How Tollywood fared in 2013 - An analysis by Sriram Karri

Your intrepid film critic has been quoted in the New York Times for views on how Tollywood is faring. Written by Sriram Karri. Of course, much has been said but only few quotes taken. Good analysis and interesting views on the shifts happening in the Telugu film industry.

Please read the article from the link below:

http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/

"Dhoom-3" Movie Review (Hindi)

If I tell you that the first shot of the film is a young boy helping his father resusciate the Great Indian Circus facing liquidation from a banker who has invoked the equivalent of Sarfesi Act and that young boy grows up to restore the pride of his father in making the Great Indian Circus a must-go in Chicago, does it tell you where it all leads up? The young boy becomes Aamir Khan who targets the bank - Western Bank of Chicago - the bank that made his father Jackie Shroff bow out with his life and commits heist whenever he wants. Thats the bone of "Dhoom-3" for you - a kind of Dr Jekyll and Hyde in Aamir Khan - who just exchanged one kind of stardom with another for this role of double shades, in more ways than one, which you will realise as you watch. 

Shot entirely in Chicago, the film revolves around Aamir Khan from the start to finish in all the 172 minutes of sometimes breezy and sometimes agonising frames of stylish stunts on BMW motor bikes that vroom ahead with 360 degree turns, over-turns and even amphibian dexterity like the cars in James Bond films. The franchisee stamina is tested to a point of some fatigue which doesn't find much relief in most characters including the so-called-hero Abhishek Bachchan and his flunkie Uday Chopra. Infact, Abhishek should try to relinquish his second-most well-known job as a hapless cop (after baby-sitting) for someone else to add verve and vigor. He looks singularly boring and needs to move on as much as the predictable Uday Chopra who could have been booked under Nirbhaya Act routinely for the number of women he leches on as a cop in this film.

Katrina Kaif is the romantic centrepiece of this testerone-filled story who performs stunning acrobatics in her role as a circus troupe artist. She sustains the lightest and the emotional scenes of the film well with Aamir Khan. Aamir Khan is the deserving reason to watch the film but most of the time you feel you are being taken for a ride because of the ludicrous plot with gaping holes in the script and the storyline. This is where I like to ask Vijay Prakash Acharya what he had in mind when he narrated the story to YRF films or Aamir Saheb. When a banker comes knocking on the doors of the Great Indian Circus because of payment default, what is wrong with it? Is asking for your loan back an act of cruelty that makes you turn so spiteful that you hit on my bank anytime and run with the heist? What were Abhishek and Uday - cops in India doing in Chicago? Why were they called when there is abundant local talent? With so many heists happening on just one bank, why are so many people clueless about the modus operandi and the man behind the act when he leaves so many clues? Is the 27 minute flashback at the outset required to justify the villainy of Aamir Khan? If so, will all villains get so much footage to explain their motives ? Why does every heist of Aamir Khan end with dollar notes falling  on the street people of Chicago like autumn leaves? Why doesn't he just take that money and run? Or, why doesn't it add up to the per capita income of Chicago? 

When you walk out of the film, you realise this is a film where everyone is reverential about Aamir Khan playing a villain and one must project him in as much good light as possible because the character he is playing can otherwise do no wrong under normal circumstances. This is an opportunity lost for Aamir Khan, methinks because thats not how the legends of Hollywood think or down south, some of the hero villains like NTR, Rajkumar, Rajnikanth did? If you are playing a villain, make even the best villains feel sorry by the menace in your character, don't pussy-foot around and don't think of your star image. While Aamir excels in his role, he could have outshined more than just giving a sheepish smile and a cunning eye to outwit police. The film could have also been shorter sans some repetitive stunts, most of whom are clearly graphics. The warning at the outset could have been aptly worded: Please do not try these stunts at home as they are unreal and designed by graphics. In the second half, there is an extended chase between Aamir and Abhishek where both of them hurl weapons and counter-weapons at each other on speeding bikes. It was hilarious and reminds one of the Astras and counter-astras used in mythological films on chariots. If every successive villain in the next editon of "Dhoom" thinks like Aamir Khan in giving a justification to character, the franchise will become an innocent version of Amul Dairy. Music by Pritham lacks melody and background score by somebody else heightens the drama. Unless you are a vroom Dhoom fan and do not enjoy speeds which optimise the fuel, this film lacks in substance and variety but delivers in style, speed and thrills and yes, the surprise that Aamir Khan throws at you at the beginning, the interval and the end. I would still rate it 2.5 out of 5 for the effort and Aamir. 

"Venkatadri Express" Telugu film Review

There are not many films in Tollywood which build muscle in storyline but "Venkatadri Express" is a novel attempt in that direction. Directed by a debutant Merlapati Gandhi, the film had created some buzz in trade circles because Gandhi has some award-winning short films to his credit. "Venkatadri Express" is the name of the train that leaves Hyderabad for Tirupati. Gandhi who is the all-in-one for story-screenplay-dialogues-director has selected that train as the backdrop and the entire story is weaved into one incredible train journey of a family who alight from Hyderabad for a journey that is supposed to be a joy ride and a happy one.

It becomes a happy one for all the family members - a father Nagineedu, his wife, sons and their families including the bridegroom Brahmaji who is about to tie the knot. Except for one of the sons Sandeep (Sandeep Kishan) who misses the train because of an errand run by his mother (to get the "thaali bottu") and some silly diversions at the station. These diversions, these "Rudraveena" type distractions are what enrages Sandeep's Father time and again. Sandeep's father, Nagineedu, is one of those modern-day curiosities who keeps a statistical count of such "mistakes" committed by everyone in the family - from toddlers to wife to sons and their spouses. Before embarking on the marriage party on Venkatadri Express, Sandeep is at 99 not out in terms of number of mistakes, so all he has to do to be kicked out of his house is one more. Be that as it may, and back to the story, Sandeep misses the train but somehow makes it in time to catch the train just before Tirupati in one of the incredible chases with some remote help (and pose as if he is sleep-walking from another compartment where he his berth lies). What really happened in the time since he missed the train? Why were there blood stains on his shirt? Who is the guy in the family compartment who is joined at the hip with Sandeep? How did he make it back just in time? Will Brahmaji's marriage happen? 

These are the questions that must egg you on to watch this reasonably engrossing movie made with a bevy of characters of low-key fame but thoroughly entertertaining except in the second half when it becomes predictable. Merlapati Gandhi has roped in a good starcast that pull off fireworks all except one - Nagineedu who gave the most unconvincing characterisation yet seen in his career as a father who is stuck on old-world discipline in new blood - he appears a cross between a "Bommarillu" Prakash Raj and an ancient Gummadi and has been quite a bore. Even in the end, his characterisation lacks the consistency check and closure in climax. Sandeep Kishan pulls his role with ease and style, he is lucky to have got a script that could have pulled in more eyeballs with a bigger star. A new girl Ratul Priti looks cute and over-exposed at the same time. Brahmaji gets an important role after a long time that registers good votes at places. The real draw of the film is the under-appreciated comedy tracks that are enmeshed with the main storyline of a moving train, mainly highlighted by Sudhir ("Oye" fame) and Taagubotu Ramesh. Sudhir will get accolades for a role of a lifetime while Ramesh gets the giggles with his trademark acting. A few others, kid and MS Narayana too get the occasional laughs. Undoubtedly, getting a script like this to deliver so much on entertainment and comedy is a coup because the storyline walks on a razor edge between a running story and the heart of the flashback of how the hero and the heroine get into an incredible chase. 

Music by Ramana Gogula is good not great. His BGM seems to enthrall more than his songs. As a music director, he had given some good hits in his checkered career but in this film, coming after a gap, one can feel something amiss in his disctinct style.  Chota K Naidu, the cinematographer has given a fantastic feel to the whole experience of a moving train and the images that move the narrative. A few songs have been shot with great passion and creativity which leave haunting imagery in primary colors. Without Naidu's support for a film which has untested director, the film might have slipped into shoddiness. Duration wise, I still felt that its a miracle to pack so much into one film in 127 minutes and yet achieve a poetic end in climax (I am not giving away much nowadays you see). While the director tied most of the scenes with logic, he slipped on the side of taking short-cuts to exalt comedy. There are scenes where a ticket collector loses his marbles in throwing out freeboarders; instead of throwing them out, he discusses Telugu literature. There are only two chains in a compartment to stop a train for the hero to hop into it but both are used creatively - preventing its real use; one is used to cradle a baby  and the other like a gym rope. Also, the film despite an original story and treatment resembles loosely many plots of films like "Jab We Met", "Bommarillu", "Ala Modalaindi" in terms of twists and hairpin bending twists. But it is definitely worth a watch, whatever be the shortcomings. It gives clean, family-clean entertainment and some uproarious laughter and delivers on most counts for a debutant director. My rating: 3.5./5.

US-Iran Deal- when foes become friends

Having worked in a few multinational banks since 2002, and being at the receiving end of being forced to cut short business wherever "sanction" countries like Iran and Iraq and Syria are involved, I am delighted at the announcement of the deal between Iran and a group of international powers to freeze important parts of Iran's nuclear program in exchange for a temporary relaxation of sanctions.

The US-Iranian deal on allowing Iran to continue with its nuclear ambitions on a limited scale is one of the most epochal moments in world history and it must be lauded for what it entails - it ends Iran's international isolation, its alienation from the international banking  and will restart commercial transactions between American companies and Iranian entities. The landmark deal has raised eyebrows even in Israel because for decades, Israel and Iran were bitter foes because of irreconcilable differences in culture, religion and identity. 

This is surprising because, way back in 1943, President Roosevelt told a British Ambassador: "Persian Oil is yours; we share the oil of Iraq and Kuwait. As for Saudi Arabian oil, it's ours.". Historically, Iran was always a beligerant nation and fiercely independent in asserting itself as a regional hegemon, creating a bipolarity and sometimes tripolarity with Saudi Arabia and Iraq. I read a book by Robert Keacy in 2010 about "Iran: The Devil we know" which outlines how the country has become more liberal, less Islamist (by way of endorsing Shia regime) and built the largest ballistic missile inventory in the region. It naturally had clear ambitions to build nuclear weapons, which the US tried to thwart firing all the salvos in its range of socio-politico-economic foreign policy to check Iran. 

But nothing worked. On the contrary, instability in the region grew even as Iran, despite the international ostracisation welded itself into one voice as a nation. Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya,Syria, Egypt, some say, the Arab Spring that led rebellions against extreme Islamic fundamentalism could have been a hotbed of religious and political uprisings of the Shia. Clearly, the Iranian model of re-asserting cultural supremacy and neo-liberal religious reforms have definitely dented the gambit played by US interests in middleeast region. US tried to sell more arms to the Arab countries, orient all nations ex-Iran into a powerful force called Gulf-Cooperation-Council (GCC) to become a powerful deterrant against Iran. In turn, Iran has always criticised the GCC for its pro-US slant, had territorial disputes with UAE over three islands in the Persian Gulf and even laid claim over Bahrain that it was once part of the Persian empire. 

The US had built more bridges with the GCC countries ostracising Iran  with all the sanctions possible which intensified in 2012. The alignment of interests between the US and GCC were quite understandable: the GCC countries and Iran control over 55 per cent of the world's total oil production and 41 per cent of the world's total gas reserves. US has a lot to gain being an ally to GCC than Iran. Moreover, the Arab economies are a major buyer of arms from US. All the ruling regimes of the GCC countries, to add further, were all Sunni  - and the Shia Iran had to be checked so that its influence among the region's Shia minorities doesn't grow.

To a large extent, the ostracisation had an impact on Iran's economy - its currency fell and because of the steep sanctions  - which bar banking transactions - Iran suffered. But Iran retaliated. In 2012, there was another move by the cartographers in US to even re-name the Persian Gulf as the Arabian Gulf, that didn't work. Iran was happy that didn't name (there are few countries in the world which have seas, gulfs and oceans named after them). US intensified the sanctions impact by freezing all Iranian government assets in US territories. Iran retaliated again, this time threatening to block the Strait of Hormuz  - the little "mouth" of the Persian Gulf through which 85 per cent of all the oil the world consumes passes through. It has never carried out the threat. 

As this intensified, and Iran's oil exports faltered - the main stay of their economy, Iran never cowed down on the military front and diversified its efforts to reach out to others including BRIC nations like India and China. Iran is alleged to have continued supplying WMD and even biological weapons to countries like Syria and threatened to use them in any conflicts escalated by Israel. What must have changed US views towards adopting a lenient stance against Iran is the new-found love of China towards Iran and old-world love of India, which always had historic ties with Iran, from the times of the Persian empire.

China, while engaging with the Arab world, deepened its ties with Iran, Syria and Turkey. China is now Iran's biggest trading partner and has been supplying arms, including missiles and aircraft, to Iran since 1981. It is also important that for China, Iran is the only energy supplier in the Gulf  for its gargantuan economy that it can reach through pipelines as well as sea routes, ensuring a diversification of supply lines in the even of a blockade or disruption in its energy supplies. Besides, in the strategic rivalry with the US, Iran is a potential ally. Which is why, China, while supporting the sanctions on Iran, it is unlikely to stop dealings with Iran. Given this and the fact that India and Russia have also been continuing trade with Iran for oil supplies (there was a window of exports and imports carried on via a select conduit offered by Indian oil companies and to some extent, by State Bank of India). 

Besides, after the march of democratic movements which are eroding the bastions of conservative Islamist traditoins in many countries across the GCC and MENA regions, it appears that this move to cosy up to Iran is driven by compulsions of foreign policy to move from the Middle East to the Indo-Pacific Ocean regions. Because thats where the action is. It proves one thing though: In politics increasingly dictated by economics and win-win foreign policy, there are no permanent enemies and no permanent friends either. The event is still a small leap of faith in taming a country that has a civilzation older than the most-powerful country in the world today but it will have benign consequences going forward for the region (in cooling off oil prices) and the world. 

India, for its part played with lot of caution on Iranian front even though culturally it is closest to the Persian Empire with links dating back thousands of years. Persian was a language spoken at Moghul Courts, trade ties were always on, and were normal since 1950 but fully formalised under PV Narasimha Rao's regime  since 1993 and strengthened under the Vajpayee regime . India has done  two joint naval exercises  with Iran in 2003 and 2006, trained their army personal in combat aircraft etc. and offered to build ports for them. Both of us dread the radical regimes of Talibans calling the shots in Pakistan and elsewhere. Both are aspiring nuclear powers although differences remain in being the signatory to NPT. With the clouds eased out on sanctions, India should revive the $7 billion gas pipeline that got stalled due to US opposition, distrust of Pakistan and doubts on viability. If US and Iran could bury their differences and move on, India and Pakistan can also move on in life. I am not an expert in foreign policy but thought this little piece will drive home again why the world is going to only get better and better with countries softening their stance against each other.

“Varna” (Telugu) Dubbed from “Irandam Ulagam” (Tamil)

“Varna” is one of the most hyped films with visual effects created by the same team that worked for “Avatar”. It had everything going for it – a producer with deep-pockets (PVP) who is on a cyclical high, a director Sri Raghava (Selvaraghavan in Tamil) who gave great family entertainers like “Aadavariki Maatalu Ardhaale Vere” and “7/G Brindavan Colony” and a great looking pair- the blue-eyed Arya and the sweet-and-sensuous Anushka Shetty. Harris Jayaraj scores music and the lad who created “Kolaveridi” composed the BGM score for the film. With that kind of a team, there were huge expectations and even the trailer kissed a surge of optimism. Is the film worth the hype? Alas, No. Then what went wrong? It’s the script and the characterization again, stupid. Basics of entertainment were missing – no comedy, no romance that sticks and no entertainment value despite an extra-ordinary theme of love and other human emotions having inter-galactic appeal. Director has combined atleast two fairy tales with one half-hearted romance in modern times and then connects the two stories towards the later half.  The duration – 160 minutes – made it hard to concentrate a story involving two planets and the same lead pair – Arya and Anushka.

The story is all a flashback narration by the earthly hero Arya who is sinking in an ocean. He is a good Samaritan who falls in love with Anushka, a doctor. On the other planet, many light years away, a Goddess of love rules and is worshipped by all but the planet is effectively resident evil – wrong doers seized control of the planet where love is absent, women are ill-treated and shephearded as slaves and none of the human emotions abound. The goddess there sows the seeds of embryonic love between another Anushka and another Arya who is the son of the king. A few twists later, the earthly Arya is transposed to the other world where he eventually plays cupid between the two, culminating the wish of the Goddess of love. The  narration moves in tandem, and toggles between earth and the other planet – which looks like a supernova in color scheming but exotic and splendid in landscape and sky. Visually, the director transports us into a surreal planet full of mythical birds and beasts and flora that captures all the colors your eyeballs can absorb. A few fights here and there but most of the film moves slower than Telangana bill, the first half takes you to wit’s end to elaborate the love track between the lead pair in both the planets and only the three songs by Harris Jayaraj spruce it up.

Post-interval, the movie picks up  tempo but fails to elevate the characters or add to the story that was revealed at the outset in the form of a short animation film about the fight between evil and good. However, there are some beautiful moments in the film which leave you dazed and tranced – the snowy surroundings on the other planet where love and sometimes hate envelops the three characters on a mission ( shot in Georgia), the serene characterization of the Goddess of love, and the transformative powers of human emotions on machine-like men. All the best scenes get amply highlighted by the mesmerizing background music of Aniruddh. He will be a sought-after BGM composer after this film.  There are  big takeaways – how love drives a man to superior machismo than even a thousand military training camps and the emotions of kindness and human affections  are what makes our planet so unique in the universe. I do not know whether the message in all its subtlety will reach a wider audience because the multiplex I went to on day one was half-empty so do not know whether there is that much of nerve and verve to attract bigger audiences. It is slow, smooth but lacking in intensity of emotions – the very emotions humans can teach other beings. For most part, Anushka is shown as the one who sulks but in varied costumes. She gets a meaty role in two characters but it could have been etched better to make her characters evocative. She still carries the film on her shoulder, her costumes, her Xena-like warrior movements and swordly fights and her feminine grace light the screen. Arya as the earthly lover did better justice than the other-worldly warrior. Technically, the film looks stylish and defining in VFX for Indian Cinema. It might have cost more dollars than the marketing budget of a Hollywood animation film but if only some entertainment, comedy and ripened romance be uploaded into  this mix, “Varna” would have been a different tale. Audiences will forget a movie’s furniture pieces fast- the VFX, et al but never forget the lines, the chemistry of the love pair and the entertainment quotient. For that let down alone, and not for anything else, the film’s rating deserves 2.5/5 but not more.

Post-script: The themes of inter-planetary movement of human beings is explored by Indians also as much as Hollywood directors. Imagination must run wild to explore a start-trek kind of experience because thought can travel faster than light. There is nothing wrong with that because Hindu Astronomy recognizes that there are 24 earths in the universe which are similar to our own. Recently, we read somewhere that Russians have researched a possibility of the netherworlds lying under the earth’s crust which leads  to the worlds like Naga loka etc. talked about by fiction writers like Amish Tripathi. There are also ways and means defined in our own ancient books about many worlds that can be experienced once human beings go outside their sensory range – like experiencing the body in several realms, travelling in astral light etc. Cinema lends itself perfectly to such possibilities being explored. But where movies like “Avatar” click and movies like “Baba” and “Varna” fail is in deliverance on emotions and mass value. Hopefully, these lessons will be learnt well before deep-pocketed producers look for the exit door of the film industry.

"Masala" Telugu Film Review

Masala is a ridiculous film with retrograde humour imported from Bollywood's hit film "Bol Bacchan". Infact, its a remake of the same film made by Rohit Shetty. In Telugu, quite a few big names got associated with the remake - Suresh Productions, Victory Venkatesh (plays Ajay Devgn), Ram (plays Abhishek Bacchan) and the female leads, played by Anjali and Shahzad Pudamjee. Directed by K Vijaybhaskar, who was the titular head in most of the hit films enriched by the vigorous penmanship of Trivikram Srinivas. 

The story is set in a village called Bhimarajapuram where Venkatesh is the chieftain who settles disputes and lords over the village folk. Posani Krishna Murali is the antagonist to Venkatesh. Into this village enter Ram and his sister Anjali, who lose their house and savings in a court dispute. Ram tells one lie after another to win the trust of Venkatesh, that he has a lookalike brother, a mother who has a lookalike and so on. The drift of the story is all stretching this absurdity further and making Venkatesh a joker in the pack led to believe all the drivel that Ram and his gang dish out. A comedy of errors is what unfolds as  the story moves in garrulous overtones of cheap drama with just a few good laughs and a banal ending. 

Venkatesh provides the good laughs in the film with his Butler English. Infact, that is the only saving grace of the film and but for that, most of the plot is crass and unequal to the standards of Telugu film comedy seen in recent times. Telugu film comedy is far superior to the levels of no-brainer comedy imported by the remake of the Hindi film and its an insult to the audience. Anjali, who looked so bright and promising in SVSC has a forgettable role in the film. Ram who plays the twin shades of a Gay metrosexual and an innocent youth carries off well. 

Venkatesh, despite a frivolous role that doesn't elevate his stature or earmark his career with the portrayal as a village don. He pulls off a fiery performance despite the shortfalls in the characterisation. He has the best lines in the film and what he speaks in English should make this film a brand ambassador for Russell's Spoken English. Here are some of the best lines which are the only paisa vasool in the film. "Today, I want everybody down to earth." "It is not hell, it is pine apple." "Let's give her a supervise (surprise)." "What a family hysteria." (history). "I want one night stand with your family." "I suspect all religions." (respect). "Take my sarees." (sorrys). "Please pest control yourself." "Shut up in the mouth and get out of the house.". "Without interest, I trust you." "Honesty is the best mutual policy," (you mean, mutual fund or insurance policy?) "Bloody burgar take him to jail." "You are my brother in law please become my sister's umbrella." "Cat under my hand, searching the whole motherland". "This is not normal marriage sir, this is pot exchange marriage." And finally, he says,"Watch the climax in my IMAX". Jayaprakash Reddy is the only other character who fires salvos and heightens the impact of Venkatesh's faulty one-liners ("My English better than the British!") by riposting as "Horrible Sir Horrible Sir! or "Bull Shit Sir Bull Shit Sir!). 

Music by SS Thaman is average and could have been better. Duration of the film is 140 minutes and but for the dialogues by Venkatesh, it would have been a tastless comedy. 2.5 out of 5.

"Goliyon ki Rasleela - Ram-Leela" (Hindi Film Review)

I thought I came for the wrong movie when I saw the long title preceding the words Ram Leela. Then the portent came in the censor certificate about the duration of the film - 154 minutes. Then came a warning that this film is an adaptation from Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet". That means the film must end in a tragedy, I thought. It did end in a tragedy with Ranvir Singh and Deepika Padukone, the Rajasthani equivalents of Romeo and Juliet, shooting each other down in a climax at point blank range. The climax itself justifies the title - Goliyon ki Rasleela Ram-Leela. Because in that epic shot which already wears out the audience after a dozen songs and 153 minutes, Ram (Ranvir) and Leela (Deepika) kiss for one last time before releasing the trigger on their magazine. First time, Sanjay Leela Bhansali takes the credit for allowing two lovers, darlings of the masses, take each others' lives instead of shooting at their own temples. In short, Sanjay Leela Bhansali has attempted a lavish re-interpretation of Romeo and Juliet with extravagant paraphernalia and bizarre theatrics but lost the plot that could connect with the mood of the times. The film is great in performances, visual effects, scale and grandeur but fails in characterisation, emotions, depth and consistency.

The story is faithful to the bard's original story. Instead of the feud between the Montagues and the Capulets, this is the story of a couple caught between Raanjadas and Sannades, in one village of Rajasthan where the police turn a nelson's eye to the biggest arms bazaar. It is more anarchic than Obama's country where everyone, even toddlers, carry guns and shoot at will. Ram goes to the other side for a holi party and gets smitten by Leela in one helluva dance. They connect instantly and the love develops between the two even as Leela's mother, the gang-leader of Sannades, played by Supriya Pathak Kapur, rushes her marriage with an archaeologist.  Leela returns to Ram's place, her love grows stronger and the enemity grows stronger between the Raanjada's and the Sannade's. Unlike in Romeo and Juliet, where Juliet's cousin Tybalt is mistakenly killed by Romeo, in "GKRR", Ram's brother is mistakenly shot dead by Leela's brother and the exchange leads to another death, Leela's brother. That shot, a high-octane sequence builds up into the best action sequence of the film with intensity and suspense. After that, the elopement of Ram with Leela, the subsequent return and then the fateful ending after much macabre killings. A few cinematic changes by Sanjay Leela Bhansali to nativise the story here - a signed written order by Leela to annihilate every single Raanjada and instead of drinking poison, they consummate their love again with kisses and bullets before taking their own lives, at a time when remorse and regret returns to the warring people on both sides. In the end, Ramleela is celebrated with the burning of Ravan's effigy by both the sides, but alas, the lead pair is gone.

To be fair, the film has some electrifying moments  - the passion between Deepika and Ranvir sets the screen ablaze, the dialogues by the warring factions on both sides, especially by Supriya Pathak and Abhimanyu Singh as well as by Ranvir Singh are outstanding. Characterisation of the three of them is exceptional. Supriya Pathak had the best lines in the film and this is one of her best performances. Ranvir Singh, looks a maginificent hulk in his chivalrous avatar as the energetic Rajput; he strikes great balance as a hate-disperser and a love-monger. Whether he removes his shirt or turban, he oozes out machismo and animal magnetism. Would he be the talent that can maneuvre competition from Kapurs and Khans? Likely. Deepika is lissome and beautiful as ever, looking better in traditional costumes and royal frills. Her dancing skills looked prim and proper but curtailed by the energy of Ranvir. Of all the starcast, her accent looked more out-of-place, however. She is clearly not marwari-conversant unlike the rest of the cast. 

Sanjay Leela Bhansali has got good support from screenplay writer Siddharth-Garima who also wrote crisp dialogues in local dialect. Another experiment: Sanjay Leela Bhansali scored music himself. Almost all the songs sound alike except one modern tempo beat, with rhytms and soundscapes resonating the Rajasthani hills and villages - too much of folk music from titles to end-titles. I wonder if this is all straight-lifted out of Sanjay's repertoire of folk tunes tucked away in rural hinterlands because except for Monty who scored for "Saawariya", it has been Ismail Durbaar mostly. Surely, Sanjay's background score is richer than his songs scored, which are too many and farcical. Despite the talent and its harvest, the film doesn't have enough substance or emotions to sustain a modern audience. I wonder why Sanjay had to pick Shakespeare to make a point or two about a love story between a cracker of a lead pair. He didn't start films with an intent to revive Shakespeare like Vishal Bharadwaj. On the contrary, Sanjay had a touch of an artist who can take cinematic experience to new highs with his ensemble of opulent story-telling and grandiose backdrops. But by picking a tragedy once again, after "Devdas", he had wasted Eros's money and audience's time. It was not worth 154 minutes of macabre hate and love. In the original story of Romeo and Juliet, the two families agreed that Romeo and Juliet should be buried together. On the grave were these words as per the play: "There was a story of more woe than this of Juliet and Romeo." The message of the bard that one can be unreasonable in both love and hate was driven to death by countless film-makers around the world and in India. The audience knows it but doesn't want the tragedy to repeat in the movies - at least subsequent debacles at the box office of film-makers who attempted a studious reprise of the sad ending of the lovers show that this doesn't work anymore. Poor Sanjay! Wish someone told you at Eros. Cannot rate this above-average for all the effort. 2.5 out of 5.