Spoilers ahead…
So how bad can it really be? If that’s your frame of mind when you settle into a screening of Sanjay Gupta’s Hrithik Roshan-starring Kaabil, who can blame you? The director is coming off Jazbaa, the hero off Mohenjo Daro. The bar for their new outing together is barely an inch off the ground – and for a while, the film gives off a not-bad vibe. “Not bad” is hardly the most ringing of endorsements until you remember what “bad” is. At least Aishwarya Rai Bachchan isn’t screeching. At least there’s no crocodile flying. Rohan (Hrithik Roshan) meets Supriya (Yami Gautam) on a blind date. I mean, literally. They’re both blind. She says she doesn’t want to get married. She likes her independence. He begins to panic that there’d be no movie otherwise. He turns on the charm. Her “no” becomes a “maybe.”
Rohan and Supriya are remarkable Hindi-film characters. There’s no self-pity, no anger, none of the complexes that coloured Naseeruddin Shah in Sparsh. On their next date, they dance – not tentatively, but with exuberant steps, as though auditioning for that carnival number in Luck By Chance. Part of this is surely producer Rakesh Roshan realising that if fans are paying good money to see his son dance, then dance his son shall. But the energy here is something I’ve never seen in a film with two disabled characters. And then comes the rude awakening. They go to a crowded mall, get separated – but soon, he overcomes his panic and finds a way to find her.
Rohan is very kaabil that way, almost too much so. There’s not a situation he cannot handle, no villain he cannot vanquish. His unflappability is the film’s undoing. When tragedy befalls the happy couple, Rohan sets out on a revenge mission. (The hilariously one-note bad guys are played by Ronit Roy, Rohit Roy and Girish Kulkarni.) Every step, you are reminded of better films – Aakhree Raasta, where Amitabh Bachchan went about devising elaborate schemes for murder; or Ek Hasina Thi, where Urmila Matondkar was forced by circumstances to transform into a toughie. Kaabil is entirely predictable, and it squanders its sole element of intrigue. The story of a blind man whose blindness is just a minor inconvenience is the story of Superman who merely experiences an itch when faced with Kryptonite.
Sanjay Gupta appears lost. There are far too many emotional beats in this story, and that’s not his strong point. And Gupta’s forte – getting off on sadistic, slickly shot violence – isn’t something you expect Papa Roshan to endorse. Rohan’s ploys are fun for a bit, but they get repetitive very quickly, and you wish for some real danger, some tightness, some tension. Yami Gautam barely registers, but then, it’s her co-star people will come to see. And he pulls out the stops. He gives his fans the Guzaarish martyr face, the Agneepath angry face, the Mission: Kashmir troubled face, the Jodhaa Akbar post-coital face, the Yaadein what-am-I-doing-in-this-movie? face, and of course, the Koi Mil Gaya face – the glazed eyes and slightly stupid grin of a teenager who’s just experienced his first orgasm. What we have, in other words, is less a thriller than a series of bedroom-wall posters for fans.
KEY:
- kaabil = capable, worthy
- Jazbaa = see here
- Mohenjo Daro = see here
- Luck By Chance = see here
- Ek Hasina Thi = see here
- Guzaarish = see here
- Agneepath = see here
- Jodhaa Akbar = see here
Copyright ©2017 Baradwaj Rangan. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
Baradwaj Rangan 
Dracarys
January 25, 2017
“He begins to panic that there’d be no movie otherwise.”
LikeLiked by 4 people
Anu Warrier
January 26, 2017
Poor Hrithik. I did hope he would find success at last – it’s been a grim few years for him. But… Sanjay Gupta? That was too much to expect.
LikeLiked by 2 people
blurb
January 26, 2017
“Yaadein what-am-I-doing-in-this-movie? face, and of course, the Koi Mil Gaya face – the glazed eyes and slightly stupid grin of a teenager who’s just experienced his first orgasm” — OUCH! 🙂
You are basically saying that two very discordant forces (Roshan and Gupta) have come together to make a film – and hence the major reason for the film not working. I wonder how they themselves don’t realize this. Perhaps when you are in the thick of things you don’t know your faults.
This is really said because Hrithik Roshan was a promising talent totally gone to the bins now (much like Abhishek Bachchan). I would have never expected this extrapolation of a career path from someone who showed the kind of promise they did in Lakshya. I don’t know what has gotten into him, and why he makes the choices that he does.
Also, are we suddenly seeing more thrillers these days both in Tamizh and in Bolllywood?
LikeLiked by 2 people
adhmIfIm15
January 26, 2017
BR, you have a very pronounced dislike for Hrithik, I’ve noticed, that makes your usually genially lenient self into a mean hate machine, when it comes to talking about him. Hrithik is great – he’s just lost and will find his way back.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Santa
January 26, 2017
Ouch, that was brutal on Hrithik! Looking forward to Raees review.
LikeLike
awkshwayrd
January 26, 2017
“getting off on sadistic, slickly shot violence – isn’t something you expect Papa Roshan to endorse”
He did make Koyla with SRK though – a movie I could never sit through – though that was more gritty (needlessly) than slick.
“There are far too many emotional beats in this story, and that’s not his strong point”
This figures.. One interview mentioned Papa R worked on the script, this may have been his additions. Gupta would rather have made a slick cat n mouse thriller .. speaking of, I wonder which violent Korean movie this is based off of (you just know that’s a given)
“the Agneepath angry face, the Mission: Kashmir troubled face”
But does he do his constipated jaw-clenched entire-face-shaking-from-the-effort expression? (As seen in Mission Kashmir, Agneepath, Krisshhs etc.)
I can’t figure Roshan Jr anymore. At one point it looked like he had found his pitch, and would coast along comfortably, specially with the effort he puts in – not always great but not incompetent either. Now it’s like he’s unlearned even the stuff he could do, and is just doing a bad imitation of his earlier expressions. He’s become boring – the worst thing for an actor, or a star.
@BR, Do you think he still has any decent performances left in him?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Akhilan
January 26, 2017
BR, um genuinely wanted to know what you think of Hrithik as an ‘actor’…??
Seems to me that you’re not a big fan…?? Could you perhaps elaborate on it a little bit…
I really liked him in a couple of movies… Particularly in Lakshya and Jodhaa Akbar…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anusha Sathyamoorthy
January 26, 2017
Sir, Your review of Raees, Please…….
LikeLike
Jai
January 26, 2017
Ouch! 😂😂
I was planning to watch the movie, but it now seems your review might be more entertaining than the film itself. 😁
Your description of HR’s delivery of ‘stock footage’ facial expressions from his films was priceless!! I landed up spitting a mouthful of tea on my laptop screen, your review should have ideally come with a warning—‘might induce helpless laughter’. 😂
Sigh…..to think that HR was actually my favorite actor in his Fiza/ Mission Kashmir/ Laqshya/ Koi Mil Gaya phase. I’m still not sure if his ‘bring a cannon to kill a mosquito’, sledgehammer type of emoting started AFTER those films; or if it was just that a majority/plurality of the audience started getting bored with his brand of acting, which we had earlier found quite fascinating. Will need to rewatch those films to decide….which I’m not very keen on doing. 😆
LikeLiked by 3 people
Anuja Chandramouli
January 26, 2017
“He gives his fans the Guzaarish martyr face, the Agneepath angry face, the Mission: Kashmir troubled face, the Jodhaa Akbar post-coital face, the Yaadein what-am-I-doing-in-this-movie? face, and of course, the Koi Mil Gaya face – the glazed eyes and slightly stupid grin of a teenager who’s just experienced his first orgasm. What we have, in other words, is less a thriller than a series of bedroom-wall posters for fans.”
That gave me a wicked case of the giggles! Tee hee 🙂 Classic BR! For some reason, I am feeling a little sorry for Hrithik, though I have always felt he was criminally overrated. Quite a fall from his former stint as the Golden boy of Bollywood.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Vikram S
January 26, 2017
BR, but then this was an expected outcome. The Rakesh-Roshan-world-meets-Sanjay-Gupta-world was pretty much DoA isn’t it….l guess Hrithik has to take a break and think about the choices he is making….he needs to develop the niche that the khans and akshay Kumar have built….this constant flitting from gowarikar to Sanjay Gupta is not going to help…sad on the whole since HR is a watchable star…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Notafan@hrithik.com
January 26, 2017
I hope HR doesn’t end up like Bobby Deol ( just read that interview of his)…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rahul
January 26, 2017
Hi-tech Roshan has always been boring. Your review, though nasty, is succinct and on point.
On another note, its a pity that Hindi cinema, so far, has no clue on how to use the very talented Girish Kulkarni. But at least he is paying his bills.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jai
January 26, 2017
I really hope HR manages to rediscover his touch. He’s still got an undeniable screen presence, and I think the sheer effort and conviction he pours into his roles is evident (sometimes overwhelmingly so! 😉 )
Its curious how his career trajectory has been, compared to say, Akshay Kumar. AK was a hit star in the 90’s, but no one ever thought much of his acting. He was pretty much slotted as a non-actor, a macho pin -up action star; but he really has matured into roles in Airlift, Baby and so on. Which is not to say he doesn’t do bad films now—he definitely does, but on balance, he seems to have found a niche to reinvent his image.
HR on the other hand, started off as both an acting sensation and a bona fide star (at least, he received encomiums galore for his earlier performances). And I would think he definitely is a better ACTOR than many of the younger crop of stars, and arguably delivers better performances than stars like Sallu or even the matured Akshay. But somehow, his intensity in each and every scene seems misplaced now. A face twitching, nostril flaring, jaw clenched stance conveying anguish in say, a Fiza or a Mission Kashmir was very impactful. But the same range of expressions in a ZNMD seems UTTERLY out of place. That ‘Just do it, Imran!!’ dialogue from ZNMD, delivered with a hilariously out of place fist clench/arm jab, still makes me go ROFL whenever I see it or even recall it!
That said, I can’t help but feel that at least on grounds of his sheer commitment and integrity as regards his craft, HR does deserve a film that lets him rediscover his touch. Perhaps he lands a role which lets him emote freely, letting him LIVE the part; instead of amplifying it to showcase the entire range of tics and expressions we already know he is capable of?
LikeLiked by 4 people
MANK
January 26, 2017
The last nail in Hrithik’s career ?. fortunately or unfortunately there isn’t any nails left. he has no films in hand . he was supposed to do Thugs, but opted out after Aditya chopra refused to pay his exorbitant salary.- it seems Adi did the right thing , he landed Aamir for the role. if there is any actor today who can make a 200 cr budgeted film bankable , its Aamir .Hrithik’s career seems to be in total limbo
How did it come to this?. the guy had the most spectacular debut in last 25 years. he skyrocketed to the A list with his first film and for almost a year , the madness surrounding him was almost similar to that of heydays of Rajesh Khanna. he was like a blast of energy at the time and very different from the actors who were ruling the roast. A complete package of good looks, personality, terrific dancing & fighting skills and decent acting abilities that showed lot of promise.And then it all went downhill only to be resurrected by papa again with Koi mil gaya. it seems that he learned all the wrong lessons from his downfall and resurgence.
His priorities seems to have changed over the course of his career. he not only started working less, but also started emphasizing all the wrong aspects of his persona. he developed an obsession with a kind of gym toned body to such an extend that in his his body has started to resemble that of Frankenstein’s monster or an alien species or something. his dancing that was rather graceful and fluid to begin with is now completely devoid of those qualities and appears rather repulsive with all those heavy handed acrobatics. And from a rather light and cool performer he has transformed in to the OTT actor and taking up characters that are totally unsuitable for him.
i hope he gets his priorities right. he still posses a star charisma and charm that very few movie stars have.
LikeLiked by 4 people
MANK
January 26, 2017
Jai, i have always been amused by the praise that Hrithik got for his ‘Acting’. for me his screen presence was never about his acting, it was about a cool, sexy star charisma that he brought to his characters, in the vein of hollywood stars like mel gibson or Brad Pitt. the films that i like him best -KNPH,Mission Kashmir,Dhoom2, parts of Jodha Akbar and ZNMD,Bang Bang are all about that. that’s were his strengths lie. even his one ‘Acting’ performance that i thoroughly enjoyed – the extended cameo in Luck by chance- was more about him playing a version of himself – the vain insecure star.
Rather than capitalise on his strengths, he has been busy choosing roles that are way beyond his limited abilities as an actor. he should be doing what Salman is doing. Whatever one could say about Salman, he has a very good sense of his strengths and weaknesses as a performer. he realised where his career was faltering and went back to his kind of films with dabangg that would showcase his strengths and hide his weakness. Hrithik should be doing something like that
LikeLiked by 2 people
Altman
January 26, 2017
Rahul: I think Anurag Kashysp made a wise choice by casting Girish Kulkarni as the annoying cop in Ugly. He was terrific in that exasperating complaint scene. It was disappointing to see him play a one note villain in Dangal. It seems the case here as well.
LikeLike
sravishanker1401gmailcom
January 26, 2017
“Jodhaa Akbar post-coital face, ” Vow ! A stiletto wrapped in a veg peeler. Long time since I’ve read such a succint excoriation. If this is what it takes to be entertained on a dull National holiday then let’s pray for more such bad movies 🙂
LikeLike
sravishanker1401gmailcom
January 26, 2017
Vikram S : Very good diagnosis and summing up.
LikeLike
Rohit Sathish Nair
January 26, 2017
Does the love track in the film play like this: ‘How Will Two Beaultiful, but Blind People Bond and Become a Couple, when their USP( atleast in the mainstream filmi context) has been Nullified?’ . Ideally, this may have automatically taken care of the character descriptions.
As much as this may sound interesting, two ordinary-looking people were better off for this story
LikeLiked by 1 person
Aran
January 26, 2017
I firmly believe Hrithik’s career was shafted by his father’s grand design for his son. By being touted as “the first superhero of Indian Cinema” or whatever those promotional posters said, Hrithik was sold as something bigger than anything and everything that came before. Contrast that with his more humble days where he acted and felt like the boy-next-door (despite his looks), and there you have the problem. He hasn’t been able to be successful as the greatest thing to hit Hindi cinema as the first superhero other than in the minds of six-year-olds. And the fan base he had built in his more humble avatar dispersed because he changed his approach too much.
LikeLike
Madan
January 26, 2017
MANK: Had I known how Hrithik’s career would have played out, I wouldn’t have opted to watch KNPH over PBDH. I am joking, it wouldn’t have made a difference. But you’ve described the Hrithik mania of the time well. It seems rather a waste that for all the early mania he’s only had a somewhat more successful career (ok, little more than somewhat) as a hero than his father and that too may have been aided by the combination of multiplexes (the later films, that is) and simply being Rakesh Roshan’s son. Would an outsider have still been in the reckoning after the long string of flops Hrithink endured after KNPH?
LikeLike
mostlycinema
January 26, 2017
his casting worked in Jinddagi na mile go dobara because maybe he played himself. Bollywood entertains by falling over itself .
LikeLike
MANK
January 26, 2017
Would an outsider have still been in the reckoning after the long string of flops Hrithink endured after KNPH?
Madan, well Akshay kumar suffered some 16 or 17 flops in a row in the late 90’s, yet he somehow managed to claw his way back in, so its not impossible.
yes but you are right . Hrithik, outside his home banner has a very spotty record. he has just 2 major hits Dhoom2 and Agneepath – both were multistarrers and 2 average ones Jodha akbar and ZNMD
So without his father’s support he hardly would have been the star he became. you know people always blame Bachchan Jr, for capitalising on his father’s name and prolonging his career in the industry, but Hrithik is no different or perhaps he is even worse. in the case of Abhishek , one could at least say that he did some adventurous cinema (whether he had the talent for it is another issue) and worked with some great directors, 3 mani rathnam films, a lot of cult films like Bluffmaster, Jhoom barabar jhoom, dum maro dum,…, which were rather risky projects commercially. Hrithik has absolutely nothing of substance to show for his 17 year career.
Somehow being papa roshan’s son has been both his greatest asset and his liability. as Aran said , RR tried to use HR part of his grand design. this not only mutated Hrithik as an actor but i think also destroyed RR as a filmmaker. compared to the Krishhhh crap fest that he is churning out these days , he was a solid filmmaker in his earlier days making diverse films like Khudgarz, Khel, Kishen Kanhaiyya and so on.
come to think of it, its exactly 17 years ago that KNPH released and post its extraordinary success, Hrithik was touted to wipe out all the Khans and every other actor of the industry, Alas, he now finds himself even below newbies like Ranveer
LikeLiked by 2 people
Swan
January 26, 2017
All of you stop piling on my boo. He’s talented as hell and absolutely deserves a pace in the industry and still would if he didn’t have the Roshan surname – are you kidding me? Also, he is one of India’s very few boons to Indian women.
In all seriousness, Hrithik is the complete package and consistently wrong choices and some bad luck does not mean we have to start wondering how he ever became a star actor (just watch KNPH). He is absolutely dazzling on screen and the only man I’ve not been able to take my eyes off anytime he’s on screen. He may need to rein it in but this wondering if he has acting chops at all is rather unfair to him.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
January 26, 2017
“Akshay kumar suffered some 16 or 17 flops in a row in the late 90’s, yet he somehow managed to claw his way back in, so its not impossible.” – The mitigating factor there may have been that Akki had a few hits already by then and not just the one (KNPH). Some of it was just bad luck for Hrithik. I don’t think HE did a bad job at all in Lakshya but the film didn’t do well. Still, he would have been done for without Koi Mil Gaya.
“post its extraordinary success, Hrithik was touted to wipe out all the Khans and every other actor of the industry” – He did seem like the complete package at the time. Romance, comedy, action, he had it all covered. Hindi cinema was still very much in its masala phase and by those requirements, he was alright. In hindsight, Aamir Khan changed the game with Lagaaan and DCH, thus introducing a new paradigm that left Hrithik far behind. In any case, it’s mainly AK and Salman who have had fairly consistent success in the noughties and onwards phase of Bollywood. SRK has enjoyed an uneven ride and so have most others. So it is the success of KNPH that created high expectations from Hrithik but it was the last hurrah of a dying genre which has since been mostly out of bounds for anyone not named Salman.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Madan
January 26, 2017
“He may need to rein it in but this wondering if he has acting chops at all is rather unfair to him.” – I used to feel that way too until I saw the painful Agneepath. In fairness, he wasn’t much worse than Sanju Baba’s grotesque rendition of Kancha Cheena, but that’s hardly a ringing endorsement.
LikeLike
MV
January 26, 2017
Just hoping that BR is letting Raees marinate in his mind so that a delicious review comes to our plates.
Started putting thaalam on the dining table in anticipation already!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rashky
January 26, 2017
Sir, your eye for detail is impeccable! Watching Hrithik in that dance song is unbearable.. they both are giggling immaturely like school kids.
No depth in the blind characters. It’s as if they’re mocking blindness.
Uff, so much overacting.
LikeLiked by 1 person
sihab
January 26, 2017
i think he was very much effective in luck by chance without his usual over the top emotions..
LikeLike
Rahul
January 26, 2017
Swan’s post is an indication of what went wrong with Hritik. He took upon himself the mantle of being a “complete package” , who can do everything. Hardly anyone remembers the World decathlon champion.
Among the three Khans, only Aamir is the one who can fit into any type of movie and any type of role , and this he has achieved through years of sincerity and focus. Salman has found his niche of comic action movies from Dabang. SRK is in a tough spot because his DDLJ persona can no longer work. Point is, if you do not have an archetype to fall back on , you have to be an above average performer and make very smart choices .So, Hritik has his task cut out for him. If he can’t or wouldn’t go for an archetype, the path is harder though it providers better returns.
Could he have been a dancing star like Mithun or Govinda? For someone who has all the skills of a dancer, his dancing seems joyless to me. Technically less equipped dancers like Amitabh and Rishi kapoor were much more of a joy to watch.
Maybe he should jack down his price so that he has other supporting pieces to make the project more viable , and try to find a limited range that he is comfortable with and keep at it relentlessly like Akshay did. He still has enough years left in him.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anuj
January 26, 2017
Amusing that while almost every movie critic, trade analyst and sections of the audience too are describing this as a career best for HR, here we have the ever so pessimistic and critical BRangan and his cronies branding this flawless performance of his in a not so flawless film as a “deathnail” in his career. KAABIL might have started on a slow note due to over hyped promotions of RAEES but will slowly and surely get the audiences to the theaters over the next few days. KAABIL is a mid budgeted film made on a small scale with a Rakesh Roshan underdog narrative coupled with Sanjay Gupta’s slick direction. HR has delivered a powerhouse performance and will continue doing so as long as he does more films and avoids wasting time on the Mohenjo Daro likes. KAABIL is a sureshot box office winner even if it falls short of the much hyped 100 crore club
http://bollywoodreviewguide.blogspot.in/2017/01/review-2-kaabil.html
LikeLike
Anuj
January 26, 2017
And hilariously shocking that I read few equating HR’s downfall with that of non starters like Abhishek Bachchan and blink and miss one’s like Bobby Deol. Here is a guy whose given 3 top annual grossers and 5 outright blockbusters as a solo lead. This is something that even the likes of Akshay & Ajay are nowhere near achieving, forget Abhishek and Bobby. His own box office record thus far merits him a place among the most popular actors of the post 90′ era even he never does another film for the rest of his life. But unfortunately, people who’re cronies of the likes of Brangan/Raja Sen and who giggle at the gross violation of their extensive knowledge of the English dictionary (which even describes orgasms) like to live in their own bubble without having an iota of box office knowledge and stats/facts and figures. Mind you, this “death nail” called KAABIL would still manage over 1 crore theatrical footfalls and close to 100 crore box office numbers despite HR going through an all time low in personal popularity ratings and clashing with a far bigger film like Raees. So much for comparisons with Abhishek and Bobby (lol)
http://bollywoodtradeguide.blogspot.in/
LikeLike
praneshp
January 27, 2017
This is why I watched Cuckoo again instead of going to this movie.
Welcome back, Anuj!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ravi K
January 27, 2017
Anuj, Baradwaj is not a trade analyst. He is not in the business of predicting which films will be hits or flops or tracking their grosses. This film could very well be a hit, but that has no bearing on how he reacted to it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
brangan
January 27, 2017
Akhilan: I was never a fan of KNPH, but in HR’s subsequent films (Fiza, Mission:Kashmir, Lakshya), there was a looseness, a playfulness, some sense of vulnerability that he brought to screen. That’s completely gone now, and he seems robotic. Even his dance moves don’t have that free-spirited joy that — as someone said above — we get from a Shahid Kapoor in R… Rajkumar.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anuj
January 27, 2017
@Ravi : I agree that BRangan’s reviews are his personal choice & nor am I arguing that. However, I’m amused at commentators in this comments section claiming how HR’s career is almost over and Kaabil is the final nail in the coffin. Factually, even someone like John Abraham whose never given a solo box office hit continues to act in solo starrers. In comparison HR’s got multiple blockbusters and technically MJD is the only box office flop he’s had in the last 6 years. Even the critically bashed Krrish 3 and Bang Bang were box office successes and huge grossers. Equating him with the likes of Abhishek and Bobby is preposterous.
LikeLiked by 1 person
tonks
January 30, 2017
I loved this perspective on Kaabil :
A day into their marriage, Supriya gets raped by some local goon and an MLA’S brother. Owing to the rapists’ political influence, the police lock up the couple so as to remove medical evidence and the couple return defeated in their search for justice. Nowhere in this narrative has Rohan addressed the immense struggle his wife is going through and while I’m trying to understand why- this happens. They return home and she begins to call him to dinner and tries TO COMFORT HIM by claiming that she ‘ understands this changes how he views her, how he feels for her and is perfectly willing to end the marriage and continue her job’. Any response barring utter outrage towards these views would have been unacceptable but the stoic Rohan gives us some stoic silence as HE goes through ‘suffering and anguish’. The burden of handling her husbands emotional baggage after she underwent this horrific trauma is treated as a given as Supriya smilingly cajoles him to go to bed. The following day, he goes to work, leaving his wife alone at home a mere day after this incident cheerfully preparing parathas and naturally, she is visited by the same goons, subject to the same oppression and kills herself. An emetic suicide note is revealed where she claims she did this ‘because she knew her husband couldn’t bear to watch her suffer’ again placing his emotional baggage as a priority over her own violation.
A respectful two minutes later, we cut to an item song in a bar that does nothing to forward the plot but was required for objectification ( duh) .The rest of the movie pans into an action drama of Hrithik fighting literally everyone to exact revenge for his wife, using cunning and his brute strength. I am tired. This plot is tired. It is archaic and it needs to stop. Bollywood’s use of horrific oppression of women as a mere plot-mechanism to showcase the hero’s glamorous machismo is nothing short of disrespectful and grossly insensitive to survivors of sexual abuse. Why is it so unfathomable for female characters to have more agency than just ‘ get abused and die’? From Ghajini to Action Jackson to this, this formula is so overdone and unidimensional. To reduce the VERY REAL abuse of women as just a trigger to the hero’s tragically romantic battle for revenge silences the emotional journey sexual violence survivors go through and denies them the ability to take back ownership of their stories.
LikeLiked by 9 people
Rahini David
January 30, 2017
Tonks, I can’t thank you enough for sharing this.
LikeLike
tonks
January 30, 2017
I found it via Facebook, Rahini. My friend’s friend’s daughter is the writer.
LikeLike
brangan
January 30, 2017
“Nowhere in this narrative has Rohan addressed the immense struggle his wife is going through and while I’m trying to understand why- this happens. They return home and she begins to call him to dinner and tries TO COMFORT HIM…
See, this is a very broad reading. Characters cannot be always acting the way they ought to, or the way we think they ought to. People are flawed. At this point, he’s probably feeling frustrated that he was unable to do anything, and feeling more-than-ever impaired by his blindness. It takes him a while to process the information, to snap out of it — and the next day, he apologises for the way he behaved.
Kaabil is a lousy film, and I wish it had found another trigger for the hero’s actions than rape, but this scene is entirely PLAUSIBLE – even if you and I don’t approve of it. These particular characters in this particular situation behaved this particular way. Is it ideal? No. But then life rarely is.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rahini David
January 30, 2017
BR: I don’t think the writer of that article is concerned about whether a raped woman will or will not act as it plays out. It is not at all to say that NO WOMAN will ever act in that way and that it is impossible or implausible. It is that our movies already make it all about the man, his anger, his loss, his right to have untainted women in his life and all that jazz. But usually an iota of sense to show that he mourns for her as a person not as property. So when somebody blatantly leaves that pretense and admits that this COMPLETELY about the man’s right to his unsoiled doll, we get angry. This is cheap, this disgusting but yes it is also possible and plausible. We really are a society that admires women who behave in this way. That is why this is so so so sad.
When a similar thing was pointed out in the misogyny thread someone admitted he did not understand why I was objecting to Rajini ‘forgiving’ Revathy. “Should she not be forgiven? Should she be punished?” I was asked. If that person was sarcastic that is one thing. He REALLY did not seem to understand (I think). I did not even know what to say.
This is not about this movie or that movie. This is about our collective consciousness. We are not doing good in the whole collective consciousness thingie, are we?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Filistine
January 30, 2017
SPOILERS AHEAD
That is a difficult argument, BR. On the one hand, it is true that there are many people who would potentially react like HR’s character would. But then that is the kind of argument that has led to the stalker-glorification genre of films.
One reason why this jars in this particular case is the inconsistency in the characterisation. A powerful, independent woman, one who doesn’t led a disability affect her self-confidence is suddenly reduced to a clingy, weak woman after the rape, going to the extent of committing suicide to save “his” honour.
While one cannot expect only perfect, flawless characters in a film, it is reasonable to expect a certain consistency in characterisation? Especially when depicting something that is as disturbing as rape. More so, as this inconsistency pulls you out of the film unnecessarily.
LikeLike
ramitbajaj01
January 30, 2017
Off-topic:
There is a para on BR in KJo’s biography. I found the description quite reverent and funny. Even the take on Shubra Gupta is hilarious.
LikeLike
brangan
January 30, 2017
Rahini David: But he does love her as a person. That’s what drives the film — as repulsive as it is. It is this one scene thar’s causing the outeage, that she feels victim shamed and he isn’t there for her when she needs him. By the time he processes the information and comes around, she has committed suicide..
I know it looks like I am defending this. I am just saying that this situation isn’t implausible in dramatic terms. We should not applaud it. We shouldn’t say it should be done just one way, either.
LikeLiked by 2 people
sanjana
January 30, 2017
But then violent revenge drama would not have been justified if she is alive and they lead a good life. Every film has flawed characters and life is not perfect. As for message, violent revenge cant be a message or suicide. By waiting, she could have given a different dimension to the issue. By not waiting, she turned the hero into a man who took law into his hands which is not right. Both are at fault.
LikeLike
brangan
January 30, 2017
Filistine: One reason why this jars in this particular case is the inconsistency in the characterisation. A powerful, independent woman, one who doesn’t led a disability affect her self-confidence is suddenly reduced to a clingy, weak woman after the rape, going to the extent of committing suicide to save “his” honour.
I have trouble with many of these assumptions.
(1) It is not to save his “honour.” The film operates purely on the plane of emotion, not principle. She does this to save him (the man she loves) more anguish. Especially after the threat of repeated rape.
(2) Yes, she is independent and strong, etc. And had this same situation happened in a film where the couple could see, the discourse would be very different.
But here, she has had a shockingly crude reminder that for all her independence she is still so vulnerable. The blindness she thought she conquered is now a very real threat.
All of this is very ugly, yes. But the disability does point to a possible weakening of independence and confidence. His actions too can be ‘explained’ by his blindness. A confident man capable of living on his own, making his own food etc., is now reminded of how helpless he is in this situation.
I don’t think any of this is “normal” in any way, and the disability has to be considered in this discussion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Filistine
January 30, 2017
“His actions too can be ‘explained’ by his blindness. A confident man capable of living on his own, making his own food etc., is now reminded of how helpless he is in this situation.”
Yes, I can find this believable.
“The film operates purely on the plane of emotion, not principle. She does this to save him (the man she loves) more anguish. Especially after the threat of repeated rape.”
This is where the characterisation weakens for me. Had the suicide been for “herself”, the result of a breakdown in confidence caused by the rape, it would have felt real, albeit worrisome. The idea that something as incredibly intrusive as a rape is seen as more traumatic for him, rather than her, just doesn’t sit right.
From a purely narrative perspective, I found it hard to sympathise with HR’s character from that point onwards. Much like how I’d feel in our earlier films where the solution to rape was to get the girl married off to the rapist and all is hunky dory after that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
January 30, 2017
Filistine: From a purely narrative perspective, I found it hard to sympathise with HR’s character from that point onwards.
Absolutely agree. But for me, this was more due to the slack screenplay etc. than his reaction to the rape or her letter — in the sense that the film was in a rush to end the rape-related drama and get on with the revenge. It does not deal with the situation or its emotional implications.
My point was more about whether these two, in those circumstances, were likely to have said/done those things, and I did not have an issue about the characterisation at that point. That’s the only thing I am talking about.
LikeLike
Aran
January 30, 2017
Is plausibility really the issue? Yes, technically the storyline can be plausible, but the problem here is that the woman in any man’s life existing only to make his life comfortable, to put him first above all else — and that man being upheld as a gem of society. Even when the woman is raped, it is about his coming to terms with it and his comfort, and this person is regarded as the ‘hero’ of the movie because he took revenge for something that the baddies took from him, forget what the wife lost in all this. The issue is that this is shown as an appropriate reaction to a rape and its aftermath.
BR says, “But he does love her as a person. That’s what drives the film — as repulsive as it is.” No. It’s clear that when it matters, he loves himself more and prioritizes his feelings more than he loves her. And she is supposed to love him more than herself or her needs, even when it is clear that the tragedy faced by them both is about her body, her self and her independence being violated first. Glorifying this kind of thinking is the problem. The issue is not whether the character could or would behave in that way, but that he does behave in that way, and that is being depicted as a good thing to do.
LikeLike
Kurinji
January 30, 2017
Some of us did fall for the martyr face and post coital face in guzaarish and jodha akbar . But kaabil was way into too much watching- paint-dry territory . I mean the audience is not entirely made of teenage girls and it seems too risky to make a movie entirely relying on the hero’s pretty face and bulging muscles . And should the leading pair always look right out of a vogue photoshoot even if they happen to be blind people? And the worst part is it has become so status quo in bollywood and noone bothers to complain about it anymore .Watching sparsh is highly recommended to avoid losing faith in the art form called movies.
LikeLike
olemisstarana
January 30, 2017
ooh, Ramitbajaj01… can you reproduce here for those of us who have not read?
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
January 30, 2017
Aran: the problem here is that the woman in any man’s life existing only to make his life comfortable, to put him first above all else — and that man being upheld as a gem of society.
I don’t know. I am not seeing these things.
She is not put in his life only to make his life comfortable. They fall in love… after she says no!
Does she put him above all else? I don’t know. We don’t see enough of her life to know this. She is a plot device to help HR get to the revenge stage. So I can’t say that she puts him above all else. They seem a genuinely-in-love couple. A generic couple — but we get the feeling they are equals.
And is the man being upheld as a gem of society? I did not get that at all!
Even when the woman is raped, it is about his coming to terms with it and his comfort, and this person is regarded as the ‘hero’ of the movie because he took revenge for something that the baddies took from him, forget what the wife lost in all this. The issue is that this is shown as an appropriate reaction to a rape and its aftermath.
That depends on how you look at films. I don’t see this film as prescriptive, and that this an “appropriate reaction to a rape and its aftermath.”
Is Aakhree Raasta “appropriate”? No. But it’s a revenge fantasy, like this one, and it’s up to us to work out whether the film works on those terms.
No. It’s clear that when it matters, he loves himself more and prioritizes his feelings more than he loves her.
Again, I did not get this. I got the feeling that he was shell-shocked, he could not be there for her when she needed him, and the next day, after he processed it and let his emotions out (at the dubbing studio), he got his grip on the situation and came home to apologise — only, it was too late. None of this tells me he “loves himself more.”
The issue is not whether the character could or would behave in that way, but that he does behave in that way, and that is being depicted as a good thing to do.
Again, no. I don’t think the film is showing this as a “good thing to do” at all.
The one flaw I felt was that this film equates rape = death, like many of its older ilk. I wish they’d kept her alive. HR could have still gone about his revenge. And by the end, she could have come to terms and begun her life all over again. Something like that.
I find it strange to defend this awful film, but these specific scenes did not come across to me the way they did to some of you and I’m curious to see if I’m the only one who feels this way. Any others?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anuj
January 30, 2017
Awful is a matter of perception Mr. B Rangan. Unfortunately you associate that word with 90% of commercial bollywood movies. Nothing wrong with that but its recommended that you mention an “imo” every time you call a movie “lousy” or “awful” especially considering that the only people who agree with your opinions seem to be your followers (fanboys/girls and cronies). And since you got a fetish for using fancy adjectives, it would be great to have you try your hand at script/screenplay writing especially with all the experience in journalism you got. The last time some armchair critic tried making a movie, Khalid Mohammad happened and the rest is history 😛
As for this rape angle of Kaabil, these feminists accusing this movie of being a male ego narration need to relax and take a backseat. Its just a story and one possible vision from the director’s point of view. Reaction of both protagonists concerned is highly possible in some situations at least. I never saw these pseudo feminists jump and write paragraphs on a movie like Kahaani where a female protagonist goes out to avenge her husband’s death and the entire awesomeness of the feminine angle.
LikeLike
Rahul
January 30, 2017
BR – “I find it strange to defend this awful film”
Sorry BR, you are alone on this. But if you want to buttress your argument with any box office stats of past, present and future Hritik movies for any territory in the universe, Anuj will be happy to chime in.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thulasidasan Jeewaratinam
January 31, 2017
I honestly am on BR’s side here. I just think it’s a fraction or a direction that the screenplay has taken in the character. It’s not like the writers decided to glamourize the protagonist’s struggle to prioritize himself over his wife’s trauma. It’s just the protagonist’s inability to come to terms with his disability which severely renders him helpless. It’s an arc – the difference is that it’s an arc of a character in a poorly scripted film that turns all revenge-drenched towards the second half, which is the only intention behind the makers of this vehicle. It wants to drench itself in the blood, allowing Hritik to rein in his superhero mode and showcase stunts of self-fulfillment fantasy escape. To concern itself with that plot, the makers of this film simply adopted the rape leads to death leads to revenge arc, which is dated.
I would think that the protagonist’s focus of his own trauma before his wife is rather selfish in a different film – in a drama, in a film that chooses to drive the protagonist into walls of wounded ego of male pride, of his inability to help himself or his wife. Would his wife be the same? Can he return back to his marriage? In other words, in a film that depicts the psychological wounds of a couple that tries to spring back from a trauma – WHICH isn’t the film Kaabil wants to be.
When viewing the subtext of a decision, arc, action or characterization, one has to first take in the context of the film. What does the film want to do? Does it do it right? Viewing everything under a highly-set bar is also a variation on narrow parochialism.
ALSO, there’s a film of such kind that I wrote on the second paragraph. Very recent; by Asgfar Farhadi. The Salesman. (Now that’s a different film, concerning a couple’s reaction to a (possible) rape, wounded male ego, building female insecurity).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Aran
January 31, 2017
Anuj, it is understood that anything anyone writes here is a matter of perception and a matter of opinion. No need to say imo with every sentence. Some people’s opinion though is based on an expertise gained through studying the craft of filmmaking and the language of cinema – an opinion that is recognized and paid for as a professional skill I might add, while others’ opinions are based on an unexplained (and imo! wholly unnecessary) devotion to Hrithik Roshan and his movies.
As for your dig at Khalid Mohammed, if that’s all you’ve got… then I think I’ll now go find and watch Silsilay, the only movie in his body of work that I think I missed. 🙂
BR, I suppose your ‘any others’ query goes out to people other than me and I think I’ve been clear in my reading of the scenes / movie, so I don’t think that thread needs a response from me at this point.
However, I’ve not been around this blog’s comment section for a while as much as I want to – I read pretty much all the reviews but don’t read comments as much lately as life has gotten in the way for the past few months. So I wonder if responding to Anuj is feeding the troll, so to speak. -_-
LikeLike
praneshp
January 31, 2017
@brangan: – “I find it strange to defend this awful film, but these specific scenes did not come across to me the way they did to some of you and I’m curious to see if I’m the only one who feels this way. Any others?”
I know how I generally feel about this sort of outrage, but for specifics I can go watch the movie. Will there be compensation of some sort?
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
January 31, 2017
I thought the film was awful, but with Sanjay Gupta at the helm, I didn’t have many expectations. (It is sad that they didn’t clear that low bar either.) I must confess to having liked him in Jodha Akbar, Lakshya, Dhoom2 and even parts of Koi Mil Gaya. I do feel sorry to see his career trajectory slow down.
Anuj, you don’t see the difference between a revenge drama and a film which seems to think that a rape victim should end her life to save her husband any more emotional trauma, just so that the husband could take revenge? As a plot device, that stinks. Especially today.
p.s. Is there any particular reason for the slam at ‘pseudo feminists’? Also, if you are so sure that this blog is populated by BR’s fanboys/girls and cronies’, why are you here? To teach us the error of our ways? 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Aditya (Gradwolf)
January 31, 2017
A very small change in the script would have made a huge change in this reading IMO. When Supriya goes through the whole gamut of trying to calm him down, make him eat dinner and the awful dialog about how she understands she’s different to him now (to put it mildly), Rohan just sits there listening (or not, who knows). That is the issue, he doesn’t react, forget react if I remember correctly, he doesn’t even look at her. That’s where – while I am with BR usually on the whole plausibility of events/reactions and that characters can act the way that is not ideal or progressive or just not the way we want them to – I think Kaabil goes from being just a story to something that silently endorses a form of social injustice. That’s really the moment for me that is the crux of the terrible depiction of rape in this film as pointed by most unfortunate souls who had to sit through this film.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
January 31, 2017
Nothing wrong with that but its recommended that you mention an “imo” every time you call a movie “lousy” or “awful”
Redundant, no?
Considering it’s his blog, and he’s posting his review of a film (any film), whose opinion would he be spouting, other than his own?
You’re free to disagree with him; he’s used to it, even if you think we’re all acolytes, sitting at the feet of the master.
[Considering you take pot shots at Aamir Khan quite frequently yourself, have you appended ‘IMO’ to those posts?]
LikeLiked by 3 people
brangan
January 31, 2017
anuj: Take this from me. Unless one is the Buddha, anything anyone says is an IMO, reflective of only his/her views and not the universe in general.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Aditya (Gradwolf)
January 31, 2017
If Anuj’s perception is that Rangan thinks 90% of commercial Bollywood films are awful, I wonder what he feels about some film critics out there!
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
January 31, 2017
Thulasidasan Jeewaratinam: It’s just the protagonist’s inability to come to terms with his disability which severely renders him helpless.
Absolutely.
And while I agree in general with this part of your comment — “I would think that the protagonist’s focus of his own trauma before his wife is rather selfish in a different film” – I wouldn’t even go as far here. For “focus” denotes a conscious effort. This isn’t conscious.
It was very easy for me to believe that HR’s reaction — given his disability — was something like PTSD (rather than egoism or selfishness). He’s shell-shocked. He could barely process things himself, let alone be there for his wife. That’s what that scene is about. He’s probably not even listening to her. And this reaction — while not ideal — is entirely understandable under the circumstances, given his condition.
Which is why this isn’t, as you rightly say, about the “wounded ego of male pride.” This isn’t even about ego. This is about his realisation that for his his attempts to overcome his ‘disability,’ this is what can happen.
Aran: Yes, I completely got your POV. Thanks. I was wondering if there were others who wanted to chime in about what they felt.
LikeLike
Rahini David
January 31, 2017
BR: I kind of agree with Thulasidasan that this would be worse in a drama or soap opera.
And if we consider role reversal we should notice the old movies where women who have just lost their husbands mourned the loss of their pottu, poo, thali and such stuff. Before I knew the significance of that whole business, I used to be damn irritated about the whole, “Aiyayo poiteengala, ini naan pottu vechuka koodatha, poo vechuka mudiyatha” and all that. A man has just died for God’s sake. After I understood how widows are treated, the whole thing fell into perspective but I still don’t like that sort of mourning.
Even now, I am hugely offended when I hear men advised to wear helmets as they are now married and have dependents in their lives. Lives of unmarried men matter too.
I also understand that the movie with a disabled protagonist may be musing about his own disadvantage when such a thing happens.
But no, a man who even for a split second allows his wife to say something like “I understand that I am now different to you” after a rape is not a hero at all. This is a terrible terrible “kick the dog” moment. This is too serious a thing and not akin to a college boy peeing on the principal’s door step and then genuinely feeling bad the next day when he is sober.
See it is that single line “I understand and accept that I am now different to you” that makes all the difference. If she had told something like “I understand that you are in even more pain than I am after this incident” and he had let her, then I wouldn’t have a problem with this at all.
Rough Translation: “Oh you died and robbed me of my right to wear mangalsutra.”
LikeLike
Anuja Chandramouli
January 31, 2017
Personally, I can’t begin to stress how much I loathe watching a film where a rape victim is made to kill herself. I wrote an article on this very subject and the finer points of rape in Tamil cinema many moons ago, after watching Yuddham Sei and being thoroughly outraged with Mysskin’s need to bump off rape victims:
http://www.behindwoods.com/tamil-movie-articles/movies-08/yudham-sei-06-08-11.html
As many of you pointed out, Supriya’s suicide, her note, and the godawful dialogue are truly appalling. But that said, can’t say I have a problem with Hrithik’s portrayal of that character. Traditionally even the most macho of men have trouble dealing with this kind of emotional trauma and if for him, the shared trauma of rape boils down to a personal sense of failure it is entirely plausible and dare I say it, typical? In a proper, commercial revenge saga that is about all the realism we can hope for.
LikeLike
brangan
January 31, 2017
Rahini David: But no, a man who even for a split second allows his wife to say something like “I understand that I am now different to you” after a rape is not a hero at all.
At this stage, he is not yet a hero. That happens around interval point, a little later. At this stage, he just comes across as a very flawed, vulnerable, all-too-human man.
And he does not “allow” her to say this. She says it, and he sits there, lost in his own world, frozen. The scene isn’t as if she is saying something and he is dismissing her. It’s that she is saying something and he’s not even in a place to listen or offer support.
That’s the difference I am trying to point out.
It’s a pity this scene had to come in a hero-narrative. The aftermath of a rape and its effects on a couple — like Ghar, or Vaanam Vasappadum — isn’t something that’s been explored as a drama all too often on screen.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Filistine
January 31, 2017
Rahini: “See it is that single line “I understand and accept that I am now different to you” that makes all the difference. If she had told something like “I understand that you are in even more pain than I am after this incident” and he had let her, then I wouldn’t have a problem with this at all.”
I think that captures very well my own reaction. Everything after that point felt awkward. I wonder if it points to a very male reaction to the rape, from a writing perspective. However sympathetic we are, I doubt if men can really “understand” rape – the intrusiveness, the trauma. Yes, men can be rape victims as well. But the nature of female rape involves more than just sex – the suppression, the violation and the general patriarchy/misogyny that goes with it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
sanjana
January 31, 2017
Does he deserve benefit of doubt for his not behaving politically correct leading to suicide of his girfriend?
I am yet to watch the movie and so I will listen to both sides of the argument.
LikeLike
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
January 31, 2017
BR: Unless one is the Buddha, anything anyone says is an IMO, reflective of only his/her views and not the universe in general.
Amen to that. 🙂
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
January 31, 2017
For a Hindi film that dealt with the trauma that rape inflicts, not only on the victim, but also on her husband, I think nothing comes close to Ghar. It’s important to note that the protagonist didn’t feel the need to kill herself, so as to ‘cleanse’ herself.
That said, I didn’t have the visceral reaction to the scene in Kaabil that many others had. To me, it was this particular person in this particular situation, who could not react at that precise moment to reassure his wife. So? He is flawed. He is human. He didn’t react the correct way.
My problem with the film was that there was nothing to prepare us for that emotional arc in this character. Nothing that gives us a sense that this is what is happening to him. Between the script not really developing the emotional scope of the character, and Hrithik’s own inability to transcend what’s written on paper to show that conflict, the scene failed big time.
The suicide note was a goddawful plot device.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Aran
January 31, 2017
BR, your interpretation of the scene and the character at that moment is too kind. I suppose that means that if he is shell-shocked and his wife isn’t, he is the ‘weaker’ of the two there. I’m pretty sure Sanjay Gupta and Rakesh Roshan would not be stepping up to endorse that reading anytime soon. 🙂
Also, I somehow missed this one paragraph in your earlier comment: “The one flaw I felt was that this film equates rape = death, like many of its older ilk. I wish they’d kept her alive. HR could have still gone about his revenge. And by the end, she could have come to terms and begun her life all over again. Something like that.”
Wouldn’t have worked, because if she had been alive, why would it have been his revenge instead of her revenge?
LikeLike
brangan
January 31, 2017
Anu Warrier: There’s a scene in Ghar where Rekha tries to jump out of a window after the rape.
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
January 31, 2017
Yes, but it in the immediate aftermath, not to absolve her husband of his emotional trauma. I can absolutely understand the reaction, actually, that sense of feeling somewhat defiled (which, by the way, has nothing to do with the woman’s ‘purity’, but reflects on the invasion of her sense of self). I think there’s a difference.
Even here, if Supriya had committed suicide in the aftermath, in that sheer rage, terror, helplessness – there would have been a sense of understanding that while this may not be the best way out, one can see the ‘why’ of it. Here, I don’t know – it sticks in your craw, the scene leading up to Supriya’s suicide. The reason for it. It worries me, like a puzzle piece that doesn’t fit in correctly. 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
January 31, 2017
When a similar thing was pointed out in the misogyny thread someone admitted he did not understand why I was objecting to Rajini ‘forgiving’ Revathy. “Should she not be forgiven? Should she be punished?” I was asked. If that person was sarcastic that is one thing. He REALLY did not seem to understand (I think). I did not even know what to say.
Rahini David: I’ll answer on behalf of the person in question (nope, he’s not a sock 🙂 ). IIRC, Rajini forgives the rapist, not Revathy. But then, I would not have a problem had the character ‘forgiven’ Revathy’s because, to me, the characters should be faithful to the milieu. Here the story takes place in a patriarchal village where chastity and masculinity are the defining characteristics of women and men, respectively. Furthermore, as BR had elaborated in the MNM thread, certain films need to be viewed through the ‘screenplay angle’ and the ‘eyes’ of the characters involved. In such films there’s no need for the ’emotional connect’ at all! Look how BR ‘views’ Aakhree Raasta (a typical Bhagyaraj film where the rape victim commits suicide). It may not work for somebody if they want to view it ’emotionally’.
LikeLike
MV
January 31, 2017
The song that proclaims the lead characters’ love goes “mein tere kaabil ho ya tere kaabil nahi”. So possibly there was some sense of insecurity about their worthiness to each other. This, with the rape trauma, made her do what she did. Maybe.
But Hrithik not reacting to her statement – especially when he knows that she cannot see his body-language or expressions – doesnt quite sound plausible. I am no one to say, but since one of his senses is compromised, wont he more than make up for it by using words or touch? But as Brangan says, it is fine to leave this out in the screenplay, as it is a revenge movie rather than a drama.
But then, is it that difficult to just add a simple indicator within the screenplay, that rape was not (or should not be) the reason for her suicide, without sounding like a public service message? Or infact, even at the risk of sounding like a pubic service ad, have some scroll at the end of the movie or at the beginning that the makers dont endorse the idea of rape equalling shame yada yada?
LikeLike
Anuj
February 1, 2017
“Some people’s opinion though is based on an expertise gained through studying the craft of filmmaking and the language of cinema – an opinion that is recognized and paid for as a professional skill I might add, while others’ opinions are based on an unexplained (and imo! wholly unnecessary) devotion to Hrithik Roshan and his movies.” ~ and majority of them just watch movies and form their opinions without bothering about the so called “experts”. Funny that these same experts you speak of have varying opinions as different as chalk and cheese. As for you devotion bit, the only thing I’m devoted to are entertaining films. Pity that you form opinions & even go to the extent of terming someone as a “troll” only for disagreeing with your favorite reviewer and his bunch of yes men/cronies.
“As for your dig at Khalid Mohammed, if that’s all you’ve got… then I think I’ll now go find and watch Silsilay, the only movie in his body of work that I think I missed” ~thanks for reminding that there’s a movie by that name that actually exists. The way likes of Khalid, Rangan, Raja Sen and many more go about shooting their mouths off on films, you might be tempted to believe they’re nothing short of Sorcese and Sippy themselves.
“If Anuj’s perception is that Rangan thinks 90% of commercial Bollywood films are awful, I wonder what he feels about some film critics out there!” ~yes most of them are a selfish bunch of joker. Imo, a “professional” critics task involves stepping into the shoes of the movie’s “target audience” (niche, urban or mass) and review a movie from their perspective. However since most critics out there are just a bunch of regular “movie watchers” with superior English writing skills than the average movie goer, “researching” and “analyzing” the audiences’ sensibility is something they’re incapable of. And hence they’re not worth being taken seriously, neither by the paying public, nor by film-makers and nor by anybody remotely associated with the process of film-making (post production publicity and gimmicks not included).
LikeLike
Anuj
February 1, 2017
Continuing from above, the only so called “critics” I somewhat agree with at most times and believe that they’re a lot more authentic and professional in their approach are Rajeev Masand, Anupama Chopra and Komal Nahta.
LikeLike
Feryal
February 1, 2017
If I may offer a different perspective on the whole rape leading to suicide though…in the interval scene where Rohan talks to the cops, he talks about her letter and says that it wasn’t the first rape that lead her to suicide. They still try to soldier on. She was even able to accept that the law wasn’t going to do much more than twiddle their thumbs …its when she’s raped a second time and threatened with its continuation that she kills herself. It’s that loss of security fin her future, the helplessness it would arouse in her husband constantly, that leads to her decision.
LikeLike
Rahini David
February 1, 2017
Honest Raj: I know you are not him. I don’t automatically suspect people of sock puppetry. Only when they seem to be ‘just the type.’
I do understand the milieu and all that. I do cut slack for older movies and movies with uneducated protagonists. But not if they are ‘heroes’, heroes are quite different from protagonists, no? I still did not watch that Rajini movie and I can understand that only the rapist is forgiven and the wife is merely accepted (for want of a better word). When I am able to I will confirm this, but he is the protagonist anyway.
I don’t that much slack for movies that were made after my birth. It is a sort of ‘I am not that old’ thing for me.
The movie may be a 1984 movie, but the guy who asked “Should she not be forgiven” asked it in 2016. Why should I cut slack for him? If he had said the same thing that you said about only the rapist being forgiven, then I would accept him as a reasonable person. But he didn’t, no?
I personally cut a lot of slack for misogynistic mythological stories and of course all cultures including ours are full of such stories. But when a person narrates a misogynistic mythological story and then claims that it is a morally uplifting, I do get irritated. But if they say something like “Antha kaalathulalaam paavam avunga apadi thaanea” then I wholeheartedly accept such stories. There is a lot more to such stories and anyway they preserve the attitude of our ancestors in a sort of amber.
Also, maybe the people involved in the making of those older movies did not know better. But Kaabil pudhu padam thaanea.
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
February 1, 2017
@Anuj, so in your estimation, the only critics that are worth following are the ones you agree with? Got it.
If critics are not worth following, their views are not worth taking seriously, why are you on a critic’s blog reading him? 🙂
LikeLike
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
February 1, 2017
Rahini: Actually, KKK was a remake of Puttanna Kanagal’s anthology film Katha Sangama, which came almost a decade before. I’ve not seen the Kannada film, but it was an offbeat one made with little or no compromises. Unlike the Tamil version, the hero doesn’t beat nor forgives the villain (ironically, played by Rajini himself). Maybe, the makers of the Tamil version had to compromise on certain aspects to make it more appealing to the mainstream audience. I’m yet to see Kaabil, so cannot really comment on that. But I do not subscribe to ‘older filmmakers did not know better’ viewpoint.
LikeLike
Anuj
February 2, 2017
“so in your estimation, the only critics that are worth following are the ones you agree with?” ~up to you. They’re the one’s I trust and I speak only for myself.
“If critics are not worth following, their views are not worth taking seriously, why are you on a critic’s blog reading him?” ~ nothing wrong in knowing the views and opinions of the other side of the spectrum even if you do not agree with them 99% of the times 🙂
LikeLike
Aran
February 2, 2017
Anuj, first off, I apologize for the troll comment. I didn’t call you a troll, but the question itself was a bit mean-spirited of me. Though just for the sake of clarification of my motives, I merely wanted to know whether it is worth engaging. I try not to get into back and forths on the internet unless I feel it’s going to help the conversation or the other person in some way, or else it’s just a waste of time for both parties. In any case, it was not a nice thing to say from my side and I apologize.
About the notion of critiquing, which is what a critic does (or is supposed to do), it traditionally is about analyzing something through particular lenses and determining whether it has value. In the case of movies, they try to evaluate them most particularly through the lens of the craft of film-making, though issues like media effects on society, responsibility of art, freedom to make art and so on are some issues that can be applied as well, as evidenced just by this thread. A critic’s job is not to determine whether the ‘target audience’ or ‘average public’ would like the movie. No one can do that really. No one can say what the public will like or dislike. If that were the case, all film-makers would just employ these people who know the pulse of movie-goers and never make a flop movie ever again.
LikeLike
Arun Pradeep
February 2, 2017
The film was such a letdown. Its jus lazy writing. The fact that Hrithik is a dubbing artist is shown once, which is enough to justify his ingeniousness later. Ithalaam nambiyaar kalathu technique.
And the open space in the middle of the building where the elevator is supposed to be built. They show it once earlier and it comes into play again much later. I was hoping against hope that the throwaway remark made by Inspector Nalavade, to a constable about Whatsapp groups, doesn’t come into play later. Thankfully it did not.
One other saving grace was how the crowd at the mall did not break into applause after Hrithik and Yami find each other again.
LikeLike
Meeraj (@meeraj2709)
March 4, 2017
This page looks like a hirthik roshan haters club..Those who cant act in a 1 minute video are challenging the man who is ruling in the industry from 17 years..common guys stop making so much of analysis..
The reviewer is certainly getting enough junk of favors from khans to bash hrithik..See his old reviews he under reports failures of khans and johars while exaggerate little flaws of hrihtik roshan..
To him befikre and ae dil hai mushkil was better than kaabil..get a life you filthy guy..
Now we know which direction your pendulum swings..A coffee night with johar ha..??
Just by using hi fi words and bashing by making fun of someones hard work is not letting you any were..It s an entertainment business,if you really want to scratch your head than watch discovery channel or watch kuch kuch hota hai or ddlj with that camp..
Stop calling yourself a reviewer,YOu dont even deserve 1 mb of my internet data,…
Heights of swinging MR pendulum…#Boycottrangan
LikeLike
Odiyan - Mallu Himmatwala - Sreekumar menon - mallu sajid khan...
December 3, 2018
@Meeraj:
Congratulations for the success of the #boycottrangan campaign…
LikeLike