Review: Australia
SOFT CORN
Baz Luhrmann’s latest is a curiously subdued affair, but lovers of hokey Hollywood epics won’t be complaining.
JAN 4, 2008 – IN THE PRESENT DAY, AN ANACHRONISM LIKE AUSTRALIA
is the very definition of indefensible – except if, like me, you have a sweet tooth for all things past, especially gargantuan epics where the handsomeness of the production is surpassed only by the handsomeness of the protagonists. What Baz Luhrmann has attempted here is, at one level, wholly admirable. We’re at a slightly cynical age of the cinema where movie stars prefer to look like anything but movie stars. They mess up their perfect features with prosthetics – all for the sake of their craft (and perhaps an Oscar as well) – and this pursuit of imperfection often percolates down to the material itself.
The epics of today are weighted down by moral ambiguity, an unwholesome blurring of the lines between good and evil, along with deconstructionist impulses and an often novelistic approach to the interior worlds of the characters. Australia, on the other hand, harks back to pure cinema, pure spectacle. The point isn’t to delve deep but rather to smooth out the surface – there’s not a whiff of motivation here that’s not telegraphed miles of outback ahead.
The instant the dainty Sarah Ashley (Nicole Kidman) sets foot in the rough-and-tumble continent of the film’s title, you know she will – with the assistance of the cattle-driving cowboy known only as the Drover (Hugh Jackman) – make the transition from delicate English rose to thorny frontierswoman. And you know she will return the favour by aiding his navigation from native savage to neutered family man. And you know she’s fooling no one – least of all herself (unless she’s never set eyes on a hokey Hollywood epic or ever read a steamy bodice ripper) – when she pretends to hate him at first. And you know he’s fooling no one when he pretends not to be attracted to this willowy creature who is, in every possible way, his antipode.
And you know how reptilian the villain truly is when he’s repeatedly identified by his crocodile-skin boots. He’s out to steal every square inch of Sarah’s sprawling ranch, which she’s inherited from a husband who’s murdered a few minutes into the film, and as if that weren’t evil enough, he’s – gasp! – a racist. The good Sarah, however, is catholic in her acceptance of all humankind, even the part-Aboriginal child she strikes up an unlikely maternal rapport with. (Brandon Walters skillfully imbues this youngster with the kind of saucer-eyed innocence that can wear down the defenses of the most hardened of moviegoers.)
And thus Australia plays out, as a deliciously campy pastiche of Giant (racism lessons amidst dry desert land) and Red River (cattle driving set against headstrong personal relationships) and Casablanca (the hero not wishing to be reminded of a tune he associates with a lost love) and all those scores of films that featured a grizzled old souse as comic sidekick. Even the farcical nature of the early sequences is reminiscent of the broad musical comedies of a certain vintage. (I’m thinking of the scene where Sarah bursts into raptures upon sighting, for the first time, a herd of kangaroos. The romantic vision is underscored by music that’s equally flighty, until a gunshot erupts. A second later, a horrified Sarah is treated to the sight of her first kangaroo carcass.)
The wonderful Jackman gives his scenes every molecule of his being, as if he believed every ridiculous minute of what he’s putting himself through, and Kidman is equally game, fluttery and frantic as though doing everything in her power to distract our attention from that heaving bosom. (Her highlight is a very funny moment, bordering on burlesque, where she attempts to sing Over the Rainbow from The Wizard of Oz. Unable to recall either the words or the tune, she wings the rest of it most amusingly.)
But after a while, the tone changes. Australia becomes more serious and sentimental, in ways this cheerfully trashy material cannot hope to be shaped into. Where something like Gone With the Wind – a similar conflation of wartime hysteria and weepy romance – was truly resonant with emotion, thanks largely to the superbly written characters, the big epiphanies here don’t feel earned. They are mechanical contrivances, wound up like clockwork and left to detonate at precise intervals – and they don’t quite make the transition from screenplay to screen.
Part of the problem may be that Luhrmann’s telling of this story is disquietingly straight. There’s no nutty auteurist conceit behind it – as there was in William Shakespeare’s Romeo + Juliet and Moulin Rouge – and his energies are uncharacteristically subdued. Late into the film, there’s the moment we’ve been waiting for, when Sarah is at a snooty ball and, after casually tossing aside her invitation, the Drover makes a dramatic entry. For the first time, we see them as movie stars – not the scruffy, artfully dusted up movie stars who were traipsing about the outback, but the cleaned-up kind who rightfully belong atop mile-high billboards. (He’s even had himself a shave, all the better to show off that dazzling smile.)
The crowd around them parts like the Red Sea in front of Moses, the orchestra strikes up Cole Porter’s sweepingly romantic Begin the Beguine, and they melt into one another’s arms and begin to dance. But Luhrmann isn’t interested in keeping them the sole focus of his attention, the way he was when he staged the marvellous sequence in Moulin Rouge where Ewan McGregor serenades Nicole Kidman with Elton John’s Your Song. There, Luhrmann had eyes for no one else; here his eyes are on everyone else, on the secondary dynamics of those milling around the leads. We’d expected the bodice to be ripped, and instead, we see it being undone cautiously, button by beady button.
A rescue operation towards the end, after the Japanese invade Australia, is similarly shorn of thrill and suspense. The sequence is so flat, you come dangerously close to not caring who lives and who dies. But the full-out final stretch atones for a lot of the earlier sins. The music soars without an iota of restraint or shame, and there are enough teary reunions to pad out the climaxes of three smaller films – and if you don’t have a lump in your throat by this point, it’s either because you’ve got a heart of stone or a great deal of gritty moral fibre. For the rest of us, as we leave the theatre, it’s with a smile and a fair amount of sheepishness at being seduced by some of the shallower blandishments of the cinema.
Copyright ©2009 The New Sunday Express. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
Please tell us this marks a return to you reviewing english releases instead of hindi
And oh, thought you’d call this ‘Corn with the wind’
Damn, you are good!
Arun: Don’t know man. I was asked to do this because there were no new Hindi releases this week. And damn, I should have thought of “Corn with the Wind”
Oh come on, I winked away a teeny tiny tear when the Drover thought he’d lost his true love once again. Awwww! So pretty!
In a way what I appreciated about this movie was that in this Luhrmann finally embraced his love for the pretty and said to hell with the rest. Maybe now he’ll be able to go beyond it. Although, given he wants to make The Great Gatsby next, I just don’t know.
Talking of Gone with the Wind…how do you have the patience to sit thru something like that in this day and age? It must have felt corny even for the 60s audience. But then if you can sit thru something like Rama Rama kya hai drama or Mere Baap pehle Aap complying with your professional demands I guess GWTW is’nt that patience-testing
Vijay: I’m afraid I don’t agree with you at all. That’s like saying someone wouldn’t like to listen to MKT’s music today. It all depends on your interest. Maybe a casual movie/music listener may be swayed solely by current-day trends, but if you’re a buff, the era a piece of art belongs to doesn’t matter at all. After a brief mental recalibration — the kind you’d do to watch, say, a weepy Bhimsingh movie today — all these other considerations cease to matter. I think GWTW is a fantastic book and an equally fantastic movie. The four-odd hours just zip by — I mean, there’s just so much happening from scene to scene. And I can’t believe you’re comparing this great piece of escapist entertainment (not to mention monumental example of moviemaking synergy) to something like (gasp) Rama Rama
Amrita: The Great Gatsby? Seriously? So we can expect a flashing disco-ball of a green light?
Yup, he just bought the rights to Gatsby so that’s possibly his next project — should be very interesting!
You are being a little too kind to this overblown wannabe epic.having an ambitious title and a stunning background scenery.kidman was mary poppins personified and the film addressed practically every cliche in the book.
Digression:
BR…did you check out “Bommalattam”. I think its a movie worthy of your thoughts:)
Brangan, but Bhim Singh’s movies do feel torturous in parts despite the mental recalibration that I do, enna panradhu
And I am a guy who generally gets suckered in by these weepy melodramas. Those who grew up watching those movies (like our parents generation) might be more successful at mental recalibration. They also have a certain nostalgia factor for it. For that matter, even I do. I get ina different mindset when watching 60s Sivaji movies. But Hollywood is different. It doesnt enjoy any such nostalgia benefit.
The cultural and emotional barrier still exists.
I agree that a movie buff/critic will try his best to look past all these factors while a casual viewer will reject it outright. But even for a buff the appeal/impact has to be much less than what it could have been for a critic or buff in the 60s.And that applies even for a comedy-entertainer like Kadhalikka Neramillai which I watched recently and found it boring in most parts.
I think a lot of mainstream cinema’s appeal is limited to an era or two(20-30 yrs). Who knows, 10 years from now, the then teenage generation might look back at the 80s and laugh at some of Kamal’s over-the-top acting and horrific disco dresses in some of his films(just like how we laugh at Sivaji sometimes), while we, those of us who grew up in that era, would have fond memories and nostalgic affinity
But however I am not saying that I woud react that way to ALL movies released 30 yrs back. For instance, some of Balachander’s movies from the 70s still holds up mostly for me, despite the bell bottoms, “touches” and indoor sets.
I am somewhat uncomfortable with the time chosen; wasn’t that the exact phase when the White Man’s burden slowly started being seen for what it was: the White Man’s bucaneering.
Sure, I am not screaming over rooftops that I need guilty self-references;I understand this movie’s about Australia and for Australia. I just can’t connect with the righteous self-references.
If Baz had to settle for one thing to be proud of, I guess he’d go the same way as the REAL Baz.
His (very broad) brush strokes.
Anon: Is it still playing? Last I checked, it was out of the major theatres. I did catch Silambattam though, and no, I’m NOT going to write about it
Vijay: Oh, I am a major sucker for melodramas too, including ones where Sowcar Janaki’s eyes are blinded by a bunsen burner
I think that’s because we grew up watching them on DD.
But why do you say Hollywood is different? Didn’t you grow up with HW movies on TV and video too? Or for that matter Star Trek or Sherlock Holmes on TV? Doesn’t that take you back to “those good old days” nostalgia? But then, I guess we’ve already had this argument over Star Wars and 2001
On another note, regarding “I agree that a movie buff/critic will try his best to look past all these factors” – with regards to GWTW, it wasn’t just looking past these factors. There are a lot of older movies where I do have to do this (e.g. It Happened One Night), but not with this particular one. It’s really a damn entertaining movie.
And speaking of “Kamal’s over-the-top acting and horrific disco dresses,” I’ll never forget this incident where I’d raved and raved about his dance for Unakenna mele ninraai to a much younger cousin, and years later, when it finally showed up on TV, I didn’t know where to look. He, needless to say, was in splits
“But however I am not saying that I woud react that way to ALL movies released 30 yrs back. For instance, some of Balachander’s movies from the 70s still holds up mostly for me, despite the bell bottoms, “touches” and indoor sets.”
Not me. I recently bought quite a few 70s B&W films of Balachander and found most of them boring. The film style has changed a lot in the last 3 decades and the style of 70s is woefully outdated.
Silambattam? why? why??? why???????????
Bommalattam is playing at INOX Chennai 12:25 PM this week. You should catch it to atone for Silambattam
u watched silambattam??? I wonder what made you to walk into a hall that shows it. Btwn did u hear Naan kadavul? What is your idea?
Tambi Dude: reg. “the style of 70s is woefully outdated,” if you’re going to factor in “style” as a criterion for old-movie watching, then you can pretty much rule out 99% of the older films. Why, even Mani Ratnam’s strong backlighting and one-word dialogues and so on seem somewhat odd today. IMO, Balachander was at his peak in the period from the early 70s to the mid-80s. So maybe he stuck with Raghunatha Reddy, but these films are otherwise so rich in characterisation and plot and sharp dialogue, I’d watch them in an instant over most Tamil films made today. Of course, even with these, there are some things I don’t care for, but overall, these are very strong films.
Anon: Because we bunch of cousins decided to get all down-and-dirty, that’s all
But I must say, it is exactly what you’d expect. A trashy, full-blooded masala movie, with no fancy pretensions to being anything else. I must say I had more fun during this than during Abhiyum Naanum, which, by the 75th well-meaning dialogue, had me yawning away. Of course, this doesn’t mean I’m going to line up for Engal Aasan 
sakthi: Have written about NK for this week’s column. I really liked it.
brangan: Let me hitch my cart to the Abhiyum NAnum bashwagon. Vijay TV had one of their panel discussions on why girls and fathers liked the movie so much, and there was quite the efflux of milk and honey. Amidst discussions of respect for the Girl Child they cut to a tracking shot of Prakashraj looking for his daughter through her loud crying. He finds her in the kitchen crying and promptly proceeds to slap his wife before proceeding to mollycoddle his daughter.
vAzhga peNNuRimai!!!!
BR, maybe I need to give it another try then. I must have watched it on a restless day. I feel that the melodrama quotient in Hollywood, even the 40s stuff, is probably still not comparable to that of a 60s Bhimsingh movie. I mean they are on different planes altogether. So maybe If I watch Paasamalar and then watch GOTW immediately, I might not have to do much of a mental recalibration at all, so what am I complaining about?
Reg, Sherlock Holmes it was finely done by Jeremy Brett(?) and I might like it even if I watch it now. No era-specific corny or melodramatic content(mostly because of the content/genre). It takes you back to those days in a more..I dont know how to put it..realistic or make-believable manner because of the presentation and acting. Whereas formula(formula doesnt mean just masala but also formula tearjerkers)mainstream movies/serials of a particular era holds up well moistly only for that era.
And also the nostalgia quotient is somehow higher for movies made close to home(maybe because of the culture, language/or emotionally we feel closer to these characters) . It is difficult to have nostalgia for an American movie, even something supposedly as iconic as GOTW, made 60 yrs back, unless you had watched a lot of movies from that era growing up and have a lot of data points to draw a calibration curve
Tambi dude, if Balachander’s 70s movies dont work for you, I guess you can simply forget the social dramas of the 60s
Good to hear that you liked NK; mostly I’ve heard only complaints about this soundtrack and am eagerly awaiting your take.
And good that you’ve not watched Bommalattam. I lost all the respect for BR (not you) after this stupid excuse for a thriller(?!). was really astonished by the overall positive reviews that it got in media. (comeback of BR and all that crap)
10 minutes into it, you’ll start feeling when it is going to end, and that happens very rarely to me. A flimsy premise with lousy characterization, inane dialogues, obvious continuity and sync glitches, a rather unconventional (!!!) style of screenplay (that for the most parts was irritating) and some kind of a suspense knot which didn’t make any impact at all by the time it was finally (!)untied.(However the very next day I happened to watch MudhalMariyaadhai on a bus, so all the anger that Bommalattam triggered has dissipated by now)
MW what happened to Poo which you thought was supposed to be good once?
BR, talking of KB would you think he shares some cinematic traits with David Mamet? I have not seen a lot of movies of Mamet(just Oleanna, House of Games, Glengarry Glen Ross) but from what I have seen so far, Mamet seems to be a close equivalent to KB in Hollywood.Same drama/playright to cinema transition, sharp dialogue etc. Both of them dont place a lot of emphasis on visual storytelling but their characterization/dialogue make up for a lot of it, although Mamet could be more contemporary. I could be off here with the comparison, but just a quick thought. Maybe Mamet has done more in his other films.
Maybe Abhiyum naanum is the daughter’s vaaranam aayiram – it is probably difficult to appreciate if you aren’t a girl or are one but havent seen a father like the one portrayed in the movie. Just like only the guys who actually have seen the ‘peter’ fathers like Krishnan seem to appreciate VA.
I personally found Abhiyum Naanum exactly as BR describes – Vikraman redux, intolerable.
But nothing on earth will move me to watch Silambattam. Much rather Bachna E Haseeon than Silambattam
Come On Raj! Not even Raaja soulfully crooning koNNu puttE, koNNu puttE so that Simbu and Sneha can cavort on hay filled train compartments?
Deepauk M: Oh, that’s the least annoying bit. Jut wait till you get to the part where the servant/family-member starts to sing a paean to Trisha.
Vijay: “And also the nostalgia quotient is somehow higher for movies made close to home” – I agree somewhat, but for me, I get nostalgic about anything that I experienced during a particular period of my life — whether books or movies or music or whatever. I don’t pin it down to a specific cultural factor (e.g. whether Tamil), but more of an experiential thing.
And about Mamet and KB, I’d also say both were very interested in the interior worlds of the characters — they had a very specific psychological interest. KB is quite unique in that respect among directors of the time, because almost everyone around him was interested mostly in plot development, while in films like Thappu Thalangal and Nizhal Nijamaagiradhu and Agni Saatchi, you’ll find a lot of psychological character detail. (Needless to say, I’m generalising quite a bit, but you get the point.)
Kiruba: Oh, I too have my share of complaints about NK, but overall, there’s a lot to like. Didn’t catch up on Poo, BTW.
rangan (re: msg # 17)
I meant portrayal of characters of 70s also. Take Aval Oru Todarkadai. I found the portrayal of Sujata’s family very in-your-face ,lacking subtlety.
Or take Nizhal Nijamagiradhu. I found Sumitra highly irritating and also the side story of mentally deficient servant and shoba also poor and unable to hold my interest.
I seem to have liked them back in 70s, but then that was 3 decades ago.
This is about tamil movies. I find most of 70s and 80s Hindi movies close to unwatchable. Even movies like Arjun which I was once a big fan of looked badly dated now in presentation.
to Vijay ( reg msg # 19).
Jermy Brett’s portrayal of Sherlock Holmes is almost universally acknowledged as the best ever. He took some liberties with the interpretation of SH’s character, but the end product was awesome. I have around 20 short stories (episodes) in my DVD collection and it is something I enjoy immensely. I watch one episode or other every 2/3 months and never get tired of it.
Of course there are classic Hindi movies of 80s like Govind Nihalani’s Ardh Satya or Aakrosh which I still love to watch. Among the recent ones, Hey Raam or Satya comes in that category.
typo “This is about tamil movies. ”
should read as “This is not about tamil movies. “
A link to an old “nostalgia” piece — on Star Wars
You had to post a link to an old “nostalgia” piece., didnt you.. now look what you have done …i ended up reading all the back articles and am heading straight away to watch Agni Natchatiram . Damn you..
Rangan – thanks for that link. I don’t care so much about Star Wars, but that ‘SYD’ Barret piece was awesome.
“but for me, I get nostalgic about anything that I experienced during a particular period of my life — whether books or movies or music or whatever. I don’t pin it down to a specific cultural factor (e.g. whether Tamil), but more of an experiential thing.”
Baddy, I completely agree to that and share the same thoughts. I remember, back in 1984, before we bought a TV set later that year, going over to a neighbor’s house every Sunday morning to watch “Diff’rent Strokes” and “Star Trek”!! I could care less for either of those but the thought does bring nostalgic memories. Similarly, our discussions and my pleas about a separate piece on Agni are also borne out of nostalgic memories from that time period…
BTW, I can understand how you felt when the Simla Special song played out later. When I watch it on TV now, I’m amazed that Kamal built his reputation as a disco dancer (also) winging his way through “Aey Unnaithane”, “Megam Kottatum” and the likes!! Of course, it’s another story that Rajni did try to match his steps in “Unnai Azhaithathu” etc!!
Bringing the discussion back to Australia..This reminds me very much of “Out of Africa” with Meryl Streep and Robert Redford. That was one very good movie and Meryl Streep was just great.
BR as far as music is concerned my nostalgia too extends much beyond Tamil FM. Some of the cheesy synth pop 80s bands like say Modern Talking has quite a bit of nostalgic value for me because I happened to hear and like them at that point.( some of Harris Jayaraj’s songs with feminine sounding male singers and easy melody lines reminds me of groups like Modern Talking and Pet Shop Boys at times
) Like you say it is more of a experiential thing. Same with old Lata/Rafi songs, although in this case there is much more to it than just nostalgic value. Sometimes quite a few songs also have the potential to evoke nostalgia even if you havent heard them before and are hearing them only now.Maybe because of the melody or the familiarity in style or that feel of the bygone era. I guess thats how GOTW should have worked for you, apart from its other cinematic merits.
With Tamil/Hindi movies though there was’nt much of a choice on DD.
It is just that my nostalgia for Hollywood extends only upto the sphagetti Westerns of the mid-60s. My only memory of anything apart from that could be Hitchcock – Dial M for Murder and a few other assorted flicks like Wait until Dark(I remember us being fascinated by the climax, later it was also flicked for a Revathi-suresh Menon TV serial with Revatni playing the blind lead). You know back then, had an instant dislike for anything black and white
shankar, kamal of those times…aarghh! flip a few pages back, and that ilanir thaliayan kamal of the 70’s was another aargh.
but remember that the star disco dancer of the 80’s in Indian film industry(which in the context of the statement would mean bollywood alone since the rest of india doesnt have film industries for people who make these statements) was Mithun Chakraborthy. Later Govinda. Now, that should put things in context for you.
I was going through your old archives and realized you don’t do any non-film articles anymore. Even the one carnatic article during December season is missing this year.
Hope you would write them again.
and no other flash fiction hidden in those older hard drives that we can meanwhile savor?
s: Yeah, I realise that. But at the time, I was doing only the reviews, while now I’ve been asked to do these other two columns every week. Naturally, something’s gotta give… But I did write about Maargazhi Raagam some time back.
Kiruba: Not heeding your dire warnings, I did end up watching Bommalattam and it was pretty much as you described it. But what I found most amusing (and also ironic) is that for someone who begins every film with “en iniya thamizh makkale,” this film is filled with Hindi dialogues, which have subsequently been dubbed into Tamil. At first I thought it was just bad lip sync, but then I found out they were actually speaking Hindi. Also, the supposed brothers from “Hyderabad” are dressed like UP-ite villagers. The names too are along the lines of Trishna, Vivek Varma, Rana and so on. Very odd. Do you know if this was meant to be a Hindi film, which was, for some reason, dubbed into Tamil (and shooting afresh only the Vivek and Manivannan parts)?
raj, you forgot one of your fave actors in that disco dancer list…Rishi Kapoor!!
br, thats right. It was supposed to be a bilingual. Hence Patekar and Reshmaiyya. I believe there are not enough producers south of the Vindhyas whom BR can con into producing his movie now so he had to find a maanga from beyond.
That said, on Reshamiyya, did you actually say that Dino Morea must feel bad about being reborn as Himesh – in your Karz review? Not fair – atleast Himesh has a few hits as ‘composer’ – no ‘music director’ – what has Dino got except flop movies and blank stares?
raj: Thanks. I knew there was something fishy here. Do you know if they’re planning an actual Hindi release (i.e. with the original dialogues and all)?
**spoiler alert**
Thx for heeding my request and sorry Bommalattam didn’t turn out well for you:( As Raj mentioned, it was supposed to be a Hindi film titled “Cinema”. BRaja found no takers for the finished product up there so he decided to dub it and tack on a few tamil segments and release it down here. I was aware of this history and that probably explains why I warmed up to it more.
I found the initial portions bad and was uncomfortable with the jerky narration. But the ending kind of indicates that these were deliberate. I kind of liked the fact that a kollywood director has the guts to attempt a sneaky crying gamesque twist. I also liked the “loopiness” in the story – Nana talking about how everything is smoke and mirrors in cinema and proceeding to attempt that in real life. There was also a nice symmetry in the way Nana hoodwinks everyone in the movie and BRaja misdirects the audience with the movie. Nana Patekar, I thought, was brilliant as the idiosyncratic director.
Oh well! Will have to wait for another Tamil movie to get my favourite critic to agree with me:)
The Hindi version was called “Cinema”.I would have checked that out first if it had released. Barathi Raja said that he had his share of fights and arguments with the eccentric Nana but came away learning a thing or two himself and that Nana was patient enough to actually speak the dialogue in Tamil. Guess from your comment that it did’nt go too well.
Naan Kadavul has one song by Shreya that briefly held my attention, thats about it. Rest of it is recycled/reused/remixed stuff.
Anon: SPOILERS AHEAD – I agree that there are a few nice things here on a strictly conceptual level. But what about follow-through?
Is that Kajal Agarwal character a love interest for Arjun? Why does she suddenly offer her body as a sop to him? (I mean, where did she even get that notion?) Why is she suddenly Rana’s muse (dressed like the typical Bharatiraja angel), if that theme isn’t going to be developed in any interesting way?
Or, take Arjun for that matter. What’s that bizarre udukkai-rattling business? Or even take the murders. It’s one thing to condone a heat-of-passion killing, had we been shown that Manivannan was killed while he was making those lewd advances. But she invites him over and THEN kills him, which makes it premeditated murder. Same with the other guy. She leads him on and then hacks him to death.
And this is supposed to be a symapthetic character who we’re supposed be happy for because she’s let off at the end? And her joy is represented by an impromptu ballet on the road? There was so much in the execution that drove me nuts.
@ BRanagan : Was just wondering if you have any piece written about Woody allen or about any of his movies. Just started watching movies in the recent past. of the lot just loved Manhattan Murder Mystery and Match point. His witty one liners seem to be a huge hit. Heading to watch Annie Hall and Manhattan during the weekend..Any recommendation and suggestions. Would love to read your article on Hey Ram. Still waiting for you to dig it out from your archive. Also would like to see any write ups about Kamal hassan other than the ‘Where does a hero go from here’ ( guess the name is rite ) the piece after Anbe sivam and the recent imaginary interview thingy after Dasa. And BTW did you hear DEV D Album and your take on that. Guess am asking too much through a single post hehe..
KPV Balaji: If you’re a fan of slapstick, try What’s Up Tiger Lily and Bananas. Then, Hannah and her Sisters, Crimes and Misdemeanors, The Purple Rose of Cairo…
You are doing Naan Kadavul music review, right? When will it be published?
raj: No, not a formal, full-fledged review. More like thoughts – it’s a Between Reviews piece.
Baddy, I did check out the “Dev D” soundtrack and I agree with you…it’s spectacular. There’s so much variety and feel…
is emosional attayachar of Dev D some sort of spoof song. The words and the way it is sung does indicate it being a spoof.
I have a hunch that the movie will be a flop but a cult hit. It seems to be a cynical interpretation of Devdas.
@BR: Will check out these movies soon…thanks
I had seen banners of Cinema at PVR Blr in June, during 10As release, but it never got released.
Coming to the dialogues, Nana speaks completely in Hindi (of course English too), but the others (except manivannan & vivek) seem to speak both Hindi and Tamil, although its mostly Hindi. And there are too many clues that point to the film being made originally in Hindi; the Mumbai registered cars, television channels etc. And the crew stays at Badami where Manivannan is the cliched Tamil Pannayar! You must’ve also noticed that Nana is not there in shots that involve Manivannan and Vivek and someone with glasses and greying hair is shown from behind as director.
kajal Agarwal was supposed to debut in this I think. she seems to be one of the characters who the director wanted us to suspect as the killer. Beyond that I have no explanations to offer abt her. Vikram was supposed to play Arjun’s character but he dropped off. (Did you know what BR said abt Arjun before Bomm released? That when we see Kamal and Shivaji on screen, we can easily make out that they are acting, but in Bomm, Action King had lived his role and none would say he is acting!)
I have this one nagging doubt which no one would clear (as none of whom I know have watched the film). There is this script discussion scene somewhere around interval where the crew decide upon going to Malaysia for the shoot instead of London (there is an assistant named Hassan and Nana says London would be difficult). The next shot is supposedly in Malaysia and the dialogues say so, but I thought I saw the fellows sitting on the same sofa, in the same positions as the previous shot! Well, I’d like to know if this is another example of the poor production values that the film can definitely boast of or I was bit too dazed that I started misinterpreting things?
BTW, your NK take was the most moving piece I’ve read in a while. Does it seem to you that such fall from respect in their later years happens for masters more often in India than in rest of the world?
And I have no words for Dev D songs. It is just awesome.
Kiruba: I’d say it was just poor production (though, truth be told, I had partly switched off by the time, so any explanation could be valid). About NK, I suppose so, because we *are* a more emotional people, right? I guess that makes the reactions more, well, (melo)dramatic.