After the accident

Perhaps it was the shadow of the previous day's film ambience. I'll never know that, but the other day I contrived to find myself in the middle of a chowk as one of the two parties in a collision. I might say a little hesitantly, not wanting to tempt Fate, that this is the first in my 6 years of driving that I was so disposed. The exact details of the "incident" are hazy as regards the causes, but fortunately, neither the two guys picking themselves up nor me were hurt in any serious way apart from a bruise or two. My vehicle didn't seem to have come out of it too well, but the other had.

There was an inevitable verbal tussle that followed the action, and my interlocuter swiftly claimed moral high ground by alleging that I had been driving at a higher speed than was necessary. He contrasted it with the speed that he claimed to be at. I didn't think the former was quite correct, and also spotted the problem in the argument about the speeds, as both the vehicles were now stationary and it was difficult to prove anyway. Nothing came of it, and we both departed the scene - me with a bent key that mercifully could restart the stunned vehicle accompanied by a increasingly shrill sound from the front wheel area.

Sometime later, I recalled an incident that occured about two months ago during which Harish and I witnessed a car making a desparate getaway on the wrong side of the road, a few metres ahead revealing another car which had come off worse. It led to us discussing how difficult it was to accept that one is wrong. I wondered if the same was true in this case; despite my reactionary state of denial, was I to blame? Try as I might, I couldn't pinpoint the cause of the collision. Perhaps I was day-dreaming as I was prone to do so. Perhaps I did not apply the brakes fully. Perhaps he did speed into the chowk without looking out (that the accident occured proved that I wasn't quite alert as well). All those possibilities existed, but what may have prompted my self-defence mechanisms to get worked up was that the other guy flatly ruled out any possibility that he may have been at fault, which I thought was quite incorrect.

I guess you can try to follow rules etc and keep a careful eye out, but sometimes minor lapses in these might be the one time such a thing happens. Wonder if I'll have the guts to own up then.

Additional Yuva points

* It seems to be already somewhat of a blog hit. A couple of friends have more compact thoughts (which make better reads than my prolix defence): Daemon in only his second post and Sarika.

* Rediff has commendably carried interviews with some of the tech. team. Editor Sreekar Prasad, Art Director Sabu Cyril, Dir. of Photography Ravi K. Chandran and Dialogue writer Anurag Kashyap.

* Yuva pops a quiet dig (thru' Vivek Oberoi) at current Hindi films...

* And funny how all six lead actor-actresses come from a filmi background.

Oh Yuva Yuuvaa!

This is likely to be a long post, so make sure you are sitting comfortably with a cup of coffee at your side...

Having an SDFS ticket (Thanks to the operating procedures of the Indian Box Office, SDFS can mean both Second Day First Show or Saturday First Show, much like FDFS), I was extremely keen to avoid all reviews and comments on Mani Ratnam's Yuva so as to be able to form an individual opinion of my own. However, I couldn't help noticing the headline of the Rediff review (by Prem Panicker): "Yuva disappoints". As a result, I wistfully thought whether the film had lost to the weight of expectations. But then a keen sense of rationalisation set in and the mind clung to past reviews of films that I had ended up disagreeing with.

Having watched it completely today, my own personal register rings happily and gleefully: the film is great! It's not 10 on 10, but there was so much to take in and marvel at that I'm rather keen on watching it once more. I'm happy to disagree with the bulk of the Rediff reviews that claimed that the film suffers in its screenplay. I can only say to you: watch it for yourself first, and make up your mind.

On the screenplay:

Mani Ratnam has been playing around with the structure of his screenplays for the last few films he's done, most notably Alaipayuthe. Perhaps if you are a film viewer of vast experience, these steps may seem insignificant and unoriginal. But in the context of mainstream Indian cinema, these are huge leaps. Hardly anyone dares to explore possibilities or even understands the need for it. Yuva brings in newer ways of telling stories to the mainstream. Remember, he also needs to cater for those stragglers who may not offer to come to terms with something other than strictly linear narratives. This is a fine balancing act, and the film scores in this respect. Critics of the screenplay may not be willing to let go of old conventions. Or they are mixing up their criticism of the story itself with the structure. I haven't seen but only read about Amores Perros (the film that was rumoured to be the basis for Yuva/AE); I don't think there's much more than any superficial similarities. And when Mani Ratnam said in interviews that it is closer to Rashomon than Amores Perros, he doesn't mean it entirely. (I mean to say that comparing Virumaandi with the Japanese classic would be more meaningful and would convey the right ideas.) Mr. Panicker talks of the midpoint being placed at first; unlike him I don't see a problem with it. Mani Ratnam has been bolder this time as past efforts have always shown him to be not entirely brave enough to go the whole hog of experimentation.

On the story:

One Rediff review criticised the lack of character development and another contradicted it by pointing to over-characterisation. (The profusion of reviews clearly bears out what I had noted a few months ago that this novel twin effort are easily the most talked about films in recent times; the flood of reviews has only just begun.) I disagree with both. The characterisation was adequate, especially given the length of the film and the content. The film straddles a window that spans from the recent past to the immediate future. We don't want too many useless details of the past that have no bearing on the next set of events. However, we are presented (if we listen carefully) sufficient aspects about the characters that indicate why someone is the way he/she is. For e.g., we don't know why a Bengali Brahmin in Rani Mukherjee is married to a Bihari thug in Abhishek Bachchan. But is it a hindrance in following the rest of the plot? I think not. I am however informed during the course of dialogue between the brothers that they individually fled their village to Calcutta for different reasons.In these matters, directors like Mani Ratnam are damned if they do and damned if they don't. They are expected to push the frontiers, but not without losing conventional plot elements, which isn't always reasonable.

Reviewers seem to be complaining about how the story doesn't delve deep into the politics and elections angle. I wonder why they thought Yuva to be all about that. Perhaps it was the effect of some of the trailers, but I think they had unreasonably made up their minds beforehand. The story essentially was about a certain period in the lives of three men, and what they do and how they think have large bearings on the story development. They are not entirely representative of their own types of youth. Neither is it about the process of how Arjun wants to get a visa or how Michael plans to win the elections or what will happen to Lallan after the film has ended. Viewers must learn to read between the lines and fill in the spaces with their own colours - in short apply some imagination and marry it with the necessary assumptions. The ending is in the usual spirit of classic Mani Ratnam optimism, though some ends are left open. I liked that, for it suggests that the writer has the courage to not contrive perfect resolutions. There is still some more distance to go.

Having said that, there are quite a few jarring details, like whether the college students are old enough to fight state elections (must check on this), why they dug up that big pit during the song and whether there's only one Coffee Day outlet in the whole of Kolkata!

The technical departments:

Some of the best names line up on the credits and it shows. The sharp editing (Sreekar Prasad), top notch photography, especially the hand-held shots (Ravi K. Chandran) and Sabu Cyril's art direction are a big asset. I thought the action ("Vikram" Dharma) was a little too exaggerated, and out of place in the MR method. Having said that, it was quite pacy at points, and the Bridge showdown was very well executed. I am never going to look at a motorcyle again without thinking of the opening sequences and that free-for-all. One can see why MR wanted a purely background score at first, wherever he uses the soundtrack like that, it enhances the storytelling. So it is a disappointment that he didn't to stick to that, purely from the pov of his own development. ( Previous thoughts on the soundtrack). It's like a batsman who wants to hit a six, but is not all sure of hitting a ball in the air - you can see the dilemma. The song sequences are not all that jarring and sometimes do propel the plot. The Sasi-Lallan montage to Dol Dol is a case in point, very well done. I enjoyed Rahman's BGM. The sync sound is unobtrusive and hence clearly doing a good job.

A special mention of Anurag Kashyap who once again proves why he is one of the best writers around. His dialogues have to span a great range, from Bihari boli to Bengali Hindi to more urban lingo, but he does a fabulous job. They are as realistic as they can get.

The screen performances:

I've hardly ever known a MR film to get its casting wrong. As I thought, Yuva scores on that angle as well, though not unscathed. Fears were expressed on the inclusion of Vivek Oberoi, Kareena Kapoor and Esha Deol. I've always thought Oberoi can act, so his tuned performance as the unsure and hedonistic Tamilian (as it turned out, which has him say "PoDa Kora.ngu" at one point, if you care) was no surprise. Kareena Kapoor is another example of what Mani saar can do to an actor - her turn as the peppy, carefree college girl is quite good, I must say. Casting them for their roles as Arjun and Mira (Meera?) was spot on.

Coming to Esha Deol, well I don't want to use the word "suck" for a Mani Ratnam film, but she hasn't really proved herself as an actress of any real capability. Unlike Abhishek Bachchan, whom I expected to do very well, given the scope and meat of his role. I still cannot believe he didn't want to do it. Prem Panicker aptly calls him the IOU of Hindi films who now cashes in. Having only seen the Small B previously in Om Jai Jagdish (compared to which this performance is an Oscar winning one!), I think this may be his best screen portrayal ever. Not completely polished, but increasingly confident of himself as an actor for sure.

Contrary to all expectations, Ajay Devgan doesn't quite put on the assured effort that we've now come to expect of him. Questions will be raised on the aptness of his appearance, given the "college student" requirements. He certainly could have done a lot more. On the other hand, my vote for the best performance goes to Rani Mukherjee. Yet again in a film by a Tamil director, she speaks Bengali, is unfazed by the intimate scenes and gives a riveting performance as the tortured Sashi. Her outburst in her last scene in the film was the crowning point. The Rani Mukherjee that appears in trash Bollywood films with terrible wardrobes must be an evil twin. Probably this one should relocate to Kodambakkam.

Bengali speakers may correct me, but I thought Om Puri as Prosenjit Babu put on an excellent accent. Though in a miniscule role, I loved watching Anant Nag on screen again. Saurabh Shukla and Vijay Raaz are competent (It is a recurring pattern in Mani Ratnam films that he can get very good actors to play even tiny roles in his films, perhaps it is a great note for their respective filmographies). Particularly, I would like to point out the guy who plays Gopal, Lallan's elder brother (Is that Sonu Sood?). Another excellent casting decision, for not only does the guy act well with his Bihari twang, he also has a close physical resemblance to Bachchan. There were quite a lot of other actors who have appeared in earlier MR flicks, most notably the guy who played the possible suitor for Shalini and Rani Mukherjee in both Alaipayuthe and Saathiya as Vishnu and the lady who played Madhavan's sister in Kannathil Muthamittal as Leela, Michael's mother. Undoubtedly, they must be in Aayitha Ezhuthu as well.

The setting:

I was greatly excited when I heard the film was set in Calcutta. I don't know if you have ever had the experience, but it sometimes happens that a place endears itself to us because some kind of exposure to it, like say, a short visit to it, or reading about it in a favourite novel etc. I've always had that fascination for Calcutta. It stems from two visits to Calcutta years ago, and it is moored in romantic associations with the history of the place and the "feel" of the city rather than any realism. All the main highlights of Calcutta are there: the bridges, the trams and Metros and fully yellow taxis, the pani-puris and the "paaDa" football in the rains, the houses as I knew them and white starched dhotis. Again reminds me of Hey Ram. Though Aayitha Ezhuthu will fundamentally be the same film as Yuva, these differences are inviting enough for someone to watch both. And where better to host a story involving politics than in Calcutta.

The details of the three different worlds that the three characters come from have been accurately portrayed and are entirely believable. You just have to see this to appreciate it.

The pan Indianism:

Ok, I'm a sucker for Pan Indianism. Not surprising considering that I'm a Tamilian who has lived a majority of my life in marathi speaking cities, with friends and neighbours who speak marathi or telugu or bengali or gujarati among others. I've hated Bollywood for never bothering to go beyond insular Punjabi and specific Hindi based settings, and worse, reducing the others to caricatures. That's why I am tremendously passionate about the efforts of the likes of Mani Ratnam and Ram Gopal Varma. The fact that you have films with characters consisting of a Maharashtrian cop making rasam for his Tamil wife, or a guy speaking Bihari Hindi in a film with a Sindhi businessman and a Telugu speaking baddy. It reflects the nation (atleast the urban nation) as we know it. So the fact that we have four Bengali lead characters (admittedly two not doing a great job), one Tamilian, one UP based, one Bihari is after my heart. This wouldn't be possible in the Tamil version I guess, where the possible spread would be more regional.

In summary:

I've shot off almost everything I felt about. I'm not saying (not yet atleast) that this is among Mani Ratnam's very best, but this is definitely another feather in his cap. That's my personal first-take. If the film is "disappointing", then I'm a cross-eyed sailor with the name of Long John. I may be a fan, but I'm not that blindly biased. I believe that MR fans are among the most critical of watchers and will have their differing opinions, but I hope the rest wouldn't be swayed by a one word description which doesn't do it justice. There are so many layers to ponder about, such as the primary colours symbolism that hangs in the background, the near-perfect reactions and retorts and a new way of looking at storytelling. Don't judge hastily or on hearsay is all I ask. Shooting off opinions without consideration is quite unreasonable and no good for the the future of such efforts. If someone is suggesting that AE is better than Yuva, then I can't wait to watch it. As for you, stuff all that I've said in a can and just go watch it yourself!

[Rant: Damn the E-Square projectionist for stopping the film before the end credits rolled out. Whoever made that decision has raised a lifelong enemity with me.]

CCCLXVI diem: annus blogus - II

So droogs! It is getting to be two years now and some things have changed and some things are still the same. If you thought that the more the things change, the more they remain the same, then it is true. Only it got a lot more complicated because, you see, sometimes the more they didn't change, the more they don't remain the same too. You must think I'm a pyahnitsa, blabbering away, having had a few firegolds last night, but would I do it to my droogs? No, no! (and btw, I'm strictly on moloko!)

I'd like to think this blog has grown; perhaps I have too. Arrested development? I can viddy certain things better than before. All thanks to the fellow bloggers who write away and delve deeper. Sports and politics, sinnys and books, all lie in their critical wake. They shive and they thrust, they leave it krovvying for all to see. But the bratties also embrace and promote their own, and give us all a piece of themselves. It helps me think and analyse, sift and extract, opine and interpret, because I slooshy to what they have to say. It's my own little Gazetta, not perfect, but is.

It also harks back to more soothing climes. Be it Ludwig Van or Rahul Dev, if they're in my gulliver, they're also out on the page. So too do the men from cinema and sportspersons, friends and thoughts, all the other vecks - all out there, jostling but orderly too. The page isn't a StaJa, you know, they stay because they like it. I like them being around too. They're droogs, you see, only they don't know me that well.

I'm no longer surprised the blog has lasted so long. It has found a rhythm of its own. It sits up and asks to be fed. Fewer blackouts allowed. It feeds on itself. It enquires politely and sometimes tolchocks me on the head. It demands books and authors. It wants to yell out about the latest flicks. It scours Biblios, of tomes and humans alike, looking for subjects to devour but fearful of no one, not even any imaginary millicents. It thinks it is less apologetic, perhaps it is less pretentious. It does not know if it has been trimmed of fat. But you, the droogs that matter, would know. Maybe it seems obnoxious to you. This post sometimes seems like that to me.

They are all primordial ancestors of these slovos: quiet introspection, loud opinionmaking, Socratic understanding, Napoleonic claims of fact, useless jetsam/flotsam of trivia, unintentional pas of faux, inhibited turns of phrase, modest attempts and a superior air of omniscience.

As always, if this hasn't made much of sense as usually happens, I beg your appypolly loggies. But keep coming back. Won't you, all you chellovecks out there? I don't know how it will pan out, Bog only knows. It's a slice of my jeezny, you know. It's horrorshow when it works out well, but when it doesn't, it's a tolchock in the zoobies. I'm still trying to pony everything, but it's not completely unravelled yet. The perils of being a malchick, looking for the answers. It's a malenky bit scary, but it seems worth the drat.

On the blog completing two years, my small homage to the language Nadsat which was invented by Anthony Burgess for his book "A Clockwork Orange". It's not a great usage here, because to truly capture the essence of it, the thoughts probably need to be more aggressive and anarchic. There isn't enough context here to understand all the words, so a Nadsat Dictionary could be useful. Still, for the droogs :-).

Last year's annual post commemmorated the occasion by using the "boustrophedon" script.

Polit-eeks and Poles & Sticks

When on the 17th of May, Sonia Gandhi did not get around to publicly making her reluctance to being PM known, I thought, strategically it was an opportunity lost. But it did all come out the next day, and played out quite interestingly.

The reason I say that it is a great tactical move is that if she had any sense, Mrs. G would know that making a success of Prime Ministership in these conditions would be a very tough job. Her own inexperience, the possible liabilities that the coterie would bring and the constant vigilant ready-to-pounce Sangh parivaar (if Indian politics was a soap opera, you would have these two parivaars being the centrepiece!) allowing no honeymoon period. In this situation, by shrewdly "renouncing" the post, she has in a fell swoop, taken the higher moral ground, robbed the BJP of a chronic issue that could've been further exploited, and most importantly given her kids an immense boost for the future. Rahul & Priyanka will benefit in many ways, direct and indirect, from this decision.

If this had been a Sonia Gandhi Prime Ministership, the Gandhi family was in danger of being unseated later by incompetence. Now we will never really know. Instead people like Dr. Manmohan Singh who are thought to be "more suited" to the requirements of the job will have the headaches. The family won't worry too much about alternative power sources emerging when the PM is chosen from among men who have no real mass base. It is obvious that the rise of Rahul and Priyanka will be accelerated now like never before, to be ready in waiting in a couple of years time maybe to take back everything. Sonia Gandhi may have realised that to wield power you need not be occupying posts. Different contexts have different needs. Bal Thackeray can command absolute power without needing to resort to the tussles of CM-ship, while the only way ABV could get his party to listen to him was by becoming PM.

On the 17th of May, I was somehow reminded of the climax of Drohkaal. People who've seen it (or its Tamil remake Kuruthi PuNal) will understand this. When you know you can't escape unscathed but you can help your team win in the future by being taken out voluntarily, it's an excellent tactical move that will garner you immense emotional sympathy as well. This move by Mrs. Gandhi may prove to have the same effect that the 1996 BJP government formation and ensuing Lok Sabha speeches by their gifted orators who helped break the "untouchability" factor in a couple of years.

I don't know whether Sonia Gandhi worked this one out like this, or if she has really taken an emotional decision based on all the factors she says, but I think it will have these positive effects for her family and her. It seems to me that the first law of Political Observation is that when you have a choice between ascribing motives to cynical reasons or moral reasons, prefer the former. For reasons of "antaraatamaa" and "security reasons" don't really make the cut. To take Gaurav's Ganguly analogy - sometimes it makes sense to drop yourself down the order and promote Laxman - if it comes out, it will be hailed as a great move.

******** I'm not very enthused about the emergence of "youth" leaders like some others. The common strand running through the names of these "new age leaders" clearly shows that almost all of them have a political surname backing them to the hilt. Clearly a passing on of the baton to a key sector of the family business. I will be better convinced of their intentions (good/bad) in a few years, but I'm not willing to pronounce happy judgements on their behalfs.

Again there's a rural-urban divide at play here, I think. People who're hailing the emergence are most likely happy to see MBA-types such as Milind Deora etc, but are probably not fans of other youth leaders and sah-parivaarvaad-types such as Akhilesh Yadav and the Chautala clan. Is this hypocrisy? For me, presently, they are all the same. Perhaps Naveen Jindal is the only one among them who has some credibility after his National Flag campaign. But he too comes from a politically active, rich business background. The point I'm making it is that the so-called emergence of the youth isn't because more young people are entering the fray, or that the fiery zeal of serving people has been ignited in them. Don't look at a few political callow swallows and make it a young summer. It's probably easier for a young person to make it big in that other family-run manDi called Bollywood.

******** It's quite funny. The CPM goes about persuading everyone to join the Govt., but they themselves won't. Mani Shankar Aiyar's expressed devotion to Madam Sonia almost mirrors the reverence of AIADMK faithful to Jayalalitha. In one day, JJ reverses every possible aggressive decision made by her over the last 3 years (which is lost in the din of Delhi). Uma Bharati was probably unwilling to again shave her head off, so Sushma opts for it. The UPA (sounds like a courier service) blast the NDA for announcing a boycott of a Sonia-swearing-in, but they themselves do it all the time: at the Centre, in Gujarat and elsewhere. Everyone does it! And the blasted Renuka Chowdhury put on a cloying display of emotion that rivals a previous performance of T.R.Baalu that I earlier thought was the worst ever.

As the Pepsi ad copywriter put it, sab saale draamebaaz.

Post Categories, last 10 posts etc

Changes to the blog template, incorporating some of Blogger's new goodies.

Plus a new set of categories to the right. It's still a work in progress, but I'd like to know if the revamped archive pages pose any problems on some browsers.

Followup to the Mani Ratnam post

Happily, my post on "Denouements in Mani Ratnam Films" got picked up by a couple of film websites. I don't know how, but allow me to crow ever so slightly about this, given a season of not so great pickings personally.

The two references are:

* Green Cine Daily's mention of the Indian Film Festival in Atlanta (George's post on KM, also listed in the post, was more relevant as mine had nothing to do with the festival - just a coincidence)

* Jump Cut - Magazin's Mani Ratnam article links to the post on the side as "Kommentare zu einzelnen Filmen bei Clipboard Conversations". The page is entirely in German, so I have to enlist some translator/translation site/species of fish.

The Bangalore Buzz

Bangalorean has a new blog called Sights, sounds and smells from Bangalore, a most commendable effort on the state of the city by someone who's been involved with some civic initiatives there. Plus a lot of useful info about the place.

All my newly-relocated-to-Bangalore friends, kindly visit.

Denouements in Mani Ratnam films

Since Aaydha Ezhuthu/Yuva releases in three weeks time, this is a good time for this post. This is something I've been dwelling about for some time now. Mani Ratnam has always attempted to straddle the world of commercial films and sanity, which explains the presence of both guest item numbers (I think he introduced it) and his trademark takes on "social issues" (as he sees it) coupled with the exploration of fresh techniques in screenplay writing, cinematography and music.

Despite my preference for his style of films, I feel on certain occasions his films have fallen short of being really good - somehow, some pieces don't completely fit and a potentially great film becomes just good or decent. Ratnam has been compared to Speilberg, initially for his similar choices of themes and his technical prowess, but this comparison is true in several other areas as well. Both have tended to be simplistic at times in their plots, and have preferred happy, if naive, resolutions to their films. Both have also yearned for acclamation in commercial and more artistic forms as well, and have received it to some extent; at the same time, they have been criticised for almost the same reasons. It is not my intention to delve further into this comparison and analysis in this post, but it brought to mind a conversation George and I were having on this subject. I of course agree with most of George's points on this comparison, but don't share his level of criticism :-). As a passing remark, I wonder if Mani Ratnam and Spielberg's story choices are influenced by their social backgrounds - they seem to be from stable families and are also sensitive to the society around them, and come up with a "outsider's" view (a more optimistic one), as compared to the vision of Scorcese or Ram Gopal Varma.

Mani Ratnam always seemed to be the one likely to herald "realistic" cinema into the mainstream, but he's been overshadowed in this by Ram Gopal Varma though the former started out much earlier. Ratnam has shown greater reluctance to sacrifice some of the routine plot elements of commercial cinema, and his continuous dilemma over whether he should make a songless film indicates that. I thought Kannathil Muthamittal was his best film from the point of view of his craft and what he wanted to say, and the National Award for Music notwithstanding, he should've gone through without any picturised music (he used some songs as part of the BGM which were very effective, I'm not convinced the remaining ones needed to be filmed). Iruvar on the other hand will definitely be Ratnam's most favourite child, and despite some flaws (which seem to me to be forced on him, given the sensitive political matter in the film), is a genius work where the music effectively establishes a period like in no other film. Here's a closer look at one area where I feel Mani Ratnam has been a little inconsistent, he knows how to start and build the innings, but the ending doesn't always come out smoothly. This is a selection of films on which I have some opinions on, I have either not seen the rest, or don't feel so strongly about them.

Mouna Raagam:

Ratnam's first ever "hit", this proved that he could portray middle-class lives as well as and as real as anyone ever could. The denouement is never in complete doubt, though one does have an odd moment of doubt given the sometimes intractable positions of the lead actors. The husband and wife do have to get back together, we wish they would, and hopes of marital life in India still primarily remain that way.

Nayakan:

Probably his first "grand" offering, the ending is dramatic and purposeful. Filmmakers (and that includes RGV) have always been fascinated by the lives of the "gangsters", but never want to show that "crime pays". The ending of Nayakan is no different, but is a little unexpected, given that at that point in the plot, the protagonist has just been triumphant (again) and seems on the verge of a family reunion. Ratnam achieves both objectives of drama and social responsibility. Velu Nayakan evokes our sympathy at that time, but we recognise that we cannot be seen to be entirely supportive of crime, even if it is a Robin Hood variety. Viewers would be more likely to accept this sort of ending than any alternative.

Anjali:

Ok, this is a film I hate - it was the first Ratnam film I saw in a theatre. I did not "get it". I didn't like the unrealistic way that children in a housing society were being portrayed, I didn't see why we had to wait until the interval to see "Anjali", and some of the scenes were contrived and over-dramatic in my opinion. The death of the child didn't evoke too many sympathetic reactions in me, because as a viewer, I had hardly invested enough time in the character. I don't know if a more happy ending would've got me interested, but for me, the ending didn't mean much - only cringing at the hyper-emotional scenes.

Roja:

If I watch Roja today, I would definitely classify its ending as the kind of naivete that sometimes exists in Ratnam's films. But then, it was totally different. Roja reflected the sentiments in people's minds as they existed back then, I think. The realities of the Kashmir conflict were fuzzy then to us. I think we all saw it as a Punjab like conflict where unrest was fomented among misguided youth. Given that the tide in Punjab was turning towards a happier settlement, we probably all thought that the same would happen with Kashmir. Roja reflects, through the eyes of her lead actress and her storyteller, this view of Kashmir as a paradise temporarily sullied by a neighbouring nation upto mischief that had misled some our youth. Pankaj Kapur's astonishing decision to let Arvind Swamy off after intense speeches from both would be hard to chew today - but then it was credible. Since the terrorists/freedom-fighters themselves were only "misguided" and against the government, they bore no grudges towards ordinary Indians. The ending was fine then, but too unrealistic today. Ratnam remained in optimistic commercialism, it was not yet fashionable to make hardhitting films in the mainstream.

Bombay:

I liked most of this film, but found the ending extremely mushy and unbelievable. Especially after much of the film is subdued and credible. The whole human chain singing paeans to peace and bringing the rioters to their senses is wishful thinking from Ratnam. This is a prime example of the outsider's view, where the conflicts are thought to to have too simplistic a solution, and doesn't take into account the difficult layers of the ground realities. Another cringe for me.

Iruvar:

Probably the many people who don't "jhep" this great film were put off by the way some elements in the story exactly mirrored the real events in TN political history and in sharp contrast, some other elements did not have a parallel in reality. Perhaps they couldn't see beyond these issues. Iruvar doesn't have a dramatic ending (reality was probably more dramatic than the film) - I don't know if it could have had a better ending, but it does give you the impression of going out with a whimper. After so much has happened in the lives of the principals, it does end quite tamely. But on one hand, I accuse him of pandering to dramatic commercial endings, on the other, I criticise him for giving a tame end. Perhaps Iruvar's ending was sufficient and I still need to come to terms with it. I still remain suspicious about the political interference and pressure on Ratnam in this, for there are so many brilliant parts to it, but the whole doesn't completely all hang together.

Dil Se:

The ending of this came in for debate. I actually liked the way it ended. The film is primarily about love and the overarching intensity of it. Everything else comes second to it, even patriotism. Some portions of the film may drag, but I think the ending suited the film well. What could better top off the passionate turns of the story than death itself?

Alaipayuthe:

The ending was a little too, what do I say, easy? I open my eyes, I've had a revelation and so have you. It's all too swift and easy. The Arvind Swamy-Khushboo subplot is to lend the realisation for Madhavan (Shalini has already had the clouds lifted before him), but the story didn't emphasise it well enough, I thought. Still, IMO, the ending is suitable and in keeping with the overall tone of the film.

Kannathil Muthamittal:

Great film, and another instance that the cinemagoers don't always support good films. What else do you want in films? Mani Ratnam practices great control in all departments and achieves excellent consistency and a smooth intermixing of all aspects. For the first time, his terrorism-based films don't overshoot the horizons of acceptable reality. The journey is more important than the goal, and the ending slips into its slot very well.

Where Aaydha Ezhuthu/Yuva will go is to be seen, but I always feel a little like watching a SRT innings. I don't always know if the crowd will appreciate the effort, but it will present some interesting points again. Looks to me like Mani Ratnam will continue his optimistic and hopeful endings in his plots, it's just the kind of person he seems to be.

Faux News - IV

Faux News bulletin

(You know it's time if it's faux pas nine!)

CTS/RSI epidemic sweeps Bihar
By our Patna correspondent

A massive outbreak of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and Repetitive Stress Injuries (CTS/RSI) has swept Bihar in the last one week. The state machinery that was gripped by election fever has now had to mobilise its efforts to combat this sudden rash of this condition.

According to medical experts, the cause of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and Repetitive Stress Injuries is when people perform some kind of repetitive work with their hands and fingers, such as typing or pressing some objects such as buttons with great rapidity. Patients experience severe stiffness in joints of the fingers and sometimes pain, and are unable to make effective use of their hands.

A curious aspect to this epidemic has been the inexplicable fact that almost all of the reported cases of CTS/RSI are of people belonging to the ruling Rashtriya Janata Dal. The RJD President Mr. Laloo Prasad Yadav has scoffed allegations linking these patients to alleged booth-capturing incidents, saying that it was a malicious canard spread by the BJP. He announced that the State Government would be providing free medical care and interim relief of Rs. 25000/- each. He cited this incident as yet another example that Bihar, contrary to popular notion, was actually technologically advanced as they had started to see "diseases caused by high-tech" (sic).

The World Health Organization which wished to investigate the curious Bihar epidemic had sent its fact-finding mission to Patna, but the State Government refused to allow them to meet the patients on grounds that it could be a contagious disease and this incident would be used by the Government's enemies to malign it. Chief Minister Rabri Devi has reportedly created a home-made remedy for CTS/RSI, which consists of three pints of goat milk, three garlic pods, a pinch of urea...

Continued on Page 6

---

DIGIT magazine puts fingers in cursor row
Our Technology correspondent

The publishers of popular Computer magazine DIGIT (formerly CHIP) find themselves in a unseemly row over one of the cursors provided on a CD of their April issue. The CD contains a set of cursors that can be installed on Windows, and are a popular part of the "goodies" that are carried in the magazine. However, the release of the latest issue of the magazine has led to controversy. Mrs. Cusrow of Pune has sued the publishers on the grounds that one of the cursors supplied was in bad taste and promoting obscenity.

Mrs. Cusrow, whose son Neville is a regular subscriber of DIGIT, says that the offending cursor is one which is used to highlight a link. This is usually in the shape of a hand, where the right index finger extends in a gesture of pointing. However, the cursor on the CD actually has the middle finger extending out instead of the index finger. (We're unable to carry a photo of this cursor since this is a family newspaper). Mrs. Cusrow is justifiably angry over this disgraceful icon.

The publishers of DIGIT have immediately withdrawn all issues of the April edition and have accepted their mistake. In a press statement, they have admitted their fault and have promised stern action against the miscreants who caused this embarassment to their readers. They are also hopeful for an out-of-court settlement to settle the suit.

---

Glycerine shortage: Ektaa cries foul, Smriti goes to Haridwar
Mumbai

Ektaa Kapoor is fuming and the TV world is feeling the heat. In an interview to a private channel yesterday, the Balaji Telefilms supremo lashed at out at rival soap opera producers for creating an artificial scarcity of glycerine in the market. She refused to name these "rogue producers" but vowed to hit back.

Readers may recall that Nayantara and Co., Nainital are India's largest suppliers of glycerine, and have had a flourishing tie-up with the TV production houses of Mumbai who are their biggest markets. But of late, large scale hoarding and stocking up of glycerine by some anonymous buyers has left Balaji Telefilms stranded for lack of the vital ingredient. Kaminii Kullwannt, head of Infrastructure at Balaji Telefilms, describes this as a clear cut strategy aimed at hurting the interests of her company.

Though Ms. Kapoor & Ms. Kullwant won't admit it, production schedules have been hit badly, but stocks of previous episodes and "Diwali/Holi/May Day" specials (which consist of a large garba party in the serials) will be used as buffers for the moment. This paper has also reliably learnt that the reason for Smriti Z. Irani's KSBKBT character Tulsi taking a vacation to Haridwar in the plot was not due to the actress's Chandni Chowk campaign, as reported in the media. The real reason was the shortage of glycerine in the open market, since she is the largest single user of the product in Indian television today.

Insiders claimed that Balaji Telefilms have undertaken a pre-emptive move to prevent similar actions in the designer sari market. One source claimed that the owner of Nav Waar and Sons (who are the biggest sari suppliers to the Hindi TV industry) has been whisked away to a secretive, undisclosed location somewhere in Kanchipuram. It does seem likely that the aggressive TV production company will go the whole nine yards in this war.

---

You can only read this high premium news content only once. To prevent multiple views, we are marking readers with indelible ink. Please send us a photocopy of your right "pinkie" finger by speedpost, and we will send you your free ink drop. If you don't have a right "pinkie" finger, please don't read this. Instead click here for a free look at an earlier edition.