MovieReviews

Fred Claus (PG)

2007-11-16T21:52:00.000-08:00

Story
Playing second fiddle to a more famous sibling can be rough. Just ask Fred Claus (Vaughn), a regular guy who has had to grow up under the shadow of his little brother, Nicholas Claus (Paul Giamatti), aka Santa. That’s a big shadow, to say the least, both figuratively and literally. As an adult, Fred has pretty much steered clear of his family, but when he finds himself in dire need of some fast cash, he calls his brother. Pleased as punch to hear from him, Nicholas nonetheless makes him a deal: If he comes up to the North Pole for a visit and to help out the few days before Christmas, then Fred can have the money. Fred reluctantly agrees and soon he’s being whisked off in Santa’s sleigh by head elf Willie (John Michael Higgins). But once Fred gets to the North Pole, nothing seems to go right and soon he is the cause of much chaos--which, unbeknownst to Fred, causes Nicholas even more stress since his North Pole operation is one step away from being shut down by a cold-hearted efficiency expert (Kevin Spacey). Can Fred quit being bitter in time to save his brother’s livelihood? Of course he can.

Acting
Hmmm, Vince Vaughn minus the R-rated Wedding Crashers/Old School irreverence? It’s a stretch. Seeing the comic actor playing it PG is a little weird, but you might enjoy how Vaughn infuses his unique energy into Fred Claus. From getting all the elves to boogie down in Santa’s workshop, to going on one rant after another (on his brother: “He’s a clown, a megalomaniac, a fame junkie!”), to pilfering money on the street and then being chased by Salvation Army Santas, it’s all good. Giamatti, too, seems a little out of his comfort zone, as the saintly St. Nick. The actor, who usually plays such endearing sad sacks, has already played against type to great effect this year as the maniacal bad guy in Shoot ‘Em Up, but he isn't nearly as successful in doing the flipside of that in Fred Claus. And what the hell is Kevin Spacey doing in this? As the villain of the film, he fills the shoes nicely, but he is almost too good at it (natch) for such a feel-good family film. Even Higgins--a character actor who is usually so hilarious in films such as The Break Up and all of Christopher Guest’s movies—has to shed the cheekiness and sugar himself up for Fred Claus. There’s also Rachel Weisz as Fred’s beleaguered girlfriend (you heard right) and Kathy Bates as the Claus boys’ mother, who always sees Fred as inferior to her other son, to fill out a cast of big names doing family fare.

Direction
Director David Dobkin is a Vince Vaughn favorite, having directed him in Wedding Crashers and Clay Pigeons, but like his muse, Dobkin seems a little out of place guiding this material. Granted, Dobkin creates a pretty magical North Pole, complete with an entire city of little dwellings, a Frosty Tavern and a huge, domed Santa’s Workshop. The montage of Fred delivering presents on Christmas Eve—falling down chimneys, stuffing cookies in his face, zooming around in the sleigh—is also well done. But overall, Fred Claus is a Vaughn vehicle—even as sugary sweet and family-friendly as it is--and all Dobkin really does is turn the camera on and let the man do his stuff. Dan Fogelman's script is also so very bland, full of any number of holes, and only picks up once Vaughn starts to improvise. Bottom line: If you’re looking to take the kids to a sweet Christmas movie and are a Vince Vaughn fan, then Fred Claus is for you.
.

Lions for Lambs (R)

2007-11-16T21:41:00.000-08:00

Story
Lions for Lambs is all talk and very little action. However articulate and astute it is, Matthew Michael Carnahan’s screenplay comes across as little more than a transcript of a political-science class debate held three years ago on the Bush administration’s post-9/11 military successes and failures. Carnahan, who also wrote The Kingdom, is so intent at getting at the heart of the matter that he ignores the need to contemplate the war on terror within a narrative framework. Instead, Lions for Lambs finds four of its six garrulous protagonists seated behind desks, tossing verbal grenades at each other. In Washington, D.C., young, ambitious and silver-tongued Republican Sen. Jasper Irving (Tom Cruise) lays out his plan to stay the course to skeptical TV journalist Janine Roth (Meryl Streep). In California, wise old college professor Stephen Malley (Robert Redford) tries to persuade slacker Todd Hayes (Andrew Garfield) to apply himself in class by telling him about two former students (Derek Luke and Michael Pena) now in the military. As Malley speaks, his students are executing the first mission under Irving’s plan to destroy a revitalized Taliban in Afghanistan. But there’s a snafu—of course—and they find themselves injured and cornered by the Taliban. While the action in Afghanistan show how the war is run by a bunch of suits concerned only with advancing their careers, the gunfire thankfully offers a respite from the endless chattering and allows us to step outside of Cruise and Redford’s offices. Otherwise, Lions for Lambs would be end up being nothing more than a stage play caught on film for posterity.

Acting
No matter how electrifying he is as the pro-war politician, Cruise brings with him his trademark on-and off-screen cockiness and swagger to a role that would be better suited to an actor whom we would find trustworthy and believable. There’s no conviction to be found in what the ever-smiling Cruise says. He’s just a salesman selling the war on terror and—by extension—himself as the next U.S. president. Granted, Cruise is playing a senator, so every word out of his mouth must be taken with a pinch of salt. But Cruise’s smug presence makes every one of Irving’s points about the war on terror come across as simply suspect and self serving. Streep doesn’t really put up much of a fight against Cruise. As a representative of a complicit media that’s more concerned with ratings than gathering news, Streep looks so school-girlishly enamored of Cruise that she seems more likely to jump him than poke holes in his theories on the war. Redford infuses Malley with the right amount of concern and cynicism, though you’re never quite sure what it is that the professor sees in his wayward student. Garfield is combative for the sake of combative as Hayes, and never for a moment do you believe that Malley’s words will sink in. As a study in contrasts, Luke and Pena—who offered a similar study in the risks and rewards of serving the greater good in last year’s World Trade Center—show much grace under pressure when all hell breaks loose around them.

Direction
“'Nowhere else have I seen such lions led by such lambs,” a German general wrote during WWI about the British soldiers sent to their slaughter by their battle-untested commanders. With this thought in mind, director Robert Redford wastes no time revealing his disdain for the Washington D.C. armchair generals who harbor little regard for the troops on the front line. That point is painfully hammered home by the ill-fated mission undertaken by Luke and Pena. And unlike the hysterical Rendition and the bombastic Kingdom, Lions for Lambs distinguishes itself as the most thoughtful, inquisitive and provocative of all the recent films to tackle the U.S. military response to 9/11. Redford and Carnahan explore the military actions in Afghanistan and Iraq from various perspectives, and they even speculate how the U.S. government would justify an attack on Iran. The goal is to prod audiences to question the decisions made by those in power—especially the Commander in Chief—and to loudly protest when they make mistakes that result in many unnecessary deaths. But given that things remain the same as they were before the last presidential election, Lions for Lambs feels like it’s too little, too late. Most of the arguments made against the Bush administration are old, even if they are still relevant, and were explored with far greater scrutiny in the damning No End in Sight. Ultimately, Lions for Lambs suffers from bad timing. .

Dan in Real Life (PG-13)

2007-11-16T21:37:00.000-08:00

Story
Come on, doesn’t the movie poster just make you want to order buttermilk pancakes with loads of butter and syrup? Minus Steve Carell’s forlorn head resting on top of the stack, of course. This poster is actually a true representation of Dan in Real Life. The film’s message is that life can be full of sweet, yummy—and, yes, even messy—things; you only have to wake up and smell the maple syrup. This pertains to Dan Burns (Carell), a family-advice columnist who is still reeling from the death of his wife four years earlier. He finds it hard to cope, especially in dealing with his three rebellious daughters (Alison Pill, Brittany Robertson, Marlene Lawston), who wish he’d just get a life already. So to get away from it all, he coerces the girls into going to the annual Burns family reunion in the country, a boisterous bunch who are nonetheless worried about poor Dan. But as fate would have it, while on an errand, Dan meets Marie (Juliette Binoche) in the local bookstore and sparks fly. It’s the first time he has felt anything for another woman, and it’s exciting—until he finds out Marie is actually his little brother Mitch’s (Dane Cook) new girlfriend, here to meet the family for the first time. Oops. Dan and Marie then spend the entire weekend trying to squelch and cover up their growing mutual attraction, but it’s no use.

Acting
Steve Carell certainly seems to be multifaceted. First, he succeeds with the R-rated raunchy comedy (The 40 Year-Old Virgin), then the quirky R-rated indie thing (Little Miss Sunshine). He stumbled a little with the PG-family fare (Evan Almighty), but now the funnyman tries his hand at the PG-13 romantic comedy—and scores once again. You can see how Carell might be good in a rom-com from his sweet performance in Virgin, but he is able to soar in Dan in Real Life, incorporating his trademark reactionary techniques while turning in a genuine portrayal of a widower trying to move on--with or without the help of his intrusive, albeit loving, family. Binoche is right there with Carell every step of the way. The French actress is terribly endearing as Marie, and when she can’t control herself from cracking up at Carell’s antics, you know it’s for real. The three young actresses playing Dan’s daughters--Pill (Confessions of a Teenage Drama Queen), as the oldest about to leave the nest; Robertson (Keeping Up with the Steins) as the middle pubescent and reigning drama queen; and little Lawston (Flightplan) as the pre-teen who still loves her daddy--also all do a nice job. Same goes for comedian Cook as Dan’s flighty younger brother, Dianne Weist and John Mahoney as Dan’s buttinsky parents—and a glammed-up Emily Blunt (Devil Wears Prada) as Dan’s blind date, a girl Dan and his siblings used to call “Pig-Nosed Ruthie.”

Direction
On the surface, Dan in Real Life does seem like it would be a bit mushy, a film that could easily lapse into corny pitfalls and over-weepy “family” moments. But in the hands of writer/director Peter Hedges, it’s easy to see why Dan works: The guy knows how to craft scenes and write engaging dialogue without slipping into clichés. Just look at Hedges’ short but impressive writing résumé of winning, intimate films--such as Pieces of April (which he also directed), About a Boy and What's Eating Gilbert Grape--to understand his talent. Dan follows suit. By centering the action on this one vacation, Hedges introduces you to a family anyone should be able to relate to in one form or another. Immediately recognizable are the dynamics between the Burns siblings, the cousins, the parents and their kids, which in turn allows for all those wacky, unpredictable, tender moments of familial bonding. The Burns family is particularly high on playing games and singing impromptu songs, especially the one Dan’s brothers sing, about his imminent blind date with Ruthie. Good times. Throw in the undeniable chemistry of a good romantic comedy and you’ve got Dan in Real Life. .

American Gangster (2007)

2007-11-13T00:12:00.000-08:00

Perhaps it's all too fitting that the latest chronicle of a crime lord's rise and fall be called simply “American Gangster.” The title reflects both the solid simplicity of its premise as well as its cultural tradition. The gangster/crime epic has been an American staple for decades, and its line has produced some of the strongest fare in cinema. We practically expect a good one to pop up regularly, and because the genre's quality is fairly reliable, it's no surprise these films keep drawing on each other as sources of guidelines and inspiration.Thus, director Ridley Scott's entry, conveniently set in the 1970s when this kind of picture was at its height, already draws comparisons to memories of the past. American Gangster reminds one of “The French Connection,” “The Godfather,” “Scarface;” some have called it “Super Fly vs. Serpico” -- the list could go on and on, really. I think this illustrates how the movie's generalness gives it both weakness and strength. Sure we've seen this sort of thing before. But every time we see it, we're entertained.Much of the draw comes from the vicarious thrill of watching an efficient crime lord at work. Yes, people like this are murderers, and they do evil things such as selling drugs, but, admit it, we root for these guys -- the more resourceful they are, and the more they don't let anyone mess around with them, the more we're likely to cheer them on. And they don't get any more charismatic than Denzel Washington, here playing real-life kingpin Frank Lucas. Frank is smart, charming, but serious. He's loyal to those who brought him up, including a mentor and his mother; he could be considered a family man. He's also a clearheaded businessman, and these are all good qualities, which he unfortunately uses to sell a pure form of heroin so strongly demanded that, even at lower than the average street price, their sales make him a rich man.

In general, these gangster stories are critiques of American capitalism, with the "Land of Opportunity" being ironically applied to underground activities that can make you wealthy and give security to your family, as long as you know how to fend off the competition (and make sure they don't literally kill you). Scott takes this a bit further not only by making the viewer complicit with the criminal ambitions on screen, but also by having practically every other character in the movie be corrupt as well. Lower-tier criminals all seek the high-life. Frank's erstwhile innocent brothers, once they're in on the enterprise, happily contribute to the cause. The local cops want in on it too -- they despise Russell Crowe's character, Richie Roberts, an honest cop who's derided for uncovering a million-dollar stash and actually having the gall to turn it in. Josh Brolin plays perhaps the lowest scum, a police investigator who extorts the criminals in his jurisdiction.What Scott seems to be saying is that this is the American dream -- to make money fast, with the law being just a hindrance. Everyone wants to be a gangster, to live large and be in charge, from these drug-trafficking crooks to the "legitimate" celebrities, like actors and sports stars. Wealth is the excuse to revel in immorality and irresponsibility, and it indirectly brings fame and misguided respect along the way. People like Richie, who eventually leads a team to attempt to bust Frank's organization, are very few and far in between. Who is more admirable, the upstanding law-abider who could be seen as a sucker (and, incidentally, has a few unsavory habits in his personal life), or the criminal mastermind, who has otherwise upstanding qualities, who's merely taking advantage of his naturally corrupt environment?

So perhaps “American Gangster” isn't such a general title after all. Perhaps here gangsters have the best kind of freedom by being able to pursue quick paths to riches and become admired for their notoriety in the process.

American Gangster (2007)

American Gangster (2007) Directed by:
Ridley Scott
American Gangster (2007) Written by:
Steve Zaillian, Terry George
American Gangster (2007) Cast:
Denzel Washington, Russell Crowe, Carla Gugino, Josh Brolin, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Ted Levine, John Ortiz, Yul Vazquez, Roger Bart

American Gangster (2007) U.S. Distributor:
Universal Pictures
American Gangster (2007) U.K. Distributor:
UIP

Bee Movie (2007)

2007-11-13T00:06:00.000-08:00

Bees rarely fly in a straight line. They hover and zigzag, with a purpose known only to the collective brain of the hive. The most genuinely apian aspect of “Bee Movie,” DreamWorks’ new animated movie about, well, bees, is that it spends a lot of its short running time buzzing happily around, sniffing out fresh jokes wherever they may bloom. There is a plot — the usual big, elaborate story with the usual important messages about saving the planet, living together in interspecies harmony and believing in yourself — but it’s a little beside the point. The real fun is the insect shtick.The DreamWorks Animation formula, exemplified in the mighty “Shrek” franchise (and imitated by would-be rivals at Sony and Fox), is to charm the children with cute creatures and slapstick action while jabbing at the grown-ups with soft, pseudosophisticated pop- cultural satire. “Bee Movie,” directed by Simon J. Smith and Steve Hickner and animated by several hundred industrious drones, pushes this strategy almost to the point of dispensing with the kid stuff altogether.

There are a few splendid cartoon set pieces — including a funny, thrilling bee’s-eye tour of New York, from Central Park flora to the surface of a tennis ball to the inside of a speeding car — that show off the latest computer animation techniques. But most of the film’s creative energy is verbal rather than visual, and semimature rather than strictly juvenile.Which is hardly surprising. As everyone knows by now, the leading man (and one of the screenwriters and producers) is Jerry Seinfeld, whose sitcom, almost a decade off the network air, lives on in syndication and in the endless recycling of memorable one-liners by a certain type of pathetic Gen-Xer. (Not me, though. I’m the complete opposite of every film critic you’ve ever met. I’m the master of my domain.)Mr. Seinfeld provides the voice and attitude for Barry B. Benson, a young bee who has reached the stage in his accelerated bug lifestyle when he must choose a career. The hive where he lives is a highly regimented place, where the bees, conditioned by 27 million years of evolution, work without a break in the same job for their whole lives. Visually, this world resembles a sweet, sunny, corporate version of Fritz Lang’s “Metropolis.”Barry’s nerdy pal, Adam (Matthew Broderick), accepts his drone future as part of the natural order of things, but Barry is a maverick, an individualist yearning to break out of the conformist world of the social insects.

He may also remind some viewers of Benjamin Braddock, the alliteratively named hero of “The Graduate,” a film that “Bee Movie” cites in a few amusing scenes. Not that Barry has an affair with a middle-aged mama bee (all bees are children of the queen, a biological fact the film notes only in passing). Instead he flies even farther from the nest, so to speak, falling in love with an actual human being, a Manhattan florist named Vanessa who speaks in the irresistibly sweet voice of Renée Zellweger.When you stop to think about it, the prospect of romance between a bee and a person raises some potentially awkward, not to say physiologically outlandish, questions. But of course you’re not supposed to think about it. The moral of the story — one of them, anyway — is that we and the bees are interdependent and that we should respect their hard work.This lesson is satirically driven home in a courtroom plot that erupts just as the love story starts to get sticky. When Barry discovers that honey is sold in supermarkets, and that it is harvested from captive bees held in smoky, shoddy fake hives, he sues the human race, going after some of its notorious bee abusers. These include Ray Liotta, who sells his own brand of honey, and Sting, whose name is obviously offensive to bees. (Both celebrities make cameo voice appearances, as does Larry King, playing a character called Bee Larry King. It’s funnier than it sounds. Or maybe it’s exactly as funny as it sounds.)Even when playing an animated bee, Mr. Seinfeld does not demonstrate great emotional range. His comfort zone as a performer ranges from peeved to perplexed to moderately psyched, with occasional bursts of obvious exaggeration to indicate that he is at least aware that more intense states of feeling exist. But his detachment works in the movie’s favor by defusing its sentimental impulses.Perhaps because of its star’s background in stand-up comedy, “Bee Movie” makes overt a conceit that is usually left implicit in animal-kingdom cartoons, namely that species is the cartoon version of ethnicity. Barry and his tribe are not just bees. They identify as “Beeish” — I’m sure “Benson” was something else back in the old country — and worry about their children dating wasps. On his travels Barry meets a mosquito who speaks in the voice of Chris Rock and who refers to his despised and misunderstood brethren as “bloods.”

These riffs on identity politics, a durable if sometimes risky source of humor in American pop culture, give “Bee Movie” an extra fillip of comic vitality — the hint of a sting, if you will, in an otherwise soft and fuzzy entertainment.“Bee Movie” is rated PG (Parental guidance suggested). A few scary moments and mild hints about, er, the birds and the bees.Bee MovieOpens today nationwide.Directed by Simon J. Smith and Steve Hickner; written by Jerry Seinfeld, Spike Feresten, Barry Marder and Andy Robin; head of character animation, Fabio Lignini; edited by Nick Fletcher; music by Rupert Gregson-Williams; production designer, Alex McDowell; produced by Mr. Seinfeld and Christina Steinberg; released by Paramount Pictures. Running time: 100 minutes.WITH THE VOICES OF: Jerry Seinfeld (Barry B. Benson), Renée Zellweger (Vanessa), Matthew Broderick (Adam Flayman), John Goodman (Layton T. Montgomery), Chris Rock (Mooseblood), Patrick Warburton (Ken), Larry King (Bee Larry King), Ray Liotta (himself) and Sting (himself).

Om Shanti Om

2007-11-12T23:56:00.000-08:00

Cut the crap, cut the gyan-baazi, cut the will-it-won't-it work naatak. Shah Rukh Khan and Farah Khan's OM SHANTI OM is a true-blue masala entertainer. If MAIN HOON NA was a chauka, this one hits a sixer!Wait, a word of advice to all netizens/readers across the globe. Don't, for God's sake don't, raise exclamations like kab?, kyun? kahan? as OM SHANTI OM begins to unravel. This is atypical Manmohan Desai film presented in a novel avtaar by Farah Khan. It's definitely not for pseudos or advocates of arthouse cinema.Now let's clear some myths surrounding OM SHANTI OM. Is it the 2007 adaptation of Subhash Ghai's immensely likable reincarnation film KARZ? Does it have traces of KUDRAT? Or MADHUMATI? Or MILAN? Or KARAN ARJUN? Hold on, there's a dash of KARZ, a bit of KARAN ARJUN, a sprinkling of KUDRAT, but beyond that it's a film that makes you nostalgic about 1970s Bollywood.To sum up, OM SHANTI OM is paisa vasool entertainment. We haven't seen SRK in a hardcore masala film since quite some time. He had drifted to other genres, which proved his range as an actor of repute and cemented his status further. With OM SHANTI OM, he gives back to the audience what he himself grew up on -- a thorough entertainer that will have the audience thirsting for more.This Diwali, have a blast!OM SHANTI OM tells the story of Om [Shah Rukh Khan] and Shanti [Deepika Padukone]. Om is a junior artist in the 70s. Shanti is the reigning superstar. He is her biggest fan. He is in love with her. Om dreams of being a superstar, but an incident changes his life forever.Om dies in a mishap, but is reborn into the present day. He attempts to discover the mystery of his demise…The general feeling is, Farah Khan has remade Ghai's KARZ from Frame A to Z. False! There're similarities, but it's not a rehashed version of Ghai's film. For, OM SHANTI OM takes you by complete surprise at several points.The first twist in the tale [Arjun - Deepika's heated confrontation, with SRK listening to this important conversation] comes as a bolt from the blue. The second jhatka comes slightly before the intermission, when Arjun takes Deepika to the set of his film 'Om Shanti Om' and the entire episode that follows, right till the intermission, is spellbinding. That's a brilliant stroke from the writing [screenplay: Mushtaq Shaikh and Farah Khan] as also the execution point of view. When the opulent set is set to flames, it leaves you wide-eyed and awe-struck. Such is the impact!

The post-interval portions only get better and better! If the initial portions are laced with humour [the premiere of 'Dreamy Girl', the Manoj Kumar episode, Ghai directing Rishi on 'Om Shanti Om' song, et al], the second half moves into a new zone completely.It's punar-janam now, but thankfully, there're no lightening, no fireworks, no zooming of the camera on the idols of Gods. The drama builds up gradually. The voices that SRK keeps hearing, the 'fire' soon after the 'Dard-E-Disco' track, the mother [Kirron Kher], an old lady now, chasing Om's car [reminds you of Raakhee of KARAN ARJUN], the flashes of SRK's earlier birth while receiving the Filmfare Award -- the incidents that make him realize that his life was cut short in his earlier janam have been well structured.When Deepika re-emerges as well, the viewer is confused, but the mystery is resolved towards the end, which, again, takes you by complete surprise.Given the fact that OM SHANTI OM is a Manmohan Desai kind of a film set in the present-day, it would be foolhardy to ask questions, raise eyebrows and look for logic. But the second half could've been crisper [length: 18 reels/2.46 hours], although Shirish Kunder's editing is perfect.Farah knows what her priorities are and most importantly, knows exactly what her target audience is. The execution of a number of sequences clearly shows Farah's growth as a storyteller. Mushtaq and Farah's writing works because the writers pull out several surprises in those 2.46 hours.

V. Manikanandan's cinematography captures the gloss and grandeur to the minutest. The opulent sets [Sabu Cyril] deserve distinction marks. Dialogues [Mayur Puri] are witty and do raise a chuckle at several points. Background score [Sandeep Chowta] is effective.Vishal-Shekhar's music is first-rate. The score is in sync with the content of the film and what accentuate the goings-on are the choreography and execution. Although every song is visually enticing, the 21-star track as also 'Dard-E-Disco' will have the masses going into a frenzy.Now to the performances! SRK proves his supremacy yet again. If you thought that playing to the gallery came easy to certain actors only, watch SRK spin magic in OM SHANTI OM. He's magnificent, the star attraction, the soul of this film, the true baadshah.Deepika has all it takes to be a top star -- the personality, the looks and yes, she's supremely talented too. Standing in the same frame as SRK and getting it right is no small achievement. She comes as a whiff of fresh air!Arjun Rampal is a complete revelation. Cast in a negative role this time, he enacts his part with panache and style. Shreyas Talpade is another surprise. A complete natural, he stands on his feet all through, not getting swayed while sharing the screen space with the topmost star.Kirron Kher is superb as the over the top mom. Javed Sheikh is alright. Bindu adds to the funny moments.On the whole, OM SHANTI OM is Bollywood masala in its truest form and also, at its best. At the box-office, the film will set new records in days to come and has the power to emerge one of the biggest hits of SRK's career. Blockbuster hit!

Jab We Met

2007-11-12T23:51:00.000-08:00

Love stories are beaten to death. The genre has been rehashed, visited and re-visited again and again and again. So much so that all love stories look, seem and sound alike. But JAB WE MET, helmed by Imtiaz Ali, takes a fresh look at love stories.Frankly, the story isn't new. It has traces of the Abhishek - Ash starrer DHAAI AKSHAR PREM KE [2000; which, in turn, was inspired by A WALK IN THE CLOUDS] and Govinda - Urmila starrer KUNWARA [2000; which, in turn, was a remake of a Telugu film BHAVANAGARU BHAGUNNARA], but director Imtiaz Ali's execution of the subject takes it to another level altogether.
Also, for any love story to work wonders, it ought to have the germs to make the viewer jump with joy and participate in the goings-on. And the principal characters here -- Shahid and Kareena -- are so real, so natural, so believable and so winsome that the viewer gets absorbed into their world as minutes pass by.To sum up, JAB WE MET is as refreshing as an ice-cold watermelon juice in scorching heat. Imtiaz Ali's expert storytelling coupled with Shahid and Kareena's sparkling performances make this film a must-watch!Aditya [Shahid Kapur], an industrialist, is heartbroken as the girl he loves is getting married to someone else. Unable to muster up the courage to return home, he drifts out of the gathering and aimlessly boards a train, bounding away into the night.As destiny would have it, he meets Geet [Kareena Kapoor] -- a beautiful but annoyingly talkative girl who is leaving Mumbai to go her hometown -- Bhatinda. Later, she has plans of eloping with her boyfriend [Tarun Arora].Geet irritates Aditya to the point of getting him to leave the train. As she tries to get him back on the train, she ends up missing it and the two find themselves stranded on a desolate station with no luggage or money.Begins the idyllic journey through the exuberant North Indian heartland in which this odd couple make their way through buses and taxis and camel-carts to reach her house in Punjab.

On arrival, Geet's family mistakes the two for lovers. Before this misconception can be cleared, Geet escapes to her boyfriend in Manali. Aditya leaves with her, confirming the suspicion that they are lovers. In Manali, Aditya feels empowered to return to Mumbai and resurrect his ailing business.Life takes a positive turn and Aditya begins to do well. One day, Geet's family, who think that she is with him, confronts Aditya. He is shocked to learn that Geet has not returned home. He takes it upon himself to find her.He finally tracks her down in a Himalayan town and begins another journey to reach Bhatinda and flow into the colors and conceptions of a loud and happy North Indian family. How their separate journeys become one, forms the remainder of the story.Opposites attract -- that's the essence of this love story. The journey of two individuals who cross each other's path one night and develop a deep bond is skilfully and convincingly depicted at the very outset.The highpoint of JAB WE MET is its story. Although the story bears an uncanny resemblance to some films, it never gives you the feeling of déjà vu. The sequence of events in the first hour is akin to a roller coaster ride. The journey that the couple undertake to reach Bhatinda first and Manali later is mesmerizing.But the pace slackens in the second hour. Partly because the goings-on get dramatic and serious. Also, things seem to be stretched in this hour. The love story takes its own sweet time to reach its destination, when the fact remains that it could've [and should've] reached the finale earlier. Thankfully, the end is expertly executed and takes the graph of the film higher.

Imtiaz Ali deserves brownie points for handling the subject with such maturity. The fun-laden scenes are truly funny and the emotional ones make you moist-eyed. Striking the right balance between light and heavy moments is akin to walking on a tight rope and Imtiaz handles the two extremes with remarkable ease. An accomplished storyteller undoubtedly!Pritam proves his versatility yet again. 'Poochho Na Poochho' and 'Tumse Hi' are seeped in melody, while 'Mauja Mauja' and 'Nagada' are racy, foot-tapping and easy on the lips. N. Nataraja Subramanian's cinematography does justice to Imtiaz's vision. The indoor look as well as the exteriors are dexterously captured by the lensman. The writing [Imtiaz Ali] is almost foolproof. Also, the ambience and setting in the Punjabi household are excellent.

Both Shahid and Kareena vie for top honours. Shahid delivers his career-best performance in JAB WE MET. He goes for a complete transformation vis-à-vis his looks and attire to look the character he has chosen to portray and the understanding with which he enacts his part is worthy of lavish praises.Kareena is in top form as well. JAB WE MET is a turning point in her career [personally as well as professionally]. Fantabulous -- that's the right word to describe her work this time. The confidence with which she handles the contrasting characterization speaks volumes. This film should do for her what KUCH KUCH HOTA HAI did for Kajol.Pawan Malhotra is excellent as Kareena's uncle. His diction as also the body language is perfect. Dara Singh is good. Tarun Arora is awkward, but that gels with his role.On the whole, JAB WE MET is one of the finest [romantic] films to come out of Bollywood in 2007. At the box-office, it has the merits to work big time. Strongly recommended… Go with your family!

Saawariya

2007-11-12T23:43:00.000-08:00

Irrespective of how his films fare at the box-office, you cannot shut your eyes to the fact that Sanjay Leela Bhansali's films have so much to offer in terms of style and substance.Alas, SAAWARIYA is all style, no substance. When a director of the calibre of SLB attempts a love story, you expect to experience the various emotions that you generally associate with romance. Sadly, the emotions you experience while watching SAAWARIYA is sorrow and after the screening, anguish.With splendid backers like Hollywood giant Columbia/Sony and a dream cast, Bhansali falters big time in SAAWARIYA. It doesn't give you the feeling that you're watching an SLB film or a film of epic proportions. Instead, you constantly feel that you're watching a 2-hour play.Dostoevsky's short story WHITE NIGHTS may sound interesting on paper, but SLB's adaptation suffers because there's not much meat in the plot. In fact, it wouldn't be erroneous to state that SAAWARIYA ranks amongst SLB's weakest films, as far as scripting is concerned.To cut a long story short, SAAWARIYA disappoints big time. You expect the moon from this genius film-maker, but you're disheartened as you watch his new creation.This time, hum dil nahin de chuke sanam!SAAWARIYA is about two young star-crossed lovers. A musician, Raj [Ranbir Kapoor], is certain that he has found his ultimate dream when he arrives at a picturesque town. However, destiny paints a different picture for Raj. One silent night, he spots a mysterious girl draped in black, standing alone at a bridge.This chance encounter introduces him to Sakina [Sonam Kapoor], a shy and quiet girl, who continues to intrigue him. Thus follows the beginning of a new friendship, where Raj, with his most charming ways and an undying spirit, tries to win Sakina's heart.Raj is unable to accept her haunting past and their friendship pulls him into a whirlwind of desire, madness and romance.SAAWARIYA suffers because of its writing mainly. Let's unravel the points that bother the viewer no end… * Which part of the country is this straight-out-of-a-fairytale town located? And what era are we talking of?* Even if you subscribe to the theory that it was love at first sight for Salman and Sonam, what is it that keeps their romance going?* Why does Salman disappear suddenly? Besides his name, the girl knows nothing about him. Not his home/native place, work/profession/work place, relatives, nothing absolutely. It's like falling in love with a shadow, isn't it? * Why does Rani Mukerji abandon Ranbir, when he comes knocking on her doors and admits that he wants to spend time with her? Why does she lose her temper, although she secretly loves him? * And Salman returns. The sequence that follows and the culmination to the story leave you completely disgruntled and perplexed! Besides, the conversation between the lead pair fails to involve you. Sure, a few sequences are filmed brilliantly, but the impact the film ought to create in totality is missing. It gets verbose and boring after a point.What makes matters worse is the setting/ambience. The film gets monotonous after a point, visually speaking, since it has been shot in its entirety on dark sets. You long for some visual relief, some bright spots, some sunshine…Monty's music is another sore point. Sure, a few songs are well tuned, but the everlasting melody, associated with SLB's films, is missing. You hear them, savour them that moment, but forget all about them once the movie concludes.Ravi K. Chandran's cinematography is of international standards. The sets look imaginative, but as mentioned earlier, you yearn for a visual break, a different colour.As a storyteller, SLB is letdown by his own writing. Things start slipping as the reels unfold. In the post-interval portions, you fervently pray that things might stabilize, for SLB as also Ranbir and Sonam's sake, but alas! The love, passion and anguish, the hallmark of SLB films, is clearly missing this time.Now to the dream launches! Ranbir Kapoor is supremely talented, no two opinions on that. Yes, he looks handsome, but what you carry home is the sincerity in his performance. If that's the [high] level of performance in his debut film, this lad will only make the Kapoor clan proud in years to come. It's a 10 on 10 for this debutante!Sonam Kapoor is an average actor. However, her role doesn't give her the opportunity to display histrionics. She looks gorgeous at places, but plain ordinary at times.Age has started showing on Salman Khan's face. He looks like an old, mature man in this film. The boyish looks have gone! As for his role, he is completely wasted in this hardly-10-minute appearance. Rani Mukerji is first-rate. Zohra Segal is superb, while Begum Para is hardly there.On the whole, SAAWARIYA lacks soul. It's SLB's weakest film to date, in terms of writing. At the box-office, the film will collect big numbers in its opening weekend due to the Diwali vacations as also the hype surrounding the film. But the cracks will start showing at relatively smaller stations/single screens first [where the practice of advance booking doesn't exist] and at big centres as days progress. For the distributors, they'll have to rely on its business from multiplexes mainly. While the business from multiplexes at Mumbai, Pune, Delhi, NCR, Kolkata, Jaipur and South will be impressive initially, there would be a big gap between multiplex and non-multiplex centres. Overall, disappointing -- in terms of content and in terms of business as well!

Dus Kahaniyaan

2007-11-12T23:33:00.000-08:00

Each film has a twist in the tale. And with 12 writers, eight composers, six directors and 25 actors, this sure is one wholesome cinematic journey. Sunday MiDDAY tells you the who's who in each story and what it's all aboutRice PlateCast: Shabana Azmi and Naseeruddin Shah. A Hindu woman and a Muslim man's journey over a rice plate. It is about the challenge that the woman faces when a strange man claims her plate of rice. Will she place her hunger before her beliefs? A sensitive story with the most awaited performances; this is something everyone is waiting for.Sex on the Beach.Cast: Dino Morea and Tareena Patel.Dino picks a worn out book on the beach and its character comes alive into a breathtaking woman. They have a great time together but suddenly everything changes. The mystery woman has some surprises in store for Dino. Dino has to pay a price for his dream coming true.Love Dale.Cast: Anupam Kher, Aftab Shivdasani and Neha Oberoi.Neha meets an old woman in the train who is wearing only one earring. She finds that strange and that chance meeting strikes the change in her life. A story about fate, destiny at play and the notion that one moment can change your entire life.
Matrimony.Cast: Mandira Bedi, Arbaz Khan and Sudhanshu Pandey.Mrs. & Mr. Sarin are a happily married couple. Living in their paradise the devoted wife goes and meets her ailing aunt every Thursday.

Aaja Nachle

2007-11-12T23:23:00.000-08:00

(Madhuri Dixit)
She was the life of Shamli. And then she made one mistake - she fell in love. The town never forgave her and she never forgave the town. She made a new life, far away from her past. But now the man, who taught her how to dance and how to live, is no more. And he has left behind a job for her. She has to go back to the town... and teach it how to dance again.
Radha (Dalai)
Her mother may be born in Shamli, but Radha is so born in New York. She knows less Hindi than an Indian parrot and has more ideas on managing her mom's life than a shrink. The only problem is that Shamli is not New York. And everybody except for Radha knows this.
Doctor (Raghubir Yadav)
Nobody knows what his real name is, but Ajanta's old caretaker wears a cap on his head and many hearts on his sleeve, all bleeding for the cause of theatre. He is Dia's support system in her fight, which becomes a battle and then a war.
Imran (Kunal Kapoor)
Local toughie, Imran, believes that tough guys don't dance and romance is for wimps. Unfortunately for him, Dia thinks otherwise and makes him the lead actor in her theatrical production, where he has to do only two things - dance and romance. He has seen a lot of rough stuff, but is Imran prepared for this?
Anokhi (Konkona Sen)
Anokhi, as the line in Godfather the novel says, is a force of nature, not truly subject to control. Whether it is her perpetually running nose, or her penchant of coming up with the most imaginative abuses. Anokhi is truly anokhi (different). Dia finds something unique in her and takes the chance of her life. Trouble is, Anokhi cannot sing or dance to save her life, or Dia's.
Mohan Sharma (Ranvir Shorey)
Owner of the town café, Mohan nurses a decade-old story of unrequited love. Dia's sudden arrival leaves him feeling vulnerable again. Although he is initially confused about his feelings, Mohan gradually comes around to assisting Dia in her endeavour to save Ajanta, even though this could open old wounds.
Mr. Chojar (Vinay Pathak)
Chojar saab, in his own words, is Shamli's responsible government official. His relationship with his boss can be summed up in two words: “Yes Sir”, spoken with eyes examining the floor; and that with the rest of the world in four words: “Put it in writing”, spoken with a sense of mysterious knowingness. From the day Dia moved into his home as a paying guest, his married life is in upheaval. But sometimes, upheaval is good.
Chaudhary Om Singh (Akhilendra Mishra)
Chaudhary Om Singh, the local ex-MLA is a typical politician - he never takes a stand in any issue. A snake in search of opportunities, he is out of power since the last election. And Dia's arrival has given him just the issue he needed. Or has it?
Sanjeev Mehta (Jugal Hansraj)
Accountant Sanjeev Mehta joins Dia's troupe to sell insurance policies and stocks, not to dance. But as the dancing starts, he enters a world which his accountant mind had never imagined before.
S.H.O. Singh (Yashpal Sharma)
As a young constable he saw his friend Mohan go to pieces when he had his heart broken, a decade ago. As he watches Mohan help Dia in her mission, Station House Officer Singh has only one aim – to protect Mohan from another heart-break. But how does he protect a man from himself?
Dhan Kuber (Nowaz)
Irrepressible, outspoken, liberal, Dhan Kuber is last thing a vagabond should be. But ever since Dia has come back, nothing in Shamli is as it should be. And now he has to choose whose side he is on - the town which feeds his stomach, or the woman who feeds his soul.
Makarand (Darshan Zariwala)
It's a pity Makarand is no more. Because if he was, he would love to be in this story. How do you introduce a man who is so many things? Artist, singer, writer, dancer, philosopher, hippie... he is the man who taught young Dia how to dance and how to live. The man who single handedly kept dance alive in Shamli, till the modern age caught up with his art. And the man who died leaving his favourite pupil some homework - to teach dance to a town that has forgotten it.
Synopsis
After nearly a decade, an unexpected phone call shakes Dia (Madhuri Dixit) out of her dance rehearsal in New York. Makarand (Darshan Zariwala), her teacher, her guru, is dying and she must return to Shamli town. The town where she grew up, the town where she learnt to live and to dance. Also the town she left on an impulse, severing ties with her parents and her people.It is a poignant and troubled return; not only has her guru passed away but the institution that he so lovingly nurtured is in decay and under threat of demolition. Ajanta theatre, the once vibrant hub of the community, the place where Dia's fondest memories are embedded must now be brought down because the local political authorities feel it a waste of prime real estate.With the help of Doctor (Raghubir Yadav), the caretaker of Ajanta, Dia sets out on a mission to prevent the destruction and resurrect the spirit of Ajanta. In an atmosphere of mistrust, ridicule and active hostility, Dia picks up the gauntlet and agrees to achieve the near impossible task of putting together a theatrical production. She must also ensure that every member of the production is from Shamli town. She has only two months to prove her point or the bulldozers will be waiting.In this context begins her tumultuous journey of dealing with small town prejudices, encountering the resentment of the powerful contractor, the cynicism of the local political powers, resolve the delicate tensions of inter personal relationships and rally her motley team of non starters - a low level muscle Imran (Kunal Kapoor), the local tomboy Anokhi (Konkona Sen), local ex-MLA Chaudhary Om Singh (Akhilendra Mishra), a vulnerable tea stall owner Mohan Sharma (Ranvir Shorey), a responsible government official Mr. Chojar (Vinay Pathak), a struggling insurance agent Sanjeev Mehta (Jugal Hansraj), the town vagabond Dhankuber (Nowaz) and a host of others.She must create in this chaos in order to save Ajanta... in order to preserve what her guru so lovingly nurtured. She must create art in order to preserve what she believes is the soul of society.The stage is finally set... Will it work? Won't it?
Lights dim.
Crowds quieten.
Curtains rise on Ajanta.