Discordant notes…Sandy’s review of London Dreams
Director: Vipul Amrutlal Shah
Starring: Salman Khan, Ajay Devgan, Asin, Ranvijay, Aditya and Om Puri
Rating: **
Another big budget film bites the dust. The reason is the same. Low on concept, low on imagination and a story that just does not cut ice.
Director Vipul Shah’s intentions are grand but they hang on an incredibly shaky and silly premise, making it a chore to sit through this. When was it that you had Indian pop singers attracting such fanatical fan base among the goras of the world as the film wants us to believe? And that too watching an Ajay Devgan sing, who frankly doesn’t appear to have one musical bone in his body.
The director takes the action away from India because big time stage concerts, he says, is not an Indian phenomenon. And herein lies the problem, because without a reference, it’s not a story you can digest.
Manjeet (Salman Khan) and Arjun (Ajay Devgan) are childhood friends, typically as different as cheese and chalk. While Manjeet is happy go lucky, Arjun- like his name – is focused and dreams of making it big as a singer. Some quick plot contrivances brings Arjun to London and he grows up with the same burning ambition to win over countless fans. Arjun creates his own band, London Dreams, along with three others (Ranvijay, Aaditya and Asin). All this while he remains in touch with his old friend Manjeet – who is portrayed as a country bumpkin with a heart of gold. Of course, his obscene womanising ways (he even impregnates a lady!) should not make him any less lovable in your eyes it seems!
Manjeet does not take his singing seriously, until Arjun sees the spark in his friend and gets him to London. Soon, it is Manjeet who becomes the shining star without even trying too hard for it. He also wins over Asin – who Arjun had set his heart upon.
What it portrays is the contrasting irony between raw talent and meticulous preparation. Manjeet is not hardworking but can effortlessly sway a crowd. Arjun applies himself to a fault, but with lesser impact. This is an interesting conflict in the film, and could have actually been watchable had its setting been something different. An Indian backdrop would have served it very well. Such a story set in the Mumbai film industry or something similar would have made for far better viewing.
But as it stays, the whole music band scenerio in the film appears a sham. The film picks up momentum in the mid-portions with Salman’s comic antics, but soon enough slips into cliched melodrama with a juvenile conspiracy and equally silly ending.
Ajay Devgan looks dapper after a long time, while Salman is unbelievably haggard and old for the part. Vipul Shah should take some blame for making their characters appear and behave in a ludicrous way in several scenes. Shah also deals in extremes with no real nuance to his characters. So if Ajay is full of obsessive ambition, Salman is the clueless man-child. There is nothing more to them.
After a rather striking debut with Ghajini, Asin disappoints with London Dreams, partly because the role lets her down. Asin’s imposing presence on screen is all wrong for a character that has precious little to do beyond smiling and shaking a leg. This is ideally Katrina Kaif’s territory.
The music by Shankar Ehsaan Loy is ho hum.
Ultimately, London Dreams is somewhat like Ajay Devgan’s character in the film- someone who tries too hard, making the effort a strained one in the end.
-Sandhya Iyer
October 30, 2009 at 10:52 PM
Thanks for the review as always Sandy.. looks like Vipul Shah has really missed the bus this time..
October 31, 2009 at 12:21 AM
I haven’t read Sandy’s review yet, but I just saw your comment, and since I have just got home from seeing London Dreams, beg to differ. This is the first film by Vipul Shah that I have seen, and what most struck me as I was watching this movie was how exactly *right* everything was. I thought the emotions, the story, and the characterizations were all right on the money. It is so seldom that I see Hindi films which get all these right that I always notice when everything works so cohesively.
I will comment again after I have had a chance to read Sandy’s review.
October 31, 2009 at 12:28 AM
Good to know your views SM.. I’m surprised you’ve never seen a Vipul Shah film. His Aankhen with Bachchan is consistently interesting.
October 31, 2009 at 12:34 AM
Thanks for the review Sandy….ace as always! Will skip this for now….though Im hearing good things bout Devgan!
October 31, 2009 at 12:54 AM
i dont agree wid dis review.
dis iz da best work of vipul till date.
all da characters in da film complement each other very well.
especially salman and Ajay.
da only ting i agree iz dat Asin iz not really given much scope but Salman completely brings da house down, especially da aeroplane parts
just watch da film and den decide
critics man i hate critics.
October 31, 2009 at 1:36 AM
Teasers were consistently giving bad vibes and this review is a confirmation. Vipul seems to be lost without Akki. Even in teasers bad dubbing and artificial crowd were quite evident. Again a very good review of bad movie!
October 31, 2009 at 4:21 AM
Hmm film is getting a varied response it seems. Thanks for sharing Sandy.
October 31, 2009 at 5:16 AM
It’s not a terrible film by any means, just not quite a convincing script and setting. The central conflict – as I’ve point out in the review – is interesting however.
But too many things don’t work for me here. Both Ajay and Salman’s characters are on extremes, the music in uninspiring, Asin is stuck in a thankless role. On the plus side, the mid-portions of the film, with a mix of comedy and drama engages you.
October 31, 2009 at 4:43 AM
pathetic review.
sandhya music is universal. mj is the most famous musician in the world.people love him in japan where they dont know abc.
a rockstar s age is not limited look at rolling stone or madonna.
masterpeaz hjave a mind of ur own.how can u let others decide for u.im dissapointed
October 31, 2009 at 5:46 AM
btw,what’s ur take on Alladin – the reviews everywhere are outright negative – i really feel sad that BIG B kept writing nice things abt. alladin on his blog – why did he do that? has he lost the pulse of the audience?
btw, 3i promo is BANG ON – mera pais doobega nahin
October 31, 2009 at 5:56 AM
ideaunique thats what even i want .jub koi piture dekhu to baap ka paisa waste na jaaye
October 31, 2009 at 8:06 AM
LOL Mannu! btw, i’ve never felt in any of aamir’s film that mera paisa waste gaya – earlier I used to think the same for BIG B’s film but off-late….well, it is not that his films are bad that hurts but it is BIG B’s disconnect with the audience’s pulse that hurts me more….i hope he doesn’t do crap films any more….
October 31, 2009 at 8:59 AM
I haven’t seen the film yet but can’t comment on it but Sandy, I’m surprised you didn’t enjoy the music much.
I think its some of the best music to come out this year.
October 31, 2009 at 9:02 AM
Rangan’s review of LD and Aladin…
http://www.desipundit.com/baradwajrangan/
October 31, 2009 at 4:11 PM
I see that Rangan equates “classy” with “western” and “massy” with “desi”, thus confirming a suspicion I have long had about Indian film goers’ terms of reference.
October 31, 2009 at 4:44 PM
“You can hear the gears churning: how to make a classy (i.e. Western) film with massy (i.e. Indian) material?”
I would read this sentence differently.. I think Rangan is wryly commenting on the director’s own aims and assumptions. I certainly don’t believe he has such a divide in his own mind. He is for example a lover of the ‘new’ Tamil cinema which is quite far from those sorts of ‘easy’ notions of classy=Western.
October 31, 2009 at 5:23 PM
Since nobody, not even Rangan, can read Vipul shah’s mind, I think this sentence sheds more light on Rangan’s own assumptions than Shah’s. I admit to being surprised, as well as dismayed, that he should have said this. I also disagree on the supposed reading of Shah’s mind, but that is a separate point.
October 31, 2009 at 9:33 PM
Thanks for the review Sandy. Am disappointed to read about Asin. Female roles in hindi cinema are pathetic (more than usual) these days. I think that’s part of the problem with this disappointing year.
October 31, 2009 at 10:07 PM
I’m also surprised by Asin being vastly sidelined in the movie. Salman and Ajay were going to get the hogs share of limelight. But it seems she really had no scope or role in the movie or did not do much of anything. I wonder why she took on this movie? Asin had many offers before and after Ghajini premiered which may have served and used her better as an actress.
November 1, 2009 at 4:40 AM
Wow. I finally had a chance to read this review, and it seems like a distillation of many or most of the other negative reviews of the film. But, while you are over generous with the slams and judgements on this film, I find you way too stingy on the details that form the basis for your opinion. As far as I can tell, though, you could never get past the idea of an Indian band making it big in England, or of “goras” (quite a racist term, by the way; I’m surprised to see you use it) appreciating such a band, and all your ensuing disappointments and disgruntlement toward the film stem from that.
Before reading, I wondered if you, too, would make an issue out of that point, as several others on the net have. I must say that I was surprised and disappointed to see you make such an issue on this point. Why? Because it demonstrates an ignorance of actual events that is nothing short of mind-boggling to me. The stray reader comments at various sites I could class under idiocy or ignorance, or the desire to make oneself feel better by putting down others. But you? A seasoned and respected critic? Now I must ask, are you really so completely unfamiliar with the rise of the British Asian music scene? Is everyone else in the Hindi film industry (some who even have regular shows on BBC!) equally ignorant?
It is not just that an Indian band *could* become popular in Britain, among non-Asian Britons, but that it *did*. Many times, in fact. And, indeed, most of them rose to fame singing in Hindi and Punjabi. Yes they also threw in the occasional English word as their audiences grew. But the songs remained primarily in their mother tongue. Is this a shocking revelation? Yet it is nothing but the truth.
So, the very aspect of the story which to you removes all its plausibility impresses me with its authenticity. Since I know about the existence and rise of several British Asian bands, this story fits very neatly into that narrative, of a story that could have happened in that milieu. Note that it could have happened only in England, because of a confluence of circumstances that is unique to that country. It could not, for instance, have happened in the U.S., where the immigrant story for Indians is very different, as are the social mores.
So, not having any trouble at all with the very plausible premise of the story, I could go on to the characters and how they are portrayed, and here again I must differ with you that there is no nuance to them. If Arjun’s character, for instance is all ambition and nothing else, there would have been no internal conflict for him to overcome. If the sum of Manjeet is to be only clueless, then he would not present such a problem for Arjun with his loyalty and fierce defence of his friend. I agree that Asin does not have much to do. She, in fact, is the typical heroine of commercial Hindi films, which is what she said in her interviews she wanted to do. Well, now she has. But I question whether the heroine in any Hindi film has any more of a role, especially in a film focused on the friendship between the two male leads.
What disturbs me even more is the overall tone of your review. It is not so much a review as a judgement. And, as I have said above, a judgement without facts to support it. I am used to a review being — in however a rudimentary form — an examination of a film’s intent and how well or ill that intent was realized, an analysis of the structure and execution of the film. Sadly, I find no one among the Bollywood reviewers meeting that minimal standard. This is the first time that I have actually read one of your reviews for a film that I have seen. Knowing that you are a respected member at SS as well at Naachgaana, and a professional journalist (I have read and enjoyed your interviews of various stars), I thought that you would give a fair and factual review, and am very disappointed to find that it is not so. I hope that this review is an aberration, brought on, perhaps, by the jaded numbness of watching too many films out of professional obligation and not personal choice.
November 1, 2009 at 4:47 AM
I meant to say, the review is a series of severe condemnations not “judgement”), without any basis given for that condemnation.
November 1, 2009 at 10:27 AM
SM: Thanks for the detailed review of “my review” . Wow, I felt like I’m the film here.
I agree I couldn’t buy the whole premise of a Punjabi lad straight away taking centre stage on the world scene of music. Call it whatever, but I’m not aware of any such band with such a background! And when I spoke to Vipul Shah, his whole argument in taking the action to London was purely because he felt he wanted stage performances since that isn’t a major phenomenon in India.
I had a big ‘relatability’ problem – not least because they didn’t look like singers at all to me. Especially Ajay Devgan – who seemed to be talking a lot about his passion but he didn’t come across as a “musical mind” to me at all. And I stand by all the problems I had with the characterisation.
The ‘conspiracy’ unleashed on Salman by his band members was equally silly I thought. As if by drugging him, all of Devgan’s problems would be solved. Both characters are inexplicably juvenile in their behaviour and that is the only reason how the script progresses. That is never the sign of a good script!
Salman’s man-child act is used to justify him falling in various traps, and mind you, this is the same gullibility with which he impregnates a woman in his village is what Shah would want us to believe I suppose.
The only aspect I liked was the central conflict ie raw talent versus studied perfection. There are many examples of these in real life. Let’s say an Aamir Khan and Govinda! I like that element in the film, but I don’t think it was explored as well as it could have.
You don’t agree with the review, That doesn’t make you right of course. I have laid down my points, You’re not convinced, that is fine by me. I might have complied to your point on ‘setting’ but ultimately, the film was for an Indian audience and if the story falls short in reference that is a failure IMO.
Also, while I appreciate your points, people should write their own reviews, rather than superciliously concluding that “I hope this is an aberration” Aberration on what basis? To your views and standards? I’m sorry, I don’t intend to adhere to that.
Anyway, thanks for the comment in any case. All views -of all kind- are welcome I guess.
November 1, 2009 at 10:28 AM
And yes, except for one song, Pyaar Ko – which was great – the rest of the music I did not enjoy.
November 1, 2009 at 4:45 AM
The slam on the film’s music is also very puzzling to me, and again it is not just you who finds it “ho hum.” What I found most impressive about the music was the way the songs incorporated the different musical orientations of the two lead characters. So, while Arjun’s compositions are derived from a grounding in western music, Manjeet’s are grounded in the Indian tradition. The influences of both classical traditions are clearly discernible in several songs. In the scene where Arjun first becomes aware of Manjeet’s musical talent, for instance, he is impressed by the way Mannu is humming variations on a tune, or what, in Carnatic music, are called sangathi’s. Similarly, in the first song where they are performing together in London, when Arjun becomes incapacitated and asks Mannu to take over the song in the middle, the whole musical approach changes as soon as Mannu starts singing, with Indian ragas clearly being infused into the previous composition. Such attention to detail was a delight to me, but it seems to have passed most critics by. Very puzzling.
November 1, 2009 at 5:08 AM
Here’s another try to post an amplification about the British Asian music phenomenon:
“As Bhachu argues, for a period of time it was ‘hip to be Asian’, as white British audiences listened to British Asian bands like Cornershop, danced to the hybrid sounds of bhangra, and wore ‘Asian’ inspired fashions …”
(from Transnational Spaces
By Peter Jackson, Phil Crang, Claire Dwyer)
LINK
November 1, 2009 at 5:09 AM
And my third and final try to repost an earlier link:
“In the early 1990s, however, this situation changed as increasing numbers of Asian artists in Britain drew on their sense of ethnic identity, allowing it to inform their music in more direct ways. Indian sounds appeared alongside hip-hop, rock, and electronic dance, in some cases as a metaphor for displacement, while lyrics became more politically charged. When Apache Indian, Bally Sagoo, Fun^Da^Mental, Hustlers HC, the Voodoo Queens, Asian Dub Foundation, Nitin Sawhney, Talvin Singh, Echobelly, Black Star Liner, and Cornershop appeared a number of them were… ”
http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/music_and_letters/v087/87.3beard.html
November 1, 2009 at 9:42 AM
somehow these comments all went into moderation. Not sure why..
November 2, 2009 at 12:12 AM
Yeah, I figured that was what was happening, but since I was leaving first thing in the morning, I wanted to get the supporting documentation in.
November 1, 2009 at 5:20 AM
OK, one really last try to post the first link again — only this time I will post an excerpt from the book in question, and forgo the link, as WordPress apparently doesn’t like it for some reason:
From:
Music and Letters
Volume 87, Number 3, August 2006
E-ISSN: 1477-4631 Print ISSN: 0027-4224
Beard, David, 1971-
Brimful of Asia: Negotiating Ethnicity on the UK Music Scene (review)
Music and Letters – Volume 87, Number 3, August 2006, pp. 482-485
Oxford University Press
This is from a review of this book:
“n the early 1990s, however, this situation changed as increasing numbers of Asian artists in Britain drew on their sense of ethnic identity, allowing it to inform their music in more direct ways. Indian sounds appeared alongside hip-hop, rock, and electronic dance, in some cases as a metaphor for displacement, while lyrics became more politically charged. When Apache Indian, Bally Sagoo, Fun^Da^Mental, Hustlers HC, the Voodoo Queens, Asian Dub Foundation, Nitin Sawhney, Talvin Singh, Echobelly, Black Star Liner, and Cornershop appeared a number of them were… “
November 1, 2009 at 10:48 AM
sm -
The British Asian music seen in general is very niche, much like the films. There is very little cross-over overall, the people who generally invest interest are again NRI’s. I am not surprised that many would not be aware of the musicians mentioned in those articles. I know of most of them but again its more likely to be brit asians who are aware.
Its a pretty big scene in asian circles of course. My own friend is trying to crack into the industry and its highly competitive with many youngsters vying to be the next big thing. But it is what it is, very niche and fairly small.
This is all changing though, much faster than Indian films are getting access to the west, the music is ahead and in much quicker time.
Point of example is Jay Sean who is creating waves in the US now with #1 single in Billboard Top 100 which knocked of Black Eyed Peas. This is a remarkable success I think, this guy is a UK Asian Urban act and has been on the scene for years but has cracked the US market which is probably the hardest one out there.
“It is not just that an Indian band *could* become popular in Britain, among non-Asian Britons, but that it *did*.”
I don’t really believe this to be the case. Sure there will be some popularity but it is miniscule. There was certainly no major mainstream breakthrough in the 90′s – by this I mean a consistent artist who cracked the market amongst non asians. Now maybe there are a few – but again how do you define popularity? And popular amongst who? I still find the same ignorant views towards Brit Asian artists as there are towards films. Its probably less, because music is a shorter form of entertainment and more universal but I seldom meet non asian britons listening to this music. The level of popularity in any case would be minority.
Jay Sean for my money would be the biggest success in UK and his peak is #4 I think in singles charts. This itself is an achievement but again its vastly due to asians rather than non asians. I’m sure there is awareness of this music – but is it popular? And popular compared to what? These guys are no Robbie Williams or Timberlakes i.e. none of them are household names.
November 1, 2009 at 10:52 AM
Wow, some poeple can really peddle half-baked opinions with such confidence. I am impressed!
November 1, 2009 at 10:57 AM
Yup, thanks Jay, Didn’t know anything about this.
November 1, 2009 at 10:52 AM
this whole exchange is very informative for someone like myself who knows nothing about this scene.
November 1, 2009 at 11:04 AM
Jay Sean is very popular amongst the asian crowd. He had Bipasha Basu in one of his music videos. He has scored 3 or 4 top 10 hits in UK. There are others too and I am not denying this music scene is not successful or popular, just it is still quite niche and confined to brit asians rather than non brit asians. But the bubble will burst soon. These guys will definitely make it. The 90′s probably provided the motivation for these guys. There was successes, I remember Corner Shop hitting #1 with a song mentioning Asha Bhosle! But they were one hit wonders. Thats the real glass ceiling. A star needs to emerge not only with one hit, but multiple hits to really be considered as a big game player.
November 1, 2009 at 11:00 AM
RE: “When was it that you had Indian pop singers attracting such fanatical fan base among the goras of the world as the film wants us to believe?”
&
RE: “The director takes the action away from India because big time stage concerts, he says, is not an Indian phenomenon. And herein lies the problem, because without a reference, it’s not a story you can digest.”
Sandy, I haven’t managed to see London Dreams yet, so at this point I can only say that your review is well-written and forceful, but that is to be expected. However, I take issue with the above two statements, not because they aren’t true, but because, EVEN IF THEY ARE, they are true of very many films. Consider the second one: that is PRECISELY what Karan Johar said about why Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna was not set in India; he said that in India, you couldn’t have an extra-marital relationship without the whole world knowing and having an opinion, interfering etc. If he was sincere, he was demonstrating a level of cluelessness that boggles the mind (so extra-marital relationships don’t happen in India? Are Indian adulterers so inept that they cannot manage to keep liaisons a secret, especially if they do not live in joint family set-ups?). For that matter, why did Love Aaj Kal, every fricking comedy and love story, NEED to be set outside India? I mean, Life Partner and Acid Factory?! Heck, with Jhoom Barabar Jhoom Yashraj took a story that was supposed to be set (according to the guy who provided the story idea) in small-town India, and nevertheless set it in the UK.
As to the first comment, surely that is as much par for the course as the notion of Brits singing the Indian national anthem, or the notion that party planners can be fabulously wealthy in Manhattan. On a more substantive note, the position of “Asians” (as desis are known in the UK) is very different in the UK than in the US, as far as pop culture visibility is concerned. A better analogy would be desis in the UK being more like Latinos in the US (not at the same level, though) — i.e. a minority group whose popular icons have great cross-cultural currency. Perhaps the only stretch is that these icons in London Dreams (Devgan) are not homegrown in the film, whereas the sorts of figures I am thinking about are homegrown, but that isn’t much of a distortion by popular film standards…
November 1, 2009 at 11:06 AM
“However, I take issue with the above two statements, not because they aren’t true, but because, EVEN IF THEY ARE, they are true of very many films.”
I didn’t say they aren’t true of many films. It’s just not very convincing here. This story could have worked in an Indian setting – that is my overarching point. I don’t care what Karan JOhar thinks- he is obiously wrong in his assumption. He wanted the locales of course! In this case, I am convinced that taking the action outside India was a mistake. That is why I am harping on it. Take this story and put in the Mumbai film industry and I say it would have made for a rivetting watch.
November 1, 2009 at 11:09 AM
Also, Q, just because something is true of many films proves what? That it is par for the course and does not need to be highlighted. I might agree with that, except that I will reiterate, here the ‘setting’ is the villain. I’m sure KANK would make for a very plausible film even if it was set in Mumbai – to that degree, it doesn’t make that much of a difference. I can’t stress enough how much difference it makes in LD.
November 1, 2009 at 11:13 AM
Fair enough, as I haven’t seen the film yet — I’ll check it out and get back to this point. [Although, I think Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna, like very many films, DID suffer from being set in a plastic, bubble-like "abroad", although I agree it was not the worst offender (e.g. Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Gham suffered even more). Whereas, the setting added to things in Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jaayenge.] It’s that relatability factor — when I see buffoons cavorting about the Mauritius landscape, i.e. not even a proper city but some malls, beaches, etc.; or when every San Francisco scene has Golden Gate backdrop; or when some ultra-traditional Indian boarding school is actually some palace in the English countryside, I can’t really relate to things anymore. That heightened level of fakeness just adds that extra few layers between me and the film.
November 1, 2009 at 11:50 AM
I think there are two separate issues here:
1)the basic entertainment quotient in a film — one can have all sorts of questions and issues about a film and still consider it entertaining at a very basic level. K3G is such a film for me.
2)Plausibility is of course an important criterion for any film but it seems to me that the way the term is often used it is sometimes a synonym for ‘realism’, sometimes not. It should never be so. Plausibility can only be measure relative to the world of a film. In other words one could argue against Superman by suggesting that people don’t fly! Closer to home one cannot criticize DDLJ for not being serious about visa issues (or perhaps it heralded the new EU!).
I think that an entire brand of cinema associated with Yashraj and Karan Johar should be thrown out of the window based on the plausibility agreement. Not because of the foreign locales as such but the fact that these are absurdly presented. The KANK example was brought up here, a number of the scenes take place outside one central train station here! It’s not that only New Yorkers would see this. Anyone could recognize the same site occurring again and again and wonder why characters keep hooking up at one station for all sorts of different situations (of course KANK has far more serious plausibility issues and the locales might be the least of the problems). Many of the films in this brand (and I only use SRK’s cinema as being most emblematic of this tendency) operate on fantasy terrain. But those films scored in terms of being more entertaining than most of the competition. I find Bhansali’s HDDCS completely implausible in terms of ‘setting’ in many ways. Even if I accept the ‘truth’ of his story (which I praised the other day in a different context) I cannot overlook certain issues which are ‘implausible’ FOR the world of that film. So I don’t believe that locales are merely details that can be ignored. These are part of the film’s fabric and shape the viewer’s perception of the film.
I always had a related problem with the condescension towards many of akshay’s comedies and so on. I have hardly seen very many in this genre (with or without akshay). But that is a matter of personal taste. I cannot however argue that the average Yashraj film was more ‘intelligent’ than the average Akshay comedy. This might sound preposterous but I sincerely believe it. Again I’d rather watch KKHH than Hey Babyy. But that is a personal preference. It’s not true for everyone. My kind are better represented in current Bollywood economics and so a KKHH sort of deal for the longest time outgrossed everything else! That’s a different argument. This is again not to suggest that a KKHH wasn’t better made than a HB but this is again not about the ‘intelligence quotient’ of a film. There can be very well made films in any conceivable genre. This is why I liked Ghajini so much within the Bollywood context. It wasn’t just that I was supporting an action film. Aamir had a massive grosser in RH in the 90s but I consider it a very mediocre film and certainly poor compared to the original. As a political matter I would be happy with a Ghajini doing well but I wouldn’t be as invested in it if it weren’t also a proper film as I see it. So for example Wanted was a welcome box office success but it’s a very poor effort otherwise (certainly for someone who’s seen the Telugu original).
In short the terms of the debate cannot be changed for different films. I consider RNBDJ to be the most implausible deal around because the very idea that a woman cannot recognize an obvious double every single day (the old masala films had precisely the opposite premise — recognition in the first instance!) is more preposterous than most of what Akshay attempts in any of his comedies. In fact if the very same plot element had been present in a Dhawan film or an Akshay comedy everyone would call it completely over the top.
All of this is not to suggest that London Dreams is a good film. I haven’t seen it and I have a hunch I’d come down more on Sandy’s side on this one than SM’s. I am also not necessarily sure whether too many reasons can be provided in a basic film review where there are space constraints, where one is expected to ‘summarise’ and so forth before anything else. With a more serious film it is paradoxically easier to do so as a basic summary touches upon these central points. But it requires more space to separate a London Dreams from others in its genre since the distinctions at an ‘intellectual’ level are usually minimal and one then has to get into other issues. But where I do find myself sympathetic to SM (even if I have no real opinion on the factual basis of Asian groups in Britain and have just been informed quite a bit within this exchange) is that one is not entirely clear why these grounds are particularly egregious when it comes to this film when tons of Bollywood films indulge in the very same thing. One might be in danger of mixing the entertainment quotient (one enjoys a film and not another within the same genre) with the plausibility one.
November 1, 2009 at 7:20 PM
A nice comment.
November 1, 2009 at 7:33 PM
thanks Munna..
November 1, 2009 at 12:40 PM
I think having an Indian band making it big in UK is a plausible scenario even if it may not be realistic. Again depends on how it is presented.
Agree RNBDJ was beyond implausible. One always tends to overlook faults of films one likes and it is understandable and excusable.
November 1, 2009 at 12:50 PM
“One always tends to overlook faults of films one likes and it is understandable and excusable.”
such diplomacy does not suit you Rajen! say what you really feel! LOL! My own attempts at diplomacy involve coming up with hideously long comments and burying the real criticism in them!
November 1, 2009 at 7:19 PM
lol.
November 2, 2009 at 12:09 AM
I’m glad to see the discussion here. I was traveling all day, so have just now been able to get online. Briefly addressing various points raised above:
– The plausibility factor: What I find plausible about the whole film is the fact that there were many British Asian bands, consisting of members from various countries in South Asia, and many Indians in such bands did indeed come from Punjab. So I found it entirely plausible that a Punjabi boy who is interested in pop music would dream of forming a band that would be successful in London, especially if he had a family connection to performing in London. I also found it plausible that an Indian Punjabi, a couple of Pakistanis, and a South Indian girl would come together to form a band. That’s the kind of composition of many of those bands. So I think Vipul Shah got it right there.
– the success of the band: I guess I don’t invest performing at Wembly with some huge prestige factor, since several Bollywood shows have been held there. It is a measure of a band’s success, but it does not represent some pinnacle of success, to my mind, such as winning a Grammy award, or having a record going platinum. In fact, that kind of success was not mooted for the band. They merely had some successful concerts. And yes, they had non desi followers as well as desis. But the main point I was reacting to was this idea that singing in Hindi would automatically mean that a band couldn’t succeed, which was raised in several reviews, not just this one.
– on British Asian bands in general: I would of course defer to Jayshah on this one, though without characterizing my earlier arguments as “half baked”. However, I think my earlier point was misunderstood. As I said just above, “success” in this context doesn’t necessarily mean having a universal or even world wide acceptance. It merely means that the acceptance was not limited to the desi audience. Now I am someone who does not follow pop music at all. Nevertheless, the rise of the British Asian music was forced onto even my notice because it was reported and commented on as the next big thing in the general news. I think that represents a level of wide spread acceptance beyond desi neighborhoods. And several of those successful musicians, such as Bally Sagoo, are known even in India and Bollywood. Thus I find it strange that this whole phenomenon, spanning almost twenty years, should be so unknown to Indian film critics. So, the rise of a Jay Sean in the present day is a direct outcome of the success of earlier Asian bands. I recall reading even that the whole Bhangra influence was not limited to the British Asian bands themselves, but spread to other leading musicians, so that the incorporation of bhangra elements has now become common in general pop music, much as the influences of Ravi Shankar and Hindustani music can be seen in the use of sitar and tabla, heck even the mridangam, in everyday American music. Even TV ads have these!
– on Sandy’s review: What I meant by “aberration” was that I found a lot of strong statements, without any supporting instances from the film itself, which I think is a requirement of a good review. For example, you have twice stated that Mannu impregnated a woman in his village. Maybe he did, but all we are actually shown in the film is him wondering if he is responsible for the pregnancy of one his partners. We see him asking her who is the father, himself or her husband? And she quickly hushes him and gestures him to go away, without answering the question. Now if I missed her actual in this scene, or if you are referring to another scene, then I wish you will correct me.
– It is fine not to find a film’s story convincing, but if it is unconvincing at an emotional level, then the argument should not be that it failed on a factual level, especially when factual basis can be found. I have been surprised to find most of the negative reviews using such kinds of weak arguments.
– One of the things I appreciated most about this film was that it gave a fairly realistic portrayal of life in foreign countries, which is usually presented in a highly distorted manner in most Hindi films.
November 9, 2009 at 12:22 PM
saw the movie loved it one of the best in the year for me.
salman rocked..
music was awesome… barson yaaron ..khanabodosh.. tapkey mast.. all are my favs right now..
completely disagree sandy.. but may be thats because after studing 15 days nonsensely and one goes for theater every logic goes wayward
so for me none of those questions matter and neither did logic after xams i had a blast of a movie.. and yup the grand setting.. salman dancing and performing.. especially barson yaaron.. ajay devagan worthful after long time..
one of the best movies of the year from me…
November 9, 2009 at 12:34 PM
unfortunately Salman has had two more or less disasters since Wanted. In absolute terms MAMK has done no more than UJ. And London dreams with than 22-23 crore opening looks to be no bigger than Tashan or JBJ or CCTC in week 1.
November 9, 2009 at 12:36 PM
that “REF” was joke yesterday.
UTD deserved the draw atleast!
November 9, 2009 at 11:59 PM
hi vijay… rooney was not offside .. aT 10 MIN..
ALSO WE DESERVED PENALTY
FLETCHER WON THE BALL
DROGBA WAS OFFSIDE AND PULLED DOWN DEFENDER..
but we will come back..
also i was surprised the wasy we did played as i was not expecting much looking at strarting line up.. but it was hell of a performance.. only if rooney had passed anderson.. valencia to oshea or valencia to anderson…
November 10, 2009 at 12:02 AM
nothing like a soccer reference to drag you out of your exam books Rooney! Good seeing you here..
November 10, 2009 at 12:25 AM
satyam- xams over.. blockbuster…
m back
(though will get more active slowly as will have lots of sleep to take.. and parties..)