Monthly Archives: May 2012

Department

Posted on by

Someone needs to take all of Ram Gopal Varma’s gadgets, lock them in the toy box and hide the key. A potentially interesting thriller, Department was swamped by RGV’s ‘rogue’ methodology. My guess is ROGUE stands for Ridiculously Overindulgent Gimmickry Undermines Everything. The nauseating (literally) camerawork and a dearth of story and character development made this a disappointing experience. But there were a few positives including an excellent effort by the wardrobe department and a handful of quite good performances.

Had the gimmick of cameras mounted on actors and props been used with restraint it could have been really striking.  For example, a chase around the Crawford market area – it looked great as the camerawork enhanced the sense of speed and confusion of the pursuit. But it is hard to appreciate someone’s acting when the camera crawls up one nostril and emerges from their ear, or is spinning around the bottom of a tea cup. The background score is what I’ve come to expect from RGV – loud, intrusive and annoying so combine that with the dizzying visuals and it is unpleasant.

The story is a standard of the cop genre: a young, slightly idealistic officer is teamed up with a shady older legend on the force. Sanjay Dutt and Rana Daggubati had a good dynamic between their characters and they played off each other well. Sanjay has a brooding reserve that suited Mahadev’s moral ambiguity, and he was world weary and cynical to the core. Mahadev has his own agenda, which is revealed all too slowly. Shivnarayan was no young ratbag to be easily distracted or lead astray– he was focussed on his career and working towards his goals. But he is realising there are many more shades of grey than he expected. Rana is a competent actor, and he certainly looks right for this role. He seemed more at ease in the second half when the action ramps up.

Mind you some of the dialogue is so stilted no one could make it work. There are great insights along the lines of “A mistake done intentionally is not a mistake”. If only I had been in charge of the Cliche Department, I would have found a much more inspirational desk calendar to pinch quotes from. A subtitle that spelled gangrene ‘gang-grin’ was another highlight.

The underworld aspect is less successful. Sawatya (wildly overacted by Vijay Raaz), and his opposition – a mysterious voice on the phone – are at war. But they didn’t provide adequate tension for the machinations of the plot to make sense or be interesting. Sawatya’s deputy DK (Abhimanyu Singh) is ridiculous, stupid, and not at all convincing. People keep banging on about Abhimanyu Singh’s intensity but I think he is just a really bad actor. Even as a corpse, he hams it up.

Amitabh as Sarjay Rao spent the first half chewing the scenery and the second being enigmatic. It wasn’t the performance I was hoping for although he was an interesting character. Excessive exposition drained the potential drama and made the characters less interesting as they did little thinking for themselves. The police would get news of their target’s whereabouts apparently out of thin air. There is no consistent internal logic, too many contradictions, and the story just doesn’t hold up. RGV seems to think he has discovered the concept of moral ambiguity and the idea is pounded home. It’s clumsy and tedious.

Lakshmi Manchu was quite good as Mahadev’s wife. Satya was from a police family so she had already worked through any moral issues she may have had about her husband’s activities. Shivnarayan’s fiancée, Doctor Bharti (Anjana Sukhani) made less sense. She seemed to have few concerns about her intended being an ‘encounter king’, and no thought about what it might mean to be married to someone who was pissing off gangsters at a rate of knots. Madhu Shalini as Naseer had a potentially interesting role – a female gangster who was as tough as nails. But her motivations weren’t clear or consistent, the relationship with DK was not believable and her acting ranged from terrible to mediocre. However I don’t think anyone would have fared well in the scene where she basically fellated a kulfi as she and DK fantasised about taking over and killing everyone. It was gross.

Nathalia Kaur got a lot of (RGV generated) publicity for her debut. Her assets are obvious and just in case you missed anything that camera gets right in there (the gold undies were unexpected and I am so glad she was wearing them). But for an item girl she lacks sensuality and relies on making what I can only describe as ‘porno face’.  Even with the minimal demands of the choreo, her ‘dancing’ was terrible. I don’t usually have a problem with the skanky item, and appearances by the likes of Mumaith Khan, Malaika Arora Khan, Rambha and others are often a highlight. This made me uncomfortable as between Nathalia’s performance and the dirty old man camera gaze creeping all over her body, it is just nasty.

Luckily someone in wardrobe realised the movie was off the rails and took a bold step that almost saved the day. Nasia and DK form their own gang – we dubbed them the Fashion Gang.

 

They dress really badly, over accessorise and spend too long fussing over their clothes when they should be running away from Rana. Meanwhile Shivnarayan has had an epiphany. He had temporarily lost his mojo once he was out of uniform and in civvies. There was some unfortunate double (acid wash) denim, and a regrettable lurex bandanna incident. But by the second half he had developed a signature style and was teaming jeans and a simple (very snug across the shoulders) linen shirt or a (so tight it looked painted on) polo shirt with minimal accessories – watch, shoes, belt and gun.

 

Classic and classy. He became the Fashion Police! He pursues and kills members of DK’s Fashion Gang – the guy in the green and purple stripy shirt, the guy in the gingham bandanna, the bedraggled beardy man, finally the leaders themselves. So when Sanjay Dutt turned up wearing double acid wash….well. It was riveting. Not enough to make this a film worth seeing, but it did keep me entertained just when I was giving up.

I feel bad for the actors in Department, especially Sanjay Dutt, Rana, Deepak Tijori and Lakshmi Manchu who I think gave solid performances. It’s a shame they have been undermined by RGV’s self indulgent antics and the lack of quality story and dialogue. Honestly I can’t recommend this is worth seeing. Unless you enjoy seeing those Crimes  of Fashion soundly punished!

Devadasu (1953)

Posted on by

So many people recommended versions of Devdas when I started watching Indian films. Prior to seeing the Telugu Devadasu, I’d watched a few of the various adaptations in Hindi. I have mentioned before that the role of Tight Slap Administrator could be a dream job for me, but honestly I would have been exhausted about an hour into any film version of Devdas. I prefer romances to involve people I can care about to some extent, otherwise why bother? Whether we’re talking whinging Dilip Kumar, tear drenched Shah Rukh or aggressively self centred Abhay Deol, Devdas is one of my least favourite characters. This is a drawback when the story is just a long wait for Dev to work out how to drink himself to death. So it was a bit of a surprise to find myself not exactly liking but empathising with Devadas (Akkineni Nageshwara Rao) and feeling quite kindly towards Parvati (Savitri). Maybe it was the lack of subtitles that let me reshape the story to suit myself. I certainly had no trouble following the story –  there are so many adaptations of the book by Sharat Chandra Chattopadhyay it’s almost a plague – and it’s easy to find a synopsis if you need one.

Director Vedantam Raghavaiah’s version opens with Devadas and Parvati as little children, partners in crime, tormenting their teachers and causing mayhem. Devadas demands her obedient following, Parvati demands to be spoilt and adored and generally that is how things go. If one upsets the other, they retaliate with no thought of the consequences. And that sets the tone for their whole relationship even as they grow up. When he was sent away to school, he seemed to become that rich kid who funded his friends’ adventures and went with the flow. Meanwhile Parvati waited at home, confident he would come back and she would be part of his life.

ANR’s Devadas is a man who knows he has screwed up and has no one else to blame. He conveys the frustration of a young man caught under the thumb of his domineering father (SV Ranga Rao), and the weakness that paralyses him. He and Parvati realise that they can’t continue to be inseparable as they were in childhood without formalising their relationship. There are some really lovely scenes early on when he and Parvati are rediscovering each other, as in this song.

There is also the infamous scene where Devadas strikes Parvati in retaliation for her pride. ANR looked appalled and remorseful after lashing out so viciously and Savitri portrayed a mix of shock, anger and sadness that spoke volumes about the way their relationship still played out. Her parents proposal is rebuffed as they are of a lower social status, and suddenly time is running out.

Parvati sneaks into his room to beg him to marry her before she is married off elsewhere but he cannot stand up to his dad (or whoever chose these pyjamas for him).

And so he loses her, cuts ties with his family and is ripe for a decline into self pity and booze.

Later, when Devadas returns home following his father’s death, he sees the married Parvati. They have a beautiful scene together where suddenly the old Devadas is visible just for a moment. They light up in each other’s presence even as they break down. He has no resilience or motivation – he is carried by the currents of luck and money and when the luck is bad, he doesn’t know how to change things.

His refuge in alcohol initially makes him happy as he hallucinates seeing Parvati. Once the addiction has hold of him, the euphoria starts to disappear and he becomes a shambling wreck. ANR portrays the gradual descent into self destruction very well. While I think Devadas is an idiot I had to look away in some scenes because he was so painfully frail and damaged.

Parvati is a minx and gets her own way but she isn’t completely obnoxious. Savitri does a wonderful job of showing Parvati using her childish impulsive ways but aware of Devadas’ attraction to her, experimenting with her sexual appeal. When she sees Devadas after he has been at school for so many years, her affection is obvious. They talk about his father’s objection to her proposal and there is little game playing when it counts. When she is married off to an elderly widower who really seems to want a nanny more than a wife, her grief is evident but she tries to fit in.

I wasn’t quite sure about the physical side of her marriage – her husband mostly treats her like a niece or daughter, but there was one scene where he said something and Savitri looked quite ill and horrified so I wondered if a conjugal visit was on the cards. She is affectionate towards her stepchildren and wins over her jealous sister-in-law. She really does make the best of it and the kids seem very fond of her so her life isn’t shown as empty without her first love. In the final scene where she realises Devadas is near and tries to see him before he dies, the family seem to stop her because they are worried, not to punish her or protect their honour. Thanks to Savitri’s nuanced acting I really felt for Parvati.

Lalitha, one of the renowned Travancore sisters, is Chandramukhi, the other woman who loves Devadas. Her role is important but doesn’t occupy as much screen time since Devadas usually prefers to pity himself in solitude.  She is flirty and practiced, a woman who knows what men want and knows she has it. Despite her commercial nous, she can’t resist the misery of her newest and most reluctant client. While he initially rejects her, a relationship of sorts does grow over time. She is prepared to lose her livelihood over him and argues with her staff, including a comically inclined orchestra, as she cuts back on working. When Devadas really deteriorates she searches for him and brings him home, offering practical care to keep him comfortable. Lalitha has great physical presence and really suits Chandramukhi’s self aware femininity. Her dancing is assured and she displays her body with confidence, again a perfect fit for this character.

I liked the less grandiose sets in this version as they suit the characters and allow them to be the focus. The music is lovely and as the duets often take the place of conversations, they fit the mood of the scenes. The dances at Chandramukhi’s brothel are quite simple and she performs alone to entertain her clientele – it’s clear what she is selling but the scenes aren’t overly vulgar.

It is really hard to comment on the technical aspects of the film as the DVD picture and sound are so bad, and there are clearly some scenes missing and abrupt edits. Once again I will have a whinge about the terrible print quality of a classic film, and wonder why this is almost the norm. If so many people can recommend a movie as a classic of their industry, why doesn’t anyone take on the task of preservation and restoration? I’m not sure who most of the supporting actors are, but they were all very good and suited their roles.

Anyway – I’ll never wholeheartedly love the story of Devadas and Parvati, but this is my favourite version to date. See it for the excellent acting that made two silly fools seem more relatable than I expected, and for some beautiful melodic songs. 3 ½ stars.

Heather says:  Devdas has never been my favourite story, perhaps because the first version I saw was Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s extravagant epic and I found it difficult to relate to the characters. However I’ve appreciated some of the earlier Hindi film versions a little more, and now agree wholeheartedly with Temple that this Telugu version is the best.

Devdas is certainly not an attractive character at all. He’s arrogant and selfish; almost child-like in his inability to deal with the world and ANR captures this perfectly. In the early scenes his conceit takes centre stage and despite the lack of subtitles his inability to deal with his family’s disapproval of Parvati comes through clearly.  As Devdas falls into self-recrimination and takes up a decadent lifestyle, ANR’s portrayal of the shattered and hopeless alcoholic almost manages to wring some sympathy, despite knowing that he brought it all on himself. So even although I want to dislike Devdas (and usually do), ANR makes his weakness understandable to such an extent that I end up pitying him. It really is an outstanding performance.

I agree with Temple that Savitri is excellent here as Parvati, giving her innocence and a child-like adoration of Devdas which makes her later actions more reasonable. I also loved Lalitha in her portrayal of Chandramukhi, but my favourite actor is the little girl who played the young Parvati. Her eyes were incredibly full of expression for such a young actor and every emotion was written loud and clear on her face. I ended up watching her scenes over and over again and would love to know who she was. Anyone know?

It is such a shame that this film isn’t available with subtitles as much of the beauty in other versions of the story is in the dialogues. I will add my plea that someone needs to please restore and re-release all these old films before they are too far gone to salvage, preferably with English  subtitles too. This really is a classic and should be required viewing for everyone interested in Telugu cinema! 4 stars.

Gabbar Singh (2012)

Posted on by

Pawan Kalyan fans in Melbourne seem to be the loudest, the most enthusiastic and to prefer shredding rather than recycling their newspapers. The air was full of strips of paper right from the opening moments of Gabbar Singh and the paper storm continued well into the second half. A packed cinema, cheerleaders up the front to lead us in our favourite Pawan Kalyan chants as everyone pushed and shoved their way in and plenty of whistles and cheers meant a great start to another adventure without subtitles.

It’s a novelty to watch a Southern remake of a Hindi film since so often the shoe is on the other foot and after Osthe in Tamil, Gabbar Singh is the Telugu version of Dabangg. The film follows the same basic plot, but many of the other roles have been limited to allow more focus on Pawan Kalyan’s character. It’s his film the whole way through and while he has the charisma and capability to carry it off, the story loses much of its focus by dropping the back stories of Gabbar Singh’s wastrel brother and the conflicts within their family.

We start with young Venkat Ratnam Naidu and his stormy relationship with his adopted father Naidu (Nagineedu) who had married Venkat’s mother Suhasini after she was widowed. Naidu prefers his own son and makes no secret of the fact which gives Venkat a huge chip on his shoulder and a somewhat argumentative personality. Venkat ends up running away from his family, but returns years later as a police officer with the assumed name of his childhood hero, Sholay’s Gabbar Singh. He returns in style, renaming the police station after himself and single-handedly annihilating a gang of bank robbers after chasing after them on horseback so it seems safe to say that he’s not mellowed in the intervening years.

It’s not long before Gabbar Singh clashes heads with local rowdy Sidappa Naidu (Abimanyu Singh) and the feud between the two forms the plot for the rest of the film. In between all the gunfights and general mayhem, Gabbar Singh falls in love with Bhagya Lakshmi (Shruti Hassan) but her role is even more reduced than that of Rajo in Dabangg and Bhagya only appears briefly in a few scenes and a couple of dance numbers. Her friend, ably played by Gayatri, has almost as much screen time and judging by the audience reaction, seems to get the better lines too. Kota Srinivasa Rao pops up as Bhagya’s father but again the role has very little scope and he barely has any input.

Sidappa has political aspirations and Gabbar Singh disrupts his attempts to fund his career through various robberies and corrupt deals. Sidappa’s response is to have his henchmen beat him with clubs which is rather extreme but doesn’t really have too much of an effect on his arch nemesis. Abhimanyu Singh’s Sidappa is a typical Telugu goon and doesn’t have any of the flamboyance or appeal of Sonu Sood’s Chhedi Singh so the villain of the story is rather disappointing. As too is the item song. Although Malaika and the backing dancers did their best, Kevvu Keka just isn’t as catchy as Munni Badnam. I was also very disappointed that Ajay as Gabbar Singh’s brother only made a very brief appearance since he’s one of my favourite actors and I was hoping for more from him.

However the film was made totally worthwhile by a scene where Gabbar Singh forces the usual crowd of rent-a-goons to participate in a session of antakshari. This has to be the funniest piece of cinema I have seen this year and it had the crowd on their feet cheering for more! Generally the dialogue seemed to be of high quality since many of the lines had the audience applauding and both Ali and Brahmi’s comedic roles got plenty of appreciative cheers. Since I didn’t understand the dialogue I focused on the myriad of excellent details instead, such as the gun hood ornaments on Gabbar Singh’s 4WD and the incredibly happy and enthusiastic backing dancers. There is a reason why men in flak jackets are not often seen dancing and it’s a point well illustrated in the first song. Generally though the songs are good and Devi Sri Prasad’s music suits the feel of the film.

There is very little of Chubul Pandey in Pawan Kalyan’s Gabbar Singh. None of the mannerisms are there, although Gabbar Singh has plenty of the same chutzpah. The sunglass tricks are reserved for Brahmi apart from an opening scene where Gabbar Singh tosses his sunnies onto a colleagues face with impressive accuracy.  There are a few moments in one song in Switzerland where the normally smooth and co-ordinated Pawan Kalyan does seem to be channelling Salman Khan’s dance style, but thankfully not for long. I did feel sorry for Shruti Hassan dancing in the snow in sandals though.

The reason that Dabangg was such a hit was that it was a Southern style film incorporating plenty of the masala elements which have sadly been missing in Bollywood for some time with a hero who suited the part. Once that novelty element is removed and the film changed to a Southern locale and hero, the story is similar to most other Telugu films. The impact is further lessened by the South’s familiarity with the use of machetes, 4WD’s that roam in packs and acrobatic fight scenes and so Gabbar Singh doesn’t stand out in the same way as Dabangg, although it is more successful than Osthe. Harish Shankar has changed the screenplay to make the film suit his leading man and Pawan Kalyan is excellent as the unorthodox police officer in a rather more orthodox story. Gabbar Singh is still well worth a watch for his performance and I’ll definitely be looking out for the DVD to finally understand the dialogues and for that brilliant antakshari scene!