Tag Archives: Movie Review

Retro Review: Dil Chahta Hai (2001)

17 Replies

4 Stars (out of 4)

Buy or rent the movie at iTunes
Buy the DVD at Amazon
Buy the soundtrack at Amazon

I’m a Farhan Akhtar fan, whether he’s working as an actor-producer in movies like Rock On!!, Luck By Chance and Karthik Calling Karthik or writing and directing action flicks like 2006’s Don. If there’s any filmmaker who could parlay Bollywood success into Hollywood success, it’s Akhtar. After watching the first film he wrote and directed, Dil Chahta Hai, I’m more convinced than ever.

Akhtar’s debut effort is part buddy comedy, part coming-of-age drama about three friends fresh out of college. Sameer (Saif Ali Khan) falls in love fast and gets his heart broken easily. Akash (Aamir Khan) is a cynic who only believes in brief flings. Sid (Akshaye Khanna) has a view of love that’s somewhere in between.

The plot gives equal amounts of time to all three of the guys, making it hard to tell if there’s really a main character in Dil Chahta Hai. The honor probably goes to Akash, as he goes through the most profound character transformation, but it’s nice to see a buddy movie that’s really about buddies, not just a main character and his sidekicks.

The story follows the three pals as they reluctantly begin their adult lives. On a road trip to Goa, they pledge their undying friendship to one another, but things change when they return home.

Sameer balks at his parents’ plans to choose a bride for him — until he meets the bride-to-be. Pooja (Sonali Kulkarni) is pretty and independent, but she already has a boyfriend. Sameer sets about trying to win her for himself.

Sid’s love story is unconventional. He befriends an older, divorced woman who moves into the neighborhood and takes an interest in Sid’s paintings. Tara (Dimple Kapadia) is no seductress, but Sid becomes captivated by both her beauty and her tragic life story.

When Sid discloses his feelings for Tara to his friends, Akash and Sameer initially react with surprise. When Akash jokes that Tara — an experienced divorcee with her own house — is the perfect woman for all of them, Sid punches him. Sid leaves the next morning to study at an artist’s colony, and Akash leaves for Australia a few days later. On the plane, Akash runs into a girl he’d once flirted with at a nightclub (played by Preity Zinta), thus beginning his own love story.

The charm of Dil Chahta Hai is its realism. Akhtar made a point of writing dialog that sounds authentic, rather than the flowery exposition or lengthy speeches typical of a lot of movies. It’s predictable, but in a way that allows the emotions of the story to come through organically.

Akhtar’s careful to balance the melodrama with humor. True friendships thrive on a diet of laughs, so Dil Chahta Hai is often very funny. Some of the numerous song-and-dance numbers are even a bit surreal, further lightening what could be a heavy movie.

I’d say that Dil Chahta Hai is a great Bollywood movie, but it doesn’t even need the qualifier: it’s just a great movie. One of these days, some Hollywood studio is going to notice Farhan Akhtar and throw millions of dollars at him to make movies for a global audience. The world will be better for it.

Links

Movie Review: Peepli Live (2010)

8 Replies

3 Stars (out of 4)

Buy the DVD at Amazon
Buy the soundtrack at Amazon

In the United States, India’s image is that of an increasingly modern nation on the path to prosperity. It supports a glamorous movie industry. A well-educated, English-speaking workforce makes India an attractive place for American companies to outsource customer service jobs. South Asians living in the States are, on average, one of the most financially successful demographic groups.

With so many positive examples, it’s easy to overlook the fact that a large portion of Indians still live in poverty. Slumdog Millionaire exposed Americans to the plight of the poor in large cities, but some of India’s poorest citizens live in rural areas that tourists never see and that get little news coverage.

Peepli Live — a movie produced by Bollywood superstar Aamir Khan — presents international audiences with a vivid depiction of rural life. The farmers in the movie live in a kind of destitution unimaginable in America. Homes with no running water or electricity, food cooked over fires fueled by cow dung, not even a private place to relieve oneself.

Such conditions prompt Peepli Live‘s lead characters, brothers Bhudia (Raghubir Yadav) and Natha (Omkar Das Manikpuri), to consider drastic measures. A local money-lender refuses to give them a loan but recommends a government program for impoverished farmers. If a farmer commits suicide, the government allegedly will pay his family $2000 — enough money for Bhudia and Natha to pay back the bank loan they took out to buy seeds and fertilizer from the large, American agricultural firm, “Sonmanto.”

Elder brother Bhudia initiates a conversation in which both he and Natha politely offer to kill themselves for the sake of the family, which includes their ancient mother and Natha’s wife and three kids. The conversation ends when Bhudia calls Natha’s bluff (“I’ll kill myself.” “No, I’ll kill myself.” “Okay, you kill yourself!”). While it makes no sense for Natha to kill himself — he’s the one with the wife and kids, after all — he’s reluctant to challenge his big brother.

A freelance reporter overhears Natha speaking about his planned suicide and prints a story in the local newspaper. The story catches the eye of a large TV news channel. Reluctant to miss out on the story, dozens of news crews descend on Natha’s house, spawning a figurative (and, eventually, literal) circus.

Local politicians try to turn Natha’s suicide to their advantage. The politicians in power are desperate to change Natha’s mind so that they look like they care about poor farmers. Their opponents want Natha to kill himself. No one cares that Natha doesn’t actually want to die.

When the plot focuses on the farmers, Peepli Live is a great movie. There’s a hilarious enmity between Natha’s mother and his wife, Dhaniya (Shalini Vatsa), who runs the household under a barrage of vulgar insults from her mother-in-law. Though by no means a tender woman, she doesn’t want her husband to die. Yet their situation is so dire, there don’t seem to be many alternatives.

The movie slows down shortly after the news vans roll in to town. The newscasters aren’t nearly as compelling as the farmers, but they dominate screentime in the second half of the movie. Bhudia seems to disappear altogether, and his lippy mother is relegated to lying silently on her cot.

Part of the point of the movie is the disconnect between urban and rural life: the way big city broadcasters promote sensational stories about farmers’ struggles for only as long as the stories earn ratings and without offering a solution to the problem. By shifting the focus from Natha and his family and onto the news crews covering them, Peepli Live is guilty of the same surface treatment of the issue that it’s criticizing.

The movie ends with a card that explains that, from 1991-2001, eight million farmers in India quit farming. And? Is that a bad thing, given how hard it is to make a living in agriculture? If so, what should the government do about it? Like the news channels it criticizes, Peepli Live entertains and asks questions, but doesn’t offer any solutions.

Links

Movie Review: Aisha (2010)

4 Replies

2.5 Stars (out of 4)

Buy the DVD at Amazon
Buy the soundtrack at Amazon

Jane Austen’s novel, Emma, has inspired numerous adaptations in the nearly 200 years since it was first published. The latest onscreen version, Aisha, is watchable, but its heroine misses the mark.

In this modern Indian update, directed by Rajshree Ojha, Emma is renamed Aisha (Sonam Kapoor): a wealthy girl from Delhi who fancies herself an expert matchmaker. Her intrusiveness and inability to read people winds up complicating the lives of all around her.

Of particular interest to Aisha is Shefali (Amrita Puri), a small-town girl who’s looking for a husband. Shefali presents a convenient means for Aisha to rid herself of her own dorky suitor, Randhir (Cyrus Sahukar). She sets about trying to force the two to fall in love, with disastrous results.

Debutant actress Puri does a lovely job as Shefali. She’s desperate not to disappoint Aisha, yet incapable of becoming the society girl she’s expected to be. The earnestness and excitability Puri brings to the role is spot on.

American filmgoers will find Aisha very accessible. The characters’ addictions to trendy fashions and designer labels is universal among young people with money to burn. The story is structured like many Hollywood movies (though it’s occasionally bogged down by the song-and-dance montages unique to Bollywood). A familiar story helps as well.

Emma Woodhouse is an enduring character because of her complexities: supreme self-assurance paired with a lack of real world experience, a compassionate nature mixed with uncontrollable nosiness. Like Emma herself, Sonam Kapoor lacks the experience to make Aisha an appealing leading lady. Kapoor plays Aisha as woefully immature, to the point that she seems like the lone adolescent in a world full of adults.

Kapoor delivers her lines with whiny condescension. When Aisha finally apologizes for her mistakes, it seems as if she’s doing so just so that people won’t be mad at her, and not because she’s gained any insight her own behavior. She responds to a declaration of love with a shrill and insincere, “Really?”

In the movie Clueless — another modern remake of Emma, from 1995 — the main character narrates the movie. It allows the audience to hear her thoughts, testifying to her change of character. A similar technique would’ve been useful in Aisha.

Despite a lackluster heroine, Aisha has a great supporting cast. In addition to Puri’s solid turn as Shefali, Abhay Deol reaffirms his rising star status with a charming and authentic performance as Arjun, Aisha’s long-time neighbor and friend (the George Knightly role in Emma).

The character who undergoes the most emotional growth throughout the story is Aisha’s best friend, Pinky (Ira Dubey). Pinky begins the movie as Aisha’s cynical sidekick, snobbishly looking down upon everyone but Aisha. There’s a moment when she realizes that she’s been too hard on Randhir, and it changes her outlook on life. Too bad Aisha didn’t experience such growth herself.

Links

Movie Review: Once Upon a Time in Mumbaai (2010)

10 Replies

3 Stars (out of 4)

Buy or rent the movie at iTunes
Buy the DVD at Amazon
Buy the soundtrack at Amazon

If organized crime is inevitable in a big city, which kind of crime syndicate is preferable: one large, powerful entity that operates without violence or several smaller gangs engaged in perpetual turf wars? Such is the question one police officer ponders in Once Upon a Time in Mumbaai.

Said police officer is Agnel Wilson (Randeep Hooda), the man responsible for investigating organized crime in Mumbai. When Wilson assumes his post in the mid-’70s, the criminal underworld is run by one man: Sultan Mirza (Ajay Devgan).

Sultan, who only needs one name, grew up an orphan on the streets of Mumbai. As his love for the city grew, he realized that Mumbai was being destroyed by gangs fighting over small portions of the smuggling business. As he rose to power, Sultan successfully divided the city among the biggest crime bosses, enabling them to conduct their illegal operations without harming innocent people. The gangsters — Sultan especially — quickly gain a more exulted reputation than either the government or the police.

Sultan’s Robin Hood-like reputation and his movie star girlfriend make him an appealing target for Officer Wilson. Little does Wilson know just how easy he had it with Sultan in charge. The climate begins to change with the rise of aspiring crime boss Shoaib Khan (Emraan Hashmi).

Shoaib’s background couldn’t be more different from Sultan’s. As a child, Shoaib turned to petty crime as a way to get a rise out of his police officer father. His father would discipline Shoaib by slapping him, further encouraging Shoaib to act out. He failed to develop a sense of empathy and embraced violence, adding a sinister edge to his dreams of surpassing Sultan.

Admiring Shoaib’s sense of courage, Sultan brings Shoaib into his inner circle. It’s a mistake that costs him and all of Mumbai dearly.

Once Upon a Time in Mumbaai, despite its flashy ’70s gangster backdrop, is a character study. Director Milan Luthria takes the time to show how Sultan became so beloved and why he’s so different from Shoaib. When Sultan slaps Shoaib, the significance is clear.

Devgan is in his element. He radiates an aura of controlled power, imbuing Sultan with benevolence and the authority over life and death simultaneously. In a white suit and sporting a mustache, Devgan already looks like a time traveller from the seventies.

The film could be shorter, but quality performances drive the story along. The easiest scenes to remove would be the song-and-dance numbers. It seems as if every movie about gangsters has to have a scene at a club after the main character makes his first big score. Shoaib’s dance club debauchery montage is unnecessary.

The movie’s subtitles are its biggest problem. At some moments, they are so poorly translated as to be confusing (and they disappear in a key scene at the movie’s end). I’m still trying to make sense of: “Till a horse is not beautified, it looks like a donkey.”

Links

Movie Review: Khatta Meetha (2010)

5 Replies

-1 Star (out of 4)

Buy the DVD at Amazon
Buy the soundtrack at Amazon

That’s right. I give Khatta Meetha a negative-one star rating. The producers owe me a star. Khatta Meetha is one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen.

Here’s the best example of why Khatta Meetha is so bad: the hero of this slapstick comedy punches his girlfriend in the face, humiliates her in public, destroys her house, threatens her, and then frames her for a crime she didn’t commit, driving her to attempt suicide. And he’s the hero! OF A COMEDY!

How did a movie so morally reprehensible get made? How? I beg you: do not pay to see this movie. No one involved with this garbage deserves to make another cent from it.

The first ten minutes of the movie are a typical Akshay Kumar slapstick comedy. Kumar plays Sachin Tichkule, a hapless contractor who’s the black sheep in a family of successful (i.e., corrupt) engineers. His brother and brothers-in-law have enough money to bribe their way into large contracts building bridges. Penniless Sachin is stuck paving roads, cutting corners to ensure future work repairing the same roads the next year.

Things quickly turn serious when a bridge Sachin’s brothers built collapses, killing dozens of people. To avoid jail, they collude with an up-and-coming politician. They convince the Tichkule family’s loyal chauffeur, Mr. Rao, to take the rap for them. The next day, the politician has Mr. Rao killed to keep him from talking.

No one else in the Tichkule family, including Sachin, seems to notice that Mr. Rao is gone. He gets mentioned in an aside in the last five minutes of the film, but the slapstick resumes shortly after Rao dies.

The bulk of the movie is bad gags, punctuated by fits of yelling that are allegedly humorous. Sachin seems doomed to forever be a failure when his ex-girlfriend, Ghena (Trisha Krishnan), becomes the local bureaucrat in charge of construction contracts.

Back in college, Sachin punched Ghena in the face when she defied him. This got him kicked out of school, which somehow led him to become a disreputable contractor. Blaming the victim is always a nice touch.

When Ghena demands that Sachin play by the rules, he belittles her in public, making threatening gestures and destroying her house, which he then jokes about. He frames her for taking bribes, and she tries to kill herself.

These are the actions of the guy the audience is supposed to identify with and cheer for. Sachin belongs in jail with his murdering brothers. But, since this is a comedy, Ghena accepts his apology from her hospital bed.

The degree of casual violence against women in Khatta Meetha is appalling. At one point, Sachin’s sister is murdered. Almost as an afterthought, one character mentions to Sachin that, before she died, she’d also been gang raped by her new husband’s friends. WTF?

There’s nothing redeemable about Khatta Meetha. Nothing. The way it flits from goofy comedy to violent drama is absurd. The way it follows scenes of violence against women with celebratory dance numbers is insulting. Everyone who had any part in making this should be ashamed.

Links

Movie Review: Toh Baat Pakki (2010)

1 Reply

2 Stars (out of 4)

Buy the DVD at Amazon
Buy the soundtrack at Amazon

Compared to many other recent Hindi comedies, Toh Baat Pakki is understated, for the most part. But the beginning and end of the movie fall back on conventional slapstick.

Tabu stars as Rajeshwari, a big sister seeking a husband for her little sister, Nisha (Yuvika Chaudhry). But she only wants the best for Nisha, who’s pretty, smart and considers teaching village children for free a hobby.

Rajeshwari literally runs into Rahul (Sharman Joshi), a friendly engineering student, as she’s walking home from the shops. She’s suspicious at first, scolding him even when he goes out of his way to return her purse. When she eventually realizes that Rahul could be a perfect match for Nisha, Rajeswhwari contrives to move him into her vacant guest bedroom. Then she invites Nisha over for an extended stay.

The plan works perfectly. Nisha and Rahul fall for each other, and Rahul ingratiates himself with Rajeshwari’s husband and their two kids. The family starts preparing for Nisha & Rahul’s wedding.

Then Yuvi (Vatsal Seth) shows up on Rajeshwari’s doorstep. The son of her husband’s uncle’s friend, Yuvi arrives looking to rent the spare room currently occupied by Rahul. It’s just temporary while his bungalow is being repaired. Because he’s handsome and already successful, Rajeshwari makes the executive decision that Yuvi is actually a better match for Nisha than Rahul. She tricks Rahul into vacating the house, installing Yuvi in his place.

Rahul, convinced that Nisha still loves him, undertakes a convoluted plan to get Yuvi to call off the wedding. No one asks Nisha what she really wants.

At its best, Toh Baat Pakki is a winsome romantic comedy. Tabu is spectacular in the complicated lead role. Rajeshwari automatically assumes the worst of people. Even when she’s being nice, it’s to further her own ends. She’s a force of will that can’t be stopped.

But Tabu keeps Rajeshwari from being a nasty caricature. She’s motivated by a sense of familial duty that has been warped into a ceaseless hunt for perfection. Rather than employing cartoonish overreactions, Rajeshwari responds to events in a believable way: a slightly raised eyebrow when a more promising suitor walks by or a furrowed brow when she spots the tacky vase she’s trying in vain to regift.

However, these subtle comic reactions are overshadowed in the beginning and end of the movie by dumb sound effects and cheesy gags. There’s no reason for Rahul’s plan to be as complicated as it is, except as a means to include unfunny bits like throwing a pile of saris on a nosy neighbor or having goons disrupt a wedding.

Early into Rahul’s scheme, one of his friends asks why he doesn’t simply tell Nisha that he wants to marry her. There’s no good reason why he shouldn’t. Rahul’s answer makes no sense, and neither does the end of the movie.

Links

Retro Review: Harishchandrachi Factory (2009)

7 Replies

3 Stars (out of 4)

Buy or rent the movie at iTunes
Buy the DVD at Amazon

I normally review only Hindi movies, but I made an exception for Harishchandrachi Factory. The Marathi movie was India’s official entry in the Best Foreign Language Film category of the 2010 Academy Awards. Ultimately, it wasn’t one of the five nominees, but it is worth watching.

The film is about the creation of the first full-length Indian motion picture in 1913: Raja Harishchandra, a depiction of the life of an ancient king renowned for always keeping his promises and telling the truth, no matter the consequences for him and his family.

(I didn’t think the moral of the story of Harishchandra was explained clearly via the movie’s subtitles. I had to look up the story later to appreciate some of the references.)

Dhundiraj Govind Phalke was the man responsible for Raja Harishchandra, in addition to dozens of other movies over the span of 19 years. He’s credited for founding the Indian film industry, back when cinema was dominated by the British.

Harishchandrachi Factory begins in 1911, when Phalke (Nandu Madhav) sees his first motion pictures: a documentary on bullfighting and a depiction of the life of Jesus Christ. He’s instantly seized with the notion of making an Indian film for an Indian audience.

Phalke, having recently sold his stake in a printing company, convinces his wife, Saraswati (Vibhawari Deshpande), and several investors that movie making is just another kind of printing, winning their support. He spends two months in England learning the trade and returns with the necessary camera equipment.

Phalke’s path is remarkably free of obstacles. Saraswati takes her husband’s career change in stride, never complaining as he sells most of their furniture to finance his London trip, which he schedules when she’s supposed to give birth to their third child. And Phalke has little trouble getting money from investors, who are impressed by his hard work ethic and the potential of the new storytelling medium.

The only hiccups occur when Phalke actually starts making his movie. Motion pictures are held in such low regard that even prostitutes refuse to join Phalke’s production, for fear of ruining their reputations. The men he hires to play the female roles are reluctant to shave their mustaches.

The lack of conflict, despite conventional wisdom, actually makes Harishchandrachi Factory more enjoyable. There is enough inherent risk in being a pioneer. Manufactured arguments between, say, Phalke and Saraswati would’ve been depressing, rather than dramatic. Happy onscreen relationships are rare enough as it is.

Harishchandrachi Factory is impressive, given that it was made for less than $500,000. But the meagreness of the budget is evident in some aspects of the movie. The costumes, particularly those of the British characters, look cheap and made from modern synthetic fabrics.

Despite the fact that they’ve little to do, the Anglo actors are distractingly bad. Most of the extras look like they were kidnapped from a British university field trip. Still, Harishchandrachi Factory is a fun and educational experience, if not a completely immersive one.

Links

Movie Review: Milenge Milenge (2010)

3 Replies

1 Star (out of 4)

Buy the DVD at Amazon
Buy the soundtrack at Amazon

Milenge Milenge (“We Will Meet, We Will Meet”) is a remake of the 2001 Hollywood romance Serendipity that is, at times, remarkably faithful to the original. Too bad the writers missed the point of the movie.

Kareena Kapoor stars as Priya, a college girl who abhors guys who drink, smoke, and lie. A tarot card reader — played by the great Kirron Kher, who acts like she’s embarrassed to be in the movie — informs Priya that she’s going to meet her soulmate on a foreign beach in seven days. The next day, Priya learns that she’s been selected to attend a youth conference in Bangkok.

At the same time, good-for-nothing fellow college student Immy (Shahid Kapoor) finagles his way onto the same trip. In Bangkok, he stumbles into Priya’s room while running from the cops and immediately falls in love with the sleeping beauty. He steals her diary and learns about the tarot card reader’s prediction. He makes sure he’s the one waiting for Priya on the beach on the seventh day.

Of course, pretending to be Priya’s fated soulmate means Immy must give up drinking and smoking. After he finally decides that being with Priya is worth abstaining, she discovers his scheme and calls the relationship off.

At this point, Milenge Milenge becomes a full-fledged Serendipity clone. The couple meet up in India when they both reach for the same item in a department store. Priya has Immy write his name and phone number on a 50 rupee note, and she writes hers inside of a book. Then she gives both the book and bill away. If Priya and Immy are destined to be together, she reasons, he’ll find the book with her name and she’ll find the note with his.

The original Hollywood movie began with two strangers meeting in a department store. They spend some time together and enjoy each other’s company, but both are already in committed relationships. They also do the bit with the book and the dollar bill, a cosmic test to see if they should ditch their partners and be together.

The whole reason that the fate angle worked in the original was that the lead couple had no history. The test of fate was based on the idea of what could be.

When Priya and Immy test fate, they already have a history, and it’s a bad one. Immy is a thief and a fraud, and Priya has good reason to dump him. If he wants to prove that he can change, he needs to be with Priya to do that.

If their test works and they are reunited by fate, it doesn’t prove that Immy is a better man. What if Priya was simply destined to be with a jerk?

In addition to the logical problem of Priya & Immy’s fated reunion, there’s also a practical one. In Serendipity, the male lead didn’t know the woman’s last name. In Milenge Milenge, Immy knows Priya’s last name, as well as where she went to college. Why not call the alumni office? Why not Google her? There’s no reason why he can’t find her.

The fact that neither Immy nor Priya thinks to consult the Internet makes the movie feel dated, as does virtually everything else about Milenge Milenge. The quality of the cinematography makes it look like a contemporary of Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge (1995) rather than a movie made in 2004. (The movie’s been stuck in post-production hell for the past six years.) A cheesy soundtrack, wacky overacting, and a prudish sense of morality make Milenge Milenge seem even older than that.

Milenge Milenge languished on the shelf for six years. It probably should’ve stayed there permanently.

Links

Movie Review: Well Done Abba (2010)

1 Reply

2 Stars (out of 4)

Buy the DVD at Amazon
Buy the soundtrack at Amazon

It’s hard to imagine a comedy film premise less sexy than: “A middle-aged chauffeur returns to his village to build a well.” But Boman Irani’s comedic skills make Well Done Abba an enjoyable, if overly long, movie.

Irani stars as the titular abba (“dad”), Armaan Ali. Armaan returns to work two months late from his month-long vacation to the village and attempts to explain the circumstances to his boss. The story of Armaan’s extended holiday is told in flashbacks with occasional returns to the modern-day. This framing device is one of many unnecessary elements in Well Done Abba.

Armaan’s vacation takes him from Mumbai back to his village near Hyderabad. He intends to find a husband for his daughter, Muskaan (Minissha Lamba), who’s being raised by Armaan’s twin brother and the twin’s wife, a pair of small time grifters. Muskaan is only interested in continuing her studies and flying kites.

Shortly after settling in, Armaan gets talked into applying for a government grant to build a well on his property. However, the grant application process turns out to be a bribery scam run by village bureaucrats. After all of the inspectors, contractors and permit officers are paid off, there’s no money left to dig the well.

Muskaan concocts a scheme to get their well built once and for all. Using the Right to Information law, she discovers how many other village families were conned out of their well money. Armed with the fake photos and contracts the corrupt officials submitted to the government, she demands that the police start an investigation: someone must have stolen all of the village wells.

Muskaan gets help from the cute mechanic in town, Arif (Sammir Dattani). He’d be an ideal marriage candidate for Muskaan, but Armaan’s too distracted by the well debacle to notice.

Well Done Abba is a great showcase for Irani. His performance is perfectly subdued as Armaan wavers between confused and irritated. The movie’s highlight is a scene in which Armaan poses for a photo. The photographer struggles to get a good headshot as the slightest muscle twitches change Armaan’s expression from goofy to dour to homicidal.

Lamba and Dattani are an adorable onscreen couple. Their relationship blooms from annoyance to friendship to love, all under the oblivious gaze of Armaan, who can’t understand why Arif goes out of his way to be nice to him.

But the strong performances by the leads can’t disguise the fact that the movie is in serious need of an editor. There are so many ideas, subplots and side characters that Well Done Abba would have been better off as a TV miniseries.

There’s the honest police inspector whose wife wishes he was corrupt, the permit officer who wants his new bride to get breast implants, and Muskaan’s friend who gets married to a sheik. At the last minute, Arif’s father reveals that the boy isn’t his son by birth. Soap operas are less convoluted than this.

Armaan’s identical twin brother, Rehman (also played by Irani), is also superfluous. Apart from one brief and predictable gag in which Armaan is mistakenly jailed instead of Rehman, the fact that the brothers are identical is never brought up again.

For all the aspects of the movie I liked, this excess plot isn’t acceptable. Trim about 44 minutes off of the 144 minute runtime and it might be a great movie.

Links

Retro Review: Jab We Met (2007)

4 Replies

1.5 Stars (out of 4)

Buy the DVD at Amazon
Buy the soundtrack at Amazon

The recent release of Milenge Milenge prompted me to watch Jab We Met (“When We Met”), a 2007 romantic comedy. Both movies star Kareena Kapoor and Shahid Kapoor (no relation). Had I not committed myself to reviewing the movie, I would’ve turned off Jab We Met within the first 45 minutes.

The movie’s first act is a prolonged meet-cute between the two leads, Aditya (Shahid) and Geet (Kareena). Aditya, emotionally exhausted by legal battles over the rights to his deceased father’s wealthy corporation, wanders the streets in the kind of depression that only exists in movies. He stares at nothing, silently boarding buses and trains, with no idea where he’s going.

He’s a lot more mobile in his melancholia than most depressed people. If the movie was going for authenticity, Aditya would’ve left the boardroom, headed home, and crawled into bed.

On the train, Aditya is verbally assailed by a fellow passenger, Geet. To call her a chatterbox is insufficient; Geet won’t shut up. She jabbers in a manner that, like Aditya’s ambulatory despondency, only exists on film. She flits from topic to topic without pause, utterly self-absorbed and failing to notice Aditya’s blank stare out the window.

The clueless chatterbox is one of my most hated movie clichés, because she doesn’t exist in real life. At least not in such an extreme and irritating form. An ordinary person wouldn’t last a minute on the receiving end of such a soliloquy before faking a trip to the bathroom and finding an empty seat at the other end of the train, thus depriving the clueless chatterbox of her audience.

Writing deliberately annoying characters is tricky because — as with Geet — they often wind up annoying the audience as well as their fellow characters. An example of annoying-done-right can be found on the television show Glee. Supporting characters refer to the main character, Rachel, as annoying, but she rarely acts in a way that’s irritating to us viewers. We get that she annoys the other characters, without having to be annoyed ourselves.

Through a series of idiotic decisions, Geet gets herself stranded at a station, minus her wallet and luggage. She berates Aditya into helping her, then berates cab drivers and beverage vendors on the way to her parents’ house. Geet’s abuse of service workers further diminishes her attractiveness.

Thus ends the first 45 minutes of a 140-minute-long movie.

The rest of the movie is pleasant enough, as Aditya finally engages with his surroundings. There are colorful wedding decorations and Geet’s equally colorful family to liven things up. But, for the most part, the remainder of Jab We Met is just above average.

The big problem is Geet. Though Kareena Kapoor does a fine job acting the part, Geet is not a nice character. She starts out annoying and fails to develop throughout the film. She reacts but doesn’t grow, remaining clueless until the last few minutes of the movie. It’s hard to believe a decent, rich guy like Aditya couldn’t have found someone better.

Links: