Category / Movie Review

by whatsonsidsmind

Animal Movie Review – A High-Octane Mass Entertainer that was Pretending to be Something Else

Written by: Siddhartha Krishnan | 5-Min Read

Full disclosure first:

  1. I am a fan of Ranbir Kapoor’s acting. I think he is one of the finest actors in India, whose full range is yet to be discovered.
  2. I believe that films should be made on all sorts of subjects and all kinds of characters. Characters that are good, amiable, virtuous, docile or flawed, misogynistic, dark, vile, and ‘animalistic’. Let the audience decide what they want to watch. Making films only about righteous, virtuous characters does not make the world any safer. Films in the end are meant for entertainment. They alone cannot be held responsible for spreading toxicity. What about upbringing, education, culture, and beliefs?
  3. I went in with high expectations for ‘Animal’ because the trailer suggested a character study of a man whose descent into madness is due to a toxic relationship he has with his father; a relationship apparently ‘carved in blood’. It gave me vibes of several gems in this genre, like ‘Taxi Driver’ and more recently ‘Joker’.
  4. What also piqued my interest was the director almost threatening his audience, in pre-release interviews, with violence that has never been seen on Indian screens, almost hinting at a genre that Indian directors have not dared – slasher/blood porn. A well-established genre in world cinema with films like ‘I Saw the Devil’ (South Korea), ‘Irreversible’ (France), ‘Goodnight Mommy’ (Austrian), and ‘Saw’ (USA) to name only a few.

What did we get? Here is my review.

Warning – in places this review might metamorphose into a rant that might be toxic for some. (Minor spoiler alert)

      The Bad

  1. The Promise of Violence …

A scene from ‘Animal’

It is one thing to make a promise, and another to keep it. Director Sandeep Reddy Vanga wasn’t even promising, he was threatening the audience with such violence that would make the squeamish pee in their pants. What did we get?

Masked men in their hundreds slashed and swatted like mosquitoes with an axe by a flawed hero in a ketchup party. Thereafter, he unleashes an other-worldly killing machine, apparently ‘Made in India’, with which he makes the remaining thousand mosquitoes fly in all directions, and a paintball party ensues where the so-called gore is hidden within clouds of smoke and balls of fire. What’s more, he has a small army with him, whose job is to sing while he plays ‘Call of Duty’ all alone in a five-star hotel, in a city, where law enforcement doesn’t exist.

See, I am all for suspending disbelief and leaving my brain at home. But the director was asking me to convince myself that my brain was my ‘d&#k’. How do I do that? By the way, ‘Call of Duty’, the video game played by 10-year-olds has more realistic violence than this comical slash fest, and that has me worried.

The one thing that this pre-interval scene does get correct is syncing the action to the beat. No mean task that requires technical prowess, and credit to action director, Supreme Sundar for achieving this. Also, Ranbir pulls off the outlandish fight scene with conviction and swagger single-handedly.

In the action sequences, you do see the influence of Korean and Thai films. But where the director has lacked, is in the writing. It had no vision, novelty or eye for detail, and it was not too distant from the action scenes already seen in South Films. In terms of shock value, cringe worthiness, and pure impact films like ‘NH7’, ‘Gangs of Wasseypur’, and ‘Badlapur’, have done a far better job.

Given the hype around the violence, I was worried that some scenes might be unsettling for my wife, who doesn’t like this kind of cinema. But in the end, we laughed through those scenes for being so outlandish. If that is what the director was aiming for, kudos to him.

  1. The Promise of a Character Study …

A scene from ‘Animal’

The trailer of ‘Animal’ suggested that it was going to explore toxic masculinity through the lens of not only physical violence, but also, mental, verbal, and sexual violence. The proposition, therefore, was new for Indian cinema because the lead character’s arc no matter how filthy or vile, had the potential to be nuanced, as well as stark. What did we get?

A constant barrage of vile, disconnected, and rhetorical – dialogues, monologues, anecdotes, and stories intended only to provoke and not to make audiences detest or connect with the lead character. Let’s take an example to make this point clearer – In the ‘Joker’ when Arthur (Joaquin Phoenix) brutally murders his friend Randall at his house, I remember some within the audience cringed and others were shocked. The ones who cringed detested the transformation of an abused man from naivety to becoming a criminal. The ones who were shocked empathized with Arthur but did not agree with the methods of the ‘Joker’ he had become. Either way, a connection with the audience had been established. This is a result of great writing.

I could not connect at any level with the Animal’s ‘Ranvijay’. The reason for his toxicity is never clearly established. We know, it’s because of his father, but how, when, where, and why is either left to the imagination or lost in translation. So when he is violent verbally, physically, or sexually through action or dialogue the reaction from the audience is laughter. Laughter at being toxic? If that was the reaction the director was trying to evoke, kudos to him.

A scene from ‘Animal’

If this was truly a character study, the toxicity would have spoken to the animal/darkness within all of us. Silence would most certainly have been the natural response to that conversation. Instead, there were giggles and chuckles instigated by the sarcasm in the dialogues. So what was the director trying to make – a satire?

Here’s my take on this aspect – Please get at your naysayers, silence your haters, and flaunt your ideology, if you must. But your politics cannot hijack the story and cheat the audience who bought a ticket to watch your film.

  1. The Promise of Originality …

Telegu superstar, Mahesh Babu in a promotional event before thousands of fans called Sandeep Reddy Vanga an original filmmaker. The hype was epic suggesting that we are going to see something not imagined in our wildest dreams. What did we get?

A son, on a rampage to kill those who tried assassinating his father. Is that new? Okay, is there newness in the violent action scenes then?

In all, we get three action scenes –

First, a desi version of the ‘hallway fight’ scene from ‘Oldboy’. Then, a sanitized, fabulist, fantasy version of the ending carnage scene from Rambo (2008). Finally, a full-on ‘Punjabi hand-to-hand Kushti scene’ with an emotional song in the background.

So much for originality.

A scene from ‘Oldboy’

‘Animal’ is most original in its last 15 minutes when it stays true to the subject at hand; the so-called father-son relationship ‘carved in blood’. Here, the conversation elevates from superficiality to being meaningful.

As for the blood and gore, the film is bloodiest in the post-credit scene, promising a second part, thereby making the entire film look like a promo for the sequel.

The editing of ‘Animal’ is jarring. The director chooses a non-linear narrative that lacks cohesion. It seems like several films within the same film. Moreover, the second half is a stretch. Some say it could have been 20 minutes shorter. However, to me, the 2nd half felt like a different film altogether, until the climax.

The Good

  1. The Music –

Animal’s songs and background score are its big USP. While some of the songs seemed unnecessary for the moments, they still are good songs. The BGM elevates the scenes considerably and is apt throughout the run-time.

  1. The Screenplay (in parts) –

Despite the disjoint writing, the screenplay is entertaining in parts. These moments show what the film could have been. Also, some of the twists were intelligently placed.

  1. The Performances –

A scene from ‘Animal’

The film’s strength is its stellar cast. All the actors have done fine a job. Anil Kapoor does his best to give a nuanced performance, but it’s only in the end that his character is given the space and time to shine. Rashmika is best when she confronts Ranbir’s character and despite apprehensions, she too delivers a decent performance. Bobby Deol is grossly underutilized to the point that I am now thinking what was the point of that 6-minute cameo? However, he shines in the little that he has to offer. The problem is that the motivations of these characters are not fully explored despite the film’s long run-time.

However, make no mistake, this is an out-an-out Ranbir Kapoor show. And despite all the flaws in the writing, he still manages to keep the eyes glued to him. If anyone could have played this role with conviction it was him. He was ‘Animal’ from start to finish.

A scene from ‘Animal’

Conclusion:

I wanted to like this film. But I guess the director was more interested in provoking his haters than making a good film. If I am a true cinephile, there is no way I can call this a good film. This might offend some and please a few. So be it.

That said, all the awards for the best cut trailer should go to ‘Animal’. The makers were able to make the audience believe what the film was not.

My Verdict:

‘Animal’ is a high-octane, mass entertainer that pretends to be brave and intelligent as well. It is engaging in parts, mainly due to its lead actor and a great cast, but it explores toxic masculinity and abuse with the maturity of a fifth grader who has recently discovered the meaning of the words power, sex, abuse, and violence. It will rake in the moolah, given the hype, but I don’t think it’s a film that is going to age well.

IMDb rating – 7.5/10

My rating – 2/5

About the author –

Siddhartha Krishnan is the author of “Two and a Half Rainbows – A Collection of Short Stories”. He is also an enthusiastic blogger and, on his website, http://www.whatsonsidsmind.com, he puts out his essays, articles, travelogues and film reviews.

by whatsonsidsmind

Understanding the Cinema of Martin Scorsese through Killers of the Flower Moon

A scene from Killers of the Flower Moon

Written by: Siddhartha Krishnan | 7 Min Read

“I always tell the younger filmmakers and students: Do it like the painters used to…Study the old masters. Enrich your palette. Expand the canvas. There’s always so much more to learn” – Martin Scorsese

I opted for a 10 pm show of the Killers of the Flower Moon, a day after its release in India. Must admit that I was wary to begin with since I had little idea of the subject at hand. Moreover, with a run time of 3 1/2 hours, the filmmaker was demanding my patience. Something, Scorsese has been known to do off late. The Irishman is a case in point. The older he has gotten the more fearless he has become.

Having said that, as an audience thrown into an alien world, where things were moving at the pace of a tractor through the prairies, things weren’t exactly thrilling at first. More so, with my eyes getting heavier with every passing minute. It took a while to realize, that the pace was deliberate. A kind of ‘slow poison’, that is intended to kill your ignorance, and your apathy. (I’ll get to this point later in this article)

Scorsese with his actors

Given the violent themes that Scorsese picks, I was introduced to his films quite late. Well into my adulthood to be precise. Thereafter, I’ve seen most of his films. Halfway into Killers, a question sprouted in my mind—does Martin Scorsese have a signature style? I ask because I don’t see that style as clearly as I would in a Quentin Tarantino or Christopher Nolan film.

Let me rephrase for specificity—what is similar between Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy, Hugo and Raging Bull, The Wolf of Wall Street, and Killers of the Flower Moon, that tells me that this is a Martin Scorsese film.

The question compelled me to dig a bit deeper, and the findings were fascinating. I’ll be sharing what I discovered in light of the director’s latest offering.

Based on journalist David Grann’s best-selling non-fiction book ‘Killers of the Flower Moon: The Osage Murders and the Birth of the FBI’ the film tells the gruesome story of the Osage Murders from the perspective of the Osage people. The genocide of the indigenous people of America is a fact known to all. How it happened is the USA’s best-kept secret.

The film opens with a group of Osage elderly burying a ceremonial pipe mourning their gradual assimilation into white society after American lawmakers move them from Kansas to Oklahoma, into a reserved area. But soon their sorrow turns into joy when they discover oil in their allotted land, making them instantly rich. But this newfound wealth invites the greed of white people, some of whom work for the Osage and some others who have foul motives.

Deputy Sheriff, William King Hale, popularly known as ‘King’, played by Robert Di Niro is one such fox. He poses as a benefactor but means the tribe no good; secretly planning the murders of the Osage members to inherit their wealth by getting his trusted men to marry into their families. This is when Ernest Burkhart, a World War I returnee, played by Leonardo Di Caprio comes into the scene. The first conversation between King and Ernest is where Scorsese’s most striking characteristic as a filmmaker comes to the fore.

  1. Character Study –

In the scene, King tries to understand how desperate Ernest is to get rich, and what his weaknesses are. We get an understanding of Leo’s character; that he is greedy and gullible. The conversation sets the tone for the film. Much like the opening scene of Taxi Driver, ‘the interview scene’, where De Niro’s character is applying for the job of a taxi driver. There too, the interview helps strike a contract with the audience.

A scene from Killers of the Flower Moon

You see such conversations throughout Killers, especially between the three main characters, King, Ernest, and Mollie. ‘Mollie Kyle’ (played by an excellent Lily Gladstone) is an Osage member whom Ernest marries on the advice of King. We know as an audience that their relationship is doomed, but that is what makes the scenes between Mollie and Ernest the most captivating. In the beginning, Mollie is suspicious of Ernest, but once she gives in, she becomes a slave to her love for him. Ernest on the other hand, is a slave to his greed. His greed is more powerful than the love he has for Mollie. The portrayal of this relationship is the highlight of the film.

You find parallels in The Wolf of Wall Street where Leo and Margot’s characters try to get into each other’s minds in the infamous dinner date scene. Although the characters are vastly different from the Killers of the Flower Moon, the similarity is how Scorsese finds cinematic value in simple conversations to reveal the qualities of his characters.

A scene from The Wolf of Wall Street

The director is not interested in demonizing or glorifying his characters. He is keener to show their motivations no matter how flawed they are. Exploring the things that make them human. He likes unraveling the layers of his characters through conversations, monologues, and voiceovers; anything that has cinematic value.

  1. Frequent collaborations with actors –

Robert Di Niro in Raging Bull

Given that his films study their characters deeply, Scorsese expects his actors to be in top form. He prefers actors with the requisite skills whom he can trust. Which explains his frequent collaborations with Robert Di Niro and Leonardo Di Caprio. Di Niro has featured in ten Scorsese films since 1973 (Mean Streets) and Caprio has been part of six. Both are part of his latest offering.

  1. Violent themes –

Growing up in an Italian neighborhood in the 40s and 50s New York, Scorsese had seen violence up close. He saw how it became a part of the daily life of people. Thus, violence is an important part of most of his films. As a filmmaker by choosing characters who are always on the edge, he gives himself a lot to play with and explore. However, he doesn’t stick to a certain style to show violence. In Gangs of New York and Goodfellas, the violence is brutal. In Killers, while the act of committing murders is violent, death has a certain calmness about it. Let’s take a scene from the film –

A scene from Goodfellas

When Mollie’s sister’s house is bombed; chaos ensues. People dig through the rubble frantically to find the bodies. But when the sister’s body is found Scorsese infuses fantasy into the screenplay by using the elements; in this case fire. The faces of the dead are calm in Killers. All of them. You find parallels to this scene in Scorsese’s 2010 psychological thriller Shutter Island, where he uses surrealism to evoke gloom.

According to Thelma Schoonmaker, his editor since the 1980s, he shows violence differently now compared to his earlier films. Moving from tight close ups (Goodfellas, Raging Bull) to wide shots (The Irishman, Killers of the Flower Moon). This might be a result of Scorsese evolving as a human being. His understanding of violence and death may have changed. A New York Times article describes a murder scene in The Irishman as “framed wide, hard and fast — simple, bloody, done”.

  1. Production design –

Sets of Killers of the Flower Moon

Production design (costume and sets) plays an important part in Scorsese’s film. They help him build believable worlds that his characters inhabit. The eye for detail is always immaculate in his films. It’s the same in Killers as it was in Casino or Hugo or The Aviator. The subjects of these films were vastly different, but by building authentic worlds he keeps the audience invested in his stories.

  1. Editing and Cinematography –

Countless images and sequences from Scorsese’s films have inspired many filmmakers over the years. His freeze frames, sped-up footage, long takes, long tracking shots, montages, and slow-motion sequences have created cinematic moments that have stayed in the minds of cinephiles.  But his editing techniques do not have a sameness. In Casino, The Departed, and The Wolf of Wall Street, he resorts to quick cuts and jump cuts to convey the required information or to be in tune with the energy of the film.

A scene from Taxi Driver

In Killers he is in no hurry. The pace is deliberately slow, at least in the beginning, picking up pace gradually towards the end. He trusts his audience to hang in there and stay invested. The nature of the crime shown in the film required this pacing; slow but menacing. Getting this balance right was the trick. It took me a while to understand this aspect while watching the film (a point I had raised earlier).

  1. Music –

Scorsese is known to have compiled several music pieces since his teenage years. He has used them in his films wherever he deemed fit. He is also known to use pop music, rock n roll, instrumentals etc. He uses music to enhance narratives and depict the arc of his characters. They may not be his personal choice of music. Again, there is no sameness when it comes to music. But music is an integral part of his films.

In Killers the music is minimalistic. Just drum beats mostly to create the dread, and to convey the impending doom. In the happier moments, like when the Osage discover oil, he uses classic rock. It works.

A scene from Shutter Island

So in light of the above findings, what did I make of the Killers of the Flower Moon?

Is it the directors’ best work? Maybe not.

Is it compelling cinema? Absolutely yes.

I think it is another feather in the cap of the visionary filmmaker who is aging like fine wine.

A scene from Killers of the Flower Moon

What is the Martin Scorsese signature style of filmmaking? I don’t think he has one, unlike many of his contemporaries, which is what makes him unique.

The only recurring feature of his films is how he studies his characters deeply. The rest is fluid, often taking the style of the technicians and artists he is collaborating with, be it editing, cinematography, music, or production design. The signature for him is not as important as the story that needs to be told. And there is no doubt that Martin Scorsese has told some powerful stories and given us cinephiles many iconic characters over the years.

Ending with another quote of his –

“Your job is to get the audience to care about your obsessions.”

About the author –

Siddhartha Krishnan is the author of “Two and a Half Rainbows – A Collection of Short Stories”. He is also an enthusiastic blogger and, on his website, http://www.whatsonsidsmind.com, he puts out his essays, articles, travelogues and film reviews.

Source reading material –

Studio Binder

New York Times

 

by whatsonsidsmind

Oppenheimer Review | Nolan’s Most Human Story Yet

Written by: Siddhartha Krishnan | 6 Min Read

Oppenheimer is the furthest, in my opinion, that Christopher Nolan has traveled from his comfort zone. The film is an amalgamation of genres—a biopic that has psycho-political undertones sufficient to qualify it as a thriller too. Whatever, genre we may choose to fit the film into, it is undoubtedly Nolan’s most human story yet. In making it, he may just have created his masterpiece.

While, there are several departures from Nolan’s earlier films; don’t be mislead into thinking that this film is not quintessentially ‘Nolanesque’. ‘Oppenheimer’ is not science fiction, even though there is a lot of science involved in building an atomic bomb. It is not futuristic; it’s historical drama mostly, but it does deliver a non-didactic message to the future. It is not action-packed and may not have a hero who is hell-bent to save the world. But it does have a scientist in a dilemma about his creation and its impact on humanity.

In short, it is a film about a man of great intellect who is believed to have changed our world forever. For good or bad, Nolan doesn’t give these answers. What he poses instead, are questions.

Lead actor, Cillian Murphy in an interview with film critic Sucharita Tyagi, mentions reading the Gita in preparation for the role, and says that Robert Oppenheimer could have found consolation in the sacred text and the infamous lines, “Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds“. While it is debatable whether these lines were taken out of context by the scientist; by mentioning the incident, Cillian touches upon an important character trait—the confusion of Oppenheimer about the consequences of his creation. Nolan in another interview affirms, that this predicament of scientists’ vis-a-vis their creations inspired him to make this film. He further adds that the scientific community is comparing the splitting of the atom, to the creation of AI and calling it the ‘Oppenheimer moment’. This I believe is a decent starting point in trying to understand the film.

The film’s trailer may have done a disservice with respect to managing people’s expectations. A faction of the critics has opined that this is an anti-war film, that is not anti-war enough because it sanitizes the brutality that the bomb unleashed both on its target (Hiroshima and Nagasaki) and its place of origin (Los Alamos). Another faction calls the film too long, that digresses into unnecessary territories without showing enough of the fireworks it had promised. To an audience that went in with preconceived notions about the film, these points will hold. However, the truth is that the film is not about the bomb. It is about Oppenheimer, as promised by its title.

Based on the book “American Prometheus – The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer“, the story is character-driven. Unlike Nolan’s earlier films, this film is not plot heavy. It is easier to understand, and the storytelling is simple and yet, intellectually challenging. Nolan has fun with timelines as always to make the sequences rousing. But the absence of an obsession with a novel subject, as we saw in Tenet or Inception, is a welcome change. There is scientific jargon thrown at you but very early on we realize that that is not what the film is about.

I went in for a 6:30 morning show in an IMAX theatre. It was the second Sunday after the film’s release in India and it was a full house. I believe that it is always best to go into a Nolan film not knowing what to expect. It is the best way to enjoy his films. That way the surprises he throws at you become more rewarding.

Here the novelty was watching exemplary acting performances on IMAX. If ever, pure acting required IMAX then this is it. For most parts, we see close-ups of actors, which means that they had no room to falter. But with a stellar cast as this one, the chances of faltering were minimal. However, most of the heavy lifting is done by the protagonist, Cillian Murphy. There is something about his face and eyes that is so unique. He can say so much without really saying it. This is a career-best performance from the actor who had been waiting for such a moment to show his full range.

Several scenes in the film are bound to linger in the minds of audiences. However, the sequence that encapsulated the essence of what the film was trying to achieve is the ‘victory speech scene’ after the successful testing of the bomb. I thought it perfectly captured the conflict in the mind of the protagonist—the elation, confusion, and exasperation. It is the climactic moment of the film in which ‘Oppie’ becomes a hero for his people, and a villain in his head. Noise and silence along with a dash of magic realism are used impeccably in this scene.

The same can be said of the much talked about ‘Trinity test scene’ when the bomb finally explodes in front of its creators. Here, I thought the director used noise and silence to explore more philosophical themes. There is silence when the bomb explodes and the aftermath i.e the rumbling and violent shaking is deliberately delayed as if to say, that it will take time for the inventors to fully understand the repercussions of their creation.

As in all of Nolan’s films the antagonist in ‘Oppenheimer’ is a formidable opponent. Robert Downey Jr plays the role of the vengeful, Lewis Strauss, a businessman and philanthropist, out to destroy Oppenheimer. His character arc is written brilliantly, and Robert Downey Jr delivers an assured, nuanced performance which is a highlight of the film.

In terms of screen time the rest of the cast, which includes A-list actors like Matt Damon, Gary Oldman, Emily Blunt, Florence Pugh, Rami Malek, and Josh Hartnett play small but significant parts. If you’ve seen the post-release interviews of some of these actors, it is clear that their job was to play their role in the life of Oppenheimer. That’s it. And they do with absolute sincerity. Among them Emily Blunt as Oppie’s wife ‘Kitty’ and Matt Damon as ‘Gen. Les Groves’ stand out.

But it is the editing of ‘Oppenheimer’ which is truly a masterclass. It is deft and divine! Yes, it is a strength in all of Nolan’s films; given how he plays with time. But here there is an almost languid, poetic touch to it. Mind you, unlike Nolan’s previous films, this is not an action-packed film, and hence the scenes are not naturally stirring. They had to be cut intelligently to create that thrill without confusing audiences. Editor Jennifer Lame expertly stitches the different stages of Oppenheimer’s life in this non-linear narrative and the end product is mesmerizing.

I was content with what I saw that Sunday morning. And that contentment I noticed in the faces of people who left the theatre that day. There was pin-drop silence in the hall throughout the 3-hour run time, and that silence continued as we exited the hall.

Cinema, we know, is an art form. Perhaps the most collaborative one. It has a language of its own. And, just like other art forms its purpose is to tell a story, thereby evoking emotions within the audience consuming it. The language of cinema is distinct from the spoken word uttered by some of its most liked characters. Sadly, there are a handful of directors left who make an effort to preserve this language of cinema. Nolan is one of those rare directors who believes that his audience is intelligent.

With ‘Oppenheimer’ the maverick director goes into uncharted territories and paints his masterpiece. This in my opinion is that work that the great auteurs of the past, the likes of Ray and Kurosawa, will be proud of. They might just be giving Nolan a light applause from heaven.

Go watch it in a theatre. Preferably in IMAX.

IMDb rating – 8.6/10

My rating – 5/5

About the author –

Siddhartha Krishnan is the author of Two and a Half Rainbows – A Collection of Short Stories. He is also a passionate blogger, and on his website, www.whatsonsidsmind.com, you can find his travel diaries, food stories, book recommendations and movie reviews.

All rights reserved by whatsonsidsmind.com

by whatsonsidsmind

The Father | Movie Review | A Masterclass in Set Design and Acting

Written by Siddhartha Krishnan | 4 Min Read

If the mind is a labyrinth of myriad thoughts and memories, then ‘The Father’ is an exquisite cinematic depiction of its mysterious workings. It imagines memories to be like pieces of a puzzle, that lack meaning by themselves. But when stitched together, they are like rooms of a house.

Florian Zellar’s ‘The Father‘ is as close to perfection that a film can strive to be. With a subject like dementia, it was easy to make another sob fest. Thankfully, however, the makers chose catharsis over melodrama. And so, we enter a fragmented mind, to experience up close the confusion and helplessness.

The film follows an octogenarian, who is constantly forgetting important life events. He is stubborn, egoistic, and yet a charmer. Anthony (played by Sir Anthony Hopkins) is not able to understand why his memory regularly fails him. Anne, his daughter, and principal caregiver (played by Olivia Colman) tries everything within her capacity to pacify him. But it is a losing battle, and sadly, acceptance is their only road to salvation.

To say that ‘The Father’ is heart-breaking is a no-brainer. But the overriding emotion one feels as an audience is confusion, since we are seeing things from the perspective of a dementia patient. But how did the director manage to achieve that?

The answer lies in the production design.

Perceptibly, there are three locations shown in the film. Anthony’s flat, Anne’s house, and the hospital. Set designer Peter Francis, in an interview explains, that to infuse confusion in the narrative they kept the architecture more or less the same across the imagined locations. But to distinguish between these locations, they made minor changes to the furnishings and furniture, which aren’t easily noticeable.

Also, doorways play an important role to show perspective—who is on the inside, and who is on the outside? Or to be more specific—what is real and what is unreal? The use of similar looking doors to move from one space to another, where the spaces themselves look oddly similar, gives the feeling that we are swimming through someone’s memories. Additionally, color tones of the walls, windows and furnishings, distinguish between different timelines, since Anthony frequently navigates between the past and present without his knowing.

‘The Father’ undoubtedly rides on the shoulders of its actors. In an interview with Stephen Colbert, director Florian Zeller said that he chose Anthony Hopkins for the role because we’ve known him to have essayed characters that are typically dominant or in control of their situation. For him to be shown as a dementia patient, the director believes was the perfect antithesis given Hopkin’s filmography. Well, an Oscar for best actor in a leading role proves that theory!

However, without a brilliant Olivia Colman, as Anne, the scenes wouldn’t have made the impact that it did. She brings in the required empathy and vulnerability to her role. She holds her own in all the scenes with the stalwart and elevates them. The two give a masterclass in acting.

To sum up, ‘The Father’ is a labor of love. It plays with very little and yet is magical. It is a rare piece of cinema that makes you cry, but with a profound realization. A must watch.

IMDb rating – 8.2/10

My Rating – 5/5

You can watch ‘The Father’ on Book my Show app for a rental of Rs 89.

 

Siddhartha Krishnan is the author of Two and a Half Rainbows – A Collection of Short Stories. He is a blogger and, on his website, www.whatsonsidsmind.com, you can find his travel diaries, food stories, book recommendations and movie reviews.

All rights reserved by whatsonsidsmind.com

by whatsonsidsmind

2023@Whatsonsidsmind | Travel | Food | Books | Movies

Hello Fellow Bloggers,

Created this short video promo to encapsulate all that I am planning for this blog in 2023. Hoping to be a lot more focused, active and creative this year. Looking forward to your continued support.

Regards,

Sid

 

Credits:

Music: Chill
Musician: LiQWYD
URL: http://www.soundcloud.com/liqwyd

Video created on – https://videoguru.page.link/Best

by whatsonsidsmind

The Menu | Movie Review | Whatsonsidsmind

Written by Siddhartha Krishnan | 4 Min Read

The use of food allegorically in films always makes for an exciting proposition. In recent years, Assamese film ‘Aamis’ and Spanish film ‘The Platform’ comes to mind where food was used in ingenious ways to tell stories marinated in subtexts. While these films weren’t easy to watch, they were nevertheless entertaining. Director Mark Mylod’s ‘The Menu’ has a similar trajectory. OTT platform, Disney + Hotstar classifies it as horror. However, to me, it felt like a satire pretending to be a psychological thriller. To be fair, though, the film does have its horrific moments.

Moreover, the horror genre is so fluid that, to an imaginative writer, it offers the flexibility to play and invent. So in terms of newness, ‘The Menu’ is a compelling watch.

The storyline is twisted. A young couple, Margot (an escort) played by an excellent Anya Taylor – Joy and Tyler (a food blogger) played by Nicholas Hoult, travel to a faraway island to eat at an exclusive restaurant named Hawthorn, where celebrity chef, Julian Slowik, played by a menacing Ralph Fiennes, has prepared a lavish menu for his chosen guest list. Slowik serves a series of courses for dinner, and before each dish he delivers an unsettling monologue. The absurdity of it all, makes Margot wary about the chef’s intentions. He seems bull-headed, and his ‘loveless’ cooking doesn’t suit her palate. The other guests, however, aren’t as doubting. They think it’s all part of Slowik’s ‘act’!

The self-indulgent guests include a renowned food critic and her editor, a fallen movie star and his personal assistant, a group of young angel investors, and a wealthy couple who are regulars at the restaurant. To Margot’s dismay, her partner Tyler isn’t any better since he is an ardent fan of Slowik and can’t stop singing praises of him. It is not until the third course that Slowik’s true nature slowly begins to unravel. The movie gathers pace thereafter.

Much of the storytelling happens through conversations, and writers Seth Reiss and Will Tracy have used absurdity in the scenes written to keep audiences guessing. But, at its core, ‘The Menu’ is a social satire, that uses elements of horror, and dark comedy to tell a story of human greed, man’s obsession with perfection, the elite’s ceaseless need to over intellectualize, and the death of passion at the altar of ambition.

In terms of cinematic language, ‘The Menu’ reminds you of Kubrick’s eccentricity in ‘The Shining’ and Bong Joon-Ho’s dark humor in ‘The Parasite’. Also, like those films, there is a lot to be mindful of as an audience because everything is there for a reason. So this film can be demanding at times.

Yet, ‘The Menu’ isn’t a perfect film by any means. Sometimes it tries too much to marry the amusing and the bizarre. I also felt that the supporting cast, should have had a greater role to play given their interesting backstories. Even so, whenever the film wavered slightly, there comes a scene to salvage the situation. For example, the way the restaurant staff were used to heighten the tension was enterprising. But the interactions between Slowik and Margot remain the most captivating parts of the film.

To sum up, ‘The Menu’ is an inventive film with an important message which comes through to the audience, at the very end, after the story has endured several twists and turns. It keeps you invested because the actors have done justice to their parts and the makers have been able to create several thrilling moments that will linger. I would recommend the film to audiences who like intelligently written thrillers that are more than what meets the eye.

If you want to know why a cheeseburger needs to be just that, nothing more and nothing less, then watch ‘The Menu’ on Disney+Hotstar.

IMDb rating – 7.3

My rating – 3.5/5

Siddhartha Krishnan is the author of Two and a Half Rainbows – A Collection of Short Stories.He is also an enthusiastic blogger, and on his website, www.whatsonsidsmind.com, you can find his travel diaries, food stories, book recommendations and movie reviews.

All rights reserved by whatsonsidsmind.com

 

by whatsonsidsmind

Kantara | Movie Review | A Film that Breaks the Mould

Written by: Siddhartha Krishnan . 5 Min Read

‘Rooted in culture’ is a phrase that is all over the internet right now after the recent success of Kannada film ‘Kantara’. But what does it really mean? Does it simply mean invoking the past, remembering forgotten heroes and mythical gods? Or, is there more to it, like being true to the time, the people and the world that the film is exploring? In filmmaking, the latter surely is a more daunting task, while the former might just require a star, few whistle-worthy dialogues, horrid graphics and a big marketing budget to cover all of that. In the recent past, within the supernatural genre, I can only name two films that have pulled off this feat. One is Tumbbad, and the other is Kantara. But, while Tumbbad is a near perfect film in all aspects, Kantara is not without its flaws. However, where it matches the horror classic is in its world building.

Kantara’s world is magical. The attention to detail is immaculate. So, the locations, costumes and sets blend perfectly with the story. We can therefore escape effortlessly into the jungles of the western ghats in Dakshina Kannada, where Panjurli Daiva, the local deity in animist form, is the protector of the forest, its creatures and its people. We also meet Shiva, a Kambala athlete from the fictional village of Kaadubettu, a darling of his people, a rogue occasionally, who goes through a fascinating character arc to meet his destiny. The film strikes a contract with its audience, through a cleverly written opening sequence, promising an entertaining journey. The makers have wisely invested their energy in selecting a very capable supporting cast, an area which can easily be overlooked in films like these. This investment has paid them rich dividends.

The stellar camerawork of cinematographer, Arvind Kashyap, is a powerful aspect of the storytelling. He gives perhaps the most well-lit film of this year, which reminded me of Girish Gangadharan’s work in the Malayalam film, ‘Jallikattu’, that was also shot mostly in a forest. As in Jallikattu, every source of light, whether natural or artificial, has been used brilliantly to create stunning moments. The fight scenes especially were scintillating. Girish Gangadharan went onto win a national award for Jallikattu and grab a big project like ‘Vikram‘ thereafter. The same is expected of Arvind Kashyap with the talent that he has displayed.

In terms of performances, the film rides on the shoulders of its lead character. Shiva, played by a brilliant Rishab Shetty, who is also the director and writer of the film, gives one of the best performances of the year. The transformation that his character goes through over the course of the film leading to the much talked about climax has been essayed to perfection. In an interview with RJ, Siddharth Kannan, Rishab mentions how he doesn’t see any other hero doing this role, because, since childhood he has grown up watching the Bhoota Kola rituals. The deep understanding of the culture has helped him become Shiva with ease.

Kantara is unabashedly a commercial entertainer. It plays to the galleries with its outlandish fight scenes and dialogues. The film falters slightly with the love story between Shiva and Leela, which did not come across as convincing as the rest of the parallel storylines. At its core, it is the oppressor vs the oppressed story, set against a backdrop of folklore and local legends. Hence, the film is aptly titled – Kantara. A Legend.

However, what the film cannot be criticized for is laziness, both in vision and execution. The makers have given it their all to win over the audience, and the effort has been appreciated by both the masses and the classes. When shows are running to packed halls even after a month, there is a truth in there which nobody can deny.

I’ve seen three films by the Shetty brothers (Rishab, Raj and Rakshit) this year, ‘Garuda Gamana Vrishabha Vahana’, ‘Charlie 777’ and now ‘Kantara’. In my opinion, they are naturally skilled in two aspects of writing, namely world building and creating magical moments out of the ordinary. A scene comes to mind in this regard, in Raj B. Shetty’s ‘Garuda Gamana Vrishabha Vahana’ where the character Bhramaiyya, a sub-inspector, has lost all hope. He wants to end his suffering and asks his driver to take him to an isolated location. What follows thereafter was unexpected and elevates a decent gangster film into a really good one. There are similar evocative moments in Kantara as well.

I feel with their vision, energy and ability to offer something new to their audiences, the Shetty brothers are a blessing to the Kannada and Indian film industry. They make good films consistently which is not possible if you are not a good student of cinema. Making a big budget film look like one may be a difficult task. But making a 16-crore film look like a 100-crore one requires ingenuity. Therein lies the magic of cinema. Thus, Kantara is a film that breaks the mould in more ways than one.

Siddhartha Krishnan is the author of Two and a Half Rainbows – A Collection of Short Stories. He is also an enthusiastic blogger and, on his website, www.whatsonsidsmind.com, he regularly puts out his essays, articles, travelogues and movie reviews.

All rights reserved by whatsonsidsmind.com

by whatsonsidsmind

2 Must Watch War Films on Netflix | Movie Review

Omaha Beach Scene from Saving Private Ryan . Pic credit – telegraph.co.uk

Written by Siddhartha Krishnan . 5 Min Read

The year was 1998. I was 15 years old. Inside a packed hall in Lighthouse Cinema (Kolkata), we were watching Steven Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan. A few minutes into the film, the famous Omaha Beach Scene happened. The air turned cold and tense. It showed in my breath which was getting heavy. I clenched the arm rest, discomforted by the carnage that was unfolding on screen. The audience around me fared no better. They too were stunned.

Each bullet that pierced the heart of a soldier, and each bomb that shattered their bodies into pieces, made us nauseous. Something changed in me that day. Perhaps it was my idea of war, which until then, had been largely shaped by the Hindi films of that decade. Unknowingly, I was guilty of romanticizing war. But this was very different. I loved the film, but I began to hate war. It left me with several unanswered questions. Who really wins a war? Who are the people calling it?

Recently, I watched two war-based films that made me remember that experience from years ago. The following are my thoughts on these two poignant and beautifully crafted films.

Last Men in Aleppo (2017)

Genre – War Documentary

Director Feras Fayyad

Last Men in Aleppo – Poster. Pic Credit – Grasshopper Films

Nowadays, documentary filmmakers have become very innovative with their storytelling. With the latest technology at their disposal, there are a million ways to tell a story. However, letting the camera do the job without intervention, is still perhaps the most truthful and effective. Director Feras Fayyad, does that with Last Men in Aleppo. As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words.

‘World Documentary Grand Jury Prize’ winner at the Sundance Film Festival (2017), this film is not for the faint-hearted. But it is essential viewing. It documents the everyday life of a volunteer group, called the White Helmets, who were engaged in search and rescue operations during the Syrian Civil War. These are ordinary citizens who have the choice to flee hell, but have chosen to stay on and save lives. They pull out dead bodies, from mountains of rubble, of little children and their mothers, hoping to find one alive. A torso, a hand, a finger, is all they find sometimes, yet, they muster courage to tell stories of hope to each other; that there will be a better tomorrow.

Shot in guerrilla style, this is documentary filmmaking in its rawest and truest form. It shows the cost of war and who really benefits from it. The camera is like a fly on the wall masterfully capturing the anguish and horror, as well as the rare moments of joy that these courageous men manage to find sometimes.

The film asks several questions of us, the fortunate, who do not have to deal with a crisis of this magnitude. Our understanding of happiness is one of them.

Pic credit – indiewire.com

The Bombardment/The Shadow in My Eye (2021)

Genre – Historical War Drama

Director – Ole Bornedal

Netflix Poster of The Bombardment. Pic credit – Netflix

Based on Operation Carthage carried out by the UK’s Royal Air Force towards the end of World War II, Danish film The Bombardment also called The Shadow in My Eye is a hard-hitting story told primarily through the eyes of children. The Air Force’s plan was to bomb the Gestapo stronghold in Copenhagen, Denmark, which was under Nazi occupation. While they do manage to hit their target, they mistakenly bomb a school (Institut Jeanne d’Arc) as well, killing innocent children and civilians. But the film is not just about that unfortunate incident. It captures several moments in the lives of its characters leading to the fateful event; to tell a poignant story about the cost of war.

The film, unusually, does not have a protagonist. It has five lead characters out of which three are children. Their performance is another strong point of the film. However, I found the character of the nun played by a brilliant Fanny Bornedal, the  most captivating. Her character is the most complex, and through her, director Ole Bornedal was able to convey the apathy and absurdity that war brings with it. This is a film that needs to be watched for being brutally honest to its subject matter. Again, not an easy watch, but an essential one.

A scene from The Bombardment. Pic credit – Movie Nation

In 2018, I saw a video of a child being rescued from a bomb explosion site in Syria. Both his parents were killed in the incident. Sitting inside an ambulance, he was covered in dust from head to toe. Except for his eyes, everything else was greyed out. The blankness in those eyes was horrifying. Perhaps he was having a meal with his parents, when in an instant his world crashed! His eyes haunted me for days until I decided to put pen to paper.

It was the genesis of my short story Fireworks, which eventually found a way into my debut book Two and a Half Rainbows two years later. It was the story of a toddler and his nanny, and a moment in their life. The child narrates verbatim the stories that his mother has told him about the daily fireworks seen from their apartment window.

This was my way of expressing the angst within me.

They say, war is inevitable. And children, women and foot soldiers must bear the brunt of it. They always have. From the age of the tribal warlords to the age of technocrats. But the question is—if we can tell fabulous stories to each other, that unites us to build spacecrafts, capable of exploring other planets; can’t we tell each other a brilliant story that unites us to end war?

What is that story? I wonder.

Siddhartha Krishnan is the author of Two and a Half Rainbows – A Collection of Short Stories. He is also an enthusiastic blogger and, on his website, www.whatsonsidsmind.com, he regularly puts out his essays, articles, travelogues, book and movie reviews.

All rights reserved by whatsonsidsmind.com

by whatsonsidsmind

The Sandman-Review | Netflix | A Brilliant Adaptation of a Classic that is not just made for its Ardent Fans

Written by: Siddhartha Krishnan . 5 Min Read

To the unversed, a species that I belonged to as far as The Sandman is concerned, this new Netflix series might seem like a fantasy epic similar to The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter or The Chronicles of Narnia. But such an assertion may not be fully correct. However, don’t get fooled into thinking that this is a Game of Thrones either! While Sandman’s universe boasts of gargoyles and other fantastic creatures, they deliciously exist only in the realm of where we spend one-third of our life—sleep. Thus, the concept and truths that this web series explores are as deep as our fabulous dreams and our worst nightmares.

The Sandman subverts the fantasy genre in more ways than one, in the end catering more to gothic horror fans than to fantasy fiction puritans. So there are many dark themes explored here with its fair share of blood and gore. But it also has an emotional depth that you don’t generally see in fantasy epics.

Based on the DC graphic novel series written by Neil Gaiman, published between 1989-1996, this screen adaptation was long awaited by its ardent fans. I don’t fall into that category, having discovered Gaiman’s writings only a year and a half ago. But ever since, his style of writing and his imagination have impressed me. He has a way of telling very true things in the most magical and unexpected ways. But I went into this series with little expectation since I am not a big fan of fantasy fiction. My apprehension―how was this adaptation going to appeal to an audience who knows nothing about the Sandman comics?

I was in for a pleasant surprise!

In recent memory, I don’t remember seeing a more precise and compelling opening to a series than this one. In just under three minutes, the concept, the world and the purpose of the story are unraveled.

I was hooked! At least for the first 6 episodes.

The hero, Morpheus, also known as Sandman or simply the Dream, is a god who controls the dreams of humans. We go into his realm to seek freedom and adventure and to face our fears and fantasies. He must control our dreams lest they consume and destroy us. But Morpheus is not a flawless god. He is vulnerable and often needs advice. He belongs to the family of the endless, whose members include desire, destiny, delirium, destruction, death and despair. Three of whom we meet in the first season. These eternal and universal forces have been given anthropomorphic personifications.

The story begins in 1916, when an occultist named Roderick Burgess invokes the god of death to revive his dead son, but mistakenly captures Morpheus. Unwilling to let go of the god he has erroneously taken captive; the Magus tries to seize his powers forcefully. He steals Morpheus’s tools in a bid to get richer. Thus, the lord of dreams is held captive for 100 yrs. When he finally manages to free himself, he realizes that without his tools; he isn’t as powerful as he used to be. So he goes in search of them, to restore balance in the waking world of humans whose dreams have gone berserk. Thus, begins an adventure through many magical worlds, including hell. We travel through a non-linear timeline spanning thousands of years to meet mythical characters like Lucifer and historical figures like Shakespeare. The scale is epic to the point of being overwhelming at times. But it remains for most parts engaging.

Season 1 adapts the first 2 volumes of the comic book series―Preludes and Nocturnes, and The Doll’s house. I found the first six episodes to be the most entertaining. Things move quickly and the themes are mostly dark. The much talked about fifth episode where the character John Dee puts his theory of truth and lies to the test, inside a diner using the staff and customers as guinea pigs, is where the writing is at its best. I am given to understand that the screenplay departs the furthest from the original in this episode. Critics of the graphic novel have said that Gaiman’s writing was the weakest here, where he subscribed to the horror tropes of the 80’s. I cannot comment on that, since I have not read the original, but I can say with certainty, that this contemporary adaptation made for some gripping cinema.

While the world and character building of the show are exemplary, adeptly supported by the CGI work, sound design and background score, the dialogues though did not sit well with me at all times. Especially in the later episodes where things get a bit verbose and sanctimonious. The darker characters have better lines than the virtuous ones. Furthermore, most characters are a shade of grey. There is no clear villain, except for Burgess, perhaps, and the truth is not monopolized only by the good guys.

From the little research that I have done, it was amply clear that while the screenplay writers (David S. Goyer, Allan Heinberg and Neil Gaiman) have been faithful to the original work; they weren’t imprisoned by it. The subtle changes that have been made were to better the original story or to contemporize it. The gender swapping of certain characters, for example, is not a trope but an attempt to give more life to the original characters. To an unassuming viewer like me, though, all of it came across as quite natural.

That brings us to the casting, which is another strong point of the web series. Tom Sturridge as Morpheus is brilliant, bringing the right amount of strength and vulnerability to his character. His physicality and voice were also apt for the role. Among, the supporting cast, I thought, Boyd Holbrook as the rogue nightmare Corinthian, Gwendoline Christie as Lucifer Morningstar and David Thewlis as John Dee were the most eye-catching. Mason Alexander makes a short, interesting appearance in this Season, as the gender fluid ‘desire’, evoking curiosity within the audience about the future of this character.

Considered as one of the most imaginative and intellectually stimulating comics ever made, The Sandman is one of those written materials which was thought to be unfilmable, much like The Life of Pi. It is a rare blend of mythology, history, horror and fantasy which gets the mind ticking. In the end, I think, for the fans the long wait has been worth it. The show has garnered rave reviews from critics and fans alike. As a relatively new fan of Mr. Gaiman and as someone who has not read the original work, I can only say that this Netflix series has all the ingredients to be a long running one. It is a brilliant adaptation of a classic that is not just made for its ardent fans.

Siddhartha Krishnan is the author of Two and a Half Rainbows – A Collection of Short Stories. He is also an enthusiastic blogger and, on his website, www.whatsonsidsmind.com, he regularly puts out his essays, articles, travelogues and movie reviews.

All rights reserved by whatsonsidsmind.com

by whatsonsidsmind

Ray On Netflix – Movie Review | Revisiting the Short Stories of the Master Storyteller

Written by Siddhartha Krishnan . 6 Min Read

In Satyajit Ray’s short story Bonku Babu’s Friend (1962) a spaceship on its way to Pluto, lands by mistake into a pond in Kankurgachi (North Kolkata). From it emerges an alien, by the name Ang, with slender legs and arms, and a disproportionately large head, wearing a pink outfit covering everything but its face. A shocked bystander, a geography teacher, by the name Bonkubihari Datta is the only witness to this event. Ang manages to befriend its human counterpart, dazzle him with its technology, and fulfill all his wishes. On the surface, this might seem like science fiction; but at its core, this is a human story. Ray cleverly uses the allegory of the alien, to tell the story of a man, who thinks and acts differently from his milieu. In other words, an outcast  —  an “alien” among his friends!

Ray, the auteur, was also a prolific short story writer among other things. He wrote in multiple genres but was most famous for his science fiction fantasies like the Pterodactyl’s Egg (1962), Bonku Babu’s Friend (1962), and The Hungry Septopus (1962), as well as his horror classics like Khagam (1973) and Indigo (1968). His stories were tightly written, highly entertaining, and had elements of fantasy in them. But there was one indispensable quality which was as clear as daylight, and that was his understanding of human behavior and motivations. Ray’s humanism is what elevated his stories from the category of popular fiction into the realm of literature. This is the essence of his storytelling and without it, an adaptation of his classics will be incomplete. It is in this light that I will be reviewing the Netflix anthology Ray.

Forget me not – Srijit Mukherjee’s adaptation of the short story Bipin Chowdhury’s Loss of Memory (1963) is the story of a man’s fall from grace. This modern retelling is darker and more twisted compared to the original story. The director takes you to Mumbai, where we meet Ipsit Nair, the blue-eyed boy of the city’s corporate scene, whose memory is believed to be as sharp as a computer. But this notion is challenged early in the film when a mysterious woman appears before Ipsit and tells him about their first meeting in Aurangabad, which ended up being a short intimate affair. An incident he doesn’t have any memory of! This triggers a series of events that keeps the suspense alive till the end.

The commendable aspects of the storytelling are the camerawork and exceptional set design. The performances too are noteworthy, especially by Ali Fazal who tries his best to deliver a nuanced performance to capture the inner conflict of the lead character. But the film falters in its writing, and while you are intrigued by what is happening to Ipsit, you do not fully connect with him in a way that you end up either hating or empathizing with him. The film is entertaining but it could have been a lot more if it had sacrificed a few twists in the tale and invested that time in adding much-needed layers to Ipsit’s character.

Rating – 3/5

Behrupiya – Based on the short story Bohurupi, Srijit Mukherjee’s second film in this anthology is about a makeup artist, too timid, to confront the cruel world. But he finds a way to get back at the people who have wronged him by using the masks he has created as his armor. But will he succeed?

The film is set in the dark underbelly of Kolkata, and again Srijit manages to make a visually stunning film. This is also the darkest film in this anthology and the protagonist Indrashish’s character is perhaps the most complex. But, here too, the film falters with the writing, and with a skillful actor like Kay Kay Menon in the role of Indrashish, a lot more could have been achieved to show the mental conflict. Instead, the film becomes too verbose as it progresses. This for me was the weakest film in the anthology.

Rating – 2.5/5

Hungama Kyon Hai Barpa – Directed by Abhishek Chaubey and based on the short story Barin Bhowmick’s Ailment (1973), this film is widely regarded as the best in this anthology. In this adapted version, a vivacious ex-wrestler and a seemingly poised but self-absorbed ghazal singer, meet on a train journey. The conversation that takes place thereafter unravels the story through a non-linear narrative, and the audience is made to believe that these are two very different people. But are they?

With two powerhouse acting talents, Manoj Bajpayee and Gajraj Rao on screen, we are in for a treat. And they deliver, with their comic timing, and exemplary understanding of their craft! The director pays a near-perfect tribute to the master storyteller, with a generous dose of surrealism, and an ode to his frames. The imagination and execution were both immaculate. All through the interest of the audience is kept alive, by not indulging in excesses and sticking to the essence of the original story in this modern retelling. This is a film that is bound to leave a smile on your face at the end of it.

Rating – 4/5

Spotlight – At a little over an hour, director Vasan Bala’s adaptation of Ray’s short story Spotlight (1983) does test your patience. Also, this is an unusual adaptation, drifting the furthest from the original story in this anthology. But, the consistent caustic humor and a sprinkling of magic realism in the narrative manages to take the audience on a trippy ride.

At the forefront is a famous actor whose only claim to fame is a stare that he has been able to master. But he suffers a blow to his ego when he is confronted by a religious cult leader lovingly called “Didi” by her followers. Her popularity far surpasses his, which sends the self-centered actor on a path of self-discovery. What we get in return through the subsequent soliloquies is a homage to the master storyteller, through some interesting imagery and intelligently written dialogues. Also, through the social and political commentary, blended cleverly into the screenplay, we hear Ray’s voice but in a modern cinematic language. This was a brave film to make and the outlandish climax scenes justifies this statement. However, despite the evident departure from the original story, it still manages to preserve the essence of the original. This for me was the best of the lot.

Rating – 4.25/5

Overall Rating – 3.5/5

In the words of Charlie Chaplin, “the deeper the truth in creative work, the longer it will live”. The stories of the Aesop Fables, Panchatantra, and Arabian Nights have stood the test of time for precisely this reason. Through fiction, the greatest writers of the past, and the present have been able to convey truths about humanity. Ray is undoubtedly one of them. However, if his stories have to truly cross over to all cultures within India, and not be limited to the bookshelves of bibliophiles then such adaptations are necessary. These stories are for mankind, and they need to be told.

In the distant future, if an alien were to visit our planet after we were gone from it; I hope it discovers a scrap dealer’s shop like “Roohi Safa” (just like Musafir Ali did in the film Hungama Kyon Hai Barpa) which houses a rare collection of Satyajit Ray’s short stories. The book may not serve its purpose for visiting Earth, but the visitor is sure to gain an understanding of how we humans thought, and what our aspirations were through it.

Siddhartha Krishnan is the author of Two and a Half Rainbows – A Collection of Short Stories. He is also an enthusiastic blogger and, on his website, www.whatsonsidsmind.com, he regularly puts out his essays, articles, travelogues, and movie reviews.

All rights reserved by whatsonsidsmind.com