The Girl In The Striped Pyjamas says...

Antaheen....a corporate ad-film!!

2010-11-14T13:14:00.000-08:00

Bengali cinema from its early days has always been seduced by what we know as modernity. When Hindi films were solving their crisis in the narrow cobweb of feudal romance and patriarchy, Tollygunj’s Uttam Kumar and Co. were giving a damn to the regressive traditions in pursuing their individual modernist paths where the film would reach its resolution. Aniruddha Roy Chowdhury’s Antaheen has probably tried too much with this idea of modernity.It seems, Modernity has been blown out of proportions when the characters are developed to be mercenaries of modernity where all the souls romanticize just for the sake of it.

An efficient cop falls for his chat friend and they cannot recognize each other even after they meet on and off. But ultimately when they decide to meet, the girl meets with her end and the ‘endless’ wait of Rahul Bose (the protagonist) is hailed to be the central philosophy of the film…its “Antaheen Opekkha” ladies and gentlemen!!

Antaheen is more of a learning process for the new corporate film makers -it is a corporate film for Star Ananda, Reliance Industries (mobile network, internet and life insurance policy, the later even had a couple of dialogues written on it), Nihar Hair Oil (the girl describing her hair to her new media love, with the help of the product mentioned), My Pepsi Can and CCD!! As a viewer these product placements have grossly hit me, giving me a picture of the world we live in where cinema has to pimp for them. The scenes are mostly painted with everything Fab India had, and there have been attempts to put “ART” in the sets with the most shinning objects found on the planet..!!

The content of the film is almost absent, except g-talk chats and CCD meetings and Chivas Regal contemplation (mid life males contemplating about love and life with pegs of this scotch). But the problem lies in other aspects. The very ideology (I know some people would hurl stones at me when I use this almost extinct concept) of the film propagates a false notion of a middle class of Kolkata, where homogenized and communicatively ‘modern responsible citizens’ are representing Bong modernity of the 2010s.

Crowded by unimportant characters of old ladies- Sharmila Tagore, who represents that essential prerogative and imperative position of the archetype Indian mother in the role of Rahuls Bose’s aunt and Aparna Sen, the uncompromising liberated lonely careerist - Star Ananda boss and the common link between the girl (Radhika Apte), and the guy, the narrative does not help us to get anything apart from a weird mid-life crisis that has become the recent crisis for a large number of contents in Bengali films.

Adding to this she teams up with her husband, Kalyan Ray in this film, who in the entire film does nothing other than boozing, and giving absolutely shitty philosophical dialogues. He too like most of the others in the film, is one of the ultimate example of someone suffering from mid-life crisis. "Frustrated" is the word for Mr.Ray, or Ranjan as per the film.

Two actors who were absolutely wasted in the film were Mita Vashisht & Sauvik Kundagrami. I dont really understand, what pleasure a director gets out of casting brilliant performers, and wasting them on screen.

Mita & Sauvik, portraying Mr. & Mrs. Mehra in the film, are another enstranged couple, where they have lost their only daughter, and Mita feels that it is her industrialist husband responsible for the loss.She even feels that he is the one behind the mysterious death of Brinda ( Radhika Apte).

God knows what Shantanu Moitro did in this movie. All the songs sounded the same, other than "Jao Pakhi". What was really sad, was the way Bhindeshi Tara was grandly distorted at the end. Don't really understand how Chandrabindoo actually gave the consent to do something like that. It seems, these days people can go up to any height to attain publicity, no matter even if one has to injure his or her baby for that.

Bengali films today are adorned with everything now - best actors, technicians, equipments and most importantly money. But these films are plagued by a false sense of exhibitionism that snatches life with all its urgency out of them. Brilliantly captured shots of Kolkata horizon quenched in rain, Avik Mukhopadhyay’s work deserves praise. But what do you have underneath the colorful cloak of visuals?

When you have nothing to say, you pimp for products using cinema as vehicle, you have unnecessary poking of politics (that too a shadow of Nandigram that has evidently never been understood, interpreted or realized by the director) and celebration of a new ‘glocal’ order of the city - everything becomes exhibitionism and pretentious.

These films are packages. Packages to bull market gain. It is astonishing that no film maker is being able to read the contemporary time and make a film that would be close to the heart and life, not to sooth our eyes satisfying scopic pleasure. What we need is not any mid-life love philosophy of awaiting and all, but something that speaks about the city more vehemently and honestly, an attempt that would trace the organic relation of a man or a woman with his or her city, a style that would try to defy the clichéd angles of surface and pretentious constructions that we are experiencing, a content which would not only lay claim through its youthful fervor, but also a content that would enunciate a view in the audience, much after the rolling of the final title card.

P.S:

Antaheen last year won the National Award for-

Best Film (as per me, which was something more than bull-shit!!)
Best Cinematography ( not a very disagreeable decision according to me )
Best Lyrics- Anindya Chatterjee, & Chandril Bhattacharya, for "Pherari Mon" ( o please!! you actually call rhymes like "mon"- "phone" etc lyrics??!! )
Best Playback (female)- Shreya Ghoshal for "Pherari Mon" ( ha ha ha...no comments!! )

Now I know, why someone somewhere rightly said, "amader aei national award byaepar'ta bujhle, is nothing but a PR game"...!!!!

Gia....A Thing Of Beauty.

2010-10-22T13:42:00.000-07:00

"Life and death,

Energy and peace...

The terrible mistakes that I have made, and would have unmade if I could.

The pains that have burned me and scarred my soul...

It was worth it.

For having been allowed to walk, where I have walked...

Which was to hell on earth...

Heaven on earth...

Back again, into, under, far in between, through it...

In it and above...."

- From the journal of " Gia Marie Carangi ".

Like the supermodel herself, the 1998 movie Gia, which charts the spectacular early-80's rise and fall of the real-life lesbian supermodel Gia Carangi, means different things to different viewers: a rags-to-riches tale, a lesbian love story, commentary on the heartlessness and fear of the first days of the AIDS epidemic, a harrowing look at the ravaging effects of long-term drug abuse, or the story of a little girl who spent her whole life trying to find someone to fill the hole left by her mother's departure.

Based on many of the real-life model's journal entries, the film is shot in a documentary style that includes commentary from various people in Gia's life — photographers, friends, fashion editors, Linda, and her mother Kathleen (played by Mercedes Ruehl).

Angelina Jolie becomes Gia in every sense of the word. Her performance is one of the best portrayals of real people in years. She is completely and utter believable. She captures what is surely the essense of Gia. She brings a desparate wanting to the character that you can feel. & mark my words, while seeing the film, you just cant move your eyes off her. She is all over the place.

It's no surprise that Angelina won a Golden Globe for this amazing performance. It's no surprise that she was nominated for an Emmy either. As a matter of fact, this is a much awarded film - including a best actress award for Angelina Jolie at the LA Outfest.

Elizabeth Mitchell, plays Linda with a deceptive ease as the girl next door bewildered by this wild thing she's grown to love, but ultimately can't save.

Mercedes Ruehl is excellent as Gia's mother, who clearly doesn't grasp her role in contributing to Gia's self-destructive tendencies.

Faye Dunaway is mainly here for star power – as a substitute-mother, she's okay here, but we all know that Faye has done some amazing work and here, she sort of phones it in.

When the narrative begins, Gia is sporting a punk hairdo and working at her father's restaurant in Philadelphia, where she is discovered by a photographer and shortly thereafter makes the leap to the big time modeling world in New York — and almost immediately begins to self-destruct as she is drawn into the drug culture that accompanied the model lifestyle.

Gia meets Linda on the set of her first big shoot, and the two women hit it off immediately despite the fact that Linda has a boyfriend and perceives herself to be very "square," and they end up sleeping together that night. Gia quickly falls in love with Linda, but her mother's departure at an early age has also left her fundamentally needy and unable to be alone. As Linda describes her, Gia is "like a puppy," saying "Love me! Love me! Love me!" all the time.

Linda is not ready to give Gia what she wants in the beginning, however, and by the time she is, it's too late — Gia is already addicted to drugs. Still, they keep trying to make it work, even at the very end when Gia is dying of AIDS.

Jolie's scenes with Mitchell are some of the best in the film, and their chemistry together is excellent. From Gia plaintively asking Linda to stay while standing naked in front of an elevator full of people, to Gia's attempts to steal Linda away from her boyfriend right in front of him, to Linda's ultimatum that Gia must choose between the drugs or their relationship, their scenes are alternately playful, intense, moving, and heartbreaking.

While the first half of the film is fascinating, inspiring, and unpredictable, the second half, which focuses on Gia's decline, is as predictable and depressing as most movies about drug-addiction are. Jolie's performance as a former drug-addict dying of AIDS is intense and moving, but difficult to watch; although these scenes were probably necessary to give a faithful account of Gia's life, that doesn't make for great entertainment.

Although Jolie had generated some buzz from two previous films — Hackers and Foxfire — Gia is arguably the movie that really announced her presence to the world. She is simply superb as Gia, the perfect actress to embody the contradictory mix of emotions and the proper balance of frailty and strength that this role required.

For the Angelina Jolie fan - it's a MUST SEE, MUST OWN film. For others, it really is worth the time and money. This is a genuine "breakout performance".

P.S:

If you want a more in-depth depiction of Gia's life - there are a couple of books available. The best being "Thing of Beauty: The Tragedy of Supermodel Gia".

Frozen Frames of The Boy In The Striped Pyjamas...

2010-10-10T07:26:00.000-07:00

The Boy In The Striped Pyjamas...

2010-10-10T07:19:00.000-07:00

Of the hundreds of films I have seen, very few have left a deep impression on my mind and sadness in my heart as the ones about the Holocaust and the Partition. The Asian sub-continent continues to feel the stinging backlash of the Partition The horror of the Nazi concentration camps still sends a chill down our spine even now. The holocaust has left an indelible scar not just on the psyche of the Jewish community but also the countries where the atrocities were committed. One can sense this feeling of guilt and shame as hard hitting films on the subjects continue to be made on the subject. Anne Frank, Life is Beautiful, Schindler’s List, The Pianist, The Reader and this one many may not have heard of , ‘The Boy in Striped Pyjamas’. It may not be strictly “entertainment” but such films fulfill a historic purpose of keeping the sense of horror alive so that no country will repeat the ghastly incidents of that decade.

The book ‘The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas’ by Irishman John Boyne was first published in 2006 and was an instant best seller. It was snapped up by Director Mark Herman who collaborated on the screenplay along with the author. The film won wide acclaim on release worldwide but somehow got lost in the brouhaha that surrounded the mediocre Slumdog Millionaire.

Screened at the Kolkata Film Festival, the film records the point of view of a child whose innocent childhood is inadvertently caught up in the ugly side of World War II in Berlin. Bruno , a nine –year old boy is the son of Ralf, a commandant in the German army who is promoted and transferred away from the city. At first they are all happy with the idea of living in a rural setting but once there the boy yearns to be back in his old home with his friends and in familiar environment..There are many things going on at home that he witnesses but cannot understand. Like the old man servant Pavel, formerly a doctor, who wears striped pyjamas. He is not allowed to talk to him, but it is the old man who ties a bandage for his hand when he falls off a swing. Why does Lt. Kotler strike Pavel when he spills some wine? Why are there increasing arguments between his mother and a very stern father who runs his office from home? He climbs a ventilator to secretly watch a film about a ‘labour camp’ his father runs. The documentary shows emaciated men with shaved heads. They smile happily as they work in a factory and play sports.

Bruno is a curious boy who finds ingenious ways to escape the four walls and once finds himself near a barbed –wire fence. He finds Shmuel, a young boy his age in striped pyjamas sitting forlornly on the other side. He realizes that this is the camp he saw in the film. They strike a friendship and this brings Bruno everyday to this forbidden land. They talk of many things and Bruno brings chocolates and sandwiches for his friend Shmuel.

Bruno and his sister are tutored at home by a strict master who instills patriotism and dedication to Hitler. Once when Shmuel is brought into the house as a servant, Bruno is delighted and offers him a cake from the platter. But Kotler notices Shmuel eating and questions him. When Shmuel replies that Bruno is a friend, a terrified Bruno denies it. Shmuel disappears for a few days and Bruno returns home disappointed after visits to their rendezvous.

When Shmuel does come back, he has a black eye. Bruno apologises for betraying him and is forgiven. He tells Bruno that his father has disappeared and wants Bruno to help find him. His mother senses that the hostile environment and the increasing stench from the ‘labour camp’ (where Jews are being gassed) are unsuitable for her family. The mother realizes the true nature of the Auschwitz camp and accosts her husband. She decides to move back to Berlin. Bruno decides to help Shmuel find his father before they leave.

This is when we begin to get edgy and tense. A sense of foreboding and anxious anticipation overcomes the viewer. Where is this going to lead? Well, do see the film for its unexpected end.

The film adopts a straightforward style and avoids the usual clichés of war films. The proximity to those who plan and commandeer the horrors of Auschwitz does make one uneasy. We are privy to plans of expansion of the camp to include more prisoners. The matter-of-fact, business -like operation is a thin veneer through which the stench of the inhuman massacre of 6 million Jews seeps through.

The several opposites are juxtaposed as naturally as they occur in reality. The sister is willingly brainwashed into racist beliefs but the 8 year old is unwittingly breaking all the rules. One boy has freedom and love while another languishes behind a barbed wire fence. The father’s reveals an unshakeable steely attitude to his ‘work’ while the mother resolves to go against it. Lt. Kotler is admired one day and dismissed disgracefully the next for his father’s desertion during war. We are aghast at the cheerful promotional film on the ‘happy’ laborers of the camp as it is actually a part of the project to expand the capacity of the incinerators. At no point does the film build up sympathy for the German family. The boys do not make statements against their situation. The Jewish boy neither hates nor envies the German boy. Their innocent friendship grows untouched by the vast chasm in their lifestyle. The scenes inside the camp are brief but will haunt you for a long time. It is of course difficult to believe that any part of the fence was left unguarded and no one ever noticed that the kids met every day.

The original music composed by James Horner adds to the poignancy of the story. Asa Butterfield as Bruno and Jack Scanlon as Shmuel give amazing performances. Vera Farmiga is the award-winning star for her role as the mother. David Thewlis as the father is restrained and very effective.