Spoilers ahead…
The last time we got a musical – a musical in the genre sense of the word, and not simply a film with a few songs – was probably in Shirish Kunder’s Jaan-e-Mann, of which I wrote: “We sit there helpless, as if hypnotised, just as [a character] is in the Jaane ke jaane na song sequence. The staging for this number includes, among other things, dancing Disney dwarves, and you may ask the question: Why dancing Disney dwarves? But the more valid question is: Why not? Musical interludes are unreal in any case, so what does it matter if the backup dancers are damsels or dwarves?” Anurag Basu’s Jagga Jasoos left me in a similar place, somewhere between “what was he smoking when he made this movie?” and “please, can I have some of that?”.
Musicals don’t need a reason for people bursting into song, but Basu, charmingly, gives us one. Jagga (a remarkable Ranbir Kapoor; more about him later, and the child actor who plays young Jagga is terrific too) is born with a stutter, and the man who will become his father (Saswata ‘Bob Biswas’ Chatterjee) tells him that the stutter will go away if he sings. So Jagga sings, and so do the people around him, and so does the movie. In a loose sense, you could call Jagga Jasoos a pop-opera, closer to the Broadway musicals than even Jaan-e-Mann, because even the lines that would normally be spoken are largely sung – Pritam scores them like recitatives.
Do people listen to lyrics anymore? This question kept popping up as I watched the film, because we clearly love the big splashy song picturizations in our cinema and we hum along with the music, but what about the lines? Pritam sometimes goes overboard with the orchestration, so we don’t hear all the words, but when we do hear them, they’re delightful (thank you, Amitabh Bhattacharya), and to “tune out’ during these passages (the way one tunes out during a song) is to miss most of what makes Jagga Jasoos such a joy. The “cornflakes song,” for instance, is so adorable that you want to pinch its cheeks, but it also contains a clue.
Jagga Jasoos joins a count-on-the-fingers-of-one-hand list of Hindi films (Heer Ranjha, Thodasa Roomani Ho Jayen) whose characters converse mostly in verse. When Jagga confronts the journalist Shruti (Katrina Kaif), he raps: “Calcutta se aayi hai journalist patrakaar / You’ve come to do a story about illegal hathyaar.” (I hope I’m remembering these words right, but this is the general sense.) Later, when they land in Africa (among the many Easter eggs, a fictional country named Shundi, from Satyajit Ray’s Goopy Gyne Bagha Byne, which is, again, a kind of musical), they look for a hotel named Agapastala. That name becomes part of a rap verse, and I chortled with glee at the rhyme Jagga comes up with: “Bikaneri bhujia wala.”
There’s an air of musicality even in the non-music bits, like the rhyming name of Jagga’s father: Tooti Footi. It sounds like a cross between an ice-cream flavour and a broken contraption in Harindranath Chattopadhyay-land. And how lyrically Jagga’s speech impediment is described: his words “so so ke nikalte hain,” they stagger out as though after a slumber. It’s probably impossible to translate this film without losing its tutti-frutti flavour, and I wondered how the subtitler managed.
I realise I’m still talking about the musicality of this movie, and that’s because that is the movie. Along with the sung “dialogue,” we get dazzling songlets. One takes off on the percussive sounds in a room, like that of a creaky fan. Another one uses the refrain “question mark,” quite literally redefining the sawaal-jawaab tradition in Indian classical music. Some of these songlets move the story forward. Some of them are there just because it’s fun to see people sing and dance, like in the post-party Khaana khaake number, which had me grinning like a goofball. I’m sorry to get all judgy on you, but you’re not alive if you don’t smile when “sannata” is rhymed with “Khambatta.”
The goofy nature of this song is borne along an undercurrent of melancholia, for amidst the conga lines and the genial hamming, we see a birthday cake for Shruti’s dead boyfriend. Jagga extrapolates the general refrain of the song (sab khaana khaake daaru peeke chale gaye) into the Meaning of Life itself, which is just one big party, where we eat, drink and leave. (In comparison to these songlets, the actual songs – even though candy-coloured and brightly choreographed – look pale.)
This sense of something… more pervades Jagga Jasoos, like an Amar Chitra Katha comic where we get a rollicking yarn plus snatches of philosophy. There’s a child’s-eye view of Big Problems, like our apathy to issues like farmer suicide and terrorism (the film opens with a nod to the Purulia arms-drop case). What if, instead of guns falling from the sky, we got cookies and cake? That’s the childlike thought that ends the film. This isn’t the “message” one usually gets from a primly noble-minded movie with a cane in its hand. It’s just a little boy or girl kneeling before bedtime and saying a prayer.
There have been musicals on “odd” subjects before, subjects we wouldn’t consider a natural fit for singing and dancing. Alan Parker’s Bugsy Malone corralled a cast of children for a musical about gangsters. And just this year, at Cannes, Bruno Dumont unveiled Jeannette: The Childhood of Joan of Arc, where the Maid of Orléans was transformed into a head-banging rocker. But I’ve never seen a musical where an Indiana Jones adventure is viewed through the prism of Tintin comics. The plot is a riff on Last Crusade (acknowledged in a scene featuring a circus train), where the search for a missing father turns into something much bigger. But instead of an adult hero, we get Hergé’s man-boy (acknowledged through that trademark quiff).
There isn’t another thirtysomething Bollywood actor who can pull off looking like a boarding-school student, and there isn’t another Bollywood actor of any age who can pull off Ranbir’s extraordinarily loose-limbed performance here – he acts with his entire being. Jagga is an extension of the protagonist from this actor-director’s earlier collaboration, Barfi!, another innocent with a speech impediment, and Ranbir’s long stammers acquire a musicality of their own. (Saurabh Shukla, who plays a cop, delivers priceless reaction shots whenever Jagga begins to speak.)
The age difference between Jagga and Shruti is brushed aside, and it isn’t until the end that we get a hint of a romance – but the bigger issue is whether the real-life romance between the leads was instrumental in Katrina’s casting. How else could a character who’s supposed to sing and be a klutz go to an actress who has neither a musical sensibility nor a talent for physical comedy? It’s not just Ranbir who shows her up. Every other actor – especially the marvellous Saswata Chatterjee, who embodies every child’s dream daddy, one that takes you splashing through muddy puddles – is perfectly cast, and even the extras in the Khaana khaake number are excellent. What would Jagga Jasoos have been with a heroine who matched the hero?
And with a little more focus? The energy comes and goes. I know we’re not supposed to treat this film as a real action-adventure, but even as a lighter take on that genre, the chase sequences are an odd fit. An instance where the leads escape on ostriches sounds wonderfully wacky on paper, but on screen, it looks choppy. This is either some hasty last-minute cutting, or an editing rhythm I wasn’t able to cotton on to –because even an earlier chase, with Tooti Footi being pursued by an assassin, goes by in a flash of, say, three comic-panel strips.
And I have to say that the individual bits don’t quite cohere into the grand vision inside Basu’s head. The first half is beautifully structured as episodes within a framing device of Shruti narrating Jagga’s adventures to an audience of children. This is a meta conceit, because this audience of children is really the children in the audience beyond the screen – the child in us. Hence the cheeky question Shruti poses to a little boy: “Are you bored?” The illusion that we are the children listening to Shruti’s narration is maintained even at interval point, where, instead of a card saying “Intermission” (and thus reminding us that we are actually watching a conventional movie), Shruti simply announces that there will be a fifteen-minute break.
The first half slides beautifully between Shruti’s episodic narration and the actual story, with Jagga: Adventure #1 introduces us to Jagga’s detecting prowess, Adventure #2 introduces us to Shruti. But in the second half, this structure is abandoned, and I missed it (and the eccentric characters from earlier, like the cop who struggles with five phones). We get a more conventional movie, which is no longer able to sustain segues like the one where Jagga walks through the top floor of a clock tower and right into the premises of his boarding school, as though they were part of adjacent comic-strip panels. Some of the gags (like Tooti Footi always being underprepared and underdressed when he has to flee) aren’t worked out properly. They don’t have the rhythms the film’s musical portions have.
I guess I’m saying that the how is better than the what, the form better than the content – but, really, if you like cinema as an art form (as opposed to just watching a movie), Jagga Jasoos is a constant source of wonderment. Even the failed bits make you go “I see what they were trying to do there” instead of “really!” The invention is non-stop, right till the fun reveal at the end. A giraffe’s lazy amble across the screen functions as a wipe. The similarities between Shruti and Tooti Footi aren’t just in their actions, but also in the halves of a split screen featuring them on either side, with matching ketchup bottles. Pumpkins are used in catapults. The drama of things being dropped from the sky is complemented with names like Akash and Badal.
You sense the “let’s go do this and see what happens’ spirit in the team, and it’s infectious. Given the constant change of location – West Bengal, Manipur, Africa, even the hilariously out-there settings of the videos that Tooti Footi keeps sending Jagga – light and colour pour naturally into Ravi Varman’s camera, but his work is more impressive indoors, when the film slips between theatre and cinema, with stunning contributions from the production designer (Rajat Poddar) and editors (Akiv Ali, Ajay Sharma).
For almost three hours, Basu immerses us in a warm bath of a world where goats lick a little boy’s toes and giraffes preside over a family reunion. Every second is suffused with a sense of kiddishness. When the postman sees Jagga’s disappointment on not receiving a courier package, he hands him a sweet and pats him on the cheek. Early on, Tooti Footi balls up his fists in an approximation of the human brain and explains to Jagga how it works. The left half, he says, is logical. The right half is mad, magical. Anurag Basu has made a right-brain movie. I’m not sure it can be defended logically, and I’m not sure I care when the result is so mad, so magical.
Copyright ©2017 Baradwaj Rangan. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
ravenus1
July 15, 2017
Would some of the choppiness have to do with the fact that Ranbir and Katrina fell out during the filming and allegedly had very cold vibes, and some of the stuff had to be shot around them?
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
July 15, 2017
But how does that explain the cardboard-ness of her performance even in the non-Ranbir scenes? There’s not one moment where you felt she belongs in the film.
LikeLiked by 6 people
Kaj
July 15, 2017
“It’s probably impossible to translate this film without losing its tutti-frutti flavour, and I wondered how the subtitler managed.”
Sadly, in the Netherlands all commercial Indian cinema get subtitled with obvious machine translations, that are translated from the English subtitles. Obvious grammar and spelling mistakes, missing an essential “not” in a sentence (which I noticed because it was better subtitled in the trailer) or literal translations of idioms, the works. If song lyrics are even subtitled (sometimes they don’t even bother with those!) they sometimes contain italic codes that aren’t being picked up by that particular projector. The trailer for the new Imtiaz Ali had little i’s before and after every sung sentence.
LikeLiked by 1 person
sanjana
July 15, 2017
Khaana Khake, coffee peeke, review padke
LikeLiked by 1 person
Suraksha
July 15, 2017
I personally loved the movie. Although the length of the movie could have been shorter, it was a fantastic effort.
Is it just me or did I see Ranbir resemble Sanjay Dutt in one of the scenes where he has a sullen face with droopy eyes? Maybe it was just a reflection of all the hardwork he has put into the next character he will be playing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Krish
July 15, 2017
Jagga Jasoos is unlike anything one would see in bollywood. It is audacious, goofy and beautiful but also a bit of a misfire. It is a very difficult movie to conceive and execute and no wonder they took this long. There are pace issues in the movie but its a very highly recommended watch as you won’t see such movies in Bollywood. Ranbir is spectacular, katrinas role is an extension of the role she played in APKGK as clumsy bumbling press reporter. i thought she was goofy enough for her part. the person who played ranbirs dad was excellent. But the real hero of the movie are the music director and lyricist. I cannot but wonder what Rahman would have done here though pritam has done a superb job. Kudos to basu for attempting this. I doubt it will do too well but will be loved to be proved wrong.
LikeLiked by 1 person
funny23world
July 15, 2017
Ranbir had mentioned in his interviews that there will be a sequel. But it looks like the movie isn’t going to be enough of a commercial success to have a sequel made. Do they leave any bits loose for the purpose of a sequel?
Basu had said that this movie was made for his children. Perhaps it makes sense that the story, much like children’s cartoon episodes, is a hodgepodge of indulgent elements rather than a linear story. Does it really cater to children? (Perhaps i should ask this one to a child rather than an adult)
LikeLike
rahulandrd
July 16, 2017
You said more about remarkable ranbir later on, but you forgor to talk about his performance.
LikeLike
Shalini
July 16, 2017
The whimsy and quirks of “Barfi” left me annoyed, but this one – how did you describe it? “Infectious wonderment.” Yes, indeedy. Loved it. Shame about Katrina. Oh, about the sub-titles; the version I saw translated “sannata” as “sonata.” So, yeah.
LikeLiked by 2 people
chhotesaab
July 16, 2017
From your review, I can see that this was one movie which really got your cinematic juices flowing ! Hope to catch the magic in theater soon …… Hope more movies like this are made, not the least for your amazing reviews of such movies.
LikeLike
km79
July 16, 2017
Very well structured as usual. This movie is a one of its kind Nd a treat for people who grew up on Tintin, Huckleberry finn and Panchatantra. Taps the child in you.
Kudos to ranbir for pulling off such an unbelievable role with extreme conviction. In the Miss Mala case which gets narrated thru a song, his reactions are to die for, especially he imitating a typewriter.
LikeLike
tejas
July 16, 2017
There’s not one moment where you fell she belongs in films.
Fixed that for you.
By the way, I see this one has got you all creative and spitting your rhymes like a rapper — riff – quiff, thirtysomething – entire being, corralled a cast of children and so on! This article is one literary gem.
LikeLike
"Original" venkatesh)
July 16, 2017
I just glad that Ranbir Kapoor is making these movies at this stage of his career.
LikeLike
Shipra
July 16, 2017
Agree to all the mad and good things told about the movie.
Watched with children and definitely with right aide of my brain and definitely enjoyed it the most.
LikeLike
soniya singh
July 16, 2017
😃My ranbir always does something special 😘
LikeLike
the brangan fan
July 16, 2017
i guess they had katrina solely for the dance moves and “cartoony” looks?
LikeLike
lakshmi
July 16, 2017
tejas: “I see this one has got you all creative and spitting your rhymes”
Reminded me of these lines from his Ae Dil Hai Mushkil review
It’s melodrama with zing.
It’s melodrama that keeps you smiling.
Is your response a sigh?
A roll of the eye?
LikeLike
brangan
July 16, 2017
tejas: corralled a cast of children
My, my, what sharp-eyed readers I have (including lakshmi, of course). This bit of alliteration was my little tribute to Tennyson’s ‘The Eagle’ (He clasps the crag with crooked hands).
Though my favourite bit of alliteration was in a piece about Inglourious Basterds, where I cracked a three-letter repetition in “allowed Allied Alliteration” 😀
One does such things to keep going after 15 years in the trade ;-D
LikeLiked by 3 people
Anu Warrier
July 17, 2017
Just came back from the theatre, grinning like an idiot. 🙂 My oh-so-jaded 12-year-old stopped thinking of himself as ‘grown-up’ and chortled along, and gulped when Jagga kept waiting for the video-cassette-that-never-came. Hurray for the child within us! I hope it does well enough for a sequel – would love to watch Nawazuddin Siddiqui have some fun on screen. 🙂
Anyone notice that Basu also gave a nod to the Saswata Chatterjee’s early film? Bagchi was a brilliant touch. I didn’t even mind Katrina.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jai
July 17, 2017
Beautiful review for an absolutely beautiful film. I thoroughly enjoyed almost every minute of it. Katrina was a misfit as you rightly said; but then Ranbir and Saswata Chatterjee are so fabulous that they pretty much shift the focus away from how stilted and cardboard like she is! (An extended, acting version of how Shahid overshadows Nargis in the Dhating Naach song? 😉 😉
With so much delightful whimsy and light hearted quirks, JJ really reaches out and appeals to the child in all of us.
Mad, magical, indeed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rajarshi Dey
July 17, 2017
Well, the cake-dropping scene is also a homage to Goopi Gyne Bagha Byne: That’s how they end a war in that movie (Dropping bengali sweets from the sky). I am really intrigued and plan to drive a total 5 hrs to watch it.
LikeLike
gaurangimaitra
July 17, 2017
Reblogged this on Green Cardamom Chronicles.
LikeLike
Mani
July 17, 2017
One of my many fav moments. A throwaway shot of Stebe Jobs Computer Centre (as a Bong might have written) when Ranbir escapes from Saurabh Shukla and is on the run in Kolkata.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Mani
July 17, 2017
Sorry..Stebe Jobs Cyber Cafe I think
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
July 17, 2017
Kaj: The bane of Indian subtitles. Sometimes I’ll see a word with a weird capital letter and go, “How could they not have spotted that?” But subtitlers tell me that it’s all done at the last minute, so maybe that’s the real problem.
funny23world: Does it really cater to children?
I think the bright colours and the slapstic and the animals will appeal to children, though I can’t really imagine them “listening” to the songs and following a musical that way.
rahulandrd: I have talked about his performance, no?
km79: Miss Mala case which gets narrated thru a song, his reactions are to die for, especially he imitating a typewriter.
That first case is a piece of musical cinema for the ages. So wonderfully imagined. Such lovely music and lyrics, all taking the ‘mystery’ forward (like that delightful cornflakes song). I’ve been arguing with people here that the MUSIC is what this movie is about. Because if you take away the staging of the clock-tower case, for instance, with tunes and choreography and lyrics, it’s a very silly case that anyone could crack in two seconds. It’s not the “what” but the “how” that makes the case so fun to watch.
Anu Warrier: Did your son get the music/lyrics bit? Because a lot of people here are saying how annoying it is when people keep singing — and it makes me wonder if they only like a set of five fixed songs in a movie and only talk elsewhere.
Jai: Oh, man. You reminded me of Dhating naach. Shahid is so phenomenal and Nargis can’t even move her hip sidewards.
Rajarshi Dey: There are lot of Easter eggs, and I’m sure people will keep adding to the list 🙂 The thing, though, for me was that the film works even if you don’t know of Shundi. Just a bunch of cine-geek clues would have added up to nothing more than a quiz.
LikeLiked by 1 person
the brangan fan
July 17, 2017
the most saddening aspect of the film is the U/A certificate
there is no single sexual/violent scene
hats off to censor board
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
July 17, 2017
BR, definitely. He’s a vocalist, and is very, very interested in music, so for him, that definitely played a huge part in his enjoyment. And he’s used to musicals, the Broadway kind, so he identified completely with the form and syntax of the movie. (I’m waiting for his demand for the audio cd – it will come soon enough.)
I’m not usually a great fan of dialogue being sung/recited, but I loved this one. Especially when, in one scene, Katrina stops singing and asks ‘Why am I singing too?”
@Shalini, I don’t think they were translating ‘sannata’ as ‘sonata’; they were keeping to the essence of what was being sung in Hindi (I think). Because ‘Bikaner ka bhirjiwala became African Impala in the sub-titles. Much like ‘vada-pao’ becomes ‘hamburger’. I think it’s because it would be impossible to translate literally and kind of make sense in English – and still keep the metre and rhyme.
LikeLike
Apu
July 17, 2017
I am tempted now to take Friday off (or pretend to be “working” from home) to catch this one. By the way, probably you know this: “Agapastala” in Bengali means “from top to bottom/all over” usually w.r.t. someone’s body.
LikeLiked by 3 people
travellingslacker
July 18, 2017
I didn’t like Barfi so hesitating to watch this one. Also, the sheer presence of Ms K is enough for me to avoid a film. This film is not doing well commercially it seems. Hope people will stop casting her after so many big flops now.
LikeLike
Deepak
July 18, 2017
After watching the movie on Sunday the first thing I did on getting home was to see what did Brangan think of the movie. And it’s really heartening when your favorite critic has similar observations as you did. The lyrics by Amitabh Bhattacharya who is probably at the top of his game right now, Saurabh Shukla’s expressions in reaction to what the other characters do, and the fantastic Saswata Chatterjee who I immediately pegged as Bob Biswas from Kahaani, etc. What a joy of a movie – kinda like Ben Stiller’s Secret Life of Walter Mitty in that you come out of the theater thoroughly refreshed and entertained. Definitely the best movie out of Bollywood this year as far as I’m concerned.
LikeLike
Anuj
July 18, 2017
The worthless bi product of 4 generations of nepotism delivers yet another trashy musical opera that’s got neither entertainment nor substance. Its an experiment gone horribly wrong, a fiasco of epic proportions, a box office DISASTER. And of course a movie made only to please armchair activists like BRangan, Raja Sen and their ilk. People like Anurag Basu/Kashyap, Imtiaz Ali, Vikaditya Motwane etc should be banned from making films.
LikeLike
Trishna
July 18, 2017
Well Written. Encapsules the movie in its entirety. Agree with the KAATrina comment.. but one does not expect much from her. yes perhaps you are right. It was that time of the Romance to have her cast 🙂 .. Here’s to the MOVIES 🙂
LikeLike
Reuben
July 18, 2017
One should have a helluva mind to create a movie like this. The quirky and disorienting images one is witnessing starts to fall in place and make sense as the movie progresses. Like for example the reason why Tutti Footi is wearing a cast in his hand is so nonchalantly explained in later scenes when we know he is the other Indian who has had a fall in the hotel. And the brief shot of a car now permanently wedged between two houses and flower pots now decorating is just a blink it and you miss it shot that alludes to the earlier equally brief shot of the bad guy getting stuck at the same spot.
Anurag Basu has shown some real respect for the intelligence of his audiences by packing in so many nuggets like that. No wonder he took the time to finish the film. Every frame has so much happening in it; so much to absorb. It is definitely a movie that requires a repeat viewing to soak in it a bit more.
And a great review too. As someone said it kind of has a literary flavour to it a la a David Foster Wallace piece of journalism
LikeLike
Anuj
July 18, 2017
Someone really needs a hell of a mind (or perhaps a lack of it) to enjoy this 2 hour 45 minute wannabe American/European migraine inducing never ending musical opera that’s got neither entertainment and nor substance. Even the attempted “child pleasing” concept in lost once the snoozeworthy narrative enters into concepts like the futility of war and cross border terrorism. I guess westernized camerawork and sets inspired by Tintin and Alice In Wonderland is good enough a recipe for the stupid, dumb and outright idiotic pseudo intellectual Goochi/Armani class chimps forming <10% of the total audience. This audience is best left alone with their Lunchboxes and Lipsticks under burkhas and chillies under their undies than mainstream piles of unbearable horse dung like Bombay Velvet, Jagga Jasoos and Tamasha!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
July 18, 2017
C’mon, Anuj, now that you’ve insulted all of us who liked the film, tell us how you really feel. Please. Don’t be shy.
LikeLiked by 8 people
Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan
July 19, 2017
Dear Anuj, as Brangan sir has repeatedly been stressing, it is one’s own opinion to like a movie or not. What he does in this space is putting forth his views and then he creates the space in comments section for people to oppose or agree to his points which leads (well.. most of the times) to a constructive argument of sorts. While we can clearly see that you hated the movie, there’s no point in demeaning the people who fall on the other side of spectrum. If you don’t like the movie and you badly want to have a discussion on it, try hearing the counterpoints which oppose your views and accept the ones which you feel right. Else, you always have the best and the most peaceful option, which is to ignore and move on.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rohit Sathish Nair
July 19, 2017
Anuj is right. We need genuine musicals like ‘Main Prem Ki Deewani Hoon’.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rohit Sathish Nair
July 19, 2017
Sing out the characters’ names. Sing out the event happening in each scene. Why use a stutter as an excuse for a musical?
LikeLike
Rohit Sathish Nair
July 19, 2017
And I must admire the fact that you are so economical at the act of ranting. All that you have to do is add a new director’s name each time
LikeLike
Reuben
July 19, 2017
Ha ha ha, this guy Anuj seems to have a visceral hatred for not only the film but towards those who enjoyed the film as well !!!
A good comic relief in an otherwise sober thread
LikeLiked by 1 person
Srinivas R
July 19, 2017
I can’t believe we are still engaging or trying to engage in a discussion with Anuj. When has that ever happened?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rahini David
July 19, 2017
If anyone understands the real difference between intellectuals and pseudo-intellectuals please type out a comment here. Please don’t assume it is unimportant. I have been searching for this answer for a long time. It is so elusive.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jai
July 19, 2017
@ Anu: “C’mon, Anuj, now that you’ve insulted all of us who liked the film, tell us how you really feel. Please. Don’t be shy.”—
Nice question. Only, I think we might have to allow for the possibility that Anuj hasn’t actually seen the film. 🙂 🙂 Or perhaps, went to watch it with the preconceived determination that he was going to hate “this 2 hour 45 minute wannabe American/European migraine inducing never ending musical opera that’s got neither entertainment and nor substance.”
@ Balasubramanian: “While we can clearly see that you hated the movie, there’s no point in demeaning the people who fall on the other side of spectrum. If you don’t like the movie and you badly want to have a discussion on it, try hearing the counterpoints which oppose your views and accept the ones which you feel right.” …
Sigh. I have said pretty much similar things to Anuj on more than one previous thread—-only to be lumped into the category of “the stupid, dumb and outright idiotic pseudo intellectual Goochi/Armani class chimps forming <10% of the total audience”. I don’t think Anuj wants to engage in a constructive debate or discussion at all.
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
July 19, 2017
Rahini David: I think a pseudo-intellectual is an intellectual who owns Gucci bags. That leaves me out — I am neither intellectual nor do I own a Gucci bag. You, on, the other hand… 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
MANK
July 19, 2017
I wanted to like this film so badly. one rarely come across such a bold experiment on such a massive scale in these days of Johar\chopra assembly line products. Alas. what was really amusing for first half an hour or so became exasperating by the interval and almost 2 hrs in to the movie i had given up completely, just sitting there dead tired waiting for the credits to roll.
the problem with this film is the same that i have felt with Basu’s previous films. he is too ambitious for his own good. he wanted to cram so much in to his film. spielbergian caper,a broadway style musical, satyajith Ray influences, Tintin, Harry potter even katrina playing the narrator and a sengupta, its too much even for a conventional film to take. So in a form bending experiment, this density becomes unbearable. The more theatrical musicals that i have loved – like Saawariya, Jhoom barabar Jhoom or Tamasha are rather lean and mean productions, they are visually dense, but they follow a simpler story line
My personal dislike for the Broadway style musical with people only singing and not talking played a big part in that. but with a little effort i do like movies like West side story or My fair lady or a Singing n the rain which all said and done perhaps still follow the pattern of musicals in indian cinema – stretches of drama interspersed with musical dance numbers, but still what Basu is attempting here is almost impossible to pull off. so its ends up a something you admire a lot , the cinematic craftsmanship is mind blowing really – the photography, the production design. but overall an unsatisfying movie, what one would generalise as a noble failure.
LikeLiked by 1 person
MANK
July 19, 2017
i have a feeling that i would like it much better on DVD- watching this in the comfort of home and at my pace- and this film may have a longer shelf life that way. i hope the failure of this film doesnt dissuade filmmakers from trying out more experiments.
LikeLike
Jai
July 19, 2017
@ Rahini: “If anyone understands the real difference between intellectuals and pseudo-intellectuals please type out a comment here.”
Oh, I have been searching for this answer a long time too. 🙂
I cannot claim my hypothesis as the correct one, but as far as I can see, the distinction is largely a matter of perception on the part of the person making that value judgement. The trend seems to be, if someone has said something opposed to your views, call them ‘pseudo intellectual’. But if they are in alignment with your views, they become ‘intellectual’! 🙂
Also, holding any sort of nuanced view now seems invites the ‘pseudo intellectual’ tag. Admire Hrithik’s charisma and star wattage; used to like his earlier movies like Fiza, Mission Kashmir and KMG, but feel his recent performances are ACTING—unnecessarily intense and belabored? Bingo—you are a pseudo!
And its not limited to films either. The same pejorative applies, for example, if you feel economic growth is important, but should not be at the cost of environment, and that wildlife needs to be protected. It doesn’t matter how much climate change data you marshal, how much time and effort you put into causes close to your heart. You still are a ‘pseudo intellectual’. Ah, well………
@ Anuj: I know this is going to invite a diatribe, but I couldn’t resist this analogy, given my passion for Indian mythos and epics. Have you heard about the concept of ‘viparita bhakti’? A state where you hate ‘the enemy’ so very much, it ends up being a dedicated devotion of sorts. Your generously stated contempt which you spew on this forum may be a form of reluctant admiration after all. Granted, a rather maleficent and unwilling kind—but clearly, ‘the other’ in this case, really, really matters. Why else would you even bother with these emotional paroxysms?
Stating your divergent opinion and defending it can be done in a civil and balanced tone, no? One that actually facilitates a level headed discussion? Your diatribes suggest something far more deep rooted. Just saying…….whether to accept it or attack the notion is, of course, completely upto you.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Rahini David
July 19, 2017
BR, if my 4 year research means anything at all, I know ONE thing about pseudo-intellectuals. You are the Rajinikanth of pseudo-intellectuals. Of that I am very sure.
So nope. Can’t be the Gucci. 😛
LikeLiked by 2 people
brangan
July 19, 2017
Rahini David: You are the Rajinikanth of pseudo-intellectuals
What? Are you saying I wear a wig at work? That if I say something in my reviews, it’s like saying it a 100 times? That my reviews contain veiled references about a future political career?
I demand an explanation,
LikeLiked by 10 people
Anuj
July 19, 2017
Pseudo intellectual : A pretentious, fake self proclaimed intellectual who likes barking against popular opinion with the belief that he/she would stand unique in a crowd but factually, has zero understanding of public opinion, perception and interest. Would find many among the communist parties and their followers, the “not in my name” gang of thugs and rascals, most of whom should be hanged in public from a lamp post. In the cinema domain we have many of them led by the most worthless and over rated of them all, Naseeruddin Shah. A desperate wannabe commercial superstar who did mass entertainers at the beginning of his career, only to fall flat on his face. But instead of accepting a drawback, went on to diss and mock commercial cinema and with the help of a few stinking piles of rotten art house junk that were mainly appreciated by delusional critics and rogue journalists, gained the guts to trash even the likes of Amitabh Bachchan and Rajesh Khanna. Girish Karnad is another rotten name that comes to mind. Among the film makers, we got the likes of Vishal Bharadwaj, Anurag Kashyap, Anurag Basu, Vitramaditya Motwane and few more who deserve to be jailed for manufacturing junk year after year and flooding cinema screens courtesy their hawala fundings and thereby occupying screen space which can be used to screen more public appealing films like Jolly LLB 2 (which lost screens to Rangoon in Feb) and Spiderman Homecoming (which lost screens in India to Jagga Jasoos).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rahini David
July 19, 2017
BR: I’ll get back to your political career (or lack of it) and veiled references after some time. I’ve got lessons to learn.
Anuj: Thank you. I am beginning to see light. But surely there must be some real, true-blue intellectuals in Indian Cinema. They may not be many but surely a person of your caliber would surely identified and be cherishing a few authentic intellectuals inside the entertainment industry. Could you name a few so I could look this up when in doubt?
LikeLike
Anuj
July 19, 2017
Rahini David : If you’re referring to film makers, I’ve always appreciated the one’s who’ve kept audience sensibility in mind without compromising on their self indulgence, irrespective of however minuscule their target audience is. Hrishikesh Mukherjee tops my list followed by Prakash Mehra. Was never a big fan of Manmohan Desai but no one would deny his understanding of the pulse of the mass audiences. Ditto for Yashraj Chopra although at a personal level, the only movies of his I’ve liked are Deewaar, Trishul, Chandni and Darr. Rakesh Roshan is another film maker whose got an excellent grip on his audience but unfortunately, being stuck in a Krrish loop is doing him no good. I’d love to see him make another Khudgarz or Khoon Bhari Maang. Johar/Barjatya and Aditya Chopra are makers I love to hate despite knowing the fact that they were masters of their craft of making magnamopous shaadi/doli cinema targetted specifically at a certain audience which formed a large chunk of the upcoming urban middle class/NRI audience of the late 90’s desperately seeking rooted Indian cinema. Its a different matter that the next generation of that same audience is more inclined towards the 3 Idiots and PK brand of cinema which Raju Hirani has exploited through his one of a kind ability of creating “mass appealing” satires. Among contemporary makers, I love watching Shoojit Sircar and Neeraj Pandey films. Despite them catering to a limited urban audience, they more often than not stay true to that audiences’ taste via films like Piku/Pink/Vicky Donor and Special 26/Baby. Kabir Khan, Rakeysh Mehra and Sanjay Bhansali have constantly blown hot and cold and we’d need to wait and watch a few more films of theirs before passing judgements. Farhan Akhtar despite making 2 outstanding gems in DCH and Lakshya has gone off the radar after a substandard remake of Don and an even worse sequel.
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
July 19, 2017
Anuj, I must give you credit for consistency. You never fail to deliver. So, basically, if someone made a film that you don’t approve of, they are pseudos, and shouldn’t have the screens made available to them lest it takes away from the type of films you want to watch.
Also, the films you want to watch should only star the heroes and heroines of whom you approve. Got it.
Let me just correct you on Naseeruddin Shah – he did not do commercial cinema ‘at the beginning of his career’. He made the switch only after he was well-entrenched as one of the ruling quartet of art and parallel cinema – none of his films in that genre were ‘stinking rotten piles of junk’ either.
But.. I can’t decide whether your vituperative diatribes are irritating, or amusing, at this point. carry on. You have a well-entrenched view that no amount of civil discourse can influence. So, carry on.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
July 19, 2017
BR, it has to be Gucci, does it? So owning a Coach bag makes me just a wannabe pseudo then? 🙂
Apropos of nothing – I wonder why ‘intellectual’ is such a pejorative?
LikeLiked by 3 people
Anuj
July 19, 2017
Its not me whose not approved of the films made by these junk directors. Hell, I don’t even watch most of them (JJ being one of the rare exceptions i did manage to catch up with). Its >99% of the audience whose given them a unanimous thumbs down over and over again for year and years together. As for Naseer “Saab”, i’m just surprised this junky flop machine defender of Kashmiriyat has even survived this far! Calling Sholay a substandard film was good enough a crime to have him isolated from the industry for good imo :p
LikeLiked by 1 person
edwardssammy
July 19, 2017
@Anuj, But BR luuurves Sholay. Does that make him an intellectual or a pseudo?
LikeLike
GODZ
July 19, 2017
@BR..Requesting you Review of Nolans Masterpiece Dunkirk. It’s already considered one of the best war movies ever..
LikeLike
Anuja Chandramouli
July 19, 2017
Apropos of nothing – I wonder why ‘intellectual’ is such a pejorative?
Anu Warrior: Exactly! It is sort of like the Peter insult right? Intellectuals as well as wannabe intellectuals irrespective of whether they tote sakku pais or what have you are fast becoming an endangered species and we need to show some love people!
BR and Rahini: ROFL
Finally how come we are not outraging about the whole ‘Nepotism Rocks!’ fracas in this space?
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
July 20, 2017
Anuj, apropos your reply to Rahini – I can get behind that, and I agree with most of what you said there.
Honestly, if you would comment in that manner, I may agree or disagree with you but I will fully back your right to not like something that others like. Why is there a need to be offensive? What does that get you? Other than stirring the pot so you can get people’s back up? Does slinging insults at all and sundry really help your cause?
Two, you seem to conflate public approval to good content. How then do you explain the likes of the Masti series? Also, if Jagga Jasoos had been a hit, would you then still classify it as self-indulgent?
Which film maker knows ahead of time which of his films will find audience appreciation? Hrishida’s finest film, the closest to his heart, Satyakam was a box office disaster. So was Basuda’s Teesri Kasam, again, one of the finest films in Hindi.
You also say …irrespective of however minuscule their target audience is.’ Well, Jagga Jasoos has a minsucle audience that loved the film. You see some of us here. Why insult us for liking it?
On the whole, this forum has been the site of civil discourse, however passionate we may get defending our own opinions. Surely we can do that without ad hominem attacks and pejoratives being flung about? Just a thought.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Anu Warrier
July 20, 2017
Finally how come we are not outraging about the whole ‘Nepotism Rocks!’ fracas in this space?
Anuja, I can’t say I’m taken aback. I’m a bit surprised that Saif went along with it. My personal opinion of Kangana is rather low, but this sort of ganging up doesn’t reflect well on any of te the people involved at all. At least Varun had the grace to apologise.
p.s. As to the Twitterati going up in flames about whether they would have said the same thing if Kangana was in the audience, I think so, yes. Today’s ‘hosts’ have to insult their audience to get their laughs. Only, they call it roasting.(And then I bemoan the lack of civility in civil discourse!)
LikeLike
Madan
July 20, 2017
@ Anuj: Re Naseer, as already pointed out, he started with parallel cinema and began to move to commercial films in the late 80s when the parallel cinema movement pretty much collapsed. I should add that this so called parallel cinema was often little more than a throwback to the 50s and 60s when it was still possible for filmmaker to make social dramas with a solid script without relying, at least not overly, on masala tropes. With the box office failure of Khamoshi, it was clear that masala was set to rule the BO in the 70s and thus parallel cinema took root. In essence, it offered an alternative to people who didn’t want to watch ONLY masala. I don’t see why you should have a problem with that because unlike today’s multiplex indulgences, parallel cinema was the king of low budget. But moving on, I do criticise Naseer for delivering half assed performances in commercial roles. He was easily the worst part of Krissh as well as Dirty Picture. If he find these films so beneath himself, he shouldn’t be a part of them; it’s hypocrisy to accept them and then openly reveal one’s contempt for them in the performance itself. I never had a problem with Om Puri’s performances in commercial films and maybe he should have convinced Naseer to see the light when he was alive.
About Anurag Basu, Jaga Jasoos may be his first bonafide flop (IF that turns out to be the case) after Tumsa Nahi Dekha, given that Kites was essentially your favourite Roshan’s vehicle and produced by his daddy. Murder, Gangster, why exactly are these pseudo-intellectual films? I mean, they are pretty much the kind of films that those you call pseudo-intellectuals wouldn’t touch with a bargepole. And what’s your problem with Barfi? By your own purely BO oriented approach of measuring the worth of a film, it was a hit. You have to be consistent, man! You can’t diss him just because he made a film YOU didn’t like if it happened to be a hit. Or did you make the mistake of thinking both Anurags are the same?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dracarys
July 20, 2017
@anuj, Dude…you need a good release…right now! 😎
Else you will hit ‘men’-o-pause a lot sooner in these times of ‘not-in-my-name’ stupidity!!!
LikeLike
Vikram S
July 20, 2017
BR, I liked jj very much. I have liked all those mgm musicals.
I dont have a Gucci bag but have a hidesign wallet… wondering which side of the spectrum I am on…
Re what anuj says, isn’t cinema a means to express? Irrespective of whether it gets popular or not?….and isn’t this forum about sharing views that may or may not be accepted by all as long as one doesn’t run down others who don’t agree…
LikeLike
Jai
July 20, 2017
Apropos the “Nepotism Rocks” fracas—-honestly, I think the “issue” has been dragged on so long, that its way past its expiry date. It was juvenile and rather bullying for KJo, Saif and Varun to have even brought this up as a gag—-it only gave Kangana additional free publicity. Whether she’s secretly pleased at that is anybody’s guess, I would think she probably is!
However, its hardly the first time hosts have directed snide remarks about people. If I recall, SRK and Saif made some gags about Vidya Balan at a Filmfare function they co hosted some years back? Ranbir and Imran poked a bit of fun at Aishwarya too, (with Ranbir imitating Ash in Guzaarish). Ash looked icily displeased! 😉 Of course, in both cases, the respective ladies were in the audience, which Kangana wasn’t in this particular case.
Aside from the pointless rehashing of this topic at IIFA, I did feel KJo initially did have a point. (Just as Kangana had a point. This isn’t a black-or-white issue, after all). Kangana has played the victim card to her benefit, most notably in her “Affair to forget” with HR (the very existence of which is disputed). And her “rags to riches” story has been repeated ad nauseam; so much so that after a point it does get a bit tiring. Great for her, she made it, she surmounted daunting odds. But is it just me, or does that tale lose some of its zing after it gets repeated for the 963rd time? I will freely admit to some extent of bias here—I am not really a fan of Kangana’s acting style, and that possibly colors my perception a bit.
BTW, KJo had written an article on NDTV a few months back, explaining his side of things:
http://www.ndtv.com/opinion/karan-affairs-in-defence-of-my-nepotism-1674657
And while I do agree that Bollywood does facilitate a considerable degree of nepotism (as do several other professions and businesses), I felt his POV was rather well articulated. He should have stopped with that, rather than bringing this issue up again! (BTW, I’m not a particular fan of his style of filmmaking, the only film of his I really liked was KANK, which, ironically, didn’t do all that well.)
LikeLike
Rahini David
July 20, 2017
Anuj: Well, I wouldn’t have said no to being enlightened about a few intellectual authors and even a few intellectual people from Hollywood but this itself was very interesting.
But I was surprised that you did not use the word “intellectual” in your last comment to me. Are these people admirable or intelligent? I don’t know about the Hindi Film Industry but I have always thought that sometimes admirable people are not surprising intelligent or that intelligent people are not always admirable. Could you weigh in your thoughts on this?
LikeLike
Jai
July 20, 2017
@ Anu Warrier: Completely agree re: your comment about Satyakam. Such an achingly lovely movie, filled with melancholy and pathos, and yet with such an empowering message at the end. I still can’t wrap my head around how this film could have tanked commercially.
Just goes to show that BO performance and the worth/content of a film are not always perfectly overlapping sets. Also, the legacy a film leaves behind– its evaluation in the years and decades post its release, is often markedly different from the relative BO performance at the time. Aradhana outperformed Khamoshi, but I would think most people would agree the latter is the better film. Likewise, both K3G and Gadar made more moolah than Lagaan, but I would think hardly anyone insists the former two are the better films, content wise. Swades often ranks among the top when people discuss SRK’s best films, but didn’t do well commercially.
Speaking of JJ, all indications are its not going to do well commercially—not too well at least. But all said and done, I would rate it higher than Ranbir’s commercial success in YJHD, for instance. It spoke to the child in me, made me laugh out loud at the cheekiness and whimsicality of some of the tracks. And made me swallow hard to clear the lump in my throat, when Tooti Footi left Jagga at the boarding school, and again when a grown Jagga keeps waiting for the video cassette birthday gift from his adoptive Dad. The amount of money JJ makes or loses, isn’t going to take away what I felt when I saw the film.
My wife and I plan to take our kids to see it this weekend in fact, though we will have to do some translation. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
sravishanker1401gmailcom
July 20, 2017
BR : “That if I say something in my reviews, it’s like saying it a 100 times?”
Would you repeat that line on Facetime with a straight face ? 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anuj
July 20, 2017
“Likewise, both K3G and Gadar made more moolah than Lagaan, but I would think hardly anyone insists the former two are the better films, content wise.” ~ now these are the kind of uninformed and baseless statements that completely need to be condemned and opposed. On what basis do you think Lagaan is a more appreciated film than Gadar or K3G? Gadar sold over 5 cr tickets at the time of release and is one of the biggest blockbusters in Hindi cinema folklore. Lagaan on the other hand performed in mostly just the major metropolitan cities. Even till date, Gadar and K3G generate higher television viewership than Lagaan. So claiming that Lagaan is a more “appreciated” film than these 2 is totally false and a baseless conclusion based on half baked metropolitan/NRI appealing journalism reports and armchair critics and their urban cronies. Look beyond the 5-6 major metros and you’d know all this talk of “universal appreciation” and “cult status” for films like Lagaan, DCH, Swades, Andaz Apna Apna etc is nothing but humbug. The appreciation and acceptance for these films is limited.
PS : I myself love Lagaan and rate it much ahead of Gadar and K3G.
LikeLike
sanjana
July 20, 2017
Anuj started a great debate and debate is what makes this space spicy.
LikeLike
Jai
July 20, 2017
Anuj, good to know that you love Lagaan and rate it much ahead of Gadar and K3G. We agree on some points at least! 😉
However, the point you are making on advancing Gadar or K3G as the “more appreciated” films as compared to Lagaan—is again conflating BO figures with content. I am not at all disputing that these films were more successful commercially. All I am saying is, and I repeat, Lagaan would seem to be the better film—quality/content wise. Since you yourself state you prefer Lagaan and rate it much higher that the other 2 films, it would seem that opinion is not only mine, no? 😉
And to clarify, I have never said that any of the movies you mentioned above (Lagaan, Swades, DCH, Andaz Apna Apna) have “universal appreciation”. No such movie exists! It really is quite impossible to appeal to everyone, no?
And while the tone of your comments is entirely your choice, would it be so difficult to counter points without bandying aspersions about “half baked metropolitan/NRI appealing journalism reports and armchair critics and their urban cronies”? Do you really feel name calling adds weight and gravitas to the points you are making? (And you do have interesting points to make, if shorn of all the vitriol, though I might not agree with them). Just a thought.
LikeLike
TheManWithTwonames
July 20, 2017
Such a cute, lovable and ambitious film, that I happily forgave it for its wrong notes. The writing had to be deceptively meandering and crispy enough to not induce lax -a very hard thing to pull off.
Hoping for another great time at the theatre this week with Dunkirk, though such brave claims are making me a tad apprehensive.
https://amp.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2017/jul/19/dunkirk-christopher-nolan-kubrick
LikeLike
rothrocks
July 20, 2017
@ Anuj: Basically Lagaan is a far more influential film than Gadar. Mind you, at the time me and my family chose to watch Gadar rather than Lagaan for whatever reason. Just saying that so that you don’t jump to level your metropolitan, intellectual insults. 😉 But it just so happened that Lagaan and DCH established AK as a star who was part of interesting films that pushed the needle as far as mainstream Hindi cinema goes. We can quibble about the quality of those films but not only have most of them been hugely successful, they have influenced Bollywood as such in a way the Anil Sharma/Sunny Deol combo hasn’t come close to. It’s like, Rafi sang some five digit number of songs and many of them were hits but we only remember a few hundred or so of them today, right? Not every film that is a hit may be found memorable and worth revisiting in the years to come. HAHK matched or surpassed the success of Sholay depending on how you parse your numbers but the former surely doesn’t enjoy the cult following that Sholay does. Hope you get my point.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jai
July 20, 2017
Apropos this whole BO collections versus movie quality discussion, I believe KJo was on record stating that he did not regret K3G losing out on several awards to Lagaan, since Lagaan was a classic and deserved to win. Of course, one can debate whether the Filmfare awards are rigged or not, but wasn’t it SRK/Dharma Productions/Yash Raj who were rumored to have the awards jury in their pockets?
And besides, I can’t think of any fathomable reason KJo would want to say this (being the producer and director of K3G), unless he really felt this way. It wasn’t as if Aamir was in his camp, or Ashutosh was a protege of his? If the very creator of a film feels another one is better than his, its worth thinking about, no?
The dichotomy of saying Box office collections=film quality is, by that metric, Chennai Express, Dhoom 3, Kick, Happy New Year etc would come into the list of best films made. Is that really a conclusion which will stand the test of time? Mind you, I watched Chennai Express and had a nice time laughing at the film. I saw Dhoom 3 and felt it had its moments. But to categorize these as great films, is beyond me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anuj
July 20, 2017
If Lagaan is a more “influential” film than Gadar, the television ratings and viewership 16 years post the release of the 2 films should prove the same, which unfortunately they do not. Go to Ludiana, Pathankot, Ajmer, Agra or Meerut and you’d hardly find a mention of Lagaan as compared to the viewership that Gadar still generates even today. As for AK’s establishment as a star, Lagaan and DCH helped him establish himself in only the 5-6 metropolitan cities. Among the tier 2 and tier 3 audience (which for >75% of the audience) he was already an established star courtesy his “universally appealing hits” like QSQT, Dil and the biggest of them all Raja Hindustani. In the Hindi cinema domain, a universal appeal refers to the Hindi movie watching audience across the nation in entirety. I’m sure any Tom, Dick or Harry would get this point.
As for collections of Kick, ETT and HNY, anyone who follows box office would know that collections of these movies crashed in week 2 and 3 and the only reason they generated huge numbers was due to face value and festive releases. Among the mass audiences, the word of mouth was even lower than 50% as indicated by the box office trend. On television, these films have garnered poor ratings as opposed to genuine universal entertainers like 3 Idiots, Dabangg, Bajrangi Bhaijaan, and Sultan.
LikeLike
Madan
July 20, 2017
“Among the tier 2 and tier 3 audience (which for >75% of the audience) he was already an established star courtesy his “universally appealing hits” like QSQT, Dil and the biggest of them all Raja Hindustani.” – All that may be true but circa 2001, Aamir was coming off the terrible flop Mela. His Sarfarosh was in fact sandwiched between two flops, Mann and Mela. So you cannot play down the significance of Lagaan to his career, no matter how hard you try. And his ‘hit rate’ improved like anything after Lagaan because his approach to selecting films also changed dramatically after Lagaan. Also, I think any Tom, Dick and Harry (your expression, not mine 😉 ) understands that by influence is meant the influence on other filmmakers, actors and others involved in the industry, not perception of TV/DVD viewers. What influence has Gadar had on other filmmakers, can you please be so kind as to articulate?
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
July 20, 2017
Anuj, you still seem to be conflating box office numbers or whether the film was ‘a hit’ with its content, as in whether it was a good film. Many really good films have not found love at the box-office; many horrible films have become hits – the Masti series, the ‘Welcome’, “No Entry’ type of films. So does it mean that everyone has to be making movie like that?
And your lip service to …irrespective of however minuscule their target audience is.’ is just that, since you don’t appear to accept that Jagga Jasoos has a miniscule audience that appreciated the film for what it was. But no, Anurag Basu shouldn’t make movies or be given theatre screens because you have decreed it. And anyone who likes movies you don’t, or that don’t become box-office hits are psuedo-intellectuals.
You know, it’s very difficult to have a rational discussion with someone who lobs insults at everyone who does not share his opinion, or who likes films or books or music that he doesn’t. Disagree with our tastes if you like, but you are not the sole arbiter (thank heavens!) of who should make what films and how, and who should be given theatres to screen their films.
(Neither am I, or Madhur Bhandarkar and Indra Kumar will never make another film as long as they live. 🙂 )
LikeLiked by 3 people
Jai
July 21, 2017
Anuj, dude, you can’t have it both ways.
Your position has been that Box office success is the only criteria to determine the worth of the movie—how “appreciated” it is. You have always been pouring scorn on the notion that the quality of a hit film may not be all that great, and conversely, that a movie which does not do well commercially, might actually be a very well made film.
But now, when confronted with a list of films which have been commercial successes but hardly “great” films content/quality wise, you seem to be adding qualifiers and asterisks by talking about ” collections of these movies crashed in week 2 and 3 and the only reason they generated huge numbers was due to face value and festive releases……”
C’mon, Man! Be consistent in the position you take, or have the gumption to accept that the others you are debating with have a point, after all!
A) You have somehow contrived to draw a distinction between the commercial successes of films like Kick, Ek Tha Tiger and Happy New Year—-as opposed to “genuine universal entertainers like 3 Idiots, Dabangg, Bajrangi Bhaijaan, and Sultan.”
Ahem……as per the BO figures which you are always fond of quoting, Kick, ETT and HNY all made more money than Dabangg, did they not? Since BO earnings are the holy grail for you, please explain to me why you deem Dabangg a “genuine universal entertainer” while the former 3 are somehow of a lesser category (though they earned more mega bucks??)
“On television, these films have garnered poor ratings”—really? You mean to say that each and every time any of these films have ever been telecast on TV, you have mapped their TRP’s to when Dabangg was telecast? Your indices to measure a film’s “worth” keep changing in order to suit your predetermined conclusion, no?
B) Please be frank about what you feel now about Dhoom 3? As I guess you already know, this is a film which earned almost as much as Dabangg 1 and 2 combined!! I didn’t particularly care for either Dhoom 3 or Dabangg, but I remember that you thought even less of Dhoom 3 than I did. And sure enough, if one peruses your comments on the Dhoom 3 thread, one can see the following remarks by you. (I am quoting the less incendiary ones only) 😉
“Aamir Khan cannot match the style,persona and x factor of Hrithik Roshan. No wonder they needed a boring done to death back story to pull this one off. And yet Aamir Khan makes a hash of it on most occassions. Definitely not at par with the first 2 installments. Time for them to sign up HR once more for the 4th edition if they decide to make one!”
And, “This one’s more of a Deewar on steroids although the midget does make a hash of it like he does with a lot of his films!”
Now that Dhoom 3 has earned such mega bucks, are you willing to “correct” your earlier opinion and claim it is a fantastic film? So do you now feel that Aamir did a better job in Dhoom 3 than Hrithik did in Dhoom 2 (since after all, Dhoom 3 seems to have made more money?)
For the record, I certainly don’t think so. I feel Hrithik was far more charismatic in Dhoom 2 than Aamir was in Dhoom 3. But your BO centric evaluation of films does not allow that judgement, does it?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jai
July 21, 2017
@ Anuj, Continuing from my comment above,
C) Salman Khan has, I believe, 11 films which have earned 100 crore and above—sprinkled across the 100 crore, 200 crore and 300 crore ‘clubs’. More than any other contemporary actor. So is it seriously your position that Salman is the finest actor over the past several years? Your BO driven judgement would certainly give him the crown, no?
D) I know you are a fan of Hrithik. And while I feel his performances have grown increasingly belabored and forced of late, I do admire his charisma. You must have seem umpteen interviews of his where he highlights his personal favorite performances as Guzaarish, Laqshya, Jodha Akbar, KMG. Even his earlier films like Fiza, Mission Kashmir. Funnily enough, he hardly ever mentions his films like Bang Bang and Krrish 3. How do you account for that? The latter 2 films made much more money, did they not? Perhaps Bang Bang made more money than Laqshya and Jodha Akbar combined? But as per your BO centric logic, this should be among Hrithik’s finest performances and one he should be proudest of, no?
Dude, at the end of the day, you are entitled to your views just as each one of us is entitled to ours. The issue lies in you presenting your opinions and hypotheses as iron clad truths, and insulting others who differ from your viewpoint. Try to take a deep breath and see some of the chinks in your “box office centric” view of things. 🙂 Peace out.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Anuj
July 21, 2017
Who are we to judge what’s quality and what’s not? Quality is a matter of perception and varies from individual to individual. It cannot have a universal definition. What does have a universal definition however, are components that can be measured and analysed via the data available to us. “Popularity” and “Acceptance” are such components that certainly can be measured and analysed based on the data available to us. And as per this definition and box office numbers/trending as well as television viewership down the years, Gadar is miles ahead of any other film of the previous decade up until the Baahubali franchise. Its beaten even the likes of 3 Idiots and K3G on theatrical footfalls and television viewership. An urban multiplex hit like Lagaan is not even competition for this legendary historic blockbuster in terms of popularity.
“What influence has Gadar had on other filmmakers, can you please be so kind as to articulate?” ~ Films are primarily made for an audience, not for the purpose of other film makers to take inspiration from. Its great if a particular brand of film making influences a budding film maker but that’s not the primary motive of making a film. As for Gadar’s influence on the audience, you could read more about it here : http://www.indiawest.com/entertainment/bollywood/sunny-deol-s-gadar-ek-prem-katha-celebrates-years/article_baae2be6-3341-11e6-b948-f7045e03c262.html
“many horrible films have become hits – the Masti series, the ‘Welcome’, “No Entry’ type of films. So does it mean that everyone has to be making movie like that?” ~ Welcome and Masti are cult films for their target audience and have been adored and enjoyed by a lot more people (from both urban and rural parts of the Hindi heartland) than urban multiplex hits like Queen, Piku and Neerja. So yes, we do definitely need films like Welcome and Masti as much as we need the Queen’s, Piku’s and Pink’s of the world. All these films entertain and enthrall their target audience in equal measure, irrespective of your or my definition of “quality”. What we do not need are films like Jagga Jasoos, Trapped and Rangoon which do not cater to anything more than 1-2% of the audience to be released and thrown on the faces of the audiences on a large scale and sabotage other more audience appealing films which cater to a much larger audience than these. Wasting huge resources on a film like Jagga Jasoos and allowing a film maker to create his self indulgent fantasy is not only idiotic from a production houses’ perspective, but a cheat on the audience as well as this film releases on a wide scale, promises the audience something that its not and cuts into shows of other more audience pleasing films running parallel at the theatres.
Ultimately, some films will work, some won’t. Its the effort to entertain and narrate a story in a manner that’s in sync with the audience choice and taste that counts. On that front, I can comfortably say that Munna Micheal, Mubarakan, Toilet-Ek Prem Katha and Bareily Ki Barfi are all a lot more “purposeful” films than pointless rubbish like JJ, Trapped, Ugly etc. Now all 4 of the above mentioned films might flop but the intention of the film maker to entertain his target audience in all these cases cannot be questioned. You could know more at http://bollywoodtradeguide.blogspot.in/
LikeLike
Anuj
July 21, 2017
“Kick, ETT and HNY all made more money than Dabangg, did they not? Since BO earnings are the holy grail for you, please explain to me why you deem Dabangg a “genuine universal entertainer” while the former 3 are somehow of a lesser category (though they earned more mega bucks??)” ~ Dabangg had theatrical footfalls of 2.5 crores from 1800 screens while Kick has 2.4 crores from 3600 screens as per boxofficeindia.com. HNY did not even record 2 crore footfalls despite releasing in 3800 screens. Kick and HNY made more money than Dabangg due to a higher average ticket price. I’m sure you know the difference between footfalls and collections and which of the 2 holds more relevance when it comes to judging a films popularity. And YES, box office trending does hold a lot of relevance when judging a films acceptance and word of mouth. Movies that begin big but run to empty halls in week 2 do not indicate a particularly positive trend. And as for Dabangg, it released at a time when Salman’s popularity was at an all time low and hence the initial was a little lower than potential (record breaking nevertheless). Had it released in today’s era in 3800 screens, it would easily have surpassed 3.5 crore footfalls and matched Bajrangi Bhaijaan week for week. As for TRP’s, I guess you’ve never heard of BARC ratings for films.
On Bang Bang collecting more then Jodha Akbar, Bang Bang was a universal entertainer catering to A/B and C centers alike, a mass appealing action entertainer in the Dhoom domain. It would obviously find a much bigger “initial” audience than a 3 hour 40 minute historical love story. Post the initial, Bang Bang went down in week 2 indicating a negative word of mouth. Jodha Akbar remained rock steady at the multiplex box office of metros right through week 2,3 and 4. However, at the mass centers Jodha Akbar witnessed a bit of a fall in the later weeks. The word of mouth was unanimously positive at urban centers but mixed at the mass centers. And as per collections and box office, films released between 2003-2011 have all suffered due to the internet piracy/torrent factor coupled with the steep increase in multiplex ticket price factor. Even the biggest blockbuster of this time, 3 Idiots witnessed just 3.2 crore footfalls which are lower than a much lesser accepted film like PK. However, the difference lies in the fact that 3 Idiots released in 1700 screens at a time when multiplexes were still in the process of overhauling the single screens in urban and semi urban centers. PK released in 3800 screens at a time when multiplexes were firmly established as a base for the urban audiences. Massive ticket prices coupled with internet piracy (the most damaging form of piracy in Indian cinema till date) dented theatrical footfalls hugely in the phase of transition between 2003-2011. These factors continue to dent footfalls, but the dent has somewhat been compensated for to a little extent by the massive increase in screen count over the last 5-6 years. Yet, both these factors have led to at a 30-40% theatrical audience deficit today. In the 70’s and 80’s, the population of the nation was barely 70 crore plus and yet the big blockbusters used to record over 5 cr footfalls. Today despite the nation being 125 cr+, footfalls barely touch the 4 cr mark!
LikeLike
Rahul
July 21, 2017
I think Anuj is a misunderstood genius. The key to understanding him is to choose data smartly out of myriad data points and then to interpret it exactly as he does – and then I am sure we will end up with the same conclusion as he did. There is a cold and austere beauty and self discipline with which he keeps chipping away the counter points in data and reasoning, which is reminiscent of Manjhi the mountain man.
Data points are like flowers – a florist does not put all the flowers in his bouquet. He picks and chooses what suits him. Viewed in this way Anuj’s greatness is clear to me, and hence Anuj is a legend not only in his own mind but my mind as well.
LikeLiked by 7 people
Madan
July 21, 2017
“Films are primarily made for an audience, not for the purpose of other film makers to take inspiration from. Its great if a particular brand of film making influences a budding film maker but that’s not the primary motive of making a film” – Anuj, the art form and the entertainment business are not mutually exclusive. Why do you find this so hard to grasp? Yes, a film is meant to entertain but a film that not only entertains but also brings something new or at least something fresh to the art form itself is more influential. Otherwise all films would be like each other and the audience would get bored and stop visiting the theatres! 😛
I don’t think one as articulate and verbose as you would have any difficulty grasping this distinction; you just want to pretend it doesn’t exist and that’s your prerogative.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
July 21, 2017
What we do not need are films like Jagga Jasoos, Trapped and Rangoon which do not cater to anything more than 1-2% of the audience to be released and thrown on the faces of the audiences
And who’s the ‘we’ in your ‘we do not need’? You do not speak for me.
‘And the intention of these makers to entertain us cannot be questioned’? Says who? But of course you can question Basu’s (or Bhansali’s or Kashyap’s or Ali’s) intention to entertain? Can I borrow your crystal ball that reads minds and intentions?
And what happened to your earlier comment about …irrespective of however minuscule their target audience is.’ ? I’m one of the ‘miniscule audience’ who liked Jagga Jasoos. As far as I’m concerned, people like me are the target audience for that film, and Basu caters to us. As are the people who watched and liked Trapped and Rangoon.
What you’re doing is cherry-picking data to support what you want, and then arguing against points that you yourself made. Seriously, who died and made you God?
LikeLiked by 4 people
Anuj
July 21, 2017
I don’t think it should be so difficult for someone to understand simple concepts like “target audience”, “audience appealing cinema” and word of mouth/trending. Anyways, I’v said whatever i had to say on this thread. Luckily I have a genius Christopher Nolan’s film to watch, think and ponder over for the next few weeks before Hindi cinema finally delivers audience appealing, rooted and grounded Indiani-zed films like TEPK and Bareily Ki Barfi ;P
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
July 22, 2017
I’m so sorry, Anuj. Y’see, pseudo-intellectual left-leaning liberals like us don’t really understand simple concepts like ‘target audience’ and ‘audience appealing cinema’ and ‘word of mouth trending’. We only understand that we like what we like and that there are at least a few filmmakers who make the sort of films that appeal to us.
I quite get that we are sub-human species, but you have to forgive us – we know not what we do.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Jai
July 22, 2017
Anuj, the issue with your reasoning is that you are cherry picking which data points to highlight, and which to obfuscate or outright ignore, all to fit your own predetermined conclusion. You are also arguing against points you yourself have held out as gospel in previous posts, and keep changing the indices you use to measure the film’s “worth”.
You haven’t for instance, deigned to address two queries I put to you, arising out of your own previous comments. One, What is your opinion now about Dhoom 3 and of Aamir’s performance in this film? You are on record dismissing the film as not being too impressive at all, and dissing Aamir’s performance in the most vitriolic manner possible. But now that the film is one of the top grossers, are you going to correct your opinion?
And please don’t launch into a spiel about average ticket prices; just a few days back, you stated that you found Tubelight a far better film than Dhoom 3—and if anything, average ticket prices in 2017 are higher than what they were in 2013? Tubelight has earned far, far less than Dhoom 3, right? Then how and why should you rate this higher?
Mind you, I didn’t care much for Dhoom 3, either. But your lack of a consistent reasoning really baffles me. You have already revealed through your flip flop, that you too, feel the “worth” of a movie may be different from its box office fate. Only, you determinedly refuse to accept that, with a bull headed resolve that is almost admirable! 😉
Two, is it your contention that Salman Khan is the finest actor of the past several years, since he has 11 odd films in the 100, 200 and 300 crore ‘clubs’? In your matrix of “BO performance equals to worth/quality” that means Salman is a far better performer than, say, Hrithik. Right?
LikeLiked by 3 people
sanjana
July 22, 2017
He seems to be objecting to glorification of certain movies by the intellectual brigade and critics. Not the films themselves.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan Mohan
July 22, 2017
“that means Salman is a far better performer than, say, Hrithik. Right” – ‘Mera woh matlab nahi tha!’ 😛
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anuj
July 22, 2017
In that case you guys do not deserve a 100 cr+ mega productions like Rangoon and JJ which release in over 2000 screens and eat into more audience pleasing films which cater to a much larger audience than the handful of 1 or 2%. There’s nothing wrong in making cinema for a minuscule audience as long as the film itself is as minuscule in scale/release and production value and has a tight, small release in a handful of screens across the prime multiplexes of metros alone. Something that a film like Lipstick under my Burkha has managed with a 300 screen release. Its given an opportunity to that minuscule audience to catch up with the film and yet not eaten into the screens for other films like Spiderman, Dunkirk and Munna Michael.
LikeLike
Anuj
July 22, 2017
“is it your contention that Salman Khan is the finest actor of the past several years, since he has 11 odd films in the 100, 200 and 300 crore ‘clubs’? In your matrix of “BO performance equals to worth/quality” that means Salman is a far better performer than, say, Hrithik. Right?” ~whether he’s the best or not is an individual’s choice as I have repeated it more than once on this blog that quality is a matter of perception that varies from person to person. But there is no denying the fact that Salman is the most POPULAR bollywood actor in the last 3 decades right from his days of Maine Pyaar Kiya. No other actor has been able to deliver the number and scale of blockbusters that he has at a pan India level. The self proclaimed King of bollywood is not even half as popular as Salman in real terms as he’s just delivered 3 major 3 cr+ footfall blockbusters in the last 25 years and even those have been mainly urban centric. No wonder once his romantic boy next charm was lost due to ageing, his popularity has nosedived over the last decade.
LikeLike
Anuj
July 22, 2017
“You haven’t for instance, deigned to address two queries I put to you, arising out of your own previous comments. One, What is your opinion now about Dhoom 3 and of Aamir’s performance in this film? You are on record dismissing the film as not being too impressive at all, and dissing Aamir’s performance in the most vitriolic manner possible. But now that the film is one of the top grossers, are you going to correct your opinion?” ~ i did not like the film. My personal opinion. The film was a huge grosser as the franchise is a popular one coupled with Aamir’s brand value adding to a blockbuster initial. The trend in week 2 and week 3 was decent indicating a positive word of mouth among the masses. However, the movie did drop in the urban multiplexes. A lot of people watched Dhoom 3 due to the 2 factors mentioned above. 60% of the one’s who watched it, liked it. Me not being one of them. Is this so difficult for u to understand?
As for Tubelight, only 30% of the people who watched it recommended it, me being one of them. So? When did i claim Tubelight to be a bigger hit than Dhoom 3? If i found Tubelight a better film, its my opinion, just like every tom dick and harry has his or her’s.
LikeLike
Jai
July 23, 2017
Anuj, thanks for accepting that: A) You did not like Dhoom 3, despite it being a huge grosser. And B) That you liked and recommended Tubelight, although it seems to be doing poorly at the turnstiles.
Just take some time and a deep breath, and extrapolate that to the discussions on this thread on Jagga Jasoos. Those of us who liked the movie are saying just that—-while it may or may not do well at the box office (indications are it won’t do well), it appealed to us, made us chortle, reached out to the child within us.
Yes, of course this is a subjective opinion. Yours disliking the movie is equally a subjective opinion, right? As you yourself say in your comments above, “quality is a matter of perception that varies from person to person”; and “its my opinion, just like every tom dick and harry has his or her’s.”
Dude, from the beginning this is what I have been saying. That quality and judgments of the worth/content of the film need not coincide with its box office performance. Only, when we enter into a discussion on the merits (or otherwise) of the film, you start quoting box office statistics to prove that the film is a bad one.
To quote from one of your comments above
“What we do not need are films like Jagga Jasoos…………. which do not cater to anything more than 1-2% of the audience to be released and thrown on the faces of the audiences on a large scale and sabotage other more audience appealing films which cater to a much larger audience than these. Wasting huge resources on a film like Jagga Jasoos and allowing a film maker to create his self indulgent fantasy is not only idiotic from a production houses’ perspective, but a cheat on the audience as well as this film releases on a wide scale, promises the audience something that its not and cuts into shows of other more audience pleasing films running parallel at the theatres.”
Here is where you need to really start analyzing, why when it suits your conclusion, you conflate box office popularity to quality, and on other occasions, you state (in an eminently reasonable manner, as many of us others have been doing), that quality is a subjective judgment. I salute your persistence in defending your position, I really do. But you need to add some measure of consistency to your logic as well.
LikeLiked by 6 people
rothrocks
July 23, 2017
“If i found Tubelight a better film, its my opinion, just like every tom dick and harry has his or her’s.” And seemingly when messrs tom, dick and harry have a different opinion than yours, especially about films of Hrithik baba, it really ruffles your feathers.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Srinivas R
July 23, 2017
Jai, I like your persistence, but Anuj doesn’t give a fuck about your opinion, or mine or BR’s. He will hold his world view as right, no matter what. I’m sure you have come across such people on the internet, so let him live happily in his own world
LikeLiked by 4 people
MANK
July 24, 2017
Afraid the knives are out for Basu. And if what Rishi kapoor say is right, then he is the most irresponsible director in the industry. he will find it impossible to make a film again
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/rishi-kapoor-ranbir-jagga-jasoos-flop-anurag-basu/1/1009210.html
LikeLike
Devarsi Ghosh
July 24, 2017
I can’t believe that these commenters above me allowed Anuj to hijack the the thread. Can people get back to discussing the movie please?
LikeLiked by 4 people
Anuj
July 25, 2017
You self obsessed narcissistic and self proclaimed supporters of the so called “meaningful cinema” would just not get it, would you? In TUBELIGHT, the attempt was to create a mass appealing film, an AUDIENCE APPEALING film. Yes it fell flat on its face for various reasons, but at least the ATTEMPT was to entertain the audience. Same goes for Dhoom 3 as well. I did not like that film too much for my own personal choice but I have never denied that Dhoom 3 kinda films do not merit a release. The same unfortunately, cannot be said about JJ. If a film maker attempts to make a JJ kinda film, he needs to make it on a very small or minuscule scale, something like a Ship of Thesus or a Lipstick under my burkha. Making a film like JJ, Rangoon or Bombay Velvet on a monumental scale is completely ridiculous and defies logic. Its just IRRESPONSIBLE and SELF INDULGENT film making, something that Rishi Kapoor has just pointed out!
LikeLike
Srinivas R
July 25, 2017
Sabba…Thambi Anuj, Konjam orama poi satham podu pa..un polambal thaanga mudiyala…
LikeLiked by 3 people
Anuj
July 25, 2017
Rishi Kapoor on the JJ fiasco :
“Neetu and I saw the film on Thursday, only a day ahead of the release. Till Wednesday, Anurag Basu was still mixing the film. Can you imagine that? Pritam [composer] probably delivered the music only a week before. What can you say? Basu doesn’t take an opinion from anybody. Today’s filmmakers are doing this with everybody.” ~ SELF INDULGENCE
“They don’t show their films before release to take opinions, and treat it as though they’re making a nuclear bomb. I didn’t hate or love the film. I only felt it needed to be abridged by 20 minutes. But who is going to give that opinion to them?” ~ Absolutely ZERO respect for audience sensibility.
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
July 25, 2017
‘Self-obsessed’ ‘narcissistic’ ‘ self-proclaimed’ – along with ‘psuedo-intellectual’, ‘left-leaning liberals’ – sorry, ‘stupid, dumb and outright idiotic pseudo intellectual Goochi/Armani class chimps’…
My, my, my… what big words, grandpa.
In any case, who the devil are you to decide Basu didn’t set out to make an audience appealing film? Just because it failed? The same way Tubelight did? If Jagga Jasoos had succeeded, what would you have said? Blamed the ‘stupid, dumb and outright idiotic pseudo intellectual Goochi/Armani class chimps’ for making a ‘self-indulgent’ film a hit?
Seriously, who are you to decide how any filmmaker needs to make his movie or market it? What on earth makes you think that films should only entertain? And ‘entertain’ in the manner that you think is entertaining?
I respect RK’s opinion of it, and he makes valid points about it; unlike you, however, he doesn’t extrapolate from that to insult people who differs from him.
Ugh!
LikeLiked by 7 people
Rahini David
July 26, 2017
Indulging oneself (or people like oneself) is so pseudo, real intellectuals indulge the audience. That not being the actual definition of intellectualism means so little as dictionary definitions is for losers(pseudos). Right?
I know that I should let this go, but hey, this amuses a few here, doesn’t it?
LikeLiked by 1 person
rothrocks
July 26, 2017
@ Rahini Basically in Anuj’s world, Rushdie is an indulgent pseudo and Chetan Bhagat is a towering intellectual.
I actually do agree with his criticism of Basu (or Kashyap with Bombay Velvet) mismanaging a big budget. Because of them other offbeat filmmakers will struggle to find favour. When you have a big budget, you do have a responsibility to get it right and finish it in time with a tight operation. Ilayaraja himself has said this about his working style when it comes to music and if he can combine creativity and professionalism for so many films, there is no excuse for a Basu to take so long to wrap up a film (pretty sure he went over budget too like Kashyap).
BUT I just don’t see how attacking people for liking such films or just the filmmaker’s previous work addresses the issue. It’s their choice, right? Let people enjoy whatever art they choose to. I don’t drag every lover of Himesh or Atif into an argument over why they listen to such horrible singers so what’s the problem if say somebody likes Rangoon or Jagga Jasoos? As one of my friends says, mind your music/cinema.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Anuj
July 26, 2017
Chethan Bhagat is definitely an “intelligent” author and if that makes him an intellectual, then so be it. As for Rushdie, well my opinion of his might get this comment deleted on this blog, so let that be. Film makers making movies for a minuscule minority is perfectly okay as long as the film remain well within the domain of being a minuscule minority in terms of production value and release (something that Lipstick and Lunchbox managed very well). As for attacking people liking such films, i don’t hear this “freedom of choice” bullshit when someone claims to be found of films like Dabangg, Krrish or Rowdy Rathore but the moment it comes to films of Kashyap/Bharadwaj domain, everything suddenly becomes a matter of opinion & choice. Although factually, there are a lot more people who’re more interested in watching the Dabangg’s and Krrish’s of the world than pungent smelling odour like Saat Khoon Maaf, Rangoon, Girl in yellow boots, Jagga Jasoos and Bombay Velvet 😛
LikeLike
Madan
July 26, 2017
“Chethan Bhagat is definitely an “intelligent” author and if that makes him an intellectual, then so be it.” – Definitely how? When you are making such categorical statements that cannot be factually proven, better offer your justification along side. Now don’t tell me he is intelligent because he worked in I Banking. It is not necessary that his intelligence would be reflected in his writing as well.
“Film makers making movies for a minuscule minority is perfectly okay as long as the film remain well within the domain of being a minuscule minority in terms of production value and release” – I have pretty much said this in the comment which you have taken issue with. So do you lack reading comprehension or do you just find it difficult to concede anything per se?
“i don’t hear this “freedom of choice” bullshit when someone claims to be found of films like Dabangg, Krrish” – Believe you meant to use fond, not found. Anyway, please show me where on this blog has anybody attacked the people who like films like Dabanng? Now if somebody got into an argument about you on those films here, I find it hard to believe it would have been without your provocation along similar lines as evidenced in this thread. Otherwise, I don’t remember anybody personally attacking those who like mass films. Maybe they do elsewhere but not here. All you do on this blog is to relentlessly assail a strawman, perhaps for no other purpose than to avail of the opportunity to use words that you are so fond of, like for example pseudo-intellectual.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Anu Warrier
July 26, 2017
I think you are under a mistaken impression here – that readers only like ‘pseudo-intellectual’ films like Saat Khoon Maaf, Rangoon, Girl in yellow boots, Jagga Jasoos and Bombay Velvet . It doesn’t seem to occur to you that people are rarely monoliths and so closed in their choices. Liking one kind of cinema doesn’t preclude us from thoroughly enjoying others.
In this whole thread, I have not come across one comment that tars the people who like Dabangg, Krrish; or Rowdy Rathore. You are the only person, however, who has continually insulted everyone from the film-makers to the actors to the readers/commenters here. So, no, your ‘freedom of choice not being given to fans of those movies’ argument is bullshit.
Plus, you seem to think in absolutes. Filmmakers should make this kind of movie and no other. If they do make what they want – ‘self-indulgent’ – they should only spend what you consider appropriate, and should only release on limited screens. And you repeat this sentiment, ad infinitum, interspersed with new insults and pejoratives each time.
In any case, you are not interested in a discussion; insults and invective rarely encourage a free exchange of thoughts. I think this thread has gone on long enough, and it’s a shame to have derailed a discussion about the film to indulge you. The only way I can see for this to not happen again is to ignore your provocative comments.
But before I do, I mangle a perfectly beautiful song to offer you some gratuitous advice:
Shikaayat kar lo jee bhar lo, kisne roka hai,
Ho sake to ye jagah chhod do, is blog bhi dhokha hai…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rohit Sathish Nair
July 27, 2017
I have what could be a very silly question, one that was rather tangentially prompted by the discussion we’ve been having in 2 threads simultaneously (and Anuj bhai, sorry for hijacking your discourse):
What draws a movie viewer to a non-native film culture (not talking about the Gump’s box of chocolates that American cinema’s body of work is)? Does he/she search in these films, for an element he is familiar with through his/her native cinema, or would he/she want it to deliver something unique to itself? (This is not a question of just one non-native film you happen to like)
To frame it another way:
If someone who watches enough Bengali (or insert suitable language here) films likes a Telugu (or do the insert thing again) film which is a bit closer to Bengali sensibilities rather than Telugu ones (but is not entirely a Speaking Telugu Hearing Bengali film), is it preferred to have more of such movies, or should the Telugu industry do away with such movies and make uniquely Telugu movies?
LikeLike
Anuj
July 27, 2017
Anu Warrier: I hope u do realise that your pointless rants are as minuscule and ridiculous as the films your and your ilk watch and approve of. None of my comments have been directly addressed to you and yet you continue barking on & on & on and then complaining about how the thread has gone too long! Applause…frankly, you guys with zero rationality in choice and one’s who claim to be the flag bearers of the “thinking” audience are not even a drop in the ocean of the audience paradigm. Neither are you a part of the urban audience and nor are you a part of mass sensibility. You’re just part of the few handful of rats who like indulging in pointless discussions and dissecting a movie to satisfy your desperate urge to be part of the so called intelligentsia. Not surprising that you swear by a reviewer who calls Nolan an “interesting” film maker and yet stops short of calling him “brilliant” for the fear of being “part of the herd of Nolan fans”, even though there’s a very logical reason why this “brilliant” film maker actually has a fan following as huge as what it is. Or a reviewer who can make a Ram Madir vs Babri Masjid issue out of a simple plot like Jolly LLB 2 where the film maker’s only intention was to send out a simple message of communal harmony via dark humour. You’re most welcome to continue barking as much as you wish but responding when not required and then complaining about the never ending nature of the thread is not something that an “intelligent” person does. And that’s perhaps why we add a prefix called “pseudo” to words like intellectual and intelligent. Reminds me of Naseer “saabs” never ending and pointless rants against mainstream actors like Amitabh Bachchan and Rajesh Khanna even when no one asks for his rotten opinions! No wonder he’s got admirers such as yourself 😀
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
July 27, 2017
Bwahahahahaha! 🙂
LikeLiked by 5 people
rekha
July 31, 2017
Intellectual: One who knows what and who is Gucci and purchases it.
Pseudo Intellectual: One who doesn’t know what and who is Gucci, but purchases a Gucci because Mr. Intellectual bought it and then rants that Gucci is over hyped.
LikeLiked by 2 people
brangan
July 31, 2017
rekha: Ah, but what about one who KNOWS about Gucci but DOES NOT purchase it. That, dear reader, is the present sociological conundrum.
LikeLiked by 8 people
sanjana
July 31, 2017
Sometimes we feel we are intellectuals, sometimes pseudos and sometimes plain dumb.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Kay
July 31, 2017
BR, that would make you quasi-intellectual.
Pseudo-intellectual would be someone who doesn’t know Gucci, but tries to pass off a Ranganathan Street roadside shop stuff as Gucci.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Apu
August 1, 2017
Finally managed to watch this – albeit on a pirated DVD (because my 4 year old would not have sat through 3 hours of a movie, her longest has been Wonder Woman movie). The sound and picture quality was horrible, so I am sure I missed out on a lot and had to guess a few things. I surely need to catch it a second time to get all details.
That aside, thanks to the review and the discussion here in helping me look out for cues, and also enjoy this movie which took its time to get going (for me). It was delightful and I look forward to a sequel.
Watching the movie I understood why the hotel was named “Agapastala” – because it seemed to be omnipresent, much like what the word actually means in Bengali. Also, the point about both being “bad luck” and how it all adds up in the end- the broken egg, the fall that leads them to Shundi and the ending car sequence.
Two complaints
– The last stretch could have been shortened by doing away with the sequence after the first train ride with some elements of the second train ride incorporated into the first one. It made the movie longer, and pulled it into something really lofty and global.
– A different heroine would have added so much more life. I was ok with Katrina in Ajab Prem, but here she was bad as a narrator. (Not sure why I thought of Ayesha Takia as a replacement)
I have a question: Does the ending throw out a hint for a sequel?
LikeLike
rekha
August 1, 2017
BR: Ah, but what about one who KNOWS about Gucci but DOES NOT purchase it. That, dear reader, is the present sociological conundrum.
Ah, that would be just a poor and jealous person 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person