AUTONAGAR SURYA (2014) - TELUGU

This automobile lacks its basic ingredient of ignition itself, the spark plug.

There is so much fire sprawled in the film, but suddenly this fire does not have a spark that would encourage me. The starting titles go through fire, there are lot of vehicles blown in fire, men are set on fire, yet it seems so lacklustre. 

Deva Katta took a well worked out story that was in movies since the age of "On the Waterfront" (remade as Ghulam in Hindi) of 1950's and added nativity and a load of action and more of unwanted songs to make this a Telugu film that has a certain format. An introduction of hero, well placed fights, an emotional backdrop that drives heroes motives, and even a routine comedy side-kick and a hero-heroine thing to bring the so-called romance. What I believe is that, he forgot to add that one-thing that makes a film a good film, that is the vision and voice of a director himself. 

Sticking to safeguards, makes this film run of the mill affair and does not make it stand out. This film has nothing that was great and yes I agree most of the stuff was mediocre yet I would not be surprised if this film is embraced by Telugu audiences. 

If I dig into the technicalities I find huge flaws, the production design was too lackadaisical and listless. The director did not even bother to take care and back date the film aptly. The film is completely lethargic in editing, songs come and go for no reason, the fights are too heavy when they could have been more subtle. The climax is so hurried that I thought the villain was built up well just to be wasted in the end. Veterans like Tanikella Bharani and even Brahmanandam are under used. 

The biggest challenge I found was to bear Naga Chaitanya for nearly 3hours. That is one heck of a task and indeed one of the toughest when you are bound to seat in a movie theater facing him in your face. There is some serious problem with this guy. He makes awkward face as if biting his teeth unnecessarily, his eyes do not show any emotion and his body language is too plain, it seems as if his body below the neck is unresponsive. I wish he pulls up his socks and learns some serious skills in acting if he has to carry the film on his own shoulders.

I must primarily say that I am not an average Telugu audience but rather an aficionado who is passionate about films, watch different kind of films and derive pleasure in varied stories and aspects of film making itself. Thus, I can say that I am not the right one to review Telugu films as I find most of them annoying. Yet, I dare to review hoping for a change and the best part is I still dare to review my rather too critical reviews too. 

This was pure average film as per me and for those who thought that this film was good, I have no comments but will admit that perhaps, I am too critical. A 1/5 for this, just for some good dialogues which are actually wasted in the attempt to please the masses and pass off as a commercial film.

दुनिया-ए-हुस्न-ओ-इश्क़

ऐसा नज़ारा आपने  दिखाया कि  सोचते है हम, 
ये हकीकत है या ख्वाब है 
ऐसा नशा आपने चढ़ाया, कि अब जान गए हम 
दुनिया-ए-हुस्न-ओ-इश्क़ का आप ही शबाब है 

प्यार की रेखा

प्यार करना जानते है पर प्यार को पाना सीखा नहीं 
प्यास नहीं हूँ, या फिर प्यार का  भूखा नहीं 
फिर भी जी रहा हूँ उनके लिए जिन्हे आज तक देखा नहीं 
नहीं मिले तो भी गुज़ार देंगे  ज़िन्दगी, मानकर यही 
की हमारी हाथ में प्यार की रेखा नहीं 

लफ्ज़ खोगया

लफ्ज़ खोगया हूँ, जीने का इरादा भी रूठ गया है 
मौत भी आज़मा नहीं सकता, उससे वादा जो टूट गया है

HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON 2 (2014) - ENGLISH

Heroes are made in most unexpected circumstances. 

Courage is what takes a man forward. I think the director of this film Dean DeBlois believes that strongly. Because, his belief is evident in the treatment of the film. From characterisation to emotions and even a including a humorous tiny sub plot. This film comes of as a sequel that dares to beat the original itself. 

Its multi layered in terms of screenplay and characterisation. Look at the scene where Hiccup discovers a strange place and in that a person whom he missed. The conversations are good and are deep in emotion. Even the tiny discovery of using the flaps on the tail of Toothless seems endearing. The small things add up to the big picture and give us a magnanimous feeling. Never there was a dull moment in this pacy animated film. 

Whilst most animated films have to indulge in a song dance sequence, lot of peppy feel-good music and histrionics of the characters. This film, keeps it pretty simple, it cuts straight into the story, does not waste a moment in discovering characters and the purpose of the film and then achieves it without much hype. Damn, terrific is the writing and kudos to the director Dean DeBlois for his bravery. As it has been said "Fortune Favours the Brave" and this film proves that saying yet again.

The editing is sharp, the cinematography is super and the animation is simply class apart. It embeds the motion picture and the typical storyboard animation beautifully and in an IMAX 3D, it comes alive. Thanks to the pain the animators took in detailing. It's all rendered beautifully on screen.

DreamWorks is not a PIXAR yet, I suppose if it sticks to films like these, I hope it can better that animation company. Of course, since TOY STORY 3, PIXAR did not stand up to it's name yet. And apart from the Shrek franchise DreamWorks itself did not make it big. With this Franchise, I suppose it has got it's breakthrough and can make it big. 

This is a rare sequel and a gem of a film. It's not for kids alone, they have company and the adults will love it. It's dark and yet humorous. I loved it and hopefully you will too. A 4/5 for this. 

Link for the review of the first film in the series : 

http://braddugg.blogspot.in/2013/03/how-to-train-your-dragon-2010-english.html

इंतज़ार का जंग

अखियों से आसूं बरस के बरसो बीत गये
जबसे दूर मुझसे मन मीत गये

सुहाग रात के हसीन सपने बो गये
पर न जाने उस रात वो कहा सोगये

जंग कर रहे है थे वो दुश्मनों से
हम भी लड़ रहे थे रोज़ उनके सपनो से

तंग आगयी पर संग की चाह मौजूद है
ज़ंग लग गयी तन को, पर मिटा नहीं उनका वजूद है

वही चौखट पे खड़े है आज, 
जहा से कई कदम दोनों आगे बढे थे
मत जाओ करके हम बहुत लड़े थे, 
देश के लिए वो जाने के लिए अड़े थे

गए तो गए, पर न खत न खबर उनका
कौन सुने रोना इस बेकल मन का

पढ़ कर वो खत, हमने रब से और सब से पूछा ये कैसी गद्दारी है
लिखा था उस में "मर मिटे है वो, अब उनकी लाश की तलाश जारी है"

उस आस

बुझने न देना उस आस को, जिसके सहारे ज़िन्दगी समायी 
उस आस ने कभी हसायी, तो कभी बहुत रुलाई 
आस था, कि मैं अपनी ज़िन्दगी आपके साये में बिताऊ 
फिर भी बितादी ज़िन्दगी, साथ लेकर तन्हाई 
नहीं मिल सकते तो न मिलो 
पर महसूस न करने देना उस आस से एक पल भी जुदाई

सावन में

सावन में मिले हम, बारिश में भीगने के लिए 
और ऐसे भीगे की ज़िन्दगी काफी नहीं सूखने के लिए

आपकी पैग़ाम

आपकी पैग़ाम पढ़कर ऐसा लगा, जैसे हसीं समा है छाया 
पैगाम पर आपकी नाम से ही लगा जैसे कोई नया मुकाम को पाया 

इंसान ही नहीं

मैं किसी कौम का नहीं, मज़हब का मतलब भी जानता नहीं 
न हिन्दू हूँ, मुसलमान भी नहीं 
और नहीं कोई शिकवा है, हमे इस दुनिया से 
फिर क्यों इलज़ाम देते है लोग की हम इंसान ही नहीं

तेरी खासियत

जिस खासियत बयाँ करने के लफ्ज़  ,वो शक्स हो तुम 
जिस आहट से हर आइना खुश हो जाए, वो अक्स हो तुम 
आपकी अंदाज़ को शायर भी अर्ज़ नहीं कर पायेंगे 
आप जैसा किसी और को खुदा भी बना नहीं पायेंगे

ULAVACHARU BIRYANI (2014) - TELUGU

A dish that's tasty in the beginning but starts to turn bland by the mid way.

If ever you meet a girl for the first time in your life, can you hug her very fondly publicly? I doubt that and that's what the protagonist Kalidasu (Prakash Raj) does. He plays a 49 year old archaeologist who has been alone for a very long time in life. He has come to terms with loneliness and starts living with it, only on a day, there is tryst and there seems to be an affair that blossoms well. Now this man named Kalidasu, seems mature, humane, sincere and even has that tiny flaws which are common to humans. Yet, there is huge contradiction in the way he perceived love and that was disappointing to me. A man who has been through most part of life, could have behaved in a different way instead of listening to what a youngster tells. 

For the sake of building up a story, one can write anything. Now, how interesting will that be depends on many factors. This story was merely cooked up with uncalled for subplots and an age-old main plot. In Telugu itself, we have many reference of such plots like "Rajahamsa" and "Ashta Chamma".

The acting was commendable by the main leads Prakash Raj and Sneha. The other pair have just fit the bill but did not contribute much. I liked Brahmaji and M S Narayana. Others were just okay. I wish the acting could have been much better than what it actually is, at least that would have added depth to the otherwise shallow script.

The title itself I thought was misleading as there is neither and Ulavacharu nor a Biryani. There are delicacies for sure but they are something else but not the ones mentioned in the title. The writing is too weak at places. Example, the whole explanation of recipe of a cook is too long and uninteresting for me. Though the cinematography and production design was considerably okay, the biggest disappointment came in the form of editing. The cuts are either too sharp or too weak. I suppose, a few sub plots could have been easily edited out. The usage of the music is seriously questionable. Ilayaraja gave good music, but I thought that was not effectively used.

Prakash Raj gave a tailor made film typical to multiplex audiences but fails in adding some interesting aspect and instead gives a half baked dish. The intent can be appreciated but the execution is way below par.

A promising trailer need not transpire into a good movie. A rule that's proven with this film again. It's an average 2/5 film that is for audiences who want to taste something different just for the sake of trying.

इज़हार

मोहब्बत का इज़हार लफ़्ज़ों से नहीं, मोहब्बत से करो 
इज़हार करना चाहती हो तो लफ्ज़ न सही, अपनी नज़ाकत से करो

कुछ नहीं

आप तो जहाँ हो हमारे, हम आपके लिए कुछ नहीं 
न गम है न ख़ुशी है, दिल के अरमान भी आज कुछ नहीं 

ग़म के नज़राने

जहाँ है पागल खाना मोहब्बत का 
हर दर पर मुकम्मल दीवाने मिलेंगे 
यकीनन हर दीवाने को इस पागल खाने में 
कभी ख़ुशी के ख़ज़ाने तो कभी ग़म के नज़राने मिलेंगे

दिल खो कर

रद्वा खदवा हूँ तेरे खातिर, फिरता हूँ मंज़िल खो कर 

आप तो मेहफ़ूज़ हो सनम, हम जीते है अपना दिल खो कर 

LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (1962) - ENGLISH

An epic film that deserves an epic viewing.

A film that's 228 minutes that is 3 hours and 48 minutes longs should have been exhausting. But this one is endearing and thus deservedly has been one of the greatest films ever made. To understand this film and appreciate it more than just the film, one would better be acquainted with the history. It has a great history behind the story. Though, there are few factual manipulations to include more drama, the whole experience of viewing this, is rewarding. It's rewarding to know that such a person existed who fought a war merely on the basis of humanity. He was completely impartial and non-judgmental. 

This was based on World War 1, now when we compare to films made on World War 1, with those made about World War 2, I found that they are very few in number. But this one stands above all other films that are based on World War 2. 

David Lean, the master behind the making of this film, shows his efforts in every frame of it. Indeed, he builds a whole world for the camera and it has great beauty in each shot. Each angle, each move is just so detailed and precise that it's tough to find fault in any frame. From the sun rise in the arabian desert to the landscapes filled with sand dunes. From battles to closed door discussions, there is a certain magnanimity to each frame. The grandeur can be attributed partly to the choice of shooting of the film 70mm cinemascope (Super Panavision 70). For me the greatness would go to the director David Lean and to the cinematographer F A Young. 

Peter O Toole perhaps, was remembered as Lawrence more than his own name. Such was the impact of his character and his depiction was pitch perfect in every aspect. Peter showcased equanimity while there was war being shown, or while grappling with his own emotional internal conflict. War is brutal but more brutal is the war within. In a war of arms, you are killed for once. But in an emotional war, each moment is deathly. Peter showcased a rare poise and I am certain the whole film experience could have been so exhausting that he would have considered it an experience of a life time that more worthy than life itself.

Amongst other things, I liked the music which was given by Maurice Jarre. The music was right up there and in such a long movie, music was very much needed to keep the emotional quotient. The music had the much needed variation. Be it the english war themes, or one to amplify arabian desert sounds or even arabian traditional music or the pathos of Lawrence too. There was a music needed for every bit and it was there all over the place. Never I felt it was over the board or too loud, it was just right. 

All the actors have done a commendable job. Above all others, I loved Alec Guinness as Prince Faisal and Omar Sharif as Sherif Ali. 

Thanks to David Lean and the producers of this epic. It's one of the most courageous decision of all those involved in the making and thankfully it paid great dividends in terms of awards and rewards. A definite 5/5 for an epic of a film. 

CITY LIGHTS (2014) - HINDI

Definitely not a bad film, watch it for the acting by everyone. 

This is a film of the downtrodden families and the helplessness of the people living that life. There are lot many compulsions and obligations they shall be having. Mostly, they are in forced circumstances making them go for desperate measures to improve their life style. The protagonist Deepak Singh is one such poor should who is driven to take desperate steps to improve the living of his family.

Rajkumar Yadav becomes Deepak Singh literally. From the Rajasthani accent to the demeanour, to the attire and even body language, everything is pitch perfect with him. Its good to find a new-age actor who becomes the characters rather than just playing the part. Rajkumar Yadav has gone way beyond many of his contemporaries. The next best part was of Manav Kaul who played the tight security guard "Vishnu".  Manav was damn good in his role, just refreshing to see a new face play a character with such conviction. Also, the heroine of the film Patralekha was commendable. While others did their job well. So this film was a lot about acting above all else.

This is an official remake of the British-Filipino film "Metro Manila". It's heartening to see a lot of credit being given to the original film. Never saw the original film, but this film was weak at places while it was brilliant at some places. Deepak comes back drunk and asks his wife, (who takes up the job of a bar dancer) to dance for him. That was a brilliantly performed scene I felt. Coming to the weakness, it lies in the writing that defies logic. 

It's a film that tries hard to be as real as possible. Real locations, realistic characters and more-so the scenes that could have possibly happened. But, there are a few things that did not satisfy my logic. So I was a bit disappointed by what was offered by this team of "Shahid" which I think was a brilliant film.

Hansal Mehta did great job in extracting acting, but he stuck to the script so tightly, that he might have forgot to ask a few questions to the writers and producers. So thus, he had presented some flaws unintentionally. The editing should have been more precise. The film though 2 hours in length seems long with not much happening. The intimate scenes of the main leads could have been trimmed down is what I strongly felt.

It's a good film still, but not a thoroughly satisfying venture to me as a viewer. A 3/5 for a film that's good and could have been so better. 

MANAM (2014) - TELUGU

I liked this film and it was wonderful to see a legend, ANR for the last time on silver screen.

The screenplay, though inspired is well written to adapt to the nativity of Telugu audiences. Thankfully, I did not take my brain inside the movie theater, so I just went with the flow and reacted for whatever was happening, without thinking anything. So I could appreciate some genuine feelings which made me feel for the characters.

Produced by Akkineni Family, this films uses many things about them, from their names to fitting whole of the family in a frame. Nagarjuna as a surprise acted well and was the best among the lot. He showcased his skills very effortlessly and he just went along with the flow. I cannot remember even one dialogue which I thought was out of place or uncalled for. Dialogues between ANR and Naga Chaitanya were a bit overboard I felt.

The film is not devoid of flaws, it has some huge and big holes. But, all those can be forgiven if the sheer effort of writing down this piece and putting all the pieces together are considered. Nagarjuna again proved to be a good producer who wishes to take challenges and it was heartening to see this script having such a huge cast. It's an experiment in Telugu Film Industry and I am happy it has paid off. 

It involves multiple flashbacks and the same people wearing different characters. It would have been really tough had this been complicated. This was a very simplified and spoon-fed screenplay and that's the reason I believe it worked. 

Of all the stories that were put in, I liked the story of Seeta (Nagarjuna) and Rama (Shriya) in the village. That was a real treat in the film. A 3/5 for a film that I liked and I hope to see such endeavors being enocuraged in Telugu Film Industry.

Just a spoiler, please watch the film "Back To The Future" which I believe is a huge inspiration for this film.

BASIC INSTINCT (1992) - ENGLISH

A taut, erotic thriller and indeed one of the finest murder mysteries ever made.

Sharon Stone steals the show by seduction and eroticism. The film is known for the erotic scenes above everything else. It has the most paused moment in cinematic history, which is the the leg crossing scene of Sharon Stone.

There is lot of eroticism which I suppose was needed for the plot, as the protagonist Catherine Tramell seduces men into her plot and uses them as tools for her own written plot. So no qualms, with the nakedness of characters in this. It never seemed that it was over the top or it could have been avoided. This marks the ingenuity of the writer. It is called smart writing by embedding some real erotic scenes to make it more interesting.

Murder mysteries if written well are generally interesting, but this was had the oomph factor with Sharon Stone as protagonist. She did go the full throttle and dug deep into the character. She made the enigmatic writer into a well balanced and a reasonable character. That enigma which she carried on screen transpires even in the viewers mind. At least it did drive my mind, so I rate her acting in this very film highly. Never before and never after did I see such a composed performance from Sharon Stone and probably I never will again. But what she did in this film alone is enough for her lifetime. She made Catherine Tramell one of the most memorable characters in Cinema History. 

I am surprised that Sharon Stone overshadowed a star like Michael Douglas in the film. If written well and acted with complete submission, the roles becomes supreme and raises above the script. Taking the script itself to greater heights.

The credit for this film must go to the writer Joe Eszterhas and the director Paul Verhoeven. every dialogue is terrific and the choice of words is meticulous and apt. 

Technically, I loved the editing and it's cut at the right moments with right space between each scenes. The transpiration of emotions is well conveyed and the acting indeed by all is great. Just that Sharon is above others in this means she is just greater by an inch above others. The production values are good and it makes a film stand long and I suppose, even 20 years later, people will watch it with same reverence as they did 20 years earlier (from now, 2014) when it was initially released.

A 4/5 for this, undoubtedly for the lines and Sharon Stone.

DAYS OF HEAVEN (1978) - ENGLISH

A terrific work of camera that takes an ordinary story to extra-ordinary level of story telling.

This is a Terrence Malick film, that shows with the cinematography. The passion exudes in ever frame, in ever shot. In detailing of the backdrop, the period, the artifacts. Malick certainly can be called a visual poet. This is the second film I watched of his, the first one being "The Thin Red Line". Both have exemplary camera work and are exquisitely detailed in composition of each frame. You can pause at any moment in these two films and you can say, hey wow, what a painting that is.

Days of Heaven came early that is 1978. Yet, the work is contemporary and long standing. It has a story that is universal. It's about love, betrayal and murder. These things flow like poetry and all is said from the eyes of a child. The voice over adds a perspective that makes the film interesting. 

Apart from technical brilliance, the film has to be known as one of the earliest Richard Gere films. He showed in this film, what he was made of. He is a tough and long running horse and he proved it with time. Also, Linda Manz as Linda did a terrific job as a child.

Most of the praise most surely go to the men who used camera very nicely. Nestor Almendros and Haskell Wexler did a stupendous job in creating paintings through camera. Thanks to them and a big thanks to Malick in knowing the perfect use of camera. 

The editing and sound, considering the period this film was set in, were pitch perfect. The editing gave fluidity to the story and the sound which I suppose was remastered by Criterion was great. From the starting scenes of huge burning down, to the horses in chase, to a gun shot. They were crystal clear and gave a thorough surround stereo feel.

I loved the camerawork above all else. It shows the diligence and prudence of Malick and salutations to him. A 4/5 for this visual poetry.

DIAL M FOR MURDER (1954) - ENGLISH

A terrific film by a terrific director. 

Setup mostly in a single apartment with lot many details of apartment and characters explored in very little time, this is a very good detailed film about murder. There is a lot of conversation, for the most part of it. Most of it is planning the murder, and the rest of conversation is about covering up by culprit, then the culprit being brought to justice. 

The best part is in the first 10-15 minutes itself we know of what would come. Who has planned whose murder that is setup very clearly. Now the rest of it is for the police to bring the murderer or the planned murderer to justice. To categorise this as a mere thriller might not be apt for this. This has a lot of drama, it's cold blooded drama and a meticulously planned murder. It's not mystery either coz there are many things that are clear. We know who plans it, what is his motive and how he wants it. What happens perhaps is different but, the person who has planned needs to be brought to justice. The only driving point from then is how is he brought to justice. 

Ray Milland does a terrific job, less of emotion and so much of cold-bloodedness in him. Damn, that is very tough to pull off and he does it with considerable ease. 

The master throws up a masterful film in this. Also, there is a significance in the title "Dial M" though shown very briefly, it has it's place. 

Without much to say about this film any further, I am going with 4/5 for a film by my favourite director. Hitchcock rocks again in this film.

BARTON FINK (1991) - ENGLISH

Perhaps, this is the only film that does complete justice to Coen Brothers as they are.

Symbolism is just supreme in this film. There can be many interpretations of a dialogue, a scene, a character and his actions. Barton Fink is a writer who abhors the Hollywood System and wants to create space in theatre for common man. When such a guy asks a girl "Are you into movies?" She replies "Are you silly?". Just for this dialogue I can derive many interpretations. Are movies Silly? Is it foolish of him to be thinking of movies? And likewise many more.

So a film, that's highly symbolic would be an understatement to this, there should be a better statement. Coz, this has a great treatment and wonderful acting in a story that's minimal in content and yet humongous in exploring the little content in the story.

John Turturro is a revelation in this film and John Goodman shows why is so good at. These are two underrated actors I believe in the last 20 years. John Goodman was superb in a few films, though he did actually act in very few than his contemporaries, his choice was good in terms of script. John Turturro is a terrific actor whose potential was unleashed in very few films, mostly by Coen Brothers though.

From the poster of this film, till the last scene, there is an intrigue that's typical only to a Coen Brothers film. if anyone is thinking, what is a mosquito doing in the poster? I recommend them to see this film to know it for yourself. 

I am happy to have seen this now fully in one ago, though earlier I tried to see it in parts, but could not finish. Indeed, it was a rewarding experience that threw many challenges in terms of narrative and treatment.

I love this film and will watch it again soon. A 4/5 for this film. Perhaps, the best of Coen Brothers till date.

NAKED LUNCH (1991) - ENGLISH

This is a film that jolted me in my sleep and made me awake, days after I saw this. Some scenes are terribly brilliant in this surreal drama.

Thanks to Criterion, because of which I got to know of this film, and picked it up from their collection. David Cronenberg is one of the outrageous directors existing today. He does not seem to compromise with his vision and tries to be so true to the material that it frightens the viewers very much. I wonder if I can ever see this on a big screen, in theater somewhere. Will they dare to put it up, will there be audience in the first place? I really doubt. yet, this is one of the finest surreal dramas that was made in 1990's.

A week after I watched it, I just woke up as I got a scene from this film in a dream. Damn, even today (which is a month after I watched it) as I type the review, the hairs strands are standing on forearms. Creepy it is and totally insane too. I wonder how such a subject was chosen to be presented.

This is an adaptation of the novel by the same name, written by William S. Burroughs. I wonder whether those who have read it imaging the details presented in the book, also have been through nightmares as I did watching this film.

Nevertheless, this is a very important aspect of art and film making and indeed it is needed. I appreciate the courage of the director and more so the producers. Obviously, this is not a film for everyone, even for the generally weird people, but it's for those who have a liking for aesthetics of weird, nightmarish, disgusting things.

I cannot reveal characters or the plot points coz that would make any reader of this review miss the fun, given that he chooses to see the film. It's definitely worth a one time watch and that perhaps is enough for a lifetime as it would not be easy to erase from memory either. It has tremendous impact undoubtedly. 

A 4/5 for one of the terrific and even terrible surreal movies.

HAIRSHCHANDRACHI FACTORY (2009) - MARATHI

A well intended story mashed up with fabricated emotions.

Indeed, as film lovers we deserve to the story of the first film made in India "Satya Harishchandra" and also the story of the man behind making it "Dadasaheb Phalke". Yes, that is well presented and documented through this film. Yet, I believe many emotions were overblown or uncalled for in this film which is made into a melodrama intentionally. Though funny in parts, and entertaining too, the pain which Dadasaheb went through to make the first indigenous film was trivialized and that's the only qualm I have with respect to this film. Otherwise, it was a job well done.

Directed by debutante, Paresh Mokashi he touches all the right chords in screenplay and script. Firstly, to make a film on this subject is in itself a brave attempt and I appreciate his courage. The writing was well intended and it tried to touch the nuances and the finer aspects of film making, be it correcting the film stock or manually editing the negative. Considering that this film was done a modest budget, I can appreciate the effort that was put in to bring the product the way it is.

Acting is indeed fine by Nandu Madhav who plays the role of Dadasaheb Phalke. Indeed his kids do a fine job and are fun to watch more than anyone else. All others have done a commendable job too. But had they controlled their emotions in the last half an hour and did not dramatize it, I believe this would have been a greater film. The director should take the responsibility of that.

The production values are OK considering the budget, but I wish such an important film that has history in it, could have been produced well and it deserved better sets and artifacts. The cinematography is just fine. There is no greatness and there is no flaw either. It does it's expected job and that's good. I was disappointed by the editing though, wish some moments were cut to mellow down the drama and stick to showing the real work done by Dadasaheb. Especially, in the last hour where he talks with Englishmen, about distribution of the film, there were some dialogues that were kept only to make Dadasaheb a great human being, which I thought were not so needed. He had done a great job by giving us the first film itself, now that needed to be reiterated is what I felt.

I am going with 3/5 for a film that's historically important. I wish it could have been much more in terms of production values and editing. 

THE THIN RED LINE (1998) - ENGLISH

Perhaps, the greatest war movie, in terms of scale.

I only wish it had a protagonist who takes the story forward. Yes, we have an army of soldiers and there is a battalion. But a guiding force would have done so much more is what I firmly believe. As it is, the film is no less than a great war film.

There is a supreme ensemble cast which includes Sean Penn, Adrien Brody, George Clooney and a host of many other actors. They do a great job in empathizing with the characters and playing their roles perfectly. They become soldiers and behave like soldiers. Not for once, did I see a Sean Penn but I saw a passionate soldier fighting for his country. All the others have done a fine job I must say. Though there some hundreds of actors in the whole film, never did I was there was an extra or someone is out of place. That is what I think is utilizing resources appropriately.

The cinematography by John Toll is exemplary and indeed I can say this is one of the finest works I have seen in a war film. I learnt that this film even with such great camera work did not win an academy award for cinematography but it was awarded to "Saving Private Ryan", which also has fine camera work and great choreography of war scenes. I can understand the fix, the jury would have been in deciding which one was better.

I resisted myself from watching this, because I never thought I had the patience of sitting through a 3 hour full length war film, which is highly detailed and nuanced. Yet, after watching it today, I confess I have seen one of the finest war films of contemporary cinema and I salute the director Terrence Malick for showing the war as it is, unabashedly, uncompromisingly and more importantly, bringing the human emotions on to the surface without any drama.

The director Terrence Malick has done very few films in his career. He began in 1969 and yet this was just his fourth film as a director. He surely has a vision that is grand and it takes time to detail all of those. But, I hope he does more work and showcases his talent giving such exemplary cinema.

A 4/5 for this one and I ma happy to have finally watch it. To watch it again, I need a lot patience though.

LUST FOR LIFE (1956) - ENGLISH

Kirk Douglas becomes Vincent Gogh and is terrific in this film. Just watch it for the portrayal.

Vincent Gogh lived a very complicated film, as shown in the film perhaps. But to adapt to the complications and portray them without any compromise would have been the most challenging part. Kirk Douglas, the fine actor he is has done this effortlessly. Kudos to the great man for his acting itself.

Expectedly, the art direction is wonderful, as this is a film about painter, his paintings in itself would make the shots beautiful. The cinematography was adequate if not great. The lines were good and the editing was fine. But mind you, this is a biopic so it would take some liberties in terms of length in showing few important aspects of the life of Vincent Gogh.

Vincent Minnelli was one of the most celebrated directors of his time and he did this film with a great grand vision as his earlier films. But, he somewhere lost his vision in the making. He made a cliched biopic that is definitely good but must not great. I suppose that the script did little justice to the emotions which Kirk Douglas portrayed and also what Vincent Gogh could have gone through emotionally. 

This is good for a one time watch just for acting. A 3/5 for a good film and of these, 2 stars only to Kirk Douglas and the remaining star for the film overall. It's a good film but tests our patience at times. 

PSYCHO (1960) - ENGLISH

Probably, the most terrific thriller made. A film that terrifies even 50 years after it's made.

To pigeonhole this as a thriller would be wrong as per me. It has a murder mystery, a psychological thriller, a huge amount of drama, and even a family backdrop. With all such elements, it would be wrong if I were to categorize this as merely a thriller. Yes, it is filled with thrills and for the 110 minutes of running time, there is hardly any dull moment.

I have seen this movie, a number of times before and each time it had a terrific impact. Also, I have always found something new, maybe a new frame, new shot or a new background sound. The discovery does not seem to stop. This I attribute to the many elements that are involved in this film.

From placing the camera, composing the shot, revealing the right emotion and making the audiences wait till the shocking aspect is revealed, Hitchcock is at his best in this film. This is indeed one of the more simpler stories he dealt. Yet, he made it so impactful that it continues to surprise audiences even today. Thanks to the music by Bernard Hermann, whose contribution to the film is very important. I cannot imagine this film without the music and I believe that it's because of the music, that the resonance was acquired.

If it's the shower scene that is most talked about in this film, I believe there are more scenes that are underrated yet very impactful. Now, I do not want to reveal those and give away some details. I can simply say, I was terrified by the climax shot where the mother is shown, more than anything else. 

The cast is perfect equally, Anthony Perkins does a wonderful job as Norman Bates. He is cold-blooded and yet looks so deceptively humane as an extremely caring human. This film and "The Trial" are perhaps the most important films in his career. 

It is the first psychological thriller of it's kind as I read on various other sites and perhaps it is also the most violent films made. Though the violence comes for less than 10 minutes, it haunts so brutally, as if it was there all through the film. 

It's a definite 5/5 for one of the finest films of all time by one of the greatest directors. 

RASHOMON (1950) - JAPANESE

Greatness comes through the narrative by adding a great perspective. Proved by Kurosawa

To date, I resisted touching Kurosawa for me though, I was meek to comprehend his greatness and perhaps even understand it. After watching Rashomon, I must say I am in a "complex" of a certain dilemma acquired by watching this film. 

A simple tale can be made complex by adding different versions of narratives to the same story, they are contradictory and inconclusive, yet they add the dimension of thought-provoking and making the viewer think actually what could have happened in the story. Perhaps, nothing of what was said and maybe all too, but the most important thing it ignites a debate within a mind. Thus, there lies the success of the film and hence it derives all the attention of the viewer. This is how the film becomes great.

Even so many years later, if this film has the charm to attract and enthrall audiences. I attribute that mostly to the narration by Kurosawa above everything else. Yes, the cinematography is brilliant, the editing is precise and makes the film breezy. The production values are good considering this is made in 1950's Japan. But above all, the treatment and the screenplay take the film to greater heights.

It's the story of a woman cheating her husband and making love with another man who is a bandit. But the husband, the woman, the bandit present three versions of the story and that makes it complex. Even the witnesses give different versions of happenings and it gets intriguing further.

Nature acts as a metaphor, the overcast skies, the rains, and the sunshine at the end add another aspect to the narrative, which I got to know by the end. Thankfully, I observed it to grasp it.

I will further examine, observe, and seek learnings from Akira Kurosawa's films. For this film, a 5/5. It's a masterpiece from one of the finest directors ever.

BEING SUPERHUMAN

All my friends have a girlfriend

How does it feel to me?

Does it seem good, or is it just the end?

If you ask me this

I feel like a God who has his end
As life is just a game and plays the way you want

Come on baby, just say along

That today this is my song

Of life with love, but without a girlfriend

I know that for many, I am just human

But for the unknown yet, perhaps I am superhuman