MxMIndia

Category: REVIEWING THE REVIEWS

  • Every week, Deepa Gahlot casts a critical eye over media reviews of Bollywood releases… in Reviewing the Reviews

    Reviewing the Reviews: Jannat 2

    Jannat 2

     

    Directed by-Kunal Deshmukh

     

    Produced by-Mahesh Bhatt, Mukesh Bhatt

     

    Story by-Shagufta Rafique

     

    Starring-Emraan Hashmi, Esha Gupta, Randeep Hooda Kunal Deshmukh’s Jannat 2, follows the Bhatt Brothers formula pretty faithfully. Crime, Sex, angst, Emraan Hashmi, in no particuar order of preference.

     

    Critics were divided on this one with ratings going from 1 to 4. It has opened well proving that Hashmi has a fan following among those who don’t go by film reviews.

     

    Sudhish Kamath of The Hindu titled it “Hardly Heaven” and wrote, “The fact that this is called Jannat 2 though it has no connection with Jannat except for the leading man and director only shows that the Bhatts are not ashamed to admit that they keep making the same film again and again (with Murder 2 or Raaz 3 coming up). Liked Murder? Then you’ll probably watch Murder 2.  Liked Jannat? Okay, here’s more of the same thing. The Bhatts have perfected this mass production with blatant disregard for originality or art by ripping off entire movies (like Murder 2 from The Chaser) or key moments here in Jannat 2 (from The Departed).”

     

    Raja Sen of rediff.com was left cold too. He gave it one star and cribbed, “A lot would have been forgiven – as it often is with these producers – if the film had either a meatier plot or a more gripping narrative, but this one’s just tiresome as the obvious story drags on. A couple of chase sequences, particularly one through the arteries of a Dargah, are slickly shot, but even these lose their charm as they get needlessly long-winded. And finally, telling a bad actress she looks like Angelina Jolie is just cruel – to both her and to the audience forced to sit there while she tries to smile coyly through a silly pout.”

     

    Rajeev Masand was kinder with 2.5 stars. “Jannat 2 isn’t all bad; in fact there are portions that are eminently watchable. Hashmi and Hooda play off nicely against each other, and their scenes together are particularly strong, occasionally laced with humour. The film also has at least two thrilling foot chase scenes, including one in the first half between two sets of cops and criminals that’s almost comical. The second chase, filmed in the crowded lanes of a dargah has an urgent breathless feel to it. If the film suffers, it’s because the material’s too slim. There just isn’t very much here apart from the obvious shades of The Departed, and some over-familiar scenarios of inter-gang rivalry. The film fully exploits its ‘Adult’ certification, peppering every scene with colourful Hindi cusswords, but after a while the graphic expletives seem excessive.”

     

    Anupama Chopra gave it 2.5 too, but was not too impressed. “Logic isn’t a priority here. Deshmukh is creating an old-school Bollywood film with high drama, punchy dialogue, thunderous background music and villains who glare and maim with aplomb. Some sequences are nicely done, including a chase sequence in a dargah. Emraan Hashmi and Randeep Hooda are also extremely watchable. But there are no surprises here and by the second half, Jannat 2 starts to feel like an endurance test with your head being bludgeoned by the violence and incessant Hindi swear words.”

     

    DNA’s Aakanksha Naval-Shetye & Chaya Unnikrishnan thought it worth 3 stars. “The action chase sequences in the dargah and the climax have been brilliantly executed and are worth a mention. Also unlike most films, the second half is actually better than the first. Kunal shows his tight grip on the film throughout and doesn’t let the film get neither preachy nor light-hearted, balancing finely between the serious nature of the topic and entertainment. The music is in tandem with the film. Emraan’s chemistry with his leading ladies has always been the talking point in all his films. But in this one, it’s clearly his chemistry with Randeep that steals the limelight and it’s this ‘jugalbandi’ between the cop and the criminal that makes the film worth a one time watch for sure.”

     

    Taran Adarsh of bollywoodhungama.com was one of the small 4 star clan. “Jannat 2 is a compelling account of a conflicted man who ultimately faces the effects of his deeds. The movie advocates that firearms and cartridges are the actual perpetrators accountable for the fatalities and killings of blameless people. Jannat 2 is ingeniously fashioned and skillfully filmed, while the characters are pertinent and compelling. On the whole, Jannat 2 is an engaging film with tremendous appeal for the masses. An absorbing story, a swift and coherent narrative, exemplary direction, fantastic action, soothing music and stellar performances summarize the highlights of this triumphant franchise.”

     

    Shubhra Gupta of The Indian Express isn’t half as gushy. “Don’t be fooled. This is not a sequel to ‘Jannat’, in which match-fixing shenanigans in high profile cricket matches gave Emran Hashmi and Kunal Deshmukh a fertile hunting ground, and us a watchable film. ‘Jannat 2’ is, for the most part, a badly-done, badly-acted enterprise, lifted only a notch by a couple of performances.”

     

  • Every week, Deepa Gahlot casts a critical eye over media reviews of Bollywood releases… in Reviewing the Reviews.

    Reviewing the Reviews: Vicky Donor

    Vicky Donor

     

    Starring: Ayushmann Khurrana, Yami Gautam, Annu Kapoor

     

    Directed by: Shoojit Sircar

     

    Produced by: John Abraham

     

    Written by: Juhi Chaturvedi

     

    Critics are often so happy to report the release of an entertaining film that easy rah-rahs follow.  Vicky Donor is one such film—funny, with quirky characters, smart dialogue, and such a sense of joie de vivre, that hardly anyone was even willing to look at the improbable side of it– that sperm donation can hardly be a career for healthy young men with no other skills.  And nobody, but nobody can make a fortune out of it.  Plus there are moral and emotional angles to it that the film doesn’t even touch upon.

     

    Still it can’t be denied that the film is entertaining, and deserves the 3 and above stars that it got from all reviewers.

     

    Anupama Chopra of Hindustan Times gave it 3.5 and commented: “Vicky Donor is one of those rare Hindi films that work purely on the strength of writing and performances. There are no crutches here of stars, sets, styling or foreign locations. But director Shoojit Sircar and writer Juhi Chaturvedi create a heart-felt, keenly observed comic-drama. Sadly, Vicky Donor derails in the second half – the climax is flat-out foolish – but until then, it’s great fun.”

     

    Aakanksha Naval-Shetye & Chaya Unnikrishnan writing in DNA, felt: “Sure the film is not without it’s flaws. There are parts when the editing could’ve been tighter and the climax does seem a tad bit far fetched too, but in the bigger picture, these are minor chips that one can overlook in favour of the entertainment the film otherwise provides. Overall, it’s absolutely worth your money, so go for it!”

     

    Ritu V Singh of IBN Live writes: “Shoojit Sircar proves himself as a director with ‘Vicky Donor’. The film which starts with ‘Sperm bhi koi donate karne ki chiz hai’, ends with a positive message without too much of preaching. Good effort by producer John Abraham who also turned an item boy for the film. It seems, John has worked hard on his dancing skills. Overall, ‘Vicky Donor’ is a lighthearted fun film, which meets expectations. It definitely deserves a watch.”

     

    Kunal Guha of yahoo movies gave it a rare 4-star rave: “Movies that try to cleanse socially disreputable professions tend to get preachy and subsequently boring. But donating one’s seed to enable the seedless garden a happy family is a cause that cannot be covered in a classroom. So director Shoojit Sircar takes us to downtown old Delhi where we breeze through this hilarious adventure that ends in just 122 minutes, leaving you craving for more. While the very mention of sperm donation makes many cringe, this film manages to make the noble deed seem respectable without  compromising on the hilarity that one associates with the process of donation.”

     

    Sukanya Varma of rediff.com, writes: “Often, sex and everything it entails is a matter of prudence, provocation or parody. On a few occasions, however, it’s treated as a perfectly healthy science with its share of hiccups and humour. Like Shoojit Sircar’s latest film, Vicky Donor. As its cheeky title suggests, the part rom, part com dwells on how there’s no need to get all queasy over a little round thing with a tail just because it’s outsourced without really dwelling too much on the sensitive nature of infertility.”

     

    Madhureeta Mukherjee of the Times Of India, gave it  3.5 stars, which seems less for the paper that is usually generous: “Director Shoojit Sircar is back with a bold, first-of-its-kind concept that’s taboo. He makes this sperm of an idea swim all the way. He intelligently uses comedy to break mindsets, without embarrassing moments.”

     

    Komal Nahata looking at it from a trade point of view and a little cautious with praise was still 3 star optimistic: “What does not work, to a certain extent, is the latter part of the second half, which starts to play out like a regular love drama. Ashima’s estrangement, Vicky’s despair and the ‘happy ending’ climax are just not predictable but also boring to a certain extent. The crucial scene in which Ashima questions Vicky as to why he has not undergone tests to clear the fact that is he not infertile, stands out like a sore thumb. The drama lacks scenes that might bring tears to the viewer’s eyes. Besides, Vicky’s character endears himself to the audience but they do not necessarily root for him. The orthodox among the audiences will also enjoy the film to an extent, but they might not like the basic plot, which deals with a social taboo.”

     

    Shubhra Gupta of the Indian Express, always a votary of the offbeat writes: “Sircar’s film, a morality tale wrapped up as a fun bon-bon, delivers enough sparkles to make us overlook the sagging bits. And that’s got to do with the perky writing, which leads to fresh characters who speak as they ought to, in flavourful, authentic settings.” From all accounts, the film is a safe bet at the box office. John Abraham can justifiably be proud of backing a dark horse in Shoojit Sircar.

     

  • Every week, Deepa Gahlot casts a critical eye over media reviews of Bollywood releases… in Reviewing the Reviews.

    Reviewing the Reviews: Agent Vinod

    Agent Vinod

    Key Cast: Saif Ali Khan, Kareena Kapoor, Ravi Kishan, Adil Hussain, Ram Kapoor and Prem Chopra, Special Appearance – Gulshan Grover

    Directed By: Sriram Raghavan

    Produced By: Saif Ali Khan & Dinesh Vijan

     

    Of late, it has been seen that more often than not critics are united in their praise or pan of a film. It used to be rare to get such a consensus but Agent Vinod has done it again. Except for one 4 star and one 4, the highest rating the film has received is 2.5.

     

    Opinion of reviewers as well as the public match in that the film’s plot does not match its high production values. Sriram Raghavan had acquired a kind of following after Ek Haseena Thi and Johnny Gaddar, which is why expectations from the film were high. The jokes are already out, a few of them calling it ‘Travel Agent Vinod’ taking potshots at the fact that it was shot on several foreign locations.

     

    Hindustan Times’s Anupama Chopra gave it 2.5 stars and wrote, “Agent Vinod is also attempting to be too many things – a slick thriller to match Hollywood but also a cheeky homage to cheesy Bollywood movies. So the film has gloss and fast-paced action but the villains are a throwback to the 1980s – after all, how seriously can you take Gulshan Grover in a white suit or Prem Chopra with a ponytail or Shahbaz Khan with one glass eye? The result is that Agent Vinod never becomes more than the sum of its parts and even though it picks up speed in the second half, it leaves you both exhausted and unsatisfied. But I enjoyed the character of Agent Vinod. If he does get a sequel, I hope he has a better narrative to romp in.”

     

    Akanksha Naval Shetye’s DNA review, one of the few 3 stars goes, “On the downside, what doesn’t work is the weak plot and it is that weak chink in the armour that fails to hold all the strong elements together that could make it a riveting watch. The script should’ve been crisper, to do justice to its ambitious, high production value. With predictable twists and forced uncomplicated sub-plots and not so required elements and characters, you know it’s time to send logic out early on and you see yourself lose interest at some points. The stereotypical characters fail to make it interesting too.”

     

    Raja Sen writing in rediff.com was left cold too and went with 2.5. “The essential problem lies in the characterisation of Saif Ali Khan’s titular protagonist, an unconvincing secret agent suffering from mood swings, saucy and wink-filled in one shot, dour and stony in the next. He’s both nonsense and no-nonsense, a flawless leading man morally incapable of doing wrong and sartorially incapable of a hair out of place. So cool for school is he, for example, that even when drugged and being slapped around with his head shoved in a pool, his white shirt stays firmly tucked into his trousers. So much of the film is sadly compromised by making the leads look good – but perhaps that’s the price we pay for actor-producers.”

     

    Writing in Mid-day, Shaheen Parkar sticks with 2.5 too. “Though there is an earnest attempt to make a thriller considering that the director (Sriram Raghavan) is known for this genre of films -Ek Hasina Thi and Johnny Gaddar — this time the makers have tried to make a masala thriller stirring in too many ingredients making it difficult to digest. Its long running time (over two and a half hours) proves tedious for the viewer. Instead of incorporating item numbers, there should have been more focus only on the agent’s mission. Also, the plot criss-crosses from Afghanistan to Morocco to Russia and even Somalia, but just everyone either knows Hindi or understands it. If only the locals in the various destinations of Agent Vinod spoke in the local languages (with subtitles) would have lend more credence to the plot. The Agent’s every move is explained leaving little suspense for the viewer, as by then you know the end.”

     

    Sonia Chopra of sify.com also gave it 2.5. “A story traversing multiple locations can be fun, if it can avoid getting convoluted. But this film overstays its invite. All spy thrillers find their inspiration in the James Bond series. Most recent Bond films have had less plot; more style. But they get away with it, because the brand is so established. But an Agent Vinod is a rookie in that respect and needs solid support.”

     

    Rajeev Masand of ibnlive, who is usually kind, gave Agent Vinod 2 stars. “For a large portion of Agent Vinod, you don’t know where things are going… and then it all stretches on so needlessly that you stop caring. Given that this is a film that sees itself as a desi-style Bond, it has glaring loopholes that are embarrassing. Like a tacky scene in which Vinod spots a familiar scorpion tattoo on a doctor’s wrist that helps him deduce that he’s actually an assassin. Or the ridiculous pre-climax portion in which a grievously injured character is gasping out a password to our hero, as he frantically tries to disarm a bomb while flying a helicopter.”

     

    Shubhra Gupta of the Indian Express also went with 2, writing, “There’s nothing to warn us that we are in for strictly bits-and-pieces of fun. But that is the film’s trajectory, split between speeding and slowing down to re-create familiar scenes. This results in a repetitive loop : fast-paced Bond-style bang-bangs interspersed with two good-looking spies criss-crossing each other, as corpses pile up. It doesn’t help that the plot is overly busy, scurrying from one point to another, and going on and on, much after the story is over. Even the camp is not high enough, and some of the humour is clunky.”

     

    Mumbai Mirror’s Karan Anshuman matched the majority with a 2.5. “In between the mayhem you’ve bomb-carrying helicopters, the Trans-Siberian Express, Russian mafia, Indian industrialists, Afghan warlords, gay flight pursers, Moroccan camels, Pakistani generals … and one man to sort it all out. Agent Vinod is the kind of film with a lot of breadth, but very little depth. The sentimental bits especially, islands on their own, just don’t cut it.”

     

    The Times of India, always rates a film higher than the rest and very rarely goes below 3 stars, which is hardly a compliment to a film. Madhureeta Mukherjee writes, “Director Sriram Raghavan, who’s made fine mind-twisters (Ek Haseena Thi, Johnny Gaddaar), attempts a spy-thriller this time. His obsession for retro reflects here again, whether it’s casting Prem Chopra and Gulshan Grover, references to classics, or infusing soundtracks from the bygone era. Aaah! Nostalgia! Agent Vinod is slick and visually stylized, but loses steam at times. The movie is a tad long and often creatively compromised – for style over substance. With well-designed stunts and car chases, there are very few high points or shock value. One being the background score (Daniel B George) that changes beautifully with the locations. Otherwise, Agent Vinod is cool. But not steamy enough to win a license to thrill.”

     

    Bollywoodhungama.com’s high 4-star rating by Taran Adarsh goes with the comment, “A hi-octane espionage thriller with a heart. It is not just brawny and dynamic, but witty and crazy too. Ultra slick and stylish, this desi Bond movie adheres to the formula and succeeds in meeting the humungous expectations.”

     

    The lowest 1-star rating is by yahoo’s Kunal Guha, who quips, “The best way to defuse a bum is through butt crunches. Unless one is referring to the Hinglisized word for a bomb. And the much-awaited dhamaka that this thriller hoped to detonate at the box office might just be defused once you read this review. Despite miraculous leaps in production values, spy thrillers in Bollywood end up looking like Chinese equivalents of western products. And here, the characters are even stereotyped to the extent of detectives wearing trench coats and moles being obvious, shifty-eyed and literally uncomfortable in their own skin. So let’s just say foreign locales, weapons to annihilate the world, designer suits and not-so-excruciating interrogations don’t cumulatively justify Agent Vinod as a thrilling movie-watching experience.”

     

  • Every week, Deepa Gahlot casts a critical eye over media reviews of Bollywood releases… in Reviewing the Reviews

    Reviewing the Reviews: Housefull 2

    Housefull 2

     

    Key Cast: Akshay Kumar, John Abraham, Riteish Deshmukh, Shreyas Talpade, Asin, Jacqueline Fernandez, Zarine Khan, Shahzan Padamsee, Rishi Kapoor, Randhir Kapoor, Mithun Chakraborty, Boman Irani

     

    Directed By: Sajid Khan

     

    Written By: Sajid Nadiadwala

     

    Produced By: Sajid Nadiadwala

     

    Sajid Khan is one of those filmmakers who revels in making crude comedies that work with a section of the masses and that encourages him to make more.

     

    Of course, films like Housefull 2 are critic proof and everybody who writes about it acknowledges it. The film has got 1 to 2 star ratings and teeth-gnashing rants from all except the trade papers and a weird 4 stars from the Times of India, which unfortunately serious cinema fans don’t take seriously any more. Four stars for this film, then what would they do when faced with a real masterpiece?

     

    Kunal Guha of yahoomovies gives it 1 and writes, “People getting kicked in the behind and falling in a puddle of embarrassment. Laughter track? Yes, please. Anyway, the film is about four friends, three of whom are pretending to be the fourth person- Jolly, who is the son of UK-based millionaire, JD. Why? Because it’s the only way to charm any prospective father-in-law. And just for fun, the two sets of fathers of the bride are arch enemies. How does that alter the plot? It doesn’t but allows for bitter exchanges filled with pokey insults and ridiculing confrontations. So much for your hard-earned multiplex ticket.”

     

    Sudhish Kamath of The HIndu titles his piece Dumb and Dumber and says. “The plot does not matter, you know what you are going to see, you are familiar with the territory because well, the stars and the action is just a rehash of the previous part that was successful and the plot and the background is just an excuse to unleash that action you have come to watch.”

     

    Rajeev Masand –1-star– says that it is for four-year-olds. Surely not! Kids do have better taste and thins one got a UA certificate. “Housefull 2, directed by Sajid Khan, is ‘bigger’ than the last film, but not necessarily better. To be fair, you can’t use words like ‘better’ or ‘funnier’ to compare these films; and asking me which one I preferred out of Housefull and Housefull 2 is like asking me what I’d rather have between a migraine and a hernia. Thank you, but I’ll pass. ” Ouch!

     

    Raja Sen of rediff. com calls it Shamefully Bad, slams down 1 star and writes, “Look, I have nothing against stupid comedies. The keyword, however, for Khan’s films is that he stresses the stupid part much too much, and all at the expense of the laughs. Even a basic, childishly simple gag – where a compulsive thief walks out of a sauna and pinches a character’s towel – is turned flat by Khan’s perplexing decision to equip that character, and only that character, with a towel for his head, which basically means he can wrap it around his privates and saunter out instead of being genuinely starkers and embarrassed. And so we have Chunky Pandey hiding behind a towel – a towel he’s holding in his bloody hands – and crying about how he wished he had a towel. Come on, Sajid, at least try to see the joke through, foolish as it is.”

     

    Anupama Chopra of Hindustan TimesT gives it a kindly 2 and writes, “If you are wondering about the quality of humour, here are some sample lines: At one point, a character says, “I got your virgin, I mean version” and “Langoors have my angoors.” Another one remarks, “You have piles in your brain.” One sequence has Riteish Deshmukh being bit on the rear end by an angry crocodile while Shreyas Talpade’s crotch is sucked by a python. In another, item-queen Malaika Arora Khan serenades Chakraborty and Boman Irani. And just when you think you’ve hit rock bottom, Khan springs a level lower. My vote for the grossest visual is Chakraborty romancing a dwarf maid.”

     

    Shubhra Gupta of The Indian Express gives it 1.5 and comemmts, “Several times in Housefull 2, random characters laugh at their own jokes and sing out: sense of huuuuumour. It pretty much says everything about the film, a sequel to the film of the same name which came out two years ago. You have to be able to find the doings of this vast cast amusing. And if you don’t, you have to be able to summon your funny bone to keep sitting, while pondering the cosmic corniness of the world according to Sajid Khan and other such weighty matters.”

     

    It’s all more in the same vein. The film makes money, Sajid Khan sticks his tongue out and goes from gross to grosser.

     

  • Every week, Deepa Gahlot casts a critical eye over media reviews of Bollywood releases… in Reviewing the Reviews.

    Reviewing the Reviews: Kahaani

    Kahaani

    Key Cast: Vidya Balan, Parambrata Chattopadhyay, Nawazuddin Siddiqui

    Directed By: Sujoy Ghosh

    Written By: Sujoy Ghosh, Advaita Kala

    Produced By: Kushal Kantilal Gada, Sujoy Ghosh

     

    Sometimes miracles are known to happen. Everything happened just right for Sujoy Ghosh’s Kahaani. After the success of The Dirty Picture, Vidya Balan was on a high. A day before the film was to release, she won a national award. This just compounded the high-powered promotion she did for the film, going to the extent of attending every media event with that unflattering ‘pregnant’ tummy – her look in the film.

     

    Critics and audiences were already favourably disposed towards the film, and though everyone pointed out the loopholes in the script, no critic was curmudgeonly enough to give it less than 3.5 stars.

     

    Gaurav Malani of Indiatimes.com gave it 4 stars and raved, “Kahaani rightly lives up to its name and reinstates the fact that the core criterion for a decent film is a strong story. And if that story is in competent hands, you don’t need anything else. No big stars, songs, budget or even a customary male lead. For a (pleasant) change, the script is indeed the hero here!”

     

    Anupama Chopra of Hindustan Times gave it 3.5 and wrote, “Kahaani is a nifty thriller with an enjoyment quotient that is indirectly proportionate to how long you spend thinking about the plot. If you back-track and try to connect all the dots, the implausibility of the story amplifies – there’s even a piecing-together-the-puzzle moment that echoes The Usual Suspects but this riddle isn’t a patch on the intricate web of lies in the Bryan Singer film. However, if you’re willing to think less, there is some fun to be had here.”

     

    Sukanya Verma writing on rediff.com rated it 4 stars. “The concept behind a jigsaw puzzle is most fascinating. Its three-step model involves drawing an intricate picture laden with buried details and fine clues, cutting it into several unrecognizable segments and assembling a jumble that carries a seemingly simple challenge – to fall in place, to make sense. Suspense thrillers are just the same. But very few films belonging to this genre are able to fit the right piece in the right place. And that’s what makes Sujoy Ghosh’s accomplishment in Kahaani worth all the applause that comes its way.”

     

    Rajeev Masand of ibnlive gave it 3.5 and wrote, “As is integral to all good stories, Ghosh creates solid characters. There’s the do-gooder rookie cop Rana, played by Parambrata Chatterjee, who’s constantly by Vidya’s side. Their antagonist comes as the surly Intelligence Bureau officer Khan, played by Nawazuddin Siddiqui, who wants the search abandoned. In Kahaani, there is attention to detail served to even bit characters like an impish errand boy in the guesthouse who becomes friends with Vidya, and a sinister contract killer who bumps off his victims after greeting them cordially.”

     

    Anuj Kumar of The Hindu also gave it 4 stars and offered fulsome praise. “A rare original story from Bollywood that engages both mind and heart, Sujoy Ghosh’s Kahaani lives up to the age-old adage that it’s not about what you say, it’s about how you say. On the surface it is a thriller about a pregnant woman’s search for her missing husband in Kolkata but its core attempts to revitalize a gender which is often clubbed with handicapped and senior citizens in public life. On the surface the four writers (Ghosh, Advaita Kala, Suresh Nair and Nikhil Vyas) plot a puzzle that you desperately want to solve but beneath it is full of moments that humanize a pregnant woman on celluloid.”

     

    Surprisingly, Shubhra Gupta of the Indian Express gave it a relatively miserly 3. “Kahaani gives us not just a woman on the trail of a missing spouse, but a terrorist plot, data-crunching specialists, contract killers, evil moles, salt-of-the-earth guys. And it keeps us guessing, more or less. Which, for a Bollywood thriller, is quite an achievement, even if the terrorist angle turns out to have faintly ludicrous edges. In the first place, Hindi cinema doesn’t really attempt fast-paced thrillers with quite these ingredients, and when it does, they turn out clunky if not plain terrible. If Kahaani had managed to keep the edge of suspense as sharp in the second half, which falls prey to a few improbable plot contrivances and some gratingly explanatory scenes, it would have been very good indeed. But despite the hiccups, it remains engaging.”

     

    Another 4 from DNA and Akanksha Naval Shetye, “There are few filmmakers who can handle the genre, and the deft handling of the twists and turns as well as the flashbacks show Sujoy’s hold over it. The film proves that Jhankaar Beats was no flash in the pan and after the trial and error of his previous two films, he can clearly take a bow for this one. Watch it and you won’t be surprised if you see yourself making a trip to watch it again.”

     

    To top it, audiences have given it thumbs up too. Vidya Balan and Sujoy Ghosh have delivered that rare species – a critically acclaimed box-office hit. The awards will follow too.

     

  • Every week, Deepa Gahlot casts a critical eye over media reviews of Bollywood releases… in Reviewing the Reviews.

    Reviewing the Reviews: Ek Main Aur Ekk Tu

    Ek Main Aur Ekk Tu

    Key Cast: Imran Khan, Kareena Kapoor, Boman Irani, Ratna Pathak Shah

    Directed by: Shakun Batra

    Produced by: Karan Johar, Hiroo Yash Johar, Ronnie Screwvala

    Screenplay by: Ayesha Devitre, Shakun Batra

     

    After the very violent Agneepath two weeks ago, Karan Johar’s production house has produced newbie Shakun Batra’s Ek Main Aur Ekk Tu, what is now known as, a typical Karan Johar film- a big-budget, empty-headed romance shot with lavish production values on a glamorous foreign location Still, some critics have found merit in this otherwise formulaic rom-com, because of an atypical ending.

     

    On the whole the film got positive reviews with 3 stars, with a few 4 and 2.5s thrown in for variety. The public inIndiawas, going by initial reports, not as kind, but the film got a better reception abroad, according to trade reports.

     

    Avijit Ghosh of The Times of India kept on with the 4-star tradition. “With only the faintest trace of theHollywoodhit, What Happens in Vegas (2008), Ek Main Aur Ekk Tu shows what first-rate direction and a cute but brave script can do to the done-to-death story of opposites getting attracted to each other. EMAET has heart, charm and an enviable lightness of being. And it certainly helps that the lead players are in fine form. Like quality wine, Kareena seems to improve with every passing year though you find shades of Geet (Jab We Met) in her part. And Imran brings just that right amount of balance to the difficult part of an uptight, gawky individual who evolves with every passing day. The movie is essentially his journey from boy to man. With its neon lights and flash,Las Vegastoo is an important character adding to the film’s mood and melody.”

     

    Aniruddha Guha of DNA also gave it a 4 star rave. “Director Shakun Batra shows rare deftness for a first-time filmmaker in Ek Main Aur Ekk Tu (EMAET). It is full of honest, warm moments that – to their credit – work without the manipulation most directors resort to in films belonging to this genre. Instead, Batra relies on sharp dialogue, and some well-etched out characters. I’d go a step further and say that the film is the best you would have seen recently in the two genres it melds together – a romantic comedy and a coming-of-age-drama, something Wake Up Sid just about fell short of.”

     

    Shubhra Gupta of The Indian Express gave it 2.5 and was left a bit cold. “Ek Main aur Ekk Tu is a half and half: it gets where it needs to with flair, but not enough surprises. The film passes by, pleasantly enough, all its expected roadsigns, providing a smile and an occasional chuckle (and one of the most rousing songs-and-dances I’ve seen in a while) but making you wish for more newness, both in its characters and in the way it wends its way onward.”

     

    Sukanya Varma of rediff.com went with 3 stars too. “EMAET is neither on the epic side like Dharma Productions’ great, grand ancestors nor weighed down by an overload of pop culture references of those that define the genre. Instead the confection’s appeal lies in its underplayed wit, quirky within plausibility protagonists and a refreshing disregard for conventional conclusions. Almost like a big studio flick with an indie mindset. Almost.”

     

    Taran Adarsh also gave it 3 and commented: “For those who swear by sentimental movies and are die-hard fans of rom-coms, who fervently wish Valentine’s Day is prolonged eternally, Ek Main Aur Ekk Tu is akin to an answer to this yearning. Rom-coms relaxing in the splendour of harmonious compositions, a creative and innovative take on present-day romance, pulsating images and timed during the Valentine week… aah, you can’t ask for more!”

     

    Rajeev Masand with 3 stars found it light and breezy. “It’s fairly typical stuff, and first-timer Shakun Batra adds all the usual ingredients. If you’ve seen even three decent rom-coms, you know where this is headed. Yet these characters feel real, and they grow on you gradually despite their standard-issue problems – he has controlling parents, she only lives for the moment. But it’s the curveball that the writers throw at you in the end that displays a rare maturity about relationships that films in this genre seldom possess.”

     

    Komal Nahta of Film Information and koimoi.com gave it three stars and pinned the problem down from the trade point of view. “Ayesha Devitre and Shakun Batra’s story is quite new for the Indian audience because here, a girl and a boy get married and then come close to each other during the period needed to end the marriage. Their screenplay is designed to appeal mainly to the youngsters in the cities. In other words, the drama, like the thought, is very urbane and while it will be enjoyed by the multiplex and city audiences, it won’t quite be lapped up or, in some cases, even understood too well by the audience in the smaller centres and of the single-screens.”

     

  • Every week, Deepa Gahlot casts a critical eye over media reviews of Bollywood releases… in Reviewing the Reviews.

    Reviewing the Reviews: Ekk Deewana Tha

    Ekk Deewana Tha

     

    Key Cast: Prateik Babbar, Amy Jackson, Manu Rishi

    Directed by: Gautham Menon

    Produced by: Gautham Menon, Reshma Ghatala, Venkat Somasundaram

    Screenplay by: Javed Akhtar

     

    Gautam Menon’s Tamil and Telugu hit is remade in Hindi and gives the critics something to crack their whips. The Prateik-Amy Jackson starrer got several 1 star ratings, some grudging 2 stars, a minus 1 and the usual Times of India 3, which doesn’t mean anything. The film spells D for Disaster.

     

    Kunal Guna of Yahoo and the Minus 1 rating writes: “Pain and pleasure have the same facial expression. This is why you will share the same face with the lead cast of Ekk Deewana Tha through the entire runtime. Love stories that curdle, portray societal and familial tribulations. But here, there is a far graver issue beyond the usual jaat-paat, rich-poor etc: The lead duo can’t act to saveTibet. And as dismissive as it may sound, in the first paragraph of this review; it is, in fact, the iceberg that makes this painful love story crash as we endure the burn.”

     

    Preeti Arora of rediff.com is unimpressed too. “While there are directors who dig relentlessly for a new theme around which a rom-com can be built, there are others such as Gautham Menon who believe old clichés are the best plot points for a love story. For starters, the girl is a year older to the boy. Then they come from different religions. The boy is a passionate movie buff, hopes to make a career in films. The girl’s family doesn’t even watch films. The girl’s brother is a toughie who needs an excuse to start a fight. But there is something called love at first sight. You get the drift.”

     

    Mayank Shekhar of Hindustan Times, gives it 1 star too, and rightly wonders what the story really is about. “ The boy, an obsessive, relentless roadside Romeo, having chased the girl from the streets of Mumbai to Mallu-land, finally  holds her, jolts her up, pops the winning question: “Kamaal ki chemistry hai hamare beech mein (there’s huge chemistry between us). Can’t you see it?” No, she says. He obviously can. That’s a matter between them. Audiences couldn’t care less. We’re beyond midway through the movie: chuck chemistry, all you’re wondering is what the hell’s the story.”

     

    Rajeev Masand stretches it to two stars and writes, “Charming in a goofy sort of way, Prateik Babbar makes the film’s first thirty minutes or so watchable even though very little happens here. His awkward body language and his nervous tics are refreshing, especially as his character, Sachin, skulks around spying on Jessie, and stalks her even. The same, unfortunately, can’t be said for the film’s pretty but vapid leading lady, whose lines appear to have been dubbed by someone much older than herself. Surprisingly, the actress is poorly made-up, and for much of the film sports an obviously fake tan. The couple’s chemistry is lukewarm, and save for a few inspired moments their banter is grating.”

     

    Shubhra Gupta of Indian Express gives it a surprising 2 – maybe for the memory of Smita Patil. “The old North Indian Hindu boy versus the South Indian Christian girl pole vault makes the movie feel mothballed. Whatever happened to the equally hoary Bollywood tradition of rebellion and elopement? Twenty five years back, this was a believable divide, with snarling patriarchs and a disapproving ‘samaaj’ guarding the posts. The movies made much of it, getting their lovers to leap off cliffs when there was no other way out. But to do this now?”

     

    The usually generous Taran Adarsh of bollywoodhungama.com goes with 2 stars as well. “What baffles the viewer is the character of Jessie. While the guy is crazily in love with her, the girl, in contrast, seems downright confused about her feelings for the guy. She appears indecisive about what she really yearns for and this aspect, to put it bluntly, sends out puzzling signals not only to the lover boy, but to the by-now-exasperated viewer as well. The screenplay totters and flounders the moment Jessie decides to part ways. The justification offered is least persuasive. Since the reason for separation is not forceful enough, it leaves the viewer feeling unsympathetic, detached and disconnected from the goings-on subsequently.”

     

    And finally Avijit Ghosh of the 3 star stamp: “The love story of Sachin and Jessie never becomes your own though the lead pair is okay. Prateik’s voice is evocative; Amy Jackson, a former Miss Liverpool, reeks of an understated sensuality, though strangely, her skin-tone keeps varying with every scene. But together they fail to synergize their performances. Ramesh Sippy’s presence too doesn’t add any sholay to the proceedings. May be the movie needed more spunk in Manu Rishi’s dialogues, to elevate itself. Even AR Rahman’s music wouldn’t figure among his Top 20 films.  Ekk Deewana Tha has its moments but it doesn’t really put you in the mood for love.”

     

  • Every week, Deepa Gahlot casts a critical eye over media reviews of Bollywood releases… in Reviewing the Reviews.

    Reviewing the Reviews: Paan Singh Tomar

    Paan Singh Tomar

    Key Cast: Irrfan Khan, Mahie Gill, Vipin Sharma

    Written And Directed By: Tigmanshu Dhulia

    Produced By: Ronnie Screwvala

     

    Tigmanshu Dhulia’s Paan Singh Tomar is one of those films that challenges the collective might of critics – both professional and the word-of-mouth kind.

     

    The film has been winning raves, and except for skeptical trade journalists, everybody has showered the film with adjectives like “compelling” and “sublime.” The film is also a challenge for those who deride Bollywood cinema; if the so-called lovers of good cinema also don’t support a film like this, then they have no right to crib.

     

    Times of India’s Avijit Ghosh gives it a well-deserved (for once) 3.5 stars, though “enjoyable” is not the word one would uses to describe a somewhat grim biopic. “Sportsmen and outlaws inhabit two different universes. One shines amidst the bright lights of glory, the other haunts the ravines of notoriety. But in director Tigmanshu Dhulia’s biopic, Paan Singh Tomar, the two worlds collide. And the result is a rather exquisite blend of drama, humour and tragedy; altogether eminently enjoyable good cinema.”

     

    Anupama Chopra, talking over the reviews of Hindustan Times, gives it 3 stars but doesn’t seem too impressed. “Despite the rich raw material and quality performances, Paan Singh Tomar doesn’t soar. Stretches of the screenplay are sluggish and strangely inert. More critically, I never got a sense of what Tomar’s conversion from an army man to a murderer did to his psyche. Yes, he resorts to violence only because he is provoked but subsequently, he seems oddly at ease with his criminality. Director Tigmanshu Dhulia establishes a loving relationship between Tomar and his wife, Indra, played by Mahie Gill. But Indra and his two children largely disappear from his life when he becomes an outlaw and we never really see him ache for them.”

     

    Shubhra Gupta of the Indian Express gives it 4. “And what makes this film unforgettable is Irrfan who is, in one word, magnificent. He brings to life both the wordless strivings and joys of an athlete, and the despair of an outlaw, who has nowhere to go, but down. Of a man always, always on the run. Shubha Shetty-Saha of Mid-day liked it too. “Perhaps a tad longer and slower than it should ideally have been, but Paan Singh Tomar is unmissable. In this cricket-obsessed country, many talented men who excelled in other forms of sports have died lonely and penniless. This is Dhulia’s perfect tribute to them and perhaps a wake-up call for all of us. Now that our hockey team is going great guns, this couldn’t have come at a better time.”

     

    Aseem Chhabria writing on rediff.com is also impressed. “The settings, the language, the costumes, the supporting cast all appear authentic. Dhulia takes us on a journey inside a world that few of us know. My own knowledge of the Chambal ravines is by looking out of fast moving trains on journeys from Delhi to Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh. Seeing PST, we come out of the theater learning so much about the real India that exists far away from the unreal world of contrived plots, garish costumes, item numbers and other nonsense most of Bollywood films feed us week after week. Dhulia has one more agenda in making PST. He reminds us — as the statement at the end of the film makes it amply clear — that India has a sad track record when it comes to the treatment of its former athletes and who were real national heroes.”

     

    Sudhish Kamath of The Hindu is all praise for Irrfan Khan. “Biopics ride on the actors portraying the main character, and Irrfan Khan as Paan Singh Tomar makes up for what he lacks in muscle and shape required of an athlete, with rustic charm and sincerity. However, he does shine as the ageing runner and the man pushed against the wall.” Karan Bali of Upperstall.com writes, “Tigmanshu Dhulia’s rousing biopic on one of India’s greatest athletes, also an army man, who turned to the gun against an indifferent and callous system, finally settles down as an extremely watchable film let down by a relatively disappointing second half after a riveting enough first one. Yes, the yet another film falls to the interval syndrome again, which makes Paan Singh Tomar a good film that, however, falls a little short of being a great one.”

     

    Komal Nahata, looking at it from the trade point of view, gives it 1 and writes, “On the whole, Paan Singh Tomar does not have the commercial ingredients to score at the box-office. Had the second half been more weighty, it could have worked reasonably well but with the post-interval portion looking like a routine dacoit drama, that won’t be possible.” Now it’s over to the audience-will they stand by good cinema or let Bollywood potboilers insult their intelligence week after week?

     

  • Every week, Deepa Gahlot casts a critical eye over media reviews of Bollywood releases… in Reviewing the Reviews.

    Deepa Gahlot: Reviewing the Reviews of Agneepath

    Agneepath

     

    Key Cast: Hrithik Roshan, Priyanka Chopra, Sanjay Dutt, Rishi Kapoor & Om Puri

     

    Directed By: Karan Malhotra

     

    Screenplay by: Ila Dutta Bedi & Karan Malhotra, based on Mukul S Anand’s Agneepath

     

    Produced by: Karan Johar

     

    It happens very rarely that critics are mostly in agreement and so is the audience. It was generally agreed that Karan Malhotra’s Agneepath remake, hit the spot, reminding everybody what was appealing about Bollywood formula flicks before filmmakers started trying to crossover. Simple revenge plots kept Bollywood chugging through most of the seventies and eighties, and it does look like moviegoers never forgot the taste of masala.

     

    With the exception of a couple of pans, and a couple of inordinate 4.5 kind of raves, a lot of critics gave Agneepath three star ratings, and everybody raved about Hrithik Roshan, Rishi Kapoor as villain; Sanjay Dutt as the bald-headed baddie got his share of kudos too.

     

    Was the 1990 Agneepath really such a cult film as it is now being made out to be?

     

    Karan Bali of Upperstall.com who obviously kept track writes, “One was surprised when the decision to remake Agneepath was announced. Especially, since though the 1990 version is (now) regarded as some sort of cult film (I wonder why), it is actually little more than a standard revenge story of the hero after his father is killed with several shades of Deewaar and Scarface thrown in already giving it a strong sense of deja vu. And of course there was the whole shoo shaa of Mr Bachchan’s ‘different’ voice (did not work) and his getting the National Award for Best Actor. With due respect to all, Agneepath (to me) has always been a highly overrated film as has been Big B’s performance. Sivakumar can rightly consider himself robbed when the National Awards for the films of 1990 were announced and his absolutely brilliant work in Marupakkam lost out to Agneepath.”

     

    Shubhra Gupta of the Indian Express writes, “This one is more an adaptation than a faithful remake of the 1990 original. Which is a good thing, because with the new characters and plotpoints, and minus some of the old stuff, the 2012 ‘Agneepath’ becomes its own film, which works precisely because it’s both a tribute and a stylish re-invention of the 70’s-spilling-into-the-80s retribution formula.”

     

    Sukanya Varma of rediff.com also concurs, headlining her piece ‘Agneepath less of a remake, more of a tribute. “The name, the man, the voice, the aura bears a lot of weight, the kind that’s impossible to measure. Or live up to. A multitude of films, including Mukul S Anand’s Agneepath, celebrate this indescribable draw he enjoys enhanced through sharply-written scenes and/or technical wizardry. Not everyone has such resonance among the audience. Realising this inadequacy rather humbly, the makers of the new Agneepath take an altogether fresh approach to its 22-year-old source. Remakes, however, are a slippery territory. They invite inevitable comparison and yet aspire for an exclusive identity.”

     

    Mayank Shekhar of The Hindustan Times justifies his 3 stars thus: “An earnest Vijay Dinanath Chauhan delivers poetic justice before a nearly packed hall on the proverbial ‘first day first show’. Audiences at my cinema respond to the cues and lines. The comments passed sometimes distract you from the screen. Everyone guffaws at the same time. This is the kind of genuine theatre experience, now getting rare, which remains most precious in the life of a film-goer. Reason can take over later. I had a ball!”

     

    Komal Nahata of koimoi.com was one of the ‘ravers’. “Director Karan Malhotra has handled the revenge drama with authority and he makes a fantastic first impression in his debut directorial venture. He is in total command of the subject and his cast and not only extracts great work from out of the actors but also keeps the audience engaged in the drama which unfolds on the screen. The man knows his art and craft and also seems to understand the commercial side of filmmaking. He is producer Karan Johar’s New Year gift to the industry just as this film is Johar’s Republic Day gift to the audience.”

     

    So was Taran Adarsh of Bollywoodhungama.com: “On the whole, Agneepath is a fitting tribute to the masterwork. The movie has all the potential to scale dizzy heights of victory and catapult Hrithik Roshan as the newest member of the Rs100 crore club, besides providing the Hindi film industry with the first giant blockbuster of 2012. A definite winner!

     

    Rajeev Masand of IBNlive found it well made but too long. “Debutant director Karan Malhotra’s re-telling of Mukul Anand’s 1990 vendetta movie ‘Agneepath’ is a glossy, well-acted production. Compared to recent ‘mass entertainers’ that tend to lazily sacrifice story and plot for retro-style action and star appeal, this remake rolls along like a well-oiled machine. And yet, after watching three hours of stabbing, gunfire, blasts, and hand-to-hand fighting, you realize the film is somewhat crippled by its over-indulgent length.”

     

    Sanjukta Sharma of Livemint was, however, left cold. “The film is made on a wide, impressive scale, and the cinematography by Kiran Deohans and Ravi K. Chandran makes it visually a celebration of colour and chaos. Everything about this Agneepath is over-emphasized. And at a running time of 3 hours, it is a test of your patience.”

     

    And Mihir Fadnavis of Mumbaiboss rants: “Karan Malhotra’s debut sits in a patch somewhere between a shameless cash grab and a callow vanity project. What is certain though, is that the film is compulsively horrible and full of unintentionally hilarious OTT drama. It’s been over 20 years since Big B’s Agneepath released, but there is not a shred of freshness to be found in the new version. The movie leaves absolutely nothing whatsoever for the viewer to digest – Mr Johar and Co just offer a frozen cadaver of Bollywood tripe and expect it to be reheated by paying audiences who can find nothing else in their fridges to snack on. It’s hard to say what’s worse, the film’s utter lack of entertainment value or the unabashed condescension towards its viewers.”

     

  • Every week, Deepa Gahlot casts a critical eye over media reviews of Bollywood releases… in Reviewing the Reviews.

    Reviewing the Reviews: Chaalis Chauraasi

    Chaalis Chauraasi

    Key Cast: Naseeruddin Shah, Atul Kulkarni, Kay Kay Menon, Ravi Kissen, Shweta Bhardwaj

    Directed By: Hriday Shetty

    Written By: Yash-Vinay

    Produced By: Anuya Mhaiskar, Sachin Awasthee, Uday Shetty

     

    This Hriday Shetty film got a decent amount of pre-release publicity because of the cast of good actors – not stars, but those who can be relied on for acting well.

     

    The cast is also probably why the film got mostly 2-2.5 star ratings, but also a 1/2 star by Komal Nahata and Nikhat Kazmi’s usual, over-generous 3.5.

     

    Most critics liked the performances, agreed that the script did not do justice to the actors. The film is hardly likely to be a big hit, it’s not one of those ‘sleepers’ in spite of three item numbers!

     

    Soumyadipta Banerjee of DNA gives it 2.5 and writes, “The best part of the film is its star cast. When you have powerful, experienced and talented actors like Naseeruddin Shah, Kay Kay Menon, Atul Kulkarni and Ravi Kissen in the star cast, they are bound to make good for all the lapses in the script. That is exactly what has happened here. All the above three (Zakir Hussain has also received a lot of praise lately) have formed an entertaining threesome who keep you engaged throughout the film.”

     

    Shubhra Gupta disagrees and gives it a low 1 star: “At one point in this film, we see lots of thrusting groins. Ravi Kishan has the most flexible one, beating all the female dancers in the row. Atul Kulkarni and Kay Kay keep up gamely. And then comes Chaalis Chaurasi’s ace tush-shaker, Naseer himself. He does this not once, but twice. The naach-gaana featuring the Shah comes and goes, and you wait for the movie. All in vain, because Chaalis Chaurasi is like an empty vessel, which rattles around noisily to no effect.”

     

    Gaurav Malani of Indiatime.com goes with the majority average rating and writes, “It would really take some effort to mess up a film starring four supremely talented actors in lead roles. An uninspiring script and a dreary director work overtime to achieve such lackluster results. At the outset, Chaalis Chauraasi looks promising with its atypical cast and chronicle. But the one-dimensional plot fails to tap the immense potential of both.”

     

    Sanjukta Sharma of Livemint gives a 2 but has a few kind words: “The screenplay is not flawless, and the story has some banal excesses. The editing is sloppy in parts, and the tacky flourishes in the execution ensure that it looks like a small film in every sense. It is meant to be a potboiler, but with a humour that never borders on the tasteless; the mindlessness in Chaalis Chauraasi has some fun to it.”

     

    Preeti Arora of rediff.com also gives it 2, but is not so kind: “The film which starts out as a comic caper straddles genres and turns into a display of blood and gore. Aiming at an over-the-top climax, the director only succeeds in prolonging the film with amateurish, badly executed action.”

     

    Komal Nahata hated it: “Yash-Vinay’s subject sustains the audience’s interest in bits and parts only. Although the film is designed as a crime comedy, the humour does not evoke laughter at too many places. Had the comedy been extraordinary and hugely entertaining, even the script may have worked but given that the humour is not very funny, the film remains ordinary fare. The second half and especially the action and crime portions are so long-drawn-out that they give the audience too much time to think – and that is another sore point.”

     

    Surprisingly Mayank Shekhar of Hindustan Times gave 3 stars and wrote, “Here’s the deal then. The drama is set in stretched real time. The gang has a common mission, a heist that may or may not go wrong. Each character in the group is loony in his own unique way. Their names are odder still. Blood-fest unnerves no one. The narrative isn’t entirely linear. Style determines the set-up. This motif has generated a gazillion crime capers/thrillers in the past. Quentin Tarantino gave it the modicum of high cool in the ’90s.”… which doesn’t explain anything.

     

  • Every week, Deepa Gahlot casts a critical eye over media reviews of Bollywood releases… in Reviewing the Reviews.

    Reviewing the Reviews: Players

    Players

    Key Cast: Abhishek Bachchan, Sonam Kapoor, Bobby Deol, Neil Nitin Mukesh and Bipasha Basu

    Directed By: Directed by: Abbas Mustan

    Screenplay by: Rohit Jugraj, Sudip Sharma

    Produced by: Studio 18

    Doesn’ t happen too often that critics are unanimous in their panning of one film. This feat was achieved by Abbas-Mustan’s Players.

     

    It was laughed at for uinintentiona1 stupidity, made worse by the fact that is was an official remake of The Italian Job, which is classic heist thriller made in 1969 and 2003, of which the director duo have made a right roya mess. Another bummer for Bachchan Jr. 0ne and a half to two stars across the board, except for the over generous Nikhat Kazmi of the T0I, who gave it 3.5.

     

    Here s a selection of extracts:

    Sukanya Varma, of rediff.com found it lack’ustre and unimaginative: The real problem with this official remake of The Italian Job is that instead of reproducing a perfectly nuanced screenplay as it is, it tries to act too smart, with excessive elements and needless tampering, in the process making a complete fool of itself. Why can’t you stick to the plan, Bollywood? All this time we witness our filmmakers rip-off Hollywood scene-by-scene but the minute they acquire rights, they are hit by an army of brainwaves or an insuppressible need to improvise (read flounder).

     

    Gaurav Malani, IndiaTimes Movies:After making a career out of surreptitiously remaking foreign films forever, director-duo Abbas Mustan have proved their recycling capabilities credibly enough to win the opportunity of directing an ‘official’ remake of a Hollywood flick. They have stars, budget, virgin locations and also a readymade film (rather two of them) for reference. But that know-all impudence of the directors to Indianize The Italian Job is like having a pizza with Punjabi tadka topping.

     

    Aniruddha Guha in DNA: It takes a lot to rip off a film and make it palatable for Indian audiences, and the Men In White, Abbas bhai & Mustan bhai, have done that all their lives. But it must really take a hell lot to buy the official rights of a film, have the license to remake the film scene-by-scene and then say, “You know what, we have the rights to screw with it, so let’s do it.”

     

    Rajeev Masand, IBN 1ive: Abbas-Mustan, who’ve successfully delivered some engaging thrillers over the years, know a thing or two about pace. ‘Players’ is packed with relentless car chases and plot twists, and the directors throw in their usual stock of skimpily dressed babes and seductive item songs. What they grapple with, unfortunately, are the little details….What fails the film after all, is the over-enthusiasm of its makers, who overstay your hospitality by dragging the film on for an unforgivable 2 hours and 45 minutes. Also, harsh as this may sound, the film suffers considerably on account of its dull cast.

     

    Mayank Shekhar, HT: With movies per se the scene gets quite muddled up and murky. Almost always. Nothing could’ve prepared you for the moronic mayhem that follows here either. Computer hacker villain (Neil Nitin Mukesh) is now the new-age Shakaal with voice-reognition software across his deadly mansion, “Open the door, baby.” Door opens. “Shut the gate, baby.” Gate shuts. He gawks at girls at various nightclubs from his media room, flicking on screens of his giants iPads, choosing one girl for every night. BMW’s Rs 25 lakh MINI Cooper gets to insert the world’s longest 70 mm commercial through this pic, incidentally on the week of the car’s launch in India.

     

    Karan Anshuman, Mumbai Mirror :Good films are about bringing new ideas to viewers, and Players is antithetical in this respect. In the remake, the writers substitute what little logic was there to begin with, with songs and add deliberate cheesiness to make the film more accessible for the masses. Indian filmmakers have a tendency to speak down to their audiences, but with Players one suspects that the makers truly believe that this is what cutting-edge is. Two stars, one word: random.

     

    Shubha Shetty-Saha, Mid-Day : If English is a phunny language, Bollywood is a really phunny place. For several years, it blissfully went through a phase when Hollywood films would be copied scene by scene, with the filmmakers even while blatantly credit stealing, pretended to be making an original film. Now that our conscience is clear and we have the fear of getting sued (whichever comes first), we have started acquiring official rights of Hollywood films. And what do we do with that pricey legal document? We cock a snook at the original script; make it so Bollywoodised that the end product seems the far removed desi bred poor cousin of the original. What is the brilliant idea behind this? No idea sirji!

     

    Shubhra Gupta, Indian Express: The guys have zero impact. So do the gals. Bipasha is same old, despite the stringiest of bikinis, and the only surprisingly not-bad thing Sonam Kapoor does is to dance dirty. In other places, she is part of the furniture. Even the iconic chase scene starring the colourful Minis, faithfully lifted from the earlier films, is long and dull. Just like the film.

     

  • Every week, Deepa Gahlot casts a critical eye over media reviews of Bollywood releases… in Reviewing the Reviews

    Reviewing the reviews: Don 2 is poor man’s Mission Impossible

    By Deepa Gahlot

     

    Don 2

    Key Cast: Shahrukh Khan, Priyanka Chopra, Lara Dutta,Om Puri, Kunal Kapoor, Boman Irani

    Directed by: Farhan Akhtar

    Produced by: Farhan Akhtar, Ritesh Sidhwani, Shahrukh Khan

    Written by: Farhan Akhtar, Ameet Mehta, Amrish Shah

     

     

    To confuse moviegoers again, Don 2 got madly mixed reviews with the highest rating being 4.5 and the lowest 1.5.  On an average, however, most reviewers gave it 2.5 and everyone agreed that Shahrukh Khan looked cool, the film was slick, the music was mediocre and it was a poor man’s Mission Impossible. Strictly for SRK devotees who, like good fans, don’t necessarily look for logic in his films. The way this film was promoted, logic is the last thing to look for in any case.

     

    The big gush came from koimoi.com’s Komal Nahata and his 4.5 stars. “Don 2 may not give the discerning audience a great high but it will be loved by those who like style, intrigue, suspense and attitude. It will score at the box-office and yield good profits to Reliance Entertainment (worldwide distributors). The producers, of course, have already made a huge profit by selling the worldwide rights and also by getting heavy subsidy from the German government. Business in big cities and multiplexes will be far better than in smaller towns and single-screen cinemas. The film will work wonders in the overseas circuit.”  Let’s see if his prophecies come out to be true.

     

    Nikhat Kazmi of Times of India, expectedly gave it 4 stars and raved, “Don 2 is a classic action/crime thriller that doesn’t let go, even for a moment. More importantly, the plot has been finely crafted, with every twist and turn falling into place like a complicated albeit neat little jigsaw.” But then, she usually raves.

     

    Slightly lower in the ratings game was Bollywood Hungama’s Taran Adarsh with 3.5. “Don 2 rides on star power and brand value. The film has a bland first hour, but the second half takes the film to another level. There’s no denying that a cohesive script would’ve made a world of a difference to the film, but the tremendous hype, star power and the lucrative period (Christmas and New Year celebrations) will make its investors reap a harvest.”

     

    DNA’s Aniruddha Guha goes with 3 stars and writes, “Characters say boring, random things to each other, there’s a pointlessly long dance sequence and the attempt at dialoguebaazi is laughable. What keeps Don 2 alive, then, is its pulsating action.”

     

    Surprisingly, India Today’s Kaveree Bamzai also gives it a generous 3 and writes, “The movie seems to have been made only to allow the actor to say and do all the things he ever wanted, be it a James Bond and Ethan Hunt rolled into one. What it does come across as finally is a Mission Impossible meets Abbas Mustan.”

     

    IBN Live’s Rajeev Masand gives it the more-or-less standard 2.5. “Don 2 is nicely shot, and there are moments where Shahrukh Khan is riveting. But that’s not enough to hold your interest for well over two hours…even the actor’s most loyal fans will find themselves yawning. I’m going with a generous two out of five for director Farhan Akhtar’s Don 2. Although packed with fast cars and bikes, this is one slow ride.”

     

    Aseem Chhabra writing in rediff.com: “For an action film with the central plot setting us up for a robbery inside a major bank, Don 2’s pacing is very slow. Coupled with that, the script explains everything to us step-by-step. And if anyone was paying attention, following the convoluted plot where Don always manages to sweet charm the morons at Interpol, in the last five minutes Akhtar sums up the film with a quick recap, revealing many more details that were never shown to us before.  It is an old fashioned gimmick to make the audience say “Wow, we were fooled!”

     

    Shubhra Gupta of Indian Express: “Don 2 needed an energized, crackling plot. What it has, in almost too much abundance, is SRK dripping dimpled coolth. But cool can only take you so far.”

     

    Piyali Dasgupta of NDTV.com writes: “There’s an easy way to describe Don2 without any spoilers. Think of great action flicks from the Lethal Weapon, Die Hard and MI4 series. Shake them up. Replace Nakatomi Plaza with Berlin’s leading bank and there it is – Don 2, a Bollywood take on great action flicks where Shahrukh wants to show that being a bad-ass is fun.”

     

    Shubha Shetty Saha of Mid-day was not impressed either. “There’s one thing that irks me the most in Bollywood action thrillers, and Don 2 carries the tradition. The smart moves by the characters is tediously explained again and again to show how the move was engineered, thereby diluting the whole effect. The audience is treated like a four-year-old brat, who doesn’t concentrate and forgets what has been told to him five minutes back. Subtlety is an art and moreover, we are not as dumb as you think. Wish the filmmakers instead concentrated on filling those gaping loopholes.”

     

    Finally, nailing it, Mayank Shekhar of Hindustan Times gives it 1.5 and says, “It (the first Don) was Vijay’s story. Salim-Javed’s tight script had a striking plot. The writers here have sub-plots. They continue to stretch and add thought to thought. The picture promises to never end. It gets hard to carry on with inane inventiveness, when you just couldn’t care less.”