This entry was posted on November 19, 2010 at 12:20 AM and is filed under the bad . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed
Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.
340 Responses to “Guzaarish, Golmaal 3 & Action Replay (ongoing) and the remains of the box office!”
Guzaarish is likely to take a slow start at the box office and rely on word of mouth. The film does not have much for the youth so good opening figures are unlikely. It will be the collections from late afternoon on Friday which will decide its fate.
The publicity has also been low key as it is a known fact that the film will have to rely on content rather than hype.
Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows Part 1 (English) is likely to take a good start at multiplexes around India but its release will be smaller than Guzaarish so overall collections may be lower.
Look at the tone of this commentary, as compared to (e.g.) that on something like Delhi-6 — as to which it was just as much “a known fact that the film will have to rely on content rather than hype”, and which was just as much a film that did “not have much for the youth…”
Reviews all over seem pretty good…I’ll most probably catch this tomorrow…VERY rarely (if ever) do i miss a Bhansali film in cinema…even if it is just for the visuals:)!
@satyam- i remember u said about RC 2 releasing with KHJJS, cool but u have missed something-
THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA 3… also coming same day.. and its huge hit with family audience in metros.. it worries me.. (and to be honest even i might take cousins kids for that one! )
saket
It just lends credence to the theory that there aren’t any “genuine” superstars anymore. The only person close to being one is Aamir Khan and even he can’t guarantee an earth shattering opening for TZP!
Even Aamir khan will not open Dhobi Ghat.That was true after Amitabh retired in 1992.But who called shahrukh as king of bollywood?who said he is No1?
Sunil: To some degree I agree with you re: no more “genuine” superstars, though there is Rajnikanth (assuming you’re referring to Hindi cinema here only?).
And films like TZP/DG are very different to say 3I and GHAJINI…expecting a similar BO opening/reaction isn’t fair as even the audiences are aware this isn’t a regular fare….
masterpraz, I was rsponding to saket’s comment.Yes if Amitabh is a standard no one is a genuine superstar.Even he couldnt open manzil,alaap.But to say there are no superstars is an exaggeration.
But Amitabh still got a good opening for Bemisaal, Silsila. I remember Bemisaal and Khuddar released within weeks of each other and I saw BOTH in packed houses. Khuddar was packed more, but people just flocked to see Amitabh.
There were huge queues to watch a 30 min appearance of Amitabh in a godawful film called Insaniyat! This was AFTER he had taken a sabbatical and somewhere between Mrityudaata.
More theaters means more revenue, not less. The possibilities are more. Amitabh was actually LIMITED by the number of theaters available and his commercial films always opened to 100% without any exceptions.
If we compare like for like, a superstar of today should be able to open a film like TZP or Dhobi Ghaat to packed houses. Aamir was able to open RDB and I do happen to think he’s the closest to being a genuine superstar, but can he open Dhobhi Ghaat to over 40 crores in its first week? If he can, it’d be a terrific achievement.
I do concede that one can’t have a 100% opening across the board in today’s times. Perhaps the capacity exceeds the demand. But there’s no reason why in today’s times a somewhat offbeat film made by a current age superstar can’t open to at least 50% of the present day record (50% of 80 Crores = 40 crores)
Piracy was rampant in those days too. At least in the video circuit. Piracy isn’t a new-age phenomenon. If you’d like to factor in “other modes of entertainment” then also factor in the fact that there was hardly any publicity for films in those days. Films used to sell solely on the name of the star!
Hello everyone, my first post here-
regarding discussion of superstars, I think that Aamir and SRK do have the extra pull( for srk is overseas and aamir the domestic)..so to say we dont have superstars would be incorrect…
for instance a BILLu opens better then almost all other stars in overseas and Peepli live ends up with a comparable opening to action replay…tht too on lesser screens.!!
So we are now going to classify “superstars” as domestic superstars, international superstars etc? We can also add superstar from the bhaiyaa belt, superstar in the turban belt, superstar from the land of the nagas while we are at it!
well the overseas belt or the domestic belt is an universe in itself..u r talking as if they are petty regional stars…(no offense to the though)..nevertheless..and why cant srk be called the king of bollywood??..the guy has had tremendous success till the day he entered…and continues too..i personally believe that currently we have 3-4 superstars but…their have been periods where only amitabh or even srk were the lone bo kings.
You didnt say that but the media said
silsila is a yash chopra film.Yes bemisaal is a success.
shahrukh should not have been called king of bollywood by anyone.
Silsila was a love triangle and Amitabh wasn’t playing to his image in the film. And Yash Chopra was hardly a factor in front of Amitabh Bachchan. Remember Vijay? Lamhe?
between dont kmnow where to put this but media anchors like barkha dutt andvir sanghvi under fire here-
We bring you the full transcripts of alleged conversations between Niira Radia, Barkha Dutt, Vir Sanghvi and others, published in Open Magazine. The magazine’s story seeks to expose the networks of lobbyists and power brokers that dictate how this country is run. MiD DAY will keep you updated on the controversy as it unfolds
Earlier this week, Telecom Minister A Raja of the DMK was forced to resign after pressure mounted on the government over irregularities in the allotment of the 2G spectrum. But this decision to sacrifice an individual in no way changes the system that Raja embodies. Evidence filed on the 15th of November in the Supreme Court seems to shed some light on the networks of lobbyists and power brokers that actually dictate how this country is run.
While Raja is gone, these networks survive, shaping and influencing our lives in ways we cannot imagine. Thanks to a fortuitous set of circumstances, the transcripts that follow shed some light on one such network of power.
Can someone point me to the juicy bits in this article? I don’t have the time or the inclination to do so myself but I’d love to see those smug faces covered in egg.
My tweets: “This sure doesn’t smell good”; “@BDUTT Fair points to an extent, but there is something unseemly about the tone of transcript. Not that of a journalist, but an “insider”; “@BDUTT Agree tag-line is unfair. OPEN seems to miss the real (and more difficult, nuanced) story in overreach for more sensational one”
“didnt get it when u say more plexes more revenue?”
Well, I meant to say that the more number of viewing avenues available should translate to more revenue. At least theoretically. A film with some amount of buzz before release will benefit from having more screenings, not less.
In the older days, each and every Amitabh movie carried buzz. Based on his name alone. It was probably a hindrance to have limited theaters in those days as more theaters would have meant more revenue. I have personally witnessed fights in queues and it would have definitely helped if there were more theaters screening Amitabh’s films.
Guzaarish opened to low response this morning of 30-40%. This was expected and the real test for the film will start this evening when the turnaround will have to come if the film is to make a big impact at the box office.
The general reports from those who are watching it and reviews are good but it remains to be seen if this translates into good collections.
The English version of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part One opened to a very good response of 60-70% at multiplexes across the country.
Once again, Potter mania has gripped India. If the advance booking is any indication, Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows — Part 1 will open bigger than Guzaarish, which toplines Hrithik Roshan and Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and releases with over 1,000 prints. The Hollywood flick is at least 400 prints short, but is giving Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s biggie a run for its money.
According to reports, about 36 minutes of the Potter film have been leaked on to the Internet. Warner Bros’ legal team is currently investigating the issue.
Harry PotterAccording to Sunil Punjabi, CEO, Cinemax says, “The advance booking is fantastic, no Harry Potter fan will miss it.” He adds that the multiplex chain has already registered 65 per cent collections on Thursday. “But comparing a traditional Hindi film to a big Hollywood franchisee is not setting the right benchmark.”
At E-Square, Pune’s first multiplex, Potter is selling 10 times more than its Hindi competitor. “We’ve sold 630 tickets for Guzaarish as against 6,370 for Harry Potter,” reveals a source at the multiplex on condition of anonymity. Trade analyst Amod Mehra is confident that Harry Potter will register a huge opening. “But there’s not enough curiosity about Guzaarish. It’s high price could also affect its recovery.”
Prakhar Joshi of PVR Cinemas attributes the Guzaaarish slump to Potter fever: “The pre-bookings till Monday were as good as that of any Hindi blockbuster. We had sold about 16,000 tickets. And then Potter came along,” he says, adding that like 2012 (2009) and Avatar (2009), he expects this to also do big business. Punjabi however believes that good word-of-mouth publicity can help Bhansali’s film. “I’m optimistic that it will do well over the weekend,” he maintains.
Sharing the same sentiment, Joshi adds, “The reports are good. So if people like the content, Guzaarish’s collections will surely pick up.”
Guzaarish research: revisiting great performances. Bardem/ Sea Inside, Amalric/ Diving Bell, Day Lewis/ Left Foot. How will Hrithik compare?
Review: She is the only one so far not happy with HR’s performance (she is fan of him)
Bhansali is among the few directors who enable Aishwarya to shed her trademark artificiality.
Looking stunning, she delivers her most heart-felt performance in years.
Hrithik struggles and sweats with a difficult role. Ethan must be gloriously life-affirming even as he begs for death. But his character, like the film, is too over-wrought and obviously manipulative.
I need to strongly point out that OVERSEAS collections for hindi films are irrelevant. The Indian diaspora is insignificant compared to the great Indian population. Let’s respect the numbers. Let’s respect the place from where the source of this debate stems from. Crowing about overseas successes is a bit like talking about India’s gold medal in Kabaddi while ignoring to mention cricket as a major sport!
Saket,
Yeh kya ho raha hai?
Virtually on everything except AB, we seem to be on the opposite side of the issues! LOL
You realy dont think much of SLB,do you?
I seem to enjoy his films inspite of his excesses. The only one I am really lukewarm about is Devdas.
yeah of all his films I like Devdas the least. But also this is his most transitional film in the sense that he’s not left the HDDCS world completely behind but he also hasn’t made that leap to the ‘hyper-aesthetics’ of his later films. Saawariya too this whole logic to a certain extreme. With Guzaarish I think he’s pulled back. The question though is: what does he do going forward. How many times and in how many ways can he do extravagant visuals? He has had the Bajirao Mastani project in him for a long time. Once he wanted to do it with Salman and Ash. This is no longer a possibility. He’s had others ideas on this but these haven’t materialized. But it all now (or any project) depends on Guzaarish. He absolutely cannot afford a failure here after Saawariya. He has his positive reviews and it is rare to find no correlation between these and the box office in a film with major stars. So a pickup wouldn’t surprise me at all. However unlike JA (where I cannot think of another film in years that had as much of a free run for weeks and weeks as this one.. the film opened just decently but the family audience sustained it.. still the gross was not more than decent or better given everything that went into the making of this one.. there’s a reason why UTV haven’t worked with Gowariker since!) there is competition here pretty much every week. Harry Potter this week (one assumes that even some of the family audience will be affected here.. kids who presumably have to go with their parents), Break Ke Baad next week (targets the same under 30 audience as Harry Potter), then KHJJS, then No Problem, then one free week followed by the TMK juggernaut. Of course the crucial weeks are this one and the next. A hit film does not flop after two weeks nor vice versa. But if it’s something with moderate, niche acceptance the distractions with these other releases might be too much. But again I wouldn’t at all be surprised with a significant pickup. of course my old point is proved once again here.. stars doing different become extremely mortal. It becomes a WOM game. Kites even after getting mauled got off to a good or better start.
I think the world is full of enough disabilities for Bhansali to target next. I’m surprised he hasn’t made a film about a neuro-muscular dsytrophy sufering scientific genius a la Stephen Hawking. Then again, there’s no Hollywood film to copy from at the moment. Perhaps we’ll see a hindi version of ‘A Beautiful Mind’ next.
I don’t hate Bhansali but I get irked by the praise he gets. I don’t think he’s the worst director around but he’s defnitely far from being hailed a genius. Devdas was as funny as Shankar’s Nayak! But I do like Khamoshi to this day. The cinematography in Black was brilliant but Bhansali only recreated the lighting from Pyaasa! It’s so obvious that Bhansali can only regurgitate and not innovate. But different strokes and all…
>I don’t hate Bhansali but I get irked by the praise he gets. I don’t think he’s the worst director around but he’s defnitely far from being hailed a genius.
I know the feeling. I feel the same about another film personality.
The thing is, when I criticize Bhansali, I don’t simultaneously praise Johar! I don’t sing paeans supporting David Dhawan, Anees Bazmee, Rohit Shetty, Farah Khan, Sajid Khan, Rakesh Roshan or Farhan Akhtar. I think Bhansali is clearly better than these guys.
Where I find Bhansali short is when I compare him to Anurag Kashyap, Rakeysh Mehra, Vishal Bharadwaj and Mani Rathnam. Frankly, I’ll take RGV over Bhansali for a multitude of reasons.
It’s not the same with you because you choose to promote a clearly inferior ‘namoona’ of a film personality and his NYC fixated friend
It’s the *feeling* that’s similar Saket not the details of the reactions to the feeling.
Of course, *you* are among those who understands films, you like ‘fine films’, have sensitvity and emotion, therefore you have different standards of comparison.
As for me, I lack those.
I think 50 crores dopmestic nett is a reasonable bar for this film.
Agree with Saket that while overseas collections are a plus, a film cannot be judged a success based on overseas numbers alone.
If a major film is scared of going toe to toe with a Hollywood film ( however big ), there already are problems. Harry Potter shouldnt really mater and cannot be an excuse for underperformance.
50 Crores domestic isn’t bad but one would expect stars like Hrithik & Ash (although female stars haven’t been traditionally able to pull in audiences on their own) to account for something above 60!
As a commercial venture, it to an extent can be. As it could be if only one person saw a film and was prepared to pay ___ crores for it. But when one talks of “hits” where films are concerned, at least my thinking (as I have long argued, and with respect not only to overseas grosses but also intra-Indian grosses as well, although the issue is most starkly presented in the case of overseas grosses) is that it won’t just be a few tens of thousands to see it, the crores adding up because those folks happen to be in countries where 1 unit of currency equals 50 or 75 Indian rupees; but because large numbers of people will see it.
Verdict: Guzaarish will be loved by the class audience in the big cities but will face rejection among the masses and in cities other than the really big ones, in towns and villages.
He said Hrithik is typically a subtle actor in his review, but uncomfortable doing melodrama in Guzaarish. Hrithik is subtle???? These film critics are just as lame as the movies they criticize.
‘A terrific, subtle actor’- am nt sure even if RakesH Roshan would even call him that. Much as I like HR.
Masand and Sen typify whats the worst about Indian film critics. Bozos.
Only one person was negative.
I liked the comment about being in a different world for 2 hrs and 15 minutes. If Bhansali has succeeded in transferring people (at least some) into a different world, I’ll say he has succeeded in what he wanted to do.
Golmaal 3 has crossed the 90 crore nett mark in two weeks. The second week business of the film is around 29 crore nett as per early estimates.
The figures in so far are East Punjab- 3 crore (38% drop), CP Berar – 1.50 crore (55% drop), CI – 90 lakhs (49% drop), Rajasthan – 1.40 crore (55% drop), Nizam/Andhra – 1.25 crore (42% drop), Mysore – 75 lakhs (64%). Mumbai circuit has dropped most due to its extraordinary first week.
The third week has seen a big drop due to the release of Guzaarish and Harry Potter but it should cross the 100 crore nett before the end of its run.
This has nothing to do with anything and normally I would not spread bile like this but this site has gotten to a point where it’s kind of like reading The Onion. Pure comedy:
Rajiv masand is one critic i dont lok upto atall. He was the first critic when i started watching rating and got to know wat areview. Those were college days iand me and my sister along with my friends were willing to watch a movie when exams were just got over. Two big films released that week black and shabd. I was hoping both to be good as i had just started liking bigb(more becoz of khakee, i just hated bigb before that as i didnt want to see old actor as leading man onscreen but gradually i was liking him more with every fim passing) . Also i had lot of sympathy for aishwarya after chalte chalte episode becoz i she was sidelined by bollywood that time and working with flop or so rising stars of that time inspite of being top actress. coming back to the point, we saw review by rajeev masand on star news hindi channel. He gave bad reviews to both the films and we were shattered and opted out of the plan of watching any of those films. But the notifying thing was review of black. As a viewer and as per media reports rani was there throughout inthe movie and bigb had small supporting role. Same thing was told by rajeev masand in his review so we believed moreover he said bigb appears only for half an hour in the film that too in post interval portion and many more thins which i kept in mind. But after weeks later we were surprised to see the film and i was like searching for rani but she appeared in second half, every thing told by him fell apart though all of those i dont remember exactly. And we came to conclusion reviewer had not seen the film he just reviewed based on some perception and media report. And we had believed him becoz same was our opinion after following promos ans news. After that day i dont trust rajeev masand atall. He said bigb was overacting throughout the fim but now he says he acted brilliantly. Can we trust such reviewers who go by perception and media hype. Last year the way he was promoting kurbaan and mnik this year months before its release he made it clear whose payroll he is on. For mnik in its releasing week, the Way he was chatting with viewers and convincing them how good it is, was just ridiculous.
I want to ask a serious question about people like Bhansali. What drives them? I can understand the “commercial” directors/producers/writers, whose only goal is to make money, lifting/copying/being “inspired” by Hollywood or other movies and remaking them for their personal benefit. But how can people like Bhansali, who think of themselves as “artists” justify such a practice? That is, don’t have any artistic vision of their own that they want to convey with their films? Some world view or philosophy, or even understanding of character? Some commentary on the human condition? These are usually the kind of motivations that drive an artist to do work. What drives Bhansali? There has not been a single original film from him. Why does he want to bother making films at all, if he doesn’t have anything to say? I find this truly puzzling. As much as I disliked Delhi 6 and RDB, I still appreciated those films for having a point of view that their maker was trying to convey, and which was original. Similarly with Gowarikar, who I also feel is overrated, but he at least has a genuine point of view that he tries to put across in his films, however well or ill. What the heck does Bhansali have to say?! I’ve never been able to figure it out.
But Bhansali does bring a certain set of aesthetic choices to the table. I don’t think he sees himself the way you’ve described him. If anything he imagines himself to be a great movie visionary in the footsteps of Raj Kapoor and Guru Dutt! I myself made the point a few days ago that there is no ‘big idea’ in Bhansali’s films. At the same time I cannot say that great cinema is only about ideas.
But even his “aesthetic choices” are often about reproducing others’ aesthetic choices, and often they are without meaning. For instance, in Devdas, he reproduced a shot from Mughal-E-Azam. Superficially they are the same — courtesans dancing. But the Devdas shot doesn’t have the context of the MEA shot, and so is devoid of any emotional significance. Similarly, many shots in Black were “beautiful”, but the lighting choices and composition didn’t add anything to the narrative, and sometimes even detracted from it. I soon concluded that trying to extract any implications of mood or emotional resonance from the cinematography was a futile exercise. This is quite in contrast to the way cinematography is used by other auteurs such as Bergman or Welles. All right, I know Bhansali isn’t in their class. But it is more than merely being at a lower level, I feel that Bhansali isn’t even in the same game, that for him each “beautiful” shot exists in isolation, and has no more justification for being in the film than that it looks good.
The reason I raised this question is that it is quite obvious that Bhansali is very passionate about his work, and puts in a lot of labor into achieving his vision. But for so much effort, I don’t see what it is all supposed to culminate in, and that’s what I was seeking clarification on.
I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said (though I’d give more to Black than you do) but Bhansali’s visuals and sound choices for that matter are sort of meant to stun the viewer with their excess. But yes as I’ve said before he has the staging of opera without the ‘passions’ of that medium. Bhansali’s aesthetic choices almost always (Black is an exception.. Bachchan is a force of nature here at many points and survives!)overwhelm any other emotional resonance he’s trying to achieve. Actually in an odd sense Saawariya came closest to what is probably his intent everywhere. A completely staged world that is only coincidentally inhabited by some humans (Rishi asked Ranbir why there were such few people in that town when he visited the sets!). But being a commercial director Saawariya cannot be the model for him. So Guzaarish offers some back-pedaling on his part but which then also presumably creates that uneasy mix. The drama at any rate hardly ever emerges organically from his films. He pounds the viewer into submission! And the problem again is that he doesn’t quite have the intellect to handle the ‘logic’ of his visuals. I do think there is something there whereas with his sound I just find him very poor (even in Black). But you’re right in that he means his sets and colors and so forth to overwhelm on their own and not be intrinsically connected to his narrative (and he isn’t an auteur to truly be led by the visuals). Finally in terms of reproducing the work of others here I’d say that there is enough of his own in all of this barring those moments where he obviously intends allusion.
Obviously Bhansali doesn’t see himself as I’ve described him! I’m trying to understand how he does see himself, because whatever understanding I have of his self-image doesn’t jibe with the work he puts out.
What is the issue even if Bhansali copies the ideas? There are section of people who immensly like his films, some think Dabaang/3-Idiots are not master pieces.
The issue if Bhansali copies his ideas is that he doesn’t have any ideas of his own. That may not matter to others, but it matters to me.
What do Dabangg or 3 Idiots have to do with this discussion? Their makers are not setting themselves up as visionaries, but are frankly looking for commercial success. But it’s ironic that you would cite these two films, because both had original stories.
have not seen guzaarish yet but will definitely check it out on the big screen.
The only bhansali film i was never enthused by was saawariya which i ended up never seeing.
Dont understand what wrong bhansali has done in the rest of his filmography to deserve this complusive criticism.
agreed –he goes overboard with melodrama, overemphasis on visuals et al.
but cmon, what is the standard he is being compared to?
For all its failings, black is and will remain one of THE hindi movies o the past decade maybe longer, IMO..
The passion and dedication to his craft is there to see…
he does have delusions of grandeur of being a modern day guru dutt etc, but dont think ambition is a bad thing.
its another issue if it is david dhawan who harbours this ambition!
khamoshi, hddcs, devdas, black —his filmography is not inferior to any contemporary maker –although many (including myself) have ohter favorites depending on theme, genre and style.
that doesnt belittle bhansali–he has his own place in the current scheme of thingz at least as of now!
“A completely staged world that is only coincidentally inhabited by some humans (Rishi asked Ranbir why there were such few people in that town when he visited the sets!). “–haha
thats y i never watched saawariya.
also found the lead cast quite unappealing esp at that time.
bhansali IMO nailed it in black—perhaps this will remain his lifetime best.
will check out guzaarish probably this weekend, to see how it is compares to his previous work!
I think Satyamhas summed it up quite brilliantly.
It is quite fashionable to bash and belittle Bhansali but I happen to like his work.
Blac, inspite of its accesses remains an exceptional film, one of the most exceptional in mainstram IMO.
HDDCS was atrend setter in many wyas.
Saawariyan nspite of its faults is something I would take over 90% of Bollywood films.
SM, SLB gave Salman one his best roles in HDDCS.
Devdas is the one where he faltered. But, I lay the blame more at a rather unspiring tale and a weak male lead.
HDDCS is one of Salman’s best roles? I found him excruciatingly annoying in it, and thought Devgan owned him. Perhaps I’m in the minority but throughout that loud, bloodless Mouna Ragam knock off, I kept wondering what Ash’s character saw in Salman’s! Don’t mean to be too harsh, it’s a harmless film but I’m genuinely surprised if the general consensus sees this as a good Salman role. Granted I’m not exposed in the man’s filmography but I recall this being a pretty passable act.
LOL,GF.
Let yourself loose once in a while and stop being such a stuffed shirt !
Dont tell me you didnt enjoy Sameeer, thandi hawa ka jhoka and all the attendant bafoonery. This is what Salman does best other than the sombre Prem act and I happen to enjoy both.
B.O. update: ‘Guzaarish’ starts slow, ‘Harry Potter’ better
- By Taran Adarsh, November 20, 2010 – 08:39 IST
Guzaarish As expected, GUZAARISH started on a slow note in most parts of the country. Like this writer pointed out a few days ago, the opening numbers were expected to be dull since the promos hadn’t created a buzz prior to its release and even the songs hadn’t caught on with listeners.
Generally, mass appealing films starring A-list stars [RAAJNEETI, DABANGG, GOLMAAL 3] embark on a terrific note, while films aimed at the big city multiplexes [GUZAARISH] usually start slow, but pick up if the reports are strong. The glowing reviews and the terrific word of mouth seem to have helped GUZAARISH and the evening shows behaved much better than noon shows. The film should show an upward trend on Saturday and Sunday, given its merits. Business at ‘A’ class centres is expected to be the best.
HARRY POTTER embarked on a much better start than GUZAARISH at the domestic box-office. The film has been liked by the kids, although the general feedback/reviews are mixed. However, the film is likely to score in its opening weekend due to its powerful brand.
Guzaarish Picks Up In Metroes Golmaal 3 Huge Second Week
Saturday 20th November 2010 09.00 IST
Boxofficeindia.Com Trade Network
Guzaarish took a slow start but picked up in metroes like Mumbai, Pune, Delhi and Bangalore in the evening. The first day collections will be low as most of the day was dull but Saturday should be better as collections picked up Friday evening at big urban centres
The two other Hindi releases Deewangi Ne Hadh Kar Di and Shahrukh Bola Khoobsurat Hai Tu were extremely dull and have no chance at the box office.
Action Replay dropped in week with collections of 6 crore nett taking its two week business to 28.50 crore nett. FLOP
Golmaal 3 had another huge week of 29 crore nett taking its two week total to around 91 crore nett. The film had a big drop at the start of its third week but it should hit the 100 crore mark after four weeks. BLOCKBUSTER
Hi Everyone. Thought of posting my take on Guzaarish here.
SLB romanticizes another aspect of human suffering caused by disabilities of extreme kind. It has quite a few complex ones to unravel. Superficially it is Euthanasia or Mercy killing which could be seen as solution for a certain section of the society. That debate has been brought to it’s legal conclusion and something which was well understood right from the beginning – that it ain’t going to happen. It is an unusual theme for the Indian masses who still imbue the para psychology as enshrined in Bhagvad Gita which will have one essential implication – the end of the body does not matter – soul is anyway immortal. In fact Lord Rama himself opted for Jal Samadhi, an act of willing end to his life. I am not sure if the movie being a movie can generate a serious debate around the issue of Euthanasia. It all depends on the popularity of the movie.
Then the second theme which is at the core of the movie is the message of life which has to be lived fully with all it’s resplendent happiness, glory, contrasts and ultimately love. This is the aspect which brings in some real performances – a deviation away from the routine hobnob and masala ongoings in the usual world of Bollywood. The cinematic genius of Sanjay Leela Bhansali was never in doubt right from his early days with every movie proving to be of an exceptional picturesque quality. This time around he has shown another of his talents – music direction which was a pleasant surprise. He has also made Hrithik sing. The song What a Wonderful life is a master piece capturing the essence of life and its contrasting elements.
Either way whether you like suffering or happiness in a movie it is all there in rather extreme degrees because SLB doesen’t believe in moderate steps. The film is not as ostentatious in grandeur or opulence as some of his earlier work, but rather well toned highlighting the real message about the subject, and life. The music so beautifully blends with the narrative and the visuals. In fact you wind up craving for more.
The beauty of this journey of Guzaarish cannot be completed without the absolutely mesmerizing performances of the lead i.e. Hrithik Roshan and Aishwarya Rai. Bravo to both of you. What a performance. This is certainly their career best. On Aish there is no doubt that she puts in her best in scripts that merit her attention or inspire her talent. The chemistry between these two actors, transcends to a new and deeper level than their two earlier works Jodhaa Akbar and D2.
A special mention has to be made about the supporting cast. Nafisa Ali is effective in her brief role. Aditya Roy Kapoor represents the alter ego to Hrithik’s character Ethan. As Omar his presence brings shades of laughter, joy and fun in Ethan’s life that he so dearly missed. The other characters play their part equally well especially the two lawyers (Ethan’s lady friend, and the public attorney). Monica Dutta charms in her cameo and plays an instrumental part in finally echoing Ethan’s Guzaarish.
The film has many shades of lighter moments, keeping the humour intact while debating on a serious subject. All in all Guzaarish is a beautiful journey of life, hope, suffering, and beyond suffering – A journey not to be missed.
I too thought the supporting cast was brilliant here. My absolute favourites have to be Rajat Kapur in a brief cameo as the opposing lawyer, the lady who played the attorney who was simply fantastic and Aditya Kapoor again in a instrumental role (and lengthy) after ACTION REPLAYY.
But for me, the films is captured in 2 moments: Ashwariya Rai Bachchan (more an event here in any case than a “moment” !) and Hrithik’s rendition of WHAT A WONDERFUL… which hits all the right notes, and for a brief moment, elevates GUZAARISH into something overly operatic, over-the-top yet done with enough passion to create a truly “feel good” moment of a rare kind.
Just saw GUZAARISH, I liked it about as much as I liked SAWARIYA if not a little bit more.All of Bhansali’s “flaws” (abstract world, operatic style etc) are all there but this is a thoroughly engaging drama with an absolute KNOCKOUT performance from Ashwariya! In recent years, this HAS to be my FAVE Ashwariya performance..she is just SOOOOOO elegant, charming, sensitive and emotional it blew me away. The scenes with her are just mesmerising…
Hrithik is good here too, this is on par with JA acting wise, however his limitations as an actor are evident here. He thankfully doesn’t go TOO overboard with facial expressions etc and there are genuine moments he hits the right nerves.
I’ll be seeing it again tomorrow in cinema JUST for Ashwariya……
The films quieter scenes and moments work best in the film….even Hirthiks silences are brilliant and he conveys more with his silence than he does with his expressions/delivery where he often seems awkward/doesn’t know how to react.
The cinema was about 30% full.
P.s: The theatrical trailer to KHJJS got a good reception with a few claps and whistles and surprisingly more than TMK! The DHOBI GHAT reaction met with a “WTF WAS THAT” type reaction which was somewhat expected….
thanx master-praz for that…
“The theatrical trailer to KHJJS got a good reception with a few claps and whistles and surprisingly more than TMK! The DHOBI GHAT reaction met with a “WTF WAS THAT” type reaction which was somewhat expected…”
i would be curous to know where this “cinema” was—esp find the whistling and clapping to khjjs wierd!
even abhishek would be stunned–lol
P.s: Music was DEFINETLY a hindrance, and the best part was Hrithiks rendition of WHAT WONDERFUL WORLD which truly hits all the right notes emotionally and otherwise….
just back from the movie – what a wonderful movie! Julie, MP has written very nicely – i am not writing anything more – just want to mention that EVERYTHING including songs worked for me – stunning performances from everyone – and yes, aish has never been given such a graceful and MATURE performance – and she delivers it amazing grace – she along with hritik is the soul of the film. a movie to be watched only on big screen…..every frame is a work of beautiful craft.
I’ve never missed Bhansali’s movies in Theatre. I don’t know why they make select audience films with high budjet. With so much English, it was mainly for multiplexes and overseas.
Guzaarish has collected in the 3.75-4 crore nett range on day one. Saturday is expected to be a lot better as it is off too a much better start than Friday morning.
Shabana Azmi goes ga-ga over Hrithik’s performance in Guzaarish
Shabana Azmi Ever since they played mother and son in Fiza, Jaya Bachchan treats Hrithik Roshan like her own son. But now she has competition. Shabana Azmi, who saw Guzaarish, has adopted Hrithik. The multiple National award-winning actress says she has not seen a performance like Hrithik’s in Guzaarish in a very long while. “If I had a son I’d like him to be Hrithik. His eyes speak volumes. His body language and his whole demeanor is breathtaking. Main to fidaa ho gayi. Actor ho to aisa.”
Hrithik is overwhelmed by Shabana’s response. Says the superstar, “Of all the compliments I’ve received for Guzaarish so far, Shabanaji’s is the best. Actually, I haven’t had time to allow any of the compliments to sink in.”
So who says an actor cannot compliment another even if they are competing for the same roles and within the same box-office parameters can’t be friends?
After the screening, Abhishek was seen profusely complimenting Hrithik, thereby putting an end to all the talk about the two not seeing eye-to-eye since Hrithik’s pairing with Aishwarya is so much in-demand. “You should make an action film. There’s so much pent-up violence within you,” Abhishek was heard telling Sanjay Bhansali after the screening.
The Big B who has worked with SLB said the film was magical. “The way Sanjay creates on celluloid is just so awesome. Everything and everyone perfect.”
When asked to comment on his bahu Aishwarya’s performance, the Big B said she was “restrained and dignified”. Just like the Big B’s comment.
Rekha has already adopted him as son. He is lucky to get so much support from the faternity. Even in audience reaction, all old ladies were talking about him.
‘Harry Potter’ conjures $24M at midnight showings
AP
– Fri Nov 19, 1:56 pm ET
LOS ANGELES – Harry Potter has added to his billions with a whopping $24 million domestic haul from midnight screenings of his latest adventure.
According to box-office tracker Hollywood.com, that puts “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1″ third in the record books for midnight debuts, behind the last two “Twilight” movies: last summer’s “Eclipse” with $30 million and 2009′s “New Moon” with $26.3 million.
“Deathly Hallows” outdid the last installment in the franchise about the young wizard, “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince,” which took in $22.2 million in its midnight debut last year.
The big start portends an opening weekend well over $100 million, said Hollywood.com analyst Paul Dergarabedian.
That would make it only the second of the seven “Harry Potter” films so far to top $100 million domestically in its first weekend. The first was “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire,” with $102.7 million in 2005.
Worldwide, the franchise has taken in nearly $5.5 billion in theatrical revenue since the first film debuted in 2001.
The latest film is based on the first part of J.K. Rowling’s seventh and final “Harry Potter” novel. The finale, “Deathly Hallows: Part 2,” is due out next July.
Box Office: Guzaarish opening poor; Harry Potter leads in multiplexes
HETAL ADESARA 20 November , 2010
MUMBAI: Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s Guzaarish starring Hrithik Roshan and Aishwarya Rai Bachchan took a very poor start on Friday, while the much anticipated Hollywood franchise – Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows: Part 1 saw a superb opening at the box office in India.
As per initial estimates with Businessofcinema.com, Guzaarish’s net collections on Friday were merely Rs 35 million (Rs 3.50 crore). The movie, however, picked up significantly in the evening shows across some metros.
On the other hand, Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows: Part 1 movie saw occupancy of approximately 65-70 per cent at multiplexes across the country on Friday. The first day net collections of Harry Potter are approximately Rs 25 million (Rs 2.5 crore) in all languages (English, Hindi, Tamil & Telugu). The advance booking, the ratio of Harry Potter v/s Guzaarish across all multiplexes in India was 7:1, while the first day occupancy ratio at multiplexes was 2:1 (Harry Potter v/s Guzaarish). The movie has also been the biggest ever release in terms of prints (531) in India for the Harry Potter franschise till date. However, the movie was released without any digital prints.
Internationally, Warner Bros saw $25 million in advance ticket sales for Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows, which is a record.
The other two Hindi films that released along with Guzaarish and Harry Potter were Diwangi Ne Hadh Kar Di and Shahrukh Bola Khoobsurat Hai Tu. However, the movies’ performance is nothing to write home about.
Thanks, Julie, Masterpraz and Henry for your views. Much appreciated.
My plan was to catch it tomorrow but has been kaiboshed for now by unexpected guests!
“And yet, Guzaarish isn’t quite a Bhansali movie – and not just because there are no fountains. The director appears to be tiptoeing around the intoxicating, hyper-expressionistic style that characterised his films from Devdas onwards, unwilling to quit cold turkey, yet afraid of being labeled the town drunk.”
I had a feeling Rangan would’t love it. He’s written the past how unlike others he feels that SLB’s best work came after Khamoshi. Basically he prefers melodramatic SLB.
Watched it last night. Except for a few melodramatic, cheesy moments(Hrithik singing, English songs and a couple more) I liked it. Its a good movie. The court scene towards the end dragged things and the ending should have been stronger but Aishwarya and Hrithik really make up for it. They were strong together.
Skimmed this a bit. Looks like typically insightful stuff from Rangan. I think I might still give this a shot at some point during the week. Can’t say that I’m terribly interested in it despite and because(!) of all the kind words floating about. And with Rangan not enthused, I’m a bit more reluctant.
Too bad.
But I have to give a thought to all other reviews as well, especially to those of the posters on this blog, and finally in such situations, make up my own mind as I did for Raavan (which I liked).
just watched guzarish. will come up with a bit more later..
quick few words–
definitely, a film not to be missed on the big screen.The film does have its bhasali-esque moments…
but going bya few promos and reactions, was making me curious about whether guzarish has surpasses black—-the answer IMO is NO…
also guzaarish it today. i was conservatively optimistic about it going in— since i’ve already seen “the sea inside”—but i’m surprised how much i ended up liking it. its good to keep your expectations low and jugde it on its own merits. its well-made albeit operatic film, as expected from bhansali. its a heck of a lot better than “saawariya”, which i didn’t like all that much. aishwarya gives a great performance, arguably her strongest yet. hrithik is pretty good, but sometimes his performance is mannered. performances by the supporting cast is also strong. if you liked bhansali’s “black”, chances are you’ll also like this. and i agree, its a movie to be seen in the big screen.
Well said Aditya…I too was surprised (just put my review up)….I didn’t have high expectations AT ALL and I dont think al ot of people did for this one…
Yes Ash is just BRILLIANT here and Hrithik is damn good too.
Askhay, I too saw it in Sydney last night but there was no trailer of KHJJS. They showed 3 trailers of “dhobi Ghaat’, one from “No one killed Jessica Lal”, another from “Tees Maar Khan” and also a new flick from Yash Raj stables called band baja baarat..
No one killed Jessica seems to be a good one esp the scenes they showed of Rani and Vidya.
FilmBuff: Sorry slip on my part, I saw it in Auckland (back home for the holidays) not Sydney where I usually would’ve seen it. Where do you usually go? Parra?
Yeah NO ONE SEEMS JESSICA seems ace….can’t say the same for BBB on the other hand!?!
BBB is another of those awful movies coming from yasraj stables. Tees Maar Khan was another – I could hardly sit thru the tralier – imagine see the movie.
I saw guzarish in Hoyta Blacktown coz they closed the merrylands hoyts. Yep I usually see movies in Greater Union at Parra ( to jog ur memory – we saw sarkar raj – filmbuff is my netname)
congrats dude.. is the monkey off the back.. as Harry says SPURS can challenge for title this year, i feel christmas has come early at White Hart Lane.
Looking forward to spurs and their match with chelsea in a months time.. friend i feel this could be the year
Saw it today. Loved the movie. Even though Hrithik seemed breathless delivering the dialogues, his eyes do the trick mostly. The sets are the hallmark of this movie, which did not seem emotionally distant this time, and were , as is usual in his movie, fantastic. Aishwarya is brilliant here, and Aditya Kapur does quite well too. Here, what really worked well , though, was the placement of the songs in the movie and they fitted in context. Well, some of the scenes are really corny, and the acting is more often than not melodramatic and hammy. But, that surprisingly worked for me, as it did for my friends. In her words, she expected the film to drag and be depressing, but the screenplay kept her hooked and had its moments of brilliance. Watch out for Hrithik’s good rendition of Armstrong’s Beautiful world. On the downside, the court scenes and arguments were farcical(as one of the reviewers put it), but one is willing to forgive it for the overall tone of the movie.
November 21, 2010
‘Harry Potter’ Has $330 Million Debut Weekend
By BROOKS BARNES
LOS ANGELES — The seventh Harry Potter movie opened to a jaw-dropping $330 million in global ticket sales over the weekend, underscoring the magical powers of the Warner Brothers marketing and distribution departments.
That brawny total easily made “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1” No. 1 in North America, where the boy wizard generated an estimated $125.1 million. It was the second-biggest domestic opening for the Harry Potter franchise; adjusting for higher ticket prices, “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire” sold $127.4 million over its first three days in November 2005.
The strong results reflect a yearlong, full-court press by Warner’s global marketing chief, Sue Kroll, to position “Deathly Hallows” as a must-see event for children and adults alike. The advertising campaign played up the sophisticated, darker elements of the plot. Harry and pals are now grown up, for instance, and the good-versus-evil battle is intensifying as the story line reaches its climax.
The marketing materials also injected some edge into the franchise by taking risks like identifying the film only by the letters “HP7” and splattering posters and billboards with what looked like blood; one poster depicted the Hogwarts castle in flames.
It paid off: about 25 percent of the North American audience for “Deathly Hallows” was in the 18-to-34-year-old demographic, according to Dan Fellman, Warner’s president of domestic distribution. In comparison, about 10 percent of the audience for the first film in the series came from that age bracket. Mr. Fellman noted that “Deathly Hallows,” which earned positive reviews, beat “Alice in Wonderland” to become the top opening movie in Imax history.
Imax showings on 239 screens accounted for $12.4 million of the domestic box office and contributed $16.6 million (on 340 screens) of the international gross. At its opening, “Alice” took in $12.1 million domestically from Imax and $15.3 million internationally.
“No other franchise has been able to age and expand the audience this way,” Mr. Fellman said.
Early last week, the first 36 minutes of “Deathly Hallows,” about a quarter of the movie, leaked onto the Internet, prompting a fresh round of hand-wringing about piracy and leading to some worries that the movie’s opening weekend would suffer as a result. Mr. Fellman said that the studio was investigating but that the pirated footage did not appear to hurt the release. (If anything, the news media coverage of the leak helped.)
The Harry Potter series, based on the books by J. K. Rowling, will conclude with the 3-D release of the second half of “Deathly Hallows” on July 15. The franchise, overseen by Alan F. Horn, Warner’s chief operating officer, has generated some $6 billion at the global box office and billions more in DVD, television and merchandise sales.
The success of “Deathly Hallows” underscores just how big a hole Warner, owned by Time Warner, will have to fill once the series ends, box office analysts said.
The weekend was also big for “Tron: Legacy,” the forthcoming Walt Disney Studios release; that picture’s final trailer played before “Deathly Hallows” in a push by Disney to attract the broadest audience possible for the science-fiction adventure, which arrives in theaters on Dec. 17 after three years of marketing.
That pre-Christmas weekend promises to bring one of the more brutal box office battles of the year. Typically, rival studios would steer clear of a release as enormous as “Tron: Legacy.” But “Yogi Bear” (Warner), the James L. Brooks comedy “How Do You Know” (Sony Pictures Entertainment) and “The Fighter” (Paramount Pictures) will all enter the marketplace or expand to wide release on Dec. 17, setting up an intense showdown going into the crucial Christmas holiday.
DreamWorks Animation’s “Megamind” was second at the box office last weekend, selling about $16.2 million in North America in its third week in theaters for a new domestic total of $109.5 million, according to Hollywood.com, which compiles ticketing statistics. “Unstoppable,” a thriller about a runaway train, from 20th Century Fox, was third, with $13.1 million in its second week for a new total of about $42 million.
The Warner comedy “Due Date,” in its third week, was fourth with $9.2 million for a new total of $72.7 million. Russell Crowe continued his losing streak with “The Next Three Days,” a Lionsgate crime thriller that arrived with a thud in fifth place, at an estimated $6.8 million.
Hollywood is once again going to battle with the puritans, The Hollywood Reporter has learned.
A coalition of major studios including Paramount, Warner Bros., MGM, Disney, Universal and Fox has filed a lawsuit against a defendant who has taken movies such as Iron Man 2, The Hurt Locker, Prince of Persia and Date Night, altered them to be free of objectionable content, and is distributing them to consumers as “family-friendly.” [RELATED: A TV show gets sued.]
The lawsuit was filed on Thurday in Arizona District Court against Family Edited DVDS, Inc. and its leader, John Webster.
The studios claim that the reproduction of the films violates their exclusive copyrights. Further, the plaintiffs allege that the defendant is selling its films in DVD-R format, which they say strips away copyright protection measures and makes them “highly vulnerable to further unauthorized copying and other forms of infringement.” [RELATED: Nintendo tries to trademark a phrase.]
The studios are requesting permanent injunctive relief.
Seven years ago, Hollywood battled DVD santizers including CleanFlicks, CleanFilms, Family Flix USA, and Play it Clean Video. In July, 2006, a federal judge ruled that santized DVDs were an infringement on the copyrights of the original films and ordered the businesses to turn over their inventory. At the time, the defendants pledged to appeal, but they never did.
Back then, some lawmakers believed that households should have the ability to skip objectionable content in films. In 2005, the Family Entertainment and Copyright Act was passed into law, which allowed manufacturers of special DVD players such as ClearPlay and their users an exemption from copyright liability for skipping the adult material. Few lawyers think the legislation allowed re-distribution of altered DVDs, however. [RELATED: Why Gerard Butler is getting sued.]
Family Edited DVDs couldn’t be reached for comment. Judging by the appearance of their website, the company may have seen this lawsuit coming. It is currently advertising a “liquidation” sale, telling its customers to get edited DVDs while they still can.
Just saw this and I have to say it’s exactly what I expected it to be. A harmless but pretty pointless film.
There’s the usual expressive cinematography and sets (the most thoughtful construct here were the photographs mounted on the ceiling of Hrithik’s room – connecting to an earlier moment in which the ceiling in his radio station is adorned by classical frescoes of Christian saints and thereby “enclosing” the central character in a world where his gaze and focus is always on what lies above, and more importantly, “beyond”) and one can’t but appreciate seeing such a film on the big screen. Additionally, Bhansali shows flashes of spirit in some of the magic sequences which are really highlights both in terms of Bhansali’s style and in terms of Hrtihik’s ability to use his best assets as a performer. But ultimately even these sequences don’t blow one away as they might have had this come from a more resourceful filmmaker. Instead, the flashbacks serve as diverting padding between a lot of leaden scenes where people weep often enough to give the Goan monsoon a run for its money.
There’s not an iota of originality or any “new” ideas with regard to any of the material Bhansali deals with. Ripping off Mar Adentro by way of The Prestige makes for a somewhat unique texture, especially when wrapped in the local Goan flavor, but beyond atmosphere there’s nothing Bhansali does to make this material his own. And speaking of pilfering, for those who have the ears for it – listen for the moment where Bhansali rips off The Kronos Quartet’s superb score for “Requiem for a Dream”.
Aside from this Hrithik’s act is all over the place even if he just about makes it through. But one should have their head examined before thinking about comparing him to Day-Lewis or Bardem. Ash on the other hand gives a rather excellent performance full of conviction. I’ve never been a fan of her previous works with Bhansali but this is by far the best. For my money, Nafisa Ali has the film’s most moving moment.
I’ll add a SPOILER here. I might be the only one to think this, but to me it was a major cop out on the filmmakers’ part to evade the moment of Ethan’s death. I realize this isn’t the “point” of a “celebratory” film, but for a film that purportedly pushes for this moment to ultimately avoid showing it felt like a somewhat gutless decision. Ah well. One of many in this sense.
Let me also be clear that it’s not that I disliked the film. One would have to be something of a curmudgeon to dislike a narrative that deals in this kind of territory especially when people are trying to bring their A game to the table. I just don’t think it offers anything new outside of the lovely atmosphere.
Hope to see this, this coming Saturday so can’t say whether I agree or disagree, but….
>to me it was a major cop out on the filmmakers’ part to evade the moment of Ethan’s death.
From what I have been ardently reading I would take it more as a coup. The end with the protaganist dying in this case is predictable and expected by the audience. When it doesn’t happen, well..one is surprised, and free to imagine it.
Secondly (as I gather), it ‘would’ be an anti climax for the film being more about life.
Thirdly, without melodrama thiese scenes cannot be enacted. It would be very unIndian .
I guess this way it was safer.
Not being a Hollywood fan, I expect to enjoy it more and would not be thinking on the lines of;
>one should have their head examined before thinking about comparing him to Day-Lewis or Bardem.
I wouldn’t compare him to anyone. Day- Lewis? Bardem? Who?
Given those comparisons I made (and Bhansali made) are not with “Hollywood” but with performances and films from other industries (English and Spanish cinema) you don’t have anything to worry about.
I was reading the Readers’ reviews at TOI on Guzarish. One person, after hailing it as a masterpiece and listing all that he liked about it, ended his post with, “the best part is its so original!!!!!”
But the film has been getting generally outstanding reviews at TOI, which makes me wonder why its collections are so low.
BTW, a couple of posters there mentioned that a Marathi film called “Sukhant” dealt with the same subject, and is a much better film. Has anyone here seen it?
This isn’t a film that’s going to set the box office on fire, I’m not surprised at the collections. But then that isn’t the “point” with this type of film which has its sights on prestige (however misplaced) more than profit.
nice writeup GF…….the amount of crap BW keeps throwing….this kind of films are a welcome relief evenif they don’t have anything original….nafisa really leaves a powerful impact in that small role….even shernaz patel was good…
If even the well respected music directors of yore, Salil Chaudhary, Shanker Jaikishan (to name 2) didn’t hesitate to copy Mozart (Salil C) why to run down poor SLB.
Guzaarish Harry Potter Weekend Business Early Estimates
Monday 22nd November 2010 11.00 IST
Boxofficeindia.Com Trade Network
Guzaarish grossed around 15 crore nett over its first weekend as per early estimates. The film picked up on Saturday but pick up was mainly in urban multiplexes. On Sunday places like CP Berar, CI and Rajasthan showed a healthy jump but overall collections remain low. Mumbai and Mysore circuit fared the best. The film will have to do rock steady weekday business to have a half decent first week. If the film shows industry standard falls it will end up with a 22 crore nett first week.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 grossed around 9 crore nett in all languages as per early estimates. The film opened well and showed the normal jumps on Saturday and Sunday. The Friday business was 2.50 crore nett.
It’s jumped by just one crore each on Sat and Sun. This is extremely bad news for the film. Looks to be heading for disaster at this point. Also Saawariya even with the OSO competition had a fantastic opening weekend before crashing. This might actually do worse if it does not stay somewhat stable at the lower end.
Again we see the dishonesty though. Look at how BOI’s spinning it, even Nahata is just using the mildest language he can. Everyone was calling Raavan a disaster when Guzaarish has opened lower than this and is not likely to get to that total.
Will have a piece later on this but Guzaarish does not deserve this sort of fate. But it also underlines something important. Stars become extremely mortal when they do ‘different’.
All is not lost but it has to be extremely steady and looking at Nahata’s commentary that seems unlikely.
It really is kind of sad with G3 making 100 crores and something like this which even at its worst is atleast a worthy effort getting a total cold shoulder.
“But it also underlines something important. Stars become extremely mortal when they do ‘different’.”
No. Sharukh did just fine as a hockey coach without romance and as an autistic muslim. Aamir did fine as a period revolutionary, as an art teacher and a bald revenge seer…. why Hritik did fine as a mogul emperor.
The problem with Guzaarish as with Raavan is that they have zero emotional connect.
Look at Peepli Live. Farmers suicide anyone? But it did better weekend business than Guzaarish.
Shahrukh did not do fine with Asoka and Swades, Hrithik was actually quite mortal even in JA where the initial was again rather modest and the film depended on WOM and even then got to just a decent total for this kind of production.
Peepli depended on Aamir’s prestige but actually did a relatively quick fade later. It’s amazing that Aamir got Peepli this far but this was light years away from TZP in box office terms. MNIK was a Karan Johar production with Kajol part of the mix. Hardly the same deal. But this film too tanked and even the initial was way lower than it should have been. The overseas gross was a different matter.
The point is that when you do different stuff the bar is just much higher. Also the ‘emotional connect’ point does not explain why the film started off so incredibly low. Clearly the audience just wasn’t interested in this sort of subject. At least with Hrithik in it.
I feel timing of release makes some impact. The family audience got divided with Harry potter an after a big hit like G-3, it takes some time to go to theatres.
The entire unit has succeeded in making satisfying film for them.
Raavan/kites didn’t give them critical aclaim or BO which is disaster for any actor.
Also the ‘emotional connect’ point does not explain why the film started off so incredibly low. Clearly the audience just wasn’t interested in this sort of subject. At least with Hrithik in it.
Yes. The reason it did so badly even in opening was the totally bad experience people had with Saawariya. Regardless of what Baradwaj Rangan thinks it was one of the worst movies to sit through ( 5.3 rating on IMDB.) And Guzaarish seemed to be traversing the same path. The audience felt insulted. woh kabhi nahin sudhurega was the subconscious response. Look at the English dialogues. What for? It could not have been for the sake of realism, when you take liberty with everything else from locale to costumes. It sends out a message , hey you guys from small towns I am not interested in conectng with you. The sky wont have fallen if Dr Suhel Seth spoke in Hindi !
Unlike Saawariya the audience who actually see Guzaarish the majority are liking it. Read twitter. Read blog reviews. Read IMDB. Read user reviews on Times on India site. I sense a movie that is being liked or loved for those who see the movie. Its not an disliked movie like a Saawariya or a Raavan.
agree on Guzaarish being a much better movie than MNIK. Just about anything is better than MNIK. And if people want to keep throwing up these major critics who gave thumbs down to Guzaarish(Masand, Rajan Sen, Khalid) just remember these same reviewers gave thumbs up to nonsense like MNIK.
It’s amazing that Aamir got Peepli this far but this was light years away from TZP in box office terms.
No. If TZP did 60cr, PL did 30 cr. and I am sure the budget of PL was less than half of TZP. And think of the subject and the star cast, an the face value…not a single star name in actors, director , anything. Look at he genre: Political satire. Look at the subject: Farmers’ suicide. 30 crores! Ten times what any similar film has done in the past. Amazing is the word.
yeah but it wasn’t really about farmer’s suicide in that grim sense of the term. It was a fairly light, comedic treatment of the subject. But everything you’re saying is really attributable to Aamir’s name. Nothing more! On the budget there’s actually not that much to choose between PL and TZP though the former was of course cheaper. The latter had an extremely low budget and it was pretty much impossible for it to lose money.
Agree with Satyam.
Plus, the films Utkal mentioned had ‘trimphant’ endings and more blissful moments which seems to be neccessary for ‘different’ films to work. I dont think this would have worked with any other actor. I would hardly blame Hrithik for it. Saawariyan is indeed cating a long shadow and people got ‘burned’ and they still remember it. Too much English is certainly not a plus tho it matters mostly in small centres where it was not expected to do well anyways.
I think the youngsters ( whom we can call the Rooney crowd for lack of a better term!) just wasnt enthused by the subject and the promos and stayed away which explains the low opening and the inability to show a dramatic turnaround on Sat and Sun.
Still, the final chapter on Guzaarish BO fate cannot be written till weekday numbers unfold.
But, while it is not a foregone conclusion, I am not holding out much hope a very strong hold.
I would like to see if another PL gets released next, how much it garners in opening weekend? If previous film works more than audience expectation, they will look forward to the next. It doesn’t matter who the actor is.
It is only the fans prercepition that only our HERO can achieve.
Very good point, Ted. Even, Aamir will be mortal if he gives more than one film that doesnt hold up to public expectation. This currency disappears fast with this fickle public.
Also the audience isn’t always ‘right’! Sometimes flops reflect more on the audience than the film itself! Of course. I was just trying to explain why it got such a bad opening. After all the WOM does not seem to be THAT bad!
( As for Saawariya and the audience, thee are films which the audience rejects at the ticket counter, buta niche audience likes it and that gets reflected in very high score on IMDB user rating ,. eg Andaz Apna Apna: 8.4, Swades : 8.3 . Whu even No smoking has a rating of 6.9. No such luck for Saawariya. No it is not the audience, but the filmmaker and Rangan who are wrong. The emperor has no clothes. and by not pointing it out pepole like Rangan are doing immense harm to Bhnsali.
By using words like ‘ operatic’ they have condoned his OTT melodrama, they have not noted the totally mediocre lyrics and trite song situations, they have looked askance at his blatant palgiarism and derivative aesthetics. as a result Bhansali who is an above average director, with a schoolboy sentimentality, but a fairly good sense of music and the visual
, has been raised to the level of a visionary autuer. Now he thinks he is Amodovar, Nolan, and Tarkovsky all rolled into oneHere is a filmmaker who needs a playwright — and, in equal measure, an occasional slap on the wrist.. Disaster is the result Sooner someone driled some sense into him, the better. May be Raja sen in his review got it right : “
The only “different”/audience-splitting film to have garnered an excellent opening is Rang De Basanti. It either broke or came very close to breaking the opening week record. The rest of the films mentioned here can’t even begin to compete with RDB!
There was Mangal Pandey/The Rising too but its record breaking opening can at least partially be attributed to Aamir’s appearance after a gap of 4 years.
Sanjay Leela Bhasali’s 2010 Magnum Opus Guzaarish released last week.
The movie has a total cost of anything between 65-80 cr going by all the sources.This kind of cost was always going to be a uphill task for any movie, leave alone a movie like Guzaarish which doesnt boast of a proper commerical setting.
The movie opened in the overseas markets to a lukewarm to decent response and has the following approximate numbers.
USA = 420 K Dollars first weekend.
UAE = 355 K Dollars first weekend.
UK = 250 K Dollars first weekend.(155 K pounds).
Around the world will add another 150-200 K max.
Which gives an opening weekend of around 1.2 Million Dollars to Guzaarish which in no way justifies its costs.
At this rate the movie will end its overseas run around ~2 million dollars(~9 cr) and give a share of around 4 cr.
Domestically,the movie had a opening weekend of around 14.5-15 cr nett.Now unless the movie remains very steady from monday onwards at a industry standard rate movie should have 22-23 cr first week and total nett ending around 32-34 cr.
Now given that starting next week there will be another slew of movies at a regular pace week after week and that even if the movie does remain steady,it will be on the lower side only at the maximum,given that the jumps in saturday and sunday till now dont show any significant chances of a long term run here,though it should be added that the movie did not have any crash on sat or sun, but that could be attributed to the fact that it didnt start with a bang anyways.
So the domestic final nett can range from anywhere between 32-40 cr giving a share of around 16-20 cr.
Given these kind of boxoffice numbers, the max a movie can get from other sources is 20 cr(TV/DVD/Music).
Thus the total revenue generated by Guzaarish comes to around,
Indian = 16-20 cr, more likely to end around 16-18 cr.
Overseas = 4 cr.
Other = 20 cr.
Total = 40-44 cr.
So, how much the movie helps the leads/director in the long term or how much acclaim it sees on TV/DVD is yet to be seen but as for now the movie is sure to be a loser on the Boxoffice front, with losses ranging from anywhere from 25-35 crores.
like they say, those who can…do. As if rangan or rajeev masand or any of the critic can! Raja Sen is a critic like any other , whatever you may think of his reviews. By the way, I was not endorsing his skills as a reviewer, only pointing out , the fact that some one needs to tell Bhansali the truth, and at least he did it.
Raja Sen has been trying to get a break in films for some time now. He actually wrote the dialogues for a film called 99. There’s probably a good reason why he’s a frustrated critic.
Khalid Mohammed made Fiza and two other forgettable films whose names I can’t even recall right now!
Masand won’t even get a chance to EVER direct a movie. He’s the absolute worst of all critics!
And mentioning Rangan with the likes of these gents is frankly a huge insult to the subject of film criticism.
I’m hardly a Bhansali supporter myself but whatever be his shortcomings, Masand, Raja Sen, KMo et al are the least qualified to comment on his films! Such is the sad state of film criticism in India.
A film that’s sad throughout like Guzaarish is always going to have a tough time at the boxoffice. Even Black had a triumphant ending (this is not to take away anything from its success, which by any measure was remarkable)
Some of the vitriol against Guzaarish is just inexplicable. These guys are never that harsh on crap like Golmaal 3 and Houseful (which was not only in bad taste but also racist) It’s definitely got its flaws but compared to 99.9% of other bollywood movies out there, this one is special.
I’m not a huge fan of Black but to give the film its due, it’s probably the only film I’ve seen in India (in a half-full multiplex, I might add) in which the audience stood up and clapped after the film got over!
I’d easily take Black over Guzaarish. Even while the former film was “inspired” by the west, there’s a lot in it that at least works as a throwback to Hindi cinema’s black-and-white stalwarts. Not to mention that Black is populated with a better central pair of actors.
I’ll take Bachchan and Rani at their loudest decibel levels over Hrithik aiming for quiet subtlety. I don’t mean to be overly harsh on Hrithik. He’s not an affront here at all, and has some fine moments. But he’s just not enough of an actor to linger. But to each their own.
Tyler, i agree – but it ironically true that when BLACK released, i saw it twice in theater? reason, even it was loud and caricaturist, still it was better than other crap BW threw during that time…..we really don’t have too many choices in BW….that’s the sad reality
And btw for those criticizing Aamir for saying that dhobi ghat is not for masses, there was a trailer of dhobi ghat before guzaarish. You know what the lady next to me said (among many other gems) to her husband right after: ‘Yeh Dhobi Ghat Kya Hai?’
BTW I find the majority of North American (goreys and all) audience pretty dumb too. When I watched hereafter, there were a bunch of people acting like they had seen the worst and most boring film in their lives. Can’t remember the exact comments, but there was plenty of “we should have seen paranormal activity 2 instead”.
Did anyone else who saw the film think that the “rivalry” bit was kind of shoehorned in here? I remember thinking there could have been a better film here if this was explored a bit more but that rival character came out of nowhere and didn’t seem to add to the story in any important way other than extend the Christ parallel for Hrithik’s character in that he’s in some way willing to “forgive” his transgressors. Just felt it was unnecessary…also don’t mean to read too much into it but can’t help but think that there was something odd that in a film where all things Christian are somewhat central, the “villain” here appears in the form of a Muslim, not to mention the fawning “disciple” is also a Muslim character.
why North India, or India, anywhere in the world people prefer happy films to sad films, and they can take a sad film only if there is a preemptive upbeat ending or a satisfying epiphany.
that’s right though ironically enough the music isn’t much of a factor in the film.. Udi is the only complete song here, everything else one just hears brief snippets of. Disappointingly there’s only one line of the title song which was probably the best one.
Saket, ” Khalid Mohammed made Fiza and two other forgettable films whose names I can’t even recall right now!” But if that is the criterai, let me point out that Rangan hasn’t even made a forgettable film, though he to had been trying to writea script fora tamil film ( forgettable or not I have no clue.). And incidentally, Khaild has also written 3 scripts for none other than Shyam Benegal, and was nominated for the best story for Zubeida, in the SCREEN AWARDS . That’s a lot more credentials than Rangan I think if that be your criteria.
And are you trying to say critics like Rajeev Maand, Khaild Mohammad, Raja Sen, Anupama Chopra have the right to write on films by Gowarikar, Raju Hirani, Vishal Bhardwaj, Mnai Ratnam, Anurag Kashyap but not on films by Bhansali? With admirers like that Bhansali does not need detractors.
I don’t know from where you get the idea that I admire Bhansali. I don’t! I actually find him to be a self-absorbed director who happens to be immensely passionate about the kind of cinema he believes in. And he has his strengths. As GF mentioned in his short review, he’s very good at building ‘atmosphere’. He’s pretty adept at handling visuals even if they are OTT like the other elements in his films. But the point is, I do realize that it’s a “deliberate” choice on his part. I disagree with that choice, I expect more out of a film, but that’s my prerogative.
Where I disagree with you, vehemently I might add, is when you quote the so called “critics” like Raja Sen, Masand and KMo. Do you realize that the same Raja Sen gave ‘Kisna’ a glowing review because he was “assisting” Subhash Ghai at the time. Do you realize that Masand is actually on KJo’s payroll? How else could you explain his approval of not only KANK but also Kurbaan? Do you realize how much of a duechebag KMo is? These guys have no ethics, they work out of barely concealed agendas and you are quoting them to criticize Bhansali?
Do you honestly sense an agenda in Rangan’s reviews? You may disagree with his choices and frankly I do as well, but the best part about film criticism is that it opens up a debate; it offers a counterpoint to another viewer’s reaction and by reading someone like Rangan (who’s not only a gifted writer) one “understands” the medium much better. Where exactly can you pin-point some of these desirable traits in reviews written by Masand, Sen or KMo? These guys are hacks; work on hidden agendas (look up Anurag Kashyap’s one word summary of KMo!) and quite possibly get paid to write their reviews. Trusting their judgment is not only error prone, but also downright foolish!
P.S. As for KMo’s talent as a script writer, I don’t have any issues with that. I thoroughly recommend anyone to watch Zubeidaa, which happens to be semi-autobigraphical and quite good!
Good God, you lost all credibility for your arguments when you started trying to validate morons like Sen, Khalid and Masand. These people are obviously corrupt and Khalid winning some meaningless award does not make him an expert on anything related to cinema.
I’m not a fan of SLB but your vitriol seems way beyond the pale. Has he done something to harm you personally? Stolen from you? Taken food from your mouth? Insulted a family member?
What I ask? What has he done to you except make movies no one has forced you to watch.
And Saket, Rangan wrote a ful page eulogy to the music of Guzaarish. See what I mean? Who is doing more harm than good to Bhansali. Now he will think he is Satyajit Ray who can compose his own music . ( Franky, I thought his effort was very derivative and totally mediocre. and the lyrics were contrived and not very bright either. ( The lyrics in Saawariya were atrocious and rite to he core.)
Saket, do you know Rangan is in the payroll pf Bhansali and Mani Ratnam and Abhishek Bacchchan? Because he not only gave 3 stars to Drona but also 4 stars to Raavan. He not only gave 3 stars to S aawariya but also a full page review of praise to Guzaarish;s music.
Does Rangan give stars?
I must have missed those. Never saw any ever.
Where on the page are they? I’m not being sarcastic, but am rather astonished that I missed them.
“Saket, do you know Rangan is in the payroll pf Bhansali and Mani Ratnam and Abhishek Bacchchan?”
I don’t think so. I don’t think I’ve anything to debate/clarify after you’ve reduced Rangan’s well argued pieces to this level. I’m offended someone can’t see the difference between Rangan and the others.
Just off the debate, does any one have an answer to why thu budget of this film is 75crores. It completely beats me that a film which is shot mostly in a rented house in Goa (Some English couple), works around 8-9 characters, has great visuals but lacks the grandeur and opulence of something like HDDCS and Devdas, even has Bhansali as a home music director, has only two big ticket artistes in Aishwarya and Hrithik – has an uncannily low publicity should have a budget of 75crores. Have Bhansali and UTV confirmed teh budget and if it is so – god save this film. It is heading out to be a thumping disaster. A film of this scale should really not cost anywhere more than 25-30 crores. If the cost of Hrithik Ash and Bhansali has been added on I should imagine that it cannot all be fixed, must be fixed and profit sharing to a large extent.
Anyhow it still does not in my view take anything away from Hrithik and Ash – they both have been wonderful and should take take positive strides from hereon.
I am not Hrithik’s fan, but appericiate him for working on this type of films. Box office doesn’t matter. I can see in twitter how people sending messages to him and Aishwarya. What else they need?
Komal has it for 75 crore including promotions. Jaju said on Twitter 60 crore. But he hasn’t said anything about promotions. At Moifight it is 80. (25 for Bhansali+15 Hrithik+5 Aish+35 movie production).
And this might be the most plausible total.. not that a couple of crores matters very much.. just that it seems more in keeping with the trending on this.
The smartest thing that Bhansali does in this film (to my mind) is my earlier note on focusing on things that exist “above” the physical world here. Hrithik for most of this film is on his back and his gaze often seems to be aimed “up” in some manner. It’s key that in his “lowest” point in the film, when Sofia has had to leave his side, Omar has moved on, and his petition has been effectively ruled unconstitutional, Hrithik’s head is hanging very low (his body raised to a vertical position so that he can watch the news report) with his hair obscuring his face and his gaze fixed on the ground. At two times in the film, he orders Omar to “RISE” in a very emphatic way, as if “rising”is the greatest feat of magic of all. His moment with the leaky ceiling raining on his embattled, angry eyes, as if the world itself is keeping him from looking at the heavens. And of course his accident is also connected to a moment where he is rising, godlike, over the audience below only to then be brought down to their “human” world permanently. For a Christ figure, the act of “rising” is more important than anything else, and it makes sense that he seems happiest when his gaze is fixed to the heavens. So then it’s especially fitting that the final shot in the film has Hrithik looking up at the camera as it shoots down at him– a beaming, beatific smile on his face.
Saket, obviously I don’t think Rangan is in the payroll of anyone. Neither do I think Rajeev Masand is. My point is if Rangan can like Saawariya and Raavan,, surely Masand can like KANK and Qurbaani. And I can say a lot more people , critics as well as ordinary viewers , have liked KANK and Qurabani much more than Sawariya and Raavan. So it is grossly unfair to accuse Masand of any agenda. I am not talking of the qulaity of writing here, which I don’t acre for much if I don’t appreciate someone’s insight into a film to start with.
I’m not only accusing Masand of intellectual fraud, but also for being immensely dumb. He’s got no insights to offer, nothing noteworthy to talk about, his oratory skills are even worse and he thinks he’s a smartass when he’s only a fatass…
OLd gold, Rangan gives stars in his printed reviewing New Indian Express on Sunday. he same review appears on his blog later. He gave 3 stars to Guzaarish, 4 stars to Raavan in recent times.
People need to use a little common sense. Does any one really believe that UTV’s Ronnie Screwala who is a shrewd businessman paid SLB 25 cr to direct Guzaarish after the failure of Saawariya?
UTV held Ashutosh Gowariker’s feet to the fire to not go over budget on JA which had a bigger cast and sets.
was chatting with my sis a few minutes ago in India. she mentioned that the PVR thetare she went to yesterday was packed to capacity and the audience looked spellbound.
Guzaarish has done 488k off 108 screens in the US. This is not a bad number compared to the Indian performance but it’s a significantly lower per screen average compared to that of CDI, TZP and even UJ (in fact this has the highest among the four films). Still with this holiday period coming up it could do 1-1.2m at this end. I saw it with a fairly significant audience and I think the reaction was quite positive. Would be surprised if it didn’t show stability here.
How shameless these guys are from BOI to Taran to Nahata. The film has done worse than Raavan when reviews were diametrically opposed and they’re saying it’s ‘under-performing’. If the film doesn’t stay stable at this point it’s a colossal flop let alone a regular one!
GUZAARISH hasn’t lived up to the expectations in key international markets. The film is below average in U.S.A., but hugely disappointing in U.K. and Australia. In fact, it ranks amongst Hrithik Roshan’s lowest openers there. The film has fared better in Middle East.
Guzaarish has seen a 45-50% drop from Friday in East Punjab circuit which is a dominated by multiplexes. A Friday to Monday comparison from key multiplexes in the circuit is as follows.
Golmaal 3 matched the lifetime business of Dabangg in Mumbai of 25 crore in just two weeks. The third weekend has given Golmaal 3 a near 1 crore share in Mumbai meaning it has comfortably crossed the Mumbai circuit business of Dabangg in just 17 days. The film is an All Time Blockbuster in the circuit.
The leader in Mumbai is Three Idiots with 38 crore approx share which Golmaal 3 will not get close to but it will finish second with around 28 crore share. The top lifetime distributor shares in Mumbai circuit are as follows.
1. Three Idiots (2009) – 38 crore
2. Golmaal 3 (2010) – 28 crore (Expected)
3. Dabangg (2010) – 25 crore
4. Ghajini (2008) – 20.50 crore
5. Hum Aapke Hain Kaun (1994) – 18.50 crore
6. Raajneeti (2010) – 16.50 crore
7. Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge (1995) – 16.25 crore
Hrithik Roshan [ Images ], who plays a quadriplegic person in his latest film Guzaarish — may have got great reviews for his performance but not everyone is happy with it.
Dr Ketna Mehta, who runs Nina Foundation that assists paraplegics, sent in her views on Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s [ Images ] film, and why she would never recommend the film to anyone.
The positives of the movie is that the film’s craft and direction are spectacular and flawless, the actors are more than convincing and this is the first movie on a spinal injured — a quadriplegic — in Indian cinema.
The images are real and flawless — the accident, topple from the bed, helplessness at the leaking roof, feeling the fresh air outdoors and many other such images.
A film is both a potent tool for transforming mindsets and can sometimes also don the role of weapons of mass destruction. We need the best in the industry to project and showcase more responsible cinema.
As a person with spinal injury and as the founder of our NGO, Nina Foundation, I would not recommend this movie to my friends with spinal injury. I will elaborate on this rationale:
Its a non-Indian take. The biggest motivating factor for a traumatic spinal injured is his ring of FAMILY. The entire family rallies around and forms a ring of support both physical and emotional. The independent living concept shown in the movie with Ethan living with only caretakers and caregivers is remote. More than one member of the family takes charge and enables one to sail through life happily.
We have glowing examples of Indian quadriplegics living with this life transforming disability for more than 12 years (the number in the movie): Major HP S Ahluwalia, Rajendra Johar, Sruti Mohapatra, Subramaniam, Arvind Prabhoo, Nishant Khade, Abdulla — and I can go on. They have families, friends and successful careers and goals and are leading successful lives.
Disability is an ‘untouchable,’ ‘invisible’ taboo concept in India [ Images ]. The movie with its ending propagates this very concept. But a human being and his wishes are above the law? A disabled is better off ending his life? Obstacles and problems should taint our view about life? Spinal injury is too big a problem to live with?
Our NGO is attempting to create interest, involvement and inspiration among friends with spinal injury. Believe me, it’s an uphill task. It takes hours and years to convince how to overcome our daily problems and yet lead a life of happiness and dignity. Guzaarish’s depressing tone nullifies that in three hours. Despite being financially independent (Ethan has written a book, has a radio show), he wants to end his life.
Hrithik Roshan in GuzaarishIndia is the capital of people with spinal injury, over 15 lakhs, and we add 20,000 every year. Most are ‘invisible’ as they are tucked away at home struggling to manage each day. How many can afford a Rs 10 lakh sip and puff wheelchair or tilt table in our country?
The reason to feel depressed is that there are no rehabilitation centres offering holistic services to face life. The rehabilitation at physical, psychological, social, vocational, recreational and spiritual levels prepare us to conduct our lives and also achieve a lot personally, professionally and in sports (there is wheelchair tennis, basketball, quad rugby, swimming etc).
Alongwith the helplessness of rain falling on Ethan’s face, there could have been more instances of enjoying the ‘fly on the nose’ moments. Spinal injury is a ‘real’ tough issue. It’s not easy either living with paraplegia or quadriplegia. Yet, it is hope which makes us rewrite medical books, push our limits, surprise our doctors and therapists. All the stakeholders work towards giving spunk back to our spines and this is a huge healthcare force. They too are disappointed by the treatment of the subject and ending of the movie.
And finally, Mr Bhansali, we don’t need euthanasia or suicide to end our lives in India. Poor management of bed sores, urine infections, bowel complications, osteoporosis, high cost of ventilators and medication, lack of trained attendants and caregivers and lack of world class rehabilitation centres do the job anyway, unfailingly. Even today in Bollywood land, Mumbai [ Images ], we don’t have a world class spinal injury rehabilitation centre.
Charity is very easy, sponsoring a few spinal injured is simpler but getting involved with interest and inspiring our friends with spinal injury is the need of the hour. Imagine our children and young friends with spinal injury watching the movie with their devoted parents and families. The fact is that the very talented Mr Bhansali makes convincing movies on different aspects of disability; we would like positive role models conveying inspiring messages to face that one more day in our lives!
Dr Ketna Mehta met with a spinal injury 15 years ago in a paragliding accident. She then set up Nina Foundation to offer care and counselling to paraplegics. Her PhD topic was healthcare management pertaining to spinal cord injury.
What I find very interesting about viewers’ reactions to Guzaarish is that it seems to have inspired a fanatical following in those who do like it. Even in this very blog I have seen disparaging comments about films like Golmal 3 doing better at the box office than Guzaarish, and elsewhere (e.g., the TOI reader comments, though that is not the only place) faulting the audience that makes films like Golmal 3 hits and calling them all sorts of names for liking films of that sort. Why this need to insult the intellectual capability of a wide section of the audience?
Now in the comments on the above article, I was flabbergasted that many people state that Dr. Mehta is not capable of understanding the fine cinematic exercise that is Guzaarish! Don’t just dismiss them as “Rediff comments” — the interesting thing is that they are not the typical hysterical comments one means when using that phrase. They are more in line with a new breed of commenter — the Guzaarish bhakts! I suppose it is an achievement of the film to have inspired such passion and devotion among a section of the audience — a section, though, by their own comments, which does not have any exposure to anything but commercial Bollywood films. That is, they do not seem to have been aware of even other Hindi films which are offbeat, or about non-commercial subjects, let alone such films from other Indian languages. So, for all their pretensions of intellectual loftiness, they, too, seem not to watch any films without big “stars.” So in that respect I guess Bhansali’s achievement is to persuade big stars to act in his films.
BTW, referring to a discussion earlier in the thread about stars being “mortal” when they attempt the “different” — I think this has more to do with the definition of “star” in India. That is, a “star” by definition is one who can open a film in a big way. If a major star does an offbeat film for no or very little fee, as is done in Hollywood, and thus bringing down the budget to a manageable level, I think people would still talk about the star failing to open the film “big”, even if the film collects sufficient money to make a big profit and thus be a genuine hit.
After the multiplexes became widespread, people had to redefine their perceptions of what a “big” film is, from one that can run for 100 days or 50 weeks, to one that opens big. I think it is time for the media and audiences to once again readjust their ideas on “successful” films as being those which can make a reasonable profit for everyone concerned (including distributors).
It is certainly true that all films with major stars are more or less marketed the same way, evidently budgeted the same way (!), and finally treated the same way in terms of expectations and so on. Again Guzaarish should have been a much smaller release. Obviously it wasn’t possible with this budget but sometimes you can get the job done if you start in select theaters and gradually expand. Will say having seen the film that this non-reaction is puzzling. Because it isn’t just about a flop here. That happens when a minimal audience shows up for a film. Here clearly no one showed up. The jump from Fri to Sat was completely negligible, the same for Sun. That never happens. Even poor films see some kind of jump before collapsing. Here people just didn’t want to show up. There was some kind of ‘block’ with this film. It could well be that Hrithik in this kind of part was an even greater deterrent than other stars doing the same because of his image. Because nothing else explains why there was no jump at all. The reviews were very good. Even if one assumes WOM wasn’t as great as the media presented it to be that still should have accounted for at least a 6-7 crore Sat. We’ve seen this for all kinds of films, all kinds of failures even. The other factor here as someone mentioned might have been the soundtrack which didn’t do anything for anyone. And also as Jay pointed out the post-Saawariya factor. The ironic thing is that the trailers made it look more over the top visually and in keeping with Bhansali’s recent career than is actually the case. It is actually quite restrained on this score.
I think for sure SLB has suffered in the same way as say RGV has in that his “type” of film is so known now that the brand has suffered after a mauling. Like RGV with Aag, Bhansali really got rough treatment with Saawariya and that has left a mark on him for the rest of his career for sure. And his films are more niche then massy, but the cost associated is quite stupid considering his track record. Least RGV’s movies are made on tighter leaner budgets it seems, but Bhansali seems to get a bigger budget each time.
BOI is saying the film won’t make more than 26-27 crore. So basically this is another Saawariya deal if not worst considering Saawariya opened against OSO. And Guzaarish has the “dream pair” like many like to believe with oodles of “chemistry” from Dhoom 2 and Jodha Akbar.
Bhansali probably should make a lighter film like HDDCS. That was hardly a bad film at all, quite enjoyed it. He’s not a terrible director but just does not seem to learn from past mitakes. Devdas was a decent success but consider the “remake” factor, the casting coup of SRK-Aish-Mads, the awesome soundtrack then really it did not do the box office any justice. Saawariya even bigger disaster. Now Guzaarish.
Not suggesting the films are bad, just “who” makes the executive decisions to bankroll such films with a track record like this? And surely Bhansali realises his style is tough to bare for the masses.
These are all good points. Actually I think Guzaarish is doing worse than Saawariya. There was OSO but the film did get to a flying start before collapsing. And yes RGV can keep doing films because it’s hard to lose much on any of his films. They just have very small budgets. The problem Bhansali has is that his kind of cinema can never have a smaller budget. Which then leaves as you’ve suggested the option of doing easier formats. Of course even HDDCS had rough sailing outside the Bombay territory and the South. Did quite unevenly elsewhere (though with more multiplexes at the time it would have been fine all over). I do feel sorry for him as these two films in a row will make it very hard for him to make his kind of film with any star the next time around. And I don’t see Bhansali as doing too well with compromises.
One shouldnt really have problems with Dr. Mehta’s comments. I can see where he is coming from and while SLB doesnt seem to have done anything to trivialise the cause of people with spinal injury, Dr. Mehta cannpt be blamed for wishing that SLB had done more for the cause. At the same time, I dont think that SLB is wrong or his film is faulty. It is a matter of perspectives and priorities.
I think it’s too much to expect a film even on this subject to be some kind of vehicle for a larger cause. But even if so I’d argue that just the Hrithik kind of star representing this condition perhaps does more for people in a similar situation than anything else.
Guzaarish disappointed on Monday with collections around 2 crore nett collections at the box office. This takes the four day total to 17 crore nett with the week likely to finish below 22 crore nett.
The film needed a good Monday if it was to have even a reasonably tally at the box office in the long run but it now looks like the film will close its lifetime business at around 26-27 crore nett which is very bad especially for the big names involved in the film.
The drop on Monday was across the board and even a circuit like Mysore where gentry films have a better market fell 55% from Friday.
click here
After Action Replayy on Diwali, Guzaarish is another big film with a very poor performance at the box office.
Quite stunning.. this film has performed worse than Saawariya but also JBJ, D6, Raavan, CCTC (a number of other Akshay flops), I could really extend this list. Both in terms of initial and final gross (allowing for inflation). With Saawariya though I didn’t mind it I could easily see why it had been rejected. Here it’s much harder to understand this. Unbelievable.
Let us summarise the causes for the failure of Guzaarish to avoid an extended postmortem.
In no particular order;
1. Shadow of Saawariyan and resulting loss of credibility for SLB.
2. Tpoic/promos
3. Lack of hit music
4. Lack of capital/currency/credibility of the director/lead actors in this kind of films
5. ‘Stoopid’ audience. Sorry, SM but audience needs to share some of the blame
In short, anything but the film itself. It looks like the film never stood a chance.
yeah we had that debate about Aamir’s comments on DG recently.. and quite frankly the G3/Guzaarish double bears him out. We can argue about whether his words were well-chosen or not but surely there’s no debate about the reality. And incidentally this is not about that abstraction called the ‘masses’. Why didn’t this film receive half of JA’s support (itself a low bar) in the multiplexes?
By the way as I just mentioned elsewhere Bhansali has himself to blame for the advertising also. The film is far more visually restrained than Black or Saawariya but you couldn’t say this looking at the trailers.
“And incidentally this is not about that abstraction called the ‘masses’. Why didn’t this film receive half of JA’s support (itself a low bar) in the multiplexes?”
I don’t think the “multiplex audience” is any more sophisticated or knowledgeable about films than the so-called “single screen” audience. The overwhelming of both segments are looking for escapist cinema. It’s just their places of escape are different.
Among both segments are some that are aware of and can appreciate good cinema which is not escapist. But it is necessarily a small segment, and the argument you have made below on the maximum collections to be expected from “experimental” films bears this out.
The objection to Aamir’s remarks (at least from me) wasn’t about the sentiment, but on the choice of words. Obviously DG is a niche film, and there is nothing wrong in trying to set the expectations accordingly. But, as you have said, the dividing line isn’t the “mass” and “multiplex” audiences, but those who look for entertainment in their films vs. those looking for enlightenment — not in a spiritual sense, but in films throwing a light on understanding the human condition. Perhaps a better way of putting it might be to say some people like films that give all the answers, while a much small percentage of the audience likes films that raise questions.
but I don’t think Aamir was thinking of a mass audience when he said that. He was in my view only referring to the multiplex audiences that liked TZP and so on. And it is true that most people do look for ‘entertainment’ but then they define this word in very narrow ways. So I might only be entertained by TMK! Don’t disagree with anything you’ve said and I certainly haven’t defended Aamir’s precise language but I think that if he had followed your suggestion he would still have been accused of the same condescension.
I don’t think the audience needs to share “the blame” for any film. In simple business terms, a film maker is a seller with a product. The audience are the buyers with varying tastes. If the seller doesn’t cater to those tastes, then they will not buy the product. End of story. In no other business do you have the seller denigrating the buyer for not recognizing his genius in making a great product that no one is buying. A smart film maker either does extensive market research to target the product to those most likely to buy it, or control production costs so that even a small number of “buyers” will still make the venture profitable. In this respect Aamir has been the smartest film maker recently, in tailoring his budget to the probable returns of his films.
In “artistic” terms, the creator is still working in the area of mass communication, with emphasis on the “communication” part. If you are trying to say something, and the people receiving it aren’t understanding your message, then you should either modify your style of communication or, again, identify who is understanding it, and target those only. The communication isn’t complete until the receiver actually gets what the sender is trying to send. Again the onus in films is on the sender (creator/film maker). If the maker wants to satisfy only his/her own tastes and doesn’t care for anyone else’s opinion, then fine, but don’t exhibit your film and get disappointed if you are not lauded.
Finally, the “audience” isn’t monolithic. Even Guzaarish is finding appreciation among some part of the audience. But the problem here is that the film’s costs are not being matched with the audience’s returns. There needs to be much more discipline in production houses and among directors in doing necessary market research, heck, even in properly analyzing the returns from previous films of all varieties, and identifying their target audience more realistically. It is naive (or “stoopid”, to quote Rajen) to think the mere presence of big name stars will guarantee a large audience. Note that the “stars” are not limited to the actors alone. Nowadays some directors have also become “stars” in their own right, with not only name recognition, but recognizable branding as well. But this “star” status comes with the corresponding price of the star “image.” The “star” can only cash in on that status when the film on offer correlates to that image or branding. If anyone steps out of that niche, then the returns aren’t guaranteed.
” stoopid audience? you mean to say, the audience became suddenly stupid for this film.? It’s the same audience that made a Peepli Live a blockbuster and Dev D and Black a hit.
The biggest reason for the astounding failure is the anger against SLB and his arrogance. It is like when the voters voted against Indira Gandhii’s congress , in the process defeating mnay decent candidates. Because they wanted to teach her a lesson.
The audience wants to ask SLB:
Why the never-never land and exotic people? Can’t you tell us a story with characters we can relate to?
Why the bltant pagiarism without an iota of effort at Indianizing the material? It’s one thing to shamelessly copy Miracle Worker, The Prestige, The Sea Inside..etc etc , but not even bother to change the costume?
Why “operatic”? Go make an opera and prove yourself if you are so enamoured of the form
Why English dialogues which is not even required for authenticity, since you have dispensed with in any way? why actors like Suhel Seth? You want to show that you are above us hoi polloi?
Great! Good luck! You see your own film. But please excuse us!
( I am speaking from experience. I know it will be a half decent film, with many god moments. But the sheer revulsion against SLB and the behavior of his cronies who praise him to the skies has prevented me from going to thetheater.so far.)
Actually the gross of Peepli Live was about 30-35 crores, that of Dev D was about 15 crores. Forget the budget or expectations for a minute. The audience is the very same!What do I mean by this? Take D6, a film which made 33-35 crores depending on who you believe. If you compare this with Dev D the differential is only about the lead star. Once you account for the initial both films more or less have the same audience. What if this is the maximum audience for films ‘experimental’ films. D6 was quite experimental in its treatment, RDB wasn’t. Raavan was unorthodox similarly, Guru wasn’t. The audience can patronize ‘different’ films but not more than this. what happens is that with a big star the project automatically becomes bigger but in no industry of the world does niche or unorthodox cinema become mass cinema just because a major star is attached to it. In Hollywood of course they would just go for a limited release. In India they don’t do this, people think (and it’s not always their fault, the advertising is often misleading) it’s a different film but with a major star and director and show up. So Raavan was from the Guru team, D6 from the RDB guy and so on but actually these later films were rather different. It is too facile to say these are ‘bad’ films. If Abhishek had acted in Dev D that film would do no more than D6. Again the same issue. You get the initial but the audience for these films is a limited one. Of course there is a certain intangible here because when a film is made and pitched like Dev D only people who are open to such films show up in the first place. So any negativity is limited. when it’s done like a major release however a lot of people react angrily. Now take Guzaarish. Here the problem is that no one even showed up which is why it’s behind Raavan and D6 otherwise it would get to the same total. Why no one did can be debated. But the point is that the film it was based on was a niche effort even for a Western audience. Such films are not mass hits even at this end. So Bhansali gets inspired from such films and adds major stars and releases it like any other big production. Bollywood just continues to do things stupidly. Peepli Live by the way is a better example than many. It is Aamir’s incredible prestige that the film got as far as it did but if you leave aside the initial the film was hardly extraordinary. Nothing compared to the trending of TZP in any case. And when one watches Peepli one isn’t surprised. I personally didn’t like it much but that’s not the point. It too is an experimental film for a mass audience. If Aamir had himself been in it the film would have added some crores. Still wouldn’t have been anywhere close to a TZP. By the way if Aamir were to again do this sort of thing, a film people could associate with Peepli I don’t think he’d get even this initial.
RDB had a tragic end though. It’s fairly experimental in terms of the narrative drawing a parallel between the freedom fighters and repressed angst of modern day youth. But not only did the film get a fab opening, it trended extremely well!
I’m not exaggerating when I say this — the RDB effect can’t be understated when it comes to the ‘real world’ Jessica Lal case being reopened due to public pressure. The candle light vigils organized in Delhi were pretty much inspired from the film.
What RDB shows us is that it’s very much possible for an experimental film to not only open well but also sustain. The audience ‘connection’ has to be pretty strong though.
All this is fine and accepted. But Satyam, you still haven’t tried to answer why it DID NOT get even the initial of even a Raavan? I hear evetone say how Hritk is sicha box office monster compared to Abhi. At least I have proffered an explnation: the anger against SLB. ( Incidentally, I did go and watch Ravan the first weekend, knowing taht it woul be bad, because of my love for Mani. That’s the difference.) You have explained the phenomenal initial of Peepli because of Amir’s prestige, which obviously SLB or Hritik don’t enjoy. Simple.
To turn this debate around, is Abhishek going to beat Hrithik’s initial in ‘Kites’ in Dhoom 3 without any other major star? In all probability he won’t!
Raavan was a film with pretty strong buzz before its release. People were curious to watch the film. The trailers did the trick. Guzaarish, in all probability, suffered from poor publicity and poor trailers.
Oh I think he would in D3.. obviously there would be a villain here too.. remember abhishek has hardly ever done those instant winners at the box office.
Krrish and D2 released the same year. D2 was significantly ahead on the initial. Meanwhile Race wasn’t too far from D2. In other words in certain genres even less than top stars can do. As we see with Golmaal the comedy genre can produce returns bigger than anything Akshay has ever achieved. But there’s also another point here. Pound for pound Abhishek isn’t going to get Hrithik’s returns in the Kites format. But then this format is Hrithik’s strength. One could also say that Hrithik did not get to the D6 or Raavan total with Guzaarish even though this was so well reviewed whereas the other two were mauled. Hrithik’s strength genre will never be the same as Abhishek’s. HAd Abhishek continued to do the BnB kind of deal I think the evidence since makes it fairly clear that this kind of rooted masala stuff would only have gotten bigger. And hrithik cannot do better than a star perceived as more rooted for this kind of genre. So the question ought to be: if Abhishek had been doing a lot more masala and Hrithik had kept doing Krrish what would have been bigger ultimately? You at least have a debate here. Of course it’s not just this genre. Abhishek hasn’t attached himself to any obvious ‘winner’ genre.
By the way given the hysteria created over Raavan it wouldn’t be unreasonable to assume that many who were on the fence about this one decided not to go. Probably many who were inclined to as well. No such problem with Guzaarish. The reviews were all very positive. Even online the reactions were mostly positive from people who had seen the film.
every film does get negative reviews. When allbollywood was around even the very best films didn’t do more than 80% or so. But there was I think a massive difference between what D6 and Guzaarish got let alone Raavan where people stored up water and other supplies because the world looked like it was ending. I think Guzaarish got very positive coverage. A film like RDB was better but not too many. Don’t think for example that leaving aside the lead performance Guru got better reviews than this.
They could cast Om Puri as the villain in D3 and it would still assuredly beat the Kites initial on the merit of the series’ brand power. I’m only slightly exaggerating!
“By the way if Aamir were to again do this sort of thing, a film people could associate with Peepli I don’t think he’d get even this initial.”
By the way he is doing ‘ this sort of thing’ again: Dhobi Ghaat, which is as experimental as it can get, and it does not even have a Hritik or Ash. And it has a fraction of the budget that Guzaarish has. But it will get a good initial, I can bet.
If I had to offer a theory, I’d say films like Guzaarish, Black & Paa rely heavily on WOM. The typical college going crowd isn’t going to jump at the first opportunity to watch these films. And they are the ones who flock to the theaters every Friday morning. These films need a very strong WOM to survive. And a relatively clear run where no other major release eats up the screens that are never going to see full capacity anyway. If the second condition isn’t met, the gross is going to be very limited.
And this explains why producers flood the market with as many prints as possible. A major film gets 2 or 3 weeks max to earn as much as possible. It’s imperative to maximize the initial in case the film even gets a ‘mixed’ reaction, which is usually the norm!
that’s quite right.. which is why the bar for such films is very high.. OSO can do very well even with mediocre WOM.. but offbeat films have to be near perfect on this score or people don’t show up.. and of course the base for such films is in any case much smaller..
It’s because I agree with this that the film is certainly in part responsible for its own failure. If Guzaarish at this point doesn’t have much of an audience it’s because the WOM on this has been lukewarm.
I’m saying something different here. Of course DG is experimental and non-commercial. But Peepli.. is a certain kind of ‘experimental’. To put it another way if DG gets the Peepli opening or better (which it should given Aamir’s in it) I think it will do more than that film. Much as if Udaan had Aamir in it this would in my view do better than Peepli. Not all experimental films are alike. Some can get enough of an audience. Others don’t.
The other thing is that we shouldn’t base critical opinion on box office categories. Yes films have to be made a certain way to appeal to a wider audience. But one that does not do the latter is not automatically poor because of this. MNJ wasn’t bad because no one liked it at the time. In this sense we have to be careful about terms like ‘emotional appeal’ and so on. But also not every worthwhile film can fall into such a category. It is not that the only kind of ‘good’ film is that which audiences can emotionally relate to. This is obviously a good box office formula but doesn’t speak to anything else. There are terrible melodramas that move audiences and do well. Peepli.. didn’t have this kind of appeal, it did whatever it did because of Aamir. It was another extraordinary triumph for him precisely because it made 30-35 crores, not 60! Why? Because with a TZP there is a certain emotional core to the film, Aamir gets them in and then they love it. But Peepli would have made Rs 5 without his association! Therefore my point earlier was that another Peepli-like film wouldn’t get as much of an initial even with him. On the other hand another TZP-like deal could have a massive opening. In the same vein it is not that D6 or Raavan are the best experimental/different/whatever films they might be. Just that the way these have been handled by the respective directors a larger audience just wasn’t on the cards. By the way, and rather ironically too, Bhansali is much more restrained in Guzaarish even on this score. Some moving moments here but the film is never even close to being emotionally overwhelming. And this too has possibly hurt it. In any case my larger point is that a film not having any sort of obvious ‘emotional appeal’ is hardly an instant disqualifier.
a film not having any sort of obvious ‘emotional appeal’ is hardly an instant disqualifier.
Of course not. No smoking is a fine attempt, though it does not work fully. Obviously that kind of a film is not going to get a huge audience. But it gets respect from its niche audience. That’s why it gets 6.9 rating on IMDb as against say Saawaariya which no one thonkshas any merit ( That’s why it gets 5.3 rating on IMDb. The tarting is not an absolute yardstick or anything, but is indicative of certain reality. )
Unlke Saawariya, Guzaarish has its niche admirers ( I doubt I will be one among them. Heck, I did not even like Black.) and it will notch up impressive ratings on IMDB like Black. But I think it was designed to be much more. It was planned to be a faithfully successful film, may be a big hit, what with sexy magic shots, and all that. I am sure they did not plan on losing money.
Re: ” stoopid audience? you mean to say, the audience became suddenly stupid for this film.? It’s the same audience that made a Peepli Live a blockbuster and Dev D and Black a hit.
Stoopid audience doesnt mean they will never appreciate a good film but it only appreciates certain kind of films or it needs to have certain ingredients even if it is good film – things like blissful moments, triumphant endings, uplifting theme etc.
BTW, to some extent I always argue that audience is what it is and one makes the film knowing the audience and that it is too convinient o blame the audience but at some point, I do expect audience to show some maturity.
PL cannot be used as an argument for anything except Aamir’s credibility.
Not of sophistication of audience taste. And, the way it decayed proves the point. Sure it made quite a bit of money compared to budget but it was mainly due to Aamir’s association and smart publicity.
Films like Guzaarish are ahead of their time. Indian audience and I say this very candidly is still not mature enough for such movies. Jodhaa Akbar did well becasue at its heart it was a proper love story and Hrithik was every bit the hero material in this film – so ultimately depsite it being a period film, and long it could atleast manage to pull the family audience. The young ones still just did not have the appetite for even films like JA or any other historical for that matter hence they found it boring.
Guzaarish is a much more finely nuanced and sensitive subject but Hrithik is anything but a typical BW hero material in this. At the heart it is a sensitive subject around disability.
Even within my own family there is a split opinion about the pace of the film. The mature kinds like my sister (who is doctor) and bro in law could relate with it and found the handling of the subject beautiful – andthe aesthetcis was considered one of its own kind. But then there is the older generation who didn’t like it as much. They found Dabang a real feast and enjoyed it to the hilt. I don’t mean to be critcial but this for me is actually just a very poor reflection of how people love to evade sensitive and serious topics – and look out for what is called the typical escapist cinema in action or comedy.
Kites had a great initial compared to Guzaarish but for me the former carries no meaning whereas the latter shall remain an unforgetable experience.
Somewhere deep down I admire Bhansali for attempting this beautiful piece of work. At least he has the gall to do it and show us an alternate cinema with such aesthetics. Others including the critics all overcan just be arm chair critics, with nothing substantial to add to the quality of cinema themselves. I feel Sawariya was an undoing. Somehow that is something that spelled doom for his career – so much so that it kept even the Hrithik, Ash and Bhansali fans away. The hangover was too deep. However he has give classics and I hope that he does not ghet discouraged from attempting different cinema – it is just that the budget should be kept in perspective.
Frankly, the box office failure of Guzaarish is no big deal, what we are ignoring here is the critical failure. WE could call the audience stoopid if it was a a masterpiece or something and no one could appreciate it. The fact is, it is derivative, mish-mash of a film which has not enthused the bonafide critical community too much. Forget the trade pundits masquerading as critics and you will see average to below average reviews. Apart from Nikhat Kazmi of times who gives 3 stars even to Yuvraj and 5 stars to MNIK. no print or TV jouranlist has given it more than 3 stars. Anupama Chopra, Khalid Mohammad, Rajeev Masand, Mayank shekhar. Kaveri Bmazai have all found serious problems with the film. Many have given it 2 stars. So waht is the big achievement of the film?
I mean one could excuse Bhansali for spending 30..40..50 ..whatever crores if he was producing genuine film art. Okay the aam junta does not appreciate art, what about the critics? What about the festivals around the world? Is Guzaarish going to make any impression there? Naa! It is going to bea laughing stock with its shamelss lifting of images and concepts from iconic films of the West, without any form of transmutation. Peepli Live was selected for Sundance, Dhobi Ghaat was a wow at Toronto, Udaan was at a number of festivals, Lagaan won at Locarno and was nominated for Oscar. so why is Bhansali an ARTIST and Gowarikar and Vikram Motwani not? I mean what is the criteria here? Mind you I am not talking of box office here. So Guzaarish to a festival audience at Venice or Cannes, and you will know who is stoopid, the audience or the handful of critics who are propping up a derivative, second-rate talent who has big pretensions and knows how to sell himself?
The general drift of the reviews matters Utkal. If you just looked at the well known 7-8 names you’d find that D6 didn’t do too badly at all. Even Raavan was not all that bad. Kazmi for example thought it was Abhishek’s best performance ever. Either her or someone else. But the overall reviews were positive on Guzaarish.
On the critical bit though Raavan has received positive attention around the foreign festival circuit. What would you say about this one then?
Raavan And Ravanan To Be Screened At Various Film Festivals
Posted by Faridoon Shahryar at 11:36 PM
Mani Ratnam’s Raavan & Raavanan a big hit in film festivals & has invitation from 9 festivals for screening
Mani Ratnam has just returned from Venice after receiving the “jaeger-le coultre – glory to the filmmaker award” where his Raavan & Raavanan won him much appreciation and a standing ovation from the 600 strong special delegates audience. He is also the sole Indian to ever be awarded this prestigious award.
But looking at the impressive lineup of invites from international and prestigious festivakls for the films its clear that Raavan and Raavanan is a critical hit worldwide.
After Venice is the PUSAN International Film Festival in South Korea (Oct 7th to 15th 2010) where both the films will be screened.
The others festivals where the Mani Ratnam film in both or either version will be showcased are the following :
SITGES Film Festival, Spain (Oct 7th to 17th 2010) – Spanish Premier – Raavan (Hindi)
Mostra De Valencia, Spain (Oct 15th to 23rd 2010) – Action Section (Competition Section) – Raavan (Hindi)
MONTREAL-INTERNATIONAL FESTIVAL OF NEW CINEMA, Canada (Oct 13th to 24th 2010) – Canadian Premier – Raavanan (Tamil)
Tokyo International Film Festival, Japan (Oct 23rd to 31st 2010) – Winds of Asia-Middle East Section – Raavan (Hindi)
Mahindra Indo-American Arts Council Film Festiva, New York (Nov 12th 2010) – New York Premier – Raavanan (Tamil)
Asia Pacific Screen Awards, Australia (Dec 2nd 2010) – Competition Section – Raavan (Hindi)
International Film Festival, Goa – Indian Panaroma Section – Raavanan (Tamil)
utkal – this is the first and perhaps the last time I am going to comment on your post. Go and critic a film after wtaching a film. At least others whose names you rely on have at least watched it. All you have done is critic it based on past work. By the way the armchair critic concept does not only apply for rated reviewers.
“A disabled is better off ending his life? Obstacles and problems should taint our view about life? Spinal injury is too big a problem to live with?”
It was Hrithik’s personal decision to end his life. He never ever encourages other quadraplegics to do the same. This guy just didn’t get the movie, on a basic story level.
Satyam, not really. Raavan has been shown in festival circuit on Mani’s reputation. But I don’t think it has made any kind of impact. and no the general drift has not been very positive. They have praised the performances, the cineamtography, but not the film.
I mean come on, TZP, CDI, Udaan, Peepli Live, ..has anyone of these got a 2-star rating from anyone? The only other film from a reputed filmmaker that has got this bad rating is Raavan. The Tamil version has been rated above average generally, but the Hindi version has got way more thumbs down than thumbs ups.
I think the only critics excited by Guzaarish are the Hindi reviewers who haven’t seen much of world cinema and have been zapped by its pretensions to art.
“I mean come on, TZP, CDI, Udaan, Peepli Live, ..has anyone of these got a 2-star rating from anyone?”
Yes those movies did get some negative reviews which were posted on AllBollywood when the site was up. If I recall correctly, the ratings were in the 60s and 70s not 90s or 100%.
Recently, PL and Udaan had some negative reviews from Western critics. TZP and CDI were pretty dismissed by Western critics.
It is the rare movie that is liked by every critic so your argument carries no weight once again.
BTW Devdas which is bashed by many (including me) and loved many others was nominated for a BAFTA. Guru has a 90% rating on RottenTomatoes although it won no awards.
You seem to have a specific problem with SLB and Ratnam in particular. If their movies are invited to film festivals, then it means nothing but if an Aamir movie or some other director’s movie is invited then it is meaningful. Where is the consistency? An honor is an honor regardless of whether you like the director or not.
I would respect your opinion more if it did not seem agenda driven.
D6 did get a fair number of good reviews. Perhaps, in the balance, Guzaarish too will have more positive reviews. But not too many calling it great. and for an offbeat film to do well, the reviews have to be almost unanimously GREAT, like it was with Udaan or Peepli Live. D6, Raavan or Guzaarish level of reviews wont do.
Somewhat off topic (but maybe marginally related to the discussion about reviews):
Producers Decide To Get Realistic With Budgets
Komal Nahta
Among the corporate heads, if there are some who think on a broader level, the name of UTV’s Ronnie Screwvala comes on the top of the list. Almost every producer – corporate or individual – has been concerned at the indiscriminate spending on promotion of films around the time of release but it took a Ronnie Screwvala to get the industry united on this issue. All the leading producers including Yash Chopra, Aamir Khan, Karan Johar, Ramesh Taurani, Eros, Reliance Big and UTV, of course, met at Yash Chopra’s office on 15th November to discuss ways and means to bring down the budgets allocated to marketing. There was consensus of opinion that producers have been going overboard in their ad spend, and that matters needed to be controlled and a more rational approach needed to be taken in this direction. Aamir Khan used the platform to also express his misgivings about the tendency of producers to spend on Times Of India’s Medianet to have paid editorials written in its supplements. The actor-producer-director made it clear that it wasn’t about the financial aspect but rather about the moral one of having to pay for getting it written that one’s film is good or hit. “How can I pay to get a good review of my film?” wondered Aamir aloud. Karan Johar, while agreeing with Aamir, said, his stars and technicians expected him to spend on Medianet because other producers were spending likewise.
A four-member committee is expected to be formed soon to get to the root of the problem of overspending on publicity and marketing. It will submit its report and recommendations. The producers in the meeting on 15th November also felt that they should meet more often on a common platform like this. It was decided to hold such meetings to take up issues concerning the production sector, every first Monday of the month.
Satyam, it is not worth digging up, but Raavan was shown at many festivals, I concede. Because it was an original. Not ripped from 5 different western films . There was much to appreciate in what mani was TRYING to do. That he failed is another matter. And by and large he is artstically much more sincere than Bhansali. AS I have said earlier that’s why I saw Raavan in the first weekend. and will do so for any Mani film. But for Bhansali, I will wait for the critical tipping point. which in the case of Guzaarish has not happened.o I might catch it on DVD. The claustrophobia of Saawaria and the desperate urge to leave the theater plays strongly in my mind.
Something slightly unconnected , but not totally: The four critics from the hundred odd critics in the panel that voted in 2002 ( it is done every ten yrs) to decide the world’s Ten Best Films ever are Aruna Vasudev. Lalita Gopalan, MK Raghavendra and Sukhdev Sandhu
random and jumbled thoughts on the interesting ongoing discussion…nothing personal just my opinions…so no offense meant to anyone.
How can one criticize a movie so passionately, w/o having seen it? And something wrong w/ saying “hindi” lang. reviewers are fooled by pretensions b/c they haven’t experienced world cinema. I’ve lived overseas most of my life and have been educated here, seen a lot of cinema from around the world and i still find slb has something to offer. I don’t find him to be a great filmmaker nor a great artist, but the guy makes movies that i will always watch on the big screen. I’ve seen peepli live, and i didn’t find it that amazing…i only went to the theater b/c aamir was associated w/ it and i’d watch devdas or black or even saawariya over peepli live on the big screen.
I don’t think box office proves much at all except for someone’s business acumen maybe…I agree the type of commercial prospect that slb movies have, he should control the budgets. As far as making westernized movies w/ english dialogues, the way slb does it, i don’t have a prob. w/ it…it’s a 100 times better than i hate luv storys or k3g, or the salaam namastes of the world.
About the critics, I don’t listen to them except for the people i trust on here…obviously they’re not professional critics. the critics gave glowing reviews to mnik, that was a huge crapfest. there are countless examples of these. even dabangg which got great reviews and a made a lot of money was not very good either.
at the end of the day, you can only judge the movie and it’s your opinion doesn’t matter how much u hate the maker or how well it does at the bo or w/ the critics or festivals.
“I’ve lived overseas most of my life and have been educated here, seen a lot of cinema from around the world and i still find slb has something to offer. I don’t find him to be a great filmmaker nor a great artist, but the guy makes movies that i will always watch on the big screen.”
I’m not a Bhansali fan but more importantly this passage cuts to the heart of something that resonates very deeply with me. Well said, sarvanash.
yes, I was discussing this with someone the other day but to the degree Bhansali makes films that forces people to visit the theater even when they’re not great fans of his work he does provide a valuable service. Guzaarish though is a dangerous failure to have. A director might easily see where he might have been self-indulgent with a film like Saawariya, such reflection is just harder with a Guzaarish.
Thanks sarvanash — you’ve put your finger on not only the “it” of Bhansali, but of the cinematic as well, as that which must be experienced on the big screen.
With same day piracy downloads available online, film makers should understand the only films that make money are good entertainers (3-I, Golamaal), Hi def ones like Robot
and low budget ones.
SRK has the best chance now that Guzaarish hasn’t worked. They generally don’t reward failures in the popular category. Not that MNIK was a big success either but it obviously did a whole lot more than Guzaarish. Devgan might have an outside chance. If they’re really rewarding the box office they could go with Salman but I doubt it.
they’ll make up categories for everyone to be happy. srk and hrithik splitting popular and critics. salman getting power or some other made up award for dabangg. ajay d. will be ignored, but i don’t think that’s all that unfair he was good buy not amazing. haven’t seen guzaarish, but srk performed pretty well in a bad movie…so it wouldn’t be totally crazy if he won over ajay d. hopefully udaan isn’t ignored. and hopefully raavan gets the well deserved technical awards. Can’t really remember too many other movies right now and for some this year, i haven’t watched a lot of hindi movies.
I saw that. These guys are shameless. He’s the same guy who finds something wrong with Raavan or Guzaarish screenplays but when MNIK or WAF releasee all he does is praise. Shameless.
Adding to the growing list of big budgeted Bollywood movies hitting dust, Guzaarish opened not only to a sluggish box office in India but also in foreign territories where it was expected to do solid business.
While Kites, the previous Hrithik Roshan [ Images ] release had a big crash in India [ Images ] in the opening week, it grossed over $1 million in North America. But Guzaarish, which made $480,000 on a massive 108 theater release over the weekend, would be lucky to earn $550,000 the entire week.
According to distributor UTV, it grossed just about $5.6 million worldwide over the weekend, with the Indian gross accounting for about $3.9 million at 850 locations.
This is the third Aishwarya Rai Bachchan [ Images ] film in last four months (after Raavan and Action Replayy) to be a big box office disappointment. The saving grace was a mega hit Robot/Endhiran with Rajnikanth [ Images ] taking most of the credit for the performance.
“Who wants to see a slow-moving arty film in winter,” said a university student at a Manhattan screening of Guzaarish recently. “Why isn’t there a new date film? I think I would have been better off seeing Golmaal 3 the second time on DVD.’
Guzaarish fared poorly in the United Kingdom where it grossed $274,000 over the weekend at 58 locations. Comparatively it had better luck in Pakistan, grossing in five days about $110,000 at 16 locations.
“Who wants to see a slow-moving arty film in winter,” said a university student at a Manhattan screening of Guzaarish recently. “Why isn’t there a new date film? I think I would have been better off seeing Golmaal 3 the second time on DVD.’
The non-performance overseas (a territory where pretty much any films with big stars do well) proves yet again that a film like Guzaarish never stood a chance. Even if it had been made a little better, the topic alone would scare off audiences.
I hope Hrithik, Aish and Bhansali don’t get disappointed by this failure. They have all done a good job.
“How can one criticize a movie so passionately, w/o having seen it?”
Life is too short to see every film or read every book. One has to mkae choices based on ealier work of authors, excerpts / trailors, crtical opinion, WoM.
“And something wrong w/ saying “hindi” lang. reviewers are fooled by pretensions b/c they haven’t experienced world cinema.”
I am not saying that everyone exposed to world cinema is not liking Guzaarish. But I can vouch that people unexposed to world cinema are much more impressed by SLB’s artistic pretensions. Partly because they havent seen this kind of attempt too much, partly because they haven’t seen original source material like Sea Inside etc and cannot notice the derivative nature of his work
Let’s face it. GUZAARISH won rave reviews from critics and audience [check out the User Reviews] and is sure to bag most awards next year, but the well-made film has failed to strike a chord at the box-office. That’s the bitter truth. An expensive film [it cost UTV approx. Rs. 60 cr. - that's the actual figure, confirmed by UTV], GUZAARISH will make a hole in the pockets of its investors because the theatrical business is shockingly low. It’s a case of a good film missing the mark at the box-office.
What led to its rejection at the box-office? After speaking to a number of distributors/exhibitors over the weekend, I’ve come to the conclusion that the film failed on four counts…
* One, it caters to a really tiny audience, those who tilt towards cinema that dares to be different.
* Two, ask a common man what he looks for in a movie and the answer is entertainment. GUZAARISH did entertain, but not in the
way the common man would expect.
* Three, the music did not catch on with listeners, like the music of HUM DIL DE CHUKE SANAM and DEVDAS did.
* Four, the generous usage of English in the narrative, which kept the audience away, especially in the mass belt/single screens.
Also, a section of the industry feels that it’s a risk to have the hero of the film almost entirely on a wheel chair. Besides, the film failed to create any kind of a buzz prior to its release thanks to its promos and that could be one of the reasons for the poor start at the ticket window.
Talking from the economics point of view, GUZAARISH has cost Rs. 60 cr. to UTV, of which approx. Rs. 25 cr. has been recovered from the sale of Satellite and Music rights of the film. The remaining amount – approx. Rs. 35 cr. – has to be recovered from theatrical business and looking at its business in India and Overseas, it seems like a remote possibility. The terrific word of mouth hasn’t helped at all and the decline in business on Monday and Tuesday proves it.
Years ago, Guru Dutt’s KAAGAZ KE PHOOL, Raj Kapoor’s MERA NAAM JOKER and Yash Chopra’s LAMHE failed to work at the box-office. But the same films are considered classics today. Will GUZAARISH, which ranks amongst Bhansali’s best works to date, also be remembered fondly in years to come?
” Years ago, Guru Dutt’s KAAGAZ KE PHOOL, Raj Kapoor’s MERA NAAM JOKER and Yash Chopra’s LAMHE failed to work at the box-office. But the same films are considered classics today. ”
None of them got 2 star ratings from major critics.
“The terrific word of mouth hasn’t helped at all and the decline in business on Monday and Tuesday proves it.”
Come on, how can “terrific word of mouth” not translate to footfalls? It goes totally against logic, right? Maybe the WoM is not so terrific ? And is confined to a small minority.? User reviews are generally good, because how many want to spend time writing about a film that they have had to suffer through?
AS I ahve said earler, not seeing the truth and burying your head in the sand is what has brought about Bhansa;i’s downfall. Please dont push him further in that direction.
“but isn’t life also too short to spend hours criticizing a film (and its director) you haven’t even seen?” It is just my love for the medium. I feel we have the audience, and the makers ( only a few of course) , what we lac is a good critical tradition that can match the west and encourage truly good cinema. That is why the extra effort to correct some misconceptions and anointing of false heroes.
“Life is too short to see every film or read every book. One has to mkae choices based on ealier work of authors, excerpts / trailors, crtical opinion, WoM.”
utkal – don’t mind the pun but your theory is self defetating. You must have spent more than 48 hours on the blog (NG and SS combined) pulling down and deprecating a film that you seemingly hardly care for and one that you have not seen just to prove whatever point you want to prove. Yet you wanted to save 2.15 hours of your crucial time in your life by taking a vow not to watch the same film.
Julie, i will probably see it sometime this week. Posting something between tasks is easy. Taking out 4 hrs ( including travel time) to go to a theater takes some motivation. As it is I still have Social Network and Break Ke Baad to catch this week. And I would have liked to see the low-budget Tamil ‘ Myna’ so much. You see it’s a question of priority.
“In Indian cinema we have numerous examples of successful actors becoming their own caricatures in later parts of their careers. I think that bug has caught our directors these days. They act like they have found a template of a successful cinema and they just go on filling in the templates and expect the audience to react as they did for their earlier work. It seems SLB too (like RGV) has created his own template and sadly he looks like madly in love with the template rather than the art of storytelling itself. ”
Many can argue that SLB folows a stylistic , or operatic style of filmmaking, as against the lesser mortals who make more straight forward films.
Now Gurudutt followeda stylised form of film making as against Bimal Roy’s neorealistic format. But both touched you emotionally. Stylisation or melodrama is not the problem, it’s how you use it. Ray was neo-realistic while Ritwik Ghatak was melodramatic, but that does not mean Ghatak did not touch you.
The problem with SLB is that he does not know how to use melodrama or stylisation for a higher artistic purpose. Take Devdas and Dola Re. You take the artistic license of making Paro and Chnadramukhi meet, fine. But to what purpose? They dance together, fine? But to what dramatic purpose? It could have been used to contrast the two and their relationship with Devdas, or their suppressed antagonism, or even the commonality of their love. Anything. Something exploring their inner landscape of their thoughts. But what do they sing instead :
Dola Re Dola Re Dola Re Dola
Haye Dola Dil Dola Mann Dola Re Dola
Lag Jaane Do Najariya, Gir Jaane Do Bijuriya
Bijuriya, Bijuriya, Gir Jaane Do Aaj Bijuriya
Lag Jaane Do Najariya, Gir Jaane Do Bijuriya
Baandhke Maein Ghunghroo
Pehenke Maein Paayal
Oh, Baandhke Maein Ghunghroo
Pehenke Maein Paayal
Ho Jhoomke Naachoongi Ghoomke Naachoongi
Dola Re Dola Re Dola Re Dolaâre.
What high art!
Stupidity of the highest order. SLB treats it as no more than an item song! Compare this to the old Rajashree production ” Geet Gaata Chal, and the song
” Shyam Teri Bansi Pukare Radha Naam
Log Karen Meera Ko Yoonhi Badnaam
Saanwre Ki Bansi Ko Bajne Se Kaam
Radha Ka Bhi Shyam Voh To Meera Ka Bhi Shyam
” That is saying something!
When I saw the song Dola Re on screen I lost all respect for SLB as a filmmaker.
Look at a song like ” Yeh duniya agar mil bhi jaaye to kya’ and what deep philosophy it embodies! In contrast, the songs in Devdas do nothing to underline the film’s theme. All SLB was interested inwas choosing the right sarees and jewellery for ash and Madhuri, and creating some great looking choreography, not explore the inner landscapes of his heroines or build dramtic tension for the ensuing climax.
Prakash Mehra did so much a better job in his reinterpretation of Devdas, Muqadar Ka Sikandar. The relationships were so much more flesh and blood. The songs expressed the underlying emotions and attitude of the protagonists so well. ( Rote hue aate hain sab, Salaame Ishq, Wafa jo na kije, Dil to bas dil hai nad of course Oh Saathi re. The last one expresses the undying love that Devdas has for Paro, sorry, that Sikanadar has for Memsaab is expressed so poignantly ! The songs of Devdas are so plastic, not one coming anywhere close to these in poignancy and power.
Break Ke Baad: Average Opening Likely Predicts CINEMATIX
Wednesday 24th November 2010 09.30 IST
Press Release
Mumbai, Nov 23, 2010: Break Ke Baad has scored significantly lower than Imran Khan’s previous film I Hate Luv Storys on Cinematix™ at the Week (-1) stage, on the Awareness and Interest parameters. While I Hate Luv Storys was at 37% and 60% Unaided Awareness and Interest respectively, Break Ke Baad is only at 30% and 32% respectively.
As per the Cinematix™ predictive model, Break Ke Baad is slated to have a Rs. 12-13 Cr opening weekend (nett), assuming the film releases in 750 Cinemas. I Hate Luv Storys had opened at Rs 22.75 Cr (nett), and had released across approximately 770 cinemas.
Click Here
As a result of a weaker opening, Break Ke Baad will have to rely on good word-of-mouth for a successful run at the box office.
“While both the films have somewhat similar Awareness levels at the same stage, the difference is the scores could be because the music of Break Ke Baad has not become as popular as that of I Hate Luv Storys. Music is a key parameter to generate Interest in a romantic comedy”, said Shailesh Kapoor, CEO, Ormax Media.
The predictive model takes into account the film’s performance across the four Cinematix™ parameters – Unaided Awareness, Total Awareness, Appeal and Interest.
Data over the last six months has been used to predict a film’s opening weekend nett collections on the basis of its Cinematix™ scores. The model can predict the opening weekend collections of a film with an error margin of less than 15%. To
Cinematix™ is a weekly tracking tool to that measures the awareness and interest to watch for upcoming releases, during their marketing phase. Developed and run by India’s premiere media research & consulting firm Ormax Media, the weekly Cinematix™ track is conducted across the key theatrical revenue markets – Mumbai, Delhi, Ahmedabad, Lucknow & Indore. Cinematix™ covers theatre visitors in the age group of 15-34 years in SEC AB.
Basis the response for their film, producers can relook their media and creative strategies during the pre-release phase itself.
Films currently in the Cinematix™ track include: Break Ke Baad, Rakta Charitra 2, Khelein Hum Jee Jaan Sey, Band Baaja Baaraat, No One Killed Jessica, Yamla Pagla Deewana, Run Bhola Run, Dhobi Ghaat, Toonpur Ka Superhero, Tees Maar Khan, No Problem etc.
Besides Cinematix™, Ormax Media also conducts various other types of research for film producers. These include test screenings, promo testing and exit polls.
About Ormax Media
Ormax Media was founded in July 2008, by Vispy Doctor and Shailesh Kapoor. We are a research and consulting firm specializing in the entertainment business. Our work in the television, film, radio and Internet industries is targeted at one specific purpose – to increase the profitability of our business partners by empowering them with consumer knowledge and strategic analysis.
Our services include Quantitative & Qualitative Research. We have also developed a series of proprietary research tools and syndicated products for the entertainment business.
We currently partner with Star India, Colors, Zee Network, Imagine, Sony, Times Now, SAB, Max, UTV, Zoom, Big Broadcasting, Astro, Nick, Disney, Cartoon Network, NDTV Good Times, Yash Raj Films, Fox Star Studios, Vipul Shah Productions, Cinergy, OTX Hollywood, Vistaar Religare, Hungama, Zapak, Radio City, Radio Mirchi, Red FM, MyFM, What’s On India, Tata Sky, Mindshare, Godrej and Idea Cellular.
The Guzaarish star spends on full-page ads featuring himself following producer UTV’s decision not to shell out money on post-promotions
If the producer won’t, the star will.
Yesterday, Hrithik Roshan shelled out Rs 10.5 lakh to release a full-page ad in a daily that screamed ‘Experience Ethan’s magic’.
The spread contained tweets from fans who watched his latest release Guzaarish and loved his character, Ethan, a paraplegic.
The ‘voices’ raved about the movie and in particular, his “amazing acting”. Talk about self-promotion!
With producers UTV clamming on the publicity budget as box-office collections are not in the pink of health, the star took on the onus of advertising his character in Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s project. Expect more ads in coming weeks.
In bad taste
Moreover, Hrithik decided to use a snapshot of Ashutosh Tiwari, a paraplegic who passed away on November 21 by describing him as a ‘true Ethan’. UTV has found it in bad taste and has decided to be totally disassociated from it.
B-Town buzz is that the star is desperate to tell the world that the film may have not worked but he has been loved.
Says a source, “On Monday, there was a sharp decline in collections and UTV was not keen on spending megabucks after the film’s dismal opening.
Hrithik decided to pay from his own pocket for the film’s post-release publicity centered around his acting skills.” Considering he took home a Rs 15 crore fee for the film, this expenditure is loose change.
Adds the source, “The general perception was that the production house released the ads. But they were unaware of his personal publicity gameplan.”
As reported (It’s possible; HiTLIST, November 16), UTV head honcho Ronnie Screwvala had sent an email, inviting leading B-Town producers for a meeting at Yash Raj Studios to decide the best means to curb rising expenditures while making movies.
Screwvala’s main area of concern was the spiralling expenditure on marketing a film which he thinks “is money being splurged on assuaging ourselves (the producers’ fraternity) rather than money being spent to enlarge a market and grow the theatrical audience.”
What Roshan says
This is ridiculous. How can anyone say I have paid for the ads? Who is saying this? Ashutosh passed away recently and the page will be a beautiful memory for his loved ones. It’s an ode to the spirit that he was which changed my life. He was the true Ethan. I attended his chautha last evening and I’ve received so many blessings from his family.
What UTV says
Siddharth Roy Kapur of UTV states, “Hrithik’s performance as Ethan Mascarenhas has been lauded by critics and audiences worldwide. The objective of the ad was to convey the tremendous appreciation the film has received and to recognise the heroism of a real-life ‘Ethan’. We are all part of one team and it is irrelevant who has borne the cost of the ad.”
Shocker
In the CP-Berar territory, after estimating the total business of Guzaarish, distributors expect it to be less than that of the Mallika Sherawat-starrer Hissss!
I don’t see anything wrong in Hrithik promoting his film by spending his own money, though the picture he has chosen is not the right one IMO. He should have taken one of his magician one.
And it turned out to be no better or no worse than I had expected it to be. It is not as irritating or pointless as Saawaria. But almost as boring and fake. Right from the first frame, the fakery and bad storytelling was apparent. Just as you are being introduced to the main characters, an overwrought ” Smile ” distracts you when we should have been gently allowed into the world of Ethan and Sophie as witness to their everyday life. The cleavage revealing, low cut back top of Ash removed whatever empathy one might have had for the characters. Plot loopholes by the dozen ( Why he lives on the top floor, why he has never ventured out of the room for 14 years, why no one comes to visit him, oh there are so many) , the ludicrous court scenes, the cliches like the villainous rival and his son , the sudden appearance of the drunk husband, the perfectly gentlemanly crowd asking Ethan’s mother to shut up when she was obviously singing so beautifully, makes it a really a badly told and yawn inducing story. The only two scenes when I kind of woke up is the magic scene with levitation and the wonderfully performed ‘ Udi Udi. The performances are good but has many patches of unevenness( Frankly I don’t equate good acting necessarily with portrayal of disabled or demented characters.)
So in sum, not as bad as Saawariya, and not nearly as good as Black ( I did not care much for Black as a whole, But the part with the young Michelle, maybe because it was directly lifted from Miracle worker, worked very well. ) The worst part is, here was some good material at hand. But none of the thematic opportunities, the ethical and philosophical dimensions of euthanasia, or the pain and struggle of a quadriplegic, or the love between a beautiful woman and a bodyless man, have been explored at all. If that had been done, then box office success or not, at least it would have been worth something.
November 19, 2010 at 12:31 AM
Guzaarish To Rely On Word Of Mouth
Friday 19th November 2010 09.00 IST
Boxofficeindia.Com Trade Network
Guzaarish is likely to take a slow start at the box office and rely on word of mouth. The film does not have much for the youth so good opening figures are unlikely. It will be the collections from late afternoon on Friday which will decide its fate.
The publicity has also been low key as it is a known fact that the film will have to rely on content rather than hype.
Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows Part 1 (English) is likely to take a good start at multiplexes around India but its release will be smaller than Guzaarish so overall collections may be lower.
November 19, 2010 at 6:32 AM
Box Office: Harry Potter beats Guzarish box office opening in India
http://www.ibosnetwork.com/newsmanager/templates/template1.aspx?a=22232&z=4
November 19, 2010 at 11:14 AM
Look at the tone of this commentary, as compared to (e.g.) that on something like Delhi-6 — as to which it was just as much “a known fact that the film will have to rely on content rather than hype”, and which was just as much a film that did “not have much for the youth…”
November 19, 2010 at 11:36 AM
spot on!
November 19, 2010 at 12:35 AM
Reviews all over seem pretty good…I’ll most probably catch this tomorrow…VERY rarely (if ever) do i miss a Bhansali film in cinema…even if it is just for the visuals:)!
November 19, 2010 at 12:36 AM
Enjoyed SAWARIYA quite a bit too and specially on multiple viewings…
Preferred it to OSO at the time.
http://masterpraz.wordpress.com/2009/11/04/my-take-on-saawariya-hindi-2007/
November 18, 2010 at 11:59 PM
@satyam- i remember u said about RC 2 releasing with KHJJS, cool but u have missed something-
THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA 3… also coming same day.. and its huge hit with family audience in metros.. it worries me.. (and to be honest even i might take cousins kids for that one! )
November 19, 2010 at 1:10 AM
saket
It just lends credence to the theory that there aren’t any “genuine” superstars anymore. The only person close to being one is Aamir Khan and even he can’t guarantee an earth shattering opening for TZP!
Even Aamir khan will not open Dhobi Ghat.That was true after Amitabh retired in 1992.But who called shahrukh as king of bollywood?who said he is No1?
November 19, 2010 at 1:21 AM
Sunil: To some degree I agree with you re: no more “genuine” superstars, though there is Rajnikanth (assuming you’re referring to Hindi cinema here only?).
And films like TZP/DG are very different to say 3I and GHAJINI…expecting a similar BO opening/reaction isn’t fair as even the audiences are aware this isn’t a regular fare….
November 19, 2010 at 5:10 AM
“But who called shahrukh as king of bollywood?who said he is No1?”
Beats me. Not sure I follow the line of questioning either..
November 19, 2010 at 1:32 AM
masterpraz, I was rsponding to saket’s comment.Yes if Amitabh is a standard no one is a genuine superstar.Even he couldnt open manzil,alaap.But to say there are no superstars is an exaggeration.
November 19, 2010 at 5:08 AM
But Amitabh still got a good opening for Bemisaal, Silsila. I remember Bemisaal and Khuddar released within weeks of each other and I saw BOTH in packed houses. Khuddar was packed more, but people just flocked to see Amitabh.
There were huge queues to watch a 30 min appearance of Amitabh in a godawful film called Insaniyat! This was AFTER he had taken a sabbatical and somewhere between Mrityudaata.
November 19, 2010 at 6:52 AM
but saket during those time werent there less theaters? now we also have to think about so many plexes? and shows available?
November 19, 2010 at 7:00 AM
More theaters means more revenue, not less. The possibilities are more. Amitabh was actually LIMITED by the number of theaters available and his commercial films always opened to 100% without any exceptions.
If we compare like for like, a superstar of today should be able to open a film like TZP or Dhobi Ghaat to packed houses. Aamir was able to open RDB and I do happen to think he’s the closest to being a genuine superstar, but can he open Dhobhi Ghaat to over 40 crores in its first week? If he can, it’d be a terrific achievement.
November 19, 2010 at 7:14 AM
partly agreed but-
didnt get it when u say more plexes more revenue?
- other modes of entertainment
- piracy
- work hours
- computer
i feel that in modern world a film has to fight so many factors to open, and in that way it indirectly balances from bachchan era.. imo
still i wont dispute big b is and remains big b imo.. but just that i dont feel bridge would be that big..
November 19, 2010 at 7:15 AM
I do concede that one can’t have a 100% opening across the board in today’s times. Perhaps the capacity exceeds the demand. But there’s no reason why in today’s times a somewhat offbeat film made by a current age superstar can’t open to at least 50% of the present day record (50% of 80 Crores = 40 crores)
November 19, 2010 at 7:20 AM
Piracy was rampant in those days too. At least in the video circuit. Piracy isn’t a new-age phenomenon. If you’d like to factor in “other modes of entertainment” then also factor in the fact that there was hardly any publicity for films in those days. Films used to sell solely on the name of the star!
I assume people had to “work” in those days too
Yet, the opening shows went housefull!
November 19, 2010 at 3:34 AM
Hello everyone, my first post here-
regarding discussion of superstars, I think that Aamir and SRK do have the extra pull( for srk is overseas and aamir the domestic)..so to say we dont have superstars would be incorrect…
for instance a BILLu opens better then almost all other stars in overseas and Peepli live ends up with a comparable opening to action replay…tht too on lesser screens.!!
November 19, 2010 at 7:53 AM
So we are now going to classify “superstars” as domestic superstars, international superstars etc? We can also add superstar from the bhaiyaa belt, superstar in the turban belt, superstar from the land of the nagas while we are at it!
*end of sarcasm*
BTW, sarcasm apart, welcome abhishek!
November 19, 2010 at 9:28 AM
well the overseas belt or the domestic belt is an universe in itself..u r talking as if they are petty regional stars…(no offense to the though)..nevertheless..and why cant srk be called the king of bollywood??..the guy has had tremendous success till the day he entered…and continues too..i personally believe that currently we have 3-4 superstars but…their have been periods where only amitabh or even srk were the lone bo kings.
November 19, 2010 at 6:28 AM
You didnt say that but the media said
silsila is a yash chopra film.Yes bemisaal is a success.
shahrukh should not have been called king of bollywood by anyone.
November 19, 2010 at 7:04 AM
Silsila was a love triangle and Amitabh wasn’t playing to his image in the film. And Yash Chopra was hardly a factor in front of Amitabh Bachchan. Remember Vijay? Lamhe?
November 19, 2010 at 7:17 AM
between dont kmnow where to put this but media anchors like barkha dutt andvir sanghvi under fire here-
We bring you the full transcripts of alleged conversations between Niira Radia, Barkha Dutt, Vir Sanghvi and others, published in Open Magazine. The magazine’s story seeks to expose the networks of lobbyists and power brokers that dictate how this country is run. MiD DAY will keep you updated on the controversy as it unfolds
Earlier this week, Telecom Minister A Raja of the DMK was forced to resign after pressure mounted on the government over irregularities in the allotment of the 2G spectrum. But this decision to sacrifice an individual in no way changes the system that Raja embodies. Evidence filed on the 15th of November in the Supreme Court seems to shed some light on the networks of lobbyists and power brokers that actually dictate how this country is run.
While Raja is gone, these networks survive, shaping and influencing our lives in ways we cannot imagine. Thanks to a fortuitous set of circumstances, the transcripts that follow shed some light on one such network of power.
http://www.mid-day.com/news/2010/nov/191110-open-magazine-transcripts-vir-sanghvi-barkha-dutt-niira-radia-telecom-scam.htm
November 19, 2010 at 7:37 AM
Can someone point me to the juicy bits in this article? I don’t have the time or the inclination to do so myself but I’d love to see those smug faces covered in egg.
November 19, 2010 at 11:01 AM
Vir Sanghvi transcript excerpts: http://openthemagazine.com/article/nation/what-kind-of-story-do-you-want
Barkha Dutt transcript excerpts: http://openthemagazine.com/article/nation/tell-me-what-should-i-tell-them
My tweets: “This sure doesn’t smell good”; “@BDUTT Fair points to an extent, but there is something unseemly about the tone of transcript. Not that of a journalist, but an “insider”; “@BDUTT Agree tag-line is unfair. OPEN seems to miss the real (and more difficult, nuanced) story in overreach for more sensational one”
November 19, 2010 at 9:25 AM
Stunning. Never liked Barkha Dutt anyways.
November 19, 2010 at 7:26 AM
“didnt get it when u say more plexes more revenue?”
Well, I meant to say that the more number of viewing avenues available should translate to more revenue. At least theoretically. A film with some amount of buzz before release will benefit from having more screenings, not less.
In the older days, each and every Amitabh movie carried buzz. Based on his name alone. It was probably a hindrance to have limited theaters in those days as more theaters would have meant more revenue. I have personally witnessed fights in queues and it would have definitely helped if there were more theaters screening Amitabh’s films.
November 19, 2010 at 7:42 AM
Guzaarish Opens To Low Response
Friday 19th November 2010 13.00 IST
Boxofficeindia.Com Trade Network
Guzaarish opened to low response this morning of 30-40%. This was expected and the real test for the film will start this evening when the turnaround will have to come if the film is to make a big impact at the box office.
The general reports from those who are watching it and reviews are good but it remains to be seen if this translates into good collections.
The English version of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part One opened to a very good response of 60-70% at multiplexes across the country.
PVR Chandigarh
10.45am Guzaarish 30,000 approx
10.00am Harry Potter 35,000 approx
Velocity Indore (First show)
Guzaarish 6,515
Harry Potter 15,296
November 19, 2010 at 7:50 AM
Harry Potter beats Guzaarish on advance
Once again, Potter mania has gripped India. If the advance booking is any indication, Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows — Part 1 will open bigger than Guzaarish, which toplines Hrithik Roshan and Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and releases with over 1,000 prints. The Hollywood flick is at least 400 prints short, but is giving Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s biggie a run for its money.
According to reports, about 36 minutes of the Potter film have been leaked on to the Internet. Warner Bros’ legal team is currently investigating the issue.
Harry PotterAccording to Sunil Punjabi, CEO, Cinemax says, “The advance booking is fantastic, no Harry Potter fan will miss it.” He adds that the multiplex chain has already registered 65 per cent collections on Thursday. “But comparing a traditional Hindi film to a big Hollywood franchisee is not setting the right benchmark.”
At E-Square, Pune’s first multiplex, Potter is selling 10 times more than its Hindi competitor. “We’ve sold 630 tickets for Guzaarish as against 6,370 for Harry Potter,” reveals a source at the multiplex on condition of anonymity. Trade analyst Amod Mehra is confident that Harry Potter will register a huge opening. “But there’s not enough curiosity about Guzaarish. It’s high price could also affect its recovery.”
Prakhar Joshi of PVR Cinemas attributes the Guzaaarish slump to Potter fever: “The pre-bookings till Monday were as good as that of any Hindi blockbuster. We had sold about 16,000 tickets. And then Potter came along,” he says, adding that like 2012 (2009) and Avatar (2009), he expects this to also do big business. Punjabi however believes that good word-of-mouth publicity can help Bhansali’s film. “I’m optimistic that it will do well over the weekend,” he maintains.
Sharing the same sentiment, Joshi adds, “The reports are good. So if people like the content, Guzaarish’s collections will surely pick up.”
November 19, 2010 at 8:23 AM
Prakashjaju on twitter: This guy has been giving negative on Guizaarish last week
Guzaarish has taken very good opening
Jyoti cinema, Bhopal – Guzaarish – 9 am 11280 (capacity 35000), 11.45 am 21200 (very good), 2.45 pm 35000 (full) …
November 19, 2010 at 8:26 AM
Anupama Chopra:
Guzaarish research: revisiting great performances. Bardem/ Sea Inside, Amalric/ Diving Bell, Day Lewis/ Left Foot. How will Hrithik compare?
Review: She is the only one so far not happy with HR’s performance (she is fan of him)
Bhansali is among the few directors who enable Aishwarya to shed her trademark artificiality.
Looking stunning, she delivers her most heart-felt performance in years.
Hrithik struggles and sweats with a difficult role. Ethan must be gloriously life-affirming even as he begs for death. But his character, like the film, is too over-wrought and obviously manipulative.
Read more at: http://movies.ndtv.com/movie_Review.aspx?id=566&pfrom=Movies&cp
November 19, 2010 at 8:01 AM
I need to strongly point out that OVERSEAS collections for hindi films are irrelevant. The Indian diaspora is insignificant compared to the great Indian population. Let’s respect the numbers. Let’s respect the place from where the source of this debate stems from. Crowing about overseas successes is a bit like talking about India’s gold medal in Kabaddi while ignoring to mention cricket as a major sport!
November 19, 2010 at 8:45 AM
Saket,
Yeh kya ho raha hai?
Virtually on everything except AB, we seem to be on the opposite side of the issues! LOL
You realy dont think much of SLB,do you?
I seem to enjoy his films inspite of his excesses. The only one I am really lukewarm about is Devdas.
November 19, 2010 at 9:01 AM
yeah of all his films I like Devdas the least. But also this is his most transitional film in the sense that he’s not left the HDDCS world completely behind but he also hasn’t made that leap to the ‘hyper-aesthetics’ of his later films. Saawariya too this whole logic to a certain extreme. With Guzaarish I think he’s pulled back. The question though is: what does he do going forward. How many times and in how many ways can he do extravagant visuals? He has had the Bajirao Mastani project in him for a long time. Once he wanted to do it with Salman and Ash. This is no longer a possibility. He’s had others ideas on this but these haven’t materialized. But it all now (or any project) depends on Guzaarish. He absolutely cannot afford a failure here after Saawariya. He has his positive reviews and it is rare to find no correlation between these and the box office in a film with major stars. So a pickup wouldn’t surprise me at all. However unlike JA (where I cannot think of another film in years that had as much of a free run for weeks and weeks as this one.. the film opened just decently but the family audience sustained it.. still the gross was not more than decent or better given everything that went into the making of this one.. there’s a reason why UTV haven’t worked with Gowariker since!) there is competition here pretty much every week. Harry Potter this week (one assumes that even some of the family audience will be affected here.. kids who presumably have to go with their parents), Break Ke Baad next week (targets the same under 30 audience as Harry Potter), then KHJJS, then No Problem, then one free week followed by the TMK juggernaut. Of course the crucial weeks are this one and the next. A hit film does not flop after two weeks nor vice versa. But if it’s something with moderate, niche acceptance the distractions with these other releases might be too much. But again I wouldn’t at all be surprised with a significant pickup. of course my old point is proved once again here.. stars doing different become extremely mortal. It becomes a WOM game. Kites even after getting mauled got off to a good or better start.
November 19, 2010 at 9:50 AM
I think the world is full of enough disabilities for Bhansali to target next. I’m surprised he hasn’t made a film about a neuro-muscular dsytrophy sufering scientific genius a la Stephen Hawking. Then again, there’s no Hollywood film to copy from at the moment. Perhaps we’ll see a hindi version of ‘A Beautiful Mind’ next.
November 21, 2010 at 9:29 PM
LoL – Saket you are on a roll here! I mean all your comments and i really laughed out reading the bit on categorising superstars acc to various belts!
November 19, 2010 at 9:34 AM
I don’t hate Bhansali but I get irked by the praise he gets. I don’t think he’s the worst director around but he’s defnitely far from being hailed a genius. Devdas was as funny as Shankar’s Nayak! But I do like Khamoshi to this day. The cinematography in Black was brilliant but Bhansali only recreated the lighting from Pyaasa! It’s so obvious that Bhansali can only regurgitate and not innovate. But different strokes and all…
November 19, 2010 at 11:17 AM
>I don’t hate Bhansali but I get irked by the praise he gets. I don’t think he’s the worst director around but he’s defnitely far from being hailed a genius.
I know the feeling. I feel the same about another film personality.
November 19, 2010 at 11:31 AM
The thing is, when I criticize Bhansali, I don’t simultaneously praise Johar! I don’t sing paeans supporting David Dhawan, Anees Bazmee, Rohit Shetty, Farah Khan, Sajid Khan, Rakesh Roshan or Farhan Akhtar. I think Bhansali is clearly better than these guys.
Where I find Bhansali short is when I compare him to Anurag Kashyap, Rakeysh Mehra, Vishal Bharadwaj and Mani Rathnam. Frankly, I’ll take RGV over Bhansali for a multitude of reasons.
It’s not the same with you because you choose to promote a clearly inferior ‘namoona’ of a film personality and his NYC fixated friend
November 19, 2010 at 2:26 PM
It’s the *feeling* that’s similar Saket not the details of the reactions to the feeling.
Of course, *you* are among those who understands films, you like ‘fine films’, have sensitvity and emotion, therefore you have different standards of comparison.
As for me, I lack those.
November 19, 2010 at 9:08 AM
Releasng with Harry Potter may be a mistake, since both are multilplex movies.
November 19, 2010 at 9:13 AM
I think 50 crores dopmestic nett is a reasonable bar for this film.
Agree with Saket that while overseas collections are a plus, a film cannot be judged a success based on overseas numbers alone.
If a major film is scared of going toe to toe with a Hollywood film ( however big ), there already are problems. Harry Potter shouldnt really mater and cannot be an excuse for underperformance.
November 19, 2010 at 9:36 AM
50 Crores domestic isn’t bad but one would expect stars like Hrithik & Ash (although female stars haven’t been traditionally able to pull in audiences on their own) to account for something above 60!
November 19, 2010 at 9:55 AM
“Agree with Saket that while overseas collections are a plus, a film cannot be judged a success based on overseas numbers alone.”
Johar disagrees with you and Saket!
November 19, 2010 at 10:57 AM
So do I.
*Success* is a *success* is a *success* wherever it is.
November 19, 2010 at 11:06 AM
I agree, Success* is a *success* is a *success* wherever it is.
November 19, 2010 at 11:17 AM
As a commercial venture, it to an extent can be. As it could be if only one person saw a film and was prepared to pay ___ crores for it. But when one talks of “hits” where films are concerned, at least my thinking (as I have long argued, and with respect not only to overseas grosses but also intra-Indian grosses as well, although the issue is most starkly presented in the case of overseas grosses) is that it won’t just be a few tens of thousands to see it, the crores adding up because those folks happen to be in countries where 1 unit of currency equals 50 or 75 Indian rupees; but because large numbers of people will see it.
November 19, 2010 at 5:31 PM
Can’t expect much more from a Bhansali film. His past record at box office is hardly impressive, so 50 crores is a decent enough target.
November 19, 2010 at 6:19 PM
agreed.. specially if it opens in the 20s and gets to that point it means it had enough of an audience with which it remained stable..
November 19, 2010 at 9:18 AM
http://sandhyai.blogspot.com/2010/11/film-review-guzaarish.html
Sandy’s review.
November 19, 2010 at 9:20 AM
http://passionforcinema.com/guzaarish-movie-review-bhansali-ko-guzaarish-kyon-aata-hai/
Khalid’s review
November 19, 2010 at 9:51 AM
Lowest rating from Komal Nahta 1.5 stars
http://koimoi.c2w.com/2010/11/19/guzaarish-review-by-komal-nahta/
Verdict: Guzaarish will be loved by the class audience in the big cities but will face rejection among the masses and in cities other than the really big ones, in towns and villages.
November 19, 2010 at 9:57 AM
A low rating for a film when you actually read the review he liked!
November 19, 2010 at 10:04 AM
He gave the rating based on BO expectation.
November 19, 2010 at 11:03 AM
Review Round-up: Critics Grant ‘Guzaarish’ a Thumbs Up
http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2010/11/19/review-round-up-critics-grant-guzaarish-a-thumbs-up/
November 19, 2010 at 11:20 AM
Crowd reaction is not encouraging, even from ladies. Paa had good WOM than this.
November 19, 2010 at 11:43 AM
Public Reaction
http://www.india-forums.com/video/bollywood/108199-guzaarish-public-review.htm
November 19, 2010 at 12:04 PM
Masand is trashing Guzaarish and Hrithik’s act.
2 stars(watching live on TV)
November 19, 2010 at 12:59 PM
He said Hrithik is typically a subtle actor in his review, but uncomfortable doing melodrama in Guzaarish. Hrithik is subtle???? These film critics are just as lame as the movies they criticize.
http://www.rajeevmasand.com/reviews/our-films/not-worth-dying-for/
November 19, 2010 at 3:45 PM
‘A terrific, subtle actor’- am nt sure even if RakesH Roshan would even call him that. Much as I like HR.
Masand and Sen typify whats the worst about Indian film critics. Bozos.
November 19, 2010 at 1:37 PM
November 19, 2010 at 7:02 PM
Only one person was negative.
I liked the comment about being in a different world for 2 hrs and 15 minutes. If Bhansali has succeeded in transferring people (at least some) into a different world, I’ll say he has succeeded in what he wanted to do.
November 19, 2010 at 1:40 PM
Golmaal 3 Crosses 90 Crore Nett
Friday 19th November 2010 20.00 IST
Boxofficeindia.Com Trade Network
Golmaal 3 has crossed the 90 crore nett mark in two weeks. The second week business of the film is around 29 crore nett as per early estimates.
The figures in so far are East Punjab- 3 crore (38% drop), CP Berar – 1.50 crore (55% drop), CI – 90 lakhs (49% drop), Rajasthan – 1.40 crore (55% drop), Nizam/Andhra – 1.25 crore (42% drop), Mysore – 75 lakhs (64%). Mumbai circuit has dropped most due to its extraordinary first week.
The third week has seen a big drop due to the release of Guzaarish and Harry Potter but it should cross the 100 crore nett before the end of its run.
November 19, 2010 at 3:33 PM
offtopic
November 19, 2010 at 3:40 PM
This has nothing to do with anything and normally I would not spread bile like this but this site has gotten to a point where it’s kind of like reading The Onion. Pure comedy:
http://www.ibosnetwork.com/newsmanager/templates/template1.aspx?a=22228&z=4
November 19, 2010 at 4:03 PM
compared to what they’ve been dishing out to Abhishek for many months now this is an improvement!
November 19, 2010 at 4:12 PM
Mirani has mauled this one:
http://www.indiantelevision.com/aac/y2k10/aac852.php
these ‘experts’ see box office weakness and it’s like a shark smelling blood!
November 19, 2010 at 4:41 PM
Rajiv masand is one critic i dont lok upto atall. He was the first critic when i started watching rating and got to know wat areview. Those were college days iand me and my sister along with my friends were willing to watch a movie when exams were just got over. Two big films released that week black and shabd. I was hoping both to be good as i had just started liking bigb(more becoz of khakee, i just hated bigb before that as i didnt want to see old actor as leading man onscreen but gradually i was liking him more with every fim passing) . Also i had lot of sympathy for aishwarya after chalte chalte episode becoz i she was sidelined by bollywood that time and working with flop or so rising stars of that time inspite of being top actress. coming back to the point, we saw review by rajeev masand on star news hindi channel. He gave bad reviews to both the films and we were shattered and opted out of the plan of watching any of those films. But the notifying thing was review of black. As a viewer and as per media reports rani was there throughout inthe movie and bigb had small supporting role. Same thing was told by rajeev masand in his review so we believed moreover he said bigb appears only for half an hour in the film that too in post interval portion and many more thins which i kept in mind. But after weeks later we were surprised to see the film and i was like searching for rani but she appeared in second half, every thing told by him fell apart though all of those i dont remember exactly. And we came to conclusion reviewer had not seen the film he just reviewed based on some perception and media report. And we had believed him becoz same was our opinion after following promos ans news. After that day i dont trust rajeev masand atall. He said bigb was overacting throughout the fim but now he says he acted brilliantly. Can we trust such reviewers who go by perception and media hype. Last year the way he was promoting kurbaan and mnik this year months before its release he made it clear whose payroll he is on. For mnik in its releasing week, the Way he was chatting with viewers and convincing them how good it is, was just ridiculous.
November 19, 2010 at 6:12 PM
I want to ask a serious question about people like Bhansali. What drives them? I can understand the “commercial” directors/producers/writers, whose only goal is to make money, lifting/copying/being “inspired” by Hollywood or other movies and remaking them for their personal benefit. But how can people like Bhansali, who think of themselves as “artists” justify such a practice? That is, don’t have any artistic vision of their own that they want to convey with their films? Some world view or philosophy, or even understanding of character? Some commentary on the human condition? These are usually the kind of motivations that drive an artist to do work. What drives Bhansali? There has not been a single original film from him. Why does he want to bother making films at all, if he doesn’t have anything to say? I find this truly puzzling. As much as I disliked Delhi 6 and RDB, I still appreciated those films for having a point of view that their maker was trying to convey, and which was original. Similarly with Gowarikar, who I also feel is overrated, but he at least has a genuine point of view that he tries to put across in his films, however well or ill. What the heck does Bhansali have to say?! I’ve never been able to figure it out.
November 19, 2010 at 6:19 PM
But Bhansali does bring a certain set of aesthetic choices to the table. I don’t think he sees himself the way you’ve described him. If anything he imagines himself to be a great movie visionary in the footsteps of Raj Kapoor and Guru Dutt! I myself made the point a few days ago that there is no ‘big idea’ in Bhansali’s films. At the same time I cannot say that great cinema is only about ideas.
November 19, 2010 at 7:19 PM
But even his “aesthetic choices” are often about reproducing others’ aesthetic choices, and often they are without meaning. For instance, in Devdas, he reproduced a shot from Mughal-E-Azam. Superficially they are the same — courtesans dancing. But the Devdas shot doesn’t have the context of the MEA shot, and so is devoid of any emotional significance. Similarly, many shots in Black were “beautiful”, but the lighting choices and composition didn’t add anything to the narrative, and sometimes even detracted from it. I soon concluded that trying to extract any implications of mood or emotional resonance from the cinematography was a futile exercise. This is quite in contrast to the way cinematography is used by other auteurs such as Bergman or Welles. All right, I know Bhansali isn’t in their class. But it is more than merely being at a lower level, I feel that Bhansali isn’t even in the same game, that for him each “beautiful” shot exists in isolation, and has no more justification for being in the film than that it looks good.
The reason I raised this question is that it is quite obvious that Bhansali is very passionate about his work, and puts in a lot of labor into achieving his vision. But for so much effort, I don’t see what it is all supposed to culminate in, and that’s what I was seeking clarification on.
November 19, 2010 at 7:30 PM
I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said (though I’d give more to Black than you do) but Bhansali’s visuals and sound choices for that matter are sort of meant to stun the viewer with their excess. But yes as I’ve said before he has the staging of opera without the ‘passions’ of that medium. Bhansali’s aesthetic choices almost always (Black is an exception.. Bachchan is a force of nature here at many points and survives!)overwhelm any other emotional resonance he’s trying to achieve. Actually in an odd sense Saawariya came closest to what is probably his intent everywhere. A completely staged world that is only coincidentally inhabited by some humans (Rishi asked Ranbir why there were such few people in that town when he visited the sets!). But being a commercial director Saawariya cannot be the model for him. So Guzaarish offers some back-pedaling on his part but which then also presumably creates that uneasy mix. The drama at any rate hardly ever emerges organically from his films. He pounds the viewer into submission! And the problem again is that he doesn’t quite have the intellect to handle the ‘logic’ of his visuals. I do think there is something there whereas with his sound I just find him very poor (even in Black). But you’re right in that he means his sets and colors and so forth to overwhelm on their own and not be intrinsically connected to his narrative (and he isn’t an auteur to truly be led by the visuals). Finally in terms of reproducing the work of others here I’d say that there is enough of his own in all of this barring those moments where he obviously intends allusion.
November 19, 2010 at 7:22 PM
Obviously Bhansali doesn’t see himself as I’ve described him! I’m trying to understand how he does see himself, because whatever understanding I have of his self-image doesn’t jibe with the work he puts out.
November 19, 2010 at 6:34 PM
What is the issue even if Bhansali copies the ideas? There are section of people who immensly like his films, some think Dabaang/3-Idiots are not master pieces.
November 19, 2010 at 7:21 PM
The issue if Bhansali copies his ideas is that he doesn’t have any ideas of his own. That may not matter to others, but it matters to me.
What do Dabangg or 3 Idiots have to do with this discussion? Their makers are not setting themselves up as visionaries, but are frankly looking for commercial success. But it’s ironic that you would cite these two films, because both had original stories.
November 19, 2010 at 7:34 PM
have not seen guzaarish yet but will definitely check it out on the big screen.
The only bhansali film i was never enthused by was saawariya which i ended up never seeing.
Dont understand what wrong bhansali has done in the rest of his filmography to deserve this complusive criticism.
agreed –he goes overboard with melodrama, overemphasis on visuals et al.
but cmon, what is the standard he is being compared to?
For all its failings, black is and will remain one of THE hindi movies o the past decade maybe longer, IMO..
The passion and dedication to his craft is there to see…
he does have delusions of grandeur of being a modern day guru dutt etc, but dont think ambition is a bad thing.
its another issue if it is david dhawan who harbours this ambition!
khamoshi, hddcs, devdas, black —his filmography is not inferior to any contemporary maker –although many (including myself) have ohter favorites depending on theme, genre and style.
that doesnt belittle bhansali–he has his own place in the current scheme of thingz at least as of now!
November 19, 2010 at 7:50 PM
“A completely staged world that is only coincidentally inhabited by some humans (Rishi asked Ranbir why there were such few people in that town when he visited the sets!). “–haha
thats y i never watched saawariya.
also found the lead cast quite unappealing esp at that time.
bhansali IMO nailed it in black—perhaps this will remain his lifetime best.
will check out guzaarish probably this weekend, to see how it is compares to his previous work!
November 19, 2010 at 8:54 PM
I think Satyamhas summed it up quite brilliantly.
It is quite fashionable to bash and belittle Bhansali but I happen to like his work.
Blac, inspite of its accesses remains an exceptional film, one of the most exceptional in mainstram IMO.
HDDCS was atrend setter in many wyas.
Saawariyan nspite of its faults is something I would take over 90% of Bollywood films.
SM, SLB gave Salman one his best roles in HDDCS.
Devdas is the one where he faltered. But, I lay the blame more at a rather unspiring tale and a weak male lead.
November 19, 2010 at 8:54 PM
Typos galore in the comment above. Pardon me.
November 19, 2010 at 10:53 PM
HDDCS is one of Salman’s best roles? I found him excruciatingly annoying in it, and thought Devgan owned him. Perhaps I’m in the minority but throughout that loud, bloodless Mouna Ragam knock off, I kept wondering what Ash’s character saw in Salman’s! Don’t mean to be too harsh, it’s a harmless film but I’m genuinely surprised if the general consensus sees this as a good Salman role. Granted I’m not exposed in the man’s filmography but I recall this being a pretty passable act.
November 19, 2010 at 11:24 PM
“Granted I’m not exposed in the man’s filmography”
some of us have not been so lucky!
November 20, 2010 at 12:19 AM
See, I don’t have to say something. You guys can fight by yourself
November 20, 2010 at 11:35 AM
LOL,GF.
Let yourself loose once in a while and stop being such a stuffed shirt !
Dont tell me you didnt enjoy Sameeer, thandi hawa ka jhoka and all the attendant bafoonery. This is what Salman does best other than the sombre Prem act and I happen to enjoy both.
November 19, 2010 at 11:23 PM
B.O. update: ‘Guzaarish’ starts slow, ‘Harry Potter’ better
- By Taran Adarsh, November 20, 2010 – 08:39 IST
Guzaarish As expected, GUZAARISH started on a slow note in most parts of the country. Like this writer pointed out a few days ago, the opening numbers were expected to be dull since the promos hadn’t created a buzz prior to its release and even the songs hadn’t caught on with listeners.
Generally, mass appealing films starring A-list stars [RAAJNEETI, DABANGG, GOLMAAL 3] embark on a terrific note, while films aimed at the big city multiplexes [GUZAARISH] usually start slow, but pick up if the reports are strong. The glowing reviews and the terrific word of mouth seem to have helped GUZAARISH and the evening shows behaved much better than noon shows. The film should show an upward trend on Saturday and Sunday, given its merits. Business at ‘A’ class centres is expected to be the best.
HARRY POTTER embarked on a much better start than GUZAARISH at the domestic box-office. The film has been liked by the kids, although the general feedback/reviews are mixed. However, the film is likely to score in its opening weekend due to its powerful brand.
November 19, 2010 at 11:25 PM
Top 5: ‘G-3′ total 90 cr. +, Super Hit
November 19, 2010 at 11:26 PM
Guzaarish Picks Up In Metroes Golmaal 3 Huge Second Week
Saturday 20th November 2010 09.00 IST
Boxofficeindia.Com Trade Network
Guzaarish took a slow start but picked up in metroes like Mumbai, Pune, Delhi and Bangalore in the evening. The first day collections will be low as most of the day was dull but Saturday should be better as collections picked up Friday evening at big urban centres
The two other Hindi releases Deewangi Ne Hadh Kar Di and Shahrukh Bola Khoobsurat Hai Tu were extremely dull and have no chance at the box office.
Action Replay dropped in week with collections of 6 crore nett taking its two week business to 28.50 crore nett. FLOP
Golmaal 3 had another huge week of 29 crore nett taking its two week total to around 91 crore nett. The film had a big drop at the start of its third week but it should hit the 100 crore mark after four weeks. BLOCKBUSTER
November 20, 2010 at 1:08 AM
Just saw guzaarish…it’s a beautiful film imo. Will post views later.
November 20, 2010 at 1:12 AM
Rajen, I know you are a Hrithik and Bhansali fan. You just can’t miss this. This is also by far Aish’s best performance.
November 20, 2010 at 6:01 AM
Hi Everyone. Thought of posting my take on Guzaarish here.
SLB romanticizes another aspect of human suffering caused by disabilities of extreme kind. It has quite a few complex ones to unravel. Superficially it is Euthanasia or Mercy killing which could be seen as solution for a certain section of the society. That debate has been brought to it’s legal conclusion and something which was well understood right from the beginning – that it ain’t going to happen. It is an unusual theme for the Indian masses who still imbue the para psychology as enshrined in Bhagvad Gita which will have one essential implication – the end of the body does not matter – soul is anyway immortal. In fact Lord Rama himself opted for Jal Samadhi, an act of willing end to his life. I am not sure if the movie being a movie can generate a serious debate around the issue of Euthanasia. It all depends on the popularity of the movie.
Then the second theme which is at the core of the movie is the message of life which has to be lived fully with all it’s resplendent happiness, glory, contrasts and ultimately love. This is the aspect which brings in some real performances – a deviation away from the routine hobnob and masala ongoings in the usual world of Bollywood. The cinematic genius of Sanjay Leela Bhansali was never in doubt right from his early days with every movie proving to be of an exceptional picturesque quality. This time around he has shown another of his talents – music direction which was a pleasant surprise. He has also made Hrithik sing. The song What a Wonderful life is a master piece capturing the essence of life and its contrasting elements.
Either way whether you like suffering or happiness in a movie it is all there in rather extreme degrees because SLB doesen’t believe in moderate steps. The film is not as ostentatious in grandeur or opulence as some of his earlier work, but rather well toned highlighting the real message about the subject, and life. The music so beautifully blends with the narrative and the visuals. In fact you wind up craving for more.
The beauty of this journey of Guzaarish cannot be completed without the absolutely mesmerizing performances of the lead i.e. Hrithik Roshan and Aishwarya Rai. Bravo to both of you. What a performance. This is certainly their career best. On Aish there is no doubt that she puts in her best in scripts that merit her attention or inspire her talent. The chemistry between these two actors, transcends to a new and deeper level than their two earlier works Jodhaa Akbar and D2.
A special mention has to be made about the supporting cast. Nafisa Ali is effective in her brief role. Aditya Roy Kapoor represents the alter ego to Hrithik’s character Ethan. As Omar his presence brings shades of laughter, joy and fun in Ethan’s life that he so dearly missed. The other characters play their part equally well especially the two lawyers (Ethan’s lady friend, and the public attorney). Monica Dutta charms in her cameo and plays an instrumental part in finally echoing Ethan’s Guzaarish.
The film has many shades of lighter moments, keeping the humour intact while debating on a serious subject. All in all Guzaarish is a beautiful journey of life, hope, suffering, and beyond suffering – A journey not to be missed.
Rating: 4.25/5
November 20, 2010 at 7:28 AM
I too thought the supporting cast was brilliant here. My absolute favourites have to be Rajat Kapur in a brief cameo as the opposing lawyer, the lady who played the attorney who was simply fantastic and Aditya Kapoor again in a instrumental role (and lengthy) after ACTION REPLAYY.
But for me, the films is captured in 2 moments: Ashwariya Rai Bachchan (more an event here in any case than a “moment” !) and Hrithik’s rendition of WHAT A WONDERFUL… which hits all the right notes, and for a brief moment, elevates GUZAARISH into something overly operatic, over-the-top yet done with enough passion to create a truly “feel good” moment of a rare kind.
I thought the songs really dragged the film here…
November 20, 2010 at 8:43 AM
Glad to read your piece Julie, and nice “seeing” you after a while — haven’t seen it yet, but will in the next few days…
November 20, 2010 at 6:40 AM
Just saw GUZAARISH, I liked it about as much as I liked SAWARIYA if not a little bit more.All of Bhansali’s “flaws” (abstract world, operatic style etc) are all there but this is a thoroughly engaging drama with an absolute KNOCKOUT performance from Ashwariya! In recent years, this HAS to be my FAVE Ashwariya performance..she is just SOOOOOO elegant, charming, sensitive and emotional it blew me away. The scenes with her are just mesmerising…
Hrithik is good here too, this is on par with JA acting wise, however his limitations as an actor are evident here. He thankfully doesn’t go TOO overboard with facial expressions etc and there are genuine moments he hits the right nerves.
I’ll be seeing it again tomorrow in cinema JUST for Ashwariya……
November 20, 2010 at 6:43 AM
The films quieter scenes and moments work best in the film….even Hirthiks silences are brilliant and he conveys more with his silence than he does with his expressions/delivery where he often seems awkward/doesn’t know how to react.
The cinema was about 30% full.
P.s: The theatrical trailer to KHJJS got a good reception with a few claps and whistles and surprisingly more than TMK! The DHOBI GHAT reaction met with a “WTF WAS THAT” type reaction which was somewhat expected….
November 20, 2010 at 7:13 AM
thanx master-praz for that…
“The theatrical trailer to KHJJS got a good reception with a few claps and whistles and surprisingly more than TMK! The DHOBI GHAT reaction met with a “WTF WAS THAT” type reaction which was somewhat expected…”
i would be curous to know where this “cinema” was—esp find the whistling and clapping to khjjs wierd!
even abhishek would be stunned–lol
November 20, 2010 at 6:45 AM
P.s: Music was DEFINETLY a hindrance, and the best part was Hrithiks rendition of WHAT WONDERFUL WORLD which truly hits all the right notes emotionally and otherwise….
November 20, 2010 at 6:48 AM
julie—seems like a v good film, as i was expecting.
thanx for putting up an equally good analytical review….
will check it out this weekend
November 20, 2010 at 7:10 AM
http://www.hindustantimes.com/Will-Guzaarish-work-despite-rave-reviews/Article1-628726.aspx
Will Guzaarish work despite rave reviews?
While they all praised the movie and the performance, the trade experts were unanimously skeptical about recovery at the box-office.
November 20, 2010 at 7:23 AM
I’d be surprised if GUZAARISH trended well like JA….
November 20, 2010 at 7:47 AM
just back from the movie – what a wonderful movie! Julie, MP has written very nicely – i am not writing anything more – just want to mention that EVERYTHING including songs worked for me – stunning performances from everyone – and yes, aish has never been given such a graceful and MATURE performance – and she delivers it amazing grace – she along with hritik is the soul of the film. a movie to be watched only on big screen…..every frame is a work of beautiful craft.
November 20, 2010 at 7:58 AM
Glad you’ve liked it. I’ve to wait for few more days.
November 20, 2010 at 8:07 AM
don’t miss this one ted – and watch it on BIG SCREEN
November 20, 2010 at 9:05 AM
I’ve never missed Bhansali’s movies in Theatre. I don’t know why they make select audience films with high budjet. With so much English, it was mainly for multiplexes and overseas.
November 20, 2010 at 9:57 AM
but certain kinds of films cannot be made with a low budget..
November 20, 2010 at 8:06 AM
“and yes, aish has never been given such a graceful and MATURE role – and she delivers the performance with amazing ease”
November 20, 2010 at 8:19 AM
Guzaarish First Day Business
Saturday 20th November 2010 13.00 IST
Boxofficeindia.Com Trade Network
Guzaarish has collected in the 3.75-4 crore nett range on day one. Saturday is expected to be a lot better as it is off too a much better start than Friday morning.
Mumbai – 1.60 crore
Delhi/UP – 70 lakhs
East Punjab – 28 lakhs
West Bengal – 20 lakhs
Bihar – 5 lakhs
CP Berar – 11 lakhs
CI – 10 lakhs
Rajasthan – 15 lakh
Nizam – 25 lakhs
Mysore – 27 lakhs
Others – 10 lakhs
TOTAL – 3.81 crore
November 20, 2010 at 8:38 AM
Shabana Azmi goes ga-ga over Hrithik’s performance in Guzaarish
Shabana Azmi Ever since they played mother and son in Fiza, Jaya Bachchan treats Hrithik Roshan like her own son. But now she has competition. Shabana Azmi, who saw Guzaarish, has adopted Hrithik. The multiple National award-winning actress says she has not seen a performance like Hrithik’s in Guzaarish in a very long while. “If I had a son I’d like him to be Hrithik. His eyes speak volumes. His body language and his whole demeanor is breathtaking. Main to fidaa ho gayi. Actor ho to aisa.”
Hrithik is overwhelmed by Shabana’s response. Says the superstar, “Of all the compliments I’ve received for Guzaarish so far, Shabanaji’s is the best. Actually, I haven’t had time to allow any of the compliments to sink in.”
So who says an actor cannot compliment another even if they are competing for the same roles and within the same box-office parameters can’t be friends?
After the screening, Abhishek was seen profusely complimenting Hrithik, thereby putting an end to all the talk about the two not seeing eye-to-eye since Hrithik’s pairing with Aishwarya is so much in-demand. “You should make an action film. There’s so much pent-up violence within you,” Abhishek was heard telling Sanjay Bhansali after the screening.
The Big B who has worked with SLB said the film was magical. “The way Sanjay creates on celluloid is just so awesome. Everything and everyone perfect.”
When asked to comment on his bahu Aishwarya’s performance, the Big B said she was “restrained and dignified”. Just like the Big B’s comment.
November 20, 2010 at 8:47 AM
Azmi’s comment should disgust me. Unfortunately this is par for the course for contemporary Bollywood..
November 20, 2010 at 9:07 AM
Rekha has already adopted him as son. He is lucky to get so much support from the faternity. Even in audience reaction, all old ladies were talking about him.
November 20, 2010 at 8:44 AM
‘Harry Potter’ conjures $24M at midnight showings
AP
– Fri Nov 19, 1:56 pm ET
LOS ANGELES – Harry Potter has added to his billions with a whopping $24 million domestic haul from midnight screenings of his latest adventure.
According to box-office tracker Hollywood.com, that puts “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1″ third in the record books for midnight debuts, behind the last two “Twilight” movies: last summer’s “Eclipse” with $30 million and 2009′s “New Moon” with $26.3 million.
“Deathly Hallows” outdid the last installment in the franchise about the young wizard, “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince,” which took in $22.2 million in its midnight debut last year.
The big start portends an opening weekend well over $100 million, said Hollywood.com analyst Paul Dergarabedian.
That would make it only the second of the seven “Harry Potter” films so far to top $100 million domestically in its first weekend. The first was “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire,” with $102.7 million in 2005.
Worldwide, the franchise has taken in nearly $5.5 billion in theatrical revenue since the first film debuted in 2001.
The latest film is based on the first part of J.K. Rowling’s seventh and final “Harry Potter” novel. The finale, “Deathly Hallows: Part 2,” is due out next July.
November 20, 2010 at 3:20 PM
Fri estimate is 61.5m
November 21, 2010 at 12:55 PM
the weekend estimate is 125m. So it’s more or less 150m including the midnight screenings.
November 20, 2010 at 9:26 AM
Thanks all. Would be nice to know your thoughts as well.
November 20, 2010 at 10:07 AM
BoC:
Box Office: Guzaarish opening poor; Harry Potter leads in multiplexes
HETAL ADESARA 20 November , 2010
MUMBAI: Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s Guzaarish starring Hrithik Roshan and Aishwarya Rai Bachchan took a very poor start on Friday, while the much anticipated Hollywood franchise – Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows: Part 1 saw a superb opening at the box office in India.
As per initial estimates with Businessofcinema.com, Guzaarish’s net collections on Friday were merely Rs 35 million (Rs 3.50 crore). The movie, however, picked up significantly in the evening shows across some metros.
On the other hand, Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows: Part 1 movie saw occupancy of approximately 65-70 per cent at multiplexes across the country on Friday. The first day net collections of Harry Potter are approximately Rs 25 million (Rs 2.5 crore) in all languages (English, Hindi, Tamil & Telugu). The advance booking, the ratio of Harry Potter v/s Guzaarish across all multiplexes in India was 7:1, while the first day occupancy ratio at multiplexes was 2:1 (Harry Potter v/s Guzaarish). The movie has also been the biggest ever release in terms of prints (531) in India for the Harry Potter franschise till date. However, the movie was released without any digital prints.
Internationally, Warner Bros saw $25 million in advance ticket sales for Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows, which is a record.
The other two Hindi films that released along with Guzaarish and Harry Potter were Diwangi Ne Hadh Kar Di and Shahrukh Bola Khoobsurat Hai Tu. However, the movies’ performance is nothing to write home about.
November 20, 2010 at 10:13 AM
A couple overseas reviews for Guzaarish
Singapore – http://anutshellreview.blogspot.com/
London – http://www.timeout.com/film/reviews/89442/guzaarish.html
November 20, 2010 at 10:49 AM
Off Topic – anyone heard of this dvd?
Twitter:
600024 Started shipping of the Raavanan Special Edition Pack from today. Those who pre-ordered will get it by Monday / Tuesday.
http://twitter.com/600024
November 20, 2010 at 10:55 AM
that’s probably just the Tamil version..
November 20, 2010 at 11:33 AM
Thanks, Julie, Masterpraz and Henry for your views. Much appreciated.
My plan was to catch it tomorrow but has been kaiboshed for now by unexpected guests!
November 20, 2010 at 11:39 AM
I find Henry’s endorsement the most heartening.
November 20, 2010 at 12:05 PM
Waiting for BR review.
November 20, 2010 at 12:14 PM
might catch it tonite!
November 20, 2010 at 1:42 PM
Rangan is not thrilled:
http://baradwajrangan.wordpress.com/2010/11/20/184628357e9/
November 20, 2010 at 2:07 PM
“And yet, Guzaarish isn’t quite a Bhansali movie – and not just because there are no fountains. The director appears to be tiptoeing around the intoxicating, hyper-expressionistic style that characterised his films from Devdas onwards, unwilling to quit cold turkey, yet afraid of being labeled the town drunk.”
I had a feeling Rangan would’t love it. He’s written the past how unlike others he feels that SLB’s best work came after Khamoshi. Basically he prefers melodramatic SLB.
November 20, 2010 at 3:51 PM
Kassam, did you watch it?
November 21, 2010 at 7:49 AM
Watched it last night. Except for a few melodramatic, cheesy moments(Hrithik singing, English songs and a couple more) I liked it. Its a good movie. The court scene towards the end dragged things and the ending should have been stronger but Aishwarya and Hrithik really make up for it. They were strong together.
November 20, 2010 at 2:20 PM
fantastically good piece from Rangan..
November 20, 2010 at 3:29 PM
Skimmed this a bit. Looks like typically insightful stuff from Rangan. I think I might still give this a shot at some point during the week. Can’t say that I’m terribly interested in it despite and because(!) of all the kind words floating about. And with Rangan not enthused, I’m a bit more reluctant.
November 20, 2010 at 4:10 PM
yeah I’ll check it out too, tomorrow or more likely day after.
November 21, 2010 at 10:14 AM
Too bad.
But I have to give a thought to all other reviews as well, especially to those of the posters on this blog, and finally in such situations, make up my own mind as I did for Raavan (which I liked).
November 20, 2010 at 3:23 PM
India Today has really mauled it but they haven’t mentioned who’s actually written it:
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/Story/120558/Cinema/spectacularly-silly-pretentiously-ponderous.html
November 20, 2010 at 10:34 PM
haha. Its Kaveri Bamzai, who seems like she has a bone to pick with every member of the film, esp SLB and Hrithik.
November 20, 2010 at 10:37 PM
Such reviews can only be written on conditions of anonymity. Petty Journalism.
November 20, 2010 at 5:18 PM
Taran on twitter:
’Guzaarish’ Friday was Rs 4 cr. Picked up in the evening shows.
Guzaarish’ in Middle East: Grossed over USD 310,000 on 31 screens [Tue, Wed, Thu]. Figures from 9 more screens awaited.
November 20, 2010 at 10:17 PM
just watched guzarish. will come up with a bit more later..
quick few words–
definitely, a film not to be missed on the big screen.The film does have its bhasali-esque moments…
but going bya few promos and reactions, was making me curious about whether guzarish has surpasses black—-the answer IMO is NO…
November 20, 2010 at 11:32 PM
also guzaarish it today. i was conservatively optimistic about it going in— since i’ve already seen “the sea inside”—but i’m surprised how much i ended up liking it. its good to keep your expectations low and jugde it on its own merits. its well-made albeit operatic film, as expected from bhansali. its a heck of a lot better than “saawariya”, which i didn’t like all that much. aishwarya gives a great performance, arguably her strongest yet. hrithik is pretty good, but sometimes his performance is mannered. performances by the supporting cast is also strong. if you liked bhansali’s “black”, chances are you’ll also like this. and i agree, its a movie to be seen in the big screen.
November 21, 2010 at 12:17 AM
Well said Aditya…I too was surprised (just put my review up)….I didn’t have high expectations AT ALL and I dont think al ot of people did for this one…
Yes Ash is just BRILLIANT here and Hrithik is damn good too.
November 21, 2010 at 12:18 AM
I dont think this will do a BLACK. BTW I saw it in Sydney and yes, KHJJS got a few claps and whistles…I was as surprised as you are….
November 21, 2010 at 9:48 PM
Askhay, I too saw it in Sydney last night but there was no trailer of KHJJS. They showed 3 trailers of “dhobi Ghaat’, one from “No one killed Jessica Lal”, another from “Tees Maar Khan” and also a new flick from Yash Raj stables called band baja baarat..
No one killed Jessica seems to be a good one esp the scenes they showed of Rani and Vidya.
November 22, 2010 at 3:03 AM
FilmBuff: Sorry slip on my part, I saw it in Auckland (back home for the holidays) not Sydney where I usually would’ve seen it. Where do you usually go? Parra?
Yeah NO ONE SEEMS JESSICA seems ace….can’t say the same for BBB on the other hand!?!
November 22, 2010 at 7:30 PM
BBB is another of those awful movies coming from yasraj stables. Tees Maar Khan was another – I could hardly sit thru the tralier – imagine see the movie.
I saw guzarish in Hoyta Blacktown coz they closed the merrylands hoyts. Yep I usually see movies in Greater Union at Parra ( to jog ur memory – we saw sarkar raj – filmbuff is my netname)
November 21, 2010 at 7:41 AM
surpassed Black for me. It was difficult for me to get pass the loud performances in Black.
November 20, 2010 at 11:38 PM
Taran on twitter:
‘Guzaarish’ Overseas Update – Friday:- USA – $ 110,000 on 108 screens [decent], UK – £ 43,332 on 51 screens [slow start].
November 21, 2010 at 4:03 AM
@jayshah-
congrats dude.. is the monkey off the back.. as Harry says SPURS can challenge for title this year, i feel christmas has come early at White Hart Lane.
Looking forward to spurs and their match with chelsea in a months time.. friend i feel this could be the year
November 21, 2010 at 10:04 AM
: Mumbai: Actor Hrithik Roshan admitted to hospital for treatment of antibiotic reaction
November 21, 2010 at 12:15 PM
Saw it today. Loved the movie. Even though Hrithik seemed breathless delivering the dialogues, his eyes do the trick mostly. The sets are the hallmark of this movie, which did not seem emotionally distant this time, and were , as is usual in his movie, fantastic. Aishwarya is brilliant here, and Aditya Kapur does quite well too. Here, what really worked well , though, was the placement of the songs in the movie and they fitted in context. Well, some of the scenes are really corny, and the acting is more often than not melodramatic and hammy. But, that surprisingly worked for me, as it did for my friends. In her words, she expected the film to drag and be depressing, but the screenplay kept her hooked and had its moments of brilliance. Watch out for Hrithik’s good rendition of Armstrong’s Beautiful world. On the downside, the court scenes and arguments were farcical(as one of the reviewers put it), but one is willing to forgive it for the overall tone of the movie.
November 21, 2010 at 7:43 PM
November 21, 2010
‘Harry Potter’ Has $330 Million Debut Weekend
By BROOKS BARNES
LOS ANGELES — The seventh Harry Potter movie opened to a jaw-dropping $330 million in global ticket sales over the weekend, underscoring the magical powers of the Warner Brothers marketing and distribution departments.
That brawny total easily made “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1” No. 1 in North America, where the boy wizard generated an estimated $125.1 million. It was the second-biggest domestic opening for the Harry Potter franchise; adjusting for higher ticket prices, “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire” sold $127.4 million over its first three days in November 2005.
The strong results reflect a yearlong, full-court press by Warner’s global marketing chief, Sue Kroll, to position “Deathly Hallows” as a must-see event for children and adults alike. The advertising campaign played up the sophisticated, darker elements of the plot. Harry and pals are now grown up, for instance, and the good-versus-evil battle is intensifying as the story line reaches its climax.
The marketing materials also injected some edge into the franchise by taking risks like identifying the film only by the letters “HP7” and splattering posters and billboards with what looked like blood; one poster depicted the Hogwarts castle in flames.
It paid off: about 25 percent of the North American audience for “Deathly Hallows” was in the 18-to-34-year-old demographic, according to Dan Fellman, Warner’s president of domestic distribution. In comparison, about 10 percent of the audience for the first film in the series came from that age bracket. Mr. Fellman noted that “Deathly Hallows,” which earned positive reviews, beat “Alice in Wonderland” to become the top opening movie in Imax history.
Imax showings on 239 screens accounted for $12.4 million of the domestic box office and contributed $16.6 million (on 340 screens) of the international gross. At its opening, “Alice” took in $12.1 million domestically from Imax and $15.3 million internationally.
“No other franchise has been able to age and expand the audience this way,” Mr. Fellman said.
Early last week, the first 36 minutes of “Deathly Hallows,” about a quarter of the movie, leaked onto the Internet, prompting a fresh round of hand-wringing about piracy and leading to some worries that the movie’s opening weekend would suffer as a result. Mr. Fellman said that the studio was investigating but that the pirated footage did not appear to hurt the release. (If anything, the news media coverage of the leak helped.)
The Harry Potter series, based on the books by J. K. Rowling, will conclude with the 3-D release of the second half of “Deathly Hallows” on July 15. The franchise, overseen by Alan F. Horn, Warner’s chief operating officer, has generated some $6 billion at the global box office and billions more in DVD, television and merchandise sales.
The success of “Deathly Hallows” underscores just how big a hole Warner, owned by Time Warner, will have to fill once the series ends, box office analysts said.
The weekend was also big for “Tron: Legacy,” the forthcoming Walt Disney Studios release; that picture’s final trailer played before “Deathly Hallows” in a push by Disney to attract the broadest audience possible for the science-fiction adventure, which arrives in theaters on Dec. 17 after three years of marketing.
That pre-Christmas weekend promises to bring one of the more brutal box office battles of the year. Typically, rival studios would steer clear of a release as enormous as “Tron: Legacy.” But “Yogi Bear” (Warner), the James L. Brooks comedy “How Do You Know” (Sony Pictures Entertainment) and “The Fighter” (Paramount Pictures) will all enter the marketplace or expand to wide release on Dec. 17, setting up an intense showdown going into the crucial Christmas holiday.
DreamWorks Animation’s “Megamind” was second at the box office last weekend, selling about $16.2 million in North America in its third week in theaters for a new domestic total of $109.5 million, according to Hollywood.com, which compiles ticketing statistics. “Unstoppable,” a thriller about a runaway train, from 20th Century Fox, was third, with $13.1 million in its second week for a new total of about $42 million.
The Warner comedy “Due Date,” in its third week, was fourth with $9.2 million for a new total of $72.7 million. Russell Crowe continued his losing streak with “The Next Three Days,” a Lionsgate crime thriller that arrived with a thud in fifth place, at an estimated $6.8 million.
November 21, 2010 at 8:20 PM
Interesting:
Studios Sue to Stop ‘Family-Friendly’ DVD Service
11/15/2010 by Eriq Gardner
Hollywood is once again going to battle with the puritans, The Hollywood Reporter has learned.
A coalition of major studios including Paramount, Warner Bros., MGM, Disney, Universal and Fox has filed a lawsuit against a defendant who has taken movies such as Iron Man 2, The Hurt Locker, Prince of Persia and Date Night, altered them to be free of objectionable content, and is distributing them to consumers as “family-friendly.” [RELATED: A TV show gets sued.]
The lawsuit was filed on Thurday in Arizona District Court against Family Edited DVDS, Inc. and its leader, John Webster.
The studios claim that the reproduction of the films violates their exclusive copyrights. Further, the plaintiffs allege that the defendant is selling its films in DVD-R format, which they say strips away copyright protection measures and makes them “highly vulnerable to further unauthorized copying and other forms of infringement.” [RELATED: Nintendo tries to trademark a phrase.]
The studios are requesting permanent injunctive relief.
Seven years ago, Hollywood battled DVD santizers including CleanFlicks, CleanFilms, Family Flix USA, and Play it Clean Video. In July, 2006, a federal judge ruled that santized DVDs were an infringement on the copyrights of the original films and ordered the businesses to turn over their inventory. At the time, the defendants pledged to appeal, but they never did.
Back then, some lawmakers believed that households should have the ability to skip objectionable content in films. In 2005, the Family Entertainment and Copyright Act was passed into law, which allowed manufacturers of special DVD players such as ClearPlay and their users an exemption from copyright liability for skipping the adult material. Few lawyers think the legislation allowed re-distribution of altered DVDs, however. [RELATED: Why Gerard Butler is getting sued.]
Family Edited DVDs couldn’t be reached for comment. Judging by the appearance of their website, the company may have seen this lawsuit coming. It is currently advertising a “liquidation” sale, telling its customers to get edited DVDs while they still can.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/blogs/thr-esq/studios-sue-stop-family-friendly-45387
November 21, 2010 at 10:42 PM
Just saw this and I have to say it’s exactly what I expected it to be. A harmless but pretty pointless film.
There’s the usual expressive cinematography and sets (the most thoughtful construct here were the photographs mounted on the ceiling of Hrithik’s room – connecting to an earlier moment in which the ceiling in his radio station is adorned by classical frescoes of Christian saints and thereby “enclosing” the central character in a world where his gaze and focus is always on what lies above, and more importantly, “beyond”) and one can’t but appreciate seeing such a film on the big screen. Additionally, Bhansali shows flashes of spirit in some of the magic sequences which are really highlights both in terms of Bhansali’s style and in terms of Hrtihik’s ability to use his best assets as a performer. But ultimately even these sequences don’t blow one away as they might have had this come from a more resourceful filmmaker. Instead, the flashbacks serve as diverting padding between a lot of leaden scenes where people weep often enough to give the Goan monsoon a run for its money.
There’s not an iota of originality or any “new” ideas with regard to any of the material Bhansali deals with. Ripping off Mar Adentro by way of The Prestige makes for a somewhat unique texture, especially when wrapped in the local Goan flavor, but beyond atmosphere there’s nothing Bhansali does to make this material his own. And speaking of pilfering, for those who have the ears for it – listen for the moment where Bhansali rips off The Kronos Quartet’s superb score for “Requiem for a Dream”.
Aside from this Hrithik’s act is all over the place even if he just about makes it through. But one should have their head examined before thinking about comparing him to Day-Lewis or Bardem. Ash on the other hand gives a rather excellent performance full of conviction. I’ve never been a fan of her previous works with Bhansali but this is by far the best. For my money, Nafisa Ali has the film’s most moving moment.
I’ll add a SPOILER here. I might be the only one to think this, but to me it was a major cop out on the filmmakers’ part to evade the moment of Ethan’s death. I realize this isn’t the “point” of a “celebratory” film, but for a film that purportedly pushes for this moment to ultimately avoid showing it felt like a somewhat gutless decision. Ah well. One of many in this sense.
November 21, 2010 at 11:32 PM
agreed on the spoiler..
saw it today myself.. liked it more than you did overall and I’ll say more on this but I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said here..
November 22, 2010 at 8:36 AM
Let me also be clear that it’s not that I disliked the film. One would have to be something of a curmudgeon to dislike a narrative that deals in this kind of territory especially when people are trying to bring their A game to the table. I just don’t think it offers anything new outside of the lovely atmosphere.
November 22, 2010 at 3:01 AM
excellent set of thoughts here GF, I lked it overall more than you did though I agree on the end now you mention it…
November 22, 2010 at 7:47 AM
Hope to see this, this coming Saturday so can’t say whether I agree or disagree, but….
>to me it was a major cop out on the filmmakers’ part to evade the moment of Ethan’s death.
From what I have been ardently reading I would take it more as a coup. The end with the protaganist dying in this case is predictable and expected by the audience. When it doesn’t happen, well..one is surprised, and free to imagine it.
.
Secondly (as I gather), it ‘would’ be an anti climax for the film being more about life.
Thirdly, without melodrama thiese scenes cannot be enacted. It would be very unIndian
I guess this way it was safer.
Not being a Hollywood fan, I expect to enjoy it more and would not be thinking on the lines of;
>one should have their head examined before thinking about comparing him to Day-Lewis or Bardem.
I wouldn’t compare him to anyone. Day- Lewis? Bardem? Who?
November 22, 2010 at 7:55 AM
“Not being a Hollywood fan…”
Given those comparisons I made (and Bhansali made) are not with “Hollywood” but with performances and films from other industries (English and Spanish cinema) you don’t have anything to worry about.
November 22, 2010 at 8:08 AM
I should have said ‘western’, though I do understand the British when they speak English in their films.
November 22, 2010 at 8:31 AM
“I do understand the British when they speak Engish in their films”
This will also help you in watching Guzaarish as huge swaths of dialogue are in English. Hey, but nothing “un-Indian” there!
November 22, 2010 at 9:16 AM
>Hey, but nothing “un-Indian” there!
Would you also like to add ‘rooted”
Personally I don’t like too much English in Hindi films, but if all else is likeable I’m willing to overlook it.
November 22, 2010 at 9:54 AM
It’s definitely rooted…in The Sea Inside!
November 22, 2010 at 8:13 AM
I was reading the Readers’ reviews at TOI on Guzarish. One person, after hailing it as a masterpiece and listing all that he liked about it, ended his post with, “the best part is its so original!!!!!”
But the film has been getting generally outstanding reviews at TOI, which makes me wonder why its collections are so low.
BTW, a couple of posters there mentioned that a Marathi film called “Sukhant” dealt with the same subject, and is a much better film. Has anyone here seen it?
November 22, 2010 at 8:34 AM
This isn’t a film that’s going to set the box office on fire, I’m not surprised at the collections. But then that isn’t the “point” with this type of film which has its sights on prestige (however misplaced) more than profit.
November 22, 2010 at 8:53 AM
nice writeup GF…….the amount of crap BW keeps throwing….this kind of films are a welcome relief evenif they don’t have anything original….nafisa really leaves a powerful impact in that small role….even shernaz patel was good…
November 22, 2010 at 9:01 AM
this kind of films are a welcome relief evenif they don’t have anything original
- i agree. How many people in india watch these so called Original movies(see inside or whatever)
November 21, 2010 at 11:27 PM
“Bhansali rips off The Kronos Quartet’s superb score for “Requiem for a Dream”.
It is indeed the case. I too felt the same.
November 22, 2010 at 7:51 AM
If even the well respected music directors of yore, Salil Chaudhary, Shanker Jaikishan (to name 2) didn’t hesitate to copy Mozart (Salil C) why to run down poor SLB.
November 22, 2010 at 6:00 AM
http://www.ibosnetwork.com/newsmanager/templates/template1.aspx?a=22234&z=4
Box Office Update: Guzarish in Red not ‘Black’; set to flop with Monday crash imminentb
November 22, 2010 at 7:17 AM
Guzaarish fails to ignite the box office
November 22, 2010 at 7:20 AM
Guzaarish Harry Potter Weekend Business Early Estimates
Monday 22nd November 2010 11.00 IST
Boxofficeindia.Com Trade Network
Guzaarish grossed around 15 crore nett over its first weekend as per early estimates. The film picked up on Saturday but pick up was mainly in urban multiplexes. On Sunday places like CP Berar, CI and Rajasthan showed a healthy jump but overall collections remain low. Mumbai and Mysore circuit fared the best. The film will have to do rock steady weekday business to have a half decent first week. If the film shows industry standard falls it will end up with a 22 crore nett first week.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 grossed around 9 crore nett in all languages as per early estimates. The film opened well and showed the normal jumps on Saturday and Sunday. The Friday business was 2.50 crore nett.
November 22, 2010 at 7:22 AM
I suspect the 15 crore number here is probably higher than the actual one..
November 22, 2010 at 7:27 AM
Ok here’s Nahata with 14.25 crores:
http://koimoi.c2w.com/2010/11/22/guzaarish-box-office-poor-show-rs-14-25-crore-for-weekend/
It’s jumped by just one crore each on Sat and Sun. This is extremely bad news for the film. Looks to be heading for disaster at this point. Also Saawariya even with the OSO competition had a fantastic opening weekend before crashing. This might actually do worse if it does not stay somewhat stable at the lower end.
Again we see the dishonesty though. Look at how BOI’s spinning it, even Nahata is just using the mildest language he can. Everyone was calling Raavan a disaster when Guzaarish has opened lower than this and is not likely to get to that total.
Will have a piece later on this but Guzaarish does not deserve this sort of fate. But it also underlines something important. Stars become extremely mortal when they do ‘different’.
November 22, 2010 at 8:10 AM
All is not lost but it has to be extremely steady and looking at Nahata’s commentary that seems unlikely.
It really is kind of sad with G3 making 100 crores and something like this which even at its worst is atleast a worthy effort getting a total cold shoulder.
November 22, 2010 at 8:32 AM
“But it also underlines something important. Stars become extremely mortal when they do ‘different’.”
No. Sharukh did just fine as a hockey coach without romance and as an autistic muslim. Aamir did fine as a period revolutionary, as an art teacher and a bald revenge seer…. why Hritik did fine as a mogul emperor.
The problem with Guzaarish as with Raavan is that they have zero emotional connect.
Look at Peepli Live. Farmers suicide anyone? But it did better weekend business than Guzaarish.
November 22, 2010 at 8:40 AM
Shahrukh did not do fine with Asoka and Swades, Hrithik was actually quite mortal even in JA where the initial was again rather modest and the film depended on WOM and even then got to just a decent total for this kind of production.
Peepli depended on Aamir’s prestige but actually did a relatively quick fade later. It’s amazing that Aamir got Peepli this far but this was light years away from TZP in box office terms. MNIK was a Karan Johar production with Kajol part of the mix. Hardly the same deal. But this film too tanked and even the initial was way lower than it should have been. The overseas gross was a different matter.
The point is that when you do different stuff the bar is just much higher. Also the ‘emotional connect’ point does not explain why the film started off so incredibly low. Clearly the audience just wasn’t interested in this sort of subject. At least with Hrithik in it.
November 22, 2010 at 8:47 AM
I feel timing of release makes some impact. The family audience got divided with Harry potter an after a big hit like G-3, it takes some time to go to theatres.
The entire unit has succeeded in making satisfying film for them.
Raavan/kites didn’t give them critical aclaim or BO which is disaster for any actor.
November 23, 2010 at 2:56 PM
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/news-interviews/Peepli-took-guts-blood-sacrifice/articleshow/6976052.cms
November 22, 2010 at 9:00 AM
Also the ‘emotional connect’ point does not explain why the film started off so incredibly low. Clearly the audience just wasn’t interested in this sort of subject. At least with Hrithik in it.
Yes. The reason it did so badly even in opening was the totally bad experience people had with Saawariya. Regardless of what Baradwaj Rangan thinks it was one of the worst movies to sit through ( 5.3 rating on IMDB.) And Guzaarish seemed to be traversing the same path. The audience felt insulted. woh kabhi nahin sudhurega was the subconscious response. Look at the English dialogues. What for? It could not have been for the sake of realism, when you take liberty with everything else from locale to costumes. It sends out a message , hey you guys from small towns I am not interested in conectng with you. The sky wont have fallen if Dr Suhel Seth spoke in Hindi !
November 22, 2010 at 9:02 AM
Think you’re being too harsh.. I actually am with Rangan on Saawariya. Also think Guzaarish is way better than something like MNIK.
Also the audience isn’t always ‘right’! Sometimes flops reflect more on the audience than the film itself!
November 22, 2010 at 9:13 AM
Have you seen movie?
Unlike Saawariya the audience who actually see Guzaarish the majority are liking it. Read twitter. Read blog reviews. Read IMDB. Read user reviews on Times on India site. I sense a movie that is being liked or loved for those who see the movie. Its not an disliked movie like a Saawariya or a Raavan.
agree on Guzaarish being a much better movie than MNIK. Just about anything is better than MNIK. And if people want to keep throwing up these major critics who gave thumbs down to Guzaarish(Masand, Rajan Sen, Khalid) just remember these same reviewers gave thumbs up to nonsense like MNIK.
November 22, 2010 at 9:05 AM
It’s amazing that Aamir got Peepli this far but this was light years away from TZP in box office terms.
No. If TZP did 60cr, PL did 30 cr. and I am sure the budget of PL was less than half of TZP. And think of the subject and the star cast, an the face value…not a single star name in actors, director , anything. Look at he genre: Political satire. Look at the subject: Farmers’ suicide. 30 crores! Ten times what any similar film has done in the past. Amazing is the word.
November 22, 2010 at 9:50 AM
yeah but it wasn’t really about farmer’s suicide in that grim sense of the term. It was a fairly light, comedic treatment of the subject. But everything you’re saying is really attributable to Aamir’s name. Nothing more! On the budget there’s actually not that much to choose between PL and TZP though the former was of course cheaper. The latter had an extremely low budget and it was pretty much impossible for it to lose money.
November 22, 2010 at 9:08 AM
Agree with Satyam.
Plus, the films Utkal mentioned had ‘trimphant’ endings and more blissful moments which seems to be neccessary for ‘different’ films to work. I dont think this would have worked with any other actor. I would hardly blame Hrithik for it. Saawariyan is indeed cating a long shadow and people got ‘burned’ and they still remember it. Too much English is certainly not a plus tho it matters mostly in small centres where it was not expected to do well anyways.
I think the youngsters ( whom we can call the Rooney crowd for lack of a better term!) just wasnt enthused by the subject and the promos and stayed away which explains the low opening and the inability to show a dramatic turnaround on Sat and Sun.
November 22, 2010 at 10:24 AM
rooney crowd
November 22, 2010 at 9:11 AM
Still, the final chapter on Guzaarish BO fate cannot be written till weekday numbers unfold.
But, while it is not a foregone conclusion, I am not holding out much hope a very strong hold.
November 22, 2010 at 9:12 AM
I would like to see if another PL gets released next, how much it garners in opening weekend? If previous film works more than audience expectation, they will look forward to the next. It doesn’t matter who the actor is.
It is only the fans prercepition that only our HERO can achieve.
November 22, 2010 at 9:14 AM
Very good point, Ted. Even, Aamir will be mortal if he gives more than one film that doesnt hold up to public expectation. This currency disappears fast with this fickle public.
November 22, 2010 at 9:13 AM
Aamir needs to be excluded from this discussion as he has established a cettain credibility which is elusive for every other actor of this generation.
November 22, 2010 at 9:17 AM
Also the audience isn’t always ‘right’! Sometimes flops reflect more on the audience than the film itself! Of course. I was just trying to explain why it got such a bad opening. After all the WOM does not seem to be THAT bad!
( As for Saawariya and the audience, thee are films which the audience rejects at the ticket counter, buta niche audience likes it and that gets reflected in very high score on IMDB user rating ,. eg Andaz Apna Apna: 8.4, Swades : 8.3 . Whu even No smoking has a rating of 6.9. No such luck for Saawariya. No it is not the audience, but the filmmaker and Rangan who are wrong. The emperor has no clothes. and by not pointing it out pepole like Rangan are doing immense harm to Bhnsali.
By using words like ‘ operatic’ they have condoned his OTT melodrama, they have not noted the totally mediocre lyrics and trite song situations, they have looked askance at his blatant palgiarism and derivative aesthetics. as a result Bhansali who is an above average director, with a schoolboy sentimentality, but a fairly good sense of music and the visual
, has been raised to the level of a visionary autuer. Now he thinks he is Amodovar, Nolan, and Tarkovsky all rolled into oneHere is a filmmaker who needs a playwright — and, in equal measure, an occasional slap on the wrist.. Disaster is the result Sooner someone driled some sense into him, the better. May be Raja sen in his review got it right : “
November 22, 2010 at 9:25 AM
You seem to be exceptionally critical without giving us a review of the film and what it is that *actually* makes you say all this.
The others like GF have given us the reasons for their negative views.
All you have done is criticize SLB.
November 22, 2010 at 9:18 AM
“Here is a filmmaker who needs a playwright — and, in equal measure, an occasional slap on the wrist.” Raja Sen in his Rediff review
November 22, 2010 at 9:27 AM
Who is Raja Sen? Apart from being a self-absorbed, smug ignoramous, what are his exact qualifications?
Like they say, those who can…do. Those who can’t…teach (or in this case, preach!)
November 22, 2010 at 9:24 AM
The only “different”/audience-splitting film to have garnered an excellent opening is Rang De Basanti. It either broke or came very close to breaking the opening week record. The rest of the films mentioned here can’t even begin to compete with RDB!
There was Mangal Pandey/The Rising too but its record breaking opening can at least partially be attributed to Aamir’s appearance after a gap of 4 years.
November 22, 2010 at 9:43 AM
The Box-Office Prospects of Guzaarish are Grim
Sanjay Leela Bhasali’s 2010 Magnum Opus Guzaarish released last week.
The movie has a total cost of anything between 65-80 cr going by all the sources.This kind of cost was always going to be a uphill task for any movie, leave alone a movie like Guzaarish which doesnt boast of a proper commerical setting.
The movie opened in the overseas markets to a lukewarm to decent response and has the following approximate numbers.
USA = 420 K Dollars first weekend.
UAE = 355 K Dollars first weekend.
UK = 250 K Dollars first weekend.(155 K pounds).
Around the world will add another 150-200 K max.
Which gives an opening weekend of around 1.2 Million Dollars to Guzaarish which in no way justifies its costs.
At this rate the movie will end its overseas run around ~2 million dollars(~9 cr) and give a share of around 4 cr.
Domestically,the movie had a opening weekend of around 14.5-15 cr nett.Now unless the movie remains very steady from monday onwards at a industry standard rate movie should have 22-23 cr first week and total nett ending around 32-34 cr.
Now given that starting next week there will be another slew of movies at a regular pace week after week and that even if the movie does remain steady,it will be on the lower side only at the maximum,given that the jumps in saturday and sunday till now dont show any significant chances of a long term run here,though it should be added that the movie did not have any crash on sat or sun, but that could be attributed to the fact that it didnt start with a bang anyways.
So the domestic final nett can range from anywhere between 32-40 cr giving a share of around 16-20 cr.
Given these kind of boxoffice numbers, the max a movie can get from other sources is 20 cr(TV/DVD/Music).
Thus the total revenue generated by Guzaarish comes to around,
Indian = 16-20 cr, more likely to end around 16-18 cr.
Overseas = 4 cr.
Other = 20 cr.
Total = 40-44 cr.
So, how much the movie helps the leads/director in the long term or how much acclaim it sees on TV/DVD is yet to be seen but as for now the movie is sure to be a loser on the Boxoffice front, with losses ranging from anywhere from 25-35 crores.
http://boxofficekings.com/?p=1194
November 22, 2010 at 10:20 AM
I’ve expected overseas to do well.
November 22, 2010 at 9:47 AM
like they say, those who can…do. As if rangan or rajeev masand or any of the critic can! Raja Sen is a critic like any other , whatever you may think of his reviews. By the way, I was not endorsing his skills as a reviewer, only pointing out , the fact that some one needs to tell Bhansali the truth, and at least he did it.
November 22, 2010 at 10:05 AM
Raja Sen has been trying to get a break in films for some time now. He actually wrote the dialogues for a film called 99. There’s probably a good reason why he’s a frustrated critic.
Khalid Mohammed made Fiza and two other forgettable films whose names I can’t even recall right now!
Masand won’t even get a chance to EVER direct a movie. He’s the absolute worst of all critics!
And mentioning Rangan with the likes of these gents is frankly a huge insult to the subject of film criticism.
I’m hardly a Bhansali supporter myself but whatever be his shortcomings, Masand, Raja Sen, KMo et al are the least qualified to comment on his films! Such is the sad state of film criticism in India.
November 22, 2010 at 9:48 AM
A film that’s sad throughout like Guzaarish is always going to have a tough time at the boxoffice. Even Black had a triumphant ending (this is not to take away anything from its success, which by any measure was remarkable)
Some of the vitriol against Guzaarish is just inexplicable. These guys are never that harsh on crap like Golmaal 3 and Houseful (which was not only in bad taste but also racist) It’s definitely got its flaws but compared to 99.9% of other bollywood movies out there, this one is special.
November 22, 2010 at 10:20 AM
I’m not a huge fan of Black but to give the film its due, it’s probably the only film I’ve seen in India (in a half-full multiplex, I might add) in which the audience stood up and clapped after the film got over!
November 22, 2010 at 11:12 AM
I’d easily take Black over Guzaarish. Even while the former film was “inspired” by the west, there’s a lot in it that at least works as a throwback to Hindi cinema’s black-and-white stalwarts. Not to mention that Black is populated with a better central pair of actors.
November 22, 2010 at 11:26 AM
I have to disagree. I’ll take Guzaarish with its plot holes over Black since it did not give me a headache.
As much as I love AB, I hated Black with all its loud hammy ‘acting’. I felt the characters in Black were caricatures.
November 22, 2010 at 11:35 AM
I’ll take Bachchan and Rani at their loudest decibel levels over Hrithik aiming for quiet subtlety. I don’t mean to be overly harsh on Hrithik. He’s not an affront here at all, and has some fine moments. But he’s just not enough of an actor to linger. But to each their own.
November 22, 2010 at 8:02 PM
Tyler, i agree – but it ironically true that when BLACK released, i saw it twice in theater? reason, even it was loud and caricaturist, still it was better than other crap BW threw during that time…..we really don’t have too many choices in BW….that’s the sad reality
November 22, 2010 at 9:52 AM
And btw for those criticizing Aamir for saying that dhobi ghat is not for masses, there was a trailer of dhobi ghat before guzaarish. You know what the lady next to me said (among many other gems) to her husband right after: ‘Yeh Dhobi Ghat Kya Hai?’
November 22, 2010 at 9:54 AM
BTW I find the majority of North American (goreys and all) audience pretty dumb too. When I watched hereafter, there were a bunch of people acting like they had seen the worst and most boring film in their lives. Can’t remember the exact comments, but there was plenty of “we should have seen paranormal activity 2 instead”.
November 22, 2010 at 10:01 AM
Ha! Yeah, I heard some stuff like that as well..
November 22, 2010 at 9:59 AM
Did anyone else who saw the film think that the “rivalry” bit was kind of shoehorned in here? I remember thinking there could have been a better film here if this was explored a bit more but that rival character came out of nowhere and didn’t seem to add to the story in any important way other than extend the Christ parallel for Hrithik’s character in that he’s in some way willing to “forgive” his transgressors. Just felt it was unnecessary…also don’t mean to read too much into it but can’t help but think that there was something odd that in a film where all things Christian are somewhat central, the “villain” here appears in the form of a Muslim, not to mention the fawning “disciple” is also a Muslim character.
November 22, 2010 at 10:32 AM
many of the subplots were completely unnecessary from the abusive husband to the rivalry to even the apprentice.
November 22, 2010 at 10:08 AM
why North India, or India, anywhere in the world people prefer happy films to sad films, and they can take a sad film only if there is a preemptive upbeat ending or a satisfying epiphany.
November 22, 2010 at 10:16 AM
I think the biggest factor behind the poor opening of the film is its music. It sounds downright mediocre from whatever little I’ve heard so far.
November 22, 2010 at 10:31 AM
that’s right though ironically enough the music isn’t much of a factor in the film.. Udi is the only complete song here, everything else one just hears brief snippets of. Disappointingly there’s only one line of the title song which was probably the best one.
November 22, 2010 at 12:44 PM
so you’ve heard little of the music but its mediocre?
November 22, 2010 at 12:48 PM
Is the music busting any charts lately? From the little that I’ve heard, I find it mediocre, yes. I don’t think it will grow on me either.
November 22, 2010 at 12:57 PM
The music grows after repeat listening for Guzaarish. I’ve never impressed so much in recent times.
November 22, 2010 at 1:17 PM
Agreed.
November 22, 2010 at 10:24 AM
Saket, ” Khalid Mohammed made Fiza and two other forgettable films whose names I can’t even recall right now!” But if that is the criterai, let me point out that Rangan hasn’t even made a forgettable film, though he to had been trying to writea script fora tamil film ( forgettable or not I have no clue.). And incidentally, Khaild has also written 3 scripts for none other than Shyam Benegal, and was nominated for the best story for Zubeida, in the SCREEN AWARDS . That’s a lot more credentials than Rangan I think if that be your criteria.
And are you trying to say critics like Rajeev Maand, Khaild Mohammad, Raja Sen, Anupama Chopra have the right to write on films by Gowarikar, Raju Hirani, Vishal Bhardwaj, Mnai Ratnam, Anurag Kashyap but not on films by Bhansali? With admirers like that Bhansali does not need detractors.
November 22, 2010 at 10:39 AM
I don’t know from where you get the idea that I admire Bhansali. I don’t! I actually find him to be a self-absorbed director who happens to be immensely passionate about the kind of cinema he believes in. And he has his strengths. As GF mentioned in his short review, he’s very good at building ‘atmosphere’. He’s pretty adept at handling visuals even if they are OTT like the other elements in his films. But the point is, I do realize that it’s a “deliberate” choice on his part. I disagree with that choice, I expect more out of a film, but that’s my prerogative.
Where I disagree with you, vehemently I might add, is when you quote the so called “critics” like Raja Sen, Masand and KMo. Do you realize that the same Raja Sen gave ‘Kisna’ a glowing review because he was “assisting” Subhash Ghai at the time. Do you realize that Masand is actually on KJo’s payroll? How else could you explain his approval of not only KANK but also Kurbaan? Do you realize how much of a duechebag KMo is? These guys have no ethics, they work out of barely concealed agendas and you are quoting them to criticize Bhansali?
Do you honestly sense an agenda in Rangan’s reviews? You may disagree with his choices and frankly I do as well, but the best part about film criticism is that it opens up a debate; it offers a counterpoint to another viewer’s reaction and by reading someone like Rangan (who’s not only a gifted writer) one “understands” the medium much better. Where exactly can you pin-point some of these desirable traits in reviews written by Masand, Sen or KMo? These guys are hacks; work on hidden agendas (look up Anurag Kashyap’s one word summary of KMo!) and quite possibly get paid to write their reviews. Trusting their judgment is not only error prone, but also downright foolish!
P.S. As for KMo’s talent as a script writer, I don’t have any issues with that. I thoroughly recommend anyone to watch Zubeidaa, which happens to be semi-autobigraphical and quite good!
November 22, 2010 at 11:33 AM
Good God, you lost all credibility for your arguments when you started trying to validate morons like Sen, Khalid and Masand. These people are obviously corrupt and Khalid winning some meaningless award does not make him an expert on anything related to cinema.
I’m not a fan of SLB but your vitriol seems way beyond the pale. Has he done something to harm you personally? Stolen from you? Taken food from your mouth? Insulted a family member?
What I ask? What has he done to you except make movies no one has forced you to watch.
November 22, 2010 at 10:34 AM
And Saket, Rangan wrote a ful page eulogy to the music of Guzaarish. See what I mean? Who is doing more harm than good to Bhansali. Now he will think he is Satyajit Ray who can compose his own music . ( Franky, I thought his effort was very derivative and totally mediocre. and the lyrics were contrived and not very bright either. ( The lyrics in Saawariya were atrocious and rite to he core.)
November 22, 2010 at 11:27 AM
Saket, do you know Rangan is in the payroll pf Bhansali and Mani Ratnam and Abhishek Bacchchan? Because he not only gave 3 stars to Drona but also 4 stars to Raavan. He not only gave 3 stars to S aawariya but also a full page review of praise to Guzaarish;s music.
November 22, 2010 at 11:37 AM
Does Rangan give stars?
I must have missed those. Never saw any ever.
Where on the page are they? I’m not being sarcastic, but am rather astonished that I missed them.
November 22, 2010 at 11:56 AM
“Saket, do you know Rangan is in the payroll pf Bhansali and Mani Ratnam and Abhishek Bacchchan?”
I don’t think so. I don’t think I’ve anything to debate/clarify after you’ve reduced Rangan’s well argued pieces to this level. I’m offended someone can’t see the difference between Rangan and the others.
November 22, 2010 at 11:54 AM
Just off the debate, does any one have an answer to why thu budget of this film is 75crores. It completely beats me that a film which is shot mostly in a rented house in Goa (Some English couple), works around 8-9 characters, has great visuals but lacks the grandeur and opulence of something like HDDCS and Devdas, even has Bhansali as a home music director, has only two big ticket artistes in Aishwarya and Hrithik – has an uncannily low publicity should have a budget of 75crores. Have Bhansali and UTV confirmed teh budget and if it is so – god save this film. It is heading out to be a thumping disaster. A film of this scale should really not cost anywhere more than 25-30 crores. If the cost of Hrithik Ash and Bhansali has been added on I should imagine that it cannot all be fixed, must be fixed and profit sharing to a large extent.
Anyhow it still does not in my view take anything away from Hrithik and Ash – they both have been wonderful and should take take positive strides from hereon.
November 22, 2010 at 12:05 PM
I am not Hrithik’s fan, but appericiate him for working on this type of films. Box office doesn’t matter. I can see in twitter how people sending messages to him and Aishwarya. What else they need?
November 22, 2010 at 12:31 PM
Komal has it for 75 crore including promotions. Jaju said on Twitter 60 crore. But he hasn’t said anything about promotions. At Moifight it is 80. (25 for Bhansali+15 Hrithik+5 Aish+35 movie production).
http://koimoi.c2w.com/2010/11/22/guzaarish-box-office-poor-show-rs-14-25-crore-for-weekend/
November 22, 2010 at 12:39 PM
I posted this information last week from HR Forum. UTV needs to clear up the confusion.
Information directly from UTV distribution chain:
Total investment from UTV and SLB Prod = 55 cr (this is including print and publicity budget).
UTV is distributing the movie themselves (just like JA).
Expected recovery scheme of producers if the movies does not do well at Box-Office:
India theatrical – 40 cr Net (20-22 cr distributor shares)
Overseas Theatrical – 20-25 cr gross (10-11 cr distributer share)
Music & DVD rights – 10 cr
Satellite Rights – 10 cr
November 22, 2010 at 12:54 PM
Saw that on IndiaFM forum.
November 22, 2010 at 12:40 PM
If I’d get paid 25 crores per movie, I’d put all my passion in it as well!!
Bhansali charging 25 crores for a movie is freaking insane. This guy deserves to be banned from making films if this piece of news is true.
November 22, 2010 at 12:32 PM
Vinod Mirani has even lower collections for weekend
http://www.indiantelevision.com/aac/y2k10/aac860.php
November 22, 2010 at 12:56 PM
And this might be the most plausible total.. not that a couple of crores matters very much.. just that it seems more in keeping with the trending on this.
November 22, 2010 at 12:07 PM
The smartest thing that Bhansali does in this film (to my mind) is my earlier note on focusing on things that exist “above” the physical world here. Hrithik for most of this film is on his back and his gaze often seems to be aimed “up” in some manner. It’s key that in his “lowest” point in the film, when Sofia has had to leave his side, Omar has moved on, and his petition has been effectively ruled unconstitutional, Hrithik’s head is hanging very low (his body raised to a vertical position so that he can watch the news report) with his hair obscuring his face and his gaze fixed on the ground. At two times in the film, he orders Omar to “RISE” in a very emphatic way, as if “rising”is the greatest feat of magic of all. His moment with the leaky ceiling raining on his embattled, angry eyes, as if the world itself is keeping him from looking at the heavens. And of course his accident is also connected to a moment where he is rising, godlike, over the audience below only to then be brought down to their “human” world permanently. For a Christ figure, the act of “rising” is more important than anything else, and it makes sense that he seems happiest when his gaze is fixed to the heavens. So then it’s especially fitting that the final shot in the film has Hrithik looking up at the camera as it shoots down at him– a beaming, beatific smile on his face.
November 22, 2010 at 12:41 PM
“..camera as it shoots down at him– a beaming, beatific smile on his face.”
Oddly enough, I remember this being the exact same ending in Mission: Kashmir….
November 22, 2010 at 12:55 PM
great note GF..
November 22, 2010 at 12:38 PM
Saket, obviously I don’t think Rangan is in the payroll of anyone. Neither do I think Rajeev Masand is. My point is if Rangan can like Saawariya and Raavan,, surely Masand can like KANK and Qurbaani. And I can say a lot more people , critics as well as ordinary viewers , have liked KANK and Qurabani much more than Sawariya and Raavan. So it is grossly unfair to accuse Masand of any agenda. I am not talking of the qulaity of writing here, which I don’t acre for much if I don’t appreciate someone’s insight into a film to start with.
November 22, 2010 at 12:44 PM
I’m not only accusing Masand of intellectual fraud, but also for being immensely dumb. He’s got no insights to offer, nothing noteworthy to talk about, his oratory skills are even worse and he thinks he’s a smartass when he’s only a fatass…
November 22, 2010 at 12:40 PM
OLd gold, Rangan gives stars in his printed reviewing New Indian Express on Sunday. he same review appears on his blog later. He gave 3 stars to Guzaarish, 4 stars to Raavan in recent times.
November 22, 2010 at 1:03 PM
“(25 for Bhansali+15 Hrithik+5 Aish+35 movie production).”
25 for Bhansali – cannot be all fixed.
so is it for Hrithik a least – same thing. Can’t be all fixed.
Agree that UTV needs to clear all the confusion. They don’t seem to have come out vey clear on that front.
75 crore is an unbelievable figure for a film which is so unconventional. But wll be good to have a final word.
November 22, 2010 at 1:13 PM
People need to use a little common sense. Does any one really believe that UTV’s Ronnie Screwala who is a shrewd businessman paid SLB 25 cr to direct Guzaarish after the failure of Saawariya?
UTV held Ashutosh Gowariker’s feet to the fire to not go over budget on JA which had a bigger cast and sets.
I hope UTV clears up the false reporting.
November 22, 2010 at 1:15 PM
Agreed. Here are some links saying 50 crore production budget
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-industry/media/entertainment-/entertainment/I-always-rate-myself-100-Sanjay-Leela-Bhansali-Director-Guzaarish/articleshow/6938546.cms
November 22, 2010 at 1:16 PM
http://www.livemint.com/articles/2010/08/17210616/Bollywood-looks-to-upcoming-re.html?atype=tp
November 22, 2010 at 1:13 PM
was chatting with my sis a few minutes ago in India. she mentioned that the PVR thetare she went to yesterday was packed to capacity and the audience looked spellbound.
November 22, 2010 at 8:21 PM
Guzaarish has done 488k off 108 screens in the US. This is not a bad number compared to the Indian performance but it’s a significantly lower per screen average compared to that of CDI, TZP and even UJ (in fact this has the highest among the four films). Still with this holiday period coming up it could do 1-1.2m at this end. I saw it with a fairly significant audience and I think the reaction was quite positive. Would be surprised if it didn’t show stability here.
November 22, 2010 at 10:47 PM
Taran expectedly glossing over things but goes with the 14.5 crore number:
http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/trade/top5/index.html
How shameless these guys are from BOI to Taran to Nahata. The film has done worse than Raavan when reviews were diametrically opposed and they’re saying it’s ‘under-performing’. If the film doesn’t stay stable at this point it’s a colossal flop let alone a regular one!
November 23, 2010 at 2:10 AM
Dull show!
- By Taran Adarsh, November 23, 2010 – 09:38 IST
GUZAARISH hasn’t lived up to the expectations in key international markets. The film is below average in U.S.A., but hugely disappointing in U.K. and Australia. In fact, it ranks amongst Hrithik Roshan’s lowest openers there. The film has fared better in Middle East.
http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/trade/overseas_boxoffice/index.html
November 23, 2010 at 2:13 AM
Guzaarish Friday v Monday East Punjab Multiplexes
Tuesday 23rd November 2010 09.30 IST
Boxofficeindia.Com Trade Network
Guzaarish has seen a 45-50% drop from Friday in East Punjab circuit which is a dominated by multiplexes. A Friday to Monday comparison from key multiplexes in the circuit is as follows.
PVR Chandigarh
Friday – 1,95,000
Monday – 98,000
PVR Ludhiana
Friday – 1,05,000
Monday – 53,000
Wave Ludhiana
Friday – 1,25,000
Monday – 66,000
PVR Ambience Gurgaon
Friday – 2,55,000
Monday – 1,43,000
TOTAL
Friday – 6,80,000
Monday – 3,60,000
Drop – 47.05%
November 23, 2010 at 2:14 AM
Golmaal 3 Crosses Dabangg In Mumbai
Monday 22nd November 2010 18.00 IST
Boxofficeindia.Com Trade Network
Golmaal 3 matched the lifetime business of Dabangg in Mumbai of 25 crore in just two weeks. The third weekend has given Golmaal 3 a near 1 crore share in Mumbai meaning it has comfortably crossed the Mumbai circuit business of Dabangg in just 17 days. The film is an All Time Blockbuster in the circuit.
The leader in Mumbai is Three Idiots with 38 crore approx share which Golmaal 3 will not get close to but it will finish second with around 28 crore share. The top lifetime distributor shares in Mumbai circuit are as follows.
1. Three Idiots (2009) – 38 crore
2. Golmaal 3 (2010) – 28 crore (Expected)
3. Dabangg (2010) – 25 crore
4. Ghajini (2008) – 20.50 crore
5. Hum Aapke Hain Kaun (1994) – 18.50 crore
6. Raajneeti (2010) – 16.50 crore
7. Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge (1995) – 16.25 crore
8. Dhoom 2 (2006) – 15.75 crore
9. Om Shanti Om (2007) – 15.50 crore
10. Lage Raho Munnabhai (2006) – 15 crore
November 23, 2010 at 5:29 AM
Why I will not recommend Guzaarish to anyone
Last updated on: November 22, 2010 17:49 IST
Dr Ketna L Mehta
Hrithik Roshan [ Images ], who plays a quadriplegic person in his latest film Guzaarish — may have got great reviews for his performance but not everyone is happy with it.
Dr Ketna Mehta, who runs Nina Foundation that assists paraplegics, sent in her views on Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s [ Images ] film, and why she would never recommend the film to anyone.
The positives of the movie is that the film’s craft and direction are spectacular and flawless, the actors are more than convincing and this is the first movie on a spinal injured — a quadriplegic — in Indian cinema.
The images are real and flawless — the accident, topple from the bed, helplessness at the leaking roof, feeling the fresh air outdoors and many other such images.
A film is both a potent tool for transforming mindsets and can sometimes also don the role of weapons of mass destruction. We need the best in the industry to project and showcase more responsible cinema.
As a person with spinal injury and as the founder of our NGO, Nina Foundation, I would not recommend this movie to my friends with spinal injury. I will elaborate on this rationale:
Its a non-Indian take. The biggest motivating factor for a traumatic spinal injured is his ring of FAMILY. The entire family rallies around and forms a ring of support both physical and emotional. The independent living concept shown in the movie with Ethan living with only caretakers and caregivers is remote. More than one member of the family takes charge and enables one to sail through life happily.
We have glowing examples of Indian quadriplegics living with this life transforming disability for more than 12 years (the number in the movie): Major HP S Ahluwalia, Rajendra Johar, Sruti Mohapatra, Subramaniam, Arvind Prabhoo, Nishant Khade, Abdulla — and I can go on. They have families, friends and successful careers and goals and are leading successful lives.
Disability is an ‘untouchable,’ ‘invisible’ taboo concept in India [ Images ]. The movie with its ending propagates this very concept. But a human being and his wishes are above the law? A disabled is better off ending his life? Obstacles and problems should taint our view about life? Spinal injury is too big a problem to live with?
Our NGO is attempting to create interest, involvement and inspiration among friends with spinal injury. Believe me, it’s an uphill task. It takes hours and years to convince how to overcome our daily problems and yet lead a life of happiness and dignity. Guzaarish’s depressing tone nullifies that in three hours. Despite being financially independent (Ethan has written a book, has a radio show), he wants to end his life.
Hrithik Roshan in GuzaarishIndia is the capital of people with spinal injury, over 15 lakhs, and we add 20,000 every year. Most are ‘invisible’ as they are tucked away at home struggling to manage each day. How many can afford a Rs 10 lakh sip and puff wheelchair or tilt table in our country?
The reason to feel depressed is that there are no rehabilitation centres offering holistic services to face life. The rehabilitation at physical, psychological, social, vocational, recreational and spiritual levels prepare us to conduct our lives and also achieve a lot personally, professionally and in sports (there is wheelchair tennis, basketball, quad rugby, swimming etc).
Alongwith the helplessness of rain falling on Ethan’s face, there could have been more instances of enjoying the ‘fly on the nose’ moments. Spinal injury is a ‘real’ tough issue. It’s not easy either living with paraplegia or quadriplegia. Yet, it is hope which makes us rewrite medical books, push our limits, surprise our doctors and therapists. All the stakeholders work towards giving spunk back to our spines and this is a huge healthcare force. They too are disappointed by the treatment of the subject and ending of the movie.
And finally, Mr Bhansali, we don’t need euthanasia or suicide to end our lives in India. Poor management of bed sores, urine infections, bowel complications, osteoporosis, high cost of ventilators and medication, lack of trained attendants and caregivers and lack of world class rehabilitation centres do the job anyway, unfailingly. Even today in Bollywood land, Mumbai [ Images ], we don’t have a world class spinal injury rehabilitation centre.
Charity is very easy, sponsoring a few spinal injured is simpler but getting involved with interest and inspiring our friends with spinal injury is the need of the hour. Imagine our children and young friends with spinal injury watching the movie with their devoted parents and families. The fact is that the very talented Mr Bhansali makes convincing movies on different aspects of disability; we would like positive role models conveying inspiring messages to face that one more day in our lives!
Dr Ketna Mehta met with a spinal injury 15 years ago in a paragliding accident. She then set up Nina Foundation to offer care and counselling to paraplegics. Her PhD topic was healthcare management pertaining to spinal cord injury.
http://www.rediff.com/movies/column/why-i-will-not-recommend-guzaarish/20101122.htm
November 23, 2010 at 8:10 AM
This is frankly an unfair piece in many respects..
November 23, 2010 at 5:42 AM
What I find very interesting about viewers’ reactions to Guzaarish is that it seems to have inspired a fanatical following in those who do like it. Even in this very blog I have seen disparaging comments about films like Golmal 3 doing better at the box office than Guzaarish, and elsewhere (e.g., the TOI reader comments, though that is not the only place) faulting the audience that makes films like Golmal 3 hits and calling them all sorts of names for liking films of that sort. Why this need to insult the intellectual capability of a wide section of the audience?
Now in the comments on the above article, I was flabbergasted that many people state that Dr. Mehta is not capable of understanding the fine cinematic exercise that is Guzaarish! Don’t just dismiss them as “Rediff comments” — the interesting thing is that they are not the typical hysterical comments one means when using that phrase. They are more in line with a new breed of commenter — the Guzaarish bhakts! I suppose it is an achievement of the film to have inspired such passion and devotion among a section of the audience — a section, though, by their own comments, which does not have any exposure to anything but commercial Bollywood films. That is, they do not seem to have been aware of even other Hindi films which are offbeat, or about non-commercial subjects, let alone such films from other Indian languages. So, for all their pretensions of intellectual loftiness, they, too, seem not to watch any films without big “stars.” So in that respect I guess Bhansali’s achievement is to persuade big stars to act in his films.
BTW, referring to a discussion earlier in the thread about stars being “mortal” when they attempt the “different” — I think this has more to do with the definition of “star” in India. That is, a “star” by definition is one who can open a film in a big way. If a major star does an offbeat film for no or very little fee, as is done in Hollywood, and thus bringing down the budget to a manageable level, I think people would still talk about the star failing to open the film “big”, even if the film collects sufficient money to make a big profit and thus be a genuine hit.
After the multiplexes became widespread, people had to redefine their perceptions of what a “big” film is, from one that can run for 100 days or 50 weeks, to one that opens big. I think it is time for the media and audiences to once again readjust their ideas on “successful” films as being those which can make a reasonable profit for everyone concerned (including distributors).
November 23, 2010 at 7:42 AM
It is certainly true that all films with major stars are more or less marketed the same way, evidently budgeted the same way (!), and finally treated the same way in terms of expectations and so on. Again Guzaarish should have been a much smaller release. Obviously it wasn’t possible with this budget but sometimes you can get the job done if you start in select theaters and gradually expand. Will say having seen the film that this non-reaction is puzzling. Because it isn’t just about a flop here. That happens when a minimal audience shows up for a film. Here clearly no one showed up. The jump from Fri to Sat was completely negligible, the same for Sun. That never happens. Even poor films see some kind of jump before collapsing. Here people just didn’t want to show up. There was some kind of ‘block’ with this film. It could well be that Hrithik in this kind of part was an even greater deterrent than other stars doing the same because of his image. Because nothing else explains why there was no jump at all. The reviews were very good. Even if one assumes WOM wasn’t as great as the media presented it to be that still should have accounted for at least a 6-7 crore Sat. We’ve seen this for all kinds of films, all kinds of failures even. The other factor here as someone mentioned might have been the soundtrack which didn’t do anything for anyone. And also as Jay pointed out the post-Saawariya factor. The ironic thing is that the trailers made it look more over the top visually and in keeping with Bhansali’s recent career than is actually the case. It is actually quite restrained on this score.
November 23, 2010 at 7:53 AM
I think for sure SLB has suffered in the same way as say RGV has in that his “type” of film is so known now that the brand has suffered after a mauling. Like RGV with Aag, Bhansali really got rough treatment with Saawariya and that has left a mark on him for the rest of his career for sure. And his films are more niche then massy, but the cost associated is quite stupid considering his track record. Least RGV’s movies are made on tighter leaner budgets it seems, but Bhansali seems to get a bigger budget each time.
BOI is saying the film won’t make more than 26-27 crore. So basically this is another Saawariya deal if not worst considering Saawariya opened against OSO. And Guzaarish has the “dream pair” like many like to believe with oodles of “chemistry” from Dhoom 2 and Jodha Akbar.
Bhansali probably should make a lighter film like HDDCS. That was hardly a bad film at all, quite enjoyed it. He’s not a terrible director but just does not seem to learn from past mitakes. Devdas was a decent success but consider the “remake” factor, the casting coup of SRK-Aish-Mads, the awesome soundtrack then really it did not do the box office any justice. Saawariya even bigger disaster. Now Guzaarish.
Not suggesting the films are bad, just “who” makes the executive decisions to bankroll such films with a track record like this? And surely Bhansali realises his style is tough to bare for the masses.
November 23, 2010 at 8:01 AM
These are all good points. Actually I think Guzaarish is doing worse than Saawariya. There was OSO but the film did get to a flying start before collapsing. And yes RGV can keep doing films because it’s hard to lose much on any of his films. They just have very small budgets. The problem Bhansali has is that his kind of cinema can never have a smaller budget. Which then leaves as you’ve suggested the option of doing easier formats. Of course even HDDCS had rough sailing outside the Bombay territory and the South. Did quite unevenly elsewhere (though with more multiplexes at the time it would have been fine all over). I do feel sorry for him as these two films in a row will make it very hard for him to make his kind of film with any star the next time around. And I don’t see Bhansali as doing too well with compromises.
November 23, 2010 at 8:08 AM
One shouldnt really have problems with Dr. Mehta’s comments. I can see where he is coming from and while SLB doesnt seem to have done anything to trivialise the cause of people with spinal injury, Dr. Mehta cannpt be blamed for wishing that SLB had done more for the cause. At the same time, I dont think that SLB is wrong or his film is faulty. It is a matter of perspectives and priorities.
November 23, 2010 at 8:21 AM
I think it’s too much to expect a film even on this subject to be some kind of vehicle for a larger cause. But even if so I’d argue that just the Hrithik kind of star representing this condition perhaps does more for people in a similar situation than anything else.
November 23, 2010 at 8:02 AM
Guzaarish Disappoints On Monday
Tuesday 23rd November 2010 15.00 IST
Boxofficeindia.Com Trade Network
Guzaarish disappointed on Monday with collections around 2 crore nett collections at the box office. This takes the four day total to 17 crore nett with the week likely to finish below 22 crore nett.
The film needed a good Monday if it was to have even a reasonably tally at the box office in the long run but it now looks like the film will close its lifetime business at around 26-27 crore nett which is very bad especially for the big names involved in the film.
The drop on Monday was across the board and even a circuit like Mysore where gentry films have a better market fell 55% from Friday.
click here
After Action Replayy on Diwali, Guzaarish is another big film with a very poor performance at the box office.
November 23, 2010 at 8:06 AM
Quite stunning.. this film has performed worse than Saawariya but also JBJ, D6, Raavan, CCTC (a number of other Akshay flops), I could really extend this list. Both in terms of initial and final gross (allowing for inflation). With Saawariya though I didn’t mind it I could easily see why it had been rejected. Here it’s much harder to understand this. Unbelievable.
November 23, 2010 at 8:14 AM
Let us summarise the causes for the failure of Guzaarish to avoid an extended postmortem.
In no particular order;
1. Shadow of Saawariyan and resulting loss of credibility for SLB.
2. Tpoic/promos
3. Lack of hit music
4. Lack of capital/currency/credibility of the director/lead actors in this kind of films
5. ‘Stoopid’ audience. Sorry, SM but audience needs to share some of the blame
In short, anything but the film itself. It looks like the film never stood a chance.
November 23, 2010 at 8:25 AM
yeah we had that debate about Aamir’s comments on DG recently.. and quite frankly the G3/Guzaarish double bears him out. We can argue about whether his words were well-chosen or not but surely there’s no debate about the reality. And incidentally this is not about that abstraction called the ‘masses’. Why didn’t this film receive half of JA’s support (itself a low bar) in the multiplexes?
By the way as I just mentioned elsewhere Bhansali has himself to blame for the advertising also. The film is far more visually restrained than Black or Saawariya but you couldn’t say this looking at the trailers.
November 23, 2010 at 9:18 AM
“And incidentally this is not about that abstraction called the ‘masses’. Why didn’t this film receive half of JA’s support (itself a low bar) in the multiplexes?”
I don’t think the “multiplex audience” is any more sophisticated or knowledgeable about films than the so-called “single screen” audience. The overwhelming of both segments are looking for escapist cinema. It’s just their places of escape are different.
Among both segments are some that are aware of and can appreciate good cinema which is not escapist. But it is necessarily a small segment, and the argument you have made below on the maximum collections to be expected from “experimental” films bears this out.
November 23, 2010 at 9:22 AM
The objection to Aamir’s remarks (at least from me) wasn’t about the sentiment, but on the choice of words. Obviously DG is a niche film, and there is nothing wrong in trying to set the expectations accordingly. But, as you have said, the dividing line isn’t the “mass” and “multiplex” audiences, but those who look for entertainment in their films vs. those looking for enlightenment — not in a spiritual sense, but in films throwing a light on understanding the human condition. Perhaps a better way of putting it might be to say some people like films that give all the answers, while a much small percentage of the audience likes films that raise questions.
November 23, 2010 at 10:15 AM
but I don’t think Aamir was thinking of a mass audience when he said that. He was in my view only referring to the multiplex audiences that liked TZP and so on. And it is true that most people do look for ‘entertainment’ but then they define this word in very narrow ways. So I might only be entertained by TMK! Don’t disagree with anything you’ve said and I certainly haven’t defended Aamir’s precise language but I think that if he had followed your suggestion he would still have been accused of the same condescension.
November 23, 2010 at 9:12 AM
I don’t think the audience needs to share “the blame” for any film. In simple business terms, a film maker is a seller with a product. The audience are the buyers with varying tastes. If the seller doesn’t cater to those tastes, then they will not buy the product. End of story. In no other business do you have the seller denigrating the buyer for not recognizing his genius in making a great product that no one is buying. A smart film maker either does extensive market research to target the product to those most likely to buy it, or control production costs so that even a small number of “buyers” will still make the venture profitable. In this respect Aamir has been the smartest film maker recently, in tailoring his budget to the probable returns of his films.
In “artistic” terms, the creator is still working in the area of mass communication, with emphasis on the “communication” part. If you are trying to say something, and the people receiving it aren’t understanding your message, then you should either modify your style of communication or, again, identify who is understanding it, and target those only. The communication isn’t complete until the receiver actually gets what the sender is trying to send. Again the onus in films is on the sender (creator/film maker). If the maker wants to satisfy only his/her own tastes and doesn’t care for anyone else’s opinion, then fine, but don’t exhibit your film and get disappointed if you are not lauded.
Finally, the “audience” isn’t monolithic. Even Guzaarish is finding appreciation among some part of the audience. But the problem here is that the film’s costs are not being matched with the audience’s returns. There needs to be much more discipline in production houses and among directors in doing necessary market research, heck, even in properly analyzing the returns from previous films of all varieties, and identifying their target audience more realistically. It is naive (or “stoopid”, to quote Rajen) to think the mere presence of big name stars will guarantee a large audience. Note that the “stars” are not limited to the actors alone. Nowadays some directors have also become “stars” in their own right, with not only name recognition, but recognizable branding as well. But this “star” status comes with the corresponding price of the star “image.” The “star” can only cash in on that status when the film on offer correlates to that image or branding. If anyone steps out of that niche, then the returns aren’t guaranteed.
November 23, 2010 at 8:30 AM
Looks like there’s still someone who hasn’t got the message on Guzaarish:
http://www.hindustantimes.com/Harry-Potter-Guzaarish-wow-audiences/H1-Article1-629894.aspx
Remarkable, it’s as it there was never an issue!
November 23, 2010 at 8:38 AM
” stoopid audience? you mean to say, the audience became suddenly stupid for this film.? It’s the same audience that made a Peepli Live a blockbuster and Dev D and Black a hit.
The biggest reason for the astounding failure is the anger against SLB and his arrogance. It is like when the voters voted against Indira Gandhii’s congress , in the process defeating mnay decent candidates. Because they wanted to teach her a lesson.
The audience wants to ask SLB:
Why the never-never land and exotic people? Can’t you tell us a story with characters we can relate to?
Why the bltant pagiarism without an iota of effort at Indianizing the material? It’s one thing to shamelessly copy Miracle Worker, The Prestige, The Sea Inside..etc etc , but not even bother to change the costume?
Why “operatic”? Go make an opera and prove yourself if you are so enamoured of the form
Why English dialogues which is not even required for authenticity, since you have dispensed with in any way? why actors like Suhel Seth? You want to show that you are above us hoi polloi?
Great! Good luck! You see your own film. But please excuse us!
( I am speaking from experience. I know it will be a half decent film, with many god moments. But the sheer revulsion against SLB and the behavior of his cronies who praise him to the skies has prevented me from going to thetheater.so far.)
November 23, 2010 at 8:58 AM
Actually the gross of Peepli Live was about 30-35 crores, that of Dev D was about 15 crores. Forget the budget or expectations for a minute. The audience is the very same!What do I mean by this? Take D6, a film which made 33-35 crores depending on who you believe. If you compare this with Dev D the differential is only about the lead star. Once you account for the initial both films more or less have the same audience. What if this is the maximum audience for films ‘experimental’ films. D6 was quite experimental in its treatment, RDB wasn’t. Raavan was unorthodox similarly, Guru wasn’t. The audience can patronize ‘different’ films but not more than this. what happens is that with a big star the project automatically becomes bigger but in no industry of the world does niche or unorthodox cinema become mass cinema just because a major star is attached to it. In Hollywood of course they would just go for a limited release. In India they don’t do this, people think (and it’s not always their fault, the advertising is often misleading) it’s a different film but with a major star and director and show up. So Raavan was from the Guru team, D6 from the RDB guy and so on but actually these later films were rather different. It is too facile to say these are ‘bad’ films. If Abhishek had acted in Dev D that film would do no more than D6. Again the same issue. You get the initial but the audience for these films is a limited one. Of course there is a certain intangible here because when a film is made and pitched like Dev D only people who are open to such films show up in the first place. So any negativity is limited. when it’s done like a major release however a lot of people react angrily. Now take Guzaarish. Here the problem is that no one even showed up which is why it’s behind Raavan and D6 otherwise it would get to the same total. Why no one did can be debated. But the point is that the film it was based on was a niche effort even for a Western audience. Such films are not mass hits even at this end. So Bhansali gets inspired from such films and adds major stars and releases it like any other big production. Bollywood just continues to do things stupidly. Peepli Live by the way is a better example than many. It is Aamir’s incredible prestige that the film got as far as it did but if you leave aside the initial the film was hardly extraordinary. Nothing compared to the trending of TZP in any case. And when one watches Peepli one isn’t surprised. I personally didn’t like it much but that’s not the point. It too is an experimental film for a mass audience. If Aamir had himself been in it the film would have added some crores. Still wouldn’t have been anywhere close to a TZP. By the way if Aamir were to again do this sort of thing, a film people could associate with Peepli I don’t think he’d get even this initial.
November 23, 2010 at 9:15 AM
RDB had a tragic end though. It’s fairly experimental in terms of the narrative drawing a parallel between the freedom fighters and repressed angst of modern day youth. But not only did the film get a fab opening, it trended extremely well!
I’m not exaggerating when I say this — the RDB effect can’t be understated when it comes to the ‘real world’ Jessica Lal case being reopened due to public pressure. The candle light vigils organized in Delhi were pretty much inspired from the film.
What RDB shows us is that it’s very much possible for an experimental film to not only open well but also sustain. The audience ‘connection’ has to be pretty strong though.
November 23, 2010 at 9:40 AM
But the ideological payoff at the end was satisfying for multiplexes and the ‘heaven’ scene at the end made things uplifting in a certain way.
November 23, 2010 at 9:34 AM
This logic should also be applied for Action Replay.
November 23, 2010 at 9:35 AM
Satyam’s argument that is.
November 23, 2010 at 9:37 AM
but that’s not experimental.. LOL!
November 23, 2010 at 9:43 AM
AKshay not in the normal massy commercial film is always experimental.
November 23, 2010 at 9:59 AM
Have you seen Action Replayy? It is not experimental. It is detrimental.
ps. I did not mind it.
November 23, 2010 at 10:02 AM
Ha!
I found it miserable to be honest..
November 23, 2010 at 9:05 AM
All this is fine and accepted. But Satyam, you still haven’t tried to answer why it DID NOT get even the initial of even a Raavan? I hear evetone say how Hritk is sicha box office monster compared to Abhi. At least I have proffered an explnation: the anger against SLB. ( Incidentally, I did go and watch Ravan the first weekend, knowing taht it woul be bad, because of my love for Mani. That’s the difference.) You have explained the phenomenal initial of Peepli because of Amir’s prestige, which obviously SLB or Hritik don’t enjoy. Simple.
November 23, 2010 at 9:20 AM
To turn this debate around, is Abhishek going to beat Hrithik’s initial in ‘Kites’ in Dhoom 3 without any other major star? In all probability he won’t!
Raavan was a film with pretty strong buzz before its release. People were curious to watch the film. The trailers did the trick. Guzaarish, in all probability, suffered from poor publicity and poor trailers.
November 23, 2010 at 9:38 AM
Oh I think he would in D3.. obviously there would be a villain here too.. remember abhishek has hardly ever done those instant winners at the box office.
November 23, 2010 at 10:21 AM
Krrish and D2 released the same year. D2 was significantly ahead on the initial. Meanwhile Race wasn’t too far from D2. In other words in certain genres even less than top stars can do. As we see with Golmaal the comedy genre can produce returns bigger than anything Akshay has ever achieved. But there’s also another point here. Pound for pound Abhishek isn’t going to get Hrithik’s returns in the Kites format. But then this format is Hrithik’s strength. One could also say that Hrithik did not get to the D6 or Raavan total with Guzaarish even though this was so well reviewed whereas the other two were mauled. Hrithik’s strength genre will never be the same as Abhishek’s. HAd Abhishek continued to do the BnB kind of deal I think the evidence since makes it fairly clear that this kind of rooted masala stuff would only have gotten bigger. And hrithik cannot do better than a star perceived as more rooted for this kind of genre. So the question ought to be: if Abhishek had been doing a lot more masala and Hrithik had kept doing Krrish what would have been bigger ultimately? You at least have a debate here. Of course it’s not just this genre. Abhishek hasn’t attached himself to any obvious ‘winner’ genre.
By the way given the hysteria created over Raavan it wouldn’t be unreasonable to assume that many who were on the fence about this one decided not to go. Probably many who were inclined to as well. No such problem with Guzaarish. The reviews were all very positive. Even online the reactions were mostly positive from people who had seen the film.
November 23, 2010 at 11:28 AM
To say that Guzaarish got better reviews than D6/Raavan is right but to say that Guzaarish had “all very positive” reviews is wrong.
Check it out, average is around 2.6/5
Taran Adarsh, Bollywood Hungama 4 stars Nikhat Kazmi, Times of India 4 stars Subhash K Jha, BWHungama no rating Renuka Rao – DNA India 3 stars
Kunal Guha – Yahoo movies 1 star
SIFY review 2.5 stars
Raja Sen Rediff 2.5 stars
BigOye 3 stars
Anupama Chopra NDTV 3 stars (well 2.75 actually!!)
Pankaj Sabnani, Glamsham 3.5 stars Komal Nahta 1.5 stars
Rajeev Masand, CNN IBN 2 stars
Namrata Joshi UNRATED!(-ve)
Sukanya Varma, Filmfare no rating(ok+)
Khalid Mohd. PFC 2 stars
Gautam Chintamani, BUZZ 2 stars
Shubhra Gupta, Indian Express 2 stars Vinod Mirani, Indian Television no rating(-ve)
Baradwaj Rangan, Blogical Conclusion 3 stars Mayank Shekhar, Hindustan Times 3 stars Shubhra Gupta, India Today 2 stars
November 23, 2010 at 11:53 AM
every film does get negative reviews. When allbollywood was around even the very best films didn’t do more than 80% or so. But there was I think a massive difference between what D6 and Guzaarish got let alone Raavan where people stored up water and other supplies because the world looked like it was ending. I think Guzaarish got very positive coverage. A film like RDB was better but not too many. Don’t think for example that leaving aside the lead performance Guru got better reviews than this.
November 23, 2010 at 10:28 AM
They could cast Om Puri as the villain in D3 and it would still assuredly beat the Kites initial on the merit of the series’ brand power. I’m only slightly exaggerating!
November 23, 2010 at 9:39 AM
yes some of us have been speculating about the initial.. there is a bit of a mystery here..
November 23, 2010 at 9:08 AM
“By the way if Aamir were to again do this sort of thing, a film people could associate with Peepli I don’t think he’d get even this initial.”
By the way he is doing ‘ this sort of thing’ again: Dhobi Ghaat, which is as experimental as it can get, and it does not even have a Hritik or Ash. And it has a fraction of the budget that Guzaarish has. But it will get a good initial, I can bet.
November 23, 2010 at 9:39 AM
DG is not Peepli.. it’s experimental but a completely different subject.
November 23, 2010 at 9:30 AM
If I had to offer a theory, I’d say films like Guzaarish, Black & Paa rely heavily on WOM. The typical college going crowd isn’t going to jump at the first opportunity to watch these films. And they are the ones who flock to the theaters every Friday morning. These films need a very strong WOM to survive. And a relatively clear run where no other major release eats up the screens that are never going to see full capacity anyway. If the second condition isn’t met, the gross is going to be very limited.
And this explains why producers flood the market with as many prints as possible. A major film gets 2 or 3 weeks max to earn as much as possible. It’s imperative to maximize the initial in case the film even gets a ‘mixed’ reaction, which is usually the norm!
November 23, 2010 at 10:12 AM
that’s quite right.. which is why the bar for such films is very high.. OSO can do very well even with mediocre WOM.. but offbeat films have to be near perfect on this score or people don’t show up.. and of course the base for such films is in any case much smaller..
November 23, 2010 at 10:29 AM
It’s because I agree with this that the film is certainly in part responsible for its own failure. If Guzaarish at this point doesn’t have much of an audience it’s because the WOM on this has been lukewarm.
November 23, 2010 at 9:41 AM
Yes DG is a complete different subject but no less experimental or non-commercial.
November 23, 2010 at 10:10 AM
Satyam is saying DG is experimnetal even among the experimental films.!
November 23, 2010 at 10:10 AM
I’m saying something different here. Of course DG is experimental and non-commercial. But Peepli.. is a certain kind of ‘experimental’. To put it another way if DG gets the Peepli opening or better (which it should given Aamir’s in it) I think it will do more than that film. Much as if Udaan had Aamir in it this would in my view do better than Peepli. Not all experimental films are alike. Some can get enough of an audience. Others don’t.
The other thing is that we shouldn’t base critical opinion on box office categories. Yes films have to be made a certain way to appeal to a wider audience. But one that does not do the latter is not automatically poor because of this. MNJ wasn’t bad because no one liked it at the time. In this sense we have to be careful about terms like ‘emotional appeal’ and so on. But also not every worthwhile film can fall into such a category. It is not that the only kind of ‘good’ film is that which audiences can emotionally relate to. This is obviously a good box office formula but doesn’t speak to anything else. There are terrible melodramas that move audiences and do well. Peepli.. didn’t have this kind of appeal, it did whatever it did because of Aamir. It was another extraordinary triumph for him precisely because it made 30-35 crores, not 60! Why? Because with a TZP there is a certain emotional core to the film, Aamir gets them in and then they love it. But Peepli would have made Rs 5 without his association! Therefore my point earlier was that another Peepli-like film wouldn’t get as much of an initial even with him. On the other hand another TZP-like deal could have a massive opening. In the same vein it is not that D6 or Raavan are the best experimental/different/whatever films they might be. Just that the way these have been handled by the respective directors a larger audience just wasn’t on the cards. By the way, and rather ironically too, Bhansali is much more restrained in Guzaarish even on this score. Some moving moments here but the film is never even close to being emotionally overwhelming. And this too has possibly hurt it. In any case my larger point is that a film not having any sort of obvious ‘emotional appeal’ is hardly an instant disqualifier.
November 23, 2010 at 10:41 AM
a film not having any sort of obvious ‘emotional appeal’ is hardly an instant disqualifier.
Of course not. No smoking is a fine attempt, though it does not work fully. Obviously that kind of a film is not going to get a huge audience. But it gets respect from its niche audience. That’s why it gets 6.9 rating on IMDb as against say Saawaariya which no one thonkshas any merit ( That’s why it gets 5.3 rating on IMDb. The tarting is not an absolute yardstick or anything, but is indicative of certain reality. )
Unlke Saawariya, Guzaarish has its niche admirers ( I doubt I will be one among them. Heck, I did not even like Black.) and it will notch up impressive ratings on IMDB like Black. But I think it was designed to be much more. It was planned to be a faithfully successful film, may be a big hit, what with sexy magic shots, and all that. I am sure they did not plan on losing money.
November 23, 2010 at 10:49 AM
Re: ” stoopid audience? you mean to say, the audience became suddenly stupid for this film.? It’s the same audience that made a Peepli Live a blockbuster and Dev D and Black a hit.
Stoopid audience doesnt mean they will never appreciate a good film but it only appreciates certain kind of films or it needs to have certain ingredients even if it is good film – things like blissful moments, triumphant endings, uplifting theme etc.
BTW, to some extent I always argue that audience is what it is and one makes the film knowing the audience and that it is too convinient o blame the audience but at some point, I do expect audience to show some maturity.
November 23, 2010 at 10:51 AM
PL cannot be used as an argument for anything except Aamir’s credibility.
Not of sophistication of audience taste. And, the way it decayed proves the point. Sure it made quite a bit of money compared to budget but it was mainly due to Aamir’s association and smart publicity.
November 23, 2010 at 12:46 PM
Films like Guzaarish are ahead of their time. Indian audience and I say this very candidly is still not mature enough for such movies. Jodhaa Akbar did well becasue at its heart it was a proper love story and Hrithik was every bit the hero material in this film – so ultimately depsite it being a period film, and long it could atleast manage to pull the family audience. The young ones still just did not have the appetite for even films like JA or any other historical for that matter hence they found it boring.
Guzaarish is a much more finely nuanced and sensitive subject but Hrithik is anything but a typical BW hero material in this. At the heart it is a sensitive subject around disability.
Even within my own family there is a split opinion about the pace of the film. The mature kinds like my sister (who is doctor) and bro in law could relate with it and found the handling of the subject beautiful – andthe aesthetcis was considered one of its own kind. But then there is the older generation who didn’t like it as much. They found Dabang a real feast and enjoyed it to the hilt. I don’t mean to be critcial but this for me is actually just a very poor reflection of how people love to evade sensitive and serious topics – and look out for what is called the typical escapist cinema in action or comedy.
Kites had a great initial compared to Guzaarish but for me the former carries no meaning whereas the latter shall remain an unforgetable experience.
Somewhere deep down I admire Bhansali for attempting this beautiful piece of work. At least he has the gall to do it and show us an alternate cinema with such aesthetics. Others including the critics all overcan just be arm chair critics, with nothing substantial to add to the quality of cinema themselves. I feel Sawariya was an undoing. Somehow that is something that spelled doom for his career – so much so that it kept even the Hrithik, Ash and Bhansali fans away. The hangover was too deep. However he has give classics and I hope that he does not ghet discouraged from attempting different cinema – it is just that the budget should be kept in perspective.
November 23, 2010 at 12:51 PM
I didn’t think there was an issue with the pace of the film. Found it quite watchable actually, in fact moreso than most Bhansali films.
November 23, 2010 at 12:48 PM
and equally I admire Ash and Hrithik for attempting the same. It was a big risk but it will do wonders for them as actors rather than carricatures.
November 23, 2010 at 1:00 PM
Frankly, the box office failure of Guzaarish is no big deal, what we are ignoring here is the critical failure. WE could call the audience stoopid if it was a a masterpiece or something and no one could appreciate it. The fact is, it is derivative, mish-mash of a film which has not enthused the bonafide critical community too much. Forget the trade pundits masquerading as critics and you will see average to below average reviews. Apart from Nikhat Kazmi of times who gives 3 stars even to Yuvraj and 5 stars to MNIK. no print or TV jouranlist has given it more than 3 stars. Anupama Chopra, Khalid Mohammad, Rajeev Masand, Mayank shekhar. Kaveri Bmazai have all found serious problems with the film. Many have given it 2 stars. So waht is the big achievement of the film?
I mean one could excuse Bhansali for spending 30..40..50 ..whatever crores if he was producing genuine film art. Okay the aam junta does not appreciate art, what about the critics? What about the festivals around the world? Is Guzaarish going to make any impression there? Naa! It is going to bea laughing stock with its shamelss lifting of images and concepts from iconic films of the West, without any form of transmutation. Peepli Live was selected for Sundance, Dhobi Ghaat was a wow at Toronto, Udaan was at a number of festivals, Lagaan won at Locarno and was nominated for Oscar. so why is Bhansali an ARTIST and Gowarikar and Vikram Motwani not? I mean what is the criteria here? Mind you I am not talking of box office here. So Guzaarish to a festival audience at Venice or Cannes, and you will know who is stoopid, the audience or the handful of critics who are propping up a derivative, second-rate talent who has big pretensions and knows how to sell himself?
November 23, 2010 at 1:18 PM
The general drift of the reviews matters Utkal. If you just looked at the well known 7-8 names you’d find that D6 didn’t do too badly at all. Even Raavan was not all that bad. Kazmi for example thought it was Abhishek’s best performance ever. Either her or someone else. But the overall reviews were positive on Guzaarish.
On the critical bit though Raavan has received positive attention around the foreign festival circuit. What would you say about this one then?
November 23, 2010 at 1:54 PM
see this for example:
Raavan And Ravanan To Be Screened At Various Film Festivals
Posted by Faridoon Shahryar at 11:36 PM
Mani Ratnam’s Raavan & Raavanan a big hit in film festivals & has invitation from 9 festivals for screening
Mani Ratnam has just returned from Venice after receiving the “jaeger-le coultre – glory to the filmmaker award” where his Raavan & Raavanan won him much appreciation and a standing ovation from the 600 strong special delegates audience. He is also the sole Indian to ever be awarded this prestigious award.
But looking at the impressive lineup of invites from international and prestigious festivakls for the films its clear that Raavan and Raavanan is a critical hit worldwide.
After Venice is the PUSAN International Film Festival in South Korea (Oct 7th to 15th 2010) where both the films will be screened.
The others festivals where the Mani Ratnam film in both or either version will be showcased are the following :
SITGES Film Festival, Spain (Oct 7th to 17th 2010) – Spanish Premier – Raavan (Hindi)
Mostra De Valencia, Spain (Oct 15th to 23rd 2010) – Action Section (Competition Section) – Raavan (Hindi)
MONTREAL-INTERNATIONAL FESTIVAL OF NEW CINEMA, Canada (Oct 13th to 24th 2010) – Canadian Premier – Raavanan (Tamil)
Tokyo International Film Festival, Japan (Oct 23rd to 31st 2010) – Winds of Asia-Middle East Section – Raavan (Hindi)
Mahindra Indo-American Arts Council Film Festiva, New York (Nov 12th 2010) – New York Premier – Raavanan (Tamil)
Asia Pacific Screen Awards, Australia (Dec 2nd 2010) – Competition Section – Raavan (Hindi)
International Film Festival, Goa – Indian Panaroma Section – Raavanan (Tamil)
November 23, 2010 at 1:56 PM
or see this review:
http://www.filmjournal.com/filmjournal/content_display/reviews/specialty-releases/e3ic0c203644bbc3d5f8511bf80bafc5a40
there were negative ones in the West too but more positive than negative and certainly nowhere close to the reception the film got in India.
November 23, 2010 at 2:35 PM
Not to mention Raavan was the first Hindi picture I remember to have obtained a critic’s pick spot in the Times:
http://movies.nytimes.com/2010/06/18/movies/18raavan.html
November 23, 2010 at 1:10 PM
utkal – this is the first and perhaps the last time I am going to comment on your post. Go and critic a film after wtaching a film. At least others whose names you rely on have at least watched it. All you have done is critic it based on past work. By the way the armchair critic concept does not only apply for rated reviewers.
November 23, 2010 at 1:12 PM
I am not criticizing the film Julie, I am criticizing the maker, based on his earlier films, yes.
November 23, 2010 at 1:21 PM
“A disabled is better off ending his life? Obstacles and problems should taint our view about life? Spinal injury is too big a problem to live with?”
It was Hrithik’s personal decision to end his life. He never ever encourages other quadraplegics to do the same. This guy just didn’t get the movie, on a basic story level.
November 23, 2010 at 1:39 PM
Satyam, not really. Raavan has been shown in festival circuit on Mani’s reputation. But I don’t think it has made any kind of impact. and no the general drift has not been very positive. They have praised the performances, the cineamtography, but not the film.
I mean come on, TZP, CDI, Udaan, Peepli Live, ..has anyone of these got a 2-star rating from anyone? The only other film from a reputed filmmaker that has got this bad rating is Raavan. The Tamil version has been rated above average generally, but the Hindi version has got way more thumbs down than thumbs ups.
I think the only critics excited by Guzaarish are the Hindi reviewers who haven’t seen much of world cinema and have been zapped by its pretensions to art.
November 23, 2010 at 1:44 PM
I can’t be bothered to dig these up but I remember Tyler putting up positive reviews and more from Venice and elsewhere.
November 23, 2010 at 5:15 PM
“I mean come on, TZP, CDI, Udaan, Peepli Live, ..has anyone of these got a 2-star rating from anyone?”
Yes those movies did get some negative reviews which were posted on AllBollywood when the site was up. If I recall correctly, the ratings were in the 60s and 70s not 90s or 100%.
Recently, PL and Udaan had some negative reviews from Western critics. TZP and CDI were pretty dismissed by Western critics.
It is the rare movie that is liked by every critic so your argument carries no weight once again.
BTW Devdas which is bashed by many (including me) and loved many others was nominated for a BAFTA. Guru has a 90% rating on RottenTomatoes although it won no awards.
You seem to have a specific problem with SLB and Ratnam in particular. If their movies are invited to film festivals, then it means nothing but if an Aamir movie or some other director’s movie is invited then it is meaningful. Where is the consistency? An honor is an honor regardless of whether you like the director or not.
I would respect your opinion more if it did not seem agenda driven.
November 23, 2010 at 7:04 PM
No film ever got more than the low 80s or something at allbollywood.
November 23, 2010 at 7:36 PM
TZP was 78% , CDI – 71%
November 23, 2010 at 1:48 PM
D6 did get a fair number of good reviews. Perhaps, in the balance, Guzaarish too will have more positive reviews. But not too many calling it great. and for an offbeat film to do well, the reviews have to be almost unanimously GREAT, like it was with Udaan or Peepli Live. D6, Raavan or Guzaarish level of reviews wont do.
November 23, 2010 at 1:58 PM
yes D6 did get some good reviews from major journalists but it wasn’t positive overall for the film the way it’s been for Guzaarish.
November 23, 2010 at 1:54 PM
Somewhat off topic (but maybe marginally related to the discussion about reviews):
Producers Decide To Get Realistic With Budgets
Komal Nahta
Among the corporate heads, if there are some who think on a broader level, the name of UTV’s Ronnie Screwvala comes on the top of the list. Almost every producer – corporate or individual – has been concerned at the indiscriminate spending on promotion of films around the time of release but it took a Ronnie Screwvala to get the industry united on this issue. All the leading producers including Yash Chopra, Aamir Khan, Karan Johar, Ramesh Taurani, Eros, Reliance Big and UTV, of course, met at Yash Chopra’s office on 15th November to discuss ways and means to bring down the budgets allocated to marketing. There was consensus of opinion that producers have been going overboard in their ad spend, and that matters needed to be controlled and a more rational approach needed to be taken in this direction. Aamir Khan used the platform to also express his misgivings about the tendency of producers to spend on Times Of India’s Medianet to have paid editorials written in its supplements. The actor-producer-director made it clear that it wasn’t about the financial aspect but rather about the moral one of having to pay for getting it written that one’s film is good or hit. “How can I pay to get a good review of my film?” wondered Aamir aloud. Karan Johar, while agreeing with Aamir, said, his stars and technicians expected him to spend on Medianet because other producers were spending likewise.
A four-member committee is expected to be formed soon to get to the root of the problem of overspending on publicity and marketing. It will submit its report and recommendations. The producers in the meeting on 15th November also felt that they should meet more often on a common platform like this. It was decided to hold such meetings to take up issues concerning the production sector, every first Monday of the month.
http://koimoi.c2w.com/2010/11/23/producers-decide-to-get-realistic-with-budgets/
November 23, 2010 at 1:59 PM
Satyam, it is not worth digging up, but Raavan was shown at many festivals, I concede. Because it was an original. Not ripped from 5 different western films . There was much to appreciate in what mani was TRYING to do. That he failed is another matter. And by and large he is artstically much more sincere than Bhansali. AS I have said earlier that’s why I saw Raavan in the first weekend. and will do so for any Mani film. But for Bhansali, I will wait for the critical tipping point. which in the case of Guzaarish has not happened.o I might catch it on DVD. The claustrophobia of Saawaria and the desperate urge to leave the theater plays strongly in my mind.
November 23, 2010 at 2:18 PM
Something slightly unconnected , but not totally: The four critics from the hundred odd critics in the panel that voted in 2002 ( it is done every ten yrs) to decide the world’s Ten Best Films ever are Aruna Vasudev. Lalita Gopalan, MK Raghavendra and Sukhdev Sandhu
November 23, 2010 at 2:28 PM
Are these people affiliated with any publications, or are they independent? Are there any links to their reviews (of any film)?
November 23, 2010 at 3:14 PM
random and jumbled thoughts on the interesting ongoing discussion…nothing personal just my opinions…so no offense meant to anyone.
How can one criticize a movie so passionately, w/o having seen it? And something wrong w/ saying “hindi” lang. reviewers are fooled by pretensions b/c they haven’t experienced world cinema. I’ve lived overseas most of my life and have been educated here, seen a lot of cinema from around the world and i still find slb has something to offer. I don’t find him to be a great filmmaker nor a great artist, but the guy makes movies that i will always watch on the big screen. I’ve seen peepli live, and i didn’t find it that amazing…i only went to the theater b/c aamir was associated w/ it and i’d watch devdas or black or even saawariya over peepli live on the big screen.
I don’t think box office proves much at all except for someone’s business acumen maybe…I agree the type of commercial prospect that slb movies have, he should control the budgets. As far as making westernized movies w/ english dialogues, the way slb does it, i don’t have a prob. w/ it…it’s a 100 times better than i hate luv storys or k3g, or the salaam namastes of the world.
About the critics, I don’t listen to them except for the people i trust on here…obviously they’re not professional critics. the critics gave glowing reviews to mnik, that was a huge crapfest. there are countless examples of these. even dabangg which got great reviews and a made a lot of money was not very good either.
at the end of the day, you can only judge the movie and it’s your opinion doesn’t matter how much u hate the maker or how well it does at the bo or w/ the critics or festivals.
November 23, 2010 at 3:27 PM
extremely instructive perspective here Sarvanash.. thanks..
November 23, 2010 at 3:31 PM
“I’ve lived overseas most of my life and have been educated here, seen a lot of cinema from around the world and i still find slb has something to offer. I don’t find him to be a great filmmaker nor a great artist, but the guy makes movies that i will always watch on the big screen.”
I’m not a Bhansali fan but more importantly this passage cuts to the heart of something that resonates very deeply with me. Well said, sarvanash.
November 23, 2010 at 3:34 PM
yes, I was discussing this with someone the other day but to the degree Bhansali makes films that forces people to visit the theater even when they’re not great fans of his work he does provide a valuable service. Guzaarish though is a dangerous failure to have. A director might easily see where he might have been self-indulgent with a film like Saawariya, such reflection is just harder with a Guzaarish.
November 23, 2010 at 4:06 PM
Thanks sarvanash — you’ve put your finger on not only the “it” of Bhansali, but of the cinematic as well, as that which must be experienced on the big screen.
November 23, 2010 at 4:10 PM
With same day piracy downloads available online, film makers should understand the only films that make money are good entertainers (3-I, Golamaal), Hi def ones like Robot
and low budget ones.
November 23, 2010 at 3:41 PM
Taran’s tweet
Who will bag Best Actor award? SRK – MNIK, Ajay – OUATIM, Hrithik – Guzaarish, Salman – Dabangg, Ranbir – Raajneeti or Big B – Rann?
I like this answer:
parthdoza: @taran_adarsh if only these r the option Who will win : SRK for MNIK Whos shd win : Ajay Devgan fo OUTIM I m hopeful for KHJJS also
November 23, 2010 at 3:44 PM
SRK has the best chance now that Guzaarish hasn’t worked. They generally don’t reward failures in the popular category. Not that MNIK was a big success either but it obviously did a whole lot more than Guzaarish. Devgan might have an outside chance. If they’re really rewarding the box office they could go with Salman but I doubt it.
November 23, 2010 at 3:57 PM
they’ll make up categories for everyone to be happy. srk and hrithik splitting popular and critics. salman getting power or some other made up award for dabangg. ajay d. will be ignored, but i don’t think that’s all that unfair he was good buy not amazing. haven’t seen guzaarish, but srk performed pretty well in a bad movie…so it wouldn’t be totally crazy if he won over ajay d. hopefully udaan isn’t ignored. and hopefully raavan gets the well deserved technical awards. Can’t really remember too many other movies right now and for some this year, i haven’t watched a lot of hindi movies.
November 23, 2010 at 3:51 PM
I think filmfare goes to SRK. Jitesh Pillai has started posting all negative reviews of Guzaarish from the release day.
November 23, 2010 at 7:39 PM
I saw that. These guys are shameless. He’s the same guy who finds something wrong with Raavan or Guzaarish screenplays but when MNIK or WAF releasee all he does is praise. Shameless.
November 23, 2010 at 9:41 PM
No takers for Guzaarish worldwide
Adding to the growing list of big budgeted Bollywood movies hitting dust, Guzaarish opened not only to a sluggish box office in India but also in foreign territories where it was expected to do solid business.
While Kites, the previous Hrithik Roshan [ Images ] release had a big crash in India [ Images ] in the opening week, it grossed over $1 million in North America. But Guzaarish, which made $480,000 on a massive 108 theater release over the weekend, would be lucky to earn $550,000 the entire week.
According to distributor UTV, it grossed just about $5.6 million worldwide over the weekend, with the Indian gross accounting for about $3.9 million at 850 locations.
This is the third Aishwarya Rai Bachchan [ Images ] film in last four months (after Raavan and Action Replayy) to be a big box office disappointment. The saving grace was a mega hit Robot/Endhiran with Rajnikanth [ Images ] taking most of the credit for the performance.
“Who wants to see a slow-moving arty film in winter,” said a university student at a Manhattan screening of Guzaarish recently. “Why isn’t there a new date film? I think I would have been better off seeing Golmaal 3 the second time on DVD.’
Guzaarish fared poorly in the United Kingdom where it grossed $274,000 over the weekend at 58 locations. Comparatively it had better luck in Pakistan, grossing in five days about $110,000 at 16 locations.
November 23, 2010 at 9:45 PM
“Who wants to see a slow-moving arty film in winter,” said a university student at a Manhattan screening of Guzaarish recently. “Why isn’t there a new date film? I think I would have been better off seeing Golmaal 3 the second time on DVD.’
what a bozo!
November 23, 2010 at 10:34 PM
I hope this student doesn’t end up at a screening of Dhobi Ghat…he will kill himself lol.
November 23, 2010 at 10:39 PM
The non-performance overseas (a territory where pretty much any films with big stars do well) proves yet again that a film like Guzaarish never stood a chance. Even if it had been made a little better, the topic alone would scare off audiences.
I hope Hrithik, Aish and Bhansali don’t get disappointed by this failure. They have all done a good job.
November 23, 2010 at 10:39 PM
“How can one criticize a movie so passionately, w/o having seen it?”
Life is too short to see every film or read every book. One has to mkae choices based on ealier work of authors, excerpts / trailors, crtical opinion, WoM.
“And something wrong w/ saying “hindi” lang. reviewers are fooled by pretensions b/c they haven’t experienced world cinema.”
I am not saying that everyone exposed to world cinema is not liking Guzaarish. But I can vouch that people unexposed to world cinema are much more impressed by SLB’s artistic pretensions. Partly because they havent seen this kind of attempt too much, partly because they haven’t seen original source material like Sea Inside etc and cannot notice the derivative nature of his work
November 23, 2010 at 10:42 PM
“Life is too short to see every film or read every book”
Agreed but isn’t life also too short to spend hours criticizing a film (and its director) you haven’t even seen?
November 23, 2010 at 11:41 PM
Only awards, no B.O. rewards
November 24, 2010 – 07:41 IST
Let’s face it. GUZAARISH won rave reviews from critics and audience [check out the User Reviews] and is sure to bag most awards next year, but the well-made film has failed to strike a chord at the box-office. That’s the bitter truth. An expensive film [it cost UTV approx. Rs. 60 cr. - that's the actual figure, confirmed by UTV], GUZAARISH will make a hole in the pockets of its investors because the theatrical business is shockingly low. It’s a case of a good film missing the mark at the box-office.
What led to its rejection at the box-office? After speaking to a number of distributors/exhibitors over the weekend, I’ve come to the conclusion that the film failed on four counts…
* One, it caters to a really tiny audience, those who tilt towards cinema that dares to be different.
* Two, ask a common man what he looks for in a movie and the answer is entertainment. GUZAARISH did entertain, but not in the
way the common man would expect.
* Three, the music did not catch on with listeners, like the music of HUM DIL DE CHUKE SANAM and DEVDAS did.
* Four, the generous usage of English in the narrative, which kept the audience away, especially in the mass belt/single screens.
Also, a section of the industry feels that it’s a risk to have the hero of the film almost entirely on a wheel chair. Besides, the film failed to create any kind of a buzz prior to its release thanks to its promos and that could be one of the reasons for the poor start at the ticket window.
Talking from the economics point of view, GUZAARISH has cost Rs. 60 cr. to UTV, of which approx. Rs. 25 cr. has been recovered from the sale of Satellite and Music rights of the film. The remaining amount – approx. Rs. 35 cr. – has to be recovered from theatrical business and looking at its business in India and Overseas, it seems like a remote possibility. The terrific word of mouth hasn’t helped at all and the decline in business on Monday and Tuesday proves it.
Years ago, Guru Dutt’s KAAGAZ KE PHOOL, Raj Kapoor’s MERA NAAM JOKER and Yash Chopra’s LAMHE failed to work at the box-office. But the same films are considered classics today. Will GUZAARISH, which ranks amongst Bhansali’s best works to date, also be remembered fondly in years to come?
http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/trade/business_talk/index.html
November 24, 2010 at 12:19 AM
” Years ago, Guru Dutt’s KAAGAZ KE PHOOL, Raj Kapoor’s MERA NAAM JOKER and Yash Chopra’s LAMHE failed to work at the box-office. But the same films are considered classics today. ”
None of them got 2 star ratings from major critics.
“The terrific word of mouth hasn’t helped at all and the decline in business on Monday and Tuesday proves it.”
Come on, how can “terrific word of mouth” not translate to footfalls? It goes totally against logic, right? Maybe the WoM is not so terrific ? And is confined to a small minority.? User reviews are generally good, because how many want to spend time writing about a film that they have had to suffer through?
AS I ahve said earler, not seeing the truth and burying your head in the sand is what has brought about Bhansa;i’s downfall. Please dont push him further in that direction.
“but isn’t life also too short to spend hours criticizing a film (and its director) you haven’t even seen?” It is just my love for the medium. I feel we have the audience, and the makers ( only a few of course) , what we lac is a good critical tradition that can match the west and encourage truly good cinema. That is why the extra effort to correct some misconceptions and anointing of false heroes.
November 24, 2010 at 4:31 AM
“Life is too short to see every film or read every book. One has to mkae choices based on ealier work of authors, excerpts / trailors, crtical opinion, WoM.”
utkal – don’t mind the pun but your theory is self defetating. You must have spent more than 48 hours on the blog (NG and SS combined) pulling down and deprecating a film that you seemingly hardly care for and one that you have not seen just to prove whatever point you want to prove. Yet you wanted to save 2.15 hours of your crucial time in your life by taking a vow not to watch the same film.
Again hope you don’t mind the hidden humour
November 24, 2010 at 4:56 AM
Julie, i will probably see it sometime this week. Posting something between tasks is easy. Taking out 4 hrs ( including travel time) to go to a theater takes some motivation. As it is I still have Social Network and Break Ke Baad to catch this week. And I would have liked to see the low-budget Tamil ‘ Myna’ so much. You see it’s a question of priority.
November 24, 2010 at 6:10 AM
“In Indian cinema we have numerous examples of successful actors becoming their own caricatures in later parts of their careers. I think that bug has caught our directors these days. They act like they have found a template of a successful cinema and they just go on filling in the templates and expect the audience to react as they did for their earlier work. It seems SLB too (like RGV) has created his own template and sadly he looks like madly in love with the template rather than the art of storytelling itself. ”
http://passionforcinema.com/guzaarish2010-take-two/
November 24, 2010 at 8:52 AM
All this negativity and what is SLB’s fault?
He makes one of the better films in bollywood.
November 24, 2010 at 1:40 PM
Many can argue that SLB folows a stylistic , or operatic style of filmmaking, as against the lesser mortals who make more straight forward films.
Now Gurudutt followeda stylised form of film making as against Bimal Roy’s neorealistic format. But both touched you emotionally. Stylisation or melodrama is not the problem, it’s how you use it. Ray was neo-realistic while Ritwik Ghatak was melodramatic, but that does not mean Ghatak did not touch you.
The problem with SLB is that he does not know how to use melodrama or stylisation for a higher artistic purpose. Take Devdas and Dola Re. You take the artistic license of making Paro and Chnadramukhi meet, fine. But to what purpose? They dance together, fine? But to what dramatic purpose? It could have been used to contrast the two and their relationship with Devdas, or their suppressed antagonism, or even the commonality of their love. Anything. Something exploring their inner landscape of their thoughts. But what do they sing instead :
Dola Re Dola Re Dola Re Dola
Haye Dola Dil Dola Mann Dola Re Dola
Lag Jaane Do Najariya, Gir Jaane Do Bijuriya
Bijuriya, Bijuriya, Gir Jaane Do Aaj Bijuriya
Lag Jaane Do Najariya, Gir Jaane Do Bijuriya
Baandhke Maein Ghunghroo
Pehenke Maein Paayal
Oh, Baandhke Maein Ghunghroo
Pehenke Maein Paayal
Ho Jhoomke Naachoongi Ghoomke Naachoongi
Dola Re Dola Re Dola Re Dolaâre.
What high art!
Stupidity of the highest order. SLB treats it as no more than an item song! Compare this to the old Rajashree production ” Geet Gaata Chal, and the song
” Shyam Teri Bansi Pukare Radha Naam
Log Karen Meera Ko Yoonhi Badnaam
Saanwre Ki Bansi Ko Bajne Se Kaam
Radha Ka Bhi Shyam Voh To Meera Ka Bhi Shyam
” That is saying something!
When I saw the song Dola Re on screen I lost all respect for SLB as a filmmaker.
Look at a song like ” Yeh duniya agar mil bhi jaaye to kya’ and what deep philosophy it embodies! In contrast, the songs in Devdas do nothing to underline the film’s theme. All SLB was interested inwas choosing the right sarees and jewellery for ash and Madhuri, and creating some great looking choreography, not explore the inner landscapes of his heroines or build dramtic tension for the ensuing climax.
Prakash Mehra did so much a better job in his reinterpretation of Devdas, Muqadar Ka Sikandar. The relationships were so much more flesh and blood. The songs expressed the underlying emotions and attitude of the protagonists so well. ( Rote hue aate hain sab, Salaame Ishq, Wafa jo na kije, Dil to bas dil hai nad of course Oh Saathi re. The last one expresses the undying love that Devdas has for Paro, sorry, that Sikanadar has for Memsaab is expressed so poignantly ! The songs of Devdas are so plastic, not one coming anywhere close to these in poignancy and power.
November 24, 2010 at 3:26 PM
this is a brilliant analysis, Utkal.
November 24, 2010 at 8:08 PM
Oh, my. Still at it.
Can we lock up these two in a room with a couple of bottles of desi daru?
November 25, 2010 at 5:09 AM
hey, if you are not there, who’ll play Chunni babu?
November 24, 2010 at 2:28 PM
Break Ke Baad: Average Opening Likely Predicts CINEMATIX
Wednesday 24th November 2010 09.30 IST
Press Release
Mumbai, Nov 23, 2010: Break Ke Baad has scored significantly lower than Imran Khan’s previous film I Hate Luv Storys on Cinematix™ at the Week (-1) stage, on the Awareness and Interest parameters. While I Hate Luv Storys was at 37% and 60% Unaided Awareness and Interest respectively, Break Ke Baad is only at 30% and 32% respectively.
As per the Cinematix™ predictive model, Break Ke Baad is slated to have a Rs. 12-13 Cr opening weekend (nett), assuming the film releases in 750 Cinemas. I Hate Luv Storys had opened at Rs 22.75 Cr (nett), and had released across approximately 770 cinemas.
Click Here
As a result of a weaker opening, Break Ke Baad will have to rely on good word-of-mouth for a successful run at the box office.
“While both the films have somewhat similar Awareness levels at the same stage, the difference is the scores could be because the music of Break Ke Baad has not become as popular as that of I Hate Luv Storys. Music is a key parameter to generate Interest in a romantic comedy”, said Shailesh Kapoor, CEO, Ormax Media.
The predictive model takes into account the film’s performance across the four Cinematix™ parameters – Unaided Awareness, Total Awareness, Appeal and Interest.
Data over the last six months has been used to predict a film’s opening weekend nett collections on the basis of its Cinematix™ scores. The model can predict the opening weekend collections of a film with an error margin of less than 15%. To
Cinematix™ is a weekly tracking tool to that measures the awareness and interest to watch for upcoming releases, during their marketing phase. Developed and run by India’s premiere media research & consulting firm Ormax Media, the weekly Cinematix™ track is conducted across the key theatrical revenue markets – Mumbai, Delhi, Ahmedabad, Lucknow & Indore. Cinematix™ covers theatre visitors in the age group of 15-34 years in SEC AB.
Basis the response for their film, producers can relook their media and creative strategies during the pre-release phase itself.
Films currently in the Cinematix™ track include: Break Ke Baad, Rakta Charitra 2, Khelein Hum Jee Jaan Sey, Band Baaja Baaraat, No One Killed Jessica, Yamla Pagla Deewana, Run Bhola Run, Dhobi Ghaat, Toonpur Ka Superhero, Tees Maar Khan, No Problem etc.
Besides Cinematix™, Ormax Media also conducts various other types of research for film producers. These include test screenings, promo testing and exit polls.
About Ormax Media
Ormax Media was founded in July 2008, by Vispy Doctor and Shailesh Kapoor. We are a research and consulting firm specializing in the entertainment business. Our work in the television, film, radio and Internet industries is targeted at one specific purpose – to increase the profitability of our business partners by empowering them with consumer knowledge and strategic analysis.
Our services include Quantitative & Qualitative Research. We have also developed a series of proprietary research tools and syndicated products for the entertainment business.
We currently partner with Star India, Colors, Zee Network, Imagine, Sony, Times Now, SAB, Max, UTV, Zoom, Big Broadcasting, Astro, Nick, Disney, Cartoon Network, NDTV Good Times, Yash Raj Films, Fox Star Studios, Vipul Shah Productions, Cinergy, OTX Hollywood, Vistaar Religare, Hungama, Zapak, Radio City, Radio Mirchi, Red FM, MyFM, What’s On India, Tata Sky, Mindshare, Godrej and Idea Cellular.
November 25, 2010 at 12:42 AM
Hrithik Roshan the self-promoter
The Guzaarish star spends on full-page ads featuring himself following producer UTV’s decision not to shell out money on post-promotions
If the producer won’t, the star will.
Yesterday, Hrithik Roshan shelled out Rs 10.5 lakh to release a full-page ad in a daily that screamed ‘Experience Ethan’s magic’.
The spread contained tweets from fans who watched his latest release Guzaarish and loved his character, Ethan, a paraplegic.
The ‘voices’ raved about the movie and in particular, his “amazing acting”. Talk about self-promotion!
With producers UTV clamming on the publicity budget as box-office collections are not in the pink of health, the star took on the onus of advertising his character in Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s project. Expect more ads in coming weeks.
In bad taste
Moreover, Hrithik decided to use a snapshot of Ashutosh Tiwari, a paraplegic who passed away on November 21 by describing him as a ‘true Ethan’. UTV has found it in bad taste and has decided to be totally disassociated from it.
B-Town buzz is that the star is desperate to tell the world that the film may have not worked but he has been loved.
Says a source, “On Monday, there was a sharp decline in collections and UTV was not keen on spending megabucks after the film’s dismal opening.
Hrithik decided to pay from his own pocket for the film’s post-release publicity centered around his acting skills.” Considering he took home a Rs 15 crore fee for the film, this expenditure is loose change.
Adds the source, “The general perception was that the production house released the ads. But they were unaware of his personal publicity gameplan.”
As reported (It’s possible; HiTLIST, November 16), UTV head honcho Ronnie Screwvala had sent an email, inviting leading B-Town producers for a meeting at Yash Raj Studios to decide the best means to curb rising expenditures while making movies.
Screwvala’s main area of concern was the spiralling expenditure on marketing a film which he thinks “is money being splurged on assuaging ourselves (the producers’ fraternity) rather than money being spent to enlarge a market and grow the theatrical audience.”
What Roshan says
This is ridiculous. How can anyone say I have paid for the ads? Who is saying this? Ashutosh passed away recently and the page will be a beautiful memory for his loved ones. It’s an ode to the spirit that he was which changed my life. He was the true Ethan. I attended his chautha last evening and I’ve received so many blessings from his family.
What UTV says
Siddharth Roy Kapur of UTV states, “Hrithik’s performance as Ethan Mascarenhas has been lauded by critics and audiences worldwide. The objective of the ad was to convey the tremendous appreciation the film has received and to recognise the heroism of a real-life ‘Ethan’. We are all part of one team and it is irrelevant who has borne the cost of the ad.”
Shocker
In the CP-Berar territory, after estimating the total business of Guzaarish, distributors expect it to be less than that of the Mallika Sherawat-starrer Hissss!
November 25, 2010 at 6:57 AM
I don’t see anything wrong in Hrithik promoting his film by spending his own money, though the picture he has chosen is not the right one IMO. He should have taken one of his magician one.
November 25, 2010 at 2:22 PM
And it turned out to be no better or no worse than I had expected it to be. It is not as irritating or pointless as Saawaria. But almost as boring and fake. Right from the first frame, the fakery and bad storytelling was apparent. Just as you are being introduced to the main characters, an overwrought ” Smile ” distracts you when we should have been gently allowed into the world of Ethan and Sophie as witness to their everyday life. The cleavage revealing, low cut back top of Ash removed whatever empathy one might have had for the characters. Plot loopholes by the dozen ( Why he lives on the top floor, why he has never ventured out of the room for 14 years, why no one comes to visit him, oh there are so many) , the ludicrous court scenes, the cliches like the villainous rival and his son , the sudden appearance of the drunk husband, the perfectly gentlemanly crowd asking Ethan’s mother to shut up when she was obviously singing so beautifully, makes it a really a badly told and yawn inducing story. The only two scenes when I kind of woke up is the magic scene with levitation and the wonderfully performed ‘ Udi Udi. The performances are good but has many patches of unevenness( Frankly I don’t equate good acting necessarily with portrayal of disabled or demented characters.)
So in sum, not as bad as Saawariya, and not nearly as good as Black ( I did not care much for Black as a whole, But the part with the young Michelle, maybe because it was directly lifted from Miracle worker, worked very well. ) The worst part is, here was some good material at hand. But none of the thematic opportunities, the ethical and philosophical dimensions of euthanasia, or the pain and struggle of a quadriplegic, or the love between a beautiful woman and a bodyless man, have been explored at all. If that had been done, then box office success or not, at least it would have been worth something.