This entry was posted on February 1, 2013 at 6:58 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.
131 Responses to “David, Kadal, Race 2 (ongoing), the rest of the box office”
Race 2 grossed 66 crore nett in week one as collections fell from Monday onwards. The fall was bigger in the mass circuits as places like CPCI came down quite fast. The film held up a bit better in Delhi/UP and East Punjab.
The first week collections are the highest for a film featuring Saif Ali Khan or John Abraham and has already crossed the figures of Race (2008) but the film has not gone on from a good weekend. Rzce (2008) had grossed around61 crore nett.
The second weekend is all important for the film and will tell where the film is going.
Did you notice the fact that it did not even take 3 days for Race 2 to outgross the total gross of Players. Same director, better film and a more saleable leading man
I know the sequel factor matters. But c’mon it overtook Players in 2-3 days. And Players too had its paraphernalias- was billed as Abbas-Mustan’s biggest film. And do not forget that this was a ‘remake’ of a very popular hwood film
It’s not comparable at all. The Italian Job was hardly a blockbuster grosser even in the US! even if it were it’s hardly the same to compare this with the sequel to a well-known film! I think you know that!
As for the rest yes Abhishek was at his lowest box office point, otherwise Players would have opened much better. No doubt about it. I think though you still have BB on your mind!
Also, Race 2 might be a “better film” than Players but what does this ultimately mean? It’s like saying this week’s expired milk still smells better than last week’s dirty diaper.
Abhishek desperately requires a solo hit (D3 would not be too helpful). And since he does not seem to be too interested in doing masala, the best option for him would be a solo comedy with a big female star (Katrina, Kareena etc)- an in-form Priyan would not be a bad option to helm the project
He is in a position to work or not. To choose or not. He is not in the rat race and he just enjoys doing his own thing. I wish more were like him leaving the field to the rats and their fridays.
here’s the thing about Abhishek. He’s not very likely to do a film that he does not believe in even minimally. One can argue with the choices but I’d be very surprised if I ever saw him in that sort of comedy. But part of the other reason is that unlike what many people think he’s never had a problem attracting projects even in his darkest periods, let alone after a shot in the arm like BB. This article points out what others don’t but indeed he has not green-lighted a number of films just since BB. Now I might agree that he ought not to be doing so many films which involve other stars. I might not agree with some of the choices even otherwise. But that’s a different debate. What is clear is that he’s charting a very careful course toward box office safety at the point and despite the media the ‘competition’ has never quite bothered him in the same film. BB of course has worked out anyway. I have good sense about D3 too on this score. Obviously the other stars are box office heavyweights in each case but he got a great deal out of BB. In a sense his choices are not crazy either. Films like Players depend on big initials. later they fizzle out. These days most 100 crore grossers really do most of the gross in the first 5-7 days. So if you lose the initial you can’t make it up later. But if you’re down on your luck you need to build that credibility with the audience first. In other words if he insisted on a solo commercial or masala venture, he might not land similar initials. But a solo at the end of such a sequence would, specially if it was in the same safe genre. It’s one thing to do BB and D3 and then say Raavan and quite another to follow those up with an audience-friendly genre, which is what the Umesh Shukla film looks to be. So even where I might disagree with certain choices I see the logic.
In form Priyan? his last hit was Bhool Bhulaiya in 2007 more than 5 years ago, This is what he has made since, anything but inform.
Billu, Mere Baap Pehle Aap, De Dana Dhan, Khatta Meeta, Kamaal Dhamaal Malamal, Aakrosh, Tezz.
Aargh! So it all boils down to this. Leaving aside the fact that I do not see any need of confirming that I am not an Abhishek hater the truth is that I do not need to downgrade Abhishek Bachchan to prop-up Devgn (especially when he is on an all-time career high- 4 hundred crore grossers themselves say the story)
No but your remarks on Abhishek post-BB have taken on a much more strident (and occasionally gratuitous) tone than prior to this film. I don’t think of things so crudely in terms of ‘hate’ and so on. But there are certain remarks that don’t pass the plausibility test even in the most minimal ways and so one wonders why the person making them doesn’t see the obvious. Again, and as I’ve always said, most of these arguments for me are about the terms of the debate. Otherwise I don’t particularly care whether someone loves or hates Abhishek or anyone else for that matter.
on Devgan you’re right but that statement can’t be made without qualification when one of those films is the second sequel to a successful film, when two others are remakes of Southern superhits, when the fourth one is called Bol Bachchan, has another star in the ‘double’ part and moreover still uses the structure of an older well known comedy. Now he has Himmatwala, another remake, then Singham 2, the sequel to a remake. So on and so forth. I have nothing against Devgan but let’s not miss the obvious here. He’s going through his best phase but he seems to be completely tied up with these remakes. And by the way I say this with every star where this applies. This doesn’t of course mean that any star can be successful doing such remakes. But similarly the same star should also prove with his other stuff whether he can get this degree of success elsewhere. Of course many stars do this sort of thing these days. Ready and BG were remakes, Dabanng 2 was a sequel. But Salman it is safe to say is getting massive initials irrespective of this. What happens is that with these remakes there are lots of frills attached that then lead to a big advertising campaign. This gets you the initial. Specially if you’re in the zone in box office terms you can keep gliding by on this stuff. Note how no one showed up for Aakrosh. It was a box office disaster. So it’s one thing for a star to leverage his (or her) box office good fortunes toward something more meaningful. Quite another to keep doing the same sort of really lowbrow stuff all the time. Not criticizing Devgan here. For a number of reasons I don’t think he has any other option at this stage. But most of his films aren’t even Singham where he personally got a lot out of it as a star. The rest are just circuses where he’s part of the act. It’s like if Abhishek after BB decided to do just this sort of thing again and again. This genre already works, it has worked with a number of stars. With repetition the initial gets stronger and you feed off it as long as you can. The 100 crores at any rate cannot be mentioned without qualification. Of course whether the 100 crores have any meaning anymore is another question because most films with a good or better initial get to this number unless they tank completely. But this is where the meaning of every hit is not the same. Kahaani for Balan means more than the various 100 crore films Kareena has appeared in. Now Balan might not be the sort of actress who can be incorporated into all these bread and butter films but that’s a different debate. kareena doesn’t get much out of it either. She’s utterly replaceable. However the same isn’t true with her part in Talaash.
I have also been surprised at Saurabh’s tendency of late of taking digs at Abhishek. I dont kno if he is always spoiling for a fight or an argument or seeking attention but I would definitely think he is following wrong examples.
Ha ha..I will wait for your or Satyam’s piece on this..I have to drive 40 miles to Virginia to catch this..and I wish to make sure that it is worth taking this trouble..any honest opinion would be appreciated as to whether I should –
looooooooooooooong drive pe chal, chal.. as per Akshay Kumar!!
P.S.: I understand nothing of Tamil except – NALLA IRKA — so I also need to ensure that the movie is shown with sub-titles..
As always I’m most interested in Rangan’s review here, but especially in light of his book’s recent release this will be a singular piece to watch out for.
House of Cards debuted on Netflix today, their first series. I like the British original quite a bit (also available on netflix streaming currently). It’s a modern twist on Richard III in some ways. But that series is mostly about Ian Richardson’s villain. It’s not particularly deep otherwise. Interested to see how they’ve done the US version. Luckily it’s been a number of years since I saw the original so no chance of an overdose here!
I think Lillyhammer was Netflix’ first series. House of Cards though looks like the real deal, and it doesn’t hurt to have David Fincher as an EP and director of the first episode if I’m not mistaken.
satyam – have u watched “Student of the year”? if yes – where is ur write-up? i watched up yday reluctantly as I am not really fond of KJo movies. But I was very happy to see the 3 new comers presented in a very lavish and grand way. Siddharth malhotra is an absolute star material. Alya will have extreme reactions from audiences – either people will love her or they will simply dislike her. Varun Dhawan was good. My only grudge with the film was Rishi Kapoor playing a gay dean. I mean it was a total shit kind of character and although he played it as per the script but why he needs to do such stuff??? Otherwise – all the usual KJO stuff was present (the man can’t just get this gay thing out of his system).
i saw soty today – i actual prefer k Jo making this kind of superficial fun film rather than trying to handle something like kank. soty, if u like that kind of thing, was watchable. kank, was horrible in every way. with soty i felt he accepts his limitations and makes what he is ‘good’ at.
alia was really bad and not attractive either.
I guess no one in Indian Cinema can make a movie like this in the feel and vision! Take a Bow, for a moment i felt i am watching Hollywood movie.
I felt it pondered near the end, but till that point i enjoyed, climax should have been more tensed. But one interesting thing flm doesnt spoon feed you.
Afghanistan sequences are terrific. Kamal Hassan the director – actor – writer does a terrific job, and one is surprised if he can make this films at such age, what is Bollywood doing?
Music and BGM are also quite good. If only second half was more crispier, i would have liked it, and i didnt get who the hero was actually! but still loved the spy drama. But there was need of more action imo.
@Rooney — You didn’t get who the hero was actually? The hero was Kamal. 🙂 Or did you mean you didn’t get who his allegiances were to? Or which was his real name and which his alias? Without going into spoilers, let me say that the name he was known by in Afghanistan is his real name, and “who” he was is explained quite explicitly when he was being questioned by the FBI agent.
SPOILERS
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Ya I got his name. Ya i got who he was, Research and Analyst Wing. etc.
But what was he doing in middle of Al Qaida and America? How is Indian Inteligence connected with it? I mean to say common, what does an Indian agent doing saving america? It sounded quite funny to me. Ya they said part II is about indian part, but still how was Visham connected /clue/ chase and settled in New York? and that to for this many years?? trapped in a marriage? Doesnt this people protect boundaries of India ?
If he was some sort interpol agent i could have understood.
@Rooney – I agree with all your points. This is what I was referring to in my review, where I said there is no connection to India except through Kamal’s character, which is tenuous at best. I’ll say more in the other thread in a day or so. I’m rather rushed right now.
There’s one thing in the FBI questioning scene that I’m dying to discuss with someone. But I can’t do so without revealing spoilers, so I don’t know where and how I can indulge this wish of mine.
LOL, if I “discuss” it in Telugu, I’ll be talking to myself! No one else here understands Telugu. I’ll wait till some more people have seen it and then try.
Thanks, An Jo. I’ll continue the discussion in my review thread, but after a couple of days. By then even more people might have seen it to participate in the discussion.
Race 2 did pretty well on its second Friday collecting around 3.25 crore nett. The collections were down 75% from day one but were not much lower than Thursday. The film had dropped through the weekdays but did not drop much on the 8th day especially in the North where collections were very close to Thursday figures.
The film should show a good pick up on Saturday and go to weekend figures of 13-14 crore nett. The film was helped by the new releases providing little competition leaving Race 2 as the first choice in its second week also.
Vishwaroop improved in the evening slightly after a low start to collect 1.75-2 crore nett region with Mumbai circuit giving a major contribution of around 70 lakhs. The collections of the film are just a bit lower than Robot which was is the highest collecting film from the South in the Hindi market. Vishwaroop was released on 1000 screens approx in the Hindi market.
David collected a poor 50-60 lakhs nett on its first day. Again it was Mumbai circuit which gave a contribution of around 50%.
The other films released this week like Deewana Main Deewana, Mai And Listen Amaya all had very dull collections and shows were cancelled at many places due to lack of audience.
B.O. update: ‘Vishwaroop’ improves slightly, ‘David’ dismal
By Taran Adarsh, February 1, 2013 – 17:36 IST
The controversy surrounding the film didn’t seem to help VISHWAROOP initially. For, the Hindi version of the film opened to dull houses in the morning shows, although the occupancy was better than the remaining releases. However, the collections showed a marked improvement in the noon shows in some circuits, which is a positive sign. The fate of the well publicised DAVID was worse, with the film opening to dismal houses everywhere. The remaining Hindi releases, which were limited to a few shows at cineplexes, hardly found any takers.
Both VISHWAROOP and DAVID will have to show a miraculous jump over the weekend, if they need to sustain in the forthcoming days. However, VISHWAROOP has an edge over the new releases, as per initial trends.
Race 2 did pretty well on its second Friday collecting around 3.25 crore nett. The collections were down 75% from day one but were not much lower than Thursday. The film had dropped through the weekdays but did not drop much on the 8th day especially in the North where collections were very close to Thursday figures.
The film should show a good pick up on Saturday and go to weekend figures of 13-14 crore nett. The film was helped by the new releases providing little competition leaving Race 2 as the first choice in its second week also.
FLATOW: So do you believe that they should be moderated, these blogs?
ZIVKOVIC: Yes, I think the ideas about comment amelioration have changed over the past, you know, 10 or 15 years, that these things exist online. In the beginning, I think there was the idea that this should be a free forum. And now there are so many free fora out there that I don’t think a site like Scientific American should provide a free form for everything and everybody and all kinds of online fights to happen in our comments because I think the free speech applies to the Web as a whole, not to any particular site.
And I think the host of the site has to keep in mind what is the goal of the site, what is the reason why the site exists. If it’s educational, then these kinds of comments need to go. And it’s perfectly OK. It’s perfectly legal to do it. So I think we need to have our readers in mind first and act appropriately.
On the one hand Braveheart fought until death. Kamalahaasan capitulated. He acceded to all the demands. He lost the opportunity to go to supreme court to teach a lesson or two to the unreasonable people. Digging mountains and get a measly mouse. What happened to his brave words about self exile and other things? In comparison Aamir khan did not apologise so that Fanaa could be released in Gujarat. Even if he had been the producer, he would not have capitulated. If at all Kamalahaasan wanted to release his film somehow even in a mutilated version, why to create national hysteria in the first place? First the DTH fiasco and then this. Now all the people who supported him against the chief minister look foolish and stupid. Kamal, I will trust you no more and I will cheer you no more.
Because 95 crores is a amount big enough to make him weak. And Aamir khan didn’t apologize because gujarat’s contribution to Fanaa’s BO would have been 10%. But for Vishwaroopam Tamil nadu’s contribution to it’s BO is 80%.
Homi made his directorial debut with Saif Ali Khan in BEING CYRUS, an off-beat English language psychological drama, a critically acclaimed film. His next venture COCKTAIL was also with Saif, which was produced by Saif only. While Homi’s first film was an unconventional outing, his second was an out-n-out commercial film. Now the buzz in the trade is that director Homi will be once again teaming up with actor Saif Ali Khan for a new film.
The film is said to be a period film and it will be produced by Saif’s banner Illuminati films. As per the reports, the film will go on floors later this year.
Right from his first film BEING CYRUS director Homi Adajania has been experimental with his work. It will be interesting to see Saif doing a period saga for the first time.
Review: KADAL Is A Subpar Mani Ratnam Film That Still Outshines Just About Everything There Is
J Hurtado, Contributing Writer
2013 is shaping up to be a year of high profile Indian directors making so-so films. A few weeks ago, I reviewed Hindi auteur Vishal Bhardwaj’s Matru Ki Bijli Ka Mandola, a film with such a schizophrenic structure that it was hard to tell which emotions I was supposed to feel. Last night I caught Mani Ratnam’s Kadal (The Sea), which is certainly much more focused and linear than Bhardwaj’s film, but takes a glorious first half and squanders it on terribly predictable and overwrought melodrama before the final frames flicker across the screen.
I hate for this review to sound negative. I really enjoyed Kadal. A bad Mani Ratnam film is better than 99% of directors on their best day; however, with Ratnam looking in his rear view mirror at the critical drubbing of his last film, Raavan (Raavanan), I had higher hopes for a comeback. To audiences outside of India, Mani Ratnam is not a household name, however, in his homeland, he is probably one of the top five most respected directors in the country. His films have broached social and political topics that were largely considered to be taboo in Indian filmmaking, and he’s managed to make it interesting and commercial without losing credibility. If you don’t believe me, Hulu+ subscribers should take a look at his 2000 terrorism drama, Dil Se; it is among the finest Indian films of the last two decades…
Kadal contains what is easily the most gruesome moment in the Mani Ratnam oeuvre, and it occurs in an early scene about a dead prostitute from a Christian fishing community. A few locals take the corpse to church, where the priest refuses to permit this sinner’s burial in a plot inside, and so they take the body to an open ground by the sea and set about digging a grave. When done, they lower the body, now inside an open coffin, and find a leg sticking out – that old joke about the whore who couldn’t keep her legs crossed comes to mind – and one of them sets about breaking the limb, in order to make it fit inside. Over the sickening crunch of bones being broken, the director seems to be telling those who keep moaning that he doesn’t make nice, affecting, middle-class movies like Mouna Raagam anymore exactly where to get off…
“We sensed, in Raavan(an), a lot of these questions being probed, and Kadal is very much a companion piece to that earlier film (and a much better one), very much an in-transition work of a filmmaker constantly searching for something. Your tolerance for the inevitable rough edges, I suppose, will determine your response to the film. Put differently, and like Raavan(an), Kadal is less for those who want their films to be easily classifiable as good or bad, more for those who like their films interesting. I was riveted.”
“The only drawbacks in the mostly excellent pre-interval portions are the songs. For a while now, I have wondered why Ratnam’s songs – not the ones that play over scenes, like Nenjukkulle, but those in which characters break into exuberant steps – have begun to seem redundant (at best) and intrusive (at worst). When Thomas and his cohorts dance to Eley keechan, it’s not all that different from when Rajinikanth and Mammooty broke free from the “realistic” nature of the film until then and entered the stylised zone of choreography. And when a bride’s anticipation of her wedding night can find form in Jiya jale and when the separation of lovers can be represented through O Priya Priya, why can’t the onset of love be depicted through Adiye? But something has changed, something’s different. Unlike the case in the earlier films, these songs here bring the proceedings to a halt. As standalone music videos, they’re outstanding, but they don’t become an organic part of the film.”
Even Rangan has given up trying to defend Mani’s song picturization!
.
Haven’t seen Kadal yet but since this Rangan point applies to a larger set of films I’d again repeat what I said earlier. In the traditional sense commercial films offer obvious cues for these songs/videos to emerge. And Ratnam has certainly done a great deal of this. However the notion I’ve always resisted is the one that in that same traditional cinema the videos were somehow fluidly linked with the rest of the narrative. In my view the audience was trained to accept those cues as being ‘utterly’ natural. Of course there are those masala videos where the song is literally part of the narrative, the same happens in some older non-masala films as well. This is in a way the operatic principle. The song/video enhances the rest of the narrative or exists on the same plane with it. It is still an interruption in some sense but it is connected to the rest of the narrative. On the other hand this doesn’t happen with most movies. Except that once again the audience doesn’t recognize it as such. the ‘cues’ are delivered a certain way that come across as natural. It is analogous to the Hollywood continuity editing principle. It is not that this is somehow more ‘organic’ than say Godard’s cuts but that it creates the illusion of being so. from this perspective Ratnam is someone who problematizes all of this. Note how the more ‘Bollywood’ response to all of this is to try and do away with the videos altogether. In a sense this response secretly agrees with the point I’ve just made. It’s not that these filmmakers think they’re making more ‘Western’ narratives and hence can’t use songs in the same way. They also believe that the old ‘mix’ was itself a problem. Much like Bannerjee in his Caravan piece considers a lot of Bachchan’s comic interludes problematic within the texts of those films (here too I’d say yes these are in fact interruptions but the films depend on this.. as surely as Shakespeare is the ultimate master of such interruptions). Once again Ratnam makes explicit what is already implicit in those older films. Which is why I have forever resisted the idea that the quintessential Indian commercial film is like the Hollywood musical or alternatively like opera. It absolutely is not. Precisely because those other two models are not built on interruption. And this is not ‘apologizing’ for Ratnam because his non-musical narrative in the past 15 years or so (much as I dislike to posit such a split between the musical narrative and the non-musical one) also increasingly tends toward the elliptical (hence Raavan(an) is really an ‘essay’ on an entire tradition). Once again it is about refusing the obvious story-telling cues in a lot of instances. The two choices on Ratnam’s part emerge from the very same logic. So yes the videos might often seem dissociated but don’t Godard’s editing choices in his signature films follow the very same logic with respect to the traditional Hollywood formats? We are never ‘connected’ with his films in quite the same way, certainly not emotionally invested to the same degree, or if we now manage both these responses it’s because decades of cinema operating in Godard’s wake has better conditioned us. The initial audiences had a great deal of trouble with these works. Sometimes even the critics. This doesn’t mean my approach on Ratnam is definitive by any means but the criticism in this context often uses the traditional format, consciously or otherwise, as definitive in ways which I consider somewhat easy.
“When done, they lower the body, now inside an open coffin, and find a leg sticking out – that old joke about the whore who couldn’t keep her legs crossed comes to mind ..”–hmmm
well, has any1 seen this ratnam film here?
or vishwaroopam?
ps–david seems to be a non-starter @ the box office eveerywhere….
Had plans of watching django/ flight 2nite– but got pending work arrgh
While some others I know make merry -all I’m left with is cherrrry, no a cuppa coffee 2 stay awake n slog — whatta life ..,!!!
Wheres my mental coach ..,ok lemme stop the rant
Btw Satyam — y r u hanging around — go see vishwaroopam or flight ….Or the coastal romance kadhal !!
Watched Kadal on Saturday. Unfortunately, the version I saw was without subs, despite a very prominent “With English Subtitles” in the movie ad in a daily.
I liked it a lot (probably the lack of subtitles helped matters 🙂 ). The christian-fishermen community that the movie is set in is a unfamiliar territory for me and I was hooked right from the start. Mind you, this is not an easy watch at all. The scene in the beginning that Rangan refers to in his review is brutal and heartbreaking at once, and sets the tone for what’s to follow.
Arvind Swamy is the pick of the cast; probably his career-best performance. His persona has been used very effectively. Gautam also has a good outing here. I wish I could say the same for the heroine (Sections of audience were literally groaning whenever she came on screen). Arjun’s performance also didn’t work for me. The supporting cast is largely very good.
I love the soundtrack, but the songs in the film largely serve as speed-breakers. The problem is that the song sequences coming out from a stark setting are jarring. Having said that, Magudi Magudi and Chithirai Nila have been used very effectively.
I found Kadal a very intriguing and interesting watch, not least for Mani Ratnam’s exploration of such an overtly religious theme.
Vishwaroop managed decent collections over the weekend by collecting in the 7.75 crore nett range. The film had solid growth on each day of 30-35%. The film has managed better collections than well promoted outright Hindi films like Table No.21 and Inkaar. The collections are also a bit higher than Robot which is the highest opener for a film which is from the South and features a South Indian star as main lead. Robot had opened in the 7.25-7.50 crore nett range.
David another bilingual film did not make any mark at the box office as it collected around 2.25 crore nett. the film showed growth over the weekend but was limited growth on top of a low starting point.
Deeewana Main Deewana, Listen Amaya and Mai were all total disasters at the box office.
Using Godard’s editing patterns as an analogy for Mani Ratnam’s use of songs just doesn’t cut it. Manii is simply using the songs like the less capable Bollywood directors do, for sensual or visual titillation. The masters follow the disruptive or interruptive tradition of nautanki or jatra and stiil mange to make it work in a modern film idiom by establishing some kind of link with the main narrative. Mnai did the same in his best works like Nayagan, Bombay or Kannathil Muthumittal. Of late he is using them as music videos, or item songs, just fir titillation without anything transcendental. It si not as if he isn using these songs in any kind of radical manner say like Anurag Kashyap did in Dev d or Gangs of Wasseypur. Kashyap broke many new grounds in these songs. First, the lyrical content and form. Whether it si ‘ Emotional Atyachar’ or ” Oh Womaniya’ or ” electric Pitya’ …he is introducing new phraseology gifting oir lexicon with new words and phrases.
“Baba sahib kathin kitna rasta diya
jan nayak re halat kya khasta kiya
Riding donkeys, my horse rider piya
Getting tangled in web of spider piya”
Totally different poetic sensibilities.
The music too is a departure from the typical ‘ filmy’ tunes. It is alchemised from the rough material of folk songs, sung by untrained voices , choruses of elderly women and so on.
The use of the songs is too is radiccally different from traditional grammar of Bollywood. The song Jiya Ho Bihar Ke Lala coming at the end of #Wasseypur 1, after Mnaoj Bajpai has been shot hits you like a whiplash.
“I am a hunter she want to see my gun’ is not used in thew ay songs are used in traditional Bollywood films. But it is not one inch out of place. It is one of piece with the aesthetics of the film giving it its texture.
Invoking Goddard’s editing pattern for contexts like these would make some sense.
Mani’s use of songs thse days , post- Dil Se, with a few exceptions, is too lazy , too mindless to merit any indulgence. As I said at worst it is pure titilation, at best it is pure prettiness. A song like JIya Jale is nothing but an excuse to show the pretty locales of Kerala, the pretty dance steps of the choreographer and the pretty midriff of Priety Jinta. same goes for Chhiayan Chhaiyan. Songs like Shukriya Meherbani or baadl added nothing to the texture of Yuva, and took away quite a lot. I can clearly see Yuva emerging so much a better film without these songs , uisng instead ambient songs with roots in Kolkata for the Ajay Devgan portion and songs of Benaras and North India in the Vivek-Kareen aportion.
Defending gratuitous use of songs by Mani in his recent films is akin to defending murders in the ashrams of Sai Baba or Asharam Bapu because they are some kind of saintly figures and no fingers must be raised against them.
Re: “Defending gratuitous use of songs by Mani in his recent films is akin to defending murders in the ashrams of Sai Baba or Asharam Bapu because they are some kind of saintly figures and no fingers must be raised against them.”
While I loved both GoWs and found many of the song usage very effective (Bihar Ke Lala and Womaniya), there are some song placements that made me think that these songs are used here, because they didn’t know where to use them and they didn’t want to chop them. Chi Cha Lader, for example. There were other jarring, forced bits as well like the political references in Taar Bijli and the recurring Moora refrain. My point is that GoWs were not unqualified successes in terms of song placement.
The problem once again is that’s your view. I don’t happen to share it. The issue to repeat this point ad nauseam isn’t that you and I have different perspectives on this but that you think there is only one ‘right’ answer to these things. I skimmed the Rangan piece on Kadal as I didn’t want to learn about all the spoilers but I picked up the larger questions he raises about Ratnam’s film and the place it occupies in his career. Overall of course he liked the film a lot. I disagree with his comment on the videos but I consider this an open debate. I certainly see where he’s coming from and having interacted with him a number of times in the past he too is always someone willing to entertain other perspectives. In a certain kind of discussion it’s isn’t about who’s correct or incorrect, it isn’t about ‘ultimate’ views on a work. The field remains open. There is no ‘final analysis’ on any work, not even the greatest in history in any art form. This is what you are unable or unwilling to account for. I won’t repeat everything I’ve said on this in the past but I’ll come back to Godard. For roughly 45 years since the end of the 60s to the present date Godard has never been had the kind of iconic presence that he did prior to this. The films he did in the 60s have all become more canonized over time, even a film like Contempt that was booed by its initial audience. So there’s no doubt about this part of Godard’s work. However a lot of important work that he’s done since has been largely ignored even if thanks to the likes of Rosenbaum and Sterritt and recently Lane and some others those works are being revisited and reinvented. Over the last decade or so his work has received mostly good reviews but it has nonetheless not really dominated conversations the way his 60s work once did. Additionally significant works of his from the 80s that were either panned or ignored are now enjoying serious critical revivals. The overall view now is that critics have been rather late in understanding this ‘later’ and ‘late’ Godard. So even when it’s a filmmaker of this global stature judgments constantly change. Even when they do a director cannot suddenly re-occupy his (or her) older perch and get lionized in the same way. Trends change over time. Everything that is considered important doesn’t necessarily get the same sort of attention for all sorts of reasons. Godard wasn’t happy just repeating his key moves from the 60s and kept experimenting and has done so to this day. Not all these experiments are successful but it is a larger trajectory that involves a certain exploration of cinema, a certain interrogation of cinema. Similarly with Ratnam he too had his hugely iconic phase, he too moved away towards greater experimentation, many of these films were dismissed by audiences or critics or both, since then some have enjoyed a change in their critical fortunes, some haven’t but Ratnam has kept moving on. This phase might not be to one’s taste if one insists on a certain kind of Ratnam as surely as Godard’s Passion or Lear from the 80s won’t be to the liking of anyone who simply wishes to see the 60s Godard. One could make the very same arguments about the latter, that the audience deserted him, the critics didn’t like him, so on and so forth. But an important artist at any level is often ahead of the curve. Both audiences and critics not being interested in a work doesn’t mean anything. Because in every art form at every stage in human history there are such examples. All of this doesn’t mean that Ratnam cannot be argued against. But a director of his stature needs to be given the respect where one truly engages with the work and even when one doesn’t like it as a personal one does not simply dismiss entire groups of films as missteps on his part. My point then isn’t that there cannot be dissents on this director, even on his most iconic films, but that these can’t be cheap, easy responses of the sort that are frankly too easily available these days. The viewer needs to show some humility too. To paraphrase my earlier anecdote ‘Ratnam isn’t an idiot’!
this will be verbose. i’m sorry.
I watched kadal yesterday, and i’ve been waiting for your review ever since. i know it’s unfair to accuse a reviewer of having let the side down, but that’s close to how i feel. because this was, in my opinion a deeply, deeply flawed movie, that didn’t know what it was doing or where it was going. and that’s down to a number of (for me) deeply disturbing things.
1. the plot seems to be almost entirely derived from a 70s manmohan desai movie. the one that comes to mind immediately is amar akbar antony. or parvarish. i think you know what i mean.
2. the girl can’t act to save anyone’s life. unless the idiot-child thing was intentional. nor even then, because then the intent must have been to make her endearing.
3. the “drama” of the second half wasn’t any kind of drama at all. and honestly the drama of the first half didn’t surprise me at all either. honestly the only moment where the movie surprised me from a plot development point of view was when arjun turned out to be a green-goblinesque villain. in the first few scenes he seemed to be the one who would save the seemingly-near-autistic arvind swamy from the pits of pedantry.
4. the larger metaphors that you’re talking about, and yes, the surprisingly overt religious overtones, are done in a very strange manneristic sort of way. if i think about it, yes, i’m impressed by the character arcs he’s given thomas and sam. less so chetty, bergmans, beatrice (appallling) and jerina. and given the patchy story, that’s even worse. that thomas should find his redemption and sam should find his actual life experience (from being the bookish preacher he started out as) stick out even without the development, but no other character has a motivation that isn’t out of a masala movie of the 70s (as i said before). it seemed as if the director had got the broad brush strokes right, but failed utterly to fill them up.
5. the songs were awful to me because they seemed somehow condescending. it seems as if mani ratnam feels either a passion to educate the public about jazz and soul, or was trying to create songs just for the sake of having them. honestly that rehman, who’s pretty good at contextualising his musc, should have put up with that is a shock. \
in all, it seems to me that a large number of the things you seem to like it seem to be relativistic, and that’s one of the things i don’t like about this review. you are looking at it as “growth” for mani ratnam. partly because i see it as the exact opposite–as a departure mani ratnam is making from his own brand of cinema towards the mainstream, where plot and casting decisions are taken not on merit but to suit the whims of the financier. overall, i was disappointed, somehwat as much as i was with raavan.
( He seems to be speaking fora large number of people who haven’t liked the film.)
Race 2 had a decent second weekend and collected around 14 crore nett with the Sunday collections going to around 6 crore nett plus. The film has collected around 83.50 crore nett in ten days. The second weekend has dropped 70% which is par for the course today. The circuit figures from some markets are as follows.
Arohi: The songs in GOW 1 and 2 work to varying levels. Some amazingly well, some not so well. But my point is all of them are used in radically different ways from the standard Bollywood film song.
There are some interesting changes in terms of song placement in Kadal also. For example, Magudi Magudi, the club-dubstep-techno-pop number, appears twice in the film and takes the story forward in a very unique manner. Nenjukulle is a background song. My point is that Mani Ratnam’s films are changing and there’s less and less of sugar-coating in his latter films.
Aarohi , I have sen Raavan, and I consider it inferior to average films of mainstream Bollywood directors like Rakesh Roshan or Praksh Jha. If Mani Ratnam’s films are changing, They are certainly changing for the worse. Ravan was the most shoddily written, vacuous film I have seen recent times with no psychological truth , no attempt at character portrayal or even basic sense of story-telling. I cringed at the sight of Govinda clmbering up the nrnacvhes and Abhishek Bachchan making a hash of his teeth gnashing act, and wanted to run away with that abominable wedding song with Ganesh Acharya upfront. If Kadal is in the same mould as Ravan as Rangan implies, I have no intention of wasting my time. In fact it is third in my list of films to see over the next ten days, after Vishwaroopm and David. Unthinkable. Only a few years back I would buy every Rahman album the first day it comes out ( Still do it except for Jab Tak Hai Jaan which I dont possess) and I would make sure I caught the latest Ratnam film within the first three days of its release. I thought Dil Se was misstep and an aberration, with Yuva he just got a few things wrong. But Raavan was the last straw. I know Kadal would be better, nothing can be worse than Raavan. But no, I have had my fill of pretty looking music videos from Mani, I have far more exciting options to stimulate my mind today.
Glad you said that Aarohi. It’s not the hero-worship Utkal thinks it is but the first sign of sanity. There’s a sleight of hand to this logic anyway. For instance I have some problems with Scorsese’s GONY, I don’t think this project is as fully-realized as it might have been, I’d probably say the same for the Aviator. On the other hand I find Casino Royale to be more or less perfect film. This doesn’t mean that the two are somehow comparable (though visually Casino Royale is a lot closer to such a comparison with Scorsese than Rakesh Roshan relative to Ratnam!). We enjoy different kinds of films for all sorts of reasons. But our personal choices do not automatically establish symmetry between these works. Otherwise we’d have to concede that a well-written Stephen King work is superior to a flawed Nabokov one! Or that a well-composed SEL song was better than a flawed Tchaikovsky symphony. And so on. This ‘madness’ often crops up in these discussions. To quote someone ‘the gifts are not equal’. If one wants to find problems with Ratnam’s films the debate might involve (if there have to be comparisons) filmmakers of the order of Raj Kapoor or Guru Dutt or Bala or Bharthiraja and so on. There might be very many names on such a list but not Rakesh Roshan (or present day Prakash Jha)!
The elementary error here is to use a scale of comparison which only depends on personal emotional response to a work and is not grounded in any more serious thinking of these figures. Often one might pretend to do the latter while secretly only doing the former. So for instance Utkal covers the gap by calling Rathnam superficial and empty and so forth in some of these films. The kind of terminology one might use for the likes of Rohit Shetty! Or to give another example I don’t have a taste for just about anything Passolini does so I could dismiss all of it as empty or superficial or any such ridiculously reductive category otherwise only reserve for disposable filmmakers. The point then isn’t about arguing with a filmmaker of Ratnam’s caliber but whether one’s response constitutes a serious discourse. Utkal further proves this point when with Rahman he gets carried away at the other end and starts comparing him to Mozart! Or when he finds moments in Cocktail to be as profound as anything in Guru Dutt. Not making any of this up!
One gets into the realm of the non-serious with such opinion. I am not into this ‘democratic’ game where any and every opinion counts in the same way. Certainly every individual has a right to a personal response and furthermore a right to express it in the language they see fit. But there is absolutely no ethical calling on the ‘reader’ to accept just any opinion as a serious discourse. And to be absolutely clear I don’t challenge Utkal’s right to dislike any or all of Ratnam’s films.
Aarohi: I am not talking of their body of work but just one bad film. I am not among those hero worshipers that think That Mani cannot make a film that is worse than that of Rakesh Roshan or Prakash Jha. Rajneeti was far more satisfying for me than Raavan , Taal than Yuva and Khudgarz more than say Raavan again. Not to mention Kshnam Kshnam more than Thiruda Thiruda.
“But I have never had a bad film coming up trumps with the passage of time.”
probably because you don’t know close to enough about these matters..
Hate to be so blunt here but this is simply a question of knowledge and not opinion.
For the benefit of others here I offer Jonathan Rosenbaum on Godard’s Contempt:
“Almost exactly 33 years ago, in October 1964, the critical reception of Jean-Luc Godard’s widest American release of his career and his most expensive picture to date was overwhelmingly negative.”
What Rosenbaum doesn’t mention here is that this film was booed by many of its initial audiences. I would think this gets as close to a Raavan reception as there might be! An encyclopedia of such moments could be constituted for similar moments around the world.
Should add this on Raavan. It’s pretty amusing how the Hindi reception has completely lionized all the attention. The fact is that the Tamil reception was middling or better. The critics mostly considered this a decent effort on Ratnam’s part. generally people didn’t maul the film. Both films got positive attention at various film circuit scenes around the globe including Venice. But hey you, Utkal have decided it’s a bad film for all eternity!
And again if my responses seem a little rough it’s not because I you don’t like some of these works. I just find it incredible that you have no larger sense of perspective about these things. About how opinions change all the time, audiences and critics both. I find it amazing that you think a view you hold today is one you will hold for the rest of your life or that even if this is true that this is the only one possible when clearly there are important differing voices even today as we speak on all these works.
In any case I too have said all of this many times. Since I doubt you’re going to change your mind an iota’s worth on all of this I won’t be responding on this stuff again.
Satyam: To me it does not matter if it is a Raj Kapoor film or Rakesh Roshan. Scorsese or Sergei Leone. I don’t look at the credit title while judging a film. I judge a film on its in merit. I am hundred percent convinced and live by the dictum that an elvis Preskley sing can be as beautiful a piece of art as that of Tchaikovsky. I am sure Tchaikovsky composed some pieces which are not as good as the best works of the Beatles or Elvis. Obviously those works are slowly consigned to the dustbins of history. Just because I admire Satya or Rangeela, I am not obliged to consider RGV ka AAg as superior to Koi Mil Gaya. I am not a worshiper of brand names and have consciously worked at not falling into that trap.
Actually no Tchaikovsky is consigned to the dustbins of history. The same goes for Raj Kapoor. In fact the very opposite is true. With figures considered important over time even the lesser works or minor works or flawed works or whatever are rediscovered or re-evaluated. In fact in the Western world (or in a place like Japan) this sort of interest often becomes obsessive. Forget re-evaluating works that might have once not be considered very significant, even incomplete footage and first drafts and notebooks and what not are constantly pored over. Why? Because the discourse is considered serious. The flawed works (even accepting this for the moment) of a serious mind still contain traces of the very same thinking that inform the more successfully realized films. In fact the flawed work in this sense can often illuminate the mind and the thought as much as the successful one, sometimes even moreso. All of this doesn’t even need to be argued in a Western context. It is utterly banal. Even in an Indian context with those who know this is hardly news. Which is why for instance Rangan often has very complicated reviews on even the Ratnam films he ends up not liking. At the same time he offered an interesting take on Race 2 recently. This doesn’t mean he somehow considers Race 2 and Raavan comparable! But getting back to your point on Tchaikovsky are you kidding?! Even four bars he might have scribbled somewhere in a notebook would get the fullest attention of experts in the field! The same is true of the Beatles by the way. Have you checked out different versions of Let It Be (album) where the debate centers around whether the music in the originally released album matches the intentions of the band or not?
Now one of my favourite al-tme radio program is the Desert Island Discs from BBC. I listen to the recorded podcasts on the rdaio everyday. In the program, writers, actors, directors, artists, businessmen, scientists, all kinds..are asked to choose the eight pieces of music they would like to carry with them if they are to be exiled to a desert island forever. Now that is an interesting proposition fir me, because all this business of what is great art and what is not loses its meaning after a point. A more concrete question is : What gives you pleasure ? What do you value? That is what is more revealing to me.
So if I take someone like Terry Jones of Monty Python, this is his list: 1.Tony Pastor & His Orchestra.
Five Salted Peanuts. t 2. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart.Serenade No. 10 in B flat major for 13 Wind Instruments. Orchestra: London Wind Quintet and Ensemble 3.Dr. Hook. The Wonderful Soup Stone 4. Wiesmeyer and Stein.Duo For Two Violins In The Sixth Tone System 5. The Beatles: Penny Lane 6. Johannes Brahms. Violin Concerto in D major, Soloist: Ginette Neveu Orchestra: Philharmonia Orchestra Conductor: Issay Dobrowen 7.Paul Simon.Something So Right 8. John Lennon & The Plastic Ono Band. Imagine
So you see he may like Brahms or Mozart. But when push comes to shove and he has to take just 8, he will take a Beatles and a Paul Simon rather than another Mozart or Brahms. On the other hand there was James Ellroy who chose 8 pieces of Beethoven. The point I am trying to make is a Beatles is not inherently inferior or incomparable to Mozart. People make that comparison and choose the Beatlrs over a Mozart or Bach. ( Our Terry Jones here chooses a Beatles and a Paul Simon overa bach or Tchaikovsky. ) similarly If I had just two DVDs to take to a desert island and it had to be Koi Mil Gaya and Raavan , I would choose Koi Mil Gaya , but there is much that I would enjoy there while Raavan I couldn’t bear to watch and it would frustrate and irritate me to no end. So I care two hots if it is Mani Ratnam, if it does not give me pleasure, if it does not uplift me, pit it goes.
Sorry, one has only one life. One has to be ruthless about these things rather that try to be politically correct and appear to be a man of taste and all that.
How can you not be cognizant of the fact that many Hollywood classics were panned by the critics and/ or public upon release and usually box office failures? That fact that these movies were not liked at the time is given no importance now that they are regarded as classic movies.
“Even four bars he might have scribbled somewhere in a notebook would get the fullest attention of experts in the field! That’s why I keep a safe distance from ‘ experts’. That’s their job. To endlessly analyse , dissect, and regurgitate. I would rather listen to a Beatles rather than pore over those four bars of irrelevant flotsam that is artificially made relevant by some academe with nothing better to do. As I said, my life is short. And I would rather spend it on something that gives me pleasure than worshiping brand names.
You’re now changing the terms of the debate. First you said that ‘no one cares’ about some of this stuff. Now you’re saying ‘even if they do I don’t’. Now you’re adopting a classic anti-intellectual position. Which is fine except that you didn’t start with this. You can’t change the terms of the debate as it suits you. Everyone is wrong, there is absolutely no room for a different opinion but you are completely write for all time. In the year 2683 the opinion on Raavan will be exactly as you’ve described it today! Anything to the contrary might just be a minor inconvenience as are the different views of others on the same film today! Because academics might just be obsessing over irrelevant stuff, Rangan might just be a Ratnam fanboy (strangely I could have missed this in the book I just read from him!), the folks at Venice are merely silly, the Tamil film critics are sillier, everyone is prey to hero-worship or the mad pursuit of irrelevant stuff but Utkal heroically leads the charge and offers the one correct opinion for all time and all places! Congrats on being this ‘new man’ never before seen and further congrats for being part of a ‘history’ also never before seen. Whether it’s Ratnam or the Beatles Utkal offers the definitive view valid for all humans in all ages.
my modest advice — when you’re in a hole stop digging!
Tyler : How can you not be cognizant of the fact that many Hollywood classics were panned by the critics and/ or public upon release and usually box office failures?
Like?
Forget box office failures or successes. That does not interest me. which film that was panned by critics and public is considered a classic today? There are films which were not fully appreciated at the time of release and were later reevaluated. But something that was considered trash like Raavan is, never gets considered to be classic. But there are many films or books that were considered trash and have remained trash. In fact their numbers are much more. So if you are talking statistics, I am on safer ground. Also just because something maybe reevaluated later, there is no reason, I should stop called something that I think trash as not trash. I am not in the business of hedging my bets.
Trash? Really? I guess as they say one man’s trash is another man’s treasure. The reviews for Ravaan/Ravaanan were not that bad. The movies were actually appreciated more outside India and Ravaanan did will in the south.
As to Hollywood classics, do a search on IMDB of critical and commercial movie failures that are now considered classics. You’ll likely be amazed at what was considered ‘trash’ at one point.
Your strongly worded opinions do not make your comments ‘fact’.
GF: “And let no brand name dictate what you like.”
Or, in your case, dislike.
Absolutely. Though I haven’t bothered to see Salman Khan’s last four films does not mean I did not like him in Dabangg. Or in HAHK or Andaz Apna Apna.
Conversely, I have liked may be a dozen films of Aamir Khan prior to Talaash. That does not mean i dn’t thnk the ghost business was silly anda bad idea, and Aamir was laboured and boring in his role which did not offer much to start with ad he did not add much to it either.
The idea is : Dont let brand names dictate what you like. Or dislike.
Works of art don’t exist in some kind of ahistorical vacuum. Even if one has issues with a standalone work, examining such a work in the broader context of an artist’s body of work–especially when that artist is a defining figure like Ratnam–can provide a meaningful angle of approach and to discard this is to reveal a blindside to one’s critical faculties. You haven’t offered a definitive view on Kadal (you can’t, like anyone else who hasn’t seen it) but your impressions of the film seem guided by your experience of this “brand name” (a woeful term if there ever was one for an artist) more than anything else. Which is contradictory to the advice you keep meting out.
Satyam: For every Goddard, there will be literally hundreds other that were considered trash and are considered trash even today. How many of the Top 20 in Sight and Sound’s Best Films of all times have moved out of the Top 50. And how many outside the Top 50 have moved into the top 20?
Besides just because there may be revision of opinion on some film some day does not mean I should not call some film that I think is trash as trash.
Satyam Shivam Sundarm, Raj Kapoor or not, was a trashy film, and will always remain trash. Booby which is considered a teeny-bopper romance may be considered a classic someday. So will something like Prem Rog which is largely ignored today. Raavan which is a vacuous, empty and laboured film will always remain so. Kannathil Muthumittal and Iiruvar in spite of their unevenness will be considered classics some day. Nayakan is a classic and will always remain so. Because they contain solid, important psychological truths . Films like Alaypayudhe , though enjoyable and Dil Se , though not so enjoyable, will be just one of those films which had grrat sings and we will watch those on TC, like the songs of films like Anarkali or Chaudhvi kaa Chaand which we watch on TV today, without bothering our head about the films.
GF: I haven’t commented on Kadal so far. Only on the song picturizations that I have seen on TV. Most of my comments have been on Raavan. And the fact that Rangan says it sin in the same lane. Of course I don’t buy that. I think he is just trying to make Raavan look more respectable,. I will be seeing Kadal and making up my mind for myself.
Nothing in Rangan’s career in writing has led me to believe he’s the type to pull his punches. He’s been perfectly critical of Ratnam in the past. You, on the other hand, are clearly interested in continuing the now painfully redundant tradition of making Raavan appear less respectable. And you’re certainly on the side of many Indian critics here but that’s not exactly what I’d consider good company.
And GF: It is alright to be guided by a ‘ Brand Name’ before you have seen a film. After all there are thousands of films out there to see and you will have to choose based to some extent on your past experience of the ‘ brand’. What I am advising against is to be influenced by the brand name after or during seeing a film. Be honest. Open. without pre-judging it in any way. And respond to only what you see and hear.
I invite you to read his book, but recently Rangan’s reviews of Yuva/AE and Guru were not without their raising certain red flags – and even on Raavan he expressed some dissent if I recall. The difference though is that Rangan starts from a place that at least tries to address the filmmaker’s intentions.
Satyam: and who says Godard’s Breathless was not recived well when released.? It si currently 13th in Sight and Sounds’ list. And it has hovered around there always. .
And it was received well right from the word Go.
Here is Roger Ebert
“The movie had a sensational reception; it is safe to say the cinema was permanently changed. Young directors saw it and had abandoned their notions of the traditional studio film before they left the theater. Crowther of the Times, who was later to notoriously despise its descendant “Bonnie and Clyde,” said of “Breathless” that “sordid is really a mild word for its pile-up of gross indecencies.” The jump cuts to him were “pictorial cacophony.”
Yet Crowther conceded, “It is no cliche,” and the film’s bold originality in style, characters and tone made a certain kind of genteel Hollywood movie quickly obsolete. Godard went on to become the most famous innovator of the 1960s, although he lost the way later, with increasingly mannered experiments. Here in one quick, sure move, knowing somehow just what he wanted and how to obtain it, he achieved a turning point in the cinema just as surely as Griffith did with “Birth of a Nation” and Welles with “Citizen Kane.”
Chennai Box-Office (February 1-3)
Tuesday, 05 February , 2013, 12:40
It was a terrible weekend for movies at the Chennai Box-Office. Two big releases Mani Ratnam`s Kadal and his former assistant Bejoy Nambiar`s David were lackluster at the CBO.
Both the films failed to take the all-important opening due to negative talk. Kadal had so much riding on it; a fresh new pair, AR Rahman`s songs and the Mani Ratnam brand, but content was not liked by the audiences. Though it is this week`s number one, the film has failed to take an opening and has taken a beating at the box-office.
At number two is David, a badly dubbed Tamil version added to the woes of the audience, but due Reliance`s smart marketing got a large number of screens. This film also took a lukewarm opening. In the third position is Kanna Laddu Thinna Asai, which is still doing well due to lack of competition.
Race 2 is limping at number four and Life of Pi continues to hold on at number five..
Why has KADAL not been met with glee in Madras? I thought Mani was review-proof and to a major extent word-of-mouth proof at least in Tamil Nad – at the very least in multiplex friendly cities/suburbs/towns. There is no competition and I think this is the only film around..this is shocking for me..I had expected a week-end explosion just going by Mani’s name in Madras..
“this is shocking for me”
Not for me at all…
Ps Ann –where’s your vishwaroopam review?
Even without seeing the film can vouch Kamal would’ve come with somwthinf Better than TDKR!
Just an innocent observation –all those who suddenly got berserk writing paeans on reema Kagtis noteworthy but still amteurish attempts have gone silent when the real stuff comes in!
This is NOT a criticism folks–
Just surprised to see even the likes of Satyam silent on Kamals VR–yeah it may be a flawed piece of work but by one of the most significant cinema personalities in that country –&
To have come up with that theme
Hats off kamalahassan !!
It takes courage to show terrorists exist in afghanistan!!!
Next —
One will need permits to show that snow exists in Alaska or that there are certain ‘implants’ on certain ‘pinup girls’!
Whatta joke !!!
NASA Johnson Style is a volunteer outreach video project created by the students of NASA’s Johnson Space Center. It was created as an educational parody of Psy’s Gangnam Style. The lyrics and scenes in the video have been re-imagined in order to inform the public about the amazing work going on at NASA and the Johnson Space Center.
Special thanks to astronauts Tracy Caldwell Dyson, Mike Massimino and Clay Anderson
Special thanks to Mr. Mike Coats, Dr. Ellen Ochoa, and all supporting senior staff members
“NASA Johnson Style” Lyrics:
NASA Johnson Style
Johnson Style
Welcome to NASA’s Johnson Space Center
We are coming in hot so don’t burn up as we enter
We do science everyday that affects your daily life
Throw them up for manned space flight
Science everywhere
As we engineer the marvels
That fly though the air
And take us way beyond earth’s levels
Science everywhere
Because we engineer the marvels
That fly though the air
Flys us through the air
Control the mission out of Johnson
This is ground, hey!
And this is space, hey!
Tell me Houston what’s the problem
It’s okay!
It’s okay!
Because there’s flight controllers on the job today
NASA Johnson STYLE!
Johnson STYLE!
NA, NA, NA, NA NASA Johnson STYLE!
Johnson STYLE!
NA, NA, NA, NA NASA Johnson STYLE!
EYYYYYY science daily!
NA, NA, NA, NA, NASA STYLE!
EYYYYYY it’s amazing!
NA, NA, NA, NA ey ey ey ey ey ey!!
Orbiting earth, international space station
Where we work and live in space with a crew from several nations
Got Japanese, and Russians, that European charm
Throw them up, like the Canada Arm
Kicking out research
29k cubic feet, revolves around the earth
Science microgravity, revolves around the earth
Columbus, JEM, and Destiny
Kicking out research
Kicking out research
Train the astronauts at Johnson
To go to space, hey!
To go to space, hey!
Cause the missions of tomorrow
Start today, hey!
Start today, hey!
As we engineer the future day by day
NASA Johnson STYLE!
Johnson STYLE!
NA, NA, NA, NA NASA Johnson STYLE!
Johnson STYLE!
NA, NA, NA, NA NASA Johnson STYLE!
EYYYYYY science daily!
NA, NA, NA, NA, NASA STYLE!
EYYYYYY it’s amazing!
NA, NA, NA, NA ey ey ey ey ey ey!!
Orion or SLS, MPCV
We cannot feel the floor, cause the lack gravity
The destinations are an asteroid, mars, or moon
We are blasting off start the countdown soon
[Sound clip: launch countdown]
EYYYYYY science daily!
NA, NA, NA, NA, NASA STYLE!
EYYYYYY it’s amazing!
NA, NA, NA, NA ey ey ey ey ey ey!!
NASA Johnson Style
Return Of the H
lately some members here have been missing from action MIA..
They actually hav joined my H (& serving here!)
Some like Amy, Oldgold etc
Lately some go part time like anya & tatiana
🙂
1:4 rota hahaha
Yestyear years Bollywood biggest superstar Zeenat Aman is planning to tie the knot with a 36-year-old business man from Mumbai.
The 60-year-old actress, who’s mother to two sons in their 20′s, is all set to inspire many Indian ladies to take bold decisions when it comes to being happy.
The ‘Hare Rama Hare Krishna’ star, who married late actor Mazhar Khan in 1985, recently revealed that she is much happier now and is feeling younger again thanks to her new beau.
She said that she has met someone special, who has become a significant part of her life. She refused to divulge further details but shared that he is from India and that they are planning to marry.
The actress further added that her sons, 26-year-old Azaan and 23-year-old Zahaan, are delighted by her decision of getting married again
ps–this has given ‘hope’ to many aunties. Hope there is a remake of Nishabd–Starring Zeenat & toyboy imran khan hahaha
I think Mani’s weaving religion into films is not showing results boxofficewise. First Ravan and now Kadal. But Bombay did very well. And films with christian backgrounds doing well in Bollywood are also very few. Notable among them are Bobby and Julie. Saagar was also a sort of lukewarm success.
SATYAMSHOT 
February 1, 2013 at 7:00 AM
Race 2 Grosses 66 Crore Nett In Week One
Friday 1st February 2013 11.00 IST
Boxofficeindia.Com Trade Network
Race 2 grossed 66 crore nett in week one as collections fell from Monday onwards. The fall was bigger in the mass circuits as places like CPCI came down quite fast. The film held up a bit better in Delhi/UP and East Punjab.
The first week collections are the highest for a film featuring Saif Ali Khan or John Abraham and has already crossed the figures of Race (2008) but the film has not gone on from a good weekend. Rzce (2008) had grossed around61 crore nett.
The second weekend is all important for the film and will tell where the film is going.
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 7:00 AM
Top 5: ‘Race 2’ collects Rs 76.10 cr
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 10:01 AM
Looking at the drop, it’s unlikely it will outgross Talaash. Might end up around 90 crores.
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 10:13 AM
that’s probably right..
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 10:17 AM
Did you notice the fact that it did not even take 3 days for Race 2 to outgross the total gross of Players. Same director, better film and a more saleable leading man
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 10:21 AM
Isn’t it also coming off of a successful prequel? wouldn’t you say more than half the battel won there?
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 10:27 AM
I know the sequel factor matters. But c’mon it overtook Players in 2-3 days. And Players too had its paraphernalias- was billed as Abbas-Mustan’s biggest film. And do not forget that this was a ‘remake’ of a very popular hwood film
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 10:32 AM
It’s not comparable at all. The Italian Job was hardly a blockbuster grosser even in the US! even if it were it’s hardly the same to compare this with the sequel to a well-known film! I think you know that!
As for the rest yes Abhishek was at his lowest box office point, otherwise Players would have opened much better. No doubt about it. I think though you still have BB on your mind!
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 10:29 AM
Also, Race 2 might be a “better film” than Players but what does this ultimately mean? It’s like saying this week’s expired milk still smells better than last week’s dirty diaper.
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 10:24 AM
Abhishek desperately requires a solo hit (D3 would not be too helpful). And since he does not seem to be too interested in doing masala, the best option for him would be a solo comedy with a big female star (Katrina, Kareena etc)- an in-form Priyan would not be a bad option to helm the project
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 10:30 AM
He is in a position to work or not. To choose or not. He is not in the rat race and he just enjoys doing his own thing. I wish more were like him leaving the field to the rats and their fridays.
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 10:40 AM
here’s the thing about Abhishek. He’s not very likely to do a film that he does not believe in even minimally. One can argue with the choices but I’d be very surprised if I ever saw him in that sort of comedy. But part of the other reason is that unlike what many people think he’s never had a problem attracting projects even in his darkest periods, let alone after a shot in the arm like BB. This article points out what others don’t but indeed he has not green-lighted a number of films just since BB. Now I might agree that he ought not to be doing so many films which involve other stars. I might not agree with some of the choices even otherwise. But that’s a different debate. What is clear is that he’s charting a very careful course toward box office safety at the point and despite the media the ‘competition’ has never quite bothered him in the same film. BB of course has worked out anyway. I have good sense about D3 too on this score. Obviously the other stars are box office heavyweights in each case but he got a great deal out of BB. In a sense his choices are not crazy either. Films like Players depend on big initials. later they fizzle out. These days most 100 crore grossers really do most of the gross in the first 5-7 days. So if you lose the initial you can’t make it up later. But if you’re down on your luck you need to build that credibility with the audience first. In other words if he insisted on a solo commercial or masala venture, he might not land similar initials. But a solo at the end of such a sequence would, specially if it was in the same safe genre. It’s one thing to do BB and D3 and then say Raavan and quite another to follow those up with an audience-friendly genre, which is what the Umesh Shukla film looks to be. So even where I might disagree with certain choices I see the logic.
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 10:43 AM
In form Priyan? his last hit was Bhool Bhulaiya in 2007 more than 5 years ago, This is what he has made since, anything but inform.
Billu, Mere Baap Pehle Aap, De Dana Dhan, Khatta Meeta, Kamaal Dhamaal Malamal, Aakrosh, Tezz.
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 11:07 AM
“I think though you still have BB on your mind!”-
Aargh! So it all boils down to this. Leaving aside the fact that I do not see any need of confirming that I am not an Abhishek hater the truth is that I do not need to downgrade Abhishek Bachchan to prop-up Devgn (especially when he is on an all-time career high- 4 hundred crore grossers themselves say the story)
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 11:24 AM
No but your remarks on Abhishek post-BB have taken on a much more strident (and occasionally gratuitous) tone than prior to this film. I don’t think of things so crudely in terms of ‘hate’ and so on. But there are certain remarks that don’t pass the plausibility test even in the most minimal ways and so one wonders why the person making them doesn’t see the obvious. Again, and as I’ve always said, most of these arguments for me are about the terms of the debate. Otherwise I don’t particularly care whether someone loves or hates Abhishek or anyone else for that matter.
on Devgan you’re right but that statement can’t be made without qualification when one of those films is the second sequel to a successful film, when two others are remakes of Southern superhits, when the fourth one is called Bol Bachchan, has another star in the ‘double’ part and moreover still uses the structure of an older well known comedy. Now he has Himmatwala, another remake, then Singham 2, the sequel to a remake. So on and so forth. I have nothing against Devgan but let’s not miss the obvious here. He’s going through his best phase but he seems to be completely tied up with these remakes. And by the way I say this with every star where this applies. This doesn’t of course mean that any star can be successful doing such remakes. But similarly the same star should also prove with his other stuff whether he can get this degree of success elsewhere. Of course many stars do this sort of thing these days. Ready and BG were remakes, Dabanng 2 was a sequel. But Salman it is safe to say is getting massive initials irrespective of this. What happens is that with these remakes there are lots of frills attached that then lead to a big advertising campaign. This gets you the initial. Specially if you’re in the zone in box office terms you can keep gliding by on this stuff. Note how no one showed up for Aakrosh. It was a box office disaster. So it’s one thing for a star to leverage his (or her) box office good fortunes toward something more meaningful. Quite another to keep doing the same sort of really lowbrow stuff all the time. Not criticizing Devgan here. For a number of reasons I don’t think he has any other option at this stage. But most of his films aren’t even Singham where he personally got a lot out of it as a star. The rest are just circuses where he’s part of the act. It’s like if Abhishek after BB decided to do just this sort of thing again and again. This genre already works, it has worked with a number of stars. With repetition the initial gets stronger and you feed off it as long as you can. The 100 crores at any rate cannot be mentioned without qualification. Of course whether the 100 crores have any meaning anymore is another question because most films with a good or better initial get to this number unless they tank completely. But this is where the meaning of every hit is not the same. Kahaani for Balan means more than the various 100 crore films Kareena has appeared in. Now Balan might not be the sort of actress who can be incorporated into all these bread and butter films but that’s a different debate. kareena doesn’t get much out of it either. She’s utterly replaceable. However the same isn’t true with her part in Talaash.
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 11:57 AM
I have also been surprised at Saurabh’s tendency of late of taking digs at Abhishek. I dont kno if he is always spoiling for a fight or an argument or seeking attention but I would definitely think he is following wrong examples.
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 10:44 AM
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/mai-review-the-film-teaches-you-to-value-elders/370205-47-77.html?from=HP
Asha Bhonsle and Padmini Kolhapure sharing screenspace in this movie. A very topical movie.
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 11:17 AM
Uh ohhh…even rediff is not impressed..
http://www.rediff.com/movies/review/south-review-kadal-sai/20130201.htm
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 11:22 AM
Am not reading the reviews very closely but this person also believes Thalapathy was Ratnam’s best film…
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 11:26 AM
Ha ha..I will wait for your or Satyam’s piece on this..I have to drive 40 miles to Virginia to catch this..and I wish to make sure that it is worth taking this trouble..any honest opinion would be appreciated as to whether I should –
looooooooooooooong drive pe chal, chal.. as per Akshay Kumar!!
P.S.: I understand nothing of Tamil except – NALLA IRKA — so I also need to ensure that the movie is shown with sub-titles..
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 11:27 AM
I read this. Extremely poor in every sense.
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 11:28 AM
better one here:
http://behindwoods.com/tamil-movies/kadal/kadal-movie-review.html
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 11:39 AM
TFU Kannan@TFU_Kannan
#Kadal – The film started off well but lost steam in the middle & ended pathetic. Awesome music and amazing cinematography in vain (5.5/10)
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 12:52 PM
Kadal Review
http://greatestbattlelieswithin.blogspot.in/2013/02/Kadal-Review.html#!/2013/02/Kadal-Review.html
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 1:45 PM
As always I’m most interested in Rangan’s review here, but especially in light of his book’s recent release this will be a singular piece to watch out for.
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 3:18 PM
he had a great one on Race 2:
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 2:20 PM
House of Cards debuted on Netflix today, their first series. I like the British original quite a bit (also available on netflix streaming currently). It’s a modern twist on Richard III in some ways. But that series is mostly about Ian Richardson’s villain. It’s not particularly deep otherwise. Interested to see how they’ve done the US version. Luckily it’s been a number of years since I saw the original so no chance of an overdose here!
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 4:19 PM
I think Lillyhammer was Netflix’ first series. House of Cards though looks like the real deal, and it doesn’t hurt to have David Fincher as an EP and director of the first episode if I’m not mistaken.
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 4:33 PM
yes you’re right, forgot about this one. Have never seen it though.
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 10:02 PM
satyam – have u watched “Student of the year”? if yes – where is ur write-up? i watched up yday reluctantly as I am not really fond of KJo movies. But I was very happy to see the 3 new comers presented in a very lavish and grand way. Siddharth malhotra is an absolute star material. Alya will have extreme reactions from audiences – either people will love her or they will simply dislike her. Varun Dhawan was good. My only grudge with the film was Rishi Kapoor playing a gay dean. I mean it was a total shit kind of character and although he played it as per the script but why he needs to do such stuff??? Otherwise – all the usual KJO stuff was present (the man can’t just get this gay thing out of his system).
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 7:00 PM
i saw soty today – i actual prefer k Jo making this kind of superficial fun film rather than trying to handle something like kank. soty, if u like that kind of thing, was watchable. kank, was horrible in every way. with soty i felt he accepts his limitations and makes what he is ‘good’ at.
alia was really bad and not attractive either.
LikeLike
February 1, 2013 at 2:48 PM
Vishwaroopam.
I guess no one in Indian Cinema can make a movie like this in the feel and vision! Take a Bow, for a moment i felt i am watching Hollywood movie.
I felt it pondered near the end, but till that point i enjoyed, climax should have been more tensed. But one interesting thing flm doesnt spoon feed you.
Afghanistan sequences are terrific. Kamal Hassan the director – actor – writer does a terrific job, and one is surprised if he can make this films at such age, what is Bollywood doing?
Music and BGM are also quite good. If only second half was more crispier, i would have liked it, and i didnt get who the hero was actually! but still loved the spy drama. But there was need of more action imo.
Ratings 4/5
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 12:33 AM
@Rooney — You didn’t get who the hero was actually? The hero was Kamal. 🙂 Or did you mean you didn’t get who his allegiances were to? Or which was his real name and which his alias? Without going into spoilers, let me say that the name he was known by in Afghanistan is his real name, and “who” he was is explained quite explicitly when he was being questioned by the FBI agent.
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 2:41 PM
SPOILERS
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Ya I got his name. Ya i got who he was, Research and Analyst Wing. etc.
But what was he doing in middle of Al Qaida and America? How is Indian Inteligence connected with it? I mean to say common, what does an Indian agent doing saving america? It sounded quite funny to me. Ya they said part II is about indian part, but still how was Visham connected /clue/ chase and settled in New York? and that to for this many years?? trapped in a marriage? Doesnt this people protect boundaries of India ?
If he was some sort interpol agent i could have understood.
LikeLike
February 3, 2013 at 8:58 PM
@Rooney – I agree with all your points. This is what I was referring to in my review, where I said there is no connection to India except through Kamal’s character, which is tenuous at best. I’ll say more in the other thread in a day or so. I’m rather rushed right now.
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 12:34 AM
There’s one thing in the FBI questioning scene that I’m dying to discuss with someone. But I can’t do so without revealing spoilers, so I don’t know where and how I can indulge this wish of mine.
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 12:37 AM
You can write spoilers in bold and discuss it. Discuss it in your mother tongue with roman script. I think your mother tongue is telugu.
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 12:46 AM
LOL, if I “discuss” it in Telugu, I’ll be talking to myself! No one else here understands Telugu. I’ll wait till some more people have seen it and then try.
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 12:50 AM
I know telugu. I think there are others too.
You can wait.
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 1:43 AM
Lets teach Rooney Telugu..I guess it is easier to learn than lawyer’s language 🙂
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 1:46 AM
Sm…I watched the Tamil version…let us discuss on ur review thread shall we???
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 1:52 AM
@ SM: or email me :joan0701@ gmaildotcom
LikeLike
February 3, 2013 at 8:59 PM
Thanks, An Jo. I’ll continue the discussion in my review thread, but after a couple of days. By then even more people might have seen it to participate in the discussion.
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 12:34 AM
Race 2 did pretty well on its second Friday collecting around 3.25 crore nett. The collections were down 75% from day one but were not much lower than Thursday. The film had dropped through the weekdays but did not drop much on the 8th day especially in the North where collections were very close to Thursday figures.
The film should show a good pick up on Saturday and go to weekend figures of 13-14 crore nett. The film was helped by the new releases providing little competition leaving Race 2 as the first choice in its second week also.
BOI is pumping Race 2 like anything.
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 4:17 AM
What is the Boxoffice performance of Vishwaroopam. Planning to watch it today.
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 5:21 AM
Controversial? 5 reasons why Kamal Haasan’s ‘Vishwaroop’ is in fact cleverly secular
Full of Spoilers Only for those who have watched the film.
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/controversial-5-reasons-why-kamal-haasans-vishwaroop-is-in-fact-cleverly-secular/370339-8-66.html?from=HP
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 7:41 AM
Vishwaroop And David First Day Business
Saturday 2nd February 2013 12.00 IST
Boxofficeindia.Com Trade Network
Vishwaroop improved in the evening slightly after a low start to collect 1.75-2 crore nett region with Mumbai circuit giving a major contribution of around 70 lakhs. The collections of the film are just a bit lower than Robot which was is the highest collecting film from the South in the Hindi market. Vishwaroop was released on 1000 screens approx in the Hindi market.
David collected a poor 50-60 lakhs nett on its first day. Again it was Mumbai circuit which gave a contribution of around 50%.
The other films released this week like Deewana Main Deewana, Mai And Listen Amaya all had very dull collections and shows were cancelled at many places due to lack of audience.
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 7:42 AM
B.O. update: ‘Vishwaroop’ improves slightly, ‘David’ dismal
By Taran Adarsh, February 1, 2013 – 17:36 IST
The controversy surrounding the film didn’t seem to help VISHWAROOP initially. For, the Hindi version of the film opened to dull houses in the morning shows, although the occupancy was better than the remaining releases. However, the collections showed a marked improvement in the noon shows in some circuits, which is a positive sign. The fate of the well publicised DAVID was worse, with the film opening to dismal houses everywhere. The remaining Hindi releases, which were limited to a few shows at cineplexes, hardly found any takers.
Both VISHWAROOP and DAVID will have to show a miraculous jump over the weekend, if they need to sustain in the forthcoming days. However, VISHWAROOP has an edge over the new releases, as per initial trends.
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 7:41 AM
Race 2 Second Friday Business
Saturday 2nd February 2013 11.00 IST
Boxofficeindia.Com Trade Network
Race 2 did pretty well on its second Friday collecting around 3.25 crore nett. The collections were down 75% from day one but were not much lower than Thursday. The film had dropped through the weekdays but did not drop much on the 8th day especially in the North where collections were very close to Thursday figures.
The film should show a good pick up on Saturday and go to weekend figures of 13-14 crore nett. The film was helped by the new releases providing little competition leaving Race 2 as the first choice in its second week also.
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 12:20 PM
Something on blogs and comments..very relevant .
http://www.npr.org/2013/02/01/170855378/preserving-science-news-in-an-online-world
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 12:39 PM
Munna sir, bada technical sa lag raha tha..aap bata do 2-4 lines mein , kya keh rah hai woh ?? lol
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 1:48 PM
Audio bhi hai 🙂
For example following excerpt…
FLATOW: So do you believe that they should be moderated, these blogs?
ZIVKOVIC: Yes, I think the ideas about comment amelioration have changed over the past, you know, 10 or 15 years, that these things exist online. In the beginning, I think there was the idea that this should be a free forum. And now there are so many free fora out there that I don’t think a site like Scientific American should provide a free form for everything and everybody and all kinds of online fights to happen in our comments because I think the free speech applies to the Web as a whole, not to any particular site.
And I think the host of the site has to keep in mind what is the goal of the site, what is the reason why the site exists. If it’s educational, then these kinds of comments need to go. And it’s perfectly OK. It’s perfectly legal to do it. So I think we need to have our readers in mind first and act appropriately.
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 2:02 PM
ha ha …agree with the above regarding the need for moderation,..
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 2:48 PM
Useful.. thanks for sharing..
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 12:42 PM
Watching Terminal on AXN. Loving it though watched it so many times before.
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 2:26 PM
On the one hand Braveheart fought until death. Kamalahaasan capitulated. He acceded to all the demands. He lost the opportunity to go to supreme court to teach a lesson or two to the unreasonable people. Digging mountains and get a measly mouse. What happened to his brave words about self exile and other things? In comparison Aamir khan did not apologise so that Fanaa could be released in Gujarat. Even if he had been the producer, he would not have capitulated. If at all Kamalahaasan wanted to release his film somehow even in a mutilated version, why to create national hysteria in the first place? First the DTH fiasco and then this. Now all the people who supported him against the chief minister look foolish and stupid. Kamal, I will trust you no more and I will cheer you no more.
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 2:37 PM
Because 95 crores is a amount big enough to make him weak. And Aamir khan didn’t apologize because gujarat’s contribution to Fanaa’s BO would have been 10%. But for Vishwaroopam Tamil nadu’s contribution to it’s BO is 80%.
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 2:33 PM
http://www.metromasti.com/kollywood/news/Viswaroopam-7-days-total-collection-Vishwaroopam-day-7-box-office/24456
LikeLike
February 2, 2013 at 4:29 PM
Saif-Homis next after Cocktail !
Homi made his directorial debut with Saif Ali Khan in BEING CYRUS, an off-beat English language psychological drama, a critically acclaimed film. His next venture COCKTAIL was also with Saif, which was produced by Saif only. While Homi’s first film was an unconventional outing, his second was an out-n-out commercial film. Now the buzz in the trade is that director Homi will be once again teaming up with actor Saif Ali Khan for a new film.
The film is said to be a period film and it will be produced by Saif’s banner Illuminati films. As per the reports, the film will go on floors later this year.
Right from his first film BEING CYRUS director Homi Adajania has been experimental with his work. It will be interesting to see Saif doing a period saga for the first time.
For now, Saif is basking in the glory of the success of his latest release RACE 2!
http://www.glamsham.com/movies/scoops/13/feb/02-news-saif-ali-khan-homi-adajania-team-up-for-a-period-film-011303.asp
LikeLike
February 3, 2013 at 11:20 AM
Twitch Films
Review: KADAL Is A Subpar Mani Ratnam Film That Still Outshines Just About Everything There Is
J Hurtado, Contributing Writer
2013 is shaping up to be a year of high profile Indian directors making so-so films. A few weeks ago, I reviewed Hindi auteur Vishal Bhardwaj’s Matru Ki Bijli Ka Mandola, a film with such a schizophrenic structure that it was hard to tell which emotions I was supposed to feel. Last night I caught Mani Ratnam’s Kadal (The Sea), which is certainly much more focused and linear than Bhardwaj’s film, but takes a glorious first half and squanders it on terribly predictable and overwrought melodrama before the final frames flicker across the screen.
I hate for this review to sound negative. I really enjoyed Kadal. A bad Mani Ratnam film is better than 99% of directors on their best day; however, with Ratnam looking in his rear view mirror at the critical drubbing of his last film, Raavan (Raavanan), I had higher hopes for a comeback. To audiences outside of India, Mani Ratnam is not a household name, however, in his homeland, he is probably one of the top five most respected directors in the country. His films have broached social and political topics that were largely considered to be taboo in Indian filmmaking, and he’s managed to make it interesting and commercial without losing credibility. If you don’t believe me, Hulu+ subscribers should take a look at his 2000 terrorism drama, Dil Se; it is among the finest Indian films of the last two decades…
http://twitchfilm.com/2013/02/review-kadal-is-a-subpar-mani-ratnam-film-that-still-outshines-just-about-everything-there-is.html
LikeLike
February 3, 2013 at 11:23 AM
Baradwaj Rangan
“Kadal”… Coast analysis
Posted on February 3, 2013
Spoilers everywhere.
Kadal contains what is easily the most gruesome moment in the Mani Ratnam oeuvre, and it occurs in an early scene about a dead prostitute from a Christian fishing community. A few locals take the corpse to church, where the priest refuses to permit this sinner’s burial in a plot inside, and so they take the body to an open ground by the sea and set about digging a grave. When done, they lower the body, now inside an open coffin, and find a leg sticking out – that old joke about the whore who couldn’t keep her legs crossed comes to mind – and one of them sets about breaking the limb, in order to make it fit inside. Over the sickening crunch of bones being broken, the director seems to be telling those who keep moaning that he doesn’t make nice, affecting, middle-class movies like Mouna Raagam anymore exactly where to get off…
LikeLike
February 3, 2013 at 11:30 AM
Haven’t read beyond this point….
“We sensed, in Raavan(an), a lot of these questions being probed, and Kadal is very much a companion piece to that earlier film (and a much better one), very much an in-transition work of a filmmaker constantly searching for something. Your tolerance for the inevitable rough edges, I suppose, will determine your response to the film. Put differently, and like Raavan(an), Kadal is less for those who want their films to be easily classifiable as good or bad, more for those who like their films interesting. I was riveted.”
‘Nuff said. Can’t wait to see it this week.
LikeLike
February 3, 2013 at 12:05 PM
I just skimmed through it but Rangan’s views here are greatly reassuring.. will be checking it out this week.
LikeLike
February 3, 2013 at 12:37 PM
“The only drawbacks in the mostly excellent pre-interval portions are the songs. For a while now, I have wondered why Ratnam’s songs – not the ones that play over scenes, like Nenjukkulle, but those in which characters break into exuberant steps – have begun to seem redundant (at best) and intrusive (at worst). When Thomas and his cohorts dance to Eley keechan, it’s not all that different from when Rajinikanth and Mammooty broke free from the “realistic” nature of the film until then and entered the stylised zone of choreography. And when a bride’s anticipation of her wedding night can find form in Jiya jale and when the separation of lovers can be represented through O Priya Priya, why can’t the onset of love be depicted through Adiye? But something has changed, something’s different. Unlike the case in the earlier films, these songs here bring the proceedings to a halt. As standalone music videos, they’re outstanding, but they don’t become an organic part of the film.”
Even Rangan has given up trying to defend Mani’s song picturization!
.
LikeLike
February 3, 2013 at 1:17 PM
Haven’t seen Kadal yet but since this Rangan point applies to a larger set of films I’d again repeat what I said earlier. In the traditional sense commercial films offer obvious cues for these songs/videos to emerge. And Ratnam has certainly done a great deal of this. However the notion I’ve always resisted is the one that in that same traditional cinema the videos were somehow fluidly linked with the rest of the narrative. In my view the audience was trained to accept those cues as being ‘utterly’ natural. Of course there are those masala videos where the song is literally part of the narrative, the same happens in some older non-masala films as well. This is in a way the operatic principle. The song/video enhances the rest of the narrative or exists on the same plane with it. It is still an interruption in some sense but it is connected to the rest of the narrative. On the other hand this doesn’t happen with most movies. Except that once again the audience doesn’t recognize it as such. the ‘cues’ are delivered a certain way that come across as natural. It is analogous to the Hollywood continuity editing principle. It is not that this is somehow more ‘organic’ than say Godard’s cuts but that it creates the illusion of being so. from this perspective Ratnam is someone who problematizes all of this. Note how the more ‘Bollywood’ response to all of this is to try and do away with the videos altogether. In a sense this response secretly agrees with the point I’ve just made. It’s not that these filmmakers think they’re making more ‘Western’ narratives and hence can’t use songs in the same way. They also believe that the old ‘mix’ was itself a problem. Much like Bannerjee in his Caravan piece considers a lot of Bachchan’s comic interludes problematic within the texts of those films (here too I’d say yes these are in fact interruptions but the films depend on this.. as surely as Shakespeare is the ultimate master of such interruptions). Once again Ratnam makes explicit what is already implicit in those older films. Which is why I have forever resisted the idea that the quintessential Indian commercial film is like the Hollywood musical or alternatively like opera. It absolutely is not. Precisely because those other two models are not built on interruption. And this is not ‘apologizing’ for Ratnam because his non-musical narrative in the past 15 years or so (much as I dislike to posit such a split between the musical narrative and the non-musical one) also increasingly tends toward the elliptical (hence Raavan(an) is really an ‘essay’ on an entire tradition). Once again it is about refusing the obvious story-telling cues in a lot of instances. The two choices on Ratnam’s part emerge from the very same logic. So yes the videos might often seem dissociated but don’t Godard’s editing choices in his signature films follow the very same logic with respect to the traditional Hollywood formats? We are never ‘connected’ with his films in quite the same way, certainly not emotionally invested to the same degree, or if we now manage both these responses it’s because decades of cinema operating in Godard’s wake has better conditioned us. The initial audiences had a great deal of trouble with these works. Sometimes even the critics. This doesn’t mean my approach on Ratnam is definitive by any means but the criticism in this context often uses the traditional format, consciously or otherwise, as definitive in ways which I consider somewhat easy.
LikeLike
February 3, 2013 at 2:14 PM
“When done, they lower the body, now inside an open coffin, and find a leg sticking out – that old joke about the whore who couldn’t keep her legs crossed comes to mind ..”–hmmm
well, has any1 seen this ratnam film here?
or vishwaroopam?
ps–david seems to be a non-starter @ the box office eveerywhere….
LikeLike
February 3, 2013 at 3:05 PM
Had plans of watching django/ flight 2nite– but got pending work arrgh
While some others I know make merry -all I’m left with is cherrrry, no a cuppa coffee 2 stay awake n slog — whatta life ..,!!!
Wheres my mental coach ..,ok lemme stop the rant
Btw Satyam — y r u hanging around — go see vishwaroopam or flight ….Or the coastal romance kadhal !!
LikeLike
February 3, 2013 at 3:33 PM
Not yet — hope to catch David and Kadal in Bombay over the next few days…
LikeLike
February 3, 2013 at 11:48 PM
Watched Kadal on Saturday. Unfortunately, the version I saw was without subs, despite a very prominent “With English Subtitles” in the movie ad in a daily.
I liked it a lot (probably the lack of subtitles helped matters 🙂 ). The christian-fishermen community that the movie is set in is a unfamiliar territory for me and I was hooked right from the start. Mind you, this is not an easy watch at all. The scene in the beginning that Rangan refers to in his review is brutal and heartbreaking at once, and sets the tone for what’s to follow.
Arvind Swamy is the pick of the cast; probably his career-best performance. His persona has been used very effectively. Gautam also has a good outing here. I wish I could say the same for the heroine (Sections of audience were literally groaning whenever she came on screen). Arjun’s performance also didn’t work for me. The supporting cast is largely very good.
I love the soundtrack, but the songs in the film largely serve as speed-breakers. The problem is that the song sequences coming out from a stark setting are jarring. Having said that, Magudi Magudi and Chithirai Nila have been used very effectively.
I found Kadal a very intriguing and interesting watch, not least for Mani Ratnam’s exploration of such an overtly religious theme.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 1:41 AM
Aarohi: where did you watch it?
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 4:02 AM
Pune. E-Square.
LikeLike
February 3, 2013 at 6:16 PM
OT-nice jessica chastain interview…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2013/feb/02/jessica-chastain-blazes-oscar-glory?intcmp=ILCMUSTXT9384
ps–problem is that After ‘tree of life’ –cant see anything but a mom in her–reminds me of my mine….a soothing persona….gud nite
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 2:40 AM
Vishwaroop Decent Weekend David Dull
Monday 4th February 2013 10.30 IST
Boxofficeindia.Com Trade Network
Vishwaroop managed decent collections over the weekend by collecting in the 7.75 crore nett range. The film had solid growth on each day of 30-35%. The film has managed better collections than well promoted outright Hindi films like Table No.21 and Inkaar. The collections are also a bit higher than Robot which is the highest opener for a film which is from the South and features a South Indian star as main lead. Robot had opened in the 7.25-7.50 crore nett range.
David another bilingual film did not make any mark at the box office as it collected around 2.25 crore nett. the film showed growth over the weekend but was limited growth on top of a low starting point.
Deeewana Main Deewana, Listen Amaya and Mai were all total disasters at the box office.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 4:51 AM
Using Godard’s editing patterns as an analogy for Mani Ratnam’s use of songs just doesn’t cut it. Manii is simply using the songs like the less capable Bollywood directors do, for sensual or visual titillation. The masters follow the disruptive or interruptive tradition of nautanki or jatra and stiil mange to make it work in a modern film idiom by establishing some kind of link with the main narrative. Mnai did the same in his best works like Nayagan, Bombay or Kannathil Muthumittal. Of late he is using them as music videos, or item songs, just fir titillation without anything transcendental. It si not as if he isn using these songs in any kind of radical manner say like Anurag Kashyap did in Dev d or Gangs of Wasseypur. Kashyap broke many new grounds in these songs. First, the lyrical content and form. Whether it si ‘ Emotional Atyachar’ or ” Oh Womaniya’ or ” electric Pitya’ …he is introducing new phraseology gifting oir lexicon with new words and phrases.
“Baba sahib kathin kitna rasta diya
jan nayak re halat kya khasta kiya
Riding donkeys, my horse rider piya
Getting tangled in web of spider piya”
Totally different poetic sensibilities.
The music too is a departure from the typical ‘ filmy’ tunes. It is alchemised from the rough material of folk songs, sung by untrained voices , choruses of elderly women and so on.
The use of the songs is too is radiccally different from traditional grammar of Bollywood. The song Jiya Ho Bihar Ke Lala coming at the end of #Wasseypur 1, after Mnaoj Bajpai has been shot hits you like a whiplash.
“I am a hunter she want to see my gun’ is not used in thew ay songs are used in traditional Bollywood films. But it is not one inch out of place. It is one of piece with the aesthetics of the film giving it its texture.
Invoking Goddard’s editing pattern for contexts like these would make some sense.
Mani’s use of songs thse days , post- Dil Se, with a few exceptions, is too lazy , too mindless to merit any indulgence. As I said at worst it is pure titilation, at best it is pure prettiness. A song like JIya Jale is nothing but an excuse to show the pretty locales of Kerala, the pretty dance steps of the choreographer and the pretty midriff of Priety Jinta. same goes for Chhiayan Chhaiyan. Songs like Shukriya Meherbani or baadl added nothing to the texture of Yuva, and took away quite a lot. I can clearly see Yuva emerging so much a better film without these songs , uisng instead ambient songs with roots in Kolkata for the Ajay Devgan portion and songs of Benaras and North India in the Vivek-Kareen aportion.
Defending gratuitous use of songs by Mani in his recent films is akin to defending murders in the ashrams of Sai Baba or Asharam Bapu because they are some kind of saintly figures and no fingers must be raised against them.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 6:11 AM
Re: “Defending gratuitous use of songs by Mani in his recent films is akin to defending murders in the ashrams of Sai Baba or Asharam Bapu because they are some kind of saintly figures and no fingers must be raised against them.”
I see that.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 6:28 AM
LOL!
While I loved both GoWs and found many of the song usage very effective (Bihar Ke Lala and Womaniya), there are some song placements that made me think that these songs are used here, because they didn’t know where to use them and they didn’t want to chop them. Chi Cha Lader, for example. There were other jarring, forced bits as well like the political references in Taar Bijli and the recurring Moora refrain. My point is that GoWs were not unqualified successes in terms of song placement.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 7:53 AM
LOL, yeah I’ve wondered for years why Ratnam hasn’t been imprisoned.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 8:02 AM
The problem once again is that’s your view. I don’t happen to share it. The issue to repeat this point ad nauseam isn’t that you and I have different perspectives on this but that you think there is only one ‘right’ answer to these things. I skimmed the Rangan piece on Kadal as I didn’t want to learn about all the spoilers but I picked up the larger questions he raises about Ratnam’s film and the place it occupies in his career. Overall of course he liked the film a lot. I disagree with his comment on the videos but I consider this an open debate. I certainly see where he’s coming from and having interacted with him a number of times in the past he too is always someone willing to entertain other perspectives. In a certain kind of discussion it’s isn’t about who’s correct or incorrect, it isn’t about ‘ultimate’ views on a work. The field remains open. There is no ‘final analysis’ on any work, not even the greatest in history in any art form. This is what you are unable or unwilling to account for. I won’t repeat everything I’ve said on this in the past but I’ll come back to Godard. For roughly 45 years since the end of the 60s to the present date Godard has never been had the kind of iconic presence that he did prior to this. The films he did in the 60s have all become more canonized over time, even a film like Contempt that was booed by its initial audience. So there’s no doubt about this part of Godard’s work. However a lot of important work that he’s done since has been largely ignored even if thanks to the likes of Rosenbaum and Sterritt and recently Lane and some others those works are being revisited and reinvented. Over the last decade or so his work has received mostly good reviews but it has nonetheless not really dominated conversations the way his 60s work once did. Additionally significant works of his from the 80s that were either panned or ignored are now enjoying serious critical revivals. The overall view now is that critics have been rather late in understanding this ‘later’ and ‘late’ Godard. So even when it’s a filmmaker of this global stature judgments constantly change. Even when they do a director cannot suddenly re-occupy his (or her) older perch and get lionized in the same way. Trends change over time. Everything that is considered important doesn’t necessarily get the same sort of attention for all sorts of reasons. Godard wasn’t happy just repeating his key moves from the 60s and kept experimenting and has done so to this day. Not all these experiments are successful but it is a larger trajectory that involves a certain exploration of cinema, a certain interrogation of cinema. Similarly with Ratnam he too had his hugely iconic phase, he too moved away towards greater experimentation, many of these films were dismissed by audiences or critics or both, since then some have enjoyed a change in their critical fortunes, some haven’t but Ratnam has kept moving on. This phase might not be to one’s taste if one insists on a certain kind of Ratnam as surely as Godard’s Passion or Lear from the 80s won’t be to the liking of anyone who simply wishes to see the 60s Godard. One could make the very same arguments about the latter, that the audience deserted him, the critics didn’t like him, so on and so forth. But an important artist at any level is often ahead of the curve. Both audiences and critics not being interested in a work doesn’t mean anything. Because in every art form at every stage in human history there are such examples. All of this doesn’t mean that Ratnam cannot be argued against. But a director of his stature needs to be given the respect where one truly engages with the work and even when one doesn’t like it as a personal one does not simply dismiss entire groups of films as missteps on his part. My point then isn’t that there cannot be dissents on this director, even on his most iconic films, but that these can’t be cheap, easy responses of the sort that are frankly too easily available these days. The viewer needs to show some humility too. To paraphrase my earlier anecdote ‘Ratnam isn’t an idiot’!
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 5:44 AM
this will be verbose. i’m sorry.
I watched kadal yesterday, and i’ve been waiting for your review ever since. i know it’s unfair to accuse a reviewer of having let the side down, but that’s close to how i feel. because this was, in my opinion a deeply, deeply flawed movie, that didn’t know what it was doing or where it was going. and that’s down to a number of (for me) deeply disturbing things.
1. the plot seems to be almost entirely derived from a 70s manmohan desai movie. the one that comes to mind immediately is amar akbar antony. or parvarish. i think you know what i mean.
2. the girl can’t act to save anyone’s life. unless the idiot-child thing was intentional. nor even then, because then the intent must have been to make her endearing.
3. the “drama” of the second half wasn’t any kind of drama at all. and honestly the drama of the first half didn’t surprise me at all either. honestly the only moment where the movie surprised me from a plot development point of view was when arjun turned out to be a green-goblinesque villain. in the first few scenes he seemed to be the one who would save the seemingly-near-autistic arvind swamy from the pits of pedantry.
4. the larger metaphors that you’re talking about, and yes, the surprisingly overt religious overtones, are done in a very strange manneristic sort of way. if i think about it, yes, i’m impressed by the character arcs he’s given thomas and sam. less so chetty, bergmans, beatrice (appallling) and jerina. and given the patchy story, that’s even worse. that thomas should find his redemption and sam should find his actual life experience (from being the bookish preacher he started out as) stick out even without the development, but no other character has a motivation that isn’t out of a masala movie of the 70s (as i said before). it seemed as if the director had got the broad brush strokes right, but failed utterly to fill them up.
5. the songs were awful to me because they seemed somehow condescending. it seems as if mani ratnam feels either a passion to educate the public about jazz and soul, or was trying to create songs just for the sake of having them. honestly that rehman, who’s pretty good at contextualising his musc, should have put up with that is a shock. \
in all, it seems to me that a large number of the things you seem to like it seem to be relativistic, and that’s one of the things i don’t like about this review. you are looking at it as “growth” for mani ratnam. partly because i see it as the exact opposite–as a departure mani ratnam is making from his own brand of cinema towards the mainstream, where plot and casting decisions are taken not on merit but to suit the whims of the financier. overall, i was disappointed, somehwat as much as i was with raavan.
( He seems to be speaking fora large number of people who haven’t liked the film.)
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 6:35 AM
Race 2 Has Decent Second Weekend
Thursday 31st January 2013 12.00 IST
Boxofficeindia.Com Trade Network
Race 2 had a decent second weekend and collected around 14 crore nett with the Sunday collections going to around 6 crore nett plus. The film has collected around 83.50 crore nett in ten days. The second weekend has dropped 70% which is par for the course today. The circuit figures from some markets are as follows.
Delhi/UP – 300 (1005)
East Punjab – 128 (406)
CI – 45 (178)
Rajasthan 80 (289)
Note – All figures are in lakhs
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 6:37 AM
Midweek: ‘Vishwaroop’ picks up, ‘David’ disaster!
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 6:42 AM
Arohi: The songs in GOW 1 and 2 work to varying levels. Some amazingly well, some not so well. But my point is all of them are used in radically different ways from the standard Bollywood film song.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 8:52 AM
Utkal: I take it you have not seen Kadal.
There are some interesting changes in terms of song placement in Kadal also. For example, Magudi Magudi, the club-dubstep-techno-pop number, appears twice in the film and takes the story forward in a very unique manner. Nenjukulle is a background song. My point is that Mani Ratnam’s films are changing and there’s less and less of sugar-coating in his latter films.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 9:07 AM
Aarohi , I have sen Raavan, and I consider it inferior to average films of mainstream Bollywood directors like Rakesh Roshan or Praksh Jha. If Mani Ratnam’s films are changing, They are certainly changing for the worse. Ravan was the most shoddily written, vacuous film I have seen recent times with no psychological truth , no attempt at character portrayal or even basic sense of story-telling. I cringed at the sight of Govinda clmbering up the nrnacvhes and Abhishek Bachchan making a hash of his teeth gnashing act, and wanted to run away with that abominable wedding song with Ganesh Acharya upfront. If Kadal is in the same mould as Ravan as Rangan implies, I have no intention of wasting my time. In fact it is third in my list of films to see over the next ten days, after Vishwaroopm and David. Unthinkable. Only a few years back I would buy every Rahman album the first day it comes out ( Still do it except for Jab Tak Hai Jaan which I dont possess) and I would make sure I caught the latest Ratnam film within the first three days of its release. I thought Dil Se was misstep and an aberration, with Yuva he just got a few things wrong. But Raavan was the last straw. I know Kadal would be better, nothing can be worse than Raavan. But no, I have had my fill of pretty looking music videos from Mani, I have far more exciting options to stimulate my mind today.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 9:51 AM
this guy here thinks the exact opposite on every one of those points you’ve made on Raavan:
http://www.filmjournal.com/filmjournal/content_display/esearch/e3ic0c203644bbc3d5f8511bf80bafc5a40
” If Mani Ratnam’s films are changing, They are certainly changing for the worse.”
with all due respect such ‘certainties’ belong to the dustbins of history.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 10:05 AM
Rakesh Roshan, Prakash Jha to Mani Ratnam: The gulf is too wide for me to even begin. Let’s agree to disagree and move on.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 10:47 AM
Glad you said that Aarohi. It’s not the hero-worship Utkal thinks it is but the first sign of sanity. There’s a sleight of hand to this logic anyway. For instance I have some problems with Scorsese’s GONY, I don’t think this project is as fully-realized as it might have been, I’d probably say the same for the Aviator. On the other hand I find Casino Royale to be more or less perfect film. This doesn’t mean that the two are somehow comparable (though visually Casino Royale is a lot closer to such a comparison with Scorsese than Rakesh Roshan relative to Ratnam!). We enjoy different kinds of films for all sorts of reasons. But our personal choices do not automatically establish symmetry between these works. Otherwise we’d have to concede that a well-written Stephen King work is superior to a flawed Nabokov one! Or that a well-composed SEL song was better than a flawed Tchaikovsky symphony. And so on. This ‘madness’ often crops up in these discussions. To quote someone ‘the gifts are not equal’. If one wants to find problems with Ratnam’s films the debate might involve (if there have to be comparisons) filmmakers of the order of Raj Kapoor or Guru Dutt or Bala or Bharthiraja and so on. There might be very many names on such a list but not Rakesh Roshan (or present day Prakash Jha)!
The elementary error here is to use a scale of comparison which only depends on personal emotional response to a work and is not grounded in any more serious thinking of these figures. Often one might pretend to do the latter while secretly only doing the former. So for instance Utkal covers the gap by calling Rathnam superficial and empty and so forth in some of these films. The kind of terminology one might use for the likes of Rohit Shetty! Or to give another example I don’t have a taste for just about anything Passolini does so I could dismiss all of it as empty or superficial or any such ridiculously reductive category otherwise only reserve for disposable filmmakers. The point then isn’t about arguing with a filmmaker of Ratnam’s caliber but whether one’s response constitutes a serious discourse. Utkal further proves this point when with Rahman he gets carried away at the other end and starts comparing him to Mozart! Or when he finds moments in Cocktail to be as profound as anything in Guru Dutt. Not making any of this up!
One gets into the realm of the non-serious with such opinion. I am not into this ‘democratic’ game where any and every opinion counts in the same way. Certainly every individual has a right to a personal response and furthermore a right to express it in the language they see fit. But there is absolutely no ethical calling on the ‘reader’ to accept just any opinion as a serious discourse. And to be absolutely clear I don’t challenge Utkal’s right to dislike any or all of Ratnam’s films.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 9:57 AM
now controversy over religious portrayals in Kadal:
http://www.firstpost.com/bollywood/after-vishwaroopam-now-kadal-faces-protest-by-christian-outfit-in-tn-613377.html
this unfortunately is what happens when you give in to these things..
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 10:07 AM
I was wondering about this same thing while watching the movie. There are a few things that might offend a few people.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 10:20 AM
Aarohi: I am not talking of their body of work but just one bad film. I am not among those hero worshipers that think That Mani cannot make a film that is worse than that of Rakesh Roshan or Prakash Jha. Rajneeti was far more satisfying for me than Raavan , Taal than Yuva and Khudgarz more than say Raavan again. Not to mention Kshnam Kshnam more than Thiruda Thiruda.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 10:37 AM
One can be certain of a few things in life Death, Taxes and Bad films.
The sheen of a few films that one thought were good can wear off over time,But I have never had a bad film coming up trumps with the passage of time.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 10:53 AM
“But I have never had a bad film coming up trumps with the passage of time.”
probably because you don’t know close to enough about these matters..
Hate to be so blunt here but this is simply a question of knowledge and not opinion.
For the benefit of others here I offer Jonathan Rosenbaum on Godard’s Contempt:
“Almost exactly 33 years ago, in October 1964, the critical reception of Jean-Luc Godard’s widest American release of his career and his most expensive picture to date was overwhelmingly negative.”
What Rosenbaum doesn’t mention here is that this film was booed by many of its initial audiences. I would think this gets as close to a Raavan reception as there might be! An encyclopedia of such moments could be constituted for similar moments around the world.
Should add this on Raavan. It’s pretty amusing how the Hindi reception has completely lionized all the attention. The fact is that the Tamil reception was middling or better. The critics mostly considered this a decent effort on Ratnam’s part. generally people didn’t maul the film. Both films got positive attention at various film circuit scenes around the globe including Venice. But hey you, Utkal have decided it’s a bad film for all eternity!
And again if my responses seem a little rough it’s not because I you don’t like some of these works. I just find it incredible that you have no larger sense of perspective about these things. About how opinions change all the time, audiences and critics both. I find it amazing that you think a view you hold today is one you will hold for the rest of your life or that even if this is true that this is the only one possible when clearly there are important differing voices even today as we speak on all these works.
In any case I too have said all of this many times. Since I doubt you’re going to change your mind an iota’s worth on all of this I won’t be responding on this stuff again.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 11:00 AM
Satyam: To me it does not matter if it is a Raj Kapoor film or Rakesh Roshan. Scorsese or Sergei Leone. I don’t look at the credit title while judging a film. I judge a film on its in merit. I am hundred percent convinced and live by the dictum that an elvis Preskley sing can be as beautiful a piece of art as that of Tchaikovsky. I am sure Tchaikovsky composed some pieces which are not as good as the best works of the Beatles or Elvis. Obviously those works are slowly consigned to the dustbins of history. Just because I admire Satya or Rangeela, I am not obliged to consider RGV ka AAg as superior to Koi Mil Gaya. I am not a worshiper of brand names and have consciously worked at not falling into that trap.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 11:07 AM
Actually no Tchaikovsky is consigned to the dustbins of history. The same goes for Raj Kapoor. In fact the very opposite is true. With figures considered important over time even the lesser works or minor works or flawed works or whatever are rediscovered or re-evaluated. In fact in the Western world (or in a place like Japan) this sort of interest often becomes obsessive. Forget re-evaluating works that might have once not be considered very significant, even incomplete footage and first drafts and notebooks and what not are constantly pored over. Why? Because the discourse is considered serious. The flawed works (even accepting this for the moment) of a serious mind still contain traces of the very same thinking that inform the more successfully realized films. In fact the flawed work in this sense can often illuminate the mind and the thought as much as the successful one, sometimes even moreso. All of this doesn’t even need to be argued in a Western context. It is utterly banal. Even in an Indian context with those who know this is hardly news. Which is why for instance Rangan often has very complicated reviews on even the Ratnam films he ends up not liking. At the same time he offered an interesting take on Race 2 recently. This doesn’t mean he somehow considers Race 2 and Raavan comparable! But getting back to your point on Tchaikovsky are you kidding?! Even four bars he might have scribbled somewhere in a notebook would get the fullest attention of experts in the field! The same is true of the Beatles by the way. Have you checked out different versions of Let It Be (album) where the debate centers around whether the music in the originally released album matches the intentions of the band or not?
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 11:38 AM
Now one of my favourite al-tme radio program is the Desert Island Discs from BBC. I listen to the recorded podcasts on the rdaio everyday. In the program, writers, actors, directors, artists, businessmen, scientists, all kinds..are asked to choose the eight pieces of music they would like to carry with them if they are to be exiled to a desert island forever. Now that is an interesting proposition fir me, because all this business of what is great art and what is not loses its meaning after a point. A more concrete question is : What gives you pleasure ? What do you value? That is what is more revealing to me.
So if I take someone like Terry Jones of Monty Python, this is his list: 1.Tony Pastor & His Orchestra.
Five Salted Peanuts. t 2. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart.Serenade No. 10 in B flat major for 13 Wind Instruments. Orchestra: London Wind Quintet and Ensemble 3.Dr. Hook. The Wonderful Soup Stone 4. Wiesmeyer and Stein.Duo For Two Violins In The Sixth Tone System 5. The Beatles: Penny Lane 6. Johannes Brahms. Violin Concerto in D major, Soloist: Ginette Neveu Orchestra: Philharmonia Orchestra Conductor: Issay Dobrowen 7.Paul Simon.Something So Right 8. John Lennon & The Plastic Ono Band. Imagine
So you see he may like Brahms or Mozart. But when push comes to shove and he has to take just 8, he will take a Beatles and a Paul Simon rather than another Mozart or Brahms. On the other hand there was James Ellroy who chose 8 pieces of Beethoven. The point I am trying to make is a Beatles is not inherently inferior or incomparable to Mozart. People make that comparison and choose the Beatlrs over a Mozart or Bach. ( Our Terry Jones here chooses a Beatles and a Paul Simon overa bach or Tchaikovsky. ) similarly If I had just two DVDs to take to a desert island and it had to be Koi Mil Gaya and Raavan , I would choose Koi Mil Gaya , but there is much that I would enjoy there while Raavan I couldn’t bear to watch and it would frustrate and irritate me to no end. So I care two hots if it is Mani Ratnam, if it does not give me pleasure, if it does not uplift me, pit it goes.
Sorry, one has only one life. One has to be ruthless about these things rather that try to be politically correct and appear to be a man of taste and all that.
Just be open . And honest.
And let no brand name dictate what you like.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 11:56 AM
“And let no brand name dictate what you like.”
Or, in your case, dislike.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 11:43 AM
What is the boxoffice reception of Kadal in Chennai?
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 11:45 AM
For Utkal:
How can you not be cognizant of the fact that many Hollywood classics were panned by the critics and/ or public upon release and usually box office failures? That fact that these movies were not liked at the time is given no importance now that they are regarded as classic movies.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 11:50 AM
“Even four bars he might have scribbled somewhere in a notebook would get the fullest attention of experts in the field! That’s why I keep a safe distance from ‘ experts’. That’s their job. To endlessly analyse , dissect, and regurgitate. I would rather listen to a Beatles rather than pore over those four bars of irrelevant flotsam that is artificially made relevant by some academe with nothing better to do. As I said, my life is short. And I would rather spend it on something that gives me pleasure than worshiping brand names.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 5:35 PM
You’re now changing the terms of the debate. First you said that ‘no one cares’ about some of this stuff. Now you’re saying ‘even if they do I don’t’. Now you’re adopting a classic anti-intellectual position. Which is fine except that you didn’t start with this. You can’t change the terms of the debate as it suits you. Everyone is wrong, there is absolutely no room for a different opinion but you are completely write for all time. In the year 2683 the opinion on Raavan will be exactly as you’ve described it today! Anything to the contrary might just be a minor inconvenience as are the different views of others on the same film today! Because academics might just be obsessing over irrelevant stuff, Rangan might just be a Ratnam fanboy (strangely I could have missed this in the book I just read from him!), the folks at Venice are merely silly, the Tamil film critics are sillier, everyone is prey to hero-worship or the mad pursuit of irrelevant stuff but Utkal heroically leads the charge and offers the one correct opinion for all time and all places! Congrats on being this ‘new man’ never before seen and further congrats for being part of a ‘history’ also never before seen. Whether it’s Ratnam or the Beatles Utkal offers the definitive view valid for all humans in all ages.
my modest advice — when you’re in a hole stop digging!
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 11:58 AM
Tyler : How can you not be cognizant of the fact that many Hollywood classics were panned by the critics and/ or public upon release and usually box office failures?
Like?
Forget box office failures or successes. That does not interest me. which film that was panned by critics and public is considered a classic today? There are films which were not fully appreciated at the time of release and were later reevaluated. But something that was considered trash like Raavan is, never gets considered to be classic. But there are many films or books that were considered trash and have remained trash. In fact their numbers are much more. So if you are talking statistics, I am on safer ground. Also just because something maybe reevaluated later, there is no reason, I should stop called something that I think trash as not trash. I am not in the business of hedging my bets.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 12:07 PM
Trash? Really? I guess as they say one man’s trash is another man’s treasure. The reviews for Ravaan/Ravaanan were not that bad. The movies were actually appreciated more outside India and Ravaanan did will in the south.
As to Hollywood classics, do a search on IMDB of critical and commercial movie failures that are now considered classics. You’ll likely be amazed at what was considered ‘trash’ at one point.
Your strongly worded opinions do not make your comments ‘fact’.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 12:08 PM
GF: “And let no brand name dictate what you like.”
Or, in your case, dislike.
Absolutely. Though I haven’t bothered to see Salman Khan’s last four films does not mean I did not like him in Dabangg. Or in HAHK or Andaz Apna Apna.
Conversely, I have liked may be a dozen films of Aamir Khan prior to Talaash. That does not mean i dn’t thnk the ghost business was silly anda bad idea, and Aamir was laboured and boring in his role which did not offer much to start with ad he did not add much to it either.
The idea is : Dont let brand names dictate what you like. Or dislike.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 12:21 PM
Works of art don’t exist in some kind of ahistorical vacuum. Even if one has issues with a standalone work, examining such a work in the broader context of an artist’s body of work–especially when that artist is a defining figure like Ratnam–can provide a meaningful angle of approach and to discard this is to reveal a blindside to one’s critical faculties. You haven’t offered a definitive view on Kadal (you can’t, like anyone else who hasn’t seen it) but your impressions of the film seem guided by your experience of this “brand name” (a woeful term if there ever was one for an artist) more than anything else. Which is contradictory to the advice you keep meting out.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 12:23 PM
Satyam: For every Goddard, there will be literally hundreds other that were considered trash and are considered trash even today. How many of the Top 20 in Sight and Sound’s Best Films of all times have moved out of the Top 50. And how many outside the Top 50 have moved into the top 20?
Besides just because there may be revision of opinion on some film some day does not mean I should not call some film that I think is trash as trash.
Satyam Shivam Sundarm, Raj Kapoor or not, was a trashy film, and will always remain trash. Booby which is considered a teeny-bopper romance may be considered a classic someday. So will something like Prem Rog which is largely ignored today. Raavan which is a vacuous, empty and laboured film will always remain so. Kannathil Muthumittal and Iiruvar in spite of their unevenness will be considered classics some day. Nayakan is a classic and will always remain so. Because they contain solid, important psychological truths . Films like Alaypayudhe , though enjoyable and Dil Se , though not so enjoyable, will be just one of those films which had grrat sings and we will watch those on TC, like the songs of films like Anarkali or Chaudhvi kaa Chaand which we watch on TV today, without bothering our head about the films.
That is my stated position.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 12:27 PM
GF: I haven’t commented on Kadal so far. Only on the song picturizations that I have seen on TV. Most of my comments have been on Raavan. And the fact that Rangan says it sin in the same lane. Of course I don’t buy that. I think he is just trying to make Raavan look more respectable,. I will be seeing Kadal and making up my mind for myself.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 12:37 PM
Nothing in Rangan’s career in writing has led me to believe he’s the type to pull his punches. He’s been perfectly critical of Ratnam in the past. You, on the other hand, are clearly interested in continuing the now painfully redundant tradition of making Raavan appear less respectable. And you’re certainly on the side of many Indian critics here but that’s not exactly what I’d consider good company.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 12:33 PM
And GF: It is alright to be guided by a ‘ Brand Name’ before you have seen a film. After all there are thousands of films out there to see and you will have to choose based to some extent on your past experience of the ‘ brand’. What I am advising against is to be influenced by the brand name after or during seeing a film. Be honest. Open. without pre-judging it in any way. And respond to only what you see and hear.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 12:50 PM
GF: He’s been perfectly critical of Ratnam in the past.
Like when?
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 2:03 PM
I invite you to read his book, but recently Rangan’s reviews of Yuva/AE and Guru were not without their raising certain red flags – and even on Raavan he expressed some dissent if I recall. The difference though is that Rangan starts from a place that at least tries to address the filmmaker’s intentions.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 1:04 PM
Satyam: and who says Godard’s Breathless was not recived well when released.? It si currently 13th in Sight and Sounds’ list. And it has hovered around there always. .
And it was received well right from the word Go.
Here is Roger Ebert
“The movie had a sensational reception; it is safe to say the cinema was permanently changed. Young directors saw it and had abandoned their notions of the traditional studio film before they left the theater. Crowther of the Times, who was later to notoriously despise its descendant “Bonnie and Clyde,” said of “Breathless” that “sordid is really a mild word for its pile-up of gross indecencies.” The jump cuts to him were “pictorial cacophony.”
Yet Crowther conceded, “It is no cliche,” and the film’s bold originality in style, characters and tone made a certain kind of genteel Hollywood movie quickly obsolete. Godard went on to become the most famous innovator of the 1960s, although he lost the way later, with increasingly mannered experiments. Here in one quick, sure move, knowing somehow just what he wanted and how to obtain it, he achieved a turning point in the cinema just as surely as Griffith did with “Birth of a Nation” and Welles with “Citizen Kane.”
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20030720/REVIEWS08/307200301/1023
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 3:44 PM
Actually I was commenting on Contempt! You really must pay closer attention..
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 1:20 PM
Seems Kadal is a big hit in the south protest or no protest.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 2:29 PM
waiting for ”Kadal” review by Satyam
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 3:36 PM
Short but interesting, heartening take:
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 3:41 PM
It seems clear that this film has thematic connections with Raavan..
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 3:42 PM
From Abbas-Mustan to Mani Ratnam – every director gets a hit after they drop Abhishek. Next probably Mehra also will get a hit in BMB.
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 6:24 PM
Is this then the next mathematical equation that you are planning to patent?
Everything – Abhishek = a hit
All the best with your research..
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 5:01 PM
Behindwoods calls it an average opening for Kadal:
http://behindwoods.com/tamil-movies/kadal/kadal-box-office-feb-03.html
LikeLike
February 4, 2013 at 11:09 PM
4 star review for Kadal:
http://www.dnaindia.com/entertainment/review_review-kadal-tamil_1795430
LikeLike
February 5, 2013 at 6:29 AM
Chennai Box-Office (February 1-3)
Tuesday, 05 February , 2013, 12:40
It was a terrible weekend for movies at the Chennai Box-Office. Two big releases Mani Ratnam`s Kadal and his former assistant Bejoy Nambiar`s David were lackluster at the CBO.
Both the films failed to take the all-important opening due to negative talk. Kadal had so much riding on it; a fresh new pair, AR Rahman`s songs and the Mani Ratnam brand, but content was not liked by the audiences. Though it is this week`s number one, the film has failed to take an opening and has taken a beating at the box-office.
At number two is David, a badly dubbed Tamil version added to the woes of the audience, but due Reliance`s smart marketing got a large number of screens. This film also took a lukewarm opening. In the third position is Kanna Laddu Thinna Asai, which is still doing well due to lack of competition.
Race 2 is limping at number four and Life of Pi continues to hold on at number five..
http://www.sify.com/movies/boxoffice.php?id=15019439&cid=13525926
LikeLike
February 5, 2013 at 12:55 PM
Why has KADAL not been met with glee in Madras? I thought Mani was review-proof and to a major extent word-of-mouth proof at least in Tamil Nad – at the very least in multiplex friendly cities/suburbs/towns. There is no competition and I think this is the only film around..this is shocking for me..I had expected a week-end explosion just going by Mani’s name in Madras..
LikeLike
February 5, 2013 at 1:09 PM
“this is shocking for me”
Not for me at all…
Ps Ann –where’s your vishwaroopam review?
Even without seeing the film can vouch Kamal would’ve come with somwthinf Better than TDKR!
Just an innocent observation –all those who suddenly got berserk writing paeans on reema Kagtis noteworthy but still amteurish attempts have gone silent when the real stuff comes in!
This is NOT a criticism folks–
Just surprised to see even the likes of Satyam silent on Kamals VR–yeah it may be a flawed piece of work but by one of the most significant cinema personalities in that country –&
To have come up with that theme
Hats off kamalahassan !!
It takes courage to show terrorists exist in afghanistan!!!
Next —
One will need permits to show that snow exists in Alaska or that there are certain ‘implants’ on certain ‘pinup girls’!
Whatta joke !!!
LikeLike
February 5, 2013 at 1:58 PM
Off Topic:
Cool video from NASA – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Sar5WT76kE
NASA Johnson Style (Gangnam Style Parody)
NASA Johnson Style is a volunteer outreach video project created by the students of NASA’s Johnson Space Center. It was created as an educational parody of Psy’s Gangnam Style. The lyrics and scenes in the video have been re-imagined in order to inform the public about the amazing work going on at NASA and the Johnson Space Center.
Special thanks to astronauts Tracy Caldwell Dyson, Mike Massimino and Clay Anderson
Special thanks to Mr. Mike Coats, Dr. Ellen Ochoa, and all supporting senior staff members
“NASA Johnson Style” Lyrics:
NASA Johnson Style
Johnson Style
Welcome to NASA’s Johnson Space Center
We are coming in hot so don’t burn up as we enter
We do science everyday that affects your daily life
Throw them up for manned space flight
Science everywhere
As we engineer the marvels
That fly though the air
And take us way beyond earth’s levels
Science everywhere
Because we engineer the marvels
That fly though the air
Flys us through the air
Control the mission out of Johnson
This is ground, hey!
And this is space, hey!
Tell me Houston what’s the problem
It’s okay!
It’s okay!
Because there’s flight controllers on the job today
NASA Johnson STYLE!
Johnson STYLE!
NA, NA, NA, NA NASA Johnson STYLE!
Johnson STYLE!
NA, NA, NA, NA NASA Johnson STYLE!
EYYYYYY science daily!
NA, NA, NA, NA, NASA STYLE!
EYYYYYY it’s amazing!
NA, NA, NA, NA ey ey ey ey ey ey!!
Orbiting earth, international space station
Where we work and live in space with a crew from several nations
Got Japanese, and Russians, that European charm
Throw them up, like the Canada Arm
Kicking out research
29k cubic feet, revolves around the earth
Science microgravity, revolves around the earth
Columbus, JEM, and Destiny
Kicking out research
Kicking out research
Train the astronauts at Johnson
To go to space, hey!
To go to space, hey!
Cause the missions of tomorrow
Start today, hey!
Start today, hey!
As we engineer the future day by day
NASA Johnson STYLE!
Johnson STYLE!
NA, NA, NA, NA NASA Johnson STYLE!
Johnson STYLE!
NA, NA, NA, NA NASA Johnson STYLE!
EYYYYYY science daily!
NA, NA, NA, NA, NASA STYLE!
EYYYYYY it’s amazing!
NA, NA, NA, NA ey ey ey ey ey ey!!
Orion or SLS, MPCV
We cannot feel the floor, cause the lack gravity
The destinations are an asteroid, mars, or moon
We are blasting off start the countdown soon
[Sound clip: launch countdown]
EYYYYYY science daily!
NA, NA, NA, NA, NASA STYLE!
EYYYYYY it’s amazing!
NA, NA, NA, NA ey ey ey ey ey ey!!
NASA Johnson Style
LikeLike
February 5, 2013 at 2:08 PM
Haha Thanx
Return Of the H
lately some members here have been missing from action MIA..
They actually hav joined my H (& serving here!)
Some like Amy, Oldgold etc
Lately some go part time like anya & tatiana
🙂
1:4 rota hahaha
LikeLike
February 5, 2013 at 3:02 PM
^another scoop–someone from my H told me–
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/zeenat-aman-to-marry-36yearold-businessman-from-mumbai-/1069672/
Yestyear years Bollywood biggest superstar Zeenat Aman is planning to tie the knot with a 36-year-old business man from Mumbai.
The 60-year-old actress, who’s mother to two sons in their 20′s, is all set to inspire many Indian ladies to take bold decisions when it comes to being happy.
The ‘Hare Rama Hare Krishna’ star, who married late actor Mazhar Khan in 1985, recently revealed that she is much happier now and is feeling younger again thanks to her new beau.
She said that she has met someone special, who has become a significant part of her life. She refused to divulge further details but shared that he is from India and that they are planning to marry.
The actress further added that her sons, 26-year-old Azaan and 23-year-old Zahaan, are delighted by her decision of getting married again
ps–this has given ‘hope’ to many aunties. Hope there is a remake of Nishabd–Starring Zeenat & toyboy imran khan hahaha
LikeLike
February 6, 2013 at 11:51 PM
some numbers for Kadal:
http://www.metromasti.com/kollywood/news/Kadal-5th-day-collections-Kadal-day-5-box-office-total-collection/24615
don’t know what the source here is and whether these are gross numbers or net from TN plus AP and so on.
LikeLike
February 6, 2013 at 11:54 PM
very negative report here:
http://www.kollywoodtoday.net/news/box-office-kadal-and-david-a-disaster/
LikeLike
February 6, 2013 at 11:54 PM
Sreedhar Pillai @sri50
#Kadal – All at sea @ TN box-office. Mani sir’s worst ever opening in the last decade.
LikeLike
February 7, 2013 at 12:09 AM
I think Mani’s weaving religion into films is not showing results boxofficewise. First Ravan and now Kadal. But Bombay did very well. And films with christian backgrounds doing well in Bollywood are also very few. Notable among them are Bobby and Julie. Saagar was also a sort of lukewarm success.
LikeLike
February 7, 2013 at 6:18 AM
Xhobdo:
LikeLike