"Something Something" (Telugu Film Review)

Some stars hitch-hike their way to stardom doing the same star-turn again and again and hope for re-alignment of luck or fortune. Little do they realise that fortune favors the brave or the new or those who try out different roles. Atrophy sets in sooner for actors who play the same kind of roles. Siddharth is the star to talk about in this film "Something Something", his screen roles are less than half as exciting as his off-screen romantic tracks, maybe he should make a film on that like "Autograph Memories". This film is no different.  "Something Something" is a story borrowed from the film "Choti Si Baat".

 Kumar is an IT Geek who can't talk to girls, let alone woo them. Everyone in his office has a fling or two and are having a blast in office. Into this office steps in Hansika, the trainer. Kumar (Siddharth) lightens up, loosens his libido and makes many false starts to converse with the girl. Somebody advises that he needs the expert guidance of Premji (not Aziz Premji, just love Guru Premji). Premji (Brahmanandam) enters and starts his tutorial with Kumar. He succeeds, despite competition in the fray and all that. He gets paid by the minute and the hour like some Intellectual Property lawyer of Amarchand Mangaldass & Co. It is this chemistry between Brahmi and Siddharth that gets some genuine good laughs and punchy one-liners.

The only twist in the film is at break-time where Premji learns that Hansika is his own niece. He decides to move into reverse gear and starts a campaign that will antagonise Kumar. This is the part that is dreary and deadpan. Entertainment reaches a crescendo in the first half but fails to sustain the momentum in the second half making it an average film on the whole. Comedy with Brahmi and others is above-average and intensely situational; its been a long time since he is enmeshed with the main storyline and shows up till the end. But age is not on his side and had it been a younger comedian like Venu Madhav or Srinivas Reddy or even Sunil, the output would have been fiery and effective. Music by Sathya is new-sounding and not uniformly melodious. Director Sundar hasn't done his best in crispening the film. What peppers the film with a weak storyline are special appearances  by Rana Daggubati and Samantha, his current hearthrob.  Hansika is happy to be dressed like a princess who keeps looking at her own image in the mirror, she cannot act. On the whole, Siddharth tries to rope in the magic of Brahmanandam (Santhanam in Tamil) to turn his luck on. But this is unlikely to be a big draw in Telugu because he has no role to kill for and the film is just about average despite being a clean entertainer which families can watch. 2.5 out of 5 is my rating.

Mr KV Kamath and The Coefficient of Determination

Mr.KV Kamath has been replaced by Narayan Murthy in Infosys and people are praising both of them. I don't want to spoil the party for Kamath fans but I want to point an analogy from Statistics to explain my point. "The Coefficient of Determination" represents R Square, used in Regression Analysis for explaining the movement of a dependent variabl...e attributed to the movement of the independent variable. So, an R square, short for Coefficient of Determination, of 95 means, that the dependent variable's movement is attributed 95% to the movement of the independent variable.


Take Mr Kamath's achievements in Banking. There are paralleled by few other stalwarts, no doubt, like Mr Aditya Puri, Mr Uday Kotak and Mr Rana Kapoor. But in all fairness, if a Coefficient of Determination be used to judge his performance in ICICI Bank, as he took over from Mr N Vaghul, it must be said that the Banking Credit itself grew by leaps and bounds during his tenure, for the system as a whole. If I hazard a guess, it grew from Rs.7 lakh crores to Rs.56 lakh crores in the last decade. What does it mean? It means Mr Kamath's rise in Banking could have been matched by anybody else sitting in his place because the basic platform captured 80-95 per cent of the action from the demand for banking credit, which just grew astronomically. I am not deriding Mr Kamath's achievements here; I am only suggesting that we should evaluate his performance fairly and objectively - how much has come from independent variable (his ability) and how much has come from dependent variable (bank credit). Now, lets contrast this with his tenure at Infosys which has been quite forgettable until Mr Murthy decided to take his stewardship back. In the last three years, Infosys has been the victim of both internal turbulence - many seniors leaving the company for greener avenues or different avocations - and external turmoil. Compared to the metric of Bank Credit which grew at an average of 14% p.a. in the last ten years or so, IT industry in India grew in single digits, the world's big spenders in IT curtailed their budgets, shrunk their balance sheets, hived off unprofitable units and all this resulted in immense shakeouts, rationalisation and hardship for companies like Infosys. The famed "thirty plus" margins of Infosys can no longer be granted and Mr Kamath's tenure became a rocky one - his invincibility became a muslin thread that gave away to the shocks of the subprime crisis. You could also argue, in another perverse manner, that the Peter Principle (Every employee rises to his own level of incompetence) has applied brutally here too. It will be interesting what the Coefficient of Determination test will prove here for Mr Kamath's innings at Infosys. This is the framework I would like folks to evaluate Mr Kamath. I don't mean to disparage the man and his achievements. I met MR Kamath atleast thrice in my stint at ICICI Bank and have enormous goodwill and regards for him. But I don't want to be carried away by blind followership.

Disclaimer: I hold shares in ICICI Bank even today.

Amway and Your True Calling in Life.

Amway's CEO got arrested for financial irregularities. I am so glad this happened in my lifetime and not during my kid's retirement years. Amway is just one of the several MLM schemes that have got the better of many intelligent people. I know of most sober and savvy people working in companies like Google, Microsoft, SBI, SBH, ICICI Bank, HDFC Bank guard the Amway products and schemes like a fana...tical zealot. I had always resisted the advances of such people and wondered what is it with lovely people who will turn mercenaries overnight and begin to talk like vacuum-cleaner salesmen. Daniel Pink has just written a book "Its Human to Sell." I beg to differ. It is not human to sell always, especially when the audience is captive and they are your best buddies, teachers, students, co-workers, pen pals, boss's wife or husband, twitter followers, facebook friends, landlords, tenants, co-travellers, gas suppliers, meter readers, you name it. I have gone through the embarrassments of being at the receiving end of atleast few of my relatives and friends and closer kin. I was devastated whenever I went through the experience, I couldn't say No because they are so close to me, I couldn't buy the products, and I wouldn't "recruit" more. The chain invariably broke with me and I could never, never again resume a normal conversation with any friend or a relative or an acquaintance who sold me vague concepts of "time", "annuity", "financial freedom" and other fuzzy financial management concepts steamrolled into emotional packages.


At the core of such schemes of Amway or any such MLM scheme lie three principles:

1. They play on your insecurities of life - inadequate money, passionless job and rising expenditure to match aspirational levels.

2. They indoctrinate you with fancy "recruiting" functions that have the feel of an Evangelist session where many newcomers like you are greeted by older "recruits" breaking out into ecstatic shouts and shrieks, even getting footloose from where they are standing, talking about "How I raised myself from failure to success in selling Amway/Tupperware/Japanlife/Saradha/MihiraMagic/Landmark/whatever, how everything in life is achievable and all prosperity is sitting in the bank balance and how you can too". You have to attend atleast five such functions before you get into the jingoism that is smeared into the experienced elite who are singing hosannahs now.

3. Then having got you, your "converted" zeal, you will have to get into a producing mode of recruiting other people into your network, or become a huge consumer or even a pro-sumer - a combination of both. This is where, very few make it. And those who make it, may have succeeded against all odds - of embarrassments, of ostracisation, of hard-selling their own friends and colleagues and relatives.

I have seen a few cycles of such principle-centered selling of these schemes and have been a victim of atleast one bad experience where I was conned into a Questnet MLM scheme in the hope of owning a rare coin, an insignia of a FIFA World Cup, which will become so rare that it will cost more than the gold and the silver blended into the coin. Finally, the Questnet scheme owner got arrested and the scheme was abandoned. Having paid Rs.45000 in those days for a puny coin which has a Mexico World Cup signage on it. I got a mere Rs.9000 when I gave it to my mother a few years back because there was less silver than gold and even less gold than the powder used as letters on the coin! For all the love of soccer, my savings became a succor for someone's greed. I never invested in any Ponzi scheme after that because I now firmly believe P.T.Barnum, America's greatest showman salesman who said: A sucker is born every minute.

Many years back, when I was a banker at BNP Paribas, I spotted atleast two such Ponzi schemes - Mihira Magic, which made stuff that are flying off the shelves just as Amway products today and a call-centre which operated like a Ponzi scheme, which I will not name. Mihira Magic also finally folded up but I tried to outstmart the owners by making every chain subscriber open a salary account with the bank. It won me lot of plaudits and helped me register a fine performance at work. But the tragedy struck elsewhere, BNP Paribas, the retail bank folded up in India before Mihira Magic pulled down the curtains many years later. Mora of the story here: One swallow doesn't make a summer for a bank.

At a basic level, at a very conceptual level, one can argue that all schemes are Ponzi Schemes, whether it is about products or product managers or product consumers - its all about recruitment. But the ones that stand out are usually having the flavor that marks all the others which eventually collapsed, sooner or later. Having been in sales and relationship-building for many years now, I like to conclude this autobiographical excursion on Amway-like schemes with a few strong learnings which I learnt after many fifty-hour work-weeks during my career.

One, whether you are an employee or a business owner, your biggest asset is your career (in case of a working professional) or your business (in case of an owner or an entrepreneur).

Two, Invest in your career or business most because they have the best payoffs. Do not fall for schemes which promise you the moon and the six pence - they cannot succeed like the way you can. Invest in yourself or your business or your real assets - family, hobbies. That has the greatest payoff.

Three, Stop burning your inner and outer circle of contacts with bummer proposals and schemes which take you nowhere and what more, ostracise you forever. Build your skills, spend all your energies into making yourself relevant, employable and precious till your last day. There is no financial freedom that comes without blood, sweat, tears and hardships. DeVos is the richest man in Michigan. Okay, he is the co-founder of Amway, is worth $5.1 Billion but that is the worth of all his factory assets and stocks traded. The rest of the MLM subscribers are not worth as much.

Four, in a day of 24 hours, you work for 8 hours whichever way and sleep for 8 hours. The remaining 8 hours is for relaxation, recreation, renewal or capacity-building. Not for selling a pipe-dream, somebody else's dream.

Five, repeat of point no.three. Do not run the risk of becoming a social outlaw - "Here comes the Amway man or woman". Get the boot or Re-boot your thinking about MLMs. Build businesses or Invest in businesses or become a careerist. Don't be a MLM evangelist.

"Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani" Film Review (Hindi)

There's something about Ranbir Kapoor from the first time he appeared on screen. And there's something magical about this film YJHD, which is a phrase from one of Ranadhir Kapoor (his uncle) films. By the time I saw, the film is already crossed Rs.100 crores and is counting to the next hundred crores in BO collections. Ayaan Mukherjee, director, has given a winning script of a contemporary love story starring Deepika Padukone, Kalki K and Ranbir. YJHD is a breeze and a worthy addition to the catalogue of films like "3 Idiots", "Zindagi Naa Milegi Dubaara", "Dil Chahta Hai", "Jab We Met". 

Story is not anew. Karan (Ranbir) is flirtatious and a go-get-her Donjuan. Naina (Deepika) is a medico who takes herself and life too seriously. Karan and his gang of friends - a guy and a gal are taking off to the mountains in North for a trek adventure. Naina bumps into one of the gals (Kalki) at a grocery and she learns that the girl Kalki is her batchmate, she learns who are all going for the expedition and eventually, jumps onto the bandwagon. Sparks fly and love blossoms between two opposites. Then the twist at the interval and the fun 2.0 post-interval as the foursome get back for Kalki's wedding in a familiar finale that ends like a fairy tale. What has worked for the film are solid performances by the starcast led by Ranbir and Deepika. Deepika has shown again why she is the youth Diva  - her looks, style, gait and oomph make her a sweltering watch as she plays the two shades before and after the interval as the shy girl first and as the girl who gets her mojo and her man later. Kalki has done the exact opposite role of what she did earlier in "Zindagi Naa milegi Dubara" and she pulls it off with ease as the ebullient funster. The other guy who plays Ranbir's thick friend and room-mate also sticks out with his performance. Ranbir Kapoor is the go-to guy in the film, especially in the second half with an uproarious performance that will finally seal his place as the upcoming Superstar who will call the shots. After experimental roles like "Rocket Singh", "Barfi", "Rockstar" and "Rajneeti", Ranbir Kapoor gets a script that lets him show his repertoire  - lover boy looks, unassuming demeanour, impeccable sense of comedy timing, broody and playful swing of moods, command over language that few Hindi youthful stars have - when he says "Raftaar", you will vibrate with the meaning. I have this comfortable feeling that Ranbir Kapoor is on his way to become the most iconic Superstar of this generation because he has the best package of vulnerability, intelligence, romanticism and credibility that marked those who preceded him generations ago. It appears also that the genes of acting that he inherited on all sides and in degrees of separation from his parents and grand-arens are going to play out on many more scripts that are yet to be written out with him in mind, this is my humble conviction. 

Pritam's music is another highlight. His instrumentation is more understated than his characteristic music with its haunting emphases and lilting notes  and crescendos that surcharge the mood of the song. 'Badtameez Dil" is one helluva song that is composed way out of Pritam's comfort zone. It also has a verisimillitude to that of "Gili Gili Akka" song of Randhir Kapoor's hit song. But nine songs are too many and unjustified. The song with Madhuri Dixit is over-rated and boring - don't mistake, She is old and unbearable even if she is able to move her hip-bone. Farook Sheikh as Ranbir's father sparkles even in a brief role. Dialogues by Hameed Dalal are a stand-out. ("Dil ki dhadkaan ki awaaz kaano tak sun na chahta hoon"). Be prepared for misty eyes atleast on three occasions in the film. What undermines the film is the weakest comedy seen in Ranbir's films and pathetic attempts by director Ayaan to evoke slapstick comedy, almost a leaf out of "Barfi" stunts in the first half. The redemption of the film is in its plot, its performances,  music and the overall feel of positivity of the pangs of coming of age. The screenplay could have been better and the first half could have been shorter; there is no reference to what the hero and the heroine did for eight years when they didn't meet each other despite choosing good professions. The characterisation of Ranbir's friend who is a serial gambler and an alcoholic could have elevated Ranbir's magnanimity as a helper but it was lost in brief shots and passing references to reform him. Small blemishes in a film that rarifies your soul and makes you reach for the stars of Bollywood, and root for the next big thing  - the next Rockstar Ranbir. 4.5 out of 5 despite a weak first half. Karan Johar and Ronnie Screwala must be elated they bet on the right horse that is raking it all in. 

The Bane of Multi-level Marketing.

Sixteen years after I received my posting from Businessline newspaper, my first byeline in the paper. An article appeared on MLM yesterday. http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/money-wise/the-bane-of-multilevel-marketing/article4772529.ece

"Iddarammayalatho" Movie Review (Telugu)

Puri Jagannadh is one of the cleverest directors in Tollywood who churns out more than three films per year, sometimes four by preparing scripts that encash the flavor-of-the-month phenomenon. Between last year's Sankranti and now, he directed four films including the current offering with Style Diva Allu Arjun. But I am afraid, his decline has started with the film "Businessman", reached a nadir with "Devudu Chesina Manushulu", and later on, became known as a director who creates controversy for promoting the film. As an audience, I feel betrayed whenever I see a Puri film because he has scant respect for social responsibility and is least sensitive to sentiments of women audience (even if many of them perversely watch his films). In "Iddarammayalatho", he tries to camouflage his obsession with making films for the galleries with a little more maturity but the basic plot and lacklustre screenplay gives away in this 137 minute action thriller.

Despite the hype, and despite a sterling performance by Allu Arjun  - in dances, action stunts, and romantic scenes, the film doesn't deliver on many counts - and the reason could be the fatigue setting in for Puri's stereotypes - of machismo heroes, over-glamorised heroines and sadistic villains. I feel he is misguided in all his approach to film-making which makes even icons like Mahesh and Pawan Kalyan and Allu Arjun flock to him for direction in the hope of adding  a hit to their credit. Every frame in the film is fraught with dishonesty and deceipt - to manipulate emotions of the audience. And all this he takes liberties with the storyline frothed up from a basic one-line. The story goes like this here. Sanju Reddy (Allu Arjun) is a guitarist who falls in love with Komali (Amala Paul) who is learning violin under Brahmanandam - in Barcelona, Spain (Thank God, it's not Bangkok again!). One day, she shoots, by mistake, a murder being committed by a Gangster villain on the beach. The villains chase her down, kidnap her and make many attempts to eliminate her. Meanwhile, as the parents of both agree to come down to bless them as married, the villains kill the parents of both even as Komali and Sanju escape. This is the flashback portion, the narration actually moves in the voice of  another girl Akanksha (Catherine Theresa) who is reading a diary of Amala Paul (which itself turns out to be another twist). In learning about the diary, Akanksha falls in love with Sanju and then it takes a routine turn except that the diary itself is "planted" by Sanju so that Akanksha reads it and falls in love with him because her father, a minister (Rao Ramesh) and the gangster are partners-in-crime for a Rs. One lakh crore scam. Sanju takes revenge and settles down, we are to believe, with the two glam dolls. The storyline appears long but the screenplay is better. 

Even if the first half is more entertaining than the second half, the film's watchability is because of Allu Arjun. His uber cool dresses, stylish body language and his repertoire of dancing skills and acrobatic stunts makes him a good draw despite the presence of two glamorous faces. The best paisa-vasool moment of the film is the action sequence before the interval. Anyone wanting to make a transition from ugly looks to handsome looks should study the career graph of Allu Arjun - it is quite unparalleled. Amala Paul's performance is below-par and it appears this Kerala lass is incapable of outgrowing her shy looks and demure body language. Catherine Theresa has carried herself far better - she seems effortless in Indian dresses, has better scenes than Amala and has a screen presence. Comedy track is a big let-down for the film. Puri's obsession with Ali is not yielding success and the scenes between Brahmanandam and Ali are pure disaster. Puri is losing touch with what can fire up comedy. He also has to treat the audience with more respect, intelligence and sensibilities. In a scene where Catherine is packing off to Spain, she wears scantiest dress which you don't wear in front of your mother. And it is the father in whose presence, she is packing the clothes. In most other scenes, when the narration is pathos, he shows Catherine in min shorts baring her thighs and cleavage, that is absurd sensibility. Puri's respect for intelligence is also well-known; there are references to mining scams and CBI without reason or rationale, the second heroine Catherine who comes to Spain for studies doesn't go to college even once, all she does is to read Amala's diary and date Allu Arjun. And most of the dialogues are sexist - there are atleast four dialogues on why boys are taken for a ride by girls in the name of love, why boys losing virginity is never an issue, why girls are insensitive to boys' advances...it is these kind of dialogues that are corrupting the society and increasing crimes against women. Puri's count of felonies doesn't end with these manipulative dialogues - he talks casteism through characters which was unwarranted. He coins a word "Bapinese" to connotate converted Brahmins and also makes mockery of "Reddys" while insinuating grandeur. All this is not serious stuff, but Puri's style of directing, characterisation and story-telling smacks of a certain irresponsibility which will appeal to basic instincts of men not elevate them. According to me, his films will one day be housed in the "Hall of Shame". 2 out of 5 is my rating.

"The Great Gatsby" Film Review (English)

Finally, one of America's greatest works of fiction finds an incarnation in the big screen. This is Hollywood's sixth attempt to capture the surrealistic  almost evanscent classic by one of the most conceptual novelists  - Francis Scott Fitzgerald. I must say, it is one of the most beautiful films I have seen in a long time, probably not since "Avatar" and at the end of the 146 minutes of a magical story with a trepid ending and a tragic twist in the tail, I get a feeling that Fitzgerald's efforts have not gone in vain. He was perceived as one of the improbable screenwriters who never quite made it to Hollywood despite gallant attempts to make a film on his novels. While  Fitzgerald's other stories have been made into films  - "The Last Tycoon", "The curious case of Benjamin Button" etc., "The Great Gatsby" made many false starts and failed attempts starring many ruling stars, including Robert Redford who looks like a million-dollar baby even in night dress.

Warner Brothers has left nothing to chance this time around - the sixth time around. They roped in a starcast of the decade - Leonardo Dicaprio as Jay"Great" Gatsby, Toby Maguire as Nick Carraway, Carey Mulligan as Daisy Buchannan,  Joel Edgerton as Daisy's husband and our own Amitabh Bachchan as the jewish businessman in a cameo that marks the Superstar's official entry into Hollywood. Who can direct such a starcast and take the magical, make-believe, hard-to-project vigorous words of Fitzgerald? Baz Luhrrmann  - who has a mind of his own and a unique gift of collapsing song, ballads and drama into celluloid opus. His earlier films - "Moulin Rage", "Australia", "Romeo and Juliet" have marked him out for the potential in TGG in 3-D. Luhrrmann creates an extravagant biopic that sizzles and rarely fizzles out. 

Nick Carraway (Toby Maguire) as in the book is the main narrator of the film who observes that his great fortune in life was in meeting the "great" Gatsby. He is a struggling writer who lives next door to the regal mansion of Jay Gatsby, a self-made, self-obsessed billionaire who throws the biggest and the loudest parties - inviting anybody who cares for drowning in food and wine and dance on the house - more inclusive than our own IPL post-match parties. Nobody knows what he does, how he earned such obscene wealth and what his background is. One day, he gets a hand-written invite from Gatsby to attend one of his parties and Nick is thrilled and paints the whole party that he is the only "chosen" one. Indeed he is for reasons learnt later; Nick's cousin Daisy Buchannan lives on the other side of West Egg, across a Bay married to her husband, her many-affaired husband. Gatsby and Daisy have been in love since he was 17 but filmy fate gave Daisy away in arranged marriage to  Buchannans. Nick soon finds that his new friend Gatsby wants him to re-arrange love with his old flame. Sparks fly, naturally, when Daisy makes it to the party but her husband, like all husbands gets wind of the secret liaisions of his wife. Many wranglings later, there is a twist in the tail as Buchannan speeds away in a fit of rage in the sporty car of Gatsby only to dash into one of Buchannan's lady-loves and kills her. But the husband, a gasoline-filler, is fed with the notion that it is Gatsby who drove his car that killed his wife and not the real paramour. Daisy is indifferent to Gatsby because she is confused between the moral limits of marriage and the catnip pull of Gatsby. But Gatsby remains composed and intriguing till the end, Nick playing the last man standing for him, even at the funeral which is the most poignant shot in the film - none who made it to his lavish parties except Nick turn up at the grave. That's the long story that cannot be made shorter but what makes the film a visual feast is the images, the songs, the contextual and the subtext messages coming through the times and the characters set in 1920s - when American stock markets were at life-time highs, economy was over the hill and society was both loud, hedonistic and vainglorious. 

What endears the film is its many messages because Fitzgerald's novel is itself so timeless because of its metaphors and its malleability to interpretations. The West Egg can be today's Bay Area, the new-age Silicon Valley, the East Egg can be the old money, and the characters can all be so spine-chillingly true - a  billionaire who refuses to give up the ghosts of the past, his friend who refuses to talk turkey for fears of antagonising both the parties, a woman who cannot reign in her wayward husband and cannot hide her feelings and vacillates till the end, an old-world husband who goes after Munnis and Sheelas but doesn't want to dock his wife and what more, expect loyalty. It is these images that make the story burnt into relevance forever ninety years after Fitzgerald wrote in 1925. Baz Luhhrmann makes a winner with minimal distractions of 3-D technology and memorable motifs of Fitzgerald's prose. Leonardo Dicaprio stands out with a quirkacious range of expressions, he gets the best introduction and also makes the exit in a watery grave in the end - exactly like in "Titanic". Can't believe his looks kill even today since his debut in 1997. Toby Maguire has a veneer and a role that will get him many new fans than just kissing boring girl-friend and climbing walls as Spiderman. Joel Edgerton as Daisy's husband has the best presence after the two. Music and SFX also stand out - heard that most of the SFX are created in the Reliance studios of Hyderabad and Mumbai. Its a great flick and must watch for a great synthesis of an American legend of literature with an Australian legend in directing. 4.5 out of 5.