Bollywood Six: The women who set the screen on fire

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Top Hindi cinema actresses today: ranked according to their acting and power quotient

1. Aishwarya Rai Bachchan: Star Performer

She has immense star power. From an intensely wooden actress-cum-model to one of the most powerful actresses in Indian cinema today, she has come a long way. I believe Sanjay Leela Bhansali is responsible for turning her into a versatile performer. Post Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam, she metamorphed into an actress with considerable histrionic power, only one which she needed to tune and control – she was prone to overacting at the time. After her Bengali cinema and Raincoat phase, she became a much more controlled performer – think Jodhaa Akbar. Besides being absolutely stunning to look at, she remains hugely iconic as a searing beauty and talented actress. She is very promising in the slew of movies lined up 2010: Robot, Action Replayy, Guzaarish…. She is both, star and actor. Which is why she still tops the list, despite being much older than most of the newer lot below.

2. Priyanka Chopra: All Rounder

She ranks in my list above Kareena Kapoor, despite the latter’s longevity in the industry, simply because Priyanka makes less mistakes and isn’t prone to overacting. Priyanka is a far more controlled performer, and a very balanced actress in terms of looks, charisma, versatility and acting. She is more an actor than a star, which in my books means a lot more than the other way around. She doesn’t have the raw talent of a Rekha, Madhuri or Vidya Balan, but she has a winning combination – versatility (proved with her movies ranging from Kaminey, Aitraaz, Dostana, Fashion to Anjaana Anjaani), a breadth of expressions and emotions, which prevents her from getting monotonous on screen, great vivacity – which makes her a hugely watchable actress – she suffuses the screen with her presence and a very earthy appeal. When styled well, she looks great too. Obviously she is a hard worker and a quick learner, becuase she is extending her range as she goes along, proving her mettle in the talent game. I believe we have great things to see from her, yet.

3. Kareena Kapoor: Drama Queen

Histrionics, over-acting, over-dramatization. These are, what according to me, hold Kareena back from being a fabulous actress. She has immense talent, and with the right director (think Imtiaz Ali for Jab We Met, Santosh Sivan for Asoka, Sudhir Misra for Chameli and Vishal Bharadwaj for Omkara) she turns into a powerhouse performer with controlled histrionics, without the annoying traces of Kareenaism. Kareenaism is fun to watch as long as it is in the limited avatar of Poo (Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Gham) or as the character of Geet (Jab We Met), but really not all the time. She brings a certain vivacity to the role, but more often than not, she remains more Kareena than the character (which is what Shah Rukh is also prone to do), making it wonderful for her fans, but not appealing to those who want to watch the movie and character unfold.

4. Deepika Padukone: Growing Stunner

Her smile (which reaches her eyes) and her dimples simply distract you through the film enough that you don’t really care that she isn’t doing much. That was Deepika Padukone in her first film, Om Shanti Om. Ever since then (despite making some terrible choices like Housefull and Chandni Chowk to China), she has worked to prove herself. She improves with every film she makes. There was not much difference in her roles in Bachna Ae Haseeno (where she delivered stilted dialogue) and Love Aaj Kal (where her dialogue delivery improved, but her character remained dull – due to the requirement of the script). In Karthik Calling Karthik, she began to open up with some of her old vivacity, and has really come into her own with Lafange Parindey. She is a fabulous clothes horse, great to look at, and an obviously hard worker and learner, but I do hope she doesn’t slide downhill with what appears to be limited expressions and a dose of overacting visible in the promos of Break Ke Baad, while Khelen Hum Jee Jan Se appears to be a promising role that would show off more of her newly-honed talent.

5. Vidya Balan: Talent Unlimited

What’s stopping this hugely talented – one of the most talented actresses we have today – actor from swinging it into the big league and top of the list is the lack of star power. She is an excellent actress and performer, but it looks like she will go the route of Tabu – critical acclaim, more art house than mainstream. She is wasted in candy-floss movies, and unfortunately candy floss is what builds mainstream appeal.

5. Katrina Kaif: Screen Diva

Katrina is hugely watchable – a great looker on screen, and that’s about it. But simply because she is so watchable, despite not being able to really act much (I only liked her in New York), she tries pretty hard and she’s won the audiences over in terms of screen presence.

Vidya Balan and Katrina Kaif share the #5 spot for diametrically opposite reasons.

6. Sonam Kapoor: Maturing Slowly

Sonam is pretty and lively. She fits the bill of an Aisha perfectly, she was great as Bittu in the horrendous Delhi 6 (possibly the only good thing about that film besides its songs) and she was watchable in I Hate Luv Storys, because Imran and she look so good together. However, she has limited expressions, which became very obvious in Aisha, because she faced so much screen time, and she needs to work on her breadth of expressions and quality of acting, otherwise she would remain typecast in the pretty-girl-next-door genre. And of course, a huge plus that she has unbelievable style. She can carry off a coarse jute bag and make it look stylish.

What’s Wrong With Anjaana Anjaani?

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

I had great expectations from Anjaana Anjaani – based on the phenomenal music and energy during the promos and videos. With the reviews sounding disappointing, I still went to watch it out of sheer curiosity and I came back wondering what it is that Indian film audiences want in a movie. Agreed, the premise of the movie was about suicide, but there are hardly any dark elements in the film, except for when PC actually tries to kill herself, and is nearly successful. The film technically is slick – good camera work, nice styling and locales, power-packed performance from Priyanka Chopra (PC) and a very credible performance from Ranbir Kapoor, who one has to admit, can definitely act. He lived the role, though possibly with less zest than PC simply because of the nature of their onscreen characters. The dialogues are good for most part, some even quite crisp, and the story at least has a different premise, which is more than what we can say for the other generic love stories being made lately. In fact, it’s grim premise has genuine resonance with a contemporary youth – they tend to go into depths over love or money, and finding meaning in their lives becomes a lost cause. And finding that meaning when living out what they believe are their last days, with the person they least expect to, is existential in it’s execution. Were this to have been a Hollywood film, the same multiplex audience would have probably accepted it as a different kind of chick-flick and watched it. In Indian cinema, it is rejected in concept. There were parts that were slow and dragged, but that can be expected from any film. Overall though, I thought it worked – more than many of the big-banner love stories of this year – and yet it fared under expectations. I’m truly at a loss to figure out what it is that people found lacking in the film, especially when people go to watch movies like Housefull and Golmaal etc. I believe the Indian audiences demand sheer drama in romance, or mindless humour. Actually, it still remains a mystery to see why certain films work and others don’t. I’m curious to see the fate of Jhootha Hi Sahi – Abbas Tyrewala’s next, after Jaane Tu…Ya Jaane Na, which I felt was a small big film. A simple premise, filled with so much promise and character. Easily a film watchable multiple times, particularly because of the freshness of the casting and the sharp editing. Does Abbas manage it again, without Aamir?

What’s In A Drape? – The Pleating of Age

Verve Magazine, Fashion, September 2010

There’s something sexy about a low-waisted lehnga with a shimmering choli – it’s the eternal ‘come hither’ which is playful, young, flirtatious and so very Navratri, when you’re totally on a high with all the eligible men checking you out. A sari in its very drape is elegant sophistication – it is too mature somehow – like you need to tread carefully before stepping into those pleats! I think that’s exactly why for the longest time, I stuck to lehngas that spun out into an umbrella-shaped twirl as I danced the nights away at various sangeets and dandiya-raases. They made me feel carefree with anticipation, like the stars of the night had many memorable tales left to be told as they winked against the delicate mirror-work embroidery on my outfit. I even got married in a lehnga; and it made me hold onto my youth, unconsciously and tenaciously. Three years after my wedding, I felt the desire to be, to look different – to be more woman, less girl. I tentatively plucked the folds of a beautiful vintage black-and-silver sari that my mother wore to my reception, and drew it to myself. I found a different person looking back at me in the mirror – someone who walked not floated, stood up straight with grace and dignity. From the moment I stepped into pleats it took me years to learn how to get it right (I still struggle occasionally), I began to walk in yards of fabric that I still often pull out with my bejewelled shoes at the very moment I am to enter an event, but I never looked back. I’ve steadily begun to turn a girl’s closet into a woman’s tresorie, replete with beautiful variations of the nine-yard magic drape that makes me more woman – every time I wear it.

Captured Memories

Tags

, ,

Published: Verve Magazine, Nerve, September 2010

The most ignored aspect of a wedding is the one you would ideally want to do right for posterity – the pictures! Verve looks at various options for the album

 

Photo01
Photo02

Ehsaan Faridafsar’s photograph on the adjoining page has been taken from a photo essay in Verve’s iconic black-and-white issue – there is something blissfully happy and memorable about the imagery. Having a photographer willing to render the moments of the most important day in your life in a unique fashion apparently is not something everyone hankers towards. It is surprising, considering how much money is bled into the most spectacular invitations, back presents, sets, jewellery, clothes…and yet wedding photography remains the unfortunate step-child.

Mumbai-based artist, curator and gallerist, Bose Krishnamachari traces the evolution of marriage in India to the extravaganza popularised by the maharajas of yore – and in those times, posed portraiture was the norm. As canvases evolved to bulky and expensive camera film and to the digital varieties of date, the traditional form of posed imagery still remains a part of the wedding legacy. It is only rarely – and more abroad than in India – that the photojournalistic style of wedding photography is popularised, where candid shots are taken and irreverent moments captured to add a sense of realism to the wedding album.

Matthieu Foss, photography curator and gallerist (Mumbai) feels that weddings have been restricted to a more conventional and conservative form of photography when creating the family wedding album. From the point of the photographer, Foss points out, they are using this form to merely make a living, not as a creative act. While it would be interesting for a photographer to capture moments from a poignant and radically important time in someone’s life, it appears that the subject’s lack of interest in something different would naturally stem the photographer’s creativity, making it a space that is a mere commercial stepping-stone to more absorbing pastures. And if the photographer were doing something different, it may well be in the space of satire and kitsch. Foss gives the example of French artist Jean-Christian Bourcart, whose first job as a wedding photographer led to him being ‘fascinated by those moments of joy in a crude or absurd reality,’ which later defined his other distinct photo projects.

It is not unnatural to take wedding photography a step further and explore moments in the nature of fashion photography: styled shoots inspired by high-fashion glossies; think a more involved and personal version of Carrie Bradshaw in Sex and the City: The Movie snapped before her disastrous wedding in bridal fashion, documenting her pre-wedding preparations for an international fashion magazine. Many an aspiring socialite or fashionista would create a wedding album that looks like something out of the pages of a fashion magazine – to feel like the ultimate diva. Of course, this involves a good amount of post-processing of the images and possibly a touch up here and there!

At the other end of the glamour spectrum, with digital cameras and phone-cams, every other person considers himself/herself an amateur photographer, and impromptu and often unfortunately-candid shots of the wedding-in-process have been documented – much to the embarrassment of the couple-to-be. Loosely termed ‘contemporary wedding photography’, the professional version o f this irreverent clicking serves to capture the imagery of the wedding from the beginning to the end, without predetermined poses but with strong visual appeal.

While tradition is great when saying your vows or taking a turn around the fire, capturing eternal moments is an art and should be considered as such. With couples willing to give enough importance to the form, it may evolve into a universally appreciated aesthetic medium.

Pop-culture Candy

Tags

, , , ,

Published: Verve Magazine, Nerve, September 2010

When Pixar animator and storyboard artist, Sanjay Patel, takes a break, he sketches Hindu deities. Check out his pop-culture illustrations of traditional Hindu marriages

 

Art01

You see The Little Book of Hindu Deities and inevitably think kitsch, mired in the nostalgia of tradition and…cute. Flipping through it, you find yourself amused by artwork that is fresh, appealing and inoffensive; and fascinated by the information that you are, in all likelihood, quite unaware of. And of course, the illustrator’s repertoire is impressive – he is a supervising animator and storyboard artist for Pixar Animation Studios, where he has worked for the last 14 years on features that include Monsters, Inc., A Bugs Life, Toy Story 2, Ratatouille, WALL-E, The Incredibles, Toy Story 3 and CARS. He has worked on The Simpsons for Fox and also with legendary cartoonist John K. California-based Sanjay Patel sends us an illustrative self-portrait, while replying to our questions via email:

 

What brings about the interest in Hindu deities?
For a very long time I had zero interest in anything Indian. Growing up in LA with devout Hindu parents, I desperately just wanted to fit in. It was only until I felt comfortable being myself, did I begin to explore Hindu iconography.

 

Why do you illustrate deities in an irreverent pop-culture format?
To show people a contemporary view of Hindu iconography and their legends. By that I mean, a view from the perspective of someone born between two cultures – the US and India; through the lens of modernism, graphic design, and animation. And from a voice that is rooted in the pop culture of the US and is acutely aware of the relevance of Hinduism and its devotees. This is just a means of communicating with people in my age group, who are culturally disconnected, who love design and animation, who are curious about Hinduism and spirituality, and who just can’t resist something cute.

 

Do you feel nostalgia about tradition creeping in?
I can’t speak to the sense of nostalgia. For me, having an Indian name, background and face, and yet not ever having set foot on Indian soil, can lead to different longings: to have all the things that make me up coexist in creative space. So it’s been incredibly gratifying to finally bring together my passion for Disney animation with the roots of my parents’ traditions and to forge a new cultural symbol in the form of my books.

 

Is pop culture the way of life today, or is it a way to subconsciously subvert culture and tradition?
I’ve definitely used the tropes of pop culture to get a message across that culture is changing: that a person that looks Indian could be American, or that a book that looks like cartoon could actually be a visual temple. The Hindu Deities book looks like pure pop-culture candy, but will hopefully enlighten you without giving you a cavity.

 

What’s your verdict on India’s animation scene?
There is lots of animation work being done in India these days. Most of it is derivative and lacking in its inspiration. But as artists gain confidence, they will undoubtedly begin to create content that is unique. My hope is just as the animation master Hayao Miyazaki manages to tell stories that feel uniquely Japanese, maybe one day there will be Indian animators that will tell tales that feel uniquely rooted to their soil.

All for love? Once Upon A Time In Mumbai

Tags

,

Another mafia film…and we’ve all seen, liked and re-watched Satya, Company etc. But OUATIM has something different going on – while all the regular elements of the underworld and the dark alleys and gritty lives comes to the fore amid the sophistication of money and power, while the male protagonists Ajay Devgn (Sultan Mirza) and Emraan Hashmi (Shoaib Khan) play their roles well portraying the different facets of the dons: one who plays a kind of robinhood – is a smuggler with ethics – he won’t ‘dirty’ his city Mumbai and forges a tenuous partnership with the rest of the gangs in the city. He’s the likable anti-hero; while Khan is out and out a bad cookie. He only craves power, money and is willing to go as far as possible for it.

While their contrasting characters are at a very basic level, easily understandable, what is more interesting though, are the love stories running through the film. Why do the two very attractive women love these men? Kangna Ranaut plays a movie star (Rehana) who falls for Mirza’s persistent charms…in a way one can see the attraction. She is looking for someone to sweep her off her feet, and the men she meets in the film industry are slimy creatures who stake claim without any pretences of love or affection. Mirza on the other hand, truly loves and cherishes her. His love for his city, for his woman are all pure and devoid of the drama that controls his professional life. Khan’s relationship is a lot more complicated: why would a simple girl like Prachi Desai (Mumtaz) stick around with a hooligan like Khan, when she knows – but remains in denial – about his no-good behaviour?

Maybe Rehana has seen the purity of Mirza’s soul and fallen in love with that; what has Mumtaz seen in Khan? Is it the living-on-the-edge kind of romance that works for her, the attraction to the bad boy – eventually one who cheats on her despite his assurances of love, or the desire to make him a better person than he himself would want to be? Did she expect anything else? In her attempts to remain pure against his immortality, she constantly gives way to him and his desires…there is not much of a fight. Despite being gifted a stolen necklace, she is back with him – is it fear of the consequences, or love?

While we saw how it ended for the men, it would have been nice to know what happened to the women who loved these men unconditionally.

 

Salman Khan and Dabangg: TOI Crest’s decoding

Tags

, , ,

Some good reads on Salman and his latest machismo flick:

Seeti-taali hero of all times

Jitesh Pillai | September 18, 2010

Salman Khan is blessed with the tremendous knack of making you want to pull your hair out. You have a thousand-word, sparingly gushy profile of him ready when a TV interview he gave on 26/11 has him giving a clean chit to Pakistan. A not-too-insignificant part of India bays for his blood;you shake your head in exasperation.

That’s Salman Khan for you – India’s true-blue pulp fiction story. Every time you think he is home free, there’s a twist. Each time he escapes unscathed and you put him down finally as a good guy, he goes out and makes you feel stupid. Every time he beats up a villain shirtless, the back-benchers hoot. And every time some news is circulated about him and Katrina, Zarine or whoever, an entire generation of sisters, mothers and daughters wants to know when bhai will get married.

Chew on this: it’s the climax in Dabangg. The arch villain rips off his shirt;he is a good foot taller than our hero and he has six-packs;the viewers wait, mouth half-open, holding their breath for their hero to rip off his shirt too. But he doesn’t. The sweaty six-pack villain beats our shirt-clad hero till the hero’s brother spills the beans on his mother’s death. Our hero gets angry;in a move reminiscent of the Hulk movies, his muscles start ripping and with that, so does his shirt. Even as you gasp, a powerful gust of wind carries the shirt straight off his back. The screen picks up a red tint as our hero beats the villain in action copied straight from Guy Richie’s Sherlock Holmes.

Like Dabangg, Salman’s life too isn’t limited by a leather-bound script – he’s not the good guy, he’s intrinsically flawed, he loses control, makes mistakes, gets angry when someone steals his girl and has a knack for getting into trouble with the law. Fashion be damned, he wears wide-bottomed trousers while the rest of the world is switching to skinny pants. His dance moves can compete against a block of ice in fluidity – and lose.

When you’re just one inch short of dubbing him a kind heart, he acquires an affinity for shooting black bucks and driving over people sleeping on the pavement. When you smile warmly reading news of his large-heartedness with friends, he pours a soft drink over an actress and treats journalists like root canal surgery.

Like every pulp film, Salman’s life is laced with irony and topped with a generous dose of black humour. Like every great pulp film, Salman’s script lacks any apparent plot and is so bad that it’s actually quite good. While other actors have brought shades of grey into their roles, Salman has actually lived these. He is Chulbul Pandey from Dabangg.

The one thing that has changed though is that Salman is increasingly beginning to laugh at himself;he’s getting better at it than his dancing, acting or dressing-up. Some might even put it all down to his desire to seek approval from the masses, which has always eluded him until now – but for him, it’s just another day of being Salman.

There is something else about Salman Khan. A book I was flipping through on Bollywood heroes rather tamely compares him to Jeetendra and Rajendra Kumar, admiring his remarkable durability as a hero. It credits his success to the hyper image-building of male sexuality and points out that this is despite his limited portrayals, a lack of diverse roles and meaningful cinema. I disagree – and not just because it’s tame. If anything, I’d compare Salman at some level with Chuck Norris, the Hollywood martial arts hero. You can love to hate him, but you’d have to love him.

More so, somewhere down the line, we’ve gone on to decide what qualifies as ‘meaningful’ cinema and what does not – a question we’ve conveniently answered ourselves too. Aamir is ‘meaningful’ and Salman is not?

Nothing could be further from the truth. We’re increasingly living in times when what we are told to consider good cinema isn’t always so. What if in this time of ‘thinking’ cinema, we actually want to see larger than life portrayals, essentially plot-less films and cheap thrills with all its bells and whistles? Salman gives you all that. More than any other star, he has never dumped the hooters in the front rows for the popcorn-munching folks in Gold Class.

And the hooters reciprocated by making Salman’s hair cut from Tere Naam a hit. They did it by constantly buying new posters of the shirt-less, purple sunglass-donning star from Pyar Kiya To Darna Kya. If there wasn’t such reciprocation from Salman’s fans, Wanted would not have been as big a hit as it was and Dabangg would not have overtaken 3 Idiots in its collections on day one of its release.

That’s why what Salman does is important. He has never needed to show diversity, exhibit change, pretend to make thinking, meaningful cinema. Above all, he has never forgotten the whistlers and the hooters in the front seats.

Suddenly, though we’ve rather patronisingly dubbed him as ‘kitsch’, the larger than life portrayals are beginning to make inroads even amongst calmer, urban white-collared viewers who loosen their ties and hoot enthusiastically when Salman spins his sunglasses and pins them to the back of his collar in Dabangg. We have suddenly begun to think it’s cool to be rustic and unfinished. People who dubbed his brand of acting and cinema loud, tawdry and crass suddenly term it ‘uber-cool’.

But Salman never sought this patronage and somewhere between then and now, he has managed to show shades of the superstar – something we’d all but pronounced dead. He’s given his fans iconic dialogues, whether it was Wanted’s ‘Ek baar mainey commitment kar diya toh. . . ‘ or Dabangg’s ‘Itney chhed karunga ki confuse ho jaoge ki saans kahan sey ley aur padhe kahaan sey. ‘ Ewww.

In these script-writer and directordriven times we live in, Salman remains unapologetically larger than life. The Dabangg role was said to have been written eight times, so it could accommodate all his mannerisms.

When he does a movie, the heroine is a prop, there are item songs and a sparingly clad woman, but it’s Salman who gets the maximum whistles. And as he spins his sunglasses and tucks them into the back of his shirt, you wonder if in him, India’s north has found an answer to Rajnikanth. The whistles make you feel they have.

http://www.timescrest.com/culture/seetitaali-hero-of-all-times-3537

 

Decoding Dabangg

Avijit Ghosh | September 18, 2010

In the late 1990s, as liberalisation gathered steam, Bollywood gradually got ‘multiplexed’. Ticket prices soared to over Rs 100 – singlescreen theatres charged Rs 20 for a rear stall ticket those days – the new temples of entertainment became unaffordable, hence off-limits, for the underclass. Cinema halls, once a democratic platform of sharing for different classes, became social ghettos of the moneyed. This, with the rise of the dollar-dripping NRI sector as an important market, created a tectonic shift in Bollywood content. Pretty, young directors made pretty, urban-centric, feel-good movies for pretty girls to watch with their prettier boyfriends. The underprivileged and everything that was construed as uncomfortable to this audience’s tastes were effaced from celluloid.

Dabangg is mainstream Bollywood’s reclamation of that lost world. Earlier this year, two successful movies showed winds of change were blowing;Ishqiya, which was funny but niche in an adult sort of way, and Rajneeti, a political thriller. But Salman Khan’s knuckle-crushing movie marks the thumping return of that delightful subgenre : the unapologetic mainstream masala action flick set in small-town north India. When they clap and dance even in multiplexes, you realise this movie has broken fresh ground. This is the revenge of small towns.

Dabangg – pronounced ‘The Bang’ by those who take pride in failing their Hindi tests – blends Salman’s irreverent masculinity with paisa vasool dialogues and some of the most original action scenes in Mumbai cinema. But the movie is more than the sum of its parts. It appears fullfrontal, but is layered with a larger social subtext.

The film manages to recreate mofussil Uttar Pradesh both in sight and soul, even though the movie was shot elsewhere. The champakal (handpump ), the chakki and the thresher – now forgotten by mainstream Bollywood, form part of the movie’s landscape. The extras dancing on the streets amidst shops of ittar, surma and bangles look like genuine small-town boys and girls. The movie is comfortable in its skin. When the item girl sways to the Bhojpuri-inspired floor-scorcher, Main Zandu Balm hui, darling tere liye, Munni badnaam hui, darling tere liye, she keeps the movie’s symmetry intact. When did you last see a hero in a mainstream Bollywood film drinking from a water tap, dressed in a lungi-ganjee ? To a substantial audience section, the movie evokes something barely remembered.

Dabangg doesn’t exist in a time warp. The movie romances the small town, but never gets mawkish. Rather, it internalises everything that has changed in the kasbah. The lascivious zamindar has been replaced by the upstart bahubali, also a rising youth leader with an eye on the local MLA seat. Even the baddies in Lalganj have footstomping caller tunes on their mobiles.
Amidst all this masala, Dabangg unleashes an anti-hero seldom seen before. In traditional Bollywood, small-town and hinterland heroes are keepers of morality. Chulbul Pandey isn’t. The hero with a name you are more likely to find in regional cinema than a premier Bollywood flick isn’t a cross between a maryada purshottam Ram and a veer Arjun. He hates his step-brother, refuses to touch his step-father’s feet and is abusive and corrupt. It is the sort of thing Shakti Kapoor used to do in the 1980s. Pandeyji doesn’t really have a moral code;only a survivor’s sharpness. And he remains that way for 75 per cent of the movie. That he still remains a hero is as much a triumph of Salman’s stylised acting as what we, the people, have internalised over the years;corruption is no big deal, being ‘smart’ and a winner is. Pandeyji could very well be the ethical template of millions watching the movie.

The film is a personal triumph for Salman. Sleeping on the pavement may still not be a good idea if he is driving around or being a black buck might be risky if he’s in the vicinity. And Pakistan would love to telecast his recent television interview forever. But when it comes to figuring out the people’s pulse, few come closer.

Salman’s biceps in Veergati started the ‘bodybuilding’ craze in mid-1990 s small-town India, an affair that still continues. In every gym, he is Bollywood’s poster-boy Number 1. Yet, a few exceptions aside, his biggest hits were either romantic comedies or emotional dramas such as Maine Pyaar Kiya, Hum Aapke Hain Koun and Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam. On the other hand, Sunny Deol, Sanjay Dutt, Ajay Devgn and Akshay Kumar all began their careers as men of muscle. But as Mumbai cinema got manicured, the action heroes slowly abandoned their fists of fury and re-invented themselves as funny-faced comics and romantics.

The new Salman adroitly filled that gap. True, he was always at home in combat yarns like Karan Arjun. But with Wanted and Dabangg, he has positioned himself as Bollywood’s premier action hero. His dream combo – soft face, tough body – that Dharmendra peddled profitably right through the 1970s ensures that women get plenty to ogle at. In Dabangg, Salman also brings in a dash of irreverence. He is part-Shatrughan Sinha/Rajnikanth and part-himself. There’s symmetry to his performance as Chulbul Pandey, destined to become part of popular Hindi cinema folklore.

What Salman and debutant director Abhinav Singh Kashyap prove in this unstoppable action tale is that there is enough space for ‘unfashionable’ India to be the backdrop of a Bollywood blockbuster and that well-made movies packed with kicks, screams, explosions and gunfire also have a chance. Not everybody digs We are Family. And that includes the pretty girls and their prettier arm-candies in the multiplexes.

http://www.timescrest.com/culture/decoding-dabangg-3536

 

Inside Khan Market

Srijana Mitra Das | September 18, 2010

Fists fly. Muscles ripple. Bones break and jaws shatter as Salman Khan takes on his opponents in the latest Bollywood blockbuster. Every time Khan decimates an on-screen irritant, rips off his shirt or breaks into a jig hitching his belt up and down or pulling a towel between his legs, we are reminded of how different he is from the other two stars within the same league – Aamir and Shah Rukh Khan. Although the three share their birth year, 1965, and live in the leafy Mumbai locale of Bandra, the similarities end there.

Since Aamir’s debut in 1988, followed by Salman’s entry in 1989 and Shah Rukh’s arrival in 1992, the three have carved out distinct cinematic spaces of their own, demarcating territories in the film market, framing separate sections of the massive gallery they play to with charisma and talent. The division of space between the three has not been a planned strategy;it has grown organically, evolving at its own pace, nurtured by audience tastes, tempered by each star’s predilections. Trade analyst Taran Adarsh explains, “When the Khans came onto the scene, Bollywood was changing enormously. Its focus was shifting from entertaining the masses to pleasing the classes. The NRI and multiplex audience came into focus. These three actors combined with different filmmakers targeting diverse sections of the audience. As sensibilities matched, spaces began emerging.”

The ‘spaces’ gained significance beyond cinema. Image and brand expert Dilip Cherian comments, “Distinctions between the three Khans are clear. Aamir is the Thinking Khan. Shah Rukh is Everyman’s Khan. And Salman is the Poor Man’s Khan. When companies want to launch, staunch or expand their market base, they approach Shah Rukh. He has instant cross-sector appeal. Aamir’s advertisements are more complex. They’re the thinking man’s clever ads. Salman represents mass brands. His appeal is direct and macho at base level. ” Film critic Raja Sen however feels, “Salman is an old-school superstar. He has a larger than life persona with no pretensions. He revels in being an unreal character while the other two strive for reality.”

In the pursuit of reality, the ‘first Khan’, Aamir, has grown into a somewhat nawabi figure, a carefully-crafted artist whose understanding of cinema is becoming legend. Equally comfortable at foreign film festivals or giving viewers promotional haircuts, Aamir began by playing soft-faced lover-boys. He dived deep into drama, gave wacky comedy a go, explored shades of grey, played an ‘ordinary farmer’ in the extraordinary Lagaan, portrayed an uber-urbane playboy, performed action and directed a film exploring a child’s limitation set against the freedom of his imagination. In all this, Aamir’s target viewer seems to be the urban Indian multiplex-goer who pays premium prices to catch the star’s funny, moving, musingly intelligent films. Despite his awareness of the film business, Aamir never discusses commerce publically, focusing on characters, art and politics in his statements rather than money, awards or advertisements. His screen characters are similarly driven not by riches or fame, but larger social goals or finer individual motivations.

At the opposite end of the screen stands Shah Rukh, the only Khan who entered the industry as an outsider and still seems awed by his own phenomenal success. Debuting as a crazed lover, the early 1990s saw a series of movies featuring Shah Rukh as a demented deewana who couldn’t see where social norms and legality began or ended. His blindness to borders was indicative of more to come. With Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge, Shah Rukh’s geographical ambit widened while his protagonists, playful, sensuous and stylish, began taking on a standardised sameness, the star playing a ‘Non-Resident Indian’ whose life is neatly folded between consumption, passion and tradition. Keenly perceptive about the times, Shah Rukh embraced the glittering brashness of the arriviste. He gave voice to the nouveau riche aspirant who achieved on his own strength and wanted more with no qualms attached. Success, adulation and money were here and now;the past was nostalgia and the future unknown. Shah Rukh’s target viewer resembles his screen characters;located overseas or in urbanised Indian pockets, driven by aspiration, consumption and contradictions that further fuel the first two.

Then there is Salman, the man in the middle whose career has been the most unpredictable. Of the three Khans, Salman has perhaps been most heavily influenced by American popular culture and Hollywood in particular. From his first success in Maine Pyar Kiya, Salman played the Indian who returns home from America. His very physicality is shaped by the imagery of the Hollywood action star, the sculpted muscles and rippling abs of a Stallone, a Schwarzenegger, a Seagal. His career evolved accordingly;from playing the long-haired lover, Salman stepped firmly into close-cut action. He carefully tempered violence on screen with large doses of humour. His comedy can be loud and crass. However, this just goes into his larger persona.
Salman taps into the audience’s deeper imagining of a Hindi heartland feudal, not a polished nawab or an urbane professional, but a small-town bahubali. This persona’s writ (and vehicle) runs well above the law but he is also imbued with a noblesse oblige that comes from relationships of give and take, obligation and power. Modern legality has little place in this picture. This is a web of strong-threaded, fine-woven emotion tapping into history, hierarchy and homoerotica, all of which feed right back into the ardour with which fans surround their ‘Salman-bhai’. Taran Adarsh comments, “I’m always amazed at how loyal Salman’s fan base is. They hero-worship him. He’s like a member of their family. If anyone says anything bad about him, they pounce on them. He is literally the darling of the masses.”

Salman’s target viewer appears to be the small-town or semi-urban youth living on the margins of the metropolis, who admires the star’s physicality, his ability to crack jokes and bones together and his wooing of women with chivalry and violence. There is another aspect to Salman’s audience. Raja Sen remarks, “Of the three Khans, Salman is the only one with a religious fan base. He is himself secular and comes from a multicultural family. However, he has a massive following of Muslim fans who see him as one of their own, who make time for his movies. Unlike the other two Khans, Salman has never shied away from playing Muslim characters in films. Only now, someone’s name is Khan! But Salman’s been in that space years ago.”

The distinctions are clear. Are they water-tight though? At times, Shah Rukh has dribbled his way into what might be seen as Aamir Khan territory, Aamir has punched his way into Salman’s action zone and Salman, as with Dabangg, has smashed the barriers between metropolis and mofussil, multiplex and single-screen. Interestingly, despite all the talk of rivalries, camps and competition, the three Khans never release their films simultaneously, instead spacing these out with months between them. Evidently, market segmentation is not iron-clad. For a hard day’s night, it might well be that the Indian viewer, regardless of class, location or leaning, would just like some robust, wellrounded entertainment. The three Khans understand this better than anyone else in the industry. That’s why they rule it.

http://www.timescrest.com/culture/inside-khan-market-3535

Candlelight Feasts in Mauritius

Published: Verve Magazine, Travel, September 2010
Photographs by Bamba Sourang

Michelin-starred gastronomic exclamations, exotic spa therapies, mother-of-pearl pedicures, personal butlers who unpack your bags, private excursions, water thrills…The One and Only Le Saint Géran in Mauritius has all this and more to offer

There are times when you feel like you need to run away from your life to unwind, be pampered and not have to deal with anything – like before/after a wedding or a major occasion in your life. That’s what one of the oldest luxury spots in Mauritius is about. The hospitality of the One & Only is exactly what we crave – unobtrusive, inimitable and almost omnipresent. The Le Saint Géran is a charming property with manicured lawns, fringed by sweeping palms that provide a striking relief to the stunning blue-green waters of the Indian Ocean. The property is located on the northeast side of the island, the latter known for its pristine beauty, quiet environs and spectacular white beaches.

As I sink into our massive Ocean Suite – a sprawling villa-style set of rooms that are serviced by our own personal butler (who will unpack our bags in the enormous walk-in closet), I can really ask for no more. But as I take an appreciative turn about the beautifully appointed room with a glass of the celebratory wine left for us, I find myself accosted with the slightly perfumed accents in the room – mild and exceedingly pleasing. Choices are what this place all about – choices that pamper you and make you feel like the queen (or king) of the world. You can pick the scent of the day/night according to your mood, draw a bath by picking your own spa soak options, choose from a range of movies/ books from the library before you sink your head into a pillow that suits you just right.

While peace and serenity are key aspects of this resort, particularly with the muted European ambience and with a majority of visitors being from that part of the world, your senses are never assaulted with noise, in whichever area of the long private beach stretch you choose to park yourself. The charm of the property lies in its Mediterranean-style pool and dining area – white and blue accents, with bright orange furnishings flecking the rich turquoise of the pool water that lazily wraps itself like fingers around the floating decks and bar. At night, dressed in our evening finest, we are surrounded by little lights sparkling in the dark waters, as we sit atop the pool on our little dining island enjoying a candlelight feast. With options of course-by-course servings, sumptuous buffets and international ala carte choices, we nearly overlook the two fine-dining restaurants on the property – but their Michelin-starred chefs’ repertoire beckon invitingly.

Rasoi by Vineet, masterminded by London-based Vineet Bhatia, has created a romantic ambience on a jetty on the water, where beautiful white swans come circling around the table in perfect unison with light music, rose mojitos and strewn flower petals, making it a meal extraordinaire. Parts of the menu are exceptional, like the innovative kebab and salmon appetiser and the samosa chaat. However, it is Spoon des Îles by Alain Ducasse which is a spectacular feast for the taste buds for Indians inclined to experimentation. We take a turn about the modern restaurant and its top-line kitchen that sends out course-after-course of gourmet European delicacies: from five different varieties of tomatoes hand-picked from varied parts of the world and nine bread options (personal favourite: Scottish bread) to duck foie gras, excellent fish, meat and vegetarian entrees, exquisite desserts (madelines, chocolate, petit fours), French cheese and fresh fruit preserves that shoot through your taste buds with alacrity. Paired with accompanying wine (or pink champagne) the menu holds its own, tantalising, deliberating and commanding our senses, never once overpowering them.

If every sense needs to be perked up, the spa environs at the resort are sensationally serene. Excellent masseurs and therapists using ESPA products (love their pink mud pack) leave me feeling born again. Seeing my reaction, my husband (quite out of character) books himself for a couple of therapies post an invigorating game of golf and a top-up lesson at the renowned Peter Burwash International Tennis Academy on site, and returns as fresh as a baby. While he explores the many land and water sports activities – including kite-surfing, diving, snorkelling and deep-sea fishing – I choose to spend the afternoon at the famous French Bastien Gonzalez podiatrist salon, treating myself to a mother-of-pearl topped manicure and pedicure. Despite the tantalising range of chemical-free polish on display, I don’t have the heart to coat my beautiful, shining, pearl-dusted nails with paint!

With the band kicking up a lively mood in the evenings, nursing our post-dinner liqueur, I look at a little girl in a pink ballet dress and a silver hairband twirling with joy and know that like families before her, she will probably be back year after year, celebrating the understated pleasures of the Le Saint Géran.

The Ritual of Being Ritualistic

Tags

, , , ,

Something very cool happened this year, possibly the only cool thing about religious events. On Sept 11, 2010, Ganesh Utsav, the Jain festival and Eid all fell on the same day. Of course there was mayhem in the city in terms of noise, traffic and chaos, and there were enough nostalgic elements in the city that found it “so lovely” that bright celebrations were sparking all over. However, the point is that special days can be one and the same, they can be celebrated differently, but we lay too much importance on the rituals surrounding the festivals rather than the point of the festival. Fasting, doing ‘darshan’, breaking the fasts, wishing people, it keeps people busy and makes them feel good about being busy in the religious way, but it really leads them nowhere. What changes from one month, one week or one day to the next?

Here are two examples of ritualistic followings which I know from close observation. All the other followings, world-over, are equally ritualistic in their own way and all boil down to the same conclusion.

Ganesh Chaturthi
You bring a Ganpati murti (idol) home, most often decorated in toxic colours and invite people over to take blessings, leave money behind that gets distributed amongst undeserving priests or among street children who use it for drugs and alcohol, immerse the idol in the already toxic water after a lot of banging and singing on the street, creating massive amounts of noise pollution that will probably even deafen the Gods.
– The soft muted music that was to bring one closer to the divine in terms of shlokas and words with meaning, have been replaced by loud DJ-driven music that play the latest techno and raucous bollywood hits, where youngsters get together and dance inebriated on the streets, blocking traffic and hassling all the people in the neighborhood.
– There are neighborhood collections of donations – not for improving society, but to provide funds for the DJ, alcohol, trucks and idol-trappings.
– The colours, paint and glitter used on the idols is killing our marine life, and even though it is on an idol of worship, it doesn’t miraculously save our marine life and water. It enters our eco system and poisons us.
– During these house visits to take blessings – it becomes a means for social gathering, where people attempt to be on their best behavior, but people being people end up discussing the most inane things in front of their revered idol. Such as gossip about other people and needling those with opinions.
– While the idol is at home, one must abstain from non-veg food, alcohol etc in its vicinity. There are those so addicted to these items that they can’t wait for the idol to leave and be immersed, so that they can go back to their daily drink.
– We use offerings to the idol as a means of eating anything – sweets are offered to the idol (apparently rich sweetmeats please the Gods – wasn’t that just a ruse for priests to make away with these sweetmeats?) and that becomes ‘prasad’ – blessed by the Gods and that can be and should be consumed by people generously.
– In the homes, as there is increasing staff problems during this festival (most of the staff leaves to go to their home town to celebrate), war breaks out at home because these sweetmeats MUST be made at all costs to ensure that the right offering is done.
– Most of the staff, who struggle to make ends meet, borrow money to buy expensive idols and celebrate this festival as a means to please the Gods. They have yet, in all these years, not got any form of deliverance; but the quest continues. They will leave a cushy job that doesn’t allow them to take full leave during Ganesh Chaturthi, even if it leaves them jobless and in debt.

While the sentiment and faith is indeed strong and full of conviction, to what end is this being done? Are they leading a better life (not materialistically, but morally)? Does it tell them that there is a way to the divine, and it should be followed with a desire to do good, less harm and a genuine improvement of the soul? Or is it merely a way to party in the name of religion?

 

The Jain Paryushan
Jainism is a way of life – a strict means to leading an austere and controlled existence, which is supposed to be devoid of unnecessary trappings of religious rituals. The result of the influence of Hinduism into the sects of Jainism and the growth of the Jains as a moneyed class of people, has lead to a strong dilution of the original principles and made it chance for Jains to carry a ‘holier-than-thou’ attitude. In this week, called Paryushan, Jains practice abstinence – from certain foods and if possible, fast as well. It is a means to build the will power of the mind and to control the body’s urges towards baser instincts by solidifying the mind’s role in the decision-making. While in concept it works, it has led to many people doing this half-heartedly, because they have been cajoled into doing so by family. There is no desire to withhold for a greater purpose of mental peace, rather do it to prove to the other that they weren’t ‘bad’. There is no whole-heartedness in this desire. While Jains believe in stringent non-violence, they follow the principles according to their convenience: don’t eat garlic, potatoes and onions (because as underground roots they contain more living organisms than those growing above the surface), but appear to be unconcerned by silk and leather goods, where one silk sari kills multiple silk worms. During their festival, it becomes mandatory for others to visit those who have fasted, making it a mad rush on the one morning from one ‘parna’ to another. These parnas where the fastee breaks his/her fast with some very simple food, becomes taxing to the household as they need to take care of the fastee and provide for food for the visitors. In certain families there appears to be a display of wealth in the lines of a wedding ceremony, with jewelry and clothes et al. Austerity and control over material desires anyone? During the week, as the fasts continue, the evenings are given up to religious discourses, where you listen to a priest talk about why these things are important, being a better person and leading a better life. Maybe the hunger deadens the brain cells, but the people who attend these discourses, look absorbed by the ideas and often find themselves in meaningless material pursuits a few days later – the kind that involve fighting over money within the family. The week over, people wish each other ‘Micchami Dukkadam’ which means if I have hurt you in any way in the past, please forgive me. This universal ‘Sorry’ makes everything okay and allows people – a nice ‘get out of jail free’ card – to go back to their ways until the next year’s apology. And the week over, people rush out in hordes to every restaurant and eat to their heart’s content. Abstinence, abstinence.

Every religion and festival leads to the same thing: leading a better, more moral life and being a good person. At the end of the day, all the rituals do is misguide us into thinking we are becoming better merely by performing them, but until we change from the inside out, we remain shallow and hollow and fake. These are just external trappings that do not fix attitudes and mind-sets, rather give people excuses to be whoever they like, whilst making it okay by performing these rituals. The ritualization of religion – the strongest example being Hinduism and all its varied sects and facets, has mired people into believing that rituals will take one towards a better life, towards deliverance. Rituals are like drugs – they have a feel-good factor associated with them, which make you think you’re feeling good, but actually lead you deeper into the mire of a material world from which you can’t escape. The more you do it, the more you are afraid of what life will become when you stop doing it. The more you do it, the more your mind gets weakened, gripping the rituals as a means to a better end, not being able to do without.

If we snapped out of the weakness of relying on rituals to make us feel like better people or to prove to the world that we are better people, and actually became better people – through our actions, inactions, thoughts, words, beliefs and societal and civic duties, we wouldn’t need religious rituals, just a simple philosophy on leading a better life. And life would become better – for everyone around. Rituals don’t fix the crime problem or over population, or poverty or illiteracy or unemployment or environmental degeneration or terrorism….rituals simply add to the list of mankind’s problems. If we are more humane and less ritualistic material beings, these problems would start solving themselves. That would please God a lot more than our worldly offerings.

The reinvented Khan

Tags

, , ,

While Aamir becomes the most powerful and possibly esoteric Khan of Bollywood, and SRK swirls to the music of Karan Johar’s melodrama at a severe loss to his own histrionic credibility, the Khan we all (anyone with a brain and desire to see good cinema) gave up on, has bounced back with a film that rides entirely on his charisma and iconic characterisation. While cinema is about intelligent pursuits and thoughtful execution, the heart of Bollywood lies in pure entertainment. Salman provided it to the masses, in a crass, slapstick sorta way, but Dabangg appears to have taken his playful soul and exaggerated it on screen in a way that would bring a smile to the lips of even the toughest cynics. This is the film that he has enjoyed, and has created an iconic character, which will remain behind much after the film is long forgotten. Even those who haven’t seen the film, refer to Chulbul Pandey and his antics. Salman has reinvented himself, and many a time, it is the successful reinvention that is the most interesting graph: Amitabh, Saif, and now Chulbul. I may actually warm to Chulbul as much as I did to Maine Pyar Kiya’s Prem….