Sholay: A Behind-the-Scenes Anecdote That Had Me in Splits!

 

I am reading a book about the making of Sholay, and I came across an anecdote so hilarious that I simply could not stop laughing.

The last shot done in the Ramanagaram village was Jai’s death scene. It was a heart-breaking scene, made more poignant by their imminent departure. Toward the end of the scene, Radha looks at the Thakur - the glimmer of hope in her barren life has been extinguished - and breaks down on his shoulder. 

While shooting, Hari bhai (Sanjeev Kumar) came to Ramesh (Sippy) and in a soft, anguished tone, said, ‘I can see in Radha’s eyes that she is devastated . . . she was married to my son . . . and then I was marrying her off (to Jai) and then this tragedy happens ... I feel so bad for her . . . Can I take her in my arms and comfort her?’ 

Ramesh looked him and in a deadpan voice replied, ‘What arms?’ 

Hari bhai, the consummate actor, turned away, embarrassed!!  

Drishyam The Conclusion: Loved It

Dimpy & Vini went in with slightly low expectations, having already watched the Malayalam Drishyam 3 and not particularly loved it. But Drishyam – The Conclusion had other plans. 🍿🔥

A completely different story, a completely different game - and this time, Vijay Salgaonkar edges past not only the law but also Georgekutty!! ♟️😎

Loved it! ❤️🎬

P.S. Dimpy’s only predictable plotline was the snacks. 🍿🥟🍟🥤

Made in India – A Titan Story: A Must 'Watch'

Last weekend, I finally watched 'Made in India - A Titan Story'. This was due for a couple of weeks. Some friends and family members had already watched it and had great things to say about it. Yet, I was avoiding it.

The reason for avoiding the show had nothing to do with the subject, story or actors. It was the OTT platform: Amazon MX Player. The last time I started watching a show on the platform, I had to quit midway because of the number and frequency of ad breaks. Hence, I was apprehensive and felt that the platform would kill the excitement of watching a story that I truly wanted to watch.

The choice of OTT platform was also strange. High-profile shows are usually placed on Amazon Prime Video. My understanding, which could very well be flawed, is that shows that are unlikely to generate significant interest and traffic are 'demoted' to MX Player so that they can also be monetized through commercials.

But I wanted to watch the story. Titan is my favourite watch brand and, over the years, I have bought and worn several of its watches. I still have a couple of them in my collection, but unfortunately, these days I am required to wear smartwatches in order to monitor my SpO₂ levels, especially the sleep oxygen levels. I have always loved the elegance of Titan watches. I also appreciate the breadth of the range. There is truly something for everyone.

There was another reason why I wanted to watch the Titan story. A brother-in-law of mine has been associated with the brand for over 20 years and is part of its leadership team. Though I have had limited interactions with him on the subject, I have always been impressed by his knowledge of the watch industry and his genuine interest in understanding customers' perspectives regarding what is working and what is not with Titan watches.

So, my own interest in the brand and this personal connection compelled me to overcome the issue I had with MX Player. We started watching the six-episode series on Saturday evening... and we finished it in one go!

Before saying anything about the show, since I have shat on MX Player, let me clarify that there were no frequent ad breaks during the show. Thankfully, there were only ad banners that emerged from the bottom of the screen and then vanished. They were not irritating at all and we barely noticed them.

Now, to the show.

It's a masterpiece, and you must do yourself a favour and watch it.

The story is inspiring and full of great lessons on leadership, perseverance, overcoming setbacks, putting skin in the game, managing individuals and teams, subordinating emotions and making the right calls, stepping back or aside at the right moment for junior colleagues to demonstrate their capabilities and to let them shine, guiding the team but letting them be independent and take ownership. And achieving the goals. The story has all that but not in a preachy, textbook-lesson kind of way.

It is not that the show is only about business learnings and devoid of emotions or sensitivity. There are conflicts and complexities due to the differing approaches, preferences, and emotions of the characters. The story is fast-paced and never feels like a drag. There is hardly any extra fat, and every scene serves a purpose.

The cast and acting are brilliant.

Jim Sarbh is outstanding. His character 'demonstrates' passion while remaining composed and in control. He makes decisions that are sometimes questionable, but more often than not, he gets them right. He is willing to take calculated risks. Personally, I am more like Akash Bansal, the character played by Vaibhav Tatwawadi, as I tend to be more conservative in my approach. However, I do understand and appreciate that businesses need people who are willing to take calculated risks and constantly push the envelope. Hence, I particularly liked the character of Xerxes Desai, played by Jim Sarbh.

I have always been impressed by Jim Sarbh's acting and he is indeed 'one of the brightest Titans' of the Indian entertainment industry.

Strangely, some people are saying that Naseeruddin Shah has played a role in the series. I did not notice him. I only saw JRD Tata, who happened to look a bit like Naseeruddin Shah.

The other actors, including Paresh Ganatra, Joy Sengupta, Kaveri Seth, Lakshvir Saran, and Viraf Patel, have also done a commendable job and look believable.

Another aspect that I really liked about the show is that it is suitable to watch with family. These days, when most shows are full of obscenities (honestly, I do watch them too, but I do look for shows that I can watch with my daughter and elders), this is a clean show. In fact, I think there is only one scene in which foul language is used.

One confession: I was overwhelmed and in tears when the legendary and iconic Titan music played in the show. Pure nostalgia!

And I loved the background music. Old Hindi film songs have been used brilliantly to create the atmosphere of the 1970s and 1980s. Bombay looks beautiful in the show, presenting a stark contrast to the maddening pace, traffic, concrete structures, and crowds that define the city today.

Some people, especially those who are inclined to look for hidden motives behind everything, may argue that the show is, in a discreet manner, a branding campaign for the Tata Group and Titan. They may point to how the show hints that the focus was more 'nationalistic' than profit-driven. I personally did not watch the show through that lens at all.

A business has no business focusing on the greater good while ignoring returns on investment and profits. But if there is one business group in India that I can imagine will even try to strike the right balance between profits and India's image and interests, it is the Tata Group.

I have that reputation of the Tata Group in my mind because of how the group responded after the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks. At a time when many businesses would have been focused on the extent of losses, Tata's response appeared to be driven first by people and principles. The group stood firmly behind the families of employees who lost their lives, extended support beyond its own workforce, and restored the Taj not merely as a hotel, but as a symbol of India's resilience. Even during the attack, several employees could have run away as they knew the exits, but they chose to stay back to guide and save the guests. Many of them sacrificed themselves to save the guests. Actions such as these are what have earned the group a level of goodwill and trust that very few corporate houses in India enjoy.

Not putting them on a pedestal at all. Every individual and every organization has its flaws and contradictions.

It is a bit like the case of legendary Australian wicketkeeper-batsman Adam Gilchrist. He earned immense respect because he would walk when he knew he was out, without waiting for the umpire's decision. However, at the same time, he did appeal for a catch even when he knew that a batsman had not nicked the ball. So, nobody is perfectly virtuous all the time. Yet, on balance, Gilchrist is probably regarded as more honest than most cricketers. The Tata Group enjoys a somewhat similar reputation. It has its set of controversies but is generally respected.

Whether the series consciously attempts to suggest that the ambition to create a world-class watch brand out of India was inspired by a larger sense of national purpose, rather than purely commercial objectives, is something each viewer can judge for themselves. I watched it simply as the story of a brand, the people behind it, and the challenges they overcame while building it.

I strongly recommend that you watch the show for the entertainment and for the inspiring story of one of India's biggest and most successful consumer brands. You will not be disappointed!

Give it a 'watch'. A story that keeps 'ticking'. Worth your 'time'.😜

Juror # 2: A Courtroom Drama With No Easy Answers

What a coincidence that on the very day I wrote about some of my favorite courtroom dramas, I ended up watching another captivating addition to the genre - Juror # 2.

And it is really, really good.

The story felt refreshingly different from almost every courtroom drama movie I have watched or legal thriller I have read. Throughout the film, you constantly keep wondering what ending you actually want. Not what the law demands, not what morality demands, but what outcome you yourself are hoping for. Very few courtroom dramas manage to create that kind of internal conflict.

The movie stars Nicholas Hoult (from About a Boy and Superman) in the lead role and also features Toni Collette (from About a Boy, Little Miss Sunshine, The Sixth Sense) , J.K. Simmons (from Whiplash, Spiderman, La La Land), Gabriel Basso (from The Night Agent), and Kiefer Sutherland (from Designated Survivor, 24, A Time To Kill). The performances are restrained, mature, and perfectly suited to the tone of the film.

One of the best moments for me was realizing who the director was only when the end credits started rolling.

Directed and produced by Clint Eastwood.

That instantly explained the understated brilliance of the film. Eastwood has always had a unique ability to tell emotionally layered stories without unnecessary dramatization. Whether it is Mystic River, Million Dollar Baby, Gran Torino, Hereafter, The Bridges of Madison County, Unforgiven, Letters from Iwo Jima, Flags of Our Fathers, Sully, Invectus, American Sniper, The 15:17 To Paris, Richard Jewell, his films rarely scream for attention, yet they stay with you long after they end.

And, when it comes to Clint Eastwood, you naturally expect his movies to deliver “The Good” (Get that?😛)

Juror #2 certainly does. 

Why My Cousin Vinny Remains One of My Favorite Courtroom Dramas

I have always been extremely fond of courtroom dramas. Perhaps it started because I got hooked onto John Grisham novels at a fairly early age. The entire world of investigations, legal strategy, courtroom arguments, witness examination, and the battle of intellect between lawyers has always fascinated me.

Over the years, I have read many courtroom dramas and watched quite a few films as well. Among Indian movies, I really liked the - top of the mind recall - Jolly LLB (the one with Arshad Warsi), Mulk, Pink, Court: State vs A Nobody, Sirf Ek Bandaa Kaafi Hai, and Kesari Chapter 2 - in no particular order. Among English movies, I have liked A Time to Kill, Philadelphia, 12 Angry Men, Just Mercy, The Client, and The Rainmaker, to name a few. I am sure I am missing some names. 

And while discussing courtroom dramas and legal comedies, I know I may risk losing the image (this image is only in my mind) of being an 'intelligent movie watcher,' but I must admit that I absolutely love Liar Liar as well. It is outrageous, exaggerated, completely over-the-top in parts - and yet endlessly entertaining. Jim Carrey at his absolute chaotic best is something I can never get tired of watching.

There are also a several highly acclaimed courtroom dramas like Jana Gana Mana and Jai Bhim that are still on my watchlist.

But one courtroom drama that I can watch endlessly is My Cousin Vinny.

I honestly do not even remember how many times I have watched this movie. At one point, I even owned a DVD copy of it, back when DVDs were still a thing. Unfortunately, I lost track of it over time, and today the movie is not available on any streaming platforms in India. It is not even available for purchase on YouTube Movies.

At its core, My Cousin Vinny is about two young men who unexpectedly find themselves trapped in a serious legal situation in a small American town, and the only person available to defend them is an inexperienced, unconventional lawyer - Vinny Gambini. What follows is a highly entertaining mix of courtroom drama, culture clash, comedy, and clever legal maneuvering. The film stars Joe Pesci as Vinny and Marisa Tomei as Mona Lisa Vito, in what remains one of the most memorable performances in courtroom cinema. The movie also features strong performances from Ralph Macchio, Mitchell Whitfield, and Fred Gwynne. Without relying on over-the-top drama, the film manages to remain sharp, funny, intelligent, and deeply engaging throughout.

What makes My Cousin Vinny so enjoyable is that it is not just a courtroom drama. At its heart, it is also a story about an underdog.

Vinny is not the polished, larger-than-life lawyer one usually expects in legal dramas. He is inexperienced, unconventional, rough around the edges, and constantly underestimated. Yet, despite all odds, he slowly pieces things together and outsmarts people who initially dismiss him completely.

One of my favorite sequences from the movie - and a scene I must have watched countless times on YouTube - is the courtroom exchange involving Mona Lisa Vito, played brilliantly by Marisa Tomei. The way she casually demonstrates her deep automotive knowledge and completely changes the direction of the case is both hilarious and immensely satisfying to watch.

The brilliance of the movie lies in its balance. It is funny without becoming silly, intelligent without becoming pretentious, and dramatic without losing its warmth. Even decades later, it still feels fresh.

For me, My Cousin Vinny is far more than just another legal film. It is one of the most entertaining examples of how a good story, memorable characters, sharp writing, and an unlikely hero can come together to create something timeless. 

I would genuinely love to own the movie digitally if it becomes available on any platform. And honestly, in today’s era - where old classics are getting theatrical re-releases because of the shortage of truly memorable storytelling - I hope My Cousin Vinny gets screened in theatres again, because I would absolutely love to experience it on the big screen.

Breaking News: Good Orators Don’t Automatically Become Good Actors

Yesterday, I watched the movie Kartavya starring Saif Ali Khan, Sanjay Mishra, Rasika Dugal, Manish Chaudhari, Saharsh Kumar Shukla, Zakir Hussain and journalist-turned-actor Saurabh Dwivedi. The film itself was extremely mediocre. The storyline felt weak and too predictable with very little that could engage the audience.

So why am I wasting even more time and writing about it? 

Though one must be kind because it is his first movie, I simply could not stop myself from writing about just how disappointing Saurabh Dwivedi’s performance turned out to be. He is an exceptionally gifted speaker and has built a strong reputation through his lengthy and compelling monologues on 'The Lallantop', which he has now left. Naturally, I expected him to carry at least some of that effortless command and screen presence into cinema. Unfortunately, the opposite happened.

Dwivedi appears in only a handful of scenes, despite being positioned as the film’s principal antagonist. More importantly, nearly all his scenes are shared with seasoned performers like Sanjay Mishra, Manish Chaudhari, Saharsh Kumar Shukla and Saif Ali Khan. The contrast is brutal. Against actors with such natural rhythm and command over dialogue delivery, his performance feels even more fragile and unconvincing.

Almost every line he speaks sounds rehearsed rather than lived. There is no conversational flow, emotional spontaneity or screen instinct. His expressions appear stiff, his pauses unnatural and his dialogue delivery painfully artificial. In many scenes, it genuinely becomes uncomfortable to watch. His performance can be used as the case study of what not do in acting.

The director deserves equal criticism here. Either Dwivedi was miscast from the beginning or he was not directed properly enough to hide his limitations. It almost feels as though the makers themselves realized midway that the performance was not working, because his screen presence appears noticeably reduced as the film progresses. Whether that was due to editing choices or a conscious attempt to minimize damage, the result is obvious on screen.

I am not sure whether he has more films or web series lined up, but I hope he improves as an actor. Though, based on this performance, I will not put my money on it!

Border 2: Nostalgia, Nationalism, and the Weight of Legacy

I watched Border 2 earlier today. I must admit that I was not particularly impressed by the trailer, and my reservations were many.

The first was the casting. Varun Dhawan and Ahan Shetty are, in my view, not among the strongest actors of their generation. In fact they do not even come remotely close, though I liked Varun in 'October' and 'Badlapur'. I feared that even if the movie and storyline was compelling, weak performances could dilute its impact. 

My second concern was more fundamental. I am not a big fan of sequels that are made to cash-on the success of the 'original'. This felt like one of those cases. Sunny Deol, after a long time, witnessed significant success with Gadar 2 (again, not even remotely as good as original Gadar) and he and everyone else wanted to use the opportunity. Border 2 made a lot of sense and they went for it. Whether it would translate into a good cinematic product was uncertain.

The third concern was Sunny Deol himself. At 68, playing a Lieutenant Colonel is not easy to pull off convincingly. I had no doubt about his ability to bring intensity and emotional energy to the role - few can do that better - but age is a reality, especially when portraying a serving combat officer.

Despite all this, there was one thing I was absolutely certain about: I would watch Border 2, and I would watch it on the big screen.

When the original Border released in 1997, I was seventeen. I grew up in army cantonments, surrounded by officers and army kids, and I wanted to join the army myself. I watched Border on 'First Day, First Show' - and then again the second day first show, and the third day first show. Seems I used to be quite busy in afternoons and evenings!! 

The film was not cinematic genius, but it was raw, energetic, unapologetically patriotic, and full of Pakistan-bashing. 

Also, this was before multiplexes became the norm. Watching a film like Border in a single-screen theatre in a small town was a completely different experience. The audience whistled, clapped, shouted slogans, hurled abuses at Pakistan, and roared “Bharat Mata ki Jai” It was electric - comparable to watching a limited-overs cricket match at Eden Gardens (Kolkata) or Chinnaswamy (Bengaluru) or Chepauk (Chennai). In contrast, watching such films in multiplexes today feels like watching Test cricket at Lord’s. Audience is civilized and restrained and atmosphere is quite.....dead. Later, I watched Border for the fourth time on the big screen, and the experience was particularly special as it was in a military theatre, surrounded by an army unit.  

Out of respect for that legacy, I wanted to experience Border 2 in a theatre, regardless of my initial disappointment with the trailer.

So, how was the experience?

The film is not for purists. It takes several creative liberties in order to further glorify the soldiers and heighten dramatic effect. It is inspired by real incidents and real heroes, but not all portrayals are historically precise. 

• Sunny Deol plays Lt. Col. Fateh Singh Kler - a fictional character believed to be inspired by Brigadier Hardev Singh Kler, MVC, who later retired as a Major General. 
• Diljit Dosanjh portrays Flying Officer Nirmal Jit Singh Sekhon, PVC (1945-1971), whose story was one of the primary reasons I wanted to watch the movie. Sekhon is a towering inspiration. As I have mentioned in an earlier blog, while I deeply admire all military heroes - especially gallantry award recipients - Flying Officer Nirmal Jit Singh Sekhon is one of the three I find particularly remarkable. Flying Officer Sekhon attained martyrdom on 14 December 1971 while defending Indian airspace during the Indo-Pak War. He was posthumously awarded the Param Vir Chakra, India’s highest gallantry award, and remains the only officer of the Indian Air Force to have received this honour. Confronted with overwhelming odds, Sekhon displayed exceptional courage and composure, choosing to engage the enemy rather than withdraw. In a lone defensive action, he disrupted and repelled a Pakistan Air Force attack, forcing multiple enemy Sabre aircraft to disengage. His determined resistance significantly blunted the assault and safeguarded vital assets. Sekhon's extraordinary courage and flying skills earned him praise even from the opposing side. The PAF pilot who eventually shot him down, Salim Baig Mirza, is reported to have later praised his opponent's valor in an article, leading to the expression, "some enemies are also respectable".
• Varun Dhawan plays Major Hoshiar Singh Dahiya, PVC (1936-1998). Major Hoshiar Singh was my father’s instructor in 1975 at the Indian Military Academy (Dehradun) and later retired as a Colonel. He is celebrated for his extraordinary bravery and leadership during the 1971 Indo-Pak War, notably in the Battle of Jarpal. He captured a heavily fortified enemy position and, despite severe injuries, successfully repelled multiple counter-attacks. Leading from the front and refusing evacuation until the ceasefire, he inspired his troops to victory and inflicted heavy casualties on the enemy. His valor earned him the Param Vir Chakra, cementing his legacy as a legendary war hero.
• Ahan Shetty essays the role of Lieutenant Commander Mahender Singh Rawat, inspired by Captain Mahendra Nath Mulla, MVC (1926-1971), who was posthumously awarded the Maha Vir Chakra, India's second-highest wartime gallantry award. Captain Mulla displayed exceptional bravery during the 1971 Indo-Pak War as commanding officer of INS Khukri. When the ship was fatally damaged, he refused to abandon it, ensuring the safety of his crew first. He went down with his ship, exemplifying supreme leadership, sacrifice, and devotion to duty.

Yes, several scenes are fictionalized and inconsistent with strict military history. Did that spoil the movie? No, I enjoyed it.

Yes, the war sequences are lengthy, but understandably so. The filmmakers wanted to showcase the heroism of multiple military icons, and that demands screen time. Performances across the board are commendable - including those of Varun Dhawan and Ahan Shetty, who pleasantly surprised me. The makers ensured several connections - in terms of character names, dialogues, songs - with the original Border and I particularly enjoyed those parts. 

Some scenes were quite emotional, even tear-jerking. Perhaps they may not affect everyone the same way, but having seen the lives of military personnel up close, many moments resonated deeply with me. To my embarrassment, the tears did not go unnoticed - my wife on my right and a dear friend on my left both saw them. My wife even handed me a tissue, making matters worse! Its okay, grown men are allowed to cry - secretly, in a dark theatre, hoping to go unnoticed.

Overall, Border 2 is not a brilliant film. It is lengthy, and takes more than a few creative liberties. Yet, it deserves to be watched. It makes a sincere effort to bring to the mainstream audience the stories of several military heroes - some of whom are not widely known outside defence circles. For that intent alone, the film deserves appreciation. It may not match both - the Indian military history as well as the legacy of the original Border - but it respectfully salutes it. Sometimes, that is reason enough.

Ikkis: A Tribute That Falls Well Short

Recently, I watched the movie Ikkis, which is a biopic of 2nd Lieutenant Arun Khetarpal, the youngest recipient of India's highest gallantry award, Param Vir Chakra.

While I am inspired by all military heroes, especially the recipients of gallantry awards, Arun Khetarpal is one among the three who I find especially remarkable. They are Captain Vikram Batra ((Nickname: Shershah, Param Vir Chakra awardee, Kargil War 1999, Battle of Point 5140 and later Point 4875, killed in action), Flying Officer Nirmal Jit Singh Sekhon (Indian Air Force fighter pilot, Param Vir Chakra awardee, 1971 Indo-Pak War, air defense of Srinagar Air Base, engaged multiple enemy aircraft single-handedly, killed in action) and of course, Second Lieutenant Arun Khetarpal (Indian Army officer, 17 Poona Horse, Param Vir Chakra awardee, 1971 Indo-Pak War, Battle of Basantar, tank commander, destroyed multiple enemy tanks, killed in action).    

I have read a lot about Arun Khetarpal. His fearless maneuvers on the battlefield left the enemy in awe and forced them to retreat. He is widely recognized as the Indian tank ace of aces, credited with the destruction of ten confirmed enemy tanks during the 1971 Indo-Pakistani War. His decisive actions during the Battle of Basantar neutralized a critical Pakistani armored counteroffensive, demonstrating exceptional tactical skill, composure, and resolve. This combination of technical mastery and personal bravery firmly established his reputation as one of the most formidable tank commanders in Indian military history.  

Despite his tank being engulfed in flames and ordered to save himself, he had famously declared, "No Sir, I will not abandon my tank. My gun is still working and I will get these bastards." His unyielding bravery earned him admiration, even from his adversaries, and the posthumous Param Vir Chakra, India's highest wartime gallantry award. At just 21, he made the ultimate sacrifice, embodying the spirit of valor and patriotism. 

I was also inspired by his mother, who sent her son to war with the powerful words: "Fight like a lion and don’t come back a coward."

Having shared posts on social media every year to commemorate Arun Khetarpal’s birth and martyrdom anniversaries, I was extremely thrilled when I came to know that they are making a movie about him and eagerly awaited its release. The immense excitement and anticipation was further heightened by the director Sriram Raghavan’s reputation as a filmmaker with a strong body of work ('Ek Hasina Thi', 'Johnny Gaddaar', 'Badlapur', 'Andhadhun' as Writer & Director and 'Monica O My Darling' as Producer). 

When the trailer finally dropped, however, I felt somewhat disappointed with the casting - particularly with legendary actor Dharmendra portraying Arun Khetarpal’s father, Brigadier M. L. Khetarpal. I felt that Dharmendra appeared too old for the role, even though I knew that Brigadier Khetarpal was 81 years old during the episode depicted in the movie.

Finally, I watched the movie in December end, the day it released. Did I like the movie? Not really.

Biographical war films occupy - especially one on the life and heroics of a legend - carry not only artistic responsibility but also a moral one. In Ikkis, while the intent is good and the subject powerful, the film falls short of the legacy it seeks to honor. 

In my opinion, a key issue with the movie is that an incident, which happened post his martyrdom when his father visited Pakistanis and is an 'anecdote' in the entire story of Arun Khetarpal, has been made the centerpiece. No doubt it is an emotional incident and there is no denying its sensitivity. Its perfectly fine to use the incident as the base through which Arun's story had to be narrated but in the movie it has become a parallel and an equally significant story. 

The other concern lies in the depiction of Arun Khetarpal himself. In several parts of the film, he is portrayed as an overzealous, confused, and immature young man. While it is true that he was only 21 at the time of his martyrdom, he demonstrated a level of grit, bravery, remarkable maturity, clarity of purpose, leadership, and selflessness that many older and more seasoned military personnel do not exhibit. The emphasis should have been firmly on these defining qualities, while secondary incidents could have been suitably downplayed or omitted altogether.

The film also appears conflicted in its messaging. Though it is meant to celebrate the bravery of a hero of India-Pakistan war, the maker for some reason has hesitated to show Pakistan as the enemy. A particular dialogue, where Arun Khetarpal’s father questions who the “enemy” really is, feels irritating and bizarre. Arun Khetarpal's father was also an army officer. I agree that soldiers do not have 'personal' animosity towards the soldiers of the other army as everyone is only following orders. However, to suggest that Arun Khetarpal's father did not believe that Pakistan is an enemy, especially after what has happened before, during and after the war, is something which I found highly questionable.

In the end, Ikkis feels like a film uncertain of what it wants to say. It neither fully embraces the genre of a war film nor delivers a definitive tribute to one of India’s greatest heroes. Arun Khetarpal’s life and sacrifice deserved a narrative that celebrated valour, clarity, and inspiration. The film should have been rousing and uplifting; unfortunately, it comes nowhere close. There was not even a single 'goosebump moment,' something that almost every well-made war film is able to deliver.

I only hope that someday, a more focused and powerful film will be made on the life of 2nd Lieutenant Arun Khetarpal - one that truly reflects his courage, honors his sacrifice, and inspires generations to come.

I Want To Talk: Commendable Effort

Watched the movie 'I Want To Talk' yesterday. The reviews were quite mixed but some critics, who often make sense, talked about good performance of Abhishek Bachchan....and that was more than enough.

Have been a Junior Bachchan fan (and well-wisher) since his first movie. I admit that he is not among the finest actors out there...in fact, he is not even close. But I would put it this way... If your brother or son played cricket for India, you would cheer for him - even when you acknowledge that Sachin Tendulkar is the best. I somehow have that kind of relationship with Abhishek Bachchan! I have even endured 'Mumbai Se Aaya Mera Dost' in an empty movie hall, despite knowing it was terrible!

So, good reviews of Abhishek's performance dragged me out of home for a late night show...something that I avoid these days. And yes, I dragged my partner in crime—my wife—along.

Another motivation was the director - Shoojit Sircar. Have loved most of his work, even the slow paced 'October'.

I liked the movie and the performance of Junior Bachchan. Its a complicated story narrated in a simple manner. One can draw inspiration and hope from the movie but the director did not let it or try to make that the theme. Many a times when we struggle and fight, its all about one day at a time and thats how the story has been narrated, instead of making an attempt towards glorifying the struggle, fight or victory.

Yes, its a one-time watch and not for everyone. It would probably have made more sense to release the movie on OTT. However, in the world of mostly meaningless movies, such movies keep the hope alive. Movie industry is a blend of 'art/storytelling' and 'commerce' and the focus of this movie is clearly on the former.

RIP Sushant Singh Rajput

Recently I watched the movie for zillionth time. It is indeed an inspiring story and I watch it quite frequently. But this time, for the first time, I saw Sushant Singh Rajput in the movie. Every other time, I saw Dhoni...this time I saw the actor. And from here on....this movie would always be about Sushant Singh Rajput. RIP Sushant. 

Super 30: Movie Review

Though I am impressed with the story of the real life teacher Anand Kumar, his work and his achievements, somehow I did not feel like watching the movie made on his life. However, one lazy afternoon, with nothing else to do - I ended up watching the movie.

'Super 30', starring superstar Hrithik Roshan and directed by Vikas Bahl (Queen, Me Too) is a movie on the life of Anand Kumar - a teacher and mathematician. Anand came from a family with lesser means but he had high dreams and potential. He qualified for Cambridge but could not go as he and his family could not arrange the required funds. He did not give up his passion for mathematics but the family had to resort to make and sell Papads (wafers; thin, crisp discs) to make ends meet. He later went on to become a successful and much sought-after teacher in a private coaching center meant for helping kids prepare and qualify for Indian Institute of Technology (IIT). He later gave all that up to start free coaching for poor students. His institute has been successful and he has received several awards & accolades in India as well as at global level.

Super 30 is a good movie BUT is not an honest movie. The movie has good performance, fast-paced narrative, happy ending. However, somewhere the makers decided to make it a bollywood formula film instead of a biopic of an actual hero.

Several events have been dramatized but that is okay. After all, it is not a documentary and commercial cinema requires dramatization for entertainment purposes. However, several incidents have been overly dramatized and several facts have been ignored/omitted. I am not sure how Anand Kumar feels about it but I felt - by doing that - the movie undermines his 'actual' struggle. 

I believe that Anand encountered several challenges but he found ways to overcome them. By exaggerating his challenges, I feel the movie - unintentionally - gives a message that his challenges were not 'challenging enough' and needed exaggeration. For example (and if I am not mistaken), Anand started a for-profit coaching center in order to fund his not-for-profit coaching center. Nothing wrong with that and it was a smart move. By omitting the fact about the for-profit coaching center, the makers probably tried to exaggerate his struggles and I firmly believe that was not required.

And there is a rather lengthy scene at the end where students apply what they have learnt for fighting off local goons. It was so much dramatized/exaggerated that it became impossible to digest. And someone who does not know Anand Kumar may not be able to resist questioning the rest of the story.

This is a good movie which could have been much better and much more honest.

As far as Hrithik is concerned, before watching the movie and from the trailers, I felt that his image and looks would come in the way of delivering a powerful performance. I was worried (not really, I do not care that much about Hrithik and movies) that he would not look believable. I was pleasantly surprised as he has not allowed his image to come in the way. He has turned in a great performance and looks believable.

Overall, I do recommend the movie. At least 80% of the movie is real and that is a story that people must know about. 

Article 15: Does the director believe in it?

Recently watched the much talked about movie 'Article 15'. For the uninitiated, Article 15 of the constitution of India says 'Article 15 (1) and (2) prohibit the state from discriminating any citizen on ground of any religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them'.

The movie discusses the important topic of caste discrimination, which is rampant and is a major social evil in India. The plot is 'based' on a true incident but has been tweaked to suit the views of the maker. The movie has great actors and they have delivered powerful performances. Overall, the movie is interesting and I did not feel bored at any point of time.

However, such movies make you think. That per se is not an issue. Every movie on a real issue should make you think. But this one also makes you think about the intentions and motives. There is a background to it as well. I have watched the previous movie ('Mulk') of the director and have also watched several interviews. He seems to have certain views against the major religion in India and takes a consulting-like approach to narrate or weave the story. He develops hypotheses and then creates a narrative to prove that hypotheses. 

I really liked his previous film - Mulk. It talks about targeting Muslims and thinking that every Muslim is a terrorist. That is incorrect and it must be said. The film did show an Islamic terrorist but the director spent only few minutes on that. The rest of the movie showed how the family of the terrorist was targeted, asked to move to Pakistan etc. I would not say that it does not happen. I also agree (and firmly believe) that every Muslim is not a terrorist and that it should not even be discussed. However, the fact also is that >90% of the terrorists follow or claim to follow Islam (the reason I say "claim to follow" is because I firmly believe that most Islamic terrorists (and their handlers and religious leaders) do not even understand Islam). But it is a fact that over 90% terrorists are Muslims. Will the film-maker make a movie on that? No. Because then he would be scared of his life. 

These days when the critics appreciate a movie, I start doubting the movie and the intentions. These days it has become fashionable to talk against Hindu religion. Any movie which shows Hinduism or a certain political party in bad-light gets good reviews from critics. Take for example the movie 'Mukkabaaz'. It is a good movie about a boxer of lower caste fighting against the system for his career and love. However, there are two scenes in the movie that I found questionable. In one scene, the goons target the boxer and his coach by falsely accusing them for consuming beef. While I agree that there is an actual case which got a lot of attention from media, pseudo-seculars, so-called liberals and of course political parties. However, there is no case where someone from Hindu religion was targeted in such a manner. The goons could have targeted the boxer and coach in many different ways but the maker (another guy who seems to hate Hindu religion and was quite vocal about the case) chose this as it could  have given the movie free publicity. There is another scene in which the protagonist unnecessarily and repeatedly says "Bharat Maata ki Jai" while bashing the villain - who is a prominent local politician - in front of the cops. While the intentions were not absolutely clear but may be the film-maker tried to show that you can get away with anything by saying that. This in my opinion was a cheap tactic to garner free publicity for an otherwise good movie.

Article 15 also primarily bashes the Hindu religion or upper caste Hindus. I am not at all denying that in several parts of India, such caste-based discrimination is rampant. However, caste based discrimination is not specific to a religion. Have you not heard about the term 'Dalit-Muslims'? Although Islam does not recognize any castes, Muslim communities in South Asia (especially India) apply a system of social stratification. It is developed as a result of ethnic segregation between the foreign conquerors and the local converts. Why was that not correctly portrayed in the movie? Because it would not fit the hypotheses? 

It is important to make socially-relevant movies but it is equally (if not more) important to ensure that it is portrayed in a non-biased way. Else it would only stem (or rather further escalate) communal tensions. Such movies also suggest (or at least fails to suggest otherwise) that majority of upper-caste Hindus think like this. It is as wrong as thinking that majority of Muslim are terrorists. That goes against the very intention behind Article 15.

Newton

The movie has brilliant performances from some of the finest actors today....Rajkummar Rao and Pankaj Tripathi. 

However, I probably did not get the movie.....as I did not quite like it.

I do understand that the movie has been branded as a political satire. I also understand that for the naxal situation today, either sides (naxals as well as system) have played their part in creating/worsening the situation. Having said that, I did not quite enjoy the movie that points a finger at our democracy. It largely shows the negative role of the system, administration and forces while 'almost' ignoring the role of naxals and their supporters/sympathesizers.

This movie is India's official entry for the Oscars and now everyone who watches the movie may question the democracy, system and governance in India.

I am not blinded by my love for my country. I very well know that issues are there and many of them are fairly serious ones. However, I feel that such topics should be handled carefully and  both sides should be presented.

It is clearly not a popular opinion as tabloids suggest that most viewers have loved the movie. But like the protagonist, I am willing to hold my ground. :)

For me, this Newton was as difficult to understand as the original one!! It was all latin and Physics for me!!!

Short Review: Eye in the Sky

"Never tell a soldier that he does not know the cost of war". Great movie. It was like watching '12 Angry Men' but with a ticking bomb in the middle. Brilliantly shows what military personnel go through while making critical - life or death - decisions, where the 'best option'  is not always the 'morally correct' one.

Movie Review: Natsamrat

Watched a Marathi movie for the first time and am glad that it was 'Natsamrat'. Truly brilliant movie!!! I am worried that the bar has been set too high and the next Marathi movie may be a disappointment!!! And, what a performance by the legendary Nana Patekar. I watch so many Hindi, English, Regional and Foreign Language films but I do not think I can count many better performances!!! I do not know how much theater he actually does so not sure about 'Natsamrat' but he truly is a 'Abhinay-Samrat'.

Movie Review: Chef

Movie Review: Million Dollar Arm

Movie Review: Draft Day

Movie Review: Transcendence

Movie Review: Satya 2

I recently wrote a blog about Ram Gopal Verma and while writing the blog, I had referred to his filmography. I was particularly interested in the movies that he has directed as I firmly believe (at least so far) that he is a good director and can tell a story like no one else can.

While looking at his work as a director, I came across a movie called 'Satya 2'. Somehow I did not know much about the movie and had no clue how good/bad/ugly is the movie and how it fared at the box office. Since I had loved the original 'Satya', I decided to give it a shot.

Key Limitations

• The story has cerrtain flaws. Why was a person given huge resposibilities to start with? Why did an 'insider' reveal the identity of a big player but not the captain has been left unanswered.
• The movie has relatively unknown cast. There are some 'remotely known' faces in support role but the key actors are all new. That is not a limitation as the original 'Satya' also had a relatively unknown cast. Manoj Bajpai was known but was yet to become big....which he, to a certain extent, still is. Urmila was the only well-known actor. In this movie, the main protagonist, his partners and his opponent are all either new or are not popular actors. The role of the main police official handling the case  should have been essayed by a popular actor. For example, Mohanlal played the role of the Police Commissioner in 'Company'. Such a personality was needed in this movie.  More importantly, the choice of the actor for the role of the main protagonist is questionable. The actor has done a decent job but lacks personality that was required for the role. Someone with a stronger personality or image would have helped the movie in performing better at box office.

Key Strengths

• The story, despite its flaws, is gripping. It does not get boring at any point of time, except the meaningless songs that lacked melody. I wish the movie did not have any songs. Having said that, the movie would make you sit till the end to find out what happens.
• The treatment of the movie and narration has RGV singature all over it. The camera angles, the dialogues, the background score compliment the story really well

Overall, it is a decent movie. If you like RGV brand of cinema (real RGV style of movies and not what his lesser-intelligent clone made) then you would like the movie. However, it cannot be denied that the movie could have been much better.