behaviour is only to be expected when withdrawing from drugs. Poor Kareena Kapoor gets the worst deal. She’s the mouthpiece for the film’s PSAs. I nearly fell off my chair when she said, “Drugs are taken by one person, but the impact falls on the whole family.” Lady, you don’t say! And we need Phantom Films for this?
I come back to the icky thing about expectations, but after all the fuss with the Censor Board, I thought the edge factor was off the charts – so imagine my surprise when I caught myself sitting through the most sanskaari drug movie ever. Karma is everywhere. The cop who turned a blind eye to drug use in his state is punished when his brother turns out to be an addict, to the same substance that went past him in trucks. The person who decides to sell drugs is punished, turned into an addict for even thinking of doing something this heinous. And the singer who endorses drug use is shown the error of his ways. One scene, and he’s a changed man. His eyes open as if shown God’s light, and he seeks redemption for getting kids hooked on to drugs by freeing someone from drugs. He gets the film’s most awful line. When escaping from angry fans, he takes refuge in a dilapidated mansion (which may be a metaphor for something; almost everything in this film is), where someone asks, “Kisse bhaag raha hai?” He replies, “Apne aap se.” Didn’t Zeenat Aman’s druggie offer some version of this line four decades ago in Hare Rama Hare Krishna? And the inevitable question follows: What, apart from the admittedly gorgeous filmmaking, is new?
But yes, the filmmaking is gorgeous. Most of the characters are just abstracted pawns in the film’s grand drug-exposé design, generic representations of various facets of the drug trade rather than specific people, with specific inner lives – but the flashes of character, when they do arrive, are wonderful. Sartaj’s druggy declaration of interest in Preet is a marvellously woozy moment, and the way the Alia Bhatt character’s past is revealed through an action scene is pure genius. Throughout, the link between her and Tommy is foreshadowed through the editing, which cuts from her astonished face (on realising the money she stands to make by selling drugs) to his stunned face (finding himself in prison), or from a shot of her in water (a hallucination that also links to Goa) to him in a swimming pool. Chaubey belongs to the Vishal Bhardwaj school, and his detailing is impressive, immersive, with unexpected links cross-stitching the narrative canvas. When Tommy reveals his name to the Alia Bhatt character, she asks if he’s a dog – a later scene between them actually involves a dog. You feel like clapping and throwing someone a bone.
Udta Punjab follows films like Shanghai, where a top-notch cast and crew cannot disguise the truth that the underlying material, all these revelations, are so banal – and the banality is heightened by the surrounding aspirations to High Art. Scenes with barely anything interesting in them are allowed to go on and on, with dialogues that are distractingly “writerly.” And for all the Manmohan Desai-like coincidences, with people stumbling into each other, the film is too high-minded to simply entertain. Tommy’s search for a missing person has shades of a detective story, and the Sartaj-Preet duo’s snooping around is reminiscent of the great films about investigative journalism – but there are no thrills, no rush. Scenes are prolonged till all the juice in them evaporates. Tommy is fired by his recording company, and then he throws a tantrum on the road, and then he sees the recording-company executives in the car that pulls up alongside, and then there’s a chase, and then there’s a surprise birthday party, and then the cops come… At some point, between all the sermons and the self-righteousness, I felt like echoing what Tommy’s fans say when, instead of singing, he lapses into a maudlin account of his misguided life. Gaana ga, ya vaapas ja.
The cast saves the film to an extent. Shahid Kapoor plays Tommy as a cartoony bunny rabbit whose every expression is an exclamation point – you don’t take him seriously for a second, but it’s entertaining to see him push himself into this weird zone, strands of dyed hair flailing about like limp pasta. Kareena Kapoor embodies what Sartaj says about her: dignity. I wished she’d had at least a moment or two to cut loose, or at least lose the halo. Diljit Dosanjh is a quiet marvel – he shows us a man of limited intelligence without making him stupid. Alia Bhatt isn’t as convincing here as she was in Highway, her other film where she broke expectations of what an actress like her should be seen doing on screen, but then, her character doesn’t have that much of an arc here. Still, she makes us care. As with the others, she does more for the movie than the movie does for her.
KEY:
- Udta Punjab = Punjab is high.
- Packet nikaal = take out the packet
- sanskaari = traditional
- “Kisse bhaag raha hai?” = Who are you running from?
- “Apne aap se.” = From myself.
- Shanghai = see here
- Gaana ga, ya vaapas ja. = sing, or get lost.
- Highway = 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.
Ajay Nair
June 19, 2016
The BGM is done by Naren Chandavarkar and Benedict Taylor.
I wholeheartedly agree on the Shanghai reference.
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
June 19, 2016
Ajay Nair: Oh, my bad. Thanks for the correction.
LikeLike
P
June 19, 2016
I generally hate and I re-iterate HATE the sense of life depicted in all of Vishal Bharadwaj and Anurag Kashyap’s movies (though I adore their characters) but this time with this man I loved the sense of life too. I loved everything about it, though I hated the ugly world they inhabited, they still had ideals, and morals and values and dreams.
If that makes them too boring or pedestrian for you or for most people, I am glad that the movie chose not to please you 🙂
LikeLiked by 3 people
Saket
June 19, 2016
Don’t think there’s just one scene that changes Tommy Singh. From the very beginning he’s shown to be going through a crisis of sorts (he’s lost his mojo, for want of a better word) and after the brief stint in a jail cell where he sees firsthand the effect of his music (also his lifestyle?), he’s thrown deeper into chaos.
Just before he shoots Satish Kaushik, he wishes to run away from it all (abandon the concert where he eventually breaks down) and move to London. He’s not transformed by this point. It’s only when he sees Alia Bhatt’s character and gets to know about her fate that he finds some of his spirit back. He’s inspired by her to stage a turnaround in his own life.
I’ve seen the film twice by now and can appreciate the finer details much better. I also don’t think the film is banal. Requiem For a Dream this isn’t, but it’s not Shanghai either…
LikeLiked by 1 person
An Jo
June 19, 2016
Benedit Taylor is Radhika Apte’s boyfriend. Ilena De’Cruz is going steady with an Australian Kneebone. Preity is happy with a Goodenough husband.
Never has the short, Indian, middle-class, balding due to IT-deadline stress, but quite happy blogging with Pyaasa or Rockstar music playing alongside been threatened with paucity of women-folk as the mandatory muse…..
LikeLiked by 4 people
Vikram s
June 19, 2016
BR, I wanted to like the film…but ended up liking Shahid Kapoor & Alia Bhat’s performances…I agree with you on Kareena Kapoor getting the most poorly written role…to my annoyance, I noticed her foraying into ‘Jab we Met’ cute Punjabi territory…and the use of cuss words.. I guess the makers were trying to tell us how cool they are….and lastly…while there was detailing and nuance on one hand…there was broad brush stroke oversimplification as well…
LikeLiked by 1 person
rahulandrd
June 19, 2016
You are complaining about over explaining things in movie- clearly you are also not aware of literacy and education in Punjab. This Movie is meant to understood by common man esp from Punjab and hence lot of Punjabi too.
A man who made whole movie about and around Urdu Poetry, dont you think he must have done this deliberately?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Garvit
June 19, 2016
Thanks,Mr Rangan for explaining the banality of the movie. I also got the same feeling with Shanghai where I loved the movie but felt an emptiness to my attitude towards it at the same time. The characterisation in Shanghai was top-notch but somehow it felt as if the protagonists of different class,ideology and administrative responsibility did not meet organically though they were involved in the same case. The hesitation in their interaction but fear of crossing the line for strangers did not amplify enough. But still, Shanghai had a certain deceit to it and the night curfew scene with Emraan was innovative and heartbursting at the same time.
I would recommend everyone to download background score of Shanghai from soundcloud which is different from film songs,the finest piece of dhol music you have ever heard and then go through Shanghai with a mood of enhanced practice that has been rendered through the background score.
Coming to Udta Punjab the movie stands out among mainstream movies but is disappointing by the standards of Bhardawaj-Kashyap school. That scene where the two mother-killing druggies burst into dhum-dhum-pichak was if Haider had settled into a jail in Punjab. Also it is for the first time ,I think that Chaubey steps out of Nawabi dialogues zone of Ishqiya into desi-Punjab and has problem indigenous-izing his quirky dialogues to the Punjabi setting. Also,the destruction,doom and social penetration due to drug menace has not been elaborated but pointed towards. I think the focus here is not to send the audience with a heavy heart but a conscious one.
There is one aspect where Chaubey has again hit home run, strong feminine characterisation of Mary Jane Bhatt. He has given the strongest dialogues, indomitable spirit of carrying on,never giving up to Bhatt and she has again packed a punch much above her weight. At last, Chaubey shines through again with a Hindi-heartland character.
LikeLike
brangan
June 19, 2016
rahulandrd: A man who made whole movie about and around Urdu Poetry, dont you think he must have done this deliberately?
Whether he did it deliberately or not is a question of authorial intent, which I have no way of knowing. Also, why should I care? I can only respond to the movie from my POV, no? If the state of Punjab is thrilled with this film, I’m happy for Chaubey.
Also: This Movie is meant to understood by common man…
But this line of thinking is weird, no? Then we can begin justifying all kinds of films saying “… but this is made with the masses in mind.”
LikeLiked by 4 people
An Jo
June 19, 2016
Jejus BR Sir: I would be accused of plagiarizing here..the first para at-least. The APA clearly says that whoever publishes first, wins. It doesn’t matter the time when ideas materialized in your head. Trust me, I didn’t plagiarize..I wrote this by the pool at 4 AM EST on Saturday..
Thanks for letting this comment pass, and thanks even if it doesn’t pass..
http://www.bollybrit.com/reviews-blog/film-review-udta-punjab
LikeLike
Jaga_Jaga
June 19, 2016
Perhaps part of the reason why brangan calls the film banal, is partly/more fully attributed to his ignorance of the Punjabi culture, and how he misses almost all the great details thrown in-between? Vaguely writing in one sentence about how the director pays attention to details while listing the film as being banal, isn’t justice to this movie per me.
Some such culture related details which do not make this movie banal, and rather offers a strikingly profound tone, as I see (lots of spoilers await you fellow readers):
The import of family in Punjabi culture – family members WILL shield you from murder. Literally. That family relatives can get you a job, can help you go abroad, do shit for you, and so-on. Yet they can not shield the youngsters of their own younger family members from this drug menace. That’s how bad the situation really is today’s Punjab.
More on the family links – anyone familiar with Punjab politics can just not miss, the obvious connection between “family culture” and “akali dal” culture. In the name of being one family, the akali dal and those heading it have been directly/indirectly responsible for the decay of a vast populace of contemporary Punjabi youth.
The reality faced by immigrant workers in Bihar/UP – almost everyone who gets beaten up is a poor soul in search of a better future from these parts. Be it the lorry driver who gets to face Satraj’s wrath or poor Alia.
Without listing them as facts (which might sound documentary-like) there is no other way to put across how exactly do drugs get infiltrated into Punjab. Assuming the director had this in mind, it was the best way to communicate about the effect drugs have. And what else can Kareena tell Sartaj – who happily ignores the potential harm the drugs can offer his own family, while getting happily bribed. Of course only that “Listen buddy, drugs will mess with your family too”. Why is this listed as being a banal dialogue??
Alia getting repeat-raped upstairs, while there is an old woman downstairs who just goes on with normal life. What a brilliant allusion to what people do to Punjab? Trite by any means? I guess not!
Tommy Gabru Singh = Yo Yo Honey SIngh. Do I need say more??
One last point about the profundity in this movie – the guy who is supposed to be in-charge of the drug-godown or whatever it is, he is himself deeply drugged. This is the Punjab of today.
Thus I firmly disagree with Brangan about this movie being banal by and large.
Yet I do have problems with this movie:
Editing was bad! Could have cut about half an hour.
Editing was bad – could have actually added about half-an-hour. I know this might mean 3 full hours. But hey, if a few more characters were given more life – Kareena for example, making that shoot-out scene more organic for example, and clean-up that very amateurishly shot Satraj-Kareena investigation part.
Brangan is actually right about banality in certain scenes – Kareena and Satraj hopping onto a motorcycle with the keys ready for them to escape out of the drug-godown- what the hell man. Tommy escaping from the hospital by jumping from the first floor and nothing happening to him, but trained policemen unable to do the same gimmick. I hope Hari/Arasu were not hired on-lease to direct these parts.
I understand the Shanghai connotation made by Brangan. But that holds good only for the climax, where too much happens too soon, and you’re like Bainchod what the fuck did just happen (pardon the language – this is what happens after you see this movie!). Rest of this movie had an incredible feel about it, but Shanghai did not.
LikeLiked by 2 people
brangan
June 19, 2016
An Jo: It’s really not that big a deal. It is the opening shot after all, and a very distinctive one at that. I’m sure many people noticed it 🙂
LikeLike
Jaga_Jaga
June 19, 2016
Actually I forgot to add another point refuting Brangan’s claims of banality.
Even if it is just one scene which was used to bring about the transformation in Tommy, that was no ordinary scene. It shows two kids nonchalantly and without-an-iota of guilt that they killed their mommies because she wouldn’t give them money for drugs; thus disabling them from following the footsteps of their almighty Gabru.
If that is not enough – that your followers can kill their mommies becuase she wouldn’t allow them to follow you; for someone transforming, what else is?????
LikeLiked by 3 people
brangan
June 19, 2016
Jaga_Jaga: I bring back the point I have made several times I have made in this comments space. Films aren’t about whether something is possible. They are about whether something is plausible. In other words, the important question is not “Can this happen?” but “Is the film convincing me that this can happen?”
The latter question was never answered satisfactorily for me.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jaga_Jaga
June 19, 2016
Brangan – For me, all the bigger-picture aspects sounded pretty convincingly depicted – all of this could happen in Punjab definitely. There were a few details here and there which did not sound plausible. But they did not affect the storyline much, as I see.
In particular, about Tommy’s transformation, he is throughout the movie, an emotional hot-mess. I see impulse as being the force behind his transformation, not thorough logic. And for showing this, one scene was enough, according to me.
LikeLiked by 3 people
rkjk
June 20, 2016
I went in expecting something like “Trainspotting”, but got something like “Rang de Basanti”. I groaned so hard during the disclaimer at the beginning and those “salute the brave people of Punjab” fonts at the end.
This movie would have worked much better had it just told the story of the lives of these characters without much reference to Politicians,Police etc etc. A microcosm of the state of Punjab, so to speak. It was puzzling that the script was so bold (Alia Bhatt getting drugged and raped repeatedly, the kiddo killing Preet Sahni), yet the film is harping on about the drug menace and how it is killing Punjab, as if it isn’t self evident.
Watching a movie like Trainspotting, you get the feeling that the makers (director, writer) were just jaded with the situation in Scotland and adopted a ” This is the shit that happens in our country now, Deal with it” attitude. That would have worked so well with Udta Punjab. Something tells me they would not have had to deal with the Censor Board had they made everything implicit.
. To be fair, except Kareena Kapoor, none of the characters in the movie are clean. And the film-making as you said is excellent. But given the subject matter and that stunning Amit Trivedi Soundtrack, so much more could have been done.
Now, Just like in “PK”, the Indian Public will watch this, praise it to the skies, pat themselves on their backs for doing their bit for society , the media will get its money’s worth, the politicians will just brazen it out. The Aamir Khan model of business. The guy , I guess, has got it down to a formula.
Then again, the makers are not fools. Maybe this is exactly what they intended. When Aamir Khan has repeatedly demonstrated that money can be milked this way by adopting the holier-than-thou SJW stance, why not us? .
LikeLike
Saket
June 20, 2016
I’ve outlined above why it’s not just one scene that’s responsible for Tommy’s transformation…but even if it’s just one scene, what’s wrong with that? Is there an unwritten rule that says there ought to be at least 3 scenes before a major transformation makes sense?
Not being argumentative here…just thinking out loud! We do encounter ‘aha’ or ‘eureka’ moments from time to time that potentially can change our lives. Why question the logic of such a structure on celluloid?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Swaroop Kodur
June 20, 2016
I completely agree with your judgement and the term ‘sanskaari’ is fitting. The film rather becomes a cause and effect tale which you do not expect from our “matured” directors. The writing is honestly below par. For instance, why couldn’t Tommy Singh and his gang be not buffoons but a bunch of ignorant people? They could be ill-informed but I am sure they would take themselves and their craft seriously. The film on the other hand makes their being a gag, with no life in them whatsoever (Tommy’s brother for example). The Kareena-Diljit angle seems redundant right from the beginning. There isn’t a need nor any clarity. And yet another Indian film that justifies love as the only bridge.
Shahid Kapoor stood out for me. He has an exaggerated demeanor but makes it seem very natural and endearing. The movie could and should have been about him more than anything else because he is the pivotal point to every other strata. But the writers choose to a make him the victim, which is the problem because there are either completely good or dead wrong people throughout. Traffic works because the Soderbergh chose to be objective. Udta Punjab however takes it as a responsibility to deal with the problem.
LikeLike
rnjbond
June 20, 2016
You know, as an NRI who had almost ZERO clue as to the drug problem in Punjab, all the details really helpful for me. I was really impressed with how accurate the details in the movie were (at least according to all the reading I’ve done after seeing the film). The movie definitely wasn’t perfect (editing was one area that could have been better — some segments moved too slowly, others felt too rushed), but I’d rank it as the top film this year.
LikeLike
rnjbond
June 20, 2016
Also, I do think it’s worth noting how much Shahid Kapoor’s character is a critique of Honey Singh. Just in case the references were too subtle, in the scene where he starts singing “Coke Cock,” he opens up “Vah Vah Tommy Singh”
LikeLike
Utkal
June 20, 2016
I think the transformation through one scene was absolutely convincng and artstically apt. The scenbe by itself packed so much into it . That is how you how you dramatize things in real life of many years to a film or theatre of a couple of hours. There might have been four other incidents and months of process. But you do not have t show them. In the dramaturgy .employed that one incident is enough and utterly convincing as the trigger of transformation.
LikeLike
brangan
June 20, 2016
Saket: Actually, the film positions that one scene as the big awakening, which I am fine with in theory. But I wasn’t convinced. That is what I am talking about when I say plausibility. The film did not convince me. The characters did not convince me.
Swaroop Kodur: The film rather becomes a cause and effect tale which you do not expect from our “matured” directors.
Yes, this is what I was most surprised about, and also what I wrote about in that “expectations” para. Everything was so mainstreamed, straightforward, conveyed through dialogue. You expect this sort of stuff in a latter-day Prakash Jha movie, maybe. But strip away the good craft and good bits of writing, and we’re left with a banal PSA-ish movie, with no investment in the journey (external or internal) of the characters (at least for me).
LikeLiked by 1 person
xsxsx
June 20, 2016
One way Requiem for a dream ruined it for Udta Punjab is how they are unable to use any substantial narrative device as powerful as the close-up montage to show the moment the drug enters the system , without yielding comparisons to Requiem for a dream. A close-up to eye doesn’t even cut it.
LikeLike
Arijit
June 20, 2016
As regards the question of banality and information overload I would think that would mostly apply to the good Samaritan doctor-bad cop/good cop angle…that part was perhaps the most “filmy” of all the angles as well but I would tend to think that was deliberately done to lay out the different nexus that allow the drug trade to thrive…it was perhaps somewhat more overstated and underlined than required but at the same point of time relevant information wrapped up in easy theatrics…as regards the immigrant laborer and the drug fueled rock star angles I didn’t find anything unnecessary or banal…if you notice clearly what the director has done is taken well established images of Punjab-i way of life as shown in previous Hindi films and turned them upside down into grotesque scenarios…the effect of drugs on the different social hierarchies, the different hierarchies present in Punjabi society, treatment of women, migrant laborers and so on and so forth…I don’t think this aspect has come out very clearly in any previous mainstream film and the director deserves kudos for that…
LikeLiked by 2 people
P
June 20, 2016
The amount of jaded comments. Wow. Its shocking. But I should have expected it
Yes, Abhishek Chaubey, how could you choose a side? How could you show buffoons for what they are- buffoons? How could you show people transforming? How dare you show heroism? How could you show drugs as bad? And even if you did couldn’t you make it so mainstream and over-the-top that I could inwardly snigger at it(the way everyone sniggered at Bajirao Mastani!)? Why did you use my beloved hyper-realistic/quirky art form for anything other than nihilistic trash?!
Idealism? hmf. lets move on.
LikeLiked by 2 people
aravindan
June 21, 2016
feel a little sad that Brangan missed out on enjoying this movie because he of his ignorance wrt the punjab culture and its language. tough luck BR.
LikeLike
P
June 21, 2016
The best piece on the movie is by Manu Joseph:
http://www.hindustantimes.com/columns/udta-punjab-nothing-reforms-society-as-entertainment/story-hXilBSz2PrUuEzPIKpdH0K.html
LikeLiked by 2 people
brangan
June 21, 2016
P: You do think in extremes, don’t you? 🙂 This is the very blog that celebrated Bajrangi Bhaijaan (if this film isn’t optimistic, then what is?) and Bajirao Mastani. So no, I don’t think the people who remain underwhelmed by this film are calling out for “nihilism.” But when a complex problem is so simplistically represented, it’s bound to cause some polarisation.
The problems some of us have are wrt to the writing, the characterisations, the self-righteousness, the preachiness, etc. Rang De Basanti remains a great example of how to go all-out mainstream and yet have texture and characters one cares about. Plus, a social issue that one embraces with every fibre of the being.
To reduce all this to “you want a nihilistic film” is being facile.
LikeLiked by 5 people
sanjana
June 21, 2016
Very well made, but also banal. Interesting. Somewhat similar criticism was heaped on NH10. A half hearted appreciation. The sky is a perfect blue but boring, predictable and uninspiring. The dinner is well made but predictable with no originality. When a film is that well made why to say it is very banal in the title itself? That banality could have been explored in the summary. Is it for shock value?
LikeLiked by 2 people
brangan
June 21, 2016
sanjana: The title talks about two things. Form (very well made). And content (banal). That summed up the film for me. What’s so shocking about that?
LikeLiked by 1 person
sanjana
June 21, 2016
On the question of banality. Sometimes art imitates life. I always wonder at the utter predictability of a good and settled life. Same routine, the clock running like a slave etc. etc. To escape banality of routine, we go for holidays to predictable destinations and be back. Thats why we dream of aliens, other worlds, life after death.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Filistine
June 21, 2016
Its interesting to see in the comments section how people seem to take almost-personal offence at the suggestion that the movie may not be a masterpiece. This usually happens only with Tamil movies (usually involving Ajith or Vijay or Rajinikanth) and typically only with mass entertainers. Its is surprising to see the same amount of fandom for a not-so-mass entertainer. Any death threats so far, BR?
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
June 21, 2016
Filistine: Its is surprising to see the same amount of fandom for a not-so-mass entertainer.
Not for the entertainer, but for the maker, I think. Some cult directors gather a following and very vocal supporters. I got a lot of flak for my less-than-effusive review of Nalan’s new film. I kept saying “Look, I’m not saying it’s a bad film — just that I was somewhat underwhelmed.” But that wasn’t enough. They wanted more enthusiasm.
Which is not to say that everyone who has liked Udta Punjab has liked it ONLY because of the filmmaker. It may have genuinely worked for them, and form-wise there are a lot of fantastic things about the film.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Santa
June 21, 2016
The film certainly did not live up to the expectations set up by the trailer, the marketing, and the censorship controversy. I was expecting something far grittier. To me, the movie wasn’t about the drug problem in Punjab; it was instead a ‘masala’ movie set against the backdrop of the drug problem. What held my interest were the performances – top notch IMO. And especial high marks to Alia Bhatt who is turning out to be one of the most exciting performers of this generation.
Regarding the censorship controversy: I was expecting some truly disturbing moments or themes which our overlords at CBFC have deemed unfit for us. Instead all we get is a plethora of BCs thrown around. Much ado about literally nothing. The conspiratorial part of me wonders whether this was a deliberate ploy to raise the pre-release hype.
LikeLike
Rahul
June 21, 2016
The most grotesque scene was Shahid’s a-ha moment,and not because of the effect it had on him. The uncharacteristically sagacious lucidity of the two juveniles in piecing together their timeline of addiction and crime and their poker faced , bullet pointed, deconstruction of the effect of Shahid’s music on them was tough to digest. I liked the initial bits, when I thought the film was shaping up as a surreal black comedy, the kind of which Vishal Bhardwaj has attempted. It could have been about – “the string of events that were set into motion involving a disparate group of characters when a a day laborer came across a stash of drugs.”
The movie I got instead did not work as well for me, because the tonal disparity between the two parallel storylines, bad writing, and inadequate acting. Shahid lost himself in his role, but I wanted to see more. There was no trace of the small town guy Tejinder who became Tommy, and his antics seemed caricaturish to me sometimes. Aaliya also did not seem like a real person, and I can’t quite put my finger on the reason. Compared to them Diljeet and Kareena fared better.
LikeLike
nosinz
June 21, 2016
RanganSir, I am glad at least someone here is not blinded by the awe of AK, and has a rational take on UP.
MY SCRIBBLE SIR nowhere close …
My Thought’s …Not a Review…. Judta Anjaam
Much has been written about all the censor issues and the 86 cuts so let me start with my opinion, without giving any more fodder to the raging controversies and sabotages against a genuine effort to bring forth a very serious issue with some handy solution to resolve, though practically implausible.
When art speaks in a subtle manner it takes the form of poetry, literature, verse a sculpture and so on where your imaginations are let loose with no boundaries; Individual interpretations brings out that comfort, the belonging and the connection to these art forms, ironically with motion picture it’s exactly the opposite where most of the time imaginations are less of interpretations and more of viewers witnessing an apparent take or opinion of an artist meant for an extremely diverse audience. Our popular cinema unfortunately mostly plays up to the gallery with all its formulas, cliché’s and spoon feeding literally, although with the new breed of young filmmakers I am glad that tradition is broken, but as someone rightly said cliche’s mare nahi, cliche’s marte nahi….
So UP open with beautifully shot moonlight long-shot (open field) which given all the plethora of information floating about the plot of UP (in fact the trailer revealed some of the key scenes and core plot) was very obvious but the director had to resort to flashing jerseys, Strangely Pissing has something to do with how the major plot twists takes place in UP, whenever the leads are either pissing or just pissed or coming wa-piss (Kareena Kapoors) final scene.
The screenplay struggles to justify the content and in maintaining the balance in etching the characterization of the protagonists which gives you a feeling of something seriously amiss and half-baked, or edited out ., thankfully it is compensated by amazing performances by all the leading characters. Shahid Kapoor’s characters needed a very strong actor (which he justifies – blame the editing here) to depict the fall of once famous rap/rock star without showcasing his prime, don’t miss the brilliant hospital scene where he sings for a badly bruised character- brilliant!, or when he jumps off the wall to face gun-toting Sardar. In fact, one of the most powerful scenes involving Alia and Shahid made me feel as if I was watching a live stage performance or some street awareness campaign, very raw and intense. Alia Bhatt has raised the bar for her own past performances and her contemporaries, too bold a decision for a mainstream actor. Kareena Kapoor is an extension of her doctor’s character in 3 idiots a Deja Vu is guaranteed, Don’t miss her expression ala Omkara climax (of character). Daljit justifies his character and does what is expected out of him. UP is predictable but in no way offending or a material to Ban/censor unless the intentions are purely political. One can’t help but draw some parallels with Innirattus Amores Perros (Jackie Chan,
Direction – Good -Kudos for choice of Subject
Music – Wasseypur + Chicken Khurana +DevD
Camera – Directors earlier works was way Better
Performance – Superb
Dialogue – Average
Editing – Needed more EXP hand
Screenplay – Average
Dejavu – Amores Perros, Haider, Bollywood cliche’s, Beeba Boy’s, NH 10, TrainSpotting
LikeLike
Apu
June 22, 2016
So disclaimer at the beginning: I did not watch the movie.
So why am I commenting? Because it just seems to me, reading through the comments and review of the review (and the movie) that:
a) People agree that facts have been spelled out but they disagree on whether that was “banal” or not. Which is to say – it might be banal for some and not for others.
b) A lot of the comments talk about “understanding Punjabi culture” and I suspect that not understanding it might come in the way of the movie working for you or not, and your reaction would fluctuate between “wow, yes, that is exactly how it happens at punjab” and “Ok, so that is what happens, I see” (It was somewhat the difference in reaction to Amitabh’s fascination with bowel movements in Piku – if you know someone like that or it is sort of ingrained in your culture, you would “get it” and say “yep, that is exactly how they/we behave” vs if you don’t know anyone, it is “oh my, there are people like these? Yikes/nervous giggle”).
To further explain what I mean:
BUT if you look at it as a “movie that wants to expose the drug problem in Punjab specifically” then, the colorful language plus the documented information plus the explicit/underlined declarations are justified in telling the world (or India) that “Punjab has a drug problem and we can prove it.” The main players are then stereotypes that help carry the information. Any added layers to the characters are bonus.
(not sure if I qualify to comment, but just thought of reacting)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Utkal
June 22, 2016
MY THOUGHTS ON UDTA PUNJAB
I knew I had to see the film one more time before I could dare to write anything on it. Now I have, and it got better on second viewing. For me, that is the acid test. A genuinely good film has to get better on second viewing. On third and subsequent viewing, it may hold its impact, or it may wane a little. But on second viewing it has to get better. And this one did.
Read the rest at : http://utkaleidoscope.com/udta-punjab/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gabru Banda
June 23, 2016
I liked the film a lot, more to do with the making and the ensemble. But do Abhishek Chaubey has a third act problem as others are pointing out?. All 3 films end with get most of the cast together in a setting and gun bham wham or is that his signature style.
LikeLike
An Jo
June 23, 2016
SPOILERS
1) Why is everyone, from BR to Utkal saying the 3 guys in the opening scene are riding a bike? They are riding a scooter..unless my eyes are really deceiving me.
2) Another fine scene depicting the extent of drug-menace seeped into the society is the scene where even the watchmen at the factory producing these drugs are passed out with syringes in their hands.
3) TOILET as a metaphor? High, Tommy looks at his image in the dirty water in his commode [obvious TRAINSPOTTING inspiration] and alludes to him being the greatest, the rock-star. He then pees on his audience in a later scene. Any connection? Is he pissing his own self, the fake, retarded image of a rock-star onto the audience? Because they obviously don’t want to hear his newly realized ‘gyaan.’
4) In the song IKK KUDI that Shahid sings in the hospital, there is a line –
ओ.. सूरत ऑस दी, पारियाँ वरगी
सीरत दी ओ.. मरियम लगदी
Note the reference to ‘Mariyam.’ Later, Alia might have pulled out of the hat the name MARY JANE, but maybe Chaubey didn’t..
5) A weak and unintended connection maybe, but the first line of UD-DA PUNJAB song is –
अंदर दा कुत्ता अज्ज कढ़हिए हा…
In that hilarious first interaction scene between Alia and Tommy, when Shahid says his name is Tommy, Alia asks, ‘कुत्ता’?
6) This is just a blooper maybe. Preet says only NEEMUCH and GHAZIPUR are the areas where opium can be processed. In the barrels smuggled into the factory, the barrel screams MAZIPUR. Either a blooper, or are they so damn clever that the players erased GAZIPUR and made it MAZIPUR to avoid suspicion??
LikeLiked by 1 person
Saumya
June 29, 2016
This is actually quite a bad movie, but in the scene of bad Bollywood movies, perhaps people prefer to like it.
Before I begin, let me say Amit Trivdi’s music is perhaps the most unresearched part of the film. Remove the Punjab situation and he music still works, and that’s what’s wrong with it, the music I mean.
The characters are typical of Kashyap Chauney franchisee of film making.
Satish Kaushil is over the top, loud, like any other Bollywood film.
The sensationalism of bad language deliberately repeated (Come on, Inhave grown up in these regions and though such words are used, but NOT by everyone and not so much as shown), a strategically placed rape scenario, generously indulged in by a sensationalist director who perhaps has no idea what sexual violence feels like, extremely misplaced music genre, over pop corned sugar eyed relationship of Kareena and Daljit characters, over stupidifying the Daljit character, all to enable the script else it would have been harder work.
violence, sexual assaults, bad language, poor choice of music. A typical Kashyap – Chaubey film.
It seems the main reason people are living the film is because it talks of this subject. As cinema, it fails. As social service it perhaps scores a point here or there.
LikeLike
P
July 1, 2016
BR: Apologies for the late reply! Been super busy with a launch.
And apologies again but while you celebrated Bajirao Mastani you also kinda-sorta sniggered at it (SLB should become a skirt choreographer- I think is what you said wrt to the Deewani Mastani song and Ranveer has given this same performance before in Ram Leela, its nothing new- is what you said about the characterization- I am paraphrasing of course! )
But again, its not you, or one other person, its an entire horde of people.Everyone prefers to laugh at things rather than have the upward gaze of admiration. Where is that feeling we once had of wanting to be bedazzled and amazed and just worshipful of characters (NOT actors) who are transformational and inspiring? 😦
The theatre I saw it in had people who laughed when Alia’s character described how she was raped over and over and how they made her addicted when she had never even smoked a beedi.
What kind of a world do we live in? 😦
PS: Sure its not as detailed a film as RDB. But that doesn’t mean its not a good story or well-written. I don’t know. Detailing is not a good enough criticism. A lot of the greatest plays and music peices are broad brush strokes with barely any detail….innit?
LikeLike
brangan
July 2, 2016
P: while you celebrated Bajirao Mastani you also kinda-sorta sniggered at it (SLB should become a skirt choreographer…
There was no sniggering in that review at all. This is what I wrote:
“but Bhansali’s long takes respect the skills of the dancer, the efforts of the choreographer. Perhaps even a skirt choreographer.”
This is hardly saying “SLB should become a skirt choreographer…”
LikeLike
P
July 5, 2016
BR: I was mistaken but, you did say: “After Ram-Leela’s Tattad tattad and Malhari, one part of me wishes that Bhansali makes nothing but music videos.”
And if I start sifting for the very many sniggering comments…but I don’t have the heart to do so, because I really really do like you, your gaze, your writing so very much.
I am the “get down on my knees in admiration” sort of person (not for Udta Punjab, not for everything, but certainly for Bajirao Mastani) so maybe I expected too much.
LikeLike
filmreview
July 10, 2016
awsome movie alia bhatt play a nice role in it
LikeLike
bollyreview
July 11, 2016
I agree that the film was a bit sanskaari in parts but I think that’s fine. I’m all for cinema with substance that aims to achieve more than just make money. And there is no doubt that Udta Punjab is the coolest lecture possible. I think it was attractive and hip enough to get youth to watch it, and that works for me.
LikeLike
sachita
January 9, 2017
Loved this movie, dont think any indian movie has gotten this close to drug addiction experience -Shahid, alia and daljit’s brother – they are in hell with drugs and without it.
Not sure why the comment space was so negative for this movie. Why should it be like trainspotting? what is wrong in completing the supply chain management picture in this scenario.
Also it definitely wasnt as bad as Prakash jha movie.
LikeLike
G D
February 28, 2017
“In another magnificent scene, Tommy finds himself in a police lockup, in front of a man who has some information he needs. Small catch: the man has recognised him, and he won’t spill unless Tommy sings. Outside, cops have discovered that the door is latched from the inside, and they begin to push. Over the sound of the rattling latch, Tommy begins to sing. He sings like he’s never sung before. The man is transfixed. And we note that the cops outside are too – the rattling has stopped. It restarts only when Tommy finishes and flees.”
Sir, a small submission. In this scene, the cops don’t actually stop pushing the door. The singing fills up the soundtrack, but we can still see the latch rattling.
LikeLike