"How Will You Measure Your Life?" Book Review

"How Do You Measure Your Life?" is one of the most exciting self-help books I have come across in years. It starts off like a business book with a blurb that promises to help you find fulfilment using lessons from some of the world's greatest businesses. Deceptively alluring for a Senior Management book-reader, it draws you charmingly into the issues that keep us away from lasting happiness and sense of making a contribution to life.   We gather the book is a creative collaboration between three different folks who have differing views on God and Spirituality. The main author of the book is Clayton M Christensen, who wrote "The Innovator's Dilemma" which became a sensation in triggering a huge debate in what sustains market leadership.This book grew out of a speech Christensen used to give on finding a meaning and happiness in life at Harvard Business School. James Allworth, the second author, is a graduate of the same school where Christensen teaches. Karen Dillon was the editor of Harvard Business Review who helped chisel the thoughts of the duo into an immensely readable and lively commentary on what makes living worthwhile - sometimes bordering on spirituality, most times offering plenty of sage counsel on the right living without being preachy.

The book is neatly divided into ten chapters running to less than 207 pages. It seeks to answer primarily three questions that unlike the Innovator's dilemma, haunt every graduating student: 1. How can I be sure that  I will be successful and happy in my career? 2. How can my relationship with my family and close friends become an enduring source of happiness? 3. How can I live a life of integrity - and stay out of jail? Pretty simple, right? Yet we observe from Rajat Gupta to David Madoff, breaches of integrity abound, even if differing in degrees. Most folks have got a problem with atleast one of the three aspects inquired into by the authors. Christensen offers plenty of refreshed and relevant examples from the world of business, sports and celebrities to take us through a tour of how to answer these three questions so we may find if life's worth it.

Christensen divides the book into three sections each analysing the questions on finding respectively one's mojo in career, family and living a life of integrity without ending up in jail. The chapters on how to choose one's calling in life and the ones on bringing up children are brilliantly analysed with telling value and counter-intuitive evidence from business research. As the author says, " I don't have an opinion. The theory has an opinion." This is not a typical book that gives quick-fix solutions to perennial dilemmas. It gives the right paradigm-changing objective assessment of some of the simplest questions that we must really be asking ourselves in order to make our lives count. I recommend this book irresptive of how early or late you are in life. It sure tickles you to make those critical decisions that will deliver results in all the three areas of life - career, family and character.

"How Will You Measure Your life?" by Clayton M Christensen, James Allworth & Karen Dillon, pp.221, pub. Harper Collins

Lessons of 1962 Sino-Indian War: Have we learnt?

My dad has read every book there is to read on Indo-China War of 1962 (for that matter on every war!) which completes the 50th Anniversary today. According to his perceptible reading, India has never learnt any lessons for 50 years because despite the public outcry against Nehru after the humiliating defeat by China, it has yet to de-classify the Brookes Report (commissioned to study the wages of war). But primarily, much like the ill-famed Panchasheel policy of Nehru, there are five reasons why we lost the war to China:


1. A weak-willed Nehru's blind-bets on China's "peace initiatives".

2. Keeping Nehru's weak (first cousin) BrijmohanKoll as In-charge for war. He was so inept, my dad tells, he applied for "sick leave" when a full-scale war was on in Northeast. Which General-in-war want to be on "leave"?

3. A communist-at-heart Krishna Menon was our honorable Defence Minister during war - and he continued to blunder and get blindsided by China - until impeachment came his way.

4. Lack of preparedness in both skill, scale of weaponry and strategy - blundering after blunder, believing "headfakes" and "false alarms".

5. Wishful thinking, Utopian drams and Living on Mythical assumptions - that China can never attack India, that China is at the foot of Himalayas whereas India is on top of the mountain ranges, that we don't need to modernise or coordinate artillery and airforce, that we should retreat when outnumbered by the enemy (except the legendary Capt.Shaitan Singh).



According to my father, the real unexpected help to India came from two forces - one, the brave Nagas and other tribes in Northeast who never supported India at other times rallied behind the Indian Army in their weak battles with Chinese and two, United States of America - John F Kennedy - who "big-brothered" Pakistan not to take undue advantage of the Sino-Indian War by simultaneously attacking from East and West Pakistan. (Pakistan obliged until 1965 and then 1971). So, the lessons are many but after 50 years, the country is owed a full de-classification on how we lost - honor and lakhs of hectares of sovereign territory - to a fellow BRIC nation. As my dad says, "It is clear the Indian psyche is so scarred that we know why we will never admit this defeat - and Nehru also cringed, collapsed and cut short his life by atleast 8 years."



Even JP Datta or Manoj Kumar never made films on this war because as Indians, we would rather flex our muscles against weaker military nations and show off our bravado. But if we are determined, focused and realistic in self-introspection, then we should re-assess our strengths and weaknesses in the military battlefield, equip better, pulverise our disempowering myths - and avenge our defeat in economical battlefields. Thats what progressive nations humiliated in war have done - examples, South Korea (crushed by Japan), Japan (by US), China (by Japan), and Germany (by Allies). All of them regained national pride. What about India? Remember this always, on Oct.20th.

"Brothers" Telugu Movie Review/ "Maattraan" Tamil Movie Review

“Brothers” (“Maattraan” in Tamil) is the dubbed film starring Tamil superstar Suryaa directed by K.V.Anand who made one of the best movies – “Rangam” in 2011. K.V.Anand’s first film is about the rot in media and politics that’s splitting the social fabric. In “Brothers” (“Maatraan”), he takes on a much more advanced topic that’s still being discussed and the jury is still out at Biodiversity summits and conclaves – Genetically Modified Foods. But wait, that is not the basic story. It is more complicated. Its about the bonding between conjoined twins (joined at the hip) both played by Suryaa - who are born after Prof. Ramachandran (played by Sachin Khedekar) performs many experiments in artificial insemination in trying to create the ultimate gene factory – someone who is multi-talented combining the likes of Sachin Tendulkar, Ilayaraja, Michael Jackson and seven other people. Sounds absurd, right? Is that all? Its a little more complicated. At the outset itself, despite the efforts by Professor to implant the best sperm bank in his wife’s womb, Surya square is born as conjoined twins much against his wishes. Later, the professor forms a company called Locus Lactos Limited which makes a billion dollar Energy Drink containing milk-related contents. Soon, this energy drink called “Energion” leads the market with over 70% market share causing consternation in competition. It leadis to lot of industrial espionage from foreigners who you gather are actually from Ukraine. Why do these foreigners want to unravel the secret formulae of “Energion”? Its even more complicated. The team from Ukraine suspect that the drink made by Prof.Ram’s company is debilitating the health of the consumers by boosting the energy in short-term but flattening their lives with harmful overdoses of steroids. Or Androids. Who cares?

Our conjoined twins – Vimal and Akhil – sons of billionaire Prof.Ram meanwhile date Kajal agarwal – who is a petite Russian translator who figures out exactly what’s happening with the company and Professor. But by then, Prof.Ram and his criminal gang of overlords in factory intercept and eliminate each one of the so-called spies who uncover the real happenings in the factory – where products are inter-mixed with hazardous substances that kill millions of lives. The shocker in the film comes bang in the middle of the film at interval time – where the father of the conjoined twins hires organized labour to kill the main whistle-blower, his son Vimal. Then, in a bid to survive Akhil, the doctors transplant Vimal’s heart into Akhil so he survives. And later Akhil gets to the bottom of the murky dealings. He takes the help of Kajol to get to the real story in Ukraine which is even more complicated. Then the painful ending of realization by the father and the final confrontation between the father and the son. Phew! Quite a story that, can’t be retold without gulping down the daily intake of water a man requires.

K.V. Anand has actually steamrolled three stories into one story and like the father of the conjoined twins tried to infuse a giant killer of a plot that will be called the mother of all films. There is a story of conjoined twins, which by itself, if allowed to progress smoothly would have been a perfect entertainer. Then there is a story of industrial espionage which looks credulous. And then, there is a story of Genetically Modified foods enmeshed with animal and clinical trials of drugs tested before market release that is poorly researched and misinforms. Allowing the three stories to interact with each other in a simple plot of action and romance is the biggest mistake K.V.Anand has made. The most glaring defect in the story is the weak characterization of father - Prof.Ramachandran played well by Sachin Khedekar. How can a father be so heartless to kill his own sons right from the infancy stage to the stage they begin confronting him? By showing that a father’s sense of mammon-worshipping knows no bounds, KV Anand’s plot is the weakest I have seen in years in the manner of being absurdly wicked against one’s own children. This is why, one feels switched off after knowing the culprit is the father and the one who is massacred is one’s own offspring – it kills whatever emotion is left in the film half-way through. Had the villain been somebody else whom the twins attempt to bring to justice, it would have felt differently and maybe might have been more watchable. The initial sixty minutes of the film where the conjoined twins grow up with an overlapping body part in the hip, go to study and chill and enjoy being together in bath or baseline tennis – all of that sizzles and the audience gasp for more. But once the interval comes and goes, there ends the best part of the film and all the soul in it. The second half bores you with the tedium of the plot that’s already known well before the interval - it reminded me of the same way in which “7th Sense” (“7th Ariyu”) dragged its plot in the second half with monotonous villainy and lack of depth in characterization of the villain. In a bid to make it international (the film has atleast 15 minutes of running time in foreign languages – Russian, et al) the film over-concentrates on the dense and complicated plot without checking for its emotional content, comedy (hardly present and comes like a whiff of fresh air only in the first half).

Why does a father want to kill his own children? How can higher market share of a drink correlate with rising health hazards of children who consume it? How come everybody from Food Inspector to the highest authorities and police turn a nelson’s eye to the frauds perpetrated by the company and nobody detects except competition and eventually family members? What is the connection between a sperm bank and conjoined twins? (It has nothing to do with it. Incidentally, there has been a famous project called Nobel Prize sperm bank project which tried to collect sperm from 100 Nobel Prize winners and make a genius baby but finally the project itself became a damp squib. But that’s an interesting story). What is the most harmful substance in an Energy Drink, lets say Red-Bull? (It is caffeine and not Steroids). What is the connection between Genetically Modified Organisms and the killer product? (Again that is not explained very well by the director who made it more to sound intellectual without explaining the pros and cons of GM foods. This is not just K.V.Anand’s fault – there are several happening directors in Tollywood also who drop jargon-sounding words in the middle of a script just to pander to A-class and balcony seat audiences. By the way, this is not a conclave to discuss GMO etc. but my short take on them is that it is the most misunderstood term almost like 3-D printing - the debate should be more on who owns the seeds etc. and not on the malefic side-effects of Genetically Modified Seeds. BT Cotton seeds since introduction in India have already made India a net exporter than a net importer). There are many questions unaswered. Finally, the director should have researched on Barcelona Olympics 1992 where he says the United Team (ex-USSR republics) beats the USA because of the Energy Drink made by our Professor; it actually beat the US by a mere four medals.

What is the point? My point is that nobody denies cinematic licenses to creative directors to experiment with new genres and present different themes under one roof but why do they do poor homework, play with the wrong emotions and mess up the plot? Why over-complicate? Why not make a documentary on GM Foods or Drug trials instead of making films that suck? The real casualty is Suryaa because this film will definitely disappoint his fans despite his superlative performance as conjoined twins. Showing two different shades as conjoined twins was sheer brilliance and he excels with his all-round talents. He shows class and mass with ease unlike other heroes. Performances by Kajol is average despite huge potential of full-length role. Kajol is becoming predictable as a glamour doll without any new variations. Sachin Khedekar has got a plumpy role and he makes most capital of it after Suryaa, of course. Music by Harris Jayaraj has been good in parts. Since Harris Jayaraj has got a natural proclivity towards incorporating Russian instrumentation in his music, he composes his heart out in a few songs set in the backdrop of the Ex-Russian republics but not many memorable numbers to root for. His BGM is better than the songs but all said, Harris Jayaraj is a gifted composer whose stamp on Suryaa’s career has been most vivid and it follows here too. Cinematography and visual effects have been brilliant and atleast two songs - one starring Isha Sarvaani and another starring the conjoined twins romancing Kajol in Norway were brilliantly picturised. Stunts by Peter Hein have been very impressive. The fight before interval running for over 18 minutes is astonishingly shot with all the roller coaster and speed-revolving trains orbiting at their speeds and a frighteningly risky fight ensues between the twins and the rowdies. On the whole, the movie doesn’t deliver and has lot of mental floss that disengages you from the right mood to watch the film because of wrong emotions, lack of a good romantic track between Suryaa and Kajal. You can give 1.5 for the technical efforts of the director and one more for Suryaa’s masterly effort but afterwards you have to say “Oh My God”. 2.5 out of 5 but not a film that entertains cleanly.

"English Vinglish" Hindi Movie Review

“English Vinglish” is a lovable film that is worth the wait. If you like the English language, you will find it finger lickin’ good. If you can’t digest English language and like to stick to your native language, you will find it deliciously finger lickin’ good. No jokes here, I am serious. For fans of Sridevi who have been waiting for a film where she reinvents herself after a hiatus that’s almost a generation gone, it’s a very good comeback film. Credit must go to atleast three people besides Sridevi – the producers Rakesh Jhunjhunwala and Radhakrishna Damani (both of them India’s ace stock-pickers), debutante director Gauri Shinde (an ad professional in her own right) and her backer, R.Balki (R Balakrishnan who made acclaimed films like “Cheeni Kum” and “Paa”).

As the title says, “English Vinglish” is all about a homemaker’s falling sense of self-esteem because of her ignorance of English. Mother of two, and wife to a high-flying corporate executive, Shashi (Sridevi) is bored with life and except her younger kid who adores her, her elder kid chastises her for not knowing English. (Doesn’t happen as cruelly in real life) and her husband doesn’t show much sensitivity to her blues and midlife crisis of confidence (happens). There comes a call from Shashi’s only sister Meera in US beckoning her to come early for the wedding of her daughter. With much reluctance and usual ridicule from family, Shashi leaves for US ahead of the family members by three weeks. There, in proper Manhattan district of New York, she fumbles again and again failing to communicate in English but finds accommodative nieces and an affectionate sister. And the comes a move that redeems her sense of self-pride – a secretive enrolment into a English Class – an American equivalent of Russell’s Spoken English comprising of a cosmopolitan crowd – a Chinese, a Pakistani, a Madrasi, a Russian, an African, a Frenchman (who develops a fondness for her) apart from her – all taught by an infectiously enthusiastic Gay English teacher who looks like a cross between Clark Gable and Steve Forbes.

You can guess what happens in the end – a woman driven to desperation by family finally redeems herself, gets back her mojo in life and earns her spurs with the basic character-building traits of persistence, self-awareness and determination. Towards the climax, as the story moves, the English teacher announces the date of final test as proof of proficiency in functional English wherein each one of the students has to give a speech for five minutes in English. That coincides with the day of Shashi’s niece’s wedding- the purpose of her stay in US. But she comes up trumps on the d-day, skipping the test due to her own faltering first and later delivering the speech of her life for five minutes in full glare of the guests who turned up at the wedding, her discouraging family, raving fans of her culinary skills and the students of the English class and the teacher. She delivers a speech that stupefies all with words that stir you in fully functional English that makes her earn distinction. And then, the accolades sweeter than the Laddus she is famous for.

On the whole, a good story induces a form of trance because it alters your state of awareness – of the here and now. Director Gauri Shinde’s story can take most people of both genders to an expanded awareness of an imagined world that may not always happen– to the classroom corridors with kids who shy away from the deficiencies of their parents at the PTA meetings and get needlessly “embarrassed” by their parents, to the inside of a flight you are about to take for the very first time in your life and you choke for water, to the wide-eyed canvass that never seems to strike your visual range when you get on to the last floor of a building that’s enveloped by multiple skyscrapers in New York City, to the moments of our daily life when our destiny keeps getting shaped and re-shaped and relationships build and destroyed. Gauri Shinde seems as adept as her husband R.Balki in weaving a story that’s honest, and hugely evocative. “English Vinglish” gives you a roller-coaster ride of emotions that make you cry, laugh and not necessarily choke. In 136 minutes, she stirs your senses enough to give you a fully-bathed experience of watching a nice movie. Even though the story uses tunnels underneath the conscious walls of logic to touch the subconscious, most times it is convincing and on few occasions where it seems unreal it won’t affect your growing respect for the director.

Music by Amit Trivedi including BGM and lyrics by Swanand Kirkire are exceptional. Most of the songs enhance the story and heighten the cinematic experience which is the hallmark of a good composer. The five minutes of screen space Sridevi shares with cameo artist Amitabh Bachhan is a treat for fans. Amitabh dazzles well and every artiste gives good performance thanks to the characterization achieved by the director. Sridevi should be congratulated for taking a role that suits her demeanor and her sparkling body language which is strikingly expressive – her nuances of emoting naturally with her face and her spirited body rhythms show no signs of letting up. Age definitely shows on her face with makeup that hides the wrinkles but her acting talent in her squeaky cute voice is as spotless. I am tempted to call her by a movie title: the eternal sunshine of a spotless mind. Finally, for those who want to see the US at closer shots in the inner circles of New York city, you won’t find a better film.

Comedy and entertainment come in lavish doses through the grammar grouches of native speakers in English – they form the lightest part of the film. The film can easily find its way into the cinema halls of the countries whose populations aspire to learn English. At least 45 per cent of the dialogues are in English, the level of proficiency is expected to be a basic learner’s vocabulary of less than 1000 words and the toughest word in the film is the word - “judgemental”. I wouldn’t like to be called judgemental in rating a film of this quality and sizzle; I would not give 5 out of 5 but I think it deserves an above-average rating – 3.5 on 5. Take your family to the film – whether you like subtle messages or not – you will surely have good laughs and a feeling of seeing a neat and clean film.

"Rebel" Telugu Movie Review

“Rebel” is the most ambitious film of young Rebel Star Prabhas who has had a string of hits last year. He looks like an uber cool version of veteran actor and original Rebel Star Krishnam Raju and has quite a following equaling the likes of Mahesh Babu and Jr.NTR. Prabhas has picked up director Raghavendra Lawrence – who gave hits like “Kaanchana” and “Mass” and “Style”. Raghavendra Lawrence belongs to that unique set of choreographers who took up directing in a big way – a’la Prabhu Deva, Amma Rajasekhar. It comes with a certain brazenness and some arrogance as well : since they know all the right moves for the lead pair in songs, they will probably or perhaps become a capable director. To some extent, it worked for Lawrence for a few movies but in “Rebel” he falls flat in many areas – the movie is not worth all the hype. I wonder what is that in the movie that took one year in the making.

The plot is a simple revenge story that resembles his earlier films – “Don” and “Kanchana”. Raju (Prabhas) comes to a city in search of “Stephen Roberts” whom nobody has seen before but who commands a fierce army of sophisticated gunmen who extort millions from innocents. Raju learns that only one Naanu knows who Stephen Roberts. Naanu’s daughter is a dance teacher in Bangkok, so Raju woos her to get the bag of secrets about the elusive S.R. He gets the villains finally with lot of gory action and mindless stunts but before that Lawrence shows one more lengthy flashback that reveals Raju’s original background of inheriting the kingdom of a Don (Bhupathi Raju played by Krishnam Raju). Deeksha Sheth, the second heroine in the film is also thrown into the flashback as his first love. The plot and the narration is bland and there is no twist anywhere.



What mars the film is heavy-duty violence which is glorified with graphics – drilling machines are used to pulverize knee-joints, knuckles and shoulders, all kinds of guns are used in the film and there’s relentless spraying of bullets and men are killed like mice. Action sequences are meant to elevate the heroism of a handsome and shapely hero like Prabhas but they are highly contrived and look unimpressive and surreal. All the stunts of the film are straight-lifted from recent Hollywood movies and some are inspired by “Sherlock Holmes” series - the one that shows an improvisation over “Matrix” series in the sense of slow-moving, body-part-breaking kind. Scientifically, the stunt masters know that the only part that is movable in the human face is the lower jaw – not ears, not eyes, not nose. So, animating all over the face is not really credible. Music by Lawrence is unexceptional and lacks finesse that professionals give. Lawrence should stick to his strengths than spreading himself thin. Knowing beats is one thing, drum beats is another.



I am told that the script was first rejected by Prabhas the first time Lawrence narrated it. Prabhas would have been luckier had he gotten away out of this script. It is not a film that will cap his career or one that will rekindle “Chatrapathi” mania despite the potential of the actor. Prabhas carries the film well but his costumes in choreography could have been better. His dialogue delivery is again inconsistent; that’s an area that requires great rework if he has to cement his place amongst the top three. His heroism gets highlighted in unexpected times and falls flat in moments it should've got. Tamanna is exposed to all her body parts full - she is covered most times only 15 per cent in the film and shows that despite all the beauty, she doesn’t have depth in her acting – even the song featuring her exclusively where she does a Janet Jackson-style dancing, audience take a puff break. Deeksha does a tad better in flashback. Krishnam Raju looks relatively comfortable in his elderly role compared with earlier films. The big relief in comedy comes only at three points punctuated well with the entry of Brahmanandam, MS Narayana and Ali. Good to see Ali in a better role as “KamalHasan ShivaShankar”, he sizzles in the six minutes. Mukesh Rushi as the villain shows different shades. On the whole, “Rebel” is a wasted effort by Lawrence despite the stunts, action, drama and negligible comedy because there’s nothing new he could show – it’s a rehash of his earlier films, elements he loves to show of dance, helping the handicapped and orphans, transvestites, dons, revenge, et al. Choreography, his main forte, is also amiss, maybe Lawrence should have given another upcoming a talent a chance at that. On the whole, I would not even give it beyond 2 out of 5 but because of Prabhas, I will give “Rebel” 2.5 on 5.

PM Manmohan Singh speaks on Doordarshan: Need for Economic Literacy

Keeping aside the follies of Congress-I and the pros and cons of bringing in FDI in retail, happy to see the s(p)inister Mamatha get beaten at her bluff. With 19 seats, You cannot dictate terms to a coalition partner of 205 seats. And for God's sake, when will the politicians get a tutorial in Economics? Doing a Bharat bandh and making the economy halt for a day makes life tougher for the common man. Some part of the output of the day Rs.12500 crs. plus is gone out of the mouths of poor people - daily laborers, shift workers, etc. BJP should understand that being asinine and idiotic in approach wont get them the votes in the next election.


While I am neutral to both the parties, can BJP give a declaration in writing that they will not raise fuel prices if they come to power? Can Mamatha have a bet with CPI that she will never take harsh measures against the common man? In Economic realities, you can never do it. BJP should realise that the toughest decisions in Economic policy were taken by Congress-I - they raised fertilizer prices more than 350 per cent, they raised fuel prices several times (out of compulsion not out of sadism because the crude oil prices never spiralled out of control during BJP regimes), FDI in other sectors.

BJP and the opposition in those times never did a roadshow against the raising of fertilizer prices. (Fertilizers is one of the key goods imported by India - apart from Crude oil, Coal, Gold etc.). So, the opposition is usually selective about the protests they want to do rather than fully understand the ramifications of any decision. India has become a democracy before its people became literate, as Nandan Nilekani said, which is not the case with other democracies in the world. So, neither the people nor their chosen representatives have found the time and maturity to ripen their knowledge of what drives decisions in the world - directionally and structurally. It is the responsibility of everybody involved to discuss threadbare the consequences of policy decisions.

If the ruling party hasn't done it, it is the responsibility of the media, the elite, the educated, the opinion-leaders, the state governments, the legislators, the opposition party members - everyone, has a stake in understanding and explaining how future is impacted - if we don't allow Fresh Foreign Capital, technology, management and resource inputs of other kind into Retail or any other sector where efforts to keep it indigenous have either failed or created issues of scale and profitability.

Agents who sold post-office deposits are selling mutual funds, actuaries (and everybody down the value-chain of technical qualifications) who used to be employed by LIC are today gainfully employed in private insurance companies, entrepreneurs who are happy to be small shop-keepers are going to find alternative ways of scale-up or be pushed out.

Change is inevitable and the last 10 years of window the retail has got has only seen few flourish but many stick with old ways of handling money. There are more issues at play here but the payoffs are going to be better than worse.

Tonight, when Manmohan Singh addresses the nation at 8pm, I hope we will all see the need for a healthy debate on policy reforms instead of stalling parliaments and disrupting economic activities. If you like this post, share it with as many. If you don't like this, lets talk more and discuss why. Let us develop more economic literacy.

Post-Script: Since this was posted, Prime Minister spoke on National Television. His speech was measured, informative, persuasive and hard-hitting: "Money does not grow on trees", "They did not succeed in 1991 and they will not succeed now." Here's the link to his full speech.

http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/economy/pms-address-tonationfull-text_760537.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+moneycontrol%2FiOjZ+%28Moneycontrol+Updates%29

"Barfi" Hindi Movie Review

"Barfi" is one more experimental film directed by Anurag Basu which is in a different format than what we have seen in films like "Life in Metro" or "Gangster". Ranbir Kapoor once again proves that he is ready to take on any role in his march to superstardom - he plays the role of a dumb do-gooder in Darjeeling who splits his affections between an autist girl Priyanka Chopra and a conventionally good-looking, Bengali girl (Ileana D'Cruz). Movie's finest performances are by Ranbir, Ileana (she can act, finally!) and Priyanka. Some of the most exciting camera work on Indian Celluloid comes alive in this musical extravaganza with period-film touch. The touch extends to a differently sounding BGM and music by Pritham. What lets the movie down is entertainment, entertainment and entertainment as Silk would say.

The narrative is confusing - and the director is unable to strike a balance between what he wants to convey and what will appeal cinematically. Flashbacks, which are the last refuge of the skilful director, are used liberally without a method or purpose. After about 150 minutes and several times in the movie, you realise Anurag Basu wont let you go without showing the creative stuff - intermixing art film scenes, Chaplinesque comedy, extravagant landscape shots of Greens in Bengal and a touch of Hollywood musicals. All the efforts dont add up to a convincing film, it looks indulgent and irritatingly artful, sometimes. Ranbir Kapoor has done more experimentation than any Kapoor or Khan in their entire career - "Saawariya", "Rocket Singh",, "RockStar", etc. In his own career interest, he should now act in a script that enhances mass appeal than thinning his luck at the boxx office. Honestly, despite the artful touch, gaps in story-telling make "barfi" over-indulgent. For the effort, I would give it 2.5 out of 5 or else, the movie sucks but for the Emerging Star.