Symphony for a dummy

November 20, 2007

This entry wasn’t supposed to go into a blog. Maybe because it could probably be considered an exercise in vanity resulting from it’s sheer self-indulgence, or simply because my writing abilities can never do enough justice to the feelings I went through during the event. For the sake of preservation, however, I need to log this on to the internet.

Having cursed the city enough for its lack of interesting things to do, I finally decided to take it upon myself to search the web as to whether my beliefs were a result of sheer lethargy. Amidst many interesting events, I came across a symphony orchestra event I thought could be quite interesting to attend, so was looking forward to it for some time. Luckily, everything fell into place, I, and along with a friend of mine, attended one this Friday: Bolcom, Bach and Beethoven.

Never have I felt such a gamut of emotions in a span of 2 hours, where my expectations were not only met, but exceeded to such an extent that I’m afraid of how the next one would be. I never knew time could compress itself so effectively that at the end of it, I was almost felt with an empty feeling, ironical, considering how fulfilling the experience had been.

Being a romantic at many things is a boon more often than not; simply because of the sheer pleasure it can bring you, when you’re completely immersed in the activity, completely oblivious of any form of existence around you. My views of the event certainly arise from such fanatical feelings and I have no qualms about saying how much importance this event had for me, and I would have been desolate had it not gone the way I imagined it. From the very first movement, where Balcom’s exploits with comical music (one that might be taken out of a Tom & Jerry cartoon) were being explored, I closed my eyes, and images started to flow seamlessly through my head. Every next wave resulted in a new image; every crescendo ran through the veins like adrenaline; the fire emanating from pure pleasure. As the conductor rightly put it, his music was a juxtaposition of senseless dreams, ones where you suddenly realize in the middle of the dream that this is too nonsensical to be true. Or even nightmares, with its inimitable unbelievable quirks in between. While listening to this music, the pictures that arise were of these very dreams, some which have been in the back of your memory, recalled solely for the purpose of respecting this piece.

Bach and Beethoven had similar flavors for one, the latter’s 4th symphony often considered his most mysterious. The music here went into the realms of love at one instant and mockery of the feeling in the other: one where a lover tries in vain to be resolute and face facts, where he later realizes how helpless in love he has been reduced to; where he tries convincing himself unsuccessfully of how strong he is.

The last piece was also very beautiful, and led me down memory lane to when I was a child, and all the small problems I faced then, probably what every child of my age would have faced. Each tenor was a character in my imagery: my favorite teacher, my mother, my childhood sweetheart, my best friend as a kid, my father; the chorus became the world; and the music, me.

Passion is the first quality towards understanding art. You’ll learn the technicalities later, but once you possess the fire, every other piece of information only fine tunes the experience. I for one, have miles to go before I say I “appreciate” art. For now, it’s probably my imagination that’s keeping me at bay .. :)


bhool bhulaiya – the review

October 23, 2007

Ok, so I had to do this. I would’ve loved to have killed Priyadarshan after seeing this movie. Anyways, I wrote this review for timesofindia.com in the ‘readers review’ section, and after 2 days of waiting and it never turning up on the website, I decided to put it here, with a wider audience base. Since it was for people reading reviews to decide whether they wanted to see the movie and not for people who don’t have much work to do and love critiquing movies, I tried to keep it short and simple, wasn’t too difficult for me. I guess, keeping the comparisons off the mallu movie was the most difficult task I’ve done in the last 24 years, in any case, I didn’t succeed .

bhool bhulaiya ka review

The biggest mistake you can commit before watching this movie is go with the Malayalam movie (Manichitratazhu) in your mind. If you keep that aside, it is not a bad movie, in fact, has an interesting storyline and contains more than a few good laughs.

If people are saying that this film was marketed as a laugh-riot, I’d say either the people are lying or the director just went plain crazy. The laughs in the movie have its place, but the movie is certainly a drama, and any movie-goer would certainly decipher that during the 2.5 hours. The script is interesting in that it deviates from the usual ghost stuff, and enters into a psychological realm, something that has been rarely explored in Hindi cinema.

The cinematography captures the essence of the movie and the ambience quite well: the haveli and the backdrop of the town has been shown quite beautifully, and to good effect. Nothing much to run home about the dialogues, simply because most often than not are just effective translations from the Malayalam version. Again, this doesn’t mean they don’t serve their purpose to the first-time viewer.

Since I cannot be completely indifferent to the original version, and comparisons are inevitable; the direction here was quite appalling. The only good that could be taken out would be the recreation of the set and the Hindi-fication of the scenario in hand. Apart from that, every scene is copied, essentially rendering no original screenplay in this version whatsoever. The laughs are completely attributed to the original version, and whenever the director has tried to improvise, he has failed miserably leaving a “huh?” expression on the audience. There have been obvious holes, like showing the king to be young rather than old ( when the opposite was mentioned in the start of the movie ). And so on …

Vidya Balan has done a good job, certainly the best of the lot. Shiney Ahuja has overacted wonderfully. Paresh Rawal is too good to do anything bad in such a simple role. Akshay Kumar was good in the funny parts, and funny in the serious parts. Vikram Gokhale’s casting was very intelligent, although he doesn’t have a large part in the movie.

Having said everything, the movie is still a decent watch. For people who’re watching it the first time, I’m sure it’ll be a good experience. For people watching it after the Malayalam version, it might still be an interesting experience, albeit for other reasons.


Movie buff ain’t I ?

September 13, 2007

Considering I’ve been watching movies left, right and center ( which might give away my state of joblessness ofcourse ), why not consider blogging about a few I loved. Atleast I won’t forget about them at some point of time and curse myself for being such a fool for forgetting such an incredible movie. Who better to start with than Woody Allen himself. His movies are so influential, that you might tend to go through this I-love-NY phase ( especially if you’ve been there before ). And there are no other movies that make me ruminate so much on, I love that … :D

I’ll start off with the most recent one I’d seen.

Crimes and Misdemeanors

This movie is not a feel-good movie, fullstop. It presents real life in its full glory and almost tends to be a paradox, in the sense of it not being a movie at all. This is also realized in the last scene of the movie, where Judah quips that Cliff is talking about a movie, and that real life is different … That’s exactly the beauty of the movie, that it deals with paradoxes from the point go where the philosopher says: Love is a paradox and explains why so. One of the best monologues I’ve heard in a long time …

In terms of movie making, what a gem !
The potrayal of nostalgia, with the self-confessed Bergman style, was perfect in Annie Hall ( albeit in a lighter sense in that case ) and befits the context of this movie too.
The monologues of the philosopher, at the right places in the movie : explaining why it is difficult for the Jews to comprehend god completely ( hence giving a sense of what Judah might have gone through in his early years ); later when Cliff is falling in love; and then during the climax where he talks about values ( courtesy Neitzsche ).
The use of flashback ( Mussolini !! ); the witticism in the cut of the documentary that Cliff finally makes, absolutely crazy !!

In many ways, this movie holds a defeatist attitude. Where one can get away with murder, where the best guy might not win when it comes to love, where morals are a function of ones perspective and not a concept of rationale. The end scene sums it up perfectly, Cliff mentions that everyone pays for their crimes and misdemeanors whereas Judah disagrees … you flashback on the movie, realize that they’re only talking from personal experiences and who wins in the end …

What a fantastic movie indeed …