Swaroop King

Swaroop King
Title Image

Saturday 15 September 2012

LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL REVIEW


       A director makes only one film in his life.    Then he breaks it into pieces and makes it again.-   Jean Renoir
"Growing up " is the stage in life that has its own contents of excitements. Not always pleasant and positive, but life does throw at you whatever it can. Sometimes you find it interesting, sometimes you wonder why the hell is it happening to you. To hear and digest that your mother has cancer is not easy. But that may bring a lot of changes to your attitude, your way of life, and your relationship with your family and the people around you. All the things that come across in your life seem to have a purpose behind them, if you wish to agree with the fact. Life is beautiful when you have dinner(made by your mother) with your family, when you fight with your sister, when you go out playing cricket with your friends, when your "dil ki dhadkan" proposes you. But when things alter and you find yourself out of the comfort zone, where there are adjustments, sacrifices, responsibilities and situations where you can do nothing but hope for good....then can you say that "Life is beautiful"? Sekhar Kammula's latest film is about the above, but not entirely.


The film starts with Amala insisting her kids to leave her and move to Hyd.(If you watch a lot of Telugu movies, you can guess that she has some cancer). So, our hero and his two sisters move from their city to the world of Sekhar Kammula, where there are meek middle class people and proud rich people. The rest of the film is about the teenage infatuations, friendships, relationships, hardships, girls dancing in rain, and all other typical Sekhar Kammula stuff. The film is about a bunch of youngsters who live in a colony called "Sunshine colony"(To remind you that it is a happy place). I dont need them to introduce to you if you have seen Happy days.  They are cloned from there. Welcome to the happy happy world of Sekhar Kammula where middle class people are sensible, know the meaning of life, friendship and stuff, whereas the rich are always evil minded, corrupt, deceptive, manipulative and ruthless. They are always seen calling the "poor" guys "B-Phase dogs". That comes a million times. And the rich people in this film seem to have High BP, piles and alarming levels of short temper that makes you pity them most of the time. "Oh Sekhar......we understood that you hate the rich. But you are spoiling your own film with your prejudice". Those characters just look like vessels that carry bad, but never look human. We all know that there is no black and white in this world. Everything is gray. Thats why it seems as if Sekhar has taken his audience for granted. Keeping in mind the amount of maturity the director has displayed in his previous films, its hard to believe that this kind of characterisation came out of Sekhar's mind. And then there is Anjala Javeri who dances whenever it rains and makes expressions as if she had never seen it raining in her life. And there are always a lot of fights between the good(innocent middle class) and the bad(spoilt rich guys). There is a guy who loves a woman(Shriya) older than him, who is a computer geek, who is weak and intelligent. Does it remind you of "Tyson" in Happy Days? Its not your mistake. Oh yes...Shriya has a boyfriend who is so possessive of her. By this time you are completely convinced that this is a remake of Happy Days.

Sekhar started this movie with a noble intention to convey his version of optimism and his nostalgia. But he chose an easy way of doing this by trying to fit this into the template of his previous flick "Happy Days". The film assumes to be the journey of a youngster who suddenly falls out of his comfort zone and has to face the reality of life.(But this "reality" is Sekhar's fantasy after all). He isn't completely mature but has to act mature. He comes across a lot of things like teenage infatuations, ego clashes, aims, responsibilities and of-course love, which will not let him roam above those but pull him to their level and demand a decision from him. And there are several parallel threads in the film that too are dealt with care.( Nag raj-Lakshmi track is quite entertaining.) The film would have been refreshing if the director had chosen to stay true to the concept. But what bothers you is the artificiality that pops up uncomfortably in the film.  Shriya's story almost looks like a fairy tale.  Some of the characters in the film look too scripted and lack an appeal of reality. Do the rich always try to make fun of the poor? I don't think so. And there are cliches that are thrown disgustingly. When Shriya gets out of her car and boards the van of our heroes, you are forced to agree that the good always receive good. Too cinematic to be a Sekhar's film. Sekhar's world has always its share of optimism and positivity. In any other film of his, you can see it glaringly evident. But what saved them from being preachy and boring is their realistic and simplistic portrayal, equipped with down to earth dialogue that made it believable. But here, he too has traded off art for drama. He just sliced off his characters from Happy Days and stitched them here and wanted us to believe its a new film. It seems he planned the begining and the climax and filled the rest of the movie with "his" regular stuff. Not a very good idea Sekhar.

That being said, this is not a bad film. Its worth watching especially for the way the sentiment is worked out. No dramatic dialogues, no melodramatic music...simply as in real world. The Amala track moves you. You cant disagree when the hero says that his mother's cancer and the consequences changed his attitude towards his life. Thats what the film is supposed to portray, but somehow missed its target. The rest of the film wont make you glued to your seat, but it doesnt mean that it makes you fret with boredom. The only problem is that it gives you a feel that you have seen every scene before. You can guess everything. In that case the unfolding should be gripping enough. The film is partially successful in that department.The music is apt, but not haunting. The set is believable. The costumes are true to the characters. The actors  are fine. Kudos to Amala Akkineni. She excelled. The photography in the second half is brilliant. At the end of the movie, it says that All is well and life is beautiful. That seems to be the opinion of Sekhar Kammula. Is it? What is life.....depends on how you view it. And that forms a different philosophical discussion. Let it not be here in this review of this simple film. we can do it somewhere else. 

As a final say, its not great, but not bad. We like you Sekhar for your storytelling. But please tell us a different story each time.

PS:- Anjala Javeri is still stiff and beautiful. Shriya looked gorgeous. It seems Sekhar too is becoming conscious of the fact that girls can be exploited with camera without looking vulgar. I liked Shriya's two big...................................................................................................................eyes. Really yaar. You spoilt mind. I know what you thought. I am not like you. A good boy.

PS 2:- When the scene in which Mahesh Babu appears came, the audience expected the next photo to be Pawan Kalyan's. They began shouting "Power star Power star". But the scene ended with the hero's photo and Pawan kalyan's fans seemed to be disappointed.











Saturday 8 September 2012

SHIRDI SAI REVIEW

The words "God", "Life" and "death" may be the words that we use everyday, but the questions they arise are innumerable. They can throw you mercilessly into frozen philosophical zones where the answer always seduces you but never lends you its warmth. Is there a God who is responsible for all this? It seems to be the right question to ask if you ever meet a man like Shirdi sai baba. Director Ragahvendra Rao introduces you the Godman but never lets his hero get deeper beyond the surface of "Religious tolerance". Here is my complete review of the film.

Being aware of what a philosophical and emotional depths a film can transcend if it is about a man who is conceived a God by two different religions, its hard to appreciate this film. None of the characters around Sai Baba asks him a tough question. Its not very interesting to see a Godman confronted by people who wait for the most ground level logic to be sermonised to fall for any phakir. Even if it is a film, its hard to imagine that people are such dumbos to get convinced with surface level answers and a pinch of Viboothi. When I was half way through the film, I felt like standing and yelling at the screen "Ask Baba tougher questions". For example, the film shows Baba always talking to some imaginary or mysterious people who are invisible to normal devotees. Is it God, with whom he is talking? If he can talk to God  with that much ease and freedom, why should he go for a three day trip to all the "lokams" of Gods? What difference does that make to his devotees? That forms a question right? But when he wakes up, the britisher never asks this question but instead poses a dumb question like "How did you come to life again?"  And again he gets convinced with the simple logic Baba explains. Doesnt he know that the body and the soul are different? Poor man.Am I trying to dig too deep into something that is layer thin? May be. "Shirdi Sai" doesnt aim to be great. It aims to be a safe commercial project, that can pass off as a typical Raghavendra Rao "Bhakti flick". Thats why when Nagarjuna delivers the dialogue "Ee gaali pilichindi, ee nela rammandi, vachanu", no one takes it serious. Audience didnt seem even to bother about why a man who preaches non attachment to earthly things is so much attached to the air and earth of Shirdi. I am tempted everytime a character enters disliking Sai, expecting  the character to have atleast some brains to ask Sai a deeper philosophical question. When Sai Baba says that man can be happy aonly after death, why doesnt Sai Kumar ask "Then what is the purpose of life, if all is a suffering? What is the ultimate fruit that we get by going through all this mess?" Oh my God....Swaroop, you are expecting too much out of a telugu film.

I have nothing about Baba or his devotees. I dont know whether all this story is true or not. My comments are not about Sai Baba. They are about the film. Is it that Baba's life doesnt have enough masala? Christ's life has the epic "Crucifixion" that provides enough drama for a film. But here, no one lifts a hand against Baba. Is it the reason that we find no conflict in this film?. Yes. The director' s sole aim is to just make a film on Sai. Thats it. But he doesnt have the heart or interest to use this as a vehicle to his display of artistry. Thats why this film appears just like a wikipedia article on Sai. No implications, no enlightenment, no philosophy, no drama.When Sai claims to bear the suffering of his nephew, it doesnt look like a divine compassion towards humankind but just as a human emotion towards a relative. Thats why we just dont get the feel that this man has the wisdom of worlds in his head. He looks like just another old man who prefers to use his retirement money for his daughter's marriage instead of his heart surgery. If it is true that man can be happy only after death, why cant Baba let Taatya die? Oh Again I am going too deep? Sorry. Lets talk about the film again.

The review doesnt end if I dont mention Nagarjuna, who has just given a world class performance. He is completely believable and effortlessly likeable. Undoubtedly, he is the one and only actor on Earth who could do this character. The way he suppressed himself and let the character take him over is commendable. His eyes speak  whatever has been missing in the dialogue. I dont know how Sai Baba spoke or walk. If it is not like Nagarjuna, I can bet that Sai Baba was not as divine looking as Nag. He is sure to bag a number of awards and this is one of the best performances of Nag in his career.

Coming to other technicalities, the sets are pathetic for the reason that they shout that it is a film. Keeravani's music tries to drive the Telugus into "Bhakti" mode and I dont know whether its successful or not because I am immune to such tunes. Srikanth also did well. Sai Kumar is OK. The others overacted. Its no use commenting on the taking of a director who has been making films way past his expiry date.

As a final say, this film is for Sai Baba devotees and Nag devotees.

PS:- If you are a Sai devotee, please dont misunderstand me.  My comments are about the film's mediocrity. I state again that I know nothing about Sai Baba.

PS 2:- Beside me, three middle aged women sat to watch the movie. While I am looking at sides, getting bored, they all are in tears watching Nagarjuna's acting in the climax.