Prologue:
Here comes yet another larger than life hero in the same mould as Chatrapati. It is as if repainted Chatrapati with a different background.
Story:
An innocent man turns into a Gangster. Yes we have seen it in many RamGopal Varma’s movies. No wonder that Vinayak’s inspiration is RGV. Eeswar Prasad, an innocent man from a village in Rayalseema comes to Hyderabad and gets involved in a murder case. The first murder starts with an altercation with a gangster and he ends up killing the gangster and surrenders to the police. This is the only place I felt police did their duty in the film. Rest of the movie police are either involved in comedy sequence or catching pick pocketer like Ali but safely ignored all the murder hero commits. Hero who gets released on bail acts as if he is permanently acquitted and takes a license to kill. He kills almost every one. It is a major turn around from a noble man who cares to save lives of strangers on grounds of humanity to turn into a killer.
Just after the murder it is surprising to see Chandramohan persuading him to become a gangster. Despite the reasons quoted, a crime is still a crime. There are no comments passed to director here as he is known to rationalize crime in similar basis by citing similar lame reasons. Sharada was proved a wrong choice for his mother. Unrealistic sequences between the mother and kid (our very own Hero) are in very bad taste. Especially the scenes where hero dances all of a sudden thinking of her mother made me feel that he needs an appointment with a psychiatrist. Nayanatara is a relief for many. Comedy tracks are refreshing but who cares even if they don’t fit in the theme.
Performance:
Prabhas as macho man is a treat to watch so long as he did not open his mouth. Nayantara became slim relatively. Ali, Venu Madhav and Sunil tried their best to save the film. Kota did as well as we expect him. Director did bad. Movie over all looked like a Chatrapati remodeled. (Encompassing part of the story in multiple flash backs)
Epilogue:
It is a bit harsh review. But it came out of the headache I got after watching the movie.
PS:
I did not expect a villager mom to know much of Hindu philosophy but sending a man with smile to grave did not get digested. As per Hindu Phil, death symbolizes changing of dress by discarding a body and occupying a new body. There is a stage when you don’t get new body, that stage is called Moksha or complete liberation. It makes sense to celebrate death as liberation from body but it did not make much to celebrate it with body when soul is already gone.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Monday, February 5, 2007
GURU - Review!
Prologue:
This is a movie made for professionals. When I say professional, I don’t mean it as IT or management profession. It is for the set of people who belong to profession called audience, who use statistical/non-statistical approach to do qualitative evaluation of the film. They are the true connoisseurs. For others it is a movie which can’t be understood in the first pass. Who ever has said Da Vinci Code is cryptic movie probably did not watch “Guru”. Mani Ratnam’s taking is clubbed with Abhisek’s acting to make it a class act.
Story:
Story is the base for many movies and a story based on a villager and illiterate and yet creator of biggest Indian company has its own charm in itself. In a country where Heroes and achievers are worshipped, a movie based on one of the most successful businessman is always received with awe. How ever it is loosely based on the real life story. It did not depict all the things the so-called hero has done and so GuruBhai still remains a hero. And some patch ups like Aiswarya Rai were added to spice it up little more. The director did not waste time show that Gurubhai is a gem of a man with abundant practical sense and audience are supposed to assume this. Also he chose not to show how crooked he is as it would create a controversy. No one needs to explain the great director how to show Mumbai as it was in late 50s, he has done it flawlessly. License Raj killed many entrepreneurs during first few decades after Independence and it is attributed to conservative and socialist nature initial national leaders. (Post 1991 is the time when economy became open and that’s why Manmohan Singh is widely respected as a visionary) But that is not good excuse to justify corruption Gurubhai introduced into the bureaucracy. Corruption, Manipulation of Stocks, misusing export/import laws, producing goods with out permit, lethal blows to competitors by using one’s power are not simple enough crimes that can be justified by saying “I am moving ahead and am taking the country with me”.
Performance:
Abhisek did justice to the role. Aiswarya Rai did justice to the role. (Even though some of the scenes looked as if they are depicting personal life of the actress, they were not awkward). It is nice to see Mithunda with out a pistol in his hand. At this old age he looked as if he has realized that pen mightier than pistol. J He did really well. Madhavan comes with the same cute trademark smile and has done well too. Vidya Balan looked cute. (Only thing I felt unnecessary was the kiss scene. Even though there are few people who appreciated it, it looked gross to me and did not turn out well.) Another man behind scenes who needs a mention is AR Rahman. His music did not help the film any way. It is as if loudly announcing “I can do badly too”.
Epilogue:
If you are looking for six songs, few fights and romance scenes, you need not think of this movie. If movies are relaxation for you, skip this one. If you are a true connoisseur who can appreciate the taking, here is the one for you. Watch it second time only if you did not understand it in the first pass.
This is a movie made for professionals. When I say professional, I don’t mean it as IT or management profession. It is for the set of people who belong to profession called audience, who use statistical/non-statistical approach to do qualitative evaluation of the film. They are the true connoisseurs. For others it is a movie which can’t be understood in the first pass. Who ever has said Da Vinci Code is cryptic movie probably did not watch “Guru”. Mani Ratnam’s taking is clubbed with Abhisek’s acting to make it a class act.
Story:
Story is the base for many movies and a story based on a villager and illiterate and yet creator of biggest Indian company has its own charm in itself. In a country where Heroes and achievers are worshipped, a movie based on one of the most successful businessman is always received with awe. How ever it is loosely based on the real life story. It did not depict all the things the so-called hero has done and so GuruBhai still remains a hero. And some patch ups like Aiswarya Rai were added to spice it up little more. The director did not waste time show that Gurubhai is a gem of a man with abundant practical sense and audience are supposed to assume this. Also he chose not to show how crooked he is as it would create a controversy. No one needs to explain the great director how to show Mumbai as it was in late 50s, he has done it flawlessly. License Raj killed many entrepreneurs during first few decades after Independence and it is attributed to conservative and socialist nature initial national leaders. (Post 1991 is the time when economy became open and that’s why Manmohan Singh is widely respected as a visionary) But that is not good excuse to justify corruption Gurubhai introduced into the bureaucracy. Corruption, Manipulation of Stocks, misusing export/import laws, producing goods with out permit, lethal blows to competitors by using one’s power are not simple enough crimes that can be justified by saying “I am moving ahead and am taking the country with me”.
Performance:
Abhisek did justice to the role. Aiswarya Rai did justice to the role. (Even though some of the scenes looked as if they are depicting personal life of the actress, they were not awkward). It is nice to see Mithunda with out a pistol in his hand. At this old age he looked as if he has realized that pen mightier than pistol. J He did really well. Madhavan comes with the same cute trademark smile and has done well too. Vidya Balan looked cute. (Only thing I felt unnecessary was the kiss scene. Even though there are few people who appreciated it, it looked gross to me and did not turn out well.) Another man behind scenes who needs a mention is AR Rahman. His music did not help the film any way. It is as if loudly announcing “I can do badly too”.
Epilogue:
If you are looking for six songs, few fights and romance scenes, you need not think of this movie. If movies are relaxation for you, skip this one. If you are a true connoisseur who can appreciate the taking, here is the one for you. Watch it second time only if you did not understand it in the first pass.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
