the khans

for almost two decades now, these namesakes have dominated the hindi film industry and even now remain unrivaled legends. their charisma, influence and power is unmatched and they've become an industry within an industry.
SRK: the icon, the superstar, the king, the number one. he has reached the top defying every norm that was set then, be it to not do t.v, not do villainous characters or not be typecasted. he started with anti-hero films such as baazigar and darr which accentuated his rise and then went on to play the loverboy in ddlj, dtph, kkhh, etc. he was panned by critics during those years for hamming, being repetitive, overacting and being consistenly himself in films and not the character. he dint take the criticism too seriously (took it almost with a kind of arrogance) and went on to do more such films cementing himself as india's answer to tom cruise. he did have a dip in his career during the rise of hrithik roshan but he came back strongly with k3g, khnh and chalte chalte. frankly speaking, i never respected srk the actor...always respected the man; but tht was before he delivered swades, chak de, kank and rab ne. today, he is not the shahrukh khan he used to be...hes much more secure, ready to do different roles and experiment. hes dividing his attention between commercial and good cinema. he delivers an om shanti om which is preceded by chak de and is followed by rab ne. he has been a theatre actor and has used the skill to bring down his heaviest critics...hes become terriffic in comedy and hes arguably the best actor in bollywood when it comes to emotional scenes. i love what hes doing with his career now...doing socially effective roles and striking a balance with over the top characters as well. his wit, charm and charisma make him the biggest brand today and he uses tht with flair. i wanna see more of wot hes doin now and cant wait to see i am khan where he plays an autistic character.
his best work is definitely swades, chak de and kank. in swades, he was revelation, in chak de, he was pure inspiration and in kank (although the film dint go down well with audiences), he played his most difficult character yet...he played somone you loathe...it needed a lot of courage and conviction to pull off someone whom he had been a complete opposite of for almost a decade. 

AAMIR: he is without any argument, the most talented and the most versatile actor of his generation. his method acting has almost always been lauded by critics and his commitment to do one film at a time for more than 20 years has made him perhaps a lesser star than srk. starting off with an unnoticed holi by ketan mehta, he came into prominence with qsqt. hes never looked back since. he too has defied people along the way, when he was considered a romantic hero, he did a bazee and a sarfarosh with ease. he did comedy when it was least expected of him with andaz apna apna and hhrpk. his commitment to his role and the script is amazing and his passion and dedication towards cinema, be it screenplay, direction, producing or acting has been unparalelled. he did go through a lean patch in his career with mela, mann, ishq but came back strong with rdb, dch and lagaan. he remains an enigma even today and his fans swear by him. i have always been a huge fan of his acting ability and the conviction with which he plays every character. he is simply superb and an institution of cinema. i cant wait for 3 idiots and delhi belly.
his best work is most definitely rangeela where he made a tapori lovable, sarfarosh where he played a patriot cop, earth where he was menacing and his transformation from a lover to a fanatic was marvelous and lagaan which does not need any explanation...bhuvan still lives in our hearts (so does DJ from rdb).

SALMAN: when i see salman, i pity him as well as i am in awe of him. pity because he has such unbottled humungous talent which remains untapped...he could have probably become a better actor than aamir if he would have applied himself, but the passion and hunger which both srk and aamir has, remains unseen in salman. he still sleepwalks through roles, makes eccentric choices and stays away from great directors.awe because even after ordinary acting in a majority, he has an aura around him...he is adored by the masses and his brilliance as an actor which is second to none, can be seen only in a few films. he started off with biwi ho to aisi but came into prominence with maine pyaar kiya. he hit the right note again with hum aapke hain kaun after a few forgettable films. hes had a very inconsistent career due to eccentric decisions. hes had a few bad years and then one great year to set it all right. hes my least favourite of the khans; the reason being his lack of passion and hunger to do good cinema and good acting. hints of his superb talent are seen in few films but that pisses me off even more...the fact tht he has it in him but still doesnt apply himself. hes squandered great oppurtunites to do well and struck gold with surprisingly medicore roles. i am waiting to see a great performance by him...but with films like veer, wanted and london dreams coming up, it would be stupid to wait as they r all commercial films.
his best roles have been tere naam where he perhaps carried the film with his dynamic acting, hddcs where we all loved him as the singer who talks to god and khamoshi where he played a subtle characte with sensitivity and maturity.

delhi 6

there is a scene in 'delhi 6' where the lead protagonists, roshan tries to explain why india works for him eventhough there are so many antagonistic issues at its core. he cant really get the exact reason but nevertheless concludes that india works and he wants to stay back. i wish i could say the same about rakesh omprakash mehra's latest venture. it would be unjust to compare it with the legendary 'rdb' but both of them have so many parallels that i couldn't help myself.
mehra has been known for a very different kind of cinema...he was bold enough to give us 'aks' and followed it up with a completely contradictory 'rdb'. but alas, thats where the buck stops...he tries the same tricks that worked in 'rdb' and fails miserably at it. no, it is not a film gone horribly wrong and it does have its moments but in the end it stands out as a mediocre affair.
the first half is where we get to see the director's brilliance...he doesnt move the story forward at all...he spends it defining his characters with aplomb. he knows his characters inside out...be it their accents, their mannerisms or their stories. when i watched it go by, i was amazed to see how well he had researched and thought of every role. it was a treat to watch all the actors potray their respective roles...they were very well cast and played out their scenes brilliantly. the big dissappointment for me was abhishek bacchan, it becomes amply clear that he hasnt worked hard on roshan, an american returned indian who is half muslim and half hindu. his accent is annoying at times and comes in the way of few intense scenes where he could have been terreffic. he does however end well...but it could have been a much better performance. sonam kapoor does very well as bittu...she gets her expressions ryte...is spot on with the dialogue delivery and most important of all is vivacious. om puri, atul kularni, divya dutta, pawan malhotra and vijay raaz are the backbone of the film and i cant imagine it without them. i really wanted to see more of rishi kapoor...he was tremendous...his acting is full of experience and does very very well.
so where does the film fail or to be more precise, what makes it fail? the answer to that is monkey man or kaala bandar. mehra tries to synchronise the symbol of the monkey, the ram leela with the storyline...something he did in 'rdb'. i dint appreciate it simply because it was unreal and implausible...it bordered ridiculousness and absurdity at times. the film would have been so much better if the monkey would have been replaced by another symbol.
the climax and the love story are the next week-links in 'delhi 6'...the love story is under-developed...he tries to develop it with the expressions of his lead actors but he fails to see that both are not experienced enough to carry that out and his overconfidence in them is misplaced. the climax is also very sour...there is no grip at all...it doesnt awaken you, doesnt affect you or doesnt change you...i think thats where the biggest drawback of the film lies...it was made to make us think...but nothing close to it happens.
'delhi 6' has a great heart...it has been written and directed with a lot of affection...but the director fails simply because of his presumption that people would take the symbol of the monkey very seriously. watch it for the first half...nothing more.
Rating - 2.5/5

valkyrie

calvin coolidge once said, "true patriotism hates injustice in its own land more than anywhere else." Col. von Stauffenberg understood these lines perfectly and sacrificed everything to try and assassinate adolf hitler. everybody knows that hitler survived this attempt but what is fascinating about the film is the way it shows how the july 20th plot came to happen and what followed later (700 arrests and 200 executions).
directed by bryan singer who is known fr his consistency and intense treatment, 'valkyrie' is everything one would want in a historical thriller. singer edits to perfection leaving us with not one single moment which could be termed boring...he puts in some powerful line, my favourites being, "We have to show the world that not all of us are like him. Otherwise, this will always be Hitler's Germany." and "God promised Abraham that he would not destroy Sodom if he could find ten righteous men... I have a feeling that for Germany it may come down to one." singer does not disenchant us at all...he gives us a film high on commercial value having true patriotism at its core. whats so special about is that eventhough i knew he was gonna die in the end...i felt a moving sense of patriotism in me...i am sure i would have had tears in my eyes if i was a german...seeing men sacrifice their lives for their country with such valiance, honour and determination shook me.
now for the big question, is tom cruise any good? i'd have to say he was electrifying...he was terrific...i am not sure if the real Col. was all tht...but his presence cud be felt in every scene. you cud see that serving his country was betraying his conscience. his intensity and grit are spot-on and he delivers every line with a punch...his last line is the most remarkable...look them in the eye, they will always remember you. i cant see why many people thought he was bad in the first place. i guess its his stardom clouding his skill ( a bias tht is relevant even with srk)...but i was completely impressed. the only lapse probably was tht he spoke in an american accent...but i am sure he had reason to not do the german one...the major one being, it clogs ur dialogue delivery (a fact tht was seen with abhishek in delhi 6).
among the supporting cast, tom wilkinson is fabulous as a general staying neutral and waiting for a side to gain an upper hand. bill nighy and kenneth branagh also put in very commendable potrayals.
'valkyrie' is one of those films which deals with the 'what-ifs' of history and does it remarkably well. watch it for bryan singer, the intensity, the thrill, the drama, the patriotism and tom cruise. you'd wish that such men still lived among us...those who stood up when everyone dint raise an eybrow...those who loved their country...those who gave their lives fighting for what they believed in. you would feel pride in seeing von Stauffenberg...i did.
Rating - 4/5

dev d

watching an anurag kashyap film is a gamble...it is either phenomenal, effective and intense (black friday) or slow, baseless and incomprehensible (no smoking). 'dev d' is a classic example of kashyap's genre of cinema. you will either love it or hate it...its that simple.
based on sarat chandra chatopadhyay's novel, dev d is 'devdas' made in the present tense. not only is it audacious, brash and raw but it also makes the story of a self-destructive, egoistic, romantic alcoholic seen three times already on screen interesting and nouvel. 
its the boldest hindi film ever made and it pushes the envelope genre-wise, subject-wise and dialogue-wise. forgive my langauge, but i am proud to see that anurag kashyap had the balls to pull something like this off. just last week, i had said that we, the audience had become used to unreal, larger than life caricatures and could not digest real characters. well, the characters in dev d cannot get any more real. the vulnerability, the ego, the passion, the intensity has been so well potrayed that you are completely convinced by their individuality. kashyap uses profanity to define his actors and the moment not because he simply thought it would make the film different but because its essential. the rotating shots, the use of colour, the angles show us the genius of anurag kashyap as a director.
the downsides of the film are plenty, the second half lags and becomes repetitive when you see dev fall into an abyss of alcohol, drugs and whores (although, i completely understand that the director had to show this as gradual and not sudden). the climax of the film is not at all convincing and mr. kashyap gets it completely wrong...its sudden and is not at all impactful. the soundtrack which is magnificent fails to shine in the last 20 minutes and doesn't support the film's climax at all.
among the actors, it is abhay deol who not only personifies dev but also delivers a performance that has to be applauded even by his worst critics. he delivers every line with complexity and his expressions and dialogue delivery are spot-on. the vulnerability of dev is so well potrayed by deol that i said to myself, this guy has amazing potential as an actor. kalki koelchin and mahie gill both making their debut shine in their respective roles. kalki for her remarkable potrayal of a schoolgirl who turns into a prostitute and mahie for her personification of a vengeful, loving, lusting, conceited paro. yes, the inexperience does show in a few scenes but both are fabulous new finds to the industry.
like i said in the beginning, you will either love the movie or hate it...there are no two ways when it comes to anurag kashyap's films. it has one of the best and most engaging first halves ever made. it also has a sluggish second half. i am just glad that we still have film-makers like kashyap who are not afraid of making a very real, bold, brazen genre of cinema (not the bhandarkar kind) that effects you either positively or negatively. 
RATING - 3.5/5

victory

dear mr. harman baweja...i have a few points i have to say about u in this obnoxiously grotesque, unbelievably cliched and without a doubt one of the worst films in decades.

1. it takes a lot more than batting lessons to act in a sports film...u have completely hammed the dramatic scenes, u have overacted in every single emotional scene and i conclude by saying that u should start looking for a new career or get yourself admitted into an acting school.

2. sure, it helps being a producer's son...but it makes me angry to see a person get so much attention, so many offers when he doesn't deserve it. you are everything an actor should not be. yes, you dance well and yes you have a great physique and yes, you look, sound and dance like hrithik roshan (which is a disadvantage, if u ask me)...but being talentless when it comes to acting can get you nowhere. i have never seen a stiffer actor and expressionless actor my entire life.

3. last but not the least, i would like to say that, when actors like you, mr. tushaar kapoor, mr. fardeen khan, mr. zayed khan try to make it big in the industry and act like they deserve it...it makes me nauseous and i feel bad for the pathetic state of the film industry. i am glad that you have been given the criticism you deserve and none of the critics have spared you. i hope you choose a better film next time and act in it only after taking acting lessons.

dear mr. ajitpal mangat, it was plain simple torture to sit through your film and i have not seen a more cliched film. let me elaborate with a few points...

1. it takes more than superstar players to make a cricket based film and choosing mr. baweja as the lead actor was the last nail in the coffin.

2. your direction was tactless, annoying, listless and showed no potential in you as a director. you picked up the god of cliched scripts and tried to make a film out of it. a weak script only makes the direction tougher but when there is no skill and ability in the director, it just makes it doomed to fail.

3. cricket is not a game of sixes, fours and individuals...it is about teamwork, batting, bowling and fielding. in a country where the sport is considered a religion and every individual understands the game, you have not only insulted their intelligence but also made them very very angry. 

4. i conclude by saying that i hope your producers do not get their money back and no producer invests in another project which involves you behind the camera. like, mr. baweja i hope you go to film school first before trying to make films which disrespect the audience and try to make them look foolish.

for everyone else, i really hope you never see 'victory', not only does it dissappoint and dismay you but it also bores you to an extent that you want to leave as soon as it starts. i am clueless as to why some critics gave it any stars at all. cinema isnt about money, celebrities and producer sons. it is an art where the director is the author and the actors bring the art to life.

i completely hated, hated and hated this film. 

Rating - 0/5

luck by chance

the term 'underplay' is used very early in 'luck by chance' by the head of an acting institute. he states that underplaying a character never works in bollywood and an actor should always be over the top with his potrayal. zoya akthar spends the rest of the film in contradiciting that statement and proves that subtlety and underplaying can definitely work if used with finesse, tact and clarity. 

'luck by chance' is a fascinating film with a simple story and complex characters. it satirizes bollywood to a superlative extent but still comes out on top because its heart is in the right place. it also marks the debut of a director with vision, humogonous potential and someone who stays clear from the pseudo-real kind of cinema. 'luck by chance' is most simply a breath of fresh air at a time when film-making is getting stagnated.

it's the story of vikram and sona, two budding actors who will do whatever it takes to get them to the top. farhan akhthar completley justifies his selection and plays his manipulating, selfish and charming character with insght and delicacy. he gets everything right and does not overact or underperform. his success at making the audience love his character eventhough he does things that are regarded as villainous firmly establishes the fact that he has remarkable aptitude.

konkona sen-sharma plays her many-layered, difficult to depict character with ease. she also substantiates why she is considered one of the most gifted actresses of her generation.

not mentioning the rest of the cast would be a crime against cinema. rishi kapoor plays the caricatured producer to perfection and his break-down scene shows us not only the depth in the character but also his ability. dimple kapadia is exceptional playing the diva and is very very effective in a confession scene. hrithik roshan, in an extended special appearence is brilliant in playing the star who gets insecure in an elusive way, something that is expressed only through his eyes. juhi chawla and isha sharvani get it right in their respective roles.

the beauty of the film lies in the fact that eventhough the characters are stereotypical, they show their chasm with just expressions and 'underplay'. the performances are top-notch and the inside-jokes are fantastic.

the climax proves that the director is not scared of showing reality on screen even when indian audiences are not too high on not-happy endings. 

'luck by chance' is not cliched, not unreal, not boring and in all a superb package. it's an impressive debut by zoya akhthar...she gives us the kind of cinema we need, the kind of cinema that is appreciated and the kind of cinema that is intelligent. i guarantee that 'luck by chance' will be pure bliss for a bollywood fan.

p.s: srk delivers just one line in the film...and that one line deserves applause.

RATING - 4/5

chandni chowk to china

"can a film be tht bad n still do well at the box office?" i questioned myself after watching a film which had so much hype and very little substance. i am truly amazed at the indian audience...how can u endorse such a bad film? has our taste for cinema become so mediocre that we are satisfied with films that insult our intelligence?

to tell u the truth, 'cc2c' had everything going behind it; the storyline sounded good, the cast looked impressive, the hype was as usual, huge and the expectations were high. i went in expecting a decent entertainer with some funny lines and some good action. it turned out to be torture. dont get me wrong, 'cc2c' does not falter because the expectations are high, it would fail even if one had no expectations at all.

the action of the film is one of the best i have seen in hindi cinema so far, it is completely inspired from chinese action flicks and is mindblowing. akshay kumar overacts in a few scenes but doesnt do a bad job. his comic timing is perfect and he does the action scenes marvelously. there isnt much substance, depth or evolution in his character, hence i wouldnt praise him at all. deepika padukone on the other hand is placed in the film for publicity and looks. she doesnt have one good line in the film...if there was i dint notice. mithun da potrays his small role well and holds his own against akshay in every scene.

by now, you would be thinking, why i had criticised the film to such an extent? the reason for that is mr. nikhil advani's direction. the misadventure with 'salaam-e-ishq' wasnt enough for him to comprehend that he should stop directing films. he converts a very decent storyline with ok performances into a disaster. in trying to make it look like an old jackie chan film, he screws up in all departments...he should go back to karan johar and take lessons. i really feel bad for the cast because 'cc2c' could have been such a fantastic action-adventure-comedy film. alas! mr. advani does not let that happen and leaves us with cinema, you are completely annoyed with.

i really hope that akshay kumar does a different genre of films now, he is starting to get repetitive and it is showing in his acting. in a time when even srk is experimenting, i think he should look for better scripts and for better directors. 

please do not watch 'cc2c', it is an insult to your intelligence and a film where chaos tries to be the binding factor.

rating - 1/5