The modern thinking Indian

For a long time, Bollywood is the answer when one talks about the Indian film industry. In terms of news, awards, overseas markets, soft exports, number of movies, all of these, Bollywood (Hindi movie land) is the undoubted king. And then comes a sudden time when all this is in doubt. The sudden and fast rise of the latest Rajnikant Tamil movie, 'Sivaji: The Boss' has shown that there are other language movie industries in India that carry their own weight. All the things that I talked about in the beginning of this post are still true, but this movie carries its own facts with it, some of which challenge the dominance of the Hindi film industry.
Consider the following facts about the movie:
- It is the most expensive Indian movie, costing around 95 crores to make. Now this is only $24 million, so is very small by US standards, but is fairly expensive by Indian standards
- Ticket sales are astronomical in India, with movies halls being booked for days on end
- Fan fervour is such that companies have booked halls for their employees on specific days
- The movie is making waves
outside Tamil Nadu, with releases in Mumbai, Karnataka, Delhi, Malaysia and other places such that fans are flocking
There are a number of Indian top notch heroes who would love to be in Rajnikanth's shoes. He is supposed to be charging much more than any Hindi film hero, more than Shahrukh or Amitabh Bachchan. In most cases (with the exception of 1-2 movies in the recent past), his name associated with a movie is enough to bring in crowds who book halls for days on end. He is almost a demi-god to his fans:

They broke pumpkins to ward off evil eyes, lit camphor to perform 'aarti' and bathed gigantic cut-outs of Rajnikant with hundreds of litres of milk. As crackers burst incessantly, the Tamil superstar's fans exhibited their joy by distributing sweets.
For the most expensive film ever made (Rs 95 crore) in the history of Indian cinema, Sivaji's first two days' bookings in just Chennai crossed Rs 3 crore. "It's a smash hit. With such response, it'll have a long run. Our investment will bring back good returns," said C T Valliapan, owner of Kamala Theatre. In Chennai, the film had a 16-screen opening. "We're housefull for the next 14 days," he said.

What is the difference between a Hindi film fan and a Tamil film fan ? This is a very subjective issue, and I invite comments from readers, but my own impression based on experiences in Chennai and outside Chennai are the following:
- Hindi film fans are also very dedicated, but somehow fail to have the same fervor as a Tamil movie fan.
- It's almost like a Tamil film fan can have their opinions (at least politically) run by their stars. As the reign of MGR, Jayalalitha and the power of opinions expressed by Rajnikanth shows, people are far more inclined to follow the commands of their film stars
- There are few Hindi film fans who will go to incredible efforts to reach their stars or watch their movies, the same as a Tamil movie fan would do (for example, when there were reports in the paper about how fans from Chennai flew to Delhi because they were not getting tickets in Chennai, it seemed very believable to me)
- The story goes that Rajnikanth's birthday is an incredible event in Chennai, and I have experienced this myself. On one particular birthday, I remember that people in the office talked about that all day, and in the evening were worried that celebrations in the street would hamper their trip home. I don't think that any film star of the Hindi film industry would excite such kinds of emotions.

Labels: Fan, Film, Politics, Star, Tamil

I just sat through a morning show of Eklavya. A pretty interesting movie, pretty taut. And it had only one song, and that too a short song. The last movie based in Rajasthan that I watched was Paheli, which had too many song and dance sequences; in that respect, the time that I spent watching Eklavya was well spent.

Now I am an amateur student of cinema. What that means is that I have not done any kind of studies about the art of cinema, so if I get over-enthusiastic about some part of the movie, keep in mind that this is from an amateur mind. The movie is pretty short, it started at 11:58, and including a short break, ended at 1:45. Not more than 1 hour 45 minutes long.

Now about the movie itself. It is about the palace guard, who is responsible for the safety of the 'rana' (essentially the prince of old, and now in a democratic India, more of an important personality held in awe and respect by the surrounding people). This protection job has been in the family for nine generations, and they hold this job in great respect and tradition. The current holder of this position is 'Eklavya' (Amitabh Bachchan) who is getting old, and unable to see properly in strong light, but who has excellent hearing. He is dedicated to the whims and fancies of the rana (Boman Irani).
He is actually more devoted to the family than you would care to think, being responsible for fathering the heir to the line when the rana is unable to do his duty. The rana does not discover this until the queen is on her deathbed, at which point he gets incredibly jealous and angry.

It is at this time that the whole sequence starts to spin-up. The movie pulls in the son (Saif Ali Khan is considered the son of the rana and in reality of Eklavya), and the repressed and greedy brother and nephew of the rana (Jackie Shroff and Jimmy Shergill, respectively, in short roles).

There are a whole lot of conspiracies ongoing, finally resulting in the deaths of the rana and then his brother and nephew. Vidya Balan plays the role of Saif Ali Khan's love interest, but one gets the feeling that such roles are not going to do anything for her, since she really does not play a significant role.

The movie essentially revolves around the characters of Eklavya and Yash (Saif), but since the movie is so short, there just does not seem enough time for the characters to develop. For example, a bit more about Jackie Shroff in the movie would have been helpful, since that would have helped in depicting his character in more detail. In addition, Sanjay Dutt plays the role of a DSP (although I think in the scenario, an inspector role would have been better). The way his role is shown somehow does not depict a DSP. His role is essentially that of a person who made his way up from rags, and who does not forgive the rana for the way he and his ancestors have mis-treated the untouchables.

Aside from all this, I loved the cinematography. The shots were incredible, in fact, if for some of them, I could get still posters, I would love to have them and put them up on my wall. The scene with Amitabh showing off his knife throwing prowess was great, but it ended up feeling a bit stretched at the end. Again, the scene with the train and the camels and guns was good, but somehow, it did not have the proper tautness in the scene. That part just did not seem slick enough. But if the trend is towards making such a slick movie, then I am all for it.

Overall, a good movie, and I would certainly see it again (as my wife did, since she was watching it for a second time). Buying the DVD later may just happen.

Labels: Film, Review

Gujarat tries to portray an image as a progressive state, but it trips up ever so often. The latest incident is the movie Parzania, a hard look at the Gujarat riots, which definitely does not portray the state in a positive light. Hence, the movie is getting informally banned in the state, through the pressure of organizations such as the Bajrang Dal. The Express report:

Gujarat's multiplex owners today decided not to screen Parzania after holding meetings with Bajrang Dal activists and the film's director, Rahul Dholakia, who later said that the state state government did not "have the guts to formally impose a ban on the film".
However, what is said to be behind the decision is a veiled threat from Bajrang Dal activist Babu Bajrangi who feels the film has the "potential to disrupt the communal harmony" in the state. Interestingly, neither Bajrangi nor any of his Dal mates who sat at the meeting have seen Parzania.

It is such incidents that take the sheen off the Gujarat development story. The riots of 2002 were a blot on the state (without getting into a discussion about reasons/justifications), and one would have expected that the state would try to correct it's image.
It is not a good reflection on an administration where decisions on whether to run movies are not decided by government policy, but by the wishes of a private individual. And I would expect that the statement of the Bajrang Dal is not a reflection of the wishes of the state. It is the duty of a state to respect and enforce commercial and individual rights, and Gujarat has miserably failed in this particular area.
One can only hope that better sense prevails on the political leadership of Gujarat, and they do not see a movie as threatening their government. And even if they do, as long as a movie (or book, or any other such thing) has got the proper clearances, the Government is duty bound to follow the law.

Labels: Development, Film, Image, Law

The Ash-Abhi engagment had an effect that a lot of people would never have expected. And it is actually somewhat disturbing. If people remember, in all the media reporting about the engagement, there were a number of stories that the Bachchans were not exactly comfortable with the role essayed by Aishwarya in Dhoom 2, especially the skimpy dresses and the kiss with Hrithik. At that time, it was dismissed as a rumour, but then I read this news item and it left me wondering: Ash-Hrithik lip-lock axed by Bachchans.

The Bachchan power seems to be working in favour of winning a clean chit for their future daughter-in-law Aishwarya Rai. Aishwarya Rai's on-screen lip-lock with her Dhoom 2 co-star Hrithik Roshan has been chopped off from the film, following Bachchan clan's pressure on Yash Raj Films.

At one level, this is all fine and should not concern me. After all, this is a private movie, and if some family members make a request to the producer of a movie (who owns the movie), any changes are strictly not my business. On the flip side, these are celebrities whose actions are copied by people everywhere and who have an inordinate amount of influence on people.
With this action, the impression that a lot of people will now get is that the kissing scene was something 'not good' and a hindrance in making her a homely girl. "That is not something that a good decent girl should be doing."
Our society already faces too many pressures with champions of morality interrupting Valentine's day, police raiding parks to interrupt young couples (Meerut police attack couples in park).
It is not expected from one of the premier film families in the country that they take such a regressive step. I was actually shocked when I read this article. What next ?

Labels: Film, India, Morality