Traffic (2000)

In early 2000, I made use of the Internet for the first time and soon started spending time tracking Oscar winners. I loved getting to know about the various categories, tracked movies being shown on TV, and overall loved the exposure to Hollywood.

In these early days, I read about Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta-Jones, got to know they were getting married, and most importantly (for me) they starred in ‘Traffic’. I have wanted to watch the movie for a long time (well, 25 years) and finally got down to it, thanks to Benicio del Toro.

Why, you ask?

Benicio has starred in ‘One Battle After Another’. He was nominated for best supporting actor, and it reminded me that he had won the Oscar for ‘Traffic’. I searched, found the movie on Amazon Prime and rented it.

Brilliantly shot in sections with English and Spanish, ‘Traffic’ is a masterpiece in storytelling involving multiple arcs. Not all characters meet each other, but their lives are interwoven masterfully – it is no wonder to me that the movie won the Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay as well. There are 3 stories happening in parallel, each with its suspense intact.

The movie is about the illegal drug trade between United States of America and Mexico, how various players sustain the drug trade, and how it impacts families. Douglas’ character is a Judge who is appointed as a drug czar, only for him to discover that his teenage daughter (an excellent student) abuses drugs and has been prostituted. She later joins Narcotics Anonymous, and starts recovering.

Zeta-Jones plays a pregnant wife whose husband is arrested for distributing drugs in the USA. This is a clever storyline to showcase how families behave, even when there is illegal activity involved. I liked how Don Cheadle played his role as a honest DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) agent.

As for Benicio, he plays a Mexican police officer who stops drug transport. I couldn’t understand most of his dialogs as they were in Spanish – and subtitles wouldn’t get turned on – and I watched it as if it were a silent movie. His physical presence seems tailormade for the role.

I loved watching Viola Davis and Salma Hayek in their brief roles. I have been a huge fan of Viola ever since I watched her in ‘Air’.

‘Traffic’ is a must watch for parents and enforcement agencies. Given how drug usage in India is steadily rising (Punjab, some parts of the North-East, Kerala), it is important to see how consuming locations and transit locations are related. Schoolchildren have started abusing drugs, courting danger on so many fronts. At a time when brains are still developing, this is extremely dangerous. 

I’ll never know the high of drugs (and I don’t want to know), but I do know the high of watching a great movie. ‘Traffic’ is one such movie.

Killers of the Flower Moon (2023)

I have been meaning to write about this movie for over a year, and am finally getting down to it. I love the collaborations between Martin Scorsese and Robert De Niro, Martin Scorsese and Leonardo DiCaprio and ‘Killers of the Flower Moon’ was the best opportunity of them all – Martin Scorsese collaborating with both in the same project.

The movie is based on a book, and focuses on a series of murders of the Osage tribe members in the 1920s. The Osage Nation was transformed post the discovery of oil, and attracted the attention of a corrupt political boss.

DiCaprio’s character is a World War 1 veteran who comes back to stay with his uncle, the corrupt political boss, played by De Niro. Aided by the brainwashing of his uncle, he then gets romantically involved with Lily Gladstone’s character (a refreshing performance and casting), gets married and then has children with her.

Gladstone’s character belongs to the Osage tribe, and one by one, members of her family are found mysteriously dead. Thelma Schoonmaker’s movie editing kept me on the edge, waiting to see what happens next. Watch the movie to see how the story unfolds, the role that Brendan Fraser plays as De Niro’s lawyer (I loved this casting too) and the references to J. Edgar Hoover’s role. As an aside, I was reminded of DiCaprio’s portrayal of J. Edgar Hoover in Clint Eastwood’s ‘J. Edgar’.

Via ‘Killers of the Flower Moon’, I got to know about some Native American customs. I also got to know about the impact and occurrence of diabetes among Native Americans. It was moving to see Gladstone’s character suffer because of the illness and her criminal husband, and heartening to see the quick recovery she makes when agents of the Bureau of Investigation help her.

I had noticed DiCaprio’s stained teeth in the movie, and recollect reading a review mentioning the same point. His handsome face acquired a different character because of this. The scene where he gets paddled is menacing, and yet again I marvelled at how Scorsese depicts violence. I also noticed Gladstone’s beautiful smile and expression in one scene (when she is driven in a motorcar), and later read that it was a spontaneous and unplanned reaction that was retained in the final cut.

I highly recommend watching this movie. The IMDB rating is now 7.6.

Ghoomer (2023)

In the past, I have enjoyed the interesting portrayals of women in R Balki’s movies (Cheeni Kum, Paa, English Vinglish). Across age groups, the women have a mind of their own, are decisive and experimental in their relationship status. So, the minute I saw the poster of ‘Ghoomer’, I knew I wanted to watch it. The sports link was evident, and to my delight the portrayal of disability too.

During illness episodes, one after another, I used to mention words that sounded similar, or words that meant more than 1 thing (remember paryayvachi shabd?) This time, Ghoomer reminded me of the song ‘Ghoomar’ from Padmaavat. Watch the movie to see why Ghoomer has a significant role to play.

Ghoomer has sought inspiration from the life of Karoly Takacs, the Olympic medal-winning shooter. Like him, the budding cricketer Anina played by Saiyami Kher loses her right hand in a freak road accident and must give up her dream of representing India as a batter. An older cricketer past his prime, played by Abhishek Bachchan, gives her career a new life by encouraging her to become a bowler instead. Like all good coaches portrayed in media, he makes things difficult for her initially, helps her build strength in her left hand, and eventually she becomes so good at bowling that she gets another chance to represent India, and goes on to win glory.

There are two other strong women in the movie – Anina’s paternal grandmother played by the fantastic Shabana Azmi (may everyone be blessed with considerate paternal grandmothers like the ones she has portrayed in 2023) and the trans woman Rasika played by Ivanka Das. Witty, observant and helpful, these women light up the screen when they appear.

Balki’s movies, however well-written, have a few moments of unbelievable drama that leave me flabbergasted, but the overall taste is so good that I am willing to let them fly by. I haven’t been tracking cricket for years now, but enjoyed the scenes featuring cricket and can see why women’s cricket is gaining popularity. I was happy to see more attention given to bowlers (finally!) and the references to Physics.

Finally, the real reason that I wanted to watch the movie – Anina is a person with disability (PwD). I liked the scenes featuring other PwDs who rejoice at her bowling spell, the looks given by her team members when the scoreline is against them and they miss having an extra batter, and I read that the DCCI (Differently-Abled Cricket Council of India) hosted a special screening of the movie for 50 paraplegic cricketers. So far, all good. What’s not good? Yet again, a PwD has been shown as a super-achiever and hugely inspirational figure, instead of remaining human with flaws like any other. The other option would have been to portray the PwD as an object of pity – disability portrayal offers only these two extremes – so this was better to that extent.

While I was a bit sad to see how quick Anina is to forgive the male driver who leaves her disabled and her childhood friend who gives her the idea to hand signal while driving, I wasn’t surprised. Forgiveness is expected of women, irrespective of the harm meted out by men. The only silver lining is that the male driver is repentant and tries to make amends. As for the childhood friend, he loves her.

Watch the movie. You’d be happy after doing so!

Kantara (2022)

In search of stories different from the ones I have been exposed to, I landed on ‘Kantara’. I had read that it featured the ‘Kambala’ – an annual buffalo race held in Tulu Nadu, Karnataka – and that the movie was high grossing. I was eager to know more about the buffalo race, and decided to watch the original Kannada version with English subtitles – I am happy when I can understand some words from other languages, and the music seems more relatable too.

The movie offered much more. I got to know about ‘Buta Kola’, the ritualistic dance performance similar to ‘Theyyam’ of Kerala, the Varaha Avathar (Panjurli Daiva) and Guliga Daiva, how young boys are initiated into the dance performance, and the role it plays in mediating disputes in villages. I first read about ‘Theyyam’ in ‘Nine Lives’ by William Dalrymple, and know about the role of caste in these dance performances. The movie touched upon casteism – the landlord asks for the house to be ‘purified’ after the Kambala athlete touches him.

I loved how the story focused on an upright forest officer who is tasked with converting villagers’ land into a forest reserve, and how the villagers react to this. Morals and loyalty are questioned more than once, and the story’s love angle is the one between the Kambala athlete and a lady forest guard who hails from the same community. The love angle is set in 1990s – more than 30 years from today – and the intersectionality of patriarchy and casteism can be seen. The long-suffering wife of the landlord could have been given some more dialogues.

After seeing the depiction of widespread consumption of alcohol among male characters, I read that the earlier Karnataka government (2023 elections are done!) considered lowering the legal age of alcohol consumption from 21 to 18. I will look up alcohol consumption patterns sometime.

A sequel is expected, and I hope to watch that too.

A Man Called Otto (2022)

Photo courtesy www.imdb.com

Warning: mentions of suicide

When I read that Tom Hanks was playing an aging widower in ‘A Man Called Otto’, I got interested in watching the movie. I love actors who play age-appropriate roles – the depth they lend to characters by their sheer presence is immense. And this is Tom Hanks, after all, so expectations were high.

Otto is a widower who is seriously contemplating suicide post his wife’s demise. He tries multiple ways to end his life, but all his attempts are thwarted by other people – who don’t know he is thinking of ending his life. His character is a contrast from the character played by Robert De Niro in ‘The Intern’ – Niro’s character accepted his wife’s demise and leads his life well.

Otto’s loneliness, grief and suicidal thinking is captured in an authentic manner, and reminded me of some days from my past. Otto struggles through daily life, missing his wife constantly. He keeps her clothes around, gets angry when someone tries to touch her stuff, and visits her grave and talks to her. He lost his parents early – we don’t know anything about his wife Sonya’s family – has no children, has severed connections with his neighbours and has accepted a retirement package from his company. The scene where the cake printed with his image is cut is poignant – I am now clear that I won’t get photographs of any person printed on cakes!

His life turns around when a pregnant mother of Mexican origin moves as his neighbour, along with her husband and 2 daughters. My exposure to Hispanics is only via movies, and she doesn’t disappoint – she is warm, chatty, straightforward and a great cook. She slowly draws Otto out from his shell – he reminds her of her father who is no more. He enjoys her cooking without being patronising.

I like movies in simpler, everyday settings that focus on how people interact with each other. The movie touches upon the treatment of transgender persons (a trans man has been cast in the role), men who are effeminate, interracial friendships. Added to this is the interactions with neighbourhood animals.

The book on which the movie is based in set in Sweden, and I am keen on reading it as it features an Iranian immigrant.

Tu Jhooti Main Makkaar (2023)

After watching movies featuring Ranbir Kapoor regularly, I somehow lost interest and missed watching many of them. When “Tu Jhooti Main Makkaar” was going to be released, I had no idea that Arijit Singh has done playback singing for Ranbir many times over. The songs looked good to me – even if they reminded me of “Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani”, released a decade ago.

It piqued my interest when I read that Shraddha Kapoor’s character was a bit different, and in search of something light to watch, I decided to go for this movie. I had the sibling's company as well.

Firstly, it was wonderful to see Gurugram and generally happy, flirty Punjabi characters again – they remind me of some great times in my life. Shades of “Hitch” made me smile – it is now much easier to appreciate the easy-going break-ups rather than dramatic ones!

It was interesting to see how the joint family was portrayed differently for both Ranbir and Shraddha, with Ranbir enjoying the warmth and general camaraderie and Shraddha struggling with not having space to just be and watching her educated mother give up her dreams. I loved the dialogue delivery of both Dimple Kapadia and Hasleen Kaur, who play Ranbir’s mother and sister. The ease with which they portrayed the healthy family unit was lovely. Ranbir’s sister spends plenty of time at her maternal home along with her daughter – and this was also a nice touch. I heartily laughed at the sequences shot during the car ride and airport featuring the nonstop banter in Ranbir’s side of the family.

Now come the tougher observations. In the fight that takes place on the day of their engagement, even if Ranbir’s character wants to make it easier for Shraddha’s character (watch the movie to know why), the way he asks her if she is fucking dumb and how she should have asked him before applying to a job in a different city left much to be desired.

Shraddha’s character makes it clear that she wishes to lead her life in a nuclear family unit, and as movies would have it, the warmth of the joint family wins her over and she gets happily married and settled into her life in one – in short, the hero “rescues” her, with her MIL even helping her after a drunken night and not expecting her to do any housework. What happens to her independent streak and fractured equation with her side of the family is left completely unaddressed – her mother makes an appearance only in the last scene when Shraddha has a baby.

Earlier, Shraddha does indicate that Ranbir’s life wouldn’t change post marriage. Later, she happily takes to playing golf with him – as if adapting to his hobbies isn’t a change by itself. She likes to run – he is not shown as having taken to it! It so happens his best friend is married to her best friend - else I would have liked to know who she spends more time with.

Dimple is shown as an undemanding, genial MIL – I wonder what it would be like to see the story from her side, where she takes care of everything for her son and DIL and spares them all labour. Also, when she repeatedly slaps her adult 30+ year old son (even post his wedding, even after he says it is abusive) and his best friend, it isn’t clear why she wouldn’t do the same to the women in her family.

By no means are relationships all fun and frolic – routine life and responsibilities do take over. In midst of this, sparing some time to look at structural inequity and patriarchal expectations is necessary. And yes, pyaar hota kayi baar hai! 

The Bourne Series

When I was in high school, my classmate RM~ lent me one of Robert Ludlum’s books. I returned it to him without reading it, and now I can’t recollect the reason behind not reading it.

Later, The Bourne Series of movies arrived along with Matt Damon. I immediately fell in love with Matt Damon’s portrayal of Jason Bourne. The perfect combination of brawn and brain (and integrity), he tremendously appealed to the sapiosexual in me.

In the Bourne Series, I have watched the first three movies (2002, 2004 and 2007) on TV and liked them. The remaining two have been theatre watches for me. I didn’t enjoy The Bourne Legacy (2012) as much – it didn’t feature Matt Damon, and I was glad when he returned in Jason Bourne (2016).

Moby’s “Extreme Ways” features in the movie series more than once, and in my illness spells, I used to think of KS~ while playing the song on loop. The blue and black combination in one of the videos held special meaning to me, and the grey one more so. Even as things fell apart, I loved that the picturisations had nothing more than Matt Damon's face. 

“Oh baby, oh baby
Then it fell apart, it fell apart
Oh baby, oh baby
Like it always does, always does”

Go on, listen to the song. 

Extreme Ways – The Bourne Identity (2002) – not the official version

Extreme Ways – Jason Bourne (2016) – the official version 

I like this version even more – the pace is different.

Extreme Ways - The Bourne Ultimatum (2007) - the official version

I discovered this version today. 

Joker (2019)

11 years ago, when I watched the Dark Knight, I didn’t imagine that Christian Bale would one day stop playing Batman, and Joaquin Phoenix would eventually play Joker. Watching Joker come alive in 2019 made me think of how well the story has been written – it turns out that the director of the movie (Todd Phillips) is one of the writers. He has the Hangover series and Due Date among his earlier writing credits.

There is much to be said about the violence shown in the movie, the method acting of Phoenix that has prompted him to dangerously drop weight, the joy of watching Robert de Niro, and the storyline connecting Joker and Bruce Wayne. However, there is something else that struck me way more.

I expect to see more articles cover how mental illness has been portrayed by Joaquin Phoenix - for good and bad reasons. For instance, I would have liked to see his descent into violence portrayed differently given how stigmatized mental illness is and how popular media readily associates the mentally ill as perpetrators of violence. The movie links his violent streak with the absence of medication, and I would love to see how this can be challenged in real-life as tapering of medication is reality for many recovering patients.

Three other things struck me as remarkable.

• His relationship with his original counsellor - he is candid and shares how he feels, how he takes his medication and enquires about dosages, and how she offers the right combination of challenging him and staying supportive as she works with him
• What he writes in his journal regarding mental illness - "The worst part of having a mental illness is people expect you to behave as if you don't"
• How the underprivileged don't have ready access to mental health care, and how it can suddenly be withdrawn due to lack of funding - so even if someone is willing to take help and stay the course, it isn't possible to do so

The movie is conflicting more than once, and that perhaps is the mark of a great movie as it prompts one to assess one’s own views on what it means to be underprivileged and ill. What it means to go through childhood trauma and lose one's livelihood as an adult. What it means to get attracted to the people one does, given everything.

Recommended watch.

Hum Aapke Hain Kaun..! (1994)

HAHK, as it was popularly known, was released on August 5, 1994 and it became the first Bollywood movie to make over Rs. 1 billion. I recently saw some articles that celebrated the 20th anniversary of its release, and it reminded me of the time when the sibling and I had gone with our mother to book tickets in advance. If I recollect right, this was among the few movies that my paternal grandmother watched along with us at the theatre.

The movie was long even by Hindi movie standards, and the 14 songs added to the length of the movie. They removed 2 songs from the movie, and retained them in the soundtrack. I was a fan of Madhuri Dixit, and the success of the movie made me happy. I have watched several movies multiple times, and it used to surprise me that HAHK did not find favour in my repeat-viewing list.

Back then, I remember reading in some film magazine that Madhuri Dixit (15-05-1967) is elder to Renuka Shahane (07-10-1966) in real life and yet played her younger sister, and now Wikipedia tells me that Renuka is elder by 7 months.

“Didi tera devar” was #1 on music countdown shows, including Superhit Muqabla, for a long time. The sight of a swinging Salman Khan singing “Kudiyon ka hai zamaana” had made me think that this is favourable to women, and I somehow had faith that Madhuri Dixit would not portray characters that allowed men to take advantage of her and treat her badly.



Posters and other promotional material also covered the backless choli and the embroidered purple saree.

I remember discussing the yellow (or was it orange?) salwar kameez that Madhuri wears in this song with some friends at school.



Years later, I realized that Nisha (the character played by Madhuri Dixit) didn’t have it easy. She had flowers aimed at her butt, and didn’t speak up when her marriage was fixed with her dead sister’s husband instead of Prem, the dead sister’s husband’s brother. Prem doesn’t admit to his love either, and stays quiet. "Saali to adhi gharwali hoti hai” – the wife’s sister is half-a-wife – HAHK made use of this theme.

It took a Pomeranian (apparently, the correct term is the Indian Spitz) to rescue the lovers and unite them.

11 years after HAHK, the movie Bewafaa was based on the same theme of “Saali to adhi gharwali hoti hai” and the dutiful younger sister is labelled unfaithful. Would a man’s younger brother ever be forced to marry the wife of his dead brother? In 1981, Silsila explored that theme briefly and it bombed at the box office.

Gender stereotypes exist for several reasons, and movies have a role in perpetuating them. This is a speech by Sharmila Tagore in 2013 and she says, “Traditionally, we as a nation have tended to view a woman either as devi (goddess) or as property of man but never as an equal.” HAHK also found mention in her speech. Post the release of Kick in 2014, this article questions whether the hero is a molester or a real hero.

HAHK inspired a generation to indulge in lavish weddings – in Hindi movies and outside of them. It also cemented Madhuri’s position as the undisputed #1 leading lady, and 20 years later, she continues to receive offers to act. I am happy for her, and am hoping to see lavish weddings lose their lustre.

Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani (2013)

A few years ago, there was a controversial episode in “Koffee with Karan” where Deepika spoke candidly about her ex-boyfriend Ranbir Kapoor. Ranbir came across as a momma's boy, and that's a post for another day.

On momma's boys, i.e.

Today, Deepika and Ranbir are good friends. Recently, Ranbir’s mother Neetu (who reportedly disapproved of Deepika) warmly hugged Deepika. Why not? Deepika is on a roll with “Cocktail” and “Race 2” being declared as hits. Now, YJHD is the third-biggest grosser ever in Bollywood. It makes sense to be good to her, no?

This is my teaser post on the movie. As expected, many songs from the movie are still stuck in my mind even if I was disappointed with their sudden appearance. The songs are picturised really well, and the movie is worth watching just for them.

A group of three friends (Ranbir’s Bunny, Kalki’s Aditi and Aditya’s Avi) are on a trip to Manali, and Deepika’s good-girl, bespectacled, "topper" Naina joins them on an impulse. She is worldly unwise unlike them, and can sing Bachchan songs and use her calm head when required.

At Manali, when Bunny tells Naina that if he had a heart, he would have fallen for her smile. He then tells her that she is the sort of girl one romances, not flirts with. Finally, he says - “Apne aap pe daya karna chod do. Apne aap se pyaar karna seekho.” 

One must admit that Bunny knows how to flirt with all of them.

Naina develops a liking for Bunny and doesn’t declare her love for him because she knows that Bunny doesn’t believe in commitment. A mature head on her young shoulders, she concentrates on her studies and goes on to open a clinic close to where her parents stay.

She also wisely invests in contact lenses, or perhaps lasik eye surgery. She doesn't let go of her competitiveness as well.

Aditi is silently in love with Avi, and finds her love not reciprocated. She decides to get married to a ‘boring’ engineer with a BMW rather than wait endlessly for the drunkard, fast-losing-money bar-owner (or was it a restaurant?). She has a destination wedding in Rajasthan, and that’s where Bunny and Naina meet after years.

Bunny's real name is Kabir Thapar. He is self-centered and doesn’t wish to get deeply involved with anybody. “Main udhna chahta hoon. Bas rukhna nahin chahta.” He is an only child, his mother is dead, he has a step-mother who he hates (a charming Tanvi Azmi) and his father (Farooq Sheikh) is the indulgent sort who silently praises his son for having the courage to lead his life the way he wants and for paying the price for indulging in his dreams. This is true in Bunny’s friendships as well. He finds it easier to deal with the non-demanding Aditi when compared to the demanding Avi who has expectations from his friend. 

In short, Bunny's commitment phobia is celebrated.

Much later, while spending time with Naina, he tells her - “Tum right nahin ho. Bas mujhse alag ho.” He rightly realises that she is very different from him. Why is he drawn to her then? She has turned drop-dead gorgeous, you see. She also mouths lines such as - “Zindagi mein kuch na kuch hamesha chooth jaayega. Isliye jo hai, usi ka mazaa le lo!”

Bunny scores when he points out her double-standards when it comes to her consumption of alcohol. Earlier, his father scores when he points out to Bunny's habit of lying.

Later, when in true Hindi movie style Bunny comes to woo his girl and asks for her hand, she asks him – “Tum bhaag to nahin jaaoge?” Bunny has rejected the offer to host a new TV reality show, and is jobless when he woos her. Conveniently, both his parents are dead by now and hence Naina has no in-laws to contend with. As for Bunny, he is suddenly willing to let go of his dynamic career and independence in order to be with a pretty doctor whose life begins and ends in the same locality, and who has a controlling mother.

Hindi movies obviously don’t deal with the operating nuts and bolts of daily life. Two months later, Bunny would be cursing his decision to be with someone so different from him. He will complain that he doesn't get time with Avi, Aditi and Aditi's husband. He will find his wife's structured career boring. The fact that his wife spends lots of time at her clinic will irritate him. Her clothes will be declared as revealing, and he will act possessive. He will (subtly or otherwise) ensure that Naina loses her friendship with Vikram.

It is good for Naina that like her, Bunny isn't cynical. Perhaps their marriage would work. The rooh afza would taste just as bad as before though. Hey, the manufacturers don't think so.

In terms of performances, it is Deepika who shines in her role and is the best part of the movie. This is high praise considering that she is paired opposite the oh-so-awesome Ranbir Kapoor. I loved Kalki’s Aditi – feisty and practical, and an absolutely fantastic friend. I didn’t think much of Aditya’s portrayal of Avi, and Rana Daggubati as Vikram is wasted in his bit role. 

As for Madhuri Dixit, with the pun (unintended?) on ‘via Agra’, she shows why she remains Queen Bee.

Rock On!! (2008)

Remember the couple Joe and Debbie from the movie? The characters were played by Arjun Rampal and Shahana Goswami respectively.

Debbie’s fashion designing career doesn’t get a kick-start when Joe’s band ‘Magik’ wins a competition and gets into the professional league. This disappoints Joe the lead guitarist, and when he gets less mileage than the lead singer Aditya (played by Farhan Akhtar) he walks out of the band in a fury.

Years later, Joe is a broken man for his career doesn’t do well. He can no longer play the guitar at the big stage. Joe and Debbie are married now and have a son. Debbie takes care of Joe’s family’s fish business. It is fair to assume that fashion designing and fish don’t go together. The difference between the two of them is that she decides to take up a job that is far removed from her dreams in order to support the family. He, on the other hand, is dejected and stuck in the past.

Our generation is caught in a flux. Women work and are economically independent. Men realize that there is indeed a fair chance that they get to pursue their dreams while the women run their house. The marriage suffers when the man is unable to meet success while pursuing his dream, and doesn’t wish to give up his dream. The woman gets increasingly frustrated for she is responsible now for the finances as well as the good health of the relationship.

Check this song between 2:30 and 3:24.



Later, when Joe finds an outlet for his music, he realizes how overworked his wife is and is back to being nice to her. If Bollywood is a fair indicator of our society, the man and his dreams remain more important than the woman and her dreams. The man can remain the teenager wrapped up in his lost dreams, while the woman matures for both of them. 

Roles Bollywood actors choose

I had once written about the effect of neuroticism and how Hollywood actors choose to play neurotic characters.

When I look at Abhishek Bachchan, since 2004, he played the con artist in “Bunty Aur Babli” and “Bluffmaster”, he got conned in “Dhoom 2”, his character wove a fantasy tale in “Jhoom Barabar Jhoom” and his character pretends to be gay in “Dostana”. Why do liars appeal to him?

When I look at Meenakshi Sheshadri, she has played a strong, no-nonsense woman in “Ghar Ho To Aisa” and in “Damini”. I haven’t watched much of her other movies, so this is the image I have of her.

Rajesh Khanna and Shahrukh Khan have played the romantic hero several times in their career, and were hugely popular with women filmgoers for the same reason.

This is why the versatility of Ranbir Kapoor appeals so much, and it makes me happy to see that he isn't typecast. He can take on just about any role and make the movie work for him. And for us. Remember what I once wrote about him?

When characters act funny

Marriages are fragile relationships when compared to blood relations, and are more susceptible to negative emotions. Bollywood has come up with several interpretations of marriages, and there is enough drama with songs to boot.

In “Abhimaan” (1973), Amitabh Bachchan’s character cannot tolerate the success of his wife played by Jaya Bhaduri (who takes up a singing career at his insistence) and his pride throws their marriage in disarray. In movie-style, he realizes his mistake and then they reconcile.

This story was reportedly based on Pandit Ravi Shankar and his wife Annapurna Devi – she was more talented than him. In real life, Pandit Ravi Shankar moved on, found other women and got married again. Annapurna Devi never married again.

In “Aap Ki Kasam” (1974), Rajesh Khanna plays a jealous husband who cannot trust his wife (Mumtaz). He leaves her, and then she moves on and remarries. He ends up being a broken man. One song from this movie is stuck in my mind these days, and I have to put an end to the haunting effect of the song.

Compare “Devdas” (2002) and “Dev.D” (2009). These are my views on the story of Devdas.

Today, there is a new breed of men who don’t think twice before taking advantage of the financial independence of their wives and continue to retain all qualities of the traditional MCP. Think Akshay Kumar in “Aitraaz” (2004) – his married character is almost willing to be seduced by Priyanka Chopra’s ex-girlfriend character and the only reason he stops (from the final act so to speak) is because he suddenly remembers that he is married.

I think he suddenly remembered that his wife is a lawyer.

A side point – why badmouth pigs while labeling people as male chauvinist pigs or female chauvinist pigs? Pigs don’t have to be involved, do they?

Ghar Ho To Aisa (1990)

Bollywood in the ‘90s was full of stereotypes. The mother-in-law was evil personified, the sister-in-law was evil-trained and could take her place at short notice if required, and depending upon the story, the father-in-law would be a mute spectator or an abettor. There were multiple references to dowry and greed for money.

In “Ghar Ho To Aisa”, Meenakshi Seshadri’s Seema is an educated, rich, no-nonsense woman. Her poor friend from college Sharda (played by Deepti Naval) gets married into a family where the mother-in-law Durga (played by Bindu) and sister-in-law Kanchan (played by Rita Bhaduri) torture her. Durga has perfect control over her husband Ramprasad (played by Saeed Jaffrey), and her elder son. Sharda’s husband and Durga's elder son Vijay (played by Raj Kiran) is a bully who cannot stand up to his mother, and he proceeds to have an extra-marital affair. The affair receives full support from his parents and sister. Kanchan’s husband Bajrangi (played by Kader Khan) is a ghar-jamai and he is a mute spectator who doesn’t dare say anything against his shrewish wife.

Sharda receives support mainly from her brother-in-law Amar (played by Anil Kapoor). Seema gets married to Amar, and then proceeds to teach Durga and Kanchan the lesson of their life.

I was less than 10 years of age when I watched this movie, and remember being very impressed with Seema for standing up to her husband’s evil family. I also wondered as to why Sharda didn’t make a similar attempt.

Luckily, Seema and Amar remain married towards the end of the movie and therefore justify the title of the movie. Till date, real life doesn't mirror Bollywood and what one can wish for is Ghar Na Ho Aisa.

The movie is so old that it is freely available on YouTube. At 2:01:51, a scene starts where Kanchan and Durga plot to burn Seema’s hand. Watch how she thwarts their plan, and takes revenge of behalf of her friend.  

Pooja from Biwi No. 1 (1999)

I had watched this movie at home, and found it entertaining in the way David Dhawan movies can be. The songs were interesting, the actors played their roles well, and there was a happy ending. I added this movie to my list of Hindi-movies-with-sunshine-optimism. They don’t mirror reality.

Pooja (played by Karisma Kapoor) is a happily married housewife who takes pride in taking care of her husband, two children, her mother-in-law, the dog and the house. Her husband Prem (played by Salman Khan) gets bored of her goody-goody behavior and gets quickly attracted to a model Rupali (played by Sushmita Sen.) He starts spending more time with Rupali, and starts lying to Pooja.

When Pooja discovers the affair, she asks Prem to choose between her and Rupali. Prem chooses Rupali and moves in with her. His friend Lakhan (played by Anil Kapor) then steps in, gives Pooja tips on attracting her husband back, and she wins him over.

This is not the complete story.

Pooja actually takes Prem back – Rupali leaves Prem to go back to her boyfriend Deepak (played by Saif Ali Khan) and Prem is left alone. Pooja is the epitome of wifely sacrifice, and Prem the epitome of selfish behaviour. Sickening, both.

I wrote in my previous post that I believe the cheating spouse / spouse who emotionally abandons must be allowed to go away. This movie mirrors pretty much everything that I don’t believe in - the movie shows how physical attraction is more important than mental compatibility, how a sincere spouse who spends more time taking care of those at home is boring, how extroverted behavior is more deserving of romantic love, how emotional drama on part of the family will make the cheating spouse realise his mistake, and how husbands deserve complete trust and understanding irrespective of their behavior.

There were some nice moments. The mother-in-law (played by Himani Shivpuri) is good to Pooja and supports her instead of her errant son. The husband’s friend, Lakhan, helps Pooja tap into her self-confidence. I believe in the innate power of sincere (and direct) apologies and forgiveness, and it was good to see Deepak forgive Rupali. As for Pooja, she gets back to wearing glamorous clothes and shows off her perfect figure and dancing skills.

Life’s good when you rediscover yourself. 

Dev from Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna (2006)

I have written about extra-marital affairs in my other blog and am a firm believer that once there is an extra-marital affair, it is best to let the cheating spouse go, and officially declare emotional abandonment as unacceptable. The cheating spouse is unhappy in the marriage and it is unfair and mentally agonizing for the spouse who has been cheated to forgive the cheater. Granted that it cannot always be the case – there are families involved, and many times there are children as well – and a compromise towards maintaining peace is often reached. However, if there are no such ties involved, it is best to walk out.

One of the more dramatic movies made on extra-marital affairs is Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna, and it was my first movie review. When I read it now, I realize that my opinion on Dev the ineffectual wimp hasn’t changed. The irony – Dev was played by the super successful Shahrukh Khan.

Rhea (played by Preity Zinta) is his hard-working and professionally more successful wife. Dev is emotionally unavailable to her and their son, and is a bitter man because he cannot play football anymore (post an accident) – and therefore doesn’t have a stable career.

There are several confrontation scenes between the two of them. In one of them, Dev wrongly accuses Rhea of taking up a more lucrative offer and being selfish regarding herself and her career, and doesn’t wait for her to announce that she has let the offer pass because it would mean uprooting their family.

There is another scene where Rhea declares to him that she wears the pants in the marriage, and that harsh truth leaves him shattered. He is forced to face his own incompetence, and is unable to deal with it in a constructive manner. The affair follows.

The scene where Rhea slaps him after getting to know about his extra-marital affair had left me with mixed feelings. She could have expressed her sense of betrayal with words? For instance, with something on the lines of, “Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn.”

Perhaps Rhea decided that it was no longer worth it to be reasonable with Dev.

With the wimp out of her way, Rhea then decides to focus on her son and her work – in that order. Her mother-in-law supports her, and stays back with her. She finds love again.

Priya from Dil Chahta Hai (2001)

I had earlier written about 'Dil Chahta Hai' in this post.

Remember Sameer's (Saif Ali Khan) girlfriend Priya (Suchitra Pillai)? She looks disgusted at having Akash (Aamir Khan) around her at all times when she is trying to have a snap clicked with Sameer at a party. She finds Akash's behaviour obnoxious when he randomnly goes and proposes to Shalini (Preity Zinta) at the same party, and then has a conversation with Sameer at the beach.

Watch the clip from 24 minutes 49 seconds till 30 minutes 49 seconds.

Priya asks Sameer to stay away from Akash, and issues an ultimatum. Sameer, who doesn't have the heart to break her heart – and loves his friend more than his girlfriend – struggles with the ultimatum. After all, why is he being asked to choose between his close friend and girlfriend?

He lands up at Akash's place for advice on how to deal with the situation, and doesn't realise when Akash starts making fun of him and his confusion. “Be a man” is great advice for someone who knows what he wants – not for a confused soul like Sameer.

Siddharth (Akshay Khanna) knows Akash well and asks Sameer what he wants to do. He helps Sameer relax. By then, Akash's charming speech has had its effect and Sameer is all set to be a man.

To make matters worse, Akash tells Priya when she calls for the second time that Sameer had not visited him that day. Priya loses her cool completely and breaks up with Sameer.

Sameer and Priya wouldn't have had a long lasting relationship because of the differences in their personalities – she is more aggressive and clear thinking when compared to him, and he is gentler and a people-pleaser. However, could their relationship (while it lasted) have been more peaceful if Akash wasn't confusing Sameer, or if he wasn't teasing Priya as much?

Shashi from Yuva (2004)

I had watched this movie in Bangalore (when it was still called that) with relatives, and had liked the movie in parts.

The pair I liked the most was that of Lallan Singh (Abhishek Bachchan) and Shashi Biswas (Rani Mukerji). The wikipedia entry describes their relationship nicely - "He loves, marries and abuses his wife."

Towards the end of the movie, Shashi insists that Lallan and she leave town, and keeps asking him if he will turn up at the station. He gives every indication that he will, after returning a gun. She offers to throw it away herself, and he doesn't agree.

Unexpectedly, he goes and kills his brother. Expectedly, he doesn't turn up at the station.

Shashi is in the train waiting for him and there is no sign of him when the train starts moving. Her frustration gets vented out when the ticket checker asks her a simple question (not verbatim) - "Aapka pati bathroom mein hai?"

Watch the clip between 22 seconds and 1 minute. 



I wonder why I didn't pay as much attention to the other two couples that shared healthy relationships.

Devdas

I have a natural affinity for resilience. Those who find the resolve to move on with their lives, and actively seek happiness get my vote. The story of Devdas repeatedly gets me to think of love, and I criticize the story for one reason - the abject absence of resilience.

You know the story, don’t you?

Devdas Mukherjee (Deva) and Parvati (Paro) are childhood sweethearts in Bengal. After attaining adulthood and an education from Calcutta, Devdas succumbs to the dual pressure from prevailing norms and his parents. The demand is that he marry someone who is from the same stratum of society, and he dumps Paro. The jilted Paro marries a rich, much older zamindar. Devdas pines for Paro, and takes to alcohol. Paro gets to know that her zamindar husband is stuck in the memories of his dead wife and realizes that her marriage would remain unconsummated. In the meantime, Devdas comes into contact with a courtesan named Chandramukhi. He continues to pine for Paro, goes to meet her just before he dies – as promised to her - and dies a lonely death.

Everybody is unhappy, and remains so till the end.

For the record, I don’t watch reruns of the SRK – Madhuri - Aishwarya starrer. It is far too dramatic for me. The Dilip Kumar – Suchitra Sen – Vyjantimala starrer was watched long ago. Then, there is Dev.D – the modern-day adaptation - when Deva tastes resilience.

Dilip Kumar and Suchitra Sen made for an awesome screen pair as Deva and Paro. It is achingly beautiful to watch the unrequited romance between Deva and Paro.

Of course, the feminist in me flinched at the sight of him hurling a stone at her hitting her forehead with his fishing rod, in anger.

Then, Paro goes away. I was left with the thought, “If only they had talked to each other, instead of hurriedly reacting this way! Lovers deserve to be together.”

In the 2002 version, the sets became grander. Devdas was sent to UK to study. My pet peeve was watching Ms. Nene’s Chandramukhi in a one-sided relationship with SRK’s Devdas. What really makes a one-sided relationship attractive? Hope – one day, things would surely change? Fear – if not for him/her, where will I find love? Self-sacrifice – it gives me immense joy to do stuff for him/her? Result: severe toll on one’s psyche; one that is more evident in intimate relationships, but is true in platonic relationships too.

Whilst I enjoyed watching two of the best dancers in tinsel town share screen space, I also found it absurd from the point of view of the story. The women had their lover in common, and were dancing happily together?

Dev.D arrived earlier this year, with a few direct references to the 2002 movie including the UK angle. The story had been moved to Chandigarh and Delhi. Devdas Mukherjee became Devendra Singh Dhillon, and remained Deva. Parvati became Parminder (Paro). Chandramukhi became Chanda. This version taught Deva lessons that forced him to grow up. Deva has nobody to blame but himself- his father had wanted him to marry Paro, he doesn’t know whether he loves Paro (“Main tumse pyaar karna chahta hoon!”), and he enhances his self-destructive streak – this time, no friend feeds it.

The least dramatic version has foot-tapping, outstanding music. Sample this.



Deva, resilience tastes good, doesn’t it?