Images from Aurangzeb
- Comment
- Reblog
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
This entry was posted on March 18, 2013 at 3:40 AM and is filed under the bad. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
SATYAMSHOT
March 18, 2013 at 8:37 AM
They forgot to mention “Porn Star”.
The number of male poseurs enabled by American Gigolo (and, sadly, in an un-ironic way) is depressing…
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 8:51 AM
Who are “they?” Is there a link missing here? I honestly don’t understand your first statement. Just from the visual images I wouldn’t characterize any of them as “porn star.”
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 8:53 AM
Re: “Who are “they?””
The ones who designed and wrote the poster.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 9:26 AM
Thanks, now I see the text. But I stand by my earlier statement.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 9:35 AM
True.
Having said if I am hard-pressed to find a bright spot I might say that there is apparently a double-role here which I love. Sadly Hindi cinema does not do it often anymore- yes there was Rowdy but what else. I did not mind Utt Pataang and both Shahid, Kunal Khemu and Ranveer Shorey were fantastic in Kaminey, Superstar and Mithya
Tamil Cinema has not forgotten it- saw K.V. Anand’s Maattrraan last week- a tad overlong but good enjoyable pulp. But yes Ko was much better
And since we are talking about ‘doubles’ there is a fantastic PC game called Total Overdose which plays out like a Desai film- we have the hero’s father, a DEA agent, who is killed in the 1st mission, the baton is taken over by his son who is a DEA agent who finally in the 3rd stage gets his twin brother (who is ofcourse a criminal) to go undercover for him, infiltrate the gang and kill the baddies.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 10:36 AM
yes, but the double role thing had been reduced to nothing but a silly trope, at least in the hi-fi (stealing from an jo). i am glad some of those gimmicks are dying out or not being over used any more.
but who knows, with the return of rape-of-the-retro, these ‘traditions’ will be back too. may be himmatwala 2 will have 2 ajay devgans mouthing the stupidest lines on the planet. sajid is always dependable for something like that.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 10:49 AM
a double role shouldn’t be used with an actor who isn’t star enough. Because the double in this sense besides serving whatever narrative purpose it’s intended to also highlights the star (in a commercial setup). If you have a guy like Arjun Kapoor doing this you need a Soderbergh-like effort on the narrative! Which safe to say this isn’t!
On that note doubles had more or less vanished from Hindi cinema with the decline of masala. Now they’re making a bit of a comeback precisely as masala (in whatever debased form) is more in vogue. There is always a somewhat epic resonance to the double in the context of Hindi commercial cinema. This isn’t quite the romantic/psychoanalytic double of the European/Western tradition. Some more on all of this here.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 10:59 AM
agree with you. more often than not, it was designed to ‘showcase’ a star and provide the audience a ‘double dose’ of their favorite. unless done very innovatively, it’s of little interest otherwise.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:05 AM
Great point Satyam. A very engrossing read on the ‘psychoanalytic’ one is Saramago’s Double
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:10 AM
though it’s the book I like least among all of his mature works. At least one of the reasons is that Saramago has always been best dealing with singularity with all its whimsicalities and oddities. Even his narrators represent the same sort of quirkiness. The Double is a perfectly solid read but I prefer just about every other book of his.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:16 AM
Never thought of the singularity point. I like Dostoyevsky’s The Double as well.
And two of the most disturbing doubles are the dwarf in Appu Raja (the film keeps ‘playing with violence’) and Bachchan’s professor (accused falsely of rape) in Bemisaal- the latter is not handled well by the director though- perhaps the only blemish in an otherwise flawless film
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:23 AM
Saurabh, what are you trying to pull here? Saramago in one comment, Dostoevsky in the next? Let’s be serious and stick to the riches of masala!
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:22 AM
yes, bemisaal is one of my favorite ab films. the whole ‘insane twin brother’ thing was used badly here and is my only issue with the film too.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:33 AM
LOL. On that note have you checked out Yaar Meri Zindagi. I am dying to watch this but it’s not available anywhere on the net though the official dvd is out for quite some time. Apparently the deal here is that there is some kind of a twist to the Namak Haraam plot- Bachchan playing Khanna kind of role and Shatru doing Bachchan’s)
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:01 AM
I am not sure if I completely agree with this Antya. Yes when not done well doubles do seem gimmicky (though they can still be fun) but we had very many exceptions in bollywood. Starting with Bachchan’s great doubles- Don, Satte Pe Satta, Aakhiri Raasta, Kasme Vaade (Bandhe Haath is another underrated one)- to Dilip Kumar’s Ram aur Shyam to Sanjeev Kumar and Devan Varma’s Angoor to Kamal’s Appu Raja (technically a triple here) and many more. In the last decade itself we have had Kaminey, Mithya and Superstar- the former two are especially well done and I enjoyed Rowdy and Utt Pattaang (Vinay Pathak) as well. I for one would love to have this trope back
LOL, agreed on Sajid
In Hollywood my favourite will be Jeremy Irons in Dead Ringers
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:10 AM
angoor basically revolves around the double-role gimmick and is pretty much the epitome of the phenomemon. i am not a big fan of the satte pe satta double, although i find the movie overall the only fun film of the 80’s bachchan and love the first half (besides the very good and under rated bemisaal). don’t think much of kasme vaade either, haven’t seen the other two. i found mithya overrated, kaminey was ok. so other than best case scenarios, it’s not something i look forward to. imagine having to sit through not one but two salman’s or srk’s ‘acting’. shudder! (i just had duplicate flashbacks. ugh!)
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:15 AM
“angoor basically revolves around the double-role gimmick and is pretty much the epitome of the phenomenon.”
I disagree totally. Angoor is not at all within the epic and/or masala tradition that defines all the other great doubles of the tradition. It reworks Shakespeare insipidly as far as I’m concerned (not that the play itself is the best one within the Bard’s oeuvre!) but more importantly it doesn’t have the true registers I’m referring to. The unsurpassable double incidentally remains Don (referring to the original here and not the impostor!). I’m very partial to Kasme Vaade too!
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:19 AM
i wasn’t referring to doubles within the masala framework. i mean, the film itself originates from the the doubles gimmick since the original work is about that. and i love angoor., haven’t read the original. people are capable of enjoying things out side ‘masala tradition’ you know 🙂
agree with don, my favorite of bachchan’s double roles. as i said, don’t care about kasma vaade, talk about insipid.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:22 AM
“people are capable of enjoying things out side ‘masala tradition’ you know ”
yes and I’ve always been polite enough to extend my commiserations to them..
Just kidding.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:25 AM
ha! you are sooooo not kidding satyam! and we outsiders thank you for allowing us to bs on your blog
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 12:23 PM
“ha! you are sooooo not kidding sat yam!”
ha, you got me there! But the ‘outsiders’ are what enable the blog in the truest sense! Not to mention they allow me to proselytize all over again!
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:20 AM
I think I have said this before but Don is a ‘triple role’ imo (Don as Don, Vijay as Vijay and Vijay as Don) and not the least becuase of Bachchan’s extrordinary performance
And notice how Farhan’s ridiculous twist in the end renders this ‘triple’ ineffective since Vijay never gets to be Don. And you have Don singing to Khaike Paan Banaras Waala!
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:24 AM
thankfully, i wasn’t able to sit through farhan’s don after the first hour and never watched the second one. so i pretend those films don’t exist.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:26 AM
I love Angoor and find it one of Gulzar’s best.
And I think Babu of Satte Pe Satta is one of the all time great villainous characters in Hindi cinema- the first scene of his where he is released from jail is itself spooky (with that scintillating bg score).
The Bachchan doubles I do not like are Sooryavansham, The Great Gambler (this needed a Desai and not Samanta) and Adaalat (love the film and the older Dharma but not the younger son)
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:30 AM
yes his introduction was fantastic but a great villainous character who doesn’t do his job, doesn’t dare to ‘ruin’ the sati savitri married heroine and is paired up with ranjeeta is hardly going to make me shake in my boots. if i had hired him, i’d be pissed! what a waste of my money.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:36 AM
Antya aunty, check your mail please.
And c’mon Babu undergoes what we call a ‘change of heart’…LOL-
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:53 AM
and if you call me aunty again, you’ll have what we call a ‘change of gender’ after your equipment suffers permanent injury by my virtual knee-to-the-groin technique. did you not hear how much i hated those kids?
already replied to your mail btw.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 12:09 PM
LOL- That caught my unawares (the comment not the knee btw). But have you heard of something called “balls of brass”!
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 4:05 PM
“you’ll have what we call a ‘change of gender’ after your equipment suffers permanent injury by my virtual knee-to-the-groin technique. “– haha rofl
As for ‘balls of brass’– that’s the problem with younger bro deals. Good for emails, but taking bout gum balls & brass balls looks crass. 🙂
LikeLike
March 19, 2013 at 3:33 AM
AA- that auspicious day still hasn’t arrived when we would be needing to learn about crassness from ‘you’. Not that this is the first time you have made a comment on me in bad taste (which i tend to ignore sually) but on this occasion you also decided to involve someone else as well.
Anyway I will let this pass and and allow Antya (and Satyam) to decide if it was crass or not.
LikeLike
March 19, 2013 at 10:55 AM
hey relax kjo minor-im in no real mood to delve into this since it may well be my next ‘mr anjali singh’ here lol.
“hasn’t arrived when we would be needing to learn about crassness from ‘you’.”-totally agree there. and im as biased n selective as they come. But even I found something ‘perverse’ overall–reason already mentioned & dont wanna repeat.
“you also decided to involve someone else as well. “–no i have not involved anyone else!
“which i tend to ignore sually”–good buoy–must admit u are overall v polite with me, so i will give it back in the same kind..
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 8:51 AM
The title is controversial and provocative. Rishi is trying so many roles nowadays. He adds some color to any movie he stars in.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 8:55 AM
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 9:09 AM
Interesting piece on Trishul. Whether this film aurangzeb lives upto is to be seen. Anyways, the film seems to be interesting with a new title. Whether the son is in conflict with his father, whether he kills his brothers, wnether there are roshnara, Jahanara counterparts. Aurangzeb is always an enigma and an interesting character of history. He was cruel towards his own relatives, he wanted to succeed. Yet he was a simple man not leading a luxurious life at the expense of taxpayers’ money which included the infamous tax on kafirs. He reminds someone in some aspects.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 9:10 AM
oh no! hope the recycling of trishul theme is not true
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 9:20 AM
Agree-& moreso this hero seeks incapable of carrying this theme..
Btw anya-Thanx for that lovely gravatar (as requested by me)
Hehe
What’s that from..
Err is there something ‘dark’ to it
Plz don’t jump !!! 🙂
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 9:21 AM
Off the cliff
Be careful lol
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 1:33 PM
no plans to jump. just living on the edge as usual.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 2:28 PM
That’s Kiera Knightley in Pride and Prejudice 2005 version 🙂
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 2:37 PM
2005 version – a dumbed down version.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 3:11 PM
right on both counts. like the visual though.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 3:52 PM
@ anya “no plans to jump. just living on the edge as usual”– ahh that’s a relief –that makes two of us –perennially on the edge lol
@ Oldgold -“That’s Kiera Knightley in Pride and Prejudice 2005 version”– well picked up buddy
Actually love the ambivalence of this pic
There’s openness as well as the ‘edge’
There’s hope as well as despair-depending on the mood
Beautiful gravatar there–if someone gets us the link, I wanna out it as a screensaver –courtesy OG, anya
Ps: Oldgold –u can also go for a nice gravatar from that gravatar website ….
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 5:06 PM
>There’s hope as well as despair-
She’s just admiring the scenery.
A flamboyant version of a similar scene from the 1995 version where Elizabeth stands at a safer place to admire the scenery.
On it’s own it’s fantastic and beautiful!!!
– even if Kiery Knightley had a metal ‘rope’ to anchor her safely.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 5:13 PM
1995 version is the definitive one and my all time favorite. beautiful too!
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 5:15 PM
you are right that this moment in the 2005 one is more flamboyant, that’s why it works well as a gravatar 😉
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 5:20 PM
og–lol @ safer place & “even if Kiery Knightley had a metal ‘rope’ to anchor her safely”
“On it’s own it’s fantastic and beautiful!!!”–agree the keira one is v good
oldgold–if only anya can share with us her link, we can put her as screensaver 😉
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 5:40 PM
@ og–“She’s just admiring the scenery”
cmon one more step and she will be history lol
4 a moment–i thought she was gonna jump–but thats the beauty of this pic imo
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 6:31 PM
talking of keira kneightyl, i recently checked out the new anna karenina–has anyone seen it here?
When mood permits, will force my piece down your throats
ps-just to clarify, by the ‘piece’ meant a ‘review’ –oops lol
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 10:47 AM
Oh man I forgot they were dong this. What a bad, bad idea. Didn’t realize Prithviraj was in this.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 10:50 AM
yeah I didn’t know this before looking at this poster myself! There’s a rumor he’s in Farah Khan’s next too.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:01 AM
Not that this makes either film any more appealing! Kind of nice though.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:07 AM
Prithviraj is playing the Shashi Kapoor role here apparently. From what I’ve heard it is Trishul meets The Prestige! As in one of the twins literally dies to incriminate the father. That is the greatest trick in revenge that they pull off!
IIRC, the director here wrote the Anil Kapoor starrer My Wife’s Murder.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:11 AM
LOL, even more perverse than I thought!
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:12 AM
I’m surprised they didn’t throw Inception in there and have Vijay enter his father’s mind. Geez.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:15 AM
ha! also, shhhh…….
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:36 AM
Ha! True. You can never be careful with such jokes. God knows what may inspire them.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 3:17 PM
Abzee, if I didn’t know you were serious I’d have thought you were offering a parody! What next, the nurse from Agneepath becomes a hooker?! Oh wait…
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 3:22 PM
“What next, the nurse from Agneepath becomes a hooker?! ”
If you don’t grow up in Bandra that’s all you get buddy! Nice bourgeois nurses don’t fall for the Vijay types! Johar merely corrected this horrible fiction!
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 11:18 AM
So first yash raj gives a glorified debut to the next flag bearer of the Whatttt legacy (Fardeen, Zayed, Herman, Imran)
and now they double it up!!
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 1:29 PM
Why is the movie called Aurangzeb? If there is no relation to the real Aurangzeb, then definitely the strangest title ever.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 3:27 PM
This is forcible conversion…just as Aurangzeb’s penchant with converting everyone and anything to Islam or pay Jezia..
Either convert to liking Aurangzeb’s multiplex-style of film-making or pay Jezia by not doing so..in the form of more of such mutilations!!
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 3:47 PM
Haha…I am going to opt for the mutilations.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 3:30 PM
Talking of double roles, Angoor is first rate. Actually it is double double role. Sanjeev Kumar and Deven Verma create such a laugh riot effortlessly. Every character shines in Angoor. It is even better than Golmal where Amol Palekar invents his twin brother.
LikeLike
March 18, 2013 at 6:48 PM
Even though Angoor is right up there, I still wont rate Golmaal any less (technically not a double role but still its the idea that counts).
Amitabh’s aakhiri raasta is also a performance very well done. One could actually believe an exploited David growing into that revengeful old man and his honest,committed yet naive son(amitabh). Its a good drama between father and the son. A double role, well implemented mainly because of amitabh’s performances.
LikeLike
April 22, 2013 at 5:45 PM
The dreams that this Boning Kapoor’s son has..My God..he is already talking about female ‘adulation’
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/news-interviews/Im-not-prepared-for-female-adulation-yet-Arjun-Kapoor/articleshow/19662413.cms
Girls find you hot! How do you handle all the adulation?
I haven’t seen girls running after me, but when I hear about such things I only blush. After I made my debut as the manipulative Parma, I thought girls would hate me. I’m pleasantly surprised that they liked me! I’m not prepared for female adulation yet.
LikeLike