(by N Madhusudhan)
I haven’t seen Love AajKal (2020) yet. The vicious attack against the film, which is supposedly Imtiaz Ali’s worst, has slightly dented my interest levels. This has happened before. I still haven’t watched Jab Harry Met Sejal. I took my time to watch Tamasha, which is now receiving so much love, because of the similar negative response to the film when it released (albeit less intense than this one). I had a mixed reaction when I watched it first. There were bits I loved. There were also bits that weren’t easily likeable. But I knew there was more to it than what had immediately registered. I didn’t rant against the film.I chose to take my time and make sense of my reaction. It kept growing on me over the next few weeks.A month later, I was arguing with my friend that Tamasha was one of the most audacious dramas to come out of Bollywood. She strongly disagreed. She felt Ali is making the same film over and over – the most popular criticism against him on the internet right now. You know, the European locations, following one’s heart, love stories involving men / women already engaged / in a relationship / married, etc. Few people are willing to look beyond these tropes and realize that with each film, he takes you on a crazy ride to unnamed areas of experience.
Over the years, Ali haschosen to deal with more messed up characters and ever-increasing level of conflicts. He’s only taken more risks and has sometimes gone batshit crazy in breaking the stereotypes. Tamasha was a product of this wild imagination and conviction that only Ali could be associated with.
5 years after Tamasha, I was quite excited that Ali was making Love Aaj Kal again. Kinda like a reboot, not a remake. More than anything, a new Ali film promises newer levels of madness Ali is known to dive into. With so much expectations, it was sad to read so many negative reports against the film. Twitter had a ball roasting the film.The most common criticism seems to be against the performances, Ali’s treatment, unconvincing portrayals of the film’s central conflicts and an apparent disregard to the twitter-imposed guidelines on politically correct representation. One of the articles went on to state that Ali is losing his way and his body of work is going through a mid-life crisis, whatever that means.
Ali’s films heavily rely on the performances to translate his vision convincingly. Of all the actors who have starred in his films, I’ve foundonly Ranbir Kapoor, RandeepHooda and Deepika Padukone pulling off the characters successfully. It just feels right, and they seem to belong in Ali’s universe. Imagine Karthik Aaryan playing Ved and you’ll know what I mean.
When I watched the trailer of Love Aaj Kal, the performances instantly rang false. It made me wonder why Ali cast these relatively new actors who have clearly not grown enough to deliver the layered performances that Ali demands.You never know. We think that a filmmaker of his caliber wouldn’t settle for such bad performances. But then, it’s hard to judge what they look for in a performance. I had a similar experience watching Karthi’s performance in KaatruVeliyidai. It works for the most part of the film but hits a few false notes at some crucial places – some close-up shots, expanded eyes and all. It throws you out of the film and creates an instant disconnect. It makes a huge difference in these films because they revolve completely around their characters. And none of theseare easy characters to play.
I think it is because very few actors understand the world these filmmakers try to build. I don’t think any actor plays a Selvaraghavan protagonist better than Dhanush. I don’t think there’s any actor right now who knows how to play a Mysskin protagonist, other than Mysskin himself. I sometimes wonder whether the filmmakers themselves understand this or they merely settle for bad performances because they don’t have any choice. It baffles me everytime.
Neither of these filmmakers operate in a space that involves ticking off pretentious political correctness while writing. I think their films come from a far more honest place. You either love them or hate them. There’s no in-between. But this expectation that there shouldn’t be stalking, heroines shouldn’t seek the hero’s validation etc. just seems plain silly. The question really is “Why”. Is it because Ali thinks that his characters behave that way in a certain milieu? Would these characters really care about being woke? They wear their heart on their sleeves and matters of the heart have never been black and white. When the characters and the film’s world are so vastly different from yours and mine, does it even make sense to apply the rules of the real world to a film that builds its own?
Yes, they repeat their favorite tropes. But it’s true what Ali said in his interview with Film Companion – the envelope may be the same each time, but the letter is different.I fail to understand why people would think that Rockstar, Tamasha and Highway are the same films. Apart from the abovementioned tropes, each film is both stylistically and thematically poles apart from the other.
Rockstar wasn’t just about that shattering heartbreak that makes its protagonist the person he is.It emphasized that love defies societal norms of living and the conventions of rights and wrongs. Tamasha was about a man facing his real self and finally embracing the inner child.It was a journey powered by love.Highway was about a girl finding home outside home. It was the last thing from a love story. You could say that in essence, they’re all about people trying to break free from oppression imposed by themselves and the society. But that’s just the destination. The journey is what makes these films different. That’s the crazy fucking ride.
I feel it is important to understand these factors when you follow their work. Because we watch their films to experience this uniqueness. Not because they make successful or politically correct films. Because we also know that there are only a handful of such filmmakers in mainstream cinema right now. And theirs are films that really stay with us. When they set out to make films with such lofty ambitions, they’re bound to fall a few times.
Is it fair to say that they’ve lost their way? Are we wise enough to say they should stop making films? Shouldn’t we be more patient before conveniently writing them off? Don’t they deserve more respect, for what they’ve meant to us all these years?
Am I saying we shouldn’t criticize their films? Not at all. But don’t get personal. Is it possible to express your displeasure against a film you didn’t like without passing personal comments? Yes, if you care to try.
Baradwaj Rangan 
Devarsi Ghosh
February 17, 2020
Is it possible to express your displeasure against a film you didn’t like without passing personal comments?
Yes, dear, but one has to get the likes and retweets no?
LikeLike
KK
February 17, 2020
I have a question. How do you send these articles Baradwaj Rangan? Is there any mail id, any platform, or just his close ones who he knows personally can send these articles? I am asking because I want to send a review of Love Aaj Kal.
LikeLike
Ana
February 17, 2020
Agreed whole heartedly
LikeLike
AdhithyaKR
February 18, 2020
His mail id is available on the contact page
LikeLike
brangan
February 18, 2020
KK: Send them to my email.
Devarsi: I think it’s more than likes or tweets. Of late, it’s almost like people decide beforehand that they are going to hate or troll a film. Again, I haven’t seen LAK yet, but this is the feeling I got with ENPT and a few other high-profile films.
LikeLike
Devarsi Ghosh
February 18, 2020
BR: I think there is a larger social phenomenon at play. Social media today requires us to make quick conclusions about everything and make that publicly known as soon as possible or you’re left out of the “discourse”. This isn’t just about the subject of this post: ‘auteur’ movies. So you are not only more inclined to react publicly to anything ‘trending’ as quickly as possible, but you are also inclined to come up with the loudest and the most extreme reactions, because that the most bizarre is what gets traction in a digital attention economy.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Devarsi Ghosh
February 18, 2020
(Continued)
But that aside, LAK 2 did land in theatres with a bad rep anyway.
Kartik Aaryan is hated by the chattering class, who incidentally cannot help but wax eloquent on Ali’s most mediocre films years after their release. The Sara Ali Khan memes did not help. While “making the same film”, as reductive as it may sound, is not really a crime, it is also true that Ali is not some Wong Kar-Wai or Terrence Malick. And although I haven’t seen the film either, I’d not bank on a man nearing 50, whose idea of a rock musician is Jordan, to depict millennial relationships without embarrassing himself.
LikeLiked by 1 person
H. Prasanna
February 18, 2020
But then it is the personality they are selling, right? So, it is obvious that the attacks are personal and formed before the film releases. The reputation of filmmakers like GVM, Selva, Imtiaz, Mysskin is what comes to the forefront when selling their movies. These auteur films are sold as personal products coming from unique viewpoints. The producers/marketers grab at the fact that the mention of these names provokes reaction from the people, who support and oppose them. Then, they put them in front when marketing to gain most attention for the movie. This makes them take more heat for the movie than the stars and producers, which works for them. Also, critics pay more attention to their work. Obviously part of the desired effect is trolling. After all, Donald Trump is president of America. And Anjaan did well in the box office on the first weekend after Lingusamy’s infamous rant.
This effect is best summed up by the exasperated tamil auteur Thangar Bachaan, when he said: “If someone says a movie is good, our audience will say I will wait for it to come on TV. If someone says a movie is bad, our audience will say how can you say it is bad, I will see it and tell you my opinion.”
The attention that trolling gets doesn’t always work in the film’s favor, but this method of grabbing attention is not going away. I am pretty sure some of these filmmakers have started using this to fund more personal projects. Not to say it is a good thing, but I am sure they can access the resources to deal with it. In a situation like this, it was particularly heartening to see Adhithya KR’s column about ENPT and GVM’s comments on it. If the trolls can flood the net, so can the allies.
Credit due to BR and team as well, for curating and maintaining this culture in this space.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
February 18, 2020
Devarsi Ghosh: Thanks for mentioning that about Jordan. I wish these filmmakers would just attend CAD once and see what the local, yes the Indian, rock scene actually is like. In many cases, it’s well educated middle class dudes holding a ‘day job’ at an MNC because rock doesn’t pay, not in India. A nationwide rock ‘tour’ would be Bangalore, Mumbai and NE with optional stops at Delhi or Pune. Even before the film released, when Rahman said they weren’t going to have any real rock songs in the soundtrack, I was like, OK this is gonna be cringe even if the songs turn out to be good. Why call it Rockstar then?
LikeLike
rsylviana
February 18, 2020
I’m confused, the criticisms that you have mentioned for LAK2 and for Imtiaz Ali here are still criticisms of his work right ? Whether they are valid or invalid is another question but to say that he is remaking his own movies and their tropes is still a professional criticism right ? How can that be considered as a personal attack on the director ? As far as I can see, the personal attacks around the film have been mostly borne by poor Sara Ali Khan – somehow everything right from her jawline to her eyebrows and voice have become meme fodder in the social media.
LikeLike
Josh-E-Maddy
February 18, 2020
Madan: It was called Rockstar because the term rockstar is a victim of pejoration. And some times, like in the case of Rockstar movie, it’s misused on purpose to look hip and cool. I won’t blame the producers for using that word. Pejoration exists everywhere. In India rockstar is just used without much thought to describe “cool” music or anybody who’s cool. They even use this word for politicians. Imtiaz Ali’s Rockstar was never about rock music. The title is just a product of the sick times we live in.
Devarsi Ghosh: Going by your logic, Luv Ranjan (being close to 50) shouldn’t qualify for making movies about “millennial” relationships but he seems to be the darling of the masses and supposedly behind the “revolution” of Indian cinema. I won’t be surprised if the government will soon proffer a new scheme of Millennial Membership Certification based on the successful model of CAA and NRC.
LikeLike
Josh-E-Maddy
February 18, 2020
If reusing old music was not enough, now film makers have started reusing their old films. I am a huge fan of Imtiaz Ali but this rebooting culture is pathetic.
LikeLike
krishikari
February 18, 2020
How does Imtiaz Ali keep making films if they are so terrible? He has made some of the worst ever and some of the best loved. I’m glad somebody somehow keeps financing them, but in that whole long winded interview with Anupama Chopra neither she nor any members of that pretentious audience asked this very pressing question.
LikeLike
shaviswa
February 18, 2020
A bad film does not always attract vicious attacks. But if the bad film is also annoyingly pretentious, then the attacks will be very virulent. People react emotionally and that is how it will be. Film makers cannot blame the attackers for that. You are functioning in a public domain and have to be mentally prepared to accept the bouquets and the brickbats.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Devarsi Ghosh
February 18, 2020
Josh: What I shared wasn’t “logic”, it is an opinion I have on one particular person’s creative capabilities. If you want to treat that as a theory and apply it to others, then that’s not on me.
Also not getting into the goodness or badness of Luv Ranjan films, but they are essentially one-note sagas of how women are treacherous and men have to fight back. They are not complex human beings but caricatures. There’s no nuance or attempt to get into a sane adult relationship’s details, or explore a real human being, and Ali at least makes those attempts with debatable results. So Ali and Ranjan are very different filmmakers. Ranjan makes extremely low-risk projects. It’s the easiest thing to go bitches be hoes in India.
Also, many things are a darling of the masses today such as xenophobic and reactionary political leaders, pornography, and cigarettes. Popularity is not the same thing as quality. I get this argument a lot from even professional film writers my age: “How can Martin Scorsese say Marvel is bad, Avengers made one billion, he is just jealous of MCU.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tommy
February 18, 2020
These so-called high-profile films don’t have anything of value to offer the audience. GVM and Imtiaz Ali are stuck in a rut for so long and even Myskin’s movies of late are not that compelling. Critics won’t call them out on it because there are interviews and promotional videos to be done with them. I mean how many more videos do we need to see on Tamasha? People are being genuine regarding their dislike with such movies because they have had enough of these incompetent filmmakers churning out the same drivel year after year.
LikeLike
Madan
February 18, 2020
Josh-E-Maddy: Aye, I am aware that it is a pejoration and I had (mistakenly) believed Imtiaz to be above such nonsense. Which is what made me cringe. Maybe it exists everywhere but as a devoted fan of rock, I don’t HAVE to put up with it. I like how 90% of the time the public thinks of rock musicians as deviant junkies setting a bad example for kids and then when they want a cooleth quotient for themselves, what do they do but appropriate the word rockstar! To me it says something about the lack of authenticity of the product once you go there. Maybe it’s a strong view to have but I don’t care.
LikeLike
N Madhusudhan
February 19, 2020
Madan – I think w.r.t. Rockstar, it was a classic case of a film having a misleading title. The film ins’t necessarily the story of an underdog who turns into a rock musician but that’s the story the title would make anyone expect. Although this does happen in the film, it is just incidental and it’s not like a Gully boy. Rockstar was always a love story it’s heart. I don’t think it tried to say “all right, this is what indian rock music is like and this is what indian rock musicians do.”
H Prasanna – Interesting perspective. But when you form an opinion even before the film releases, you are missing out on something that might turn out to be genuinely good if you gave it a chance, right? The number of films that are subject to such vicious attacks and are then celebrated years later are quite many. Particularly films made by Imtiaz Ali, Selvaraghavan, GVM, Mani Ratnam etc.
rsylvania – Criticism such as recreating plot points, making the same film etc are criticism of his work only. That’s perfectly okay. I have given my views on why i don’t think that’s valid. The personal attacks i’m talking about are the ones that say Ali has lost his way, he should stop making films, he has forgotten how to write etc.
LikeLike
Madan
February 19, 2020
N Madhusudhan: Particularly having watched Shikara and seen it sink under negative publicity, I find the potential for social media to destroy a film scary. It is happening quite a lot the last couple of years. Once the chattering classes give their verdict, few dare find out for themselves.
Regarding the title of Rockstar, I understood when I eventually did watch the film (only parts of it before I got bored and tuned out) that it didn’t intend to show the rock music scene. Which though is why I disliked the choice of a misleading title. I also find the self immolation theory of art tiresome, the notion that you have to have suffered the pain yourself to be able to write about it. In this way, nobody would be able to write songs about suicide.
LikeLike
N Madhusudhan
February 19, 2020
Madan – I agree with your view on the self immolation theory. But i think it fits into Ali’s universe. I feel in some ways he is like a Selvaraghavan / Mysskin because of how he pushes the extremities of his characters and situations. I don’t think his films are necessarily “real”. He builds his own world and they’re invariably filled with severely messed up characters and weird ideologies. I think if you’re able to buy his universe, his films will resonate with you.
Regarding films sinking under negative publicity, i think the silver lining is that these films find a new lease of life after a few months in OTT platforms. That ensures that the film finds its own audience and there’s money in it for the makers. But i am someone who likes to watch films in the theatre. And to me, nothing can replace the joy of watching a unique film with the whole theatre enjoying the experience. I recently experienced it watching Psycho. I crave for such experiences. It’s sad that all of this doesn’t mean much to the twitter generation.
LikeLike
Dedee
February 23, 2020
*It could have been easily just “Love” *
(Spoliers ahead)
This is what an Imtiaz Ali can do to my kind. First declaration right after I walked out of the movie is that ‘na, It didn’t work for me’. But here I am 5 hours later, still trying to peel off what the whole point was about, invariably so.
And here is my first thought. Maybe this could have been just a LOVE AAJ, coz that’s really the more relevant story of it all. Coz the ‘kal’ here (the 90s) is pretty much what the 90s and 2000s movies have served us already; this just a twist to taht fairy tale ending. And also coz these two stories aren’t really speaking to each other as they did in the first installment of the franchise unless ofcourse the character from the kal preaches us to us.
The point is, well the whole point is about the love today. Zoe and Veer.
IT IS lonely amonst all the crowd. IT IS silent in the middle of the noise. IT IS so much colourful on the outer Insta world and as much hollow in the inner real world. There are lies, impatience, constant hustle between what do we want and what we think we want.
Above all, the struggle to choose between dedicating time to career vs to the love of your life is real. It’s fucking real. Its as real as it gets.
Coz it’s just all around us. You just have those many years to make either work, in the most conventional ways of the society. Yes, there are exceptions. But one has to go through the conventional tussle and fight to be the exception. Like to be someone who gets married at 40. Or to be someone who starts a new career altogether at 35.
Am I projecting all that I wanted from these characters onto the movie? Maybe yes. But it is also the truth that Zoe and Veer are making me think about all the ‘could have beens’ of this story that Ali had so much only touched upon.
I mean there are women and men in their mid twenties really struggling to strike a balance. It’s a real shit. And it’s also sad that you are constantly told in the society to focus on either of the one. Coz there’s only so much priority you can manage to give to either at one particular time. That shit is real.
There are also young men and women who have found their spiritual calling so early on that they are clear on wanting to discover self above all. Wanting to call out the modern facade and do what satisfies them. It’s actually fascinating how these young minds could so think intensely about dreams, passion, world, travel, soul satisfaction etc, etc.
These two people exist and it’s such an interesting premise.
Maybe if the conflict was milked enough;
Maybe if it was just about this Zoe and Veer that I’ve ended up identifying;
Maybe if there were better people who could bring these layered people onto the screen
Maybe, just maybe.
Sincerely
An Imtiaz fan.
LikeLike
rsylviana
February 24, 2020
The personal attacks i’m talking about are the ones that say Ali has lost his way, he should stop making films, he has forgotten how to write etc.
@N Madhusudhan – Insensitive and cruel as these comments are , I still feel even these would come under professional criticisms. They still talk about his ability to make films which is his professional area of expertise right ? When they say “he has lost his way” , they still mean the way of making films and not some other ability that is completely unrelated to his artistic prowess right ? I agree these are very unnecessary comments to make especially when they can stick to just criticizing his movie that just got released but I somehow feel that these cannot be clubbed under “personal attacks” on the director.
LikeLiked by 2 people