Guru: I like it !

Got up early in the morning … should say that i couldn’t sleep well in the night, was somewhat nervous or tensed owing to as usual no reasons… nyways got up at 5, made a call, felt relieved and slept till 9 (Wow …. the prologue to the post goes inline with the title … i have learnt all the crap of bollywood !)

Nyways, at other hour of the day, i was reading ‘Business Maharajas’ by Gita Piramal. The first chapter is of Dhirubhai Ambani …. suddenly this movie came to my mind as i have read in the review that this is a biographical account of Dhirubhai … and it was just next instinct when i went to movie.

(Bhai ab to movie kee kahani suru kar di jaye )

I like Guru. Although, the perception which i carried to the theater was not fully met, its not a biographical account but yaa obviously an inspiration from Dhirubhai’s life. There’s talk of polyster,shares, export-import, license raj,football meetings in typical Dhirubhai’s style etc, but not in detailed manner. In no way, it’s biographical, infact i say that indians can’t make biographical movies as once GD Birla said that Indians can’t write biographies.

Its the story of a young man, who dreams and dreams. He has his ideas, his ethics and his values and that he kept whole life. Guru Kant Desai, a young man, went to Istanbul, did some low skilled work, performed well and accelerated and at one point left all. For what ? For his dream ,and that is, “apna biziness karna hai”. His father demotivated him, but he sought after his dream and there the saga begins.

He married a girl, least bothering that she’s older to him, that she had run away, just for sake of a big dowry that girl’s father had kept aside for her. The money was a capital investment for him. He came to Mumbai, faced the monopoly, got some luck and continued making his way, crossing landmarks one after another. Finally his company emerged as the biggest company of India.

Maniratnam has always been my favorite. Whether, its Dil Se or Roja or Yuva. I like them all, just because they are different. They are offbeats and i think that Maniratnam is delievering great movies to industries. But sometimes, i feel that being kind of Maniratnam, or Kamal Hasan or Nasir must be difficult, so much expectations, so much pressure. I still can recall, how did i manage all my friends to watch Nasir’s “Yun hota to kya hota” and the movie was such a big disaster !

Hey, I haven’t mentioned about Abhishek yet ! Such a bad review He is fabulous, geniune, dreamy, real, passionate and simply excellent. One of the best performances ever ! The role was not easy .. to be a plump bania, no fights, no NRIs sequence, no big dance no.s and to replicate a “bigger than life” business person. And i guess, he delivered. Aishwarys should understand that she is good for nothing actor and she can’t act. Better be married and let our soul rest in happiness.Its a pleasure to see Mithunda in a better role after so many days, a treat. I always think that he is a fine actor being devoid of roles. He is good as independent and whimsical newspaper owner alongwith Madhvan and Vidya Balan. Although the duo has not got much time on the screen.

Here comes the wider picture. Whatever i have wrote is evident. Everyone and anyone having watched movie must be knowing about the details i have just now written, where is I in this post ? I should be coming….right ?

My first opinion and that’s songs must be scrapped at all. Infact there should not be any songs in movies, let them be during casting or some emotional scene as background music to produce the feelings, but why to disturb the focus of the audiences ? Especially the song after the birth of daughters is simply a waste. Other songs are also not that good and defintely its in no way close to Maniratnam and AR Rehnam combo. As i said that its difficult to be AR Rehman, Sachin Tendulkar and Maniratnam.

The perception with which i went to movie that i would be learning about Dhirubhai was not fulfilled. It didn’t cover in any way the detailed event of Dhirubhai’s life, however it defintely had skimmed over a lot of events. Maniratnam has covered the breadth but left the depth and noone should be unhappy with this too. There are different movies of different tastes, some revolve around single instance, while some just move at faster pace and this particular movie is in later catergory. It didn’t emphasis on events that lead to the greatness of business tycoon. It didn’t answer, what are the charges against Guru or how did he manage to bribe the ministers, no such scene in deep detail, no scence showcasing his matriculate negotiation skills etc. However what the film has shown is the focus and values of Gurubhai and his passion for his business.He made friends and foes, went outside domains for his business, looked for the loopholes in the system and took advantages.He lost one hand, but what he didn’t loose is his passion and his spirit and that’s what is successfully portrayed by Maniratnam.

Some words should also go in praise for technician. I loved the period color shown of Gujarat, Turkey and then Mumbai. Even the casting in newspaper style is eye-catching. Abhishek in matured getup was in no way artificial.

And should i write that this movie remind me of Ayn Rand ? Laughing or smirking?Okie ! It goes like, when i was watching the last scene of the movie, Abhishek delivering a hailing speech to the audience and there i was subconciously wondering, if i have come across such scene anywhere else, in some other movie or real life or some book and there i recollected and this too subconciously that its from Ayn Rand and there, the speech was of Howard Roark and that speech too was in court. I should accept that Ayn Rand is surely one of the most emphatic writer, long speeches and such that you can always recall. Even this time, when Guru was saying that he knew only one thing and that’s making Polyster, i recall Hank Rearden who used to say that he knew well the art of steel making, best steel. Ms Rand, you still had an impact over me !

Anyways, Guru is a good movie, and worth watch.

Da Vinci code:2006

So here my addiction to this blogsville is started again. Third post in three days. I guess not much when i had been silent for almost six months, and when i am so much to talk about. Again, when i have so much to talk about, i feel that i always talk about the thing that is most simple and that is of least priority. So here goes a review. Watched Da Vinci Code last weekend, on the second day of its release. We four were there and one of my best friends turn up from Chennai, so watching a movie is nice way to give three hours of good entertainment to him. We arranged the tickets in black @ Rs. 200, sat on the front seats of the plush theater, but at the end, i would say,movie was worth that.

This is my personal opinion about the movie. I have read the book, n its my all time favorites. Page turner, thrilling, a masterpiece. Its written and publicized as real, but still classified into fiction and not theology. Controversy convoluted the movie with the charges of defaming the Christianty. Its hard to understand, how the biggest and most powerful religion can be threatened by a single movie or book. Its because, its something special….:)

Its hard to give a short story of such movies, they are so fast tracked,with intewoven facts, characters intermingleness. But one can always try… The movie starts with grisly ritual murder of the director of the Louvre, french museum and Robert Langdon, the Harvard expert in religious symbols is found to be the chief suspect on the ground that Director send him some message before dying. Another policewoman, who also happens to be the granddaughter of Director masterminds the escape of Mr. Langdon. Before escape, there is some of the fact gathering by the duo on the basis of various hidden clues. Its thrill to watch but this is not as vast as it was depicted in the book. In movie, its directly shown that they got the answer after a little brainstorming, whereas in book a few chapters have been dedicated for the same. But i am sane enough to understand that here its was not possible to show each and everything in detail.

Thereafter catching one fact after another, an hour later enters Sir Leigh Teabing, an extereme rich fanatic of Holy Grail. I should confess this character is one of the most impressive alongwith Silas, the albino monk. Silas is villain bit he succeeds to gather ur sympathy in the end. No credits are being snatched away from Tom Hanks and Sophie who are obviously lead characteers and special ones. The multimedia picturisation where Teabing presents the hidden facts of "The last supper" is great infact more impressive than reading about it in the book. Also during his explanation of facts to Sophie about the ancient christian sects, the past scenes are shown very nicely in the present. Here are some mind blowing, deeply affecting scenes like atrocities committed on females by ancient catholic priests. How pregnant females were captured and brutally murdered, i felt sorry for my ancestors !

In this hour, is the part which is controversial, where Teabing out of his fanaticism literally naked the church. How steadily and heavily they are trying to propogate the false information about Mary, the wife of Jesus. How a sect called Priory of Sion is protecting the royal bloodline of the Jesus and his wife. In the end, after a lot of melodrama, everything got a fine end, but yaa to the serious movie watcher, it left many an unanswered questions to dwell his mind over them.

The movie is perfect in the story direction, based totally on the novel. However certain characters are dropped into the movie like Sophie's brother etc. Watching the locations is a great intoxicating pleasure in itself. From Franace to England, Langdon and Sophie searches exhaustively the museums and churches.

If we talk on the story telling side the direction is good, but Director must have faced the main problem of keeping the momentum of the movie. TO read complex chapters may be a pleasure but to watch the same on screen would have been boring and there Director Howard show himself as master. He gave movie the necessary touches, interweaving visual re-creations within the narration.

At the end, i shoud say that its a unique complex movie about the ideas. Its not a sequel to some super duper hit, neither some war movie nor some science fiction, yet people are so excited about it. Its a movie that comes once in decades.