Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas - Movie Review

I remember being struck by director Terry Gilliam's intense vision while watching Brazil a few weeks ago. I remember thinking that one should only watch films like this. So it was with some trepidation that I brought home the Fear and Loathing DVD, because watching something with high expectations inevitably leads to disappointment. I needn't have worried. The film is absolutely incredible. It is so funny to begin with, Raoul Duke and his attorney Gonzo on their way to Vegas to cover a motorcycle derby with an incredible arsenal of drugs. Johnny's incredibly stylistic portrayal of Duke is pure magic. Benicio is simply incredible as Gonzo. The two are so good, after a while you can't even see Johnny or Benicio any more, just two mad guys going crazy. And then, the humour starts to turn into this dark, uncomfortable vibe, the laughs are still there but by now you're suffering extreme discomfort. The script is a winner all the way, constantly surprising with such amazing lines as "At last we found our way back to the hotel room. The key wouldn't open the door." Anyone who's been to Amsterdam will surely relate to that feeling. The great thing about the whole thing is the ludicrousness of the situation. These two guys walking around doing large quantities of drugs and no one seems to mind. There are no obstacles in the path of our heroes except their own madness. The whole production of this movie was so cool. Listening to Gilliam's commentary later, I realised that so much of this movie was improvised. Gilliam likes to set up the scene and then let it play itself out, which is when one realises, I suppose, what truly gifted actors the leading pair are. I cannot recommend this movie highly enough.

The Assasination of Richard Nixon - Movie Review

Ah well, another day another movie. I have a friend who would call this movie subversive not because the protagonist tries to kill richard Nixon, but because the protagonist fails. She says that movies like this are the ones that prop up the system. They lead you to believe that they're against the system but really, they are just all about how you cannot beat it. She's right as well. In the end, one has neither sympathy for Sam Bicke nor his cause, driven as it is by rage rather than any moral stance. Who wants to support a total loser, even when his cause is to kill the president of the United States. A political film with superficial politics and superior production. That's all. Give this one a miss.

The Man Who Wasn't There - Movie Review

The perfect antidote to an intellectual thriller like '21 grams'. A movie with more soul per second than anything else I've seen from the Coen brothers, and a treatise on restraint. When the Coen brothers make wooden, two-dimemsional cardboards they make them that way not so they can escape from their acting or writing responsibilities, when the make them say their lines deadpan it's not because they're looking for some sort of 'quirkyness', it's because these characters are really beaten down by life, really tired, bored beyond belief and unable to express any of it. Ed Crane is a barber who does something one day because he thinks it might help him escape from his life as a barber, the same life that he finds no meaning in. The consequences of his actions however, are far more serious than he bargained for. Yes, he did something wrong in order to get some money together, but as he says, nothing that wasn't fair. And yet, the people who pay the price pay a price far beyond their crimes to Ed, and just when it seems like everything is going to be okay, Ed's pigeon's come home to roost. And yet, as he says, 'I feel sorry for all the people I hurt. But I don't regret any of it. I used to. I used to regret being a barber.' Possibly the most understated movie on taking the chances that one is likely to come across. I'm of the opinion that when one takes a decision, it cannot be taken as to what might change in the future. The future is unknowable, and there's no point trying to chart the course of one's life from point A to point B. Instead, a decision should stand on the grounds of what it will change in your life today. If years down the line it turns out to be the wrong decision, well, that's just life, but atleast you can say you tried. Atleast you get hanged for some crime that you actually did commit. All the actors were so good and it's nice to know that Frances McDormand can even be hot, when required. Billy rocks! Even the minor characters were stunning. The photography was scintillating black and white, pure poetry. The dialogue was as racy as a great crime thriller, the best of the noir tradition is on display here but with a real twist. and really, where else can someone see a frame like this one?

And let us not even get into what might have been if Creighton Tolliver had done what he needed to. Stunning! In other news: Saif Ali Khan finally managed to win the Rajat Kamal: he bagged the best actor award for his "sheer ease, subtlety and spontaneity in portraying a complex and demanding role" in Hum Tum. (from The Hindu) Given that Sudhir Mishra is the chairperson of the jury for the national awards this year, I think it's safe to assume that Hazaaron Khwaishein Aisi will win the best film award next year.

21 grams - Movie Review

First things first - watch this movie. I don't know how much of my enjoyment came from my not knowing anything about this film, but if you know nothing about this film, go watch it first and then read on. The direction/editing is the first thing that hits you. The film starts with a series of chronologically jumbled episodes from the lives of the characters, just tiny slices following each other with the rhythmic relentlessness of a locomotive. You try and piece together the lives of these people and the order in which these events might have happened given these tiny clues. Throughout the movie, each frame and each line offer some new information, some new meaning to try and piece into the puzzle. When you finally find out what the titular 21 grams refers to, it is goose-bump central. Then you find out who made this movie and you say "Man, I was wondering how this one came out of Hollywood." You sometimes notice how difficult it might have been to make this film because a lot of the clues are almost subliminal. The colour of the sky on a particular day. The grain of the film. The expression on the actors face. At the start, there are a million possibilities, but as one starts to piece them together, one slowly unfolds the horror that lies in wait. If you need a bit of space to deal with the intensity of the stories, the director gives none. He is merciless to the point that one of my friends asked that the movie be paused because "I need another drink, and I don't like to cry in front of other people". I am somehow glad that I didn't watch this movie in a theater even though there is no doubt that it might have been the most cathartic and disturbing cinematic experience of my life. This is a keeper, definitely. A masterclass in film making.

Garden State - Movie Review

If a movie must be quirky, let it be like this. The jokes were of the highest quality, even if they were few and far between, making one laugh out loud quite unexpectedly. The story was sweetly sentimental but made with such affection that one cannot but help be taken in by the characters, especially the vivacious and slightly-nuts Sam (Natalie Portman). It's a film that one might describe as peculiar, but never crossing the line into bizarre. The emotional scenes are played with amazing restraint. The music is noteworthy and the crew seems to have been mighty competent. This was writer-director-actor Zach Braff (from TV's Scrubs) first feature and it is definitely an auspicious debut. What amazes me about indie cinema these days is the production values. Everything is tight as a drum, the attention to detail is striking and the end result is pure quality. Quite unlike our veteran film makers like Sudhir Mishra who won't even take the trouble to stick a guy's beard on properly. Ah well.

Oh Jerry, Jerry...

It's been well known for some time that MBAs shouldn't really be writing anything apart from reports or presentations. Senior ones should limit themselves to signing checks and filling golf score cards. So why does this continue to happen. Well, alright, he started well with his sweet pieces on Mysorean cooking and RK Narayan, and I thought it was a minor blip when he wrote a pointless (yet thought provoking) piece on Macaulay, but really Jerry, this isn't the Times of India. If you want to talk about randomness, faith and a philosophical approach to the same, there are far better ways of doing it than this nonsense. Chaldeans?

The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou - Movie Review

Funky title, funky film, boring as hell. Like watching a Hyundai Santro with "Racing America" stickers and a rear spoiler chunder down the expressway at 65 kmph. Wes Anderson has made a career out of 'quirky', and while in a perfect world there should be space for a voice like this, I'd be far happier I think, if he found something coherent to say, or even a coherent way of saying whatever it is that he wants to. Style is one thing, substance is another - any MBA (or post-modernist) will tell you that. If Wes'd been a corporate executive, he'd probably be responsible for Vanilla Coke. Good for Owen Wilson though, he's managed to overcome the handicap of his nose, which can only be a good thing. And this isn't just because I used to idolise Cousteau. I even know not just his his middle name (Yves) but also how it is pronounced.

Irreversible - Movie Review

Irreviewable, more like. Shot in reverse-chronological order, this film deals with a brutal rape and murder and the events that lead up to it, or so the blurb on the jacket will have you believe. In reality, this is an irreparable waste of time. Let us take a moment to count all the absolutely pointless cinematic techniques used - the 'drunken monkey' camera work, the one shot per scene wank, the story told in reverse - and the terrible effect that they have when combined in such a pointless way. The dialogue is rambling, pointless, telling us nothing about the people involved except for their total imbecility. Why this strange camera work? So the director could conveniently point it at a dark corner where he can insert the cut for the next (previous) scene. Why one shot per take? Pure wank. Why in reverse? To prevent the audience from walking out once Monica Belucci's nude scenes were over. This is a gratuitously violent film with all the intellectual content of a porn movie. Some might call it visceral and gut-wrenching, which is true. I did feel a distinct wrenching in my gut as my viscera tried to tie itself into a knot and die. If this film shocks you, you're probably not watching enough TV. The opening credits say "Musique: Beethoven". What arrogance. Written, edited and directed by: Noe. Such hubris. This is the Hazaaron Khwaishein of France. What is it about the French these days? I thought they made good movies. If I had a rupee for every shitty, pretentious and mind numbingly dull French film I've seen in the past few months, I'd have quite a few rupees. Garde a Vue? Rubbish. A Very Long Engagement? Absolute bollocks. Manu Chau Giro Mundial 2002? Gag, puke...and so on.

Two pointless films...

...and on the same day too! The first was a French film called "A Very Long Engagement" about a girl (Audrey Tatou from Amelie) who goes looking for her fiance, presumed dead during the first world war. As a take on the suffering of the common man during war time, it was lukewarm and bearable. On all other counts, it fared pretty poorly. I'm getting a bit tired of this too-clever-by-half movie making. The second was About Schmidt, which had a far deeper message but dragged from start to finish and said what it had to very inelegantly. This is the movie Alexander Payne made before 'Sideways', so atleast he's going in the right direction. Did I mention that 'Sideways' was just wonderful?