Pathaan (2023)

Place: Mumbai
Date: February 2023
Mode: Theatre

I last watched Shah Rukh Khan in the theatre in ‘Jab Harry Met Sejal’ in 2017. I was in midst of a psychotic episode, and back then, my family and I didn’t know that mental stimulation must be kept to a minimum. My parents felt watching a movie will keep me away from being online, so we went to a nearby theatre. Post the movie, I resumed writing incoherently – this time, including references from the movie!

I am glad that I went back to the same theatre to watch Shah Rukh in ‘Pathaan’. I have been his fan since childhood, mainly because his characters (and dance moves) seemed to treat women with more kindness, humour and respect when compared to other heroes of his generation. Also, whether intentional or not, there is intelligence that found its way into his dialogues.

All of this continues in ‘Pathaan’ as well. I liked how geopolitics found mention, and was surprised to see that songs were kept to a minimum. Shah Rukh has slowed down in his dance moves – age doesn’t spare anyone – and I am glad that his character doesn’t turn rogue.

I laughed at some of the dialogues, and could hear myself laugh in the fairly empty theatre. Shah Rukh still gets me to laugh, and this is a precious tie to my childhood. The highlight of the movie for me was watching Shah Rukh and Salman share screen space, and banter. Both are 57 years old, and are still able to attract audiences to theatres. I saw children at the 8:15 p.m. show, so younger audience is also familiar with them. I am also happy that an older woman (Dimple Kapadia) had a pivotal role– it reminded me of Judi Dench in James Bond films.

Deepika Padukone’s character could have been fleshed out better and given better action sequences. I feel Aishwarya Rai does a much better job with action sequences – her movement is fantastic, so perhaps a friendly chat can help. For her personal stance and experience with #BoycottBollywood, Deepika seems made of stern stuff.

Teaser post: PK (2014)

Aamir Khan, in recent years, has resorted to interesting ways of promoting his movies. Sufficient buzz gets generated, and before you know, even non-fans are keen to watch his movie.

This time, he has gone one step ahead. He has shed his clothes and has posed on a railway track with a radio covering his privates. This link suggests that the poster has been inspired by a Portuguese musician Quim Barreiros. The movie is expected to release in December this year, and the promotion has started over four months in advance.

Sanjay Dutt and Sushant Singh Rajput are also there in the movie. Given their toned bodies, will they give competition to Aamir Khan by posing in a similar manner?

Taking offence…

…becomes quite easy when it has something to do with the big screen. Communities, business houses, actors – all of them are quick to react based on what is shown about them. Taking offence is about telling the audience the stereotype / portrayal is untrue. This has its merits, and limitations.

Deepika’s accent in “Chennai Express” is causing angst among South Indians Tamilians, even when the entire cast and crew of the movie is South Indian – save for SRK.

“Billu Barber” was renamed to “Billu” because the barber community raised objection. Muslims and kathak dancers took offence when “Vishwaroopam” was to be released. As for “Being Cyrus”, a few Parsis took offence.

Zandu balm makers Emami took offence at the song “Munni Badnaam Hui” and Malaika later endorsed the product. Rooh afza makers took offence when YJHD released - the lead character had unflattering things to say about the drink.

There were objections raised to the spoof on Doordarshan's music in "Zindagi Na Milegi Dobara".

Manoj Kumar took offence at his portrayal in “Om Shanthi Om”. Nearly 6 years after its release, the man is still going strong with his protest.

Given that movies are about creating impressions that can be viewed repeatedly and by a large audience, everybody is keen that the 'right' impression is created. Compare all of this with Brad Pitt being banned in China because he acted in “Seven years in Tibet” or Richard Gere being permanently banned in China for his support to the Dalai Lama.

To me, taking a stand (and a clever sense of humour) seems more valuable.