"Shamitabh" (Hindi Movie Review)

The voice that should have become as world-famous much before the man who still casts a spell on billions of fans was once rejected by All India Radio. Yes, we are talking about Amitabh Bachchan’s voice which is the finest amalgam of texture, timber, diction and a baritone that reads the best Hindi dialogues. So what happens when that voice has an ego that eventually engulfs a superstar? Without delving deeper into a storyline that gives away the plot, “Shamitabh” is a 153 minute roller-coaster ride through the emotions that oscillate between ego and ego-massage between two men who are joined at the hip; both of them can’t do without the other and both know this - Dhanush and Amitabh Sinha (Sr.Bachchan). Akshara Hassan is the anchor in the film building bridges between the two who throw tantrums at each other. Great performances by all the three principal stars including debutante Akshara Hassan. Yet director R.Balki, undoubtedly one of Bollywood’s exciting directors, fails to give a clean output that can sustain interest. What went wrong?

Could it be Ilayaraja’s music? No, the maestro has given three good songs and embellishes the scenes with his own majestic interpretation of how we should read a film. And he has done this for the 1000th time in his career with this film. On the other hand, director messes with the picturisation of songs. The golden rule in South is, you don’t break Ilaiyaraja’s song, you don’t insert dialogues in between Ilaiyaraja song because his music is like a symphony with interludes that ascend and descend seamlessly. If you break his song, the beauty is lost. In almost all the songs, Balki commits this crime which disrupts the sense of sounds we grew up with. Can’t beat it right? Is it PC Sriram, the ace cinematographer who lets it down? Nope, he doesn’t add his interpretations to the camera angles, his work has always been a subset of the director’s eye and this movie is no exception. R.Balki must take it on chin for making a film high on form but low on substance. He gets majestic performance from Amitabh; even Dhanush is spirited and Akshara shows much promise despite unconventional looks but the story-telling sucks. Instead of building layers into the storyline, director resorts to extracting monologous performances from 'Amitabh in the graveyard' or breaks into a song that shows a Western Toilet in flowing glory. (What a criminal waste of "Piddly" song - the best in the album - showing WC in all variants of design!) Or he takes potshots at all that’s wrong in Bollywood - middle-men acting big, producers launching zombies into heroes, NYTs making it out in bed with stars at  night, directors cocooned in their delusions of grandeur and so on. Nothing new.

The fault in our stars…is an undercurrent to the film’s plot as the director gets under the skin of a rags-to-riches Dhanush who becomes a Superstar. Beyond this undercurrent, the film hardly moves and characterisation is lacklustre; Amitabh gets to use his “voice” maximum even when he is off-screen. Dhanush hogs limelight in the first half but only until Amitabh enters. The film has many gaps in narration. Balki takes the flashback route to tell the story of a rags-to-riches superstar but halfway we lose it whether the movie is in present tense or past, although the film moves back and forth. A lot many scenes are repetitive and don’t either move the story or surprise us, which is not the case usually with Balki. He has an Admaker’s eye but in his efforts to balance commercial cinema with artistic license, he forgets to entertain. And leaves more gaps in the narration with a disappointing climax. As it is, the plot is interesting but difficult to fathom how a superstar can grow without a home-grown voice and keep it Bollywood’s best-unknown secret. Leave that, why does he show a superstar with humble beginnings on one side but  uses people on his way to stardom without acknowledging  their contribution - be it Akshara or Amitabh? Why does he carry flings with co-stars when he is in love with Akshara? Why does Amitabh throw tantrums everytime with Dhanush but cooperates with the latter when he is in bed with someone? Why dos Akshara leave her assignment as Assistant Director and go all out to help Dhanush at the outset - is it that easy for an AD to skip work and knock on the doors of the who’s who? In the second half, when Dhanush refuses to work with Amitabh and agrees to make an all-mute film with real star Abhinaya (that girl who acted in SVSC) the director doesn’t appear serious about making a sensitive statement about such actors. More, Dhanush is made to abandon the project itself halfway. A lot many questions unanswered.

What redeems the film? For sure, performance by Amitabh Bachchan.  And his witty one-liners. Balki’s brief to Bachchan is to insert theatrical oddities in a commercial cinema with him as the centrepiece. “No Whiskey, very risky”…”Don’t use your little finger  so much or you will change the definition of No.1 in Bollywood”…”My voice is worth more than your weight” are a few of AB’s best one-liners. Dhanush is good in parts but his characterisation is confusing. I wonder what happened to him when he was hearing the script of this film for the first time. It seems he turned down 33 scripts before choosing “Shamitabh”. It is quite a sub-optimal choice for him because despite his antics, he is over-shadowed by Amitabh and doesn’t use his strengths well. After “Raanjhaa”, this doesn’t really cement his entry in Bollywood. Akshara Hassan has the face of her father and the eyes of her mother, she carries her role with maturity and poise but I am afraid she doesn’t have the glamor of her sister. Since this is her first film, I hope she proves her acting talent with more versatile roles. Ilaiyaraja’s music is good only to the extent Balki uses him. In some crucial scenes, unless the director and cinematographer understand the subtle nuances of the scene and present it well, Ilaiyaraja can interpret in his own way and give it a different dimension. That’s what happened in many scenes, where the emotions get jumbled in Ilaiyaraja’s ensemble. Compared to Balki’s previous films like “Cheeni Kum” and “Paa”, the sync between the maestro’s music and the director’s intent is largely amiss. What pulls down the film is lack of entertainment and comedy and the depth that can counter the non-stop rendition of Amitabh Bachchan’s “voice”. One of the best lines Bachchan says goes something like this: “ I don’t want my film to go to Sundance festival, Cannes festival, Venice festival and so on. I want my films to get released for Diwali, Dasera and Christmas festivals and do big business.” Or to that effect. Alas, “Shamitabh” becomes a joke on the same lines - it may go to Sundance and Cannes, hasn’t got released on any festival here and may hardly do big business. Watchable only if you have loads of patience and undiminished love for Amitabh. If you skip it, however, nothing changes.

Rating: 2.75/5

#Shamitabh #AmitabhBachchan #Dhanush #RBalki #ErosFilms #Bollywood #Ilaiyaraja #IlaiyarajaMusic

Lessons from Single-Screen Theatre Not Learnt by PVR Multiplex

Recently I went to PVR Cinemas at Banjara Hills to see "Pataas". After paying Rs.150/- for executive class for the 11pm show, I felt cheated when the theatre management switched off the AC in a houseful hall packed with a movie-crazy audience. This is what PVR can do. I went with a friend from Mumbai and he was also feeling restless and said this is quite common for PVR to switch off AC especially for South Indian movies. He says they dare not do this for Hindi films, it happens only for South Indian films. South-Indian or North-Indian, I have never understood the rationale for cutting costs by switching off AC  - it is the most annoying way to control your costs. It does two things - it cuts your cinema experience as a viewer by 75 per cent and then, antagonises you against the multiplex. Want proof? Ask all the cinema hall owners maintaining single-screen theatres in Hyderabad and Secunderabad - they are all  abegging- waiting for the quality-conscious viewer who moved on to multiplexes. What happened to the halls which shut down? Many of them didn't have money to upgrade the single-screen theatres to multiplex because their occupancy fell, lease rentals got frozen in time and patronage from regular viewers dwindled. I remember Sangeet, Venkataramana, Sangam, Saptagiri, Deepak, Basant, Kumar - most of them used to cut corners with AC. 

The last time I went to Sangeet theatre was for "Lagaan". In the film, Bhuvan was learning cricket from the English Memsahib and a cute romance was building up in the air. But my mind  turned to the AC switched off. Years later, the owners of Sangeet approached me for a Rs.18 crore loan to build a multiplex in the same premises. They waited for nearly ten years before getting the funds to rebuild a world-class multiplex now. Your best source of funds and private equity is your customer - not the banker or the government. If you are the owner of the theatre, would you like your family members to sweat it out when they are watching a film in your own theatre? That experience at Sangeet hardened me; I vowed never to step inside Sangeet again. Likewise, I like to think, many would have given Sangeet a miss - reasons for an early shut down of an iconic theatre.  There are still arrogant single-screen owners who treat their customers( (viewers) shabbily. They will pay a price one day. The latest example is Venkataramana and Padmavathi theatres in Kachiguda. About a decade back, I went with my family to watch "The Legend of Bhagat Singh". It had a feverish screenplay, rousing performances and mesmerising music by AR Rahman. The climax song was playing on with extra sound "Mujhe Rangggg Deeeee Eeeeee Eeee Eeeee Eeeeee" and we were about to cry. But we didn't know where the tears were coming from - my family looked at each other as we wanted to empathise with the hanging of Bhagat Singh amidst Rahman's patriotic jingle. We were sweating actually. Those were false tears but for a good cause! I vowed to teach Venkataramana theatre management a hard lesson in customer experience - they cut the AC again after interval. I collected the ticket foils and dashed off a letter to "Times of India", after it got published. I attached a photocopy of the letter and dashed off a letter to The Commissioner of Police that most theatres especially in RTC X Roads and Kachiguda were not keeping the AC on. I was told, for the nth time that AC means air-cooled not air-conditioned. I told the representative in police HQ that I was paying for continuous supply of cool air. The Commissariat promised action. I went back with hope. Lo! and behold, the ensuing weekend saw simultaneous raids in all the theatres I complained against  - for errant AC supply.  I felt elated and satisfied that police listens and punishes the culprits. It gave me confidence to take on issues before an RTI Act came into being. But Venkataramana theatre management went back to old ways - with adhoc car parking and wishy-washy AC. After many years, they are facing the heat of competition that will eventually wipe them out - INOX Kachiguda is grabbing segments in Sec A and Sec B audiences in the most thickly-populated and film-crazy belt in the twin cities. Occupancy is down and dwindling. 

Do I need to drum up more examples of why being stingy with facets of customer experience  never helped? On the other hand, look at the success examples which never took its audience for granted. They grew and retained loyalty, and with help from sound Financial Management  either reinvented their models or turned profitable. Examples, Tivoli, Shanti, Sudarshan 70mm. It doesn't take long for a crappy-valued promoter like PVR Cinema to go the way of those who shut shop because of giving sub-optimal experience to their patrons. Love your patrons or be prepared to shit bricks one day, PVR.

#Single-screen #Multiplexes #Entertainment #PVRMultiplex #AirConditioninginCinema #MovieReviews #TheatresinHyderabad #TheatresinTwinCities 

"The Theory of Everything" (English) Movie Review

A biopic on the life and times of Stephen Hawking is a baffling attempt by any stretch. The man wearing an out-of-shape pair of spectacles with a withdrawn gaze dripping saliva even if in a state-of-the-art wheel chair and communicating something just by blinking his eyes is a familiar visual to people around the world. What can his life offer? How interesting has it been? What are the most thrilling moments, his saddest and happiest days and what were the high-points of his remarkable life? What made him pulsate to live life as if nothing changed after the doctors gave him just two years to live? What is egging him on for so many years that even at age 72, after presenting scientific papers and authoring a book that sold over a 10 million copies "A Brief History of Time", he still wants to push himself to write that one theory that strings everything together on how the universe came to being? Universal studios brings another authentic replay of a life that is still inspiring millions to throb to liveliness instead of resigning to fate and wimping out like a vegetable.

"The Theory of Everything" takes us through a recount of Stephen Hawking's life as written by his wife Jane Hawling in her autobiography of her ex-husband - now separated after three children. Directed by James Marsh with an exceptional screenplay that uses the narrative befitting a film with scientific theories and expositions, the leading pair is played with vividness and intensity that stuns you. Eddie Redmayne plays Stephen Hawking and Felicity Jones plays the first love and better half of Stephen. Unlike most films of this genre which bamboozle you with intellectual largesse and concepts that leave you dazed, the film sprinkles the essence of the science and cosmology that grew in Hawking's mind since he set foot in Cambridge with an arresting humility and then builds the romance between Stephen and Jane majestically - making it as evocative and beautiful as films like "A Beautiful Mind" or "Mr Holland's Opus". There are distractions, but by admission, honest admissions as the romance goes into unchartered territories for both the Hawkings towards the second half but the controls vest with the screenplay writer and the director throughout in the 123 minute visual. You don't get bored even once.

Irrespective of whether you regard Hawking as a scientist or not, his resilience and approach to cosmology have provoked people into investigating the unknowns of the universe, be it black holes, string theory or the debate between Quantum theory and the theory of Relativity and of course, space-time singularity. God has been extremely kind to this man who was given not more than two years to live when attacked by pneumonia - and his wife had two choices - either let Stephen lapse into coma forever or let the doctor drill a hole in the neck bypassing the throat that will silence him forever. She chose life over coma. From that point, Stephen experiences unsurpassed love and affection from his wife, his parents, his esteemed colleagues who enthused him to greatness. He coudn't utter a word but gives his denouements on the universe through a voice synthesizer specially designed for him. Eventually, his famous companion leaves him but he feels her around just as his theory on black holes. In 1974, a big blackhole called Sagittarius A-Star was discovered and the same year, Stephen combined everything we knew about black holes with what we knew about quantum theory - and proposed the surprising truth that black holes that suck light and energy have to evaporate away to nothing because they shrink and shrink. In a way, the film's climactic scene brilliantly captures the essence of quantum theory and the proposition made by Hawking. Someone asks if he believes in God. Hawking looks at the girl in the front row who drops her pen on the floor. You see the pen but what if the floor is not there any more - a plausible event in a quantum world - and the visuals cross his mind as if he walks out of his deathly chair to lift the pen from the floor. Actually, he does nothing of that sort,  he remains seated on the chair. And then he answers with effect of words that mean as if the universe is created without boundaries unlike what we knew before as bounded world - and this can only be the work of some creator we can't seem to know.

On the whole, "The Theory of Everything" leaves you with a trance-like experience and tickles your imagination with lines that ask the right questions in physics with relevance in space and time - the two dimensions where searchlights are still on and cosmologists like Stephen Hawking are grappling with linkages to the Big Bang theory. Despite such heavy content, the film's creatives ensured the simplest language and analogies like potato and peas to explain the divergence between Quantum theory and Relativity. The film's heart of the matter, however is the many-layered romance and the friendships that endured Hawking to live a meaningful life. According to a recent cover story in Outlook magazine, Hollywood has made outstanding films based on  93 out of the 100  best-selling books of all time. This film is another feather in that direction. What else can we do but applaud and salute a film that receives eight Oscar nominations. Watch out also for John Jahnson's music score - evokes emotions out of everywhere. Hawking would raise a toast to the director and Eddie Redmayne for playing it so truer with a boisterous blink of an eye.

R K Laxman: His work regaled the Layman

R.K.Laxman

I wanted to wait till what Times of India had to write about the passing of R.K.Laxman - the man who gave the paper unprecedented mileage. Dileep Padgaonkar was mighty right in saying such a poetic justice for a man who highlighted the plight of common man's most burning issues to die on a Republic Day - when the nation takes stock of the promises and potential in its constitution. Not just that Dileep added that R.K.Laxman's life in cartoons is a shining example of how freedom and responsibility should go hand in hand - a relevant debate after the massacre of Charlie Hebdo. After R.K.Laxman's death, I am sure, a murder of cows, armies of common men and packs of dogs are not the only ones who would mourn his passing. Of course, he made them all famous - crows, dogs and the ubiquitous common man - a statue of whom can be found in Pune - the city where he breathed his last. Infact, a serial was made on the ironies of common man back in the 90s - "Wagle Ki Duniya" which took his empathies with the bald-headed man with the caterpillar eyebrows, check shirts and toothbrush moustache to the masses who may not have yet read the papers.

To be fair, one always had the Dickensian question: Did we live in interesting times or was it Laxman who made our time interesting? Both, because India went through a sluggish period of low-growth, high-inflation and sloppy politicana. India also saw the dismantling of the single-party democracy in 1967- the year in which the Congress lost elections in eight states. That only meant more variety of politicians, and later India's most famous businesspersons, cine-stars, dons, sportspersons and celebrities. Laxman burst at the scene at the same time as his colleague at Free Press Journal Bal Thackaray but had a meteoric rise like none before. There were so many who drew before and after - but none achieved the peaks of Laxman's success. Possibly, Times of India's editors never interfered with Laxman whether he lampooned Nehru, Indira Gandhi or NTR or even Bal Thackaray and gave him more than a roomful of freedom with a canvas of many expressions. But credit Laxman only for his self-practised cartooning skills whose calibre only got better with each passing day as he churned "You Said It" cartoons on a daily basis and then those special occasion bigger cartoons.

To the layman, Laxman's talent looks prodigal and that is how it should read for this younger brother of R.K.Narayan - one of India's most-loved English writes of the 20th Century. Laxman grew up drawing inspiration from Sir David Low's cartoons in PUNCH magazine and then started illustrating his brother's cult literary works. He wrote for Blitz, The Hindu and others before joining Free Press Journal. But like all self-employed outliers, Laxman tried to get admission to the J.J.School of Arts to hone his natural abilities in carricature. He wrote to the Dean with a sample of his cartoons. The Dean rejected his admission with a letter: "I see no talent whatsoever. Please continue your studies." This kind of thing happened too often for people we now regard as legends. It didn't deter Laxman who went on to become Independent India's most famous cartoonist. He drew thousands of cartoons, designed logos for many of which we famously recognise like the boy in Asian Paints and wrote books to prove a point that he can write as fluently as his elder brother. "The Distroted Mirror" collected his short stories, essays and travelogues. "The Hotel Riviera" and "The Messenger" were his novels. His last book was "The Servants of India" in 2000 which was a compilation of his short stories. But the book that received accolades was his autobiography "The Tunnel of Time" released in 1998. You wouldn't find too many books in world literature which covered a life of letters in such crisp prose. Last year, Bob Mankoff, the Editor-at-large of New Yorker cartoons wrote his autobiography "How About Never" which tried to dissect a life in cartooning in much graphic detail. But "The Tunnel of Time" is a candid memoir giving such explicit detail of how a younger brother grew out of a literary giant's shadow to make his own mark in life. It also covers rare glimpses of the people Laxman and his first wife met with - including the great painter Picasso and the Nobel-prize winner Bertrand Russell. "The Tunnel of Time" was the first book I presented to Mr Bapu, Telugu's most-famous cartoonist. He raved about the book for days and thanked me for introducing a book that resonated so well with his own life - he too faced many rejections in his own life before Bapu became India-famous.

Laxman survived the emergency and the liberalization days, he covered every conceivable figure of history as reported in press. His cartoons had simplicity, humor and a light-hearted message that was both philosophical and deeply ironical. If India is a better republic today than it was at the time of birth, it is to the credit of cartoonists like Laxman who tirelessly highlighted the issues without didacticity and ado. No wonder, he got awards from Padma Vibhushan to Ramson-Magsaysay. But all awards got their veneer from association with the name of R.K.Laxman. There may be more interesting facets to R.K.Laxman's life just as R.K.Narayan because the former married twice unlike his elder brother. He couldn't draw for more than a decade after he hung up his boots. A lot must have gone through his life in those years of silence and recluse. Will we ever know? Must we know? Can't say. I can only take a leaf out of Bapu uncle's advice on how to view the lives of creative legends - "Don't try to get up close and know them more than what you know of their life's work. It might repel you." For Indians, R.K.Laxman was solid gold standard to us. We will continue to see his works on the walls, in museums, on special souvenirs relased by banks and doctors. His cartoons and the world he made will continue to inspire and humor us to make our lives more interesting - even if R.K.Laxman had the best day job in the world. R.I.P.

"Gopala Gopala" (Telugu Film Review)

Now that PK has re-tested the fun from challenges posed to Gods and Godmen, the concept originally seeded in OMG has reached heights of receptivity and curiosity. But "Gopala Gopala" is a well-timed remake of OMG completely dumbed down for the Telugu masses used to wafer-thin stories and hysterical drama. It has taken a colossal collaboration of sorts from Suresh Productions to Venkatesh to Mithun Chakraborty and director Kishore Kumar Pardasani alongwith ruling disc composer Anup Rubens. When Venkatesh jumped at the role of Paresh Rawal, he asked the producers to find the perfect playing mate - the man who would play God. Their search ended with Pawan Kalyan agreeing to do Akshay Kumar's role. Must say, Pawan Kalyan dazzles in his role as Krishna in modern costumes. And Venkatesh shines better than some of his previous films in doing justice to his role as Gopal Rao - the hapless seller of god statues whose shop gets struck down by a devastating earthquake; it hits his shop only and leaves everything intact.

The original story has a purity unheard of in a country smothered with religious motifs and blind beliefs of scary dimensions and milked by God-heads and Godmen and Godwomen promising manna from heaven. In 152 minutes, a tad too long, director Kishore Kumar has taken a clean approach to present a reasonably entertaining and authentic remake of the original story which made heads turn in Bollywood. Screenplay  is pacy and narration quite clear, music by Anup Rubens good but not the best of scores except two songs showing both Pawan Kalyan and Venkatesh. How Good are the stars in this multi-starrer? Venkatesh aces up his role better what is cropped from his films recently - he is aging but in portraying the resilience and grit and the humanity, Venky proves his acting prowess again. Of course, he will be compared with Paresh Rawal, the legend but personality-wise this role is tailor-made for him. The one who lends an extra-sensory dimension to the role is Pawan Kalyan. He comes, just as in the original right before the Interval Block in a swashbuckling sequence that sets the audience in a tizzy. His role is less chirpy than Akshay Kumar and therefore, the characterisation is a tad more elevated that reaches a crescendo post-interval. Because the Telugus have both propensity and tendency to deify heroes on celluloid, Pawan's characterisaiton gets a special touch from the makers in adding as much chutzpah. So the director avoids the original paraphernalia used like a single-round Kireetam or a necklace; instead he retains the blazing key chain, the occasional bamboo flute and wears prima donna white costumes. Pawan is shown like a zen warrior who has been doing years of Vipassana meditation; he packs punch in all his dialogues carefully crafted to suit his king-maker political career so far and portrays himself as the Lord in all divinity, humility and serenity. His characterisation will get full marks and  get burnt into the frenzied consciousness of the Telugu audience for this generation as much as the earlier characterisations did for icons like NTR. 

In many ways, this plot of God coming to Earth is a tailor-made script for Tollywood more than any other "Wood". For decades, Tollywood has been making films on mythologicals for every generation right from inception. Even in modern settings, they never lost an opportunity to make films where the God connects to a mortal in distress and descends down to mentor and guide him to a path of liberation or clarity. Allu Ramalingayya, Chiru's father-in-law once produced a classic film "Devude Digi Vaste" which was remade in Hindi with Sanjeev Kumar. Then we had Rao Gopal Rao play Lord Shiva in "Maa Voollo Maha Shivudu" - both films had Satyanarayana as a distressed mortal. Bapu made "Buddhimanthudu" with a role of a lifetime for ANR and Sobhan Babbu as Man and God. From that viewpoint, "Gopala Gopala" stands out in creating a  message-rich canvass of what the original film in Hindi successfully made - it has all the right emotions of joy, laughter, tears and pathos, fear and courage that run undercurrent to the story. A story where man is guided by his Creator towards objectivity beyond objectification. Pawan Kalyan and Venkatesh created a good characterisation on screen time where Pawan Kalyan gets atleast 45 minutes of mesmerising presence that will linger on for a long time. Venkatesh packs more energy and pace into his delivery whereas Pawan choses a path of calm and deliberate poise and Godly equanimity  - so the effect is altogether terrific on screen. 

How faithful is the remake to the original? That's a question that is better answered by the Box-office verdict. My view is that there are quite a few deviations in the rendition to suit the Telugu sensibilities but the overall effect is as dramatic as the original. The original has no  stunts and dialogues that choke you by Paresh and Akshay. GG has too many emotional scenes between Venky and PK and shows atleast three stunts. Original fight introduction of PK riding on the bike and saving Venky was more intense and effective in Hindi; in Telugu it loses fizz but then you realise it's all about Pawan Kalyan's introduction and less about the omnipotent bike. Original shows a balanced characterisation about Paresh Rawal's family and the Godmen who combine to defeat him; in GG, Shriya Saran, Venky's wife is reduced to an insignificant role without a variation in characterisation. If only Shriya realizes her folly of deserting her husband in dire straits after Pawan Kalyan counsels her, her role would have got highlighted.Of course, Mithun Chakraborty shines well in both the films - his mere presence with a snigger and a palm that cups his mouth makes him both a provocateur and a credulous character. Posani Murali overdoes his role but evokes laughter. The court scenes are as dramatic as the original but the earth quake that brings down the house for Venky was captured better in Hindi. 

On the whole, the film is a winner and deserves a one-watch for Pawan Kalyan and Venkatesh. There is a treat of a song or two which shows the two stars shake a leg. To a large extent, Venkatesh holds the screen with his presence and dialogues well in the first half building to the crescendo created by Pawan Kalyan in the second half. There are mighty bloopers though which shouldn't have crept in the first place. For instance, instead of giving butter to Pawan Kalyan, Venky pulls out a cup from the fridge that clearly looks like butter-scotch ice-cream. Despite a few slipups, director achieves a rare feat of transmitting the feelings and key messages drummed in the original for the Telugu audiences. For those who have not seen the original before, it is a sure-shot entertainer with two stars who don't throw tantrums together. For those who have seen the original, watch it for Pawan Kalyan - his performance will win hearts. As for the talk about religion and all that, forget it. Mithun still had the punch line: "There are no God-loving people here. There are only God-fearing people. As long as people are God-fearinng, our ashrams will continue to see people fill in." 

Rating: 3.5/5

#GopalaGopala #OhMyGod #Tollywood #PawanKalyan #VictoryVenkatesh #MovieReviews #AnupRubens #PK #SureshProductions #Multistarrers

Two Famous Indian Journalists and the books they wrote

I studied journalism formally in 1992. And gave up full-time writing seven years later. But we never studied the journalism or the ethics of stalwarts of Indian Origin in detail except through Rangaswami Parthasarathy's books on the topic. We heard of two icons remotely - M.V.Kamath and B.G.Verghese. Sad to hear both of them passed away in 2014. 

M.V.Kamath wrote copiously even after his active press career ended and had columns in many newspapers. He was disciplined and loved to share his love of writing and thirst for knowledge to youngsters. I read some of his books; they are both scholarly and light at the same time - difficult to achieve. I hunted down his books at many places after reading just few  like "Letters to Gauri: A passage through history" and "Shirdi Sai Baba". The ones I particularly liked were the biographies of Nani Palkhivaala and M.K.Gandhi. He explored new angles and anecdotal richness in selecting his subjects. For instance, what new light can be thrown on Gandhi? So Kamath chose to focus on his lesser-highlighted dimensions of spiritual quest. Similarly, on Palkhivaala, he chose aspects of greatness of a man that overshadows everything else in the public domain - humility, time management, budget speeches and preparation, writing and lecturing, free forum leadership etc. Kamath wrote biographies of businessmen like Charat Ram and Ramakrishna Bajaj and also on institutions like Central Bank of India. I think the one on CBI was his last. I never stopped searches for Kamath's books. My joy doubled when I stumbled upon his memoirs: "A Reporter At Large" at an obscure bookshop at Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan. Writing about other people when it is tempting to write about yourself - few are good at it. Kamath revels in this art. He gives such fine recount of famous repartees and retorts with people who live in incandescent bulbs all their life - like Henry Kissinger. Kamath wrote how he got snubbed by the condescending Kissinger and how he levelled with him many years later at a banquet. Kamath kept writing almost till 2009 and wrote books on Amul's Kurien, standards of journalism and a handbook for journalists. He never sought sensationalism unlike some of today's scribes in famous magazines. He knew his limitations, practised his faith and explored the subjects he wrote on till the very last. Poignant that he was born in Udupi and died in Manipal; not many have the luxury of nesting and resting in one pincode while orbiting the world in a lifetime.

B.G.Verghese is another journalist who passed away this year. I have had no idea who he was until I read his book: "First Draft" - one of the finest chronicles of Indian polity through the eyes of an insightful journalist. It competes with some of the best books written on the Emergency Days. My acquaintance with B.G.Verghese has been only through his books. And I read two other books. One was the biography of the magisterial press baron Ramnath Goenka. The third book was his last and I bet many journalists wouldn't have even heard of the book. It got released in 2014 as "Post Haste": a history of India's heritage and geography through stamps. It is a stunning, light-hearted journey of Indian icons and events through more than 3000 stamps issued by IndiaPost. A must-read if you love stamps and history - an engaging combination used by B.G.Verghese. His career looks picture-perfect - education in some of the finest universities in the world, awards like Magsaysay, assignments with the most tumultous political regimes and leading stints with Hindustan Times and Indian Express. Quite an eventful life that. 

May their souls R.I.P.

#BGVerghese #MVKamath #IndianJournalism #BooksbyMVKamath #BooksbyBGVerghese

The Best and Worst of My Film Reviews in 2014: A Report Card

Films Reviews rarely get rated. Even on million dollar websites and sensational TV Channels, you hardly find eggs and rotten tomatoes on a reviewer's record of the year. I have no such luxury. But I aspire in that direction. I take my reviewing seriously. When I watch a film, I look for entertainment not intelligence. I judge if the film is watchable or not. I decide if the film is a good example for family audiences. I rate it on aesthetics, refinedness, creativity, acceptability and above all, sustainability of run at the box office. And then I rate it  as honestly  and objectively as I can  - on calibrations of 0.25 on a scale of 1 to 5. If it is average, a rating has to cross 2.5. If it crosses the average rating, it has to be decently good film to touch 3 and beyond. It is really good film if it crosses 3.5; it means it is a paisa vasool. It has to be a crappy film if it doesn't even make it to 2. Then all my ratings are relatively ratable - means if you put two movies with 2.75 each, then the movie rated 3 has to be really better than 2.75 to get the rating it got. This rating business is not to my liking but it became a feature of my reviews on feedback from friends on social media who find it useful in navigating the labrynth of analysis I inflict on readers. So this year, I am giving all of you a report card of the movie reviews I have done for releases in 2014. Thirty two films have been reviewed this year as of 30th December and I have put all my ratings against them - usually reviewed within 48-72 hours of the film's release. As I see, there are some famous misses like "Race Gurram" which went on to collect over Rs.50 crs. But if there is one metric on which I like to be judged vis-a-vis others, it is consistency, dear reader. Most movies rated 3 and above have been top grossers. Movies like "BangBang", "Kick" and even "PK" have all crossed Rs.250 crores or beyond and they were rated 3.5 by me. If there are any misses, I own up to all of them. If there have been bang-on or consistent, it raises my enthusiasm to more responsible levels. As always, love your feedback and more essentially, the brickbats. Please remember, however, that films are quite personal in the way our minds process them. It is not necessary we need to agree. And there is never one way to view them or review them. Even if I take my films seriously, you needn't take the reviews, least of all mine, seriously. If the crowds vote on a film with their feet one way or the other, sometimes it is a good idea to junk all reviews and go for a film, or not, whichever applies. Happy Viewing and Happy Year ahead. Yours humbly.

Films Reviewed in 2014 and their respective ratings.

=======================================

Yevadu (Telugu) - 3.25/5

The Wolf of Wall Street (English) - 2/5

1-Nenokkadine (Telugu) - 2/5

Highway (Hindi) - 3.75/5

Aaha Kalyanam (Telugu) - 2.5/5

Legend (Telugu) - 3/5

Pratinidhi (Telugu)- 3/5

Paisaa (Telugu) - 2/5

2 States (Hindi)- 3.75/5

Race Gurram (Telugu)- 2/5

Rowdy (Telugu) - 3/5

Kochadiyaan (Tamil)/Vikramasimha (Telugu) - 2/5

Anamika (Telugu/Tamil)- 3.5/5

Manam (Telugu)- 3.5/5

Ulavacharu Biryani (Telugu) - 3.25/5

Kick (Hindi) - 3.5/5

Drushyam (Telugu)- 3/5

Bobby Jasoos (Hindi) - 3.25/5

Anjaan/Sikindar (Tamil/Telugu)- 2.25/5

Run Raja Run (Telugu)- 4/5

Aagadu (Telugu) - 2.75/5

Anna Belle - 2.7

Karthikeya - 2.5/5

Loukyam (Telugu) - 3/5

BangBang - 3.5/5

Govindudu Andarivaadele - 2.5/5

Brother of Bommali - 2.75/5

Linga (Tamil/Telugu) - 1.5/5

PK (Hindi) - 3.5/5

Mukunda (Telugu) - 3.5/5

Ugly (Hindi) - 3/5

Night At The Museum part three - 4/5

#MovieReviews #FilmReviews #MovieRatings #Ratings #Hollywood #Bollywood #Tollywood #Kollywood #IndianFilms