Hello!! Knock Knock!

One of the things that I promised myself at the beginning of this year was to be more consistent with my blogging.  I had all the excuses in the world for being busy or not having a 'life' but seriously, none of them were true. One can write when one has to. You don't need any promises.

So here I am thinking that it better be late than never, and writing about something that has fascinated me a lot in the recent months.

No, it's not a guy.

Is it just me or all the gays find this whole law business intriguing and interesting. Truth be told, I have been a great fan of  'Boston Legal' and can never get enough of it, and 'Ally Mcbeal' was the first show I honed interpreting the american accent. So what was about this new show that has got me hooked?
"The Good Wife" is a misnomer, just like what series creators did with "Desperate Housewives". They deliver you something else when you least expect it. I will be bored to give you details here since that's what wikipedia does if you already don't know about the show. And if you have not watched the show, let me say you what you should know which is not on wiki. ( See how smart I am saving both of ours time)

The show is nothing like my other favorite show 'Boston Legal'. It's inspired by real life events with a twist and most court cases featured are not facile. Each episode requires constant attention to get full understanding of nuances and it's not all fun and games standing before a judge, having 'jibber jabber' like Alan Shore made us believe in Boston Legal.

It's a real joy to see Julianna Margullies as the protagonist in the series but the surprise package is Archie Panajbi playing the role of in house investigator Kalinda Sharma.

And boy, does she look hot??

I mean she is so hot that I can turn straight for her. But it's too bad she plays a Gay. Irony of sorts!
What really astounds me is the level of good writing that goes into this show. What we get to see in India is hundred of years behind. In fact, most of our movies don't have that kind of layered characterizations, and they feed us stereotypes after stereotypes based on their little understanding of places beyond glam parties.
Has anyone noticed that a lot of time the dialogues are literal translations of english cliches? The 'Karthik calling Karthik' dialogue where Farhan asks Depika if she would take advantage of him if he gets drunk. How lame is that??

Never judge a book by it's film

Last night, I watched two movies back to back based on books. First one was 'Kite Runner', a book which was stupendous commercial success with readers across world lapping it up, despite the fact that literary critics did not think very highly of the book. Notwithstanding the critics opinion, I was immensely moved by the book when I read it exactly two years back. This was perhaps the first work of fiction that was based on Afghanistan that chronicled the country from her 70's western influenced free spirit to post taliban era. Another notable thing that this book holds special place for me is because it's the only book I finished in one go. Unputdownable. That was one word I could describe it with, then. Planning to read this again, savoring each word this time to get more nuances from the book.


However, that day has not come till date, and I decided to watch the movie based on the book. The movie was shot in Kashgar,China because of prevailing tensions in the Afghanistan. The first thing you notice in the movie is the brilliant camera work and scenic beauty. The terrain shown in the movie looks similar to Laddakh but more breathtaking, captivating and bright. Now, I have one more place to visit on my 'place to visit' list.


The movie for most part stuck to the book, and I couldn't find scenes where they altered the sequences. However, in order to stick to running time, some of the portions were perhaps not filmed/edited out. The film was in persian dari with englsih subtitles thrown in. But the excellent acting by main cast did not need much deciphering on my part, aside from the fact that I had read the book.

The second movie I saw last night was 'Brick Lane' written by Monica Ali, a debut novel which was also shortlisted by Booker in year 2003. I wanted to pick this book for a long time but couldn't read it for some reason or the other. So I was excited to hear that the book is being made into a movie and would do the festival rounds soon. The book, along with the film had to face considerable opposition from Bangladeshi community since they felt it projected them in wrong light. But now, after having seem the movie, I strongly feel there is not much controversial in the film. Every community has some quirk, peculiarities and people like to read/ write about it; rather than the mundane and ordinary stuff. Just because 'God of Small Thing' is based in kerala and talks of illicit realtionship does not mean that all malyalees are sex maniacs/incestuous. By the same analogy, the movie did show some unpleasant aspect of Bangladeshi community, but it will only be juvenile to apply that stereotype to seventh most populous country in the world.



I didn't like the movie much, I think the device employed in the novel by the author was series of letters exchanged between sisters, one living in Brick Lane, London and the other in Bangladesh. This particular feature, though splendid in print, did not come out strongly due to limitation of cinema as a medium. The cast was first rate, and most Indians will be surprised to see Satish Kaushik playing the main characters in the movie. Satish Kaushik is a trained actor, and has been active on the theater circuit as well. My first recollection of his brilliant acting was when he along with 'Pankaj Kapur' came as 'Titu and Toni' on Superhit Muqabla on Zee TV. Satish Kaushik has donned the mantle of movie director succesfully, and his most notable films include ' Hum Aap Ke Dil Mein Rahte Hain', Roop ki rani Choron Ka Raja, 'Mujhe kucch Kahna Hai', etc.

Now, before I answer the original conundrum, I must list a few movies I had seen that were based on books.

• The Namesake ( read the book first)
• Chocolate ( read the book later)
• The Da Vinci Code ( book first)
• Pinjar ( book first)

Initially, I was of the opinion that it is essential to have read the
book to enjoy the film. But now I think it is not required unless we are talking about a book like Da Vinci Code which had to be compressed in 120 minutes

'The Namesake' was more colorful, lively and relatable than Jhumpa Lahiri's book. The movie had different focus on character of 'Ashima' than ' Gogol', opposed to the situation in the book. However, considering all the time constraints, the essence of book was preserved giving it a sharp flavor and pace by Mira Nair in the movie.



'Chocolat' as people who care to look at my blogger profile page might notice, is amongst my favorite films. I fell in love with everything in the book. From red haired Juliette Binoche, who I declared to be the most beautiful women I had ever seen; to sexy Johny Depp in an underplayed performance, not to mention the place the whole movie was set. I would have to google it, but my hunch says it has to be either Italy or France. And did someone mention chocolate?? umm, I don't think there can be any one in the audiance who does not fall in love with dark, creamy, gooey, sweet, bitter chocolate shown in various montage shots in the movie. ( I need to get a slice of dark chocolate cake, NOW)

I was disappointed when I read the the book which was quite different from what was shown in the movie. Characters were not as goodlooking, colorful, mysterious as they appeared in movie. The setting was not majestic, the chemistry between lead pair was tepid.

So, that was the moment, for the first time when I realized a better movie can be made out a book. And I adhered to the dictum 'never to judge a book by it's movie' since then.

P.S. I have neither seen or read the most famous book adaptation of our times- 'The God Father'. The reason is I get put off by universal praise, though I would like to see/ read it.

Sex and the City Post

I went to watch Sex and the City movie on this Sunday evening. It was the only running show of the movie at 10 PM and I had nothing to do for the day, quite like all the other weekends. So, I decided to watch the movie alone. Before that I dropped on to a friend's place, who leads a completely insular life as he prepares for his civil services exams, and would be the last guy to know about sex and the city. I told him casually that I am going to watch this movie in an hour and did not even ask him to join me. Now, He dropped this information to some of the guys who live in his house as tenants when he went there to fix some problem.

Being a closeted a guy, I don't like people second guess me. It's not about whether or not they will be able to surmise about my sexuality, but more for my self satisfaction that I am this super intelligent dude who covers all his trails, leaving nothing behind for any one to think differently than what I want them to think ( I know it's weird )

The reason I do this is that I have in company of some super observant people-who I could sense had their reasons to doubt my sexuality. I remember- this very good friend of mine asking me in the middle of conversation, while we were surrounded by some six to seven other close friends if I was sure I was not gay. Much to his surprise, I knew he was up to some trick and I deftly passed that off as nonchalantly as I could. Why I mentioned all this is because I happened to bump into his tenant a few minutes later when he came again for something and we started talking. He gave me meaningful stares when he got to know that I was going for that movie alone. The movie being SATC.

I couldn't have cared less about what he felt. It was just a matter of always having the upper hand. Anyway, I decided to tell him I don't have any girlfriend and neither am I looking for one.

Let's talk about the movie. I have been a great fan of series and will tell you about its effect on my psyche while I was growing up in some other posts. Most of the comments I read later about the movie said the movie couldn't keep the promise of the series etc etc. But for me, I was too happy to see the foursome together on screen. I could empathize with some of the situations. I am a big fan of Samantha and Kim Katrall. I guess most gay men look up to her as an icon. She is unapologetic about anything she does. And subconsciously perhaps we all want to achieve that stage where we are completely in sync with out actions and thoughts. All in all, I had a great time watching the movie and it rekindled my spirits for all things glamorous and sassy. No wonder, I bought two shoes today!

Kaheen D'Aag lage lag jaye!

Though, it's more than two weeks since Laaga Chunari mein daag has been released, and it might be redundant to speak about it now; I find it imperative to speak about some of the issues about the movie which critics and audience have both disowned.

As director Pradeep Sarkar himself said that predicting the story line and its flow within 20 minutes of watching the film was certainly a no brainer, and it was all too evident from the promos itself what the story would be. So, whoever entered the theater hoping to catch more of 'Natasha' than 'Vibha' was sorely disappointed after not getting to see Rani Mukherjee in Neha 'Julie' Dhupia mode, mouthing suggestive dialogs .

The second grouse against the movie was it's poor acting by Rani and 'over' acting by Jaya Bachchan. I, hereby, must it make it very clear that unlike many others; I don't hold Jaya Bachchan's acting capability in high regard. To me she has been very repetitive in her expressions, always chose a certain kind of roles which suited her persona and she got lucky with a few roles where she excelled because either the director was as brillant as hrishikesh mukherjee or gulzar. However, I had to eat my words when I saw her perform in this film. She played a hapless mother torn between her ailing frustrated husband and daughter gone astray. Critics were unanimous to declare her performance a fixed expression wonder- perpetually carrying a scowl on face with epileptic facial movements. To say such a thing is real absurd, and I term this insolence as nothing but ignorance on part of critics having never stepped out of their bombay glass houses. I was so amazed to the subtleties she brought to her performance, her body language and expressions was something that I had encountered in thousands of women in UP. Shahrukh Khan whose expressions and body language have never changed in any film irrespective of the fact whether he was playing a bengali drunkard or a football coach in Newyork, yet crtics go ga- ga over him. So when I see somebody at least attempting to bring a realistic touch by changing their body language or accent-- which does not happen very often--it shows there is still hope for some acting in bollywood. Jaya Bachchan's stint in UP politics and her association must have brought her in contact with such women, and I must say she has done a good job of it, which could have become a caricature of sorts if handled ineptly by a lesser actress.

Now, if we come to Rani who is a fine actress and brings a certain honesty to her roles, has not let down her fans by a poor performance. She was dependable and good in most of her scenes. However, The toast of the critic was Koko. I have mentioned in my previous post that I feel that she is the best actress in India right now. But, certainly this was not her best role, and one does not have to bring down Rani by being effusive about the other actress who in her own wayz was extremely good.

Btw, if anyone has still not figured out, I didn't like the movie myself. And I know who is to blame. It was Pradeep Sarkaar who could not bring any freshness to the old story, the way he had done with Parineeta. Or, perhaps he was too lost in making the shots look too perfect that he forgot about the story and emotional graph. In todays time, if you bring a good set of technicians they will make sure the aesthetics are in place, and a Director must never forget what his job is all about.

Who is the 'fairest' among all

Koffee with Karan is quite a popular show on Star World and the best part of the show is that you not only get A-line celebrities ( except for an episode featuring Ektaa Kapoor and her harem of Men from K-Serials. And before you scream- Rakhi Sawant, let me say, though she is not intellectual and all, she is a loved by masses who love her as much for her crassness as for her antics). The section which is most talked about in the show, or often more controversial than others is 'Rapid Fire' round, where the host asks the guest questions in rapid succession and expects some masaaledar fiery answers.

Now, one of the most frequent questions which is put across to the guests has been: " who is the best actress- Rani, Kajol or Aishwarya?". The answers have been varied and most guest choosing between Rani or Kajol, leaving Aish behind, and if I can make a rough approximations Rani would have got 40% compared to Kajol's 60%. A few weeks back, the show featured Javed Akhtar and Shabana Azami and they were asked the same question. I don't recall Javed Akhtar's response but Shabana was quite quick and convinced in her response when she chose an actress out of the troika. "Konkona Sen Sharma", said Shabana , in her characteristic equanimity, without batting an eyelid while answering the question. This answer really got me thinking. Who is the the best actress today in Indian Cinema, and fortunately I seem to be in agreement with Shabana here.

Konkana Sen Sharma won best actress national award for ' Mr & Ms Iyer' in 2002; and I, for yet not having seen the movie, felt that there again goes story of daughter of an established art house director, having considerable influence over the jury who got the best actress award favored to her daughter, much in the same way people accused Saif Ali Khan for having snatched Best actor for Hum Tum under the aegis of her mother Sharmila Tagore. In retrospect, I feel my reservation over Konkona had much more to do with my Indian sensibilities which smells a rat every time somebody with illustrious parents excels in the fields they choose, rather than some obscure underdog winning the coveted prize from hinterlands ( How many of us raised eyebrows when Meera Jasmine won in 2004).

I feel utterly humbled later on by her acting prowess when she slipped easily into varied characters one after another such as a tamilian Iyer housewife to mother of a young child inclined to 'swing' in 'Mixed Doubles' to that of a 30+ virgin in Life in a Metro..But for me, her most lovable performance was in 'Omkara' where she played a village belle to perfection. Though, each character stood out in that movie, however, she remains my personal favorite. Her diction, body language and expression transported me to western Uttar Pradesh. Now, there is a woman who is unfazed by the presence of bigger stars like kareena in Omkaara , Rani in Laaga Chunari Mein Daag ( where reports suggest that she is taking extra care in the presence of best actress of India currently to save her reputation of being queen bee of hindi films) or with Madhuri in Aaja nachle.
An overlooked perfomance of hers in Yun hota to kya hota directed by Naseerudin Shah, where he rightly acknowledged her to be THE BEST actress in India today, should also be mentioned to highlight her versatilty. Without doubt, she is not the best looking actress around, but having said that, her acting makes up for more than how she looks. And needless to add, I am a Big fan of hers!

Chak De!

I don't often watch hindi movies, but my bored life sometimes forces me to watch one, that too, all alone. Having said that, let me add, I like watching movies. Usually, the kind of movies I watch are not appreciated by people I have for company. So, I watch them all alone, without getting distracted by distraction of my fellow moviewatcher by the designer clothes or lack of them, or finding something funny in serious scenes. So, I went out and watched two movies this weekend in quick succession.

The first movie, Chak de India, was not a movie I would have gone on a normal day. Firstly, I am not too fond of Shahrukh Khan's acting abilities, and not at all fond of his looks ( He looks like a hanger in his new lean look, What's up with these oldies, I say? I just hope that he is not taking a leaf out of Shekhar Suman's book, where he, like Shahrukh, has gone popla without shedding his teeth). And let me also add a completely extraneous statement that I was not swayed by the fact it had 16 girls playing hockey players. ( Would have been different if it had 16 male hockey players like Vivan Bhatena, He was such a cute prick in the movie). It is often said that the best way to enjoy a movie is to go without any expectation and form your opinion only after you have seen the movie. This has been proved so true in this case that I had to swallow all my misgivings about this movie. The story line and everything was dissected, and was all over the news, therefore I had a fair idea what was in store. But surprised I was, when I saw the final product. Shahrukh khan for once was restrained and did not get to twist his lips, or shed copious tears while shaking his neck the way he does when he loses his heroine. All the girls were perfectly cast and showed decent acting abilities, while dribbling the hockey stick, which by no means would have been easy.

The best part of movie was its taut screenplay and editing, Shimit Amin himself being an ex-editor would have certainly helped here. Much to my chagrin, I enjoyed the movie so much so that I even fancied Sagarika Ghatge playing the role of Preeti Sabharwal. Kudos to Jaideep Sahni and Aditya Chopra for having conceived such a film and bringing it to us, without having to worry about commercial viabilty of a movie centering around women Hockey. Jaideep, who also helms the dialogue and lyrics of the movies has brought out the character sketches beautifully. All in all, though it may been inspired by hollywood movie Miracle, yet it has been indianised so well that it makes every indian shout Chak De..India!! at the end.