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.

Movies: Michelin Star Dishes or McDonald's Burger?

There is an 'unnecessary' controversy that has been created over 'Indian' cinema and the 'National' language. Various actors and/or publicity-seekers are jumping into the dialogue. Some Hindi movie actors said that 'Hindi' is the national language and some South Indian actors said that Hindi movies are not the only ones that qualify as 'Pan-Indian' cinema as movies in South Indian languages are finding viewers across the globe now. 

As I mentioned at the very beginning, it is an unnecessary controversy and both sides should have refrained from getting into a social-media war. Lets look at what has been discussed;

Hindi is the 'National' language

That is incorrect. I do not blame the people who believe that as we were either taught that or were made to believe that. Hindi is the official language (along with English). Though I do believe that all Indians should know (and should be 'encouraged' to know) Hindi as that would help in communication across India but then, no one should be compelled to learn the language. India being such a diverse country, it is difficult to make that change happen in near future. If at all this happens, it can happen only through people initiative. It has been working so far and there is no 'need' for any change.

Hindi Movies Get More Importance

Now, lets come to the other side of the debate, which drove me to write this blog. Its about the 'Indian' cinema. Some South-Indian actors indicated that whenever 'Indian' cinema is discussed, represented or recognized, it is the Hindi cinema or 'Bollywood', which is taken into consideration. 

I am not sure if that is genuinely the case. While it may not be 'the' justification, lets look at the list of past winners of National Award for Best Feature Film. 

Since 1953, only 12 'pure-play' Hindi movies have won the National award. It excludes 'Ship of Theseus' (Hindi and English) and 'Court' (Marathi, Hindi, Gujarati and English). During the same period, 22 Bangla/Bengali, 12 Malayalam, 6 Kannada, 4 Marathi, 2 Tamil and 1 Telugu movies won awards. So, it may be unfair to say that only Hindi movies are being recognized. I agree that Hindi movies and movie stars get more media-attention and headlines. However, that is because Hindi movies are watched by a larger audience and includes some mega-stars. However, there is no biasedness or partiality as such. 

South-Indian cinema also has several mega-stars including Rajnikanth, Chiranjeevi, Mammootty, Mohanlal but except Thalaiva, others have not managed to create a significant fan-base or gain popularity outside India or their region. Of course, this is a comparative statement. I am not at all suggesting that Chiranjeevi is not popular. However, he probably is known to fewer people compared to say...Amitabh Bachchan, Shahrukh Khan, Aamir Khan, Salman Khan and Rajanikanth. It is a fact. This does not make Chiranjeevi a lesser actor. In fact, personally, I do not like most of the names mentioned above. In my opinion, list of best actors and most popular actors [in Indian context] seldom have common names. Among the current leading actors, I personally enjoy the work of Dhanush and Fahadh Faasil the most and I am not only talking about South Indian cinema!!

Which Movie Industry is Better?

Though it is not being said or discussed in as many words but the debate, comments and the arguments put forward seem to suggest that the 'stakeholders' want to comment on which movie industry [in India] is better!! This debate is again....unnecessary. 

If I talk about myself, I do not 'generally' enjoy Hindi movies but I end up watching a lot of them. Most of them are nonsensical formula-based movies. They do better (in terms of collections/returns/ROI) than the kind of movies I genuinely appreciate. Some of the popular South-Indian movies (RRR, KGF 1 & 2, Baahubali 1 & 2, Pushpa etc.) are also doing pretty well in terms of collections however it is important to understand that box-office collections do not necessarily mean cinematic brilliance [and vice versa]. 

If a movie is watched by more number of people, it does not necessarily become a great movie. Similarly, if a megastar is followed by a larger group of fans, it does not necessarily mean he/she is the best actor [or even a good actor]. McDonald's burger may be the most popular food item but is a McDonald's burger ever considered a great dish?? These days, almost every superhero movie sets the box office on fire but are they ever considered a genuine piece of art? 

In the field of art, popularity and sales volumes do not always mean brilliance. People watch nonsensical, formula-based masala movies because movies are watched with family and/or friends and people typically opt for pure-play entertainment for such events. For example, when I am watching a movie alone, I would watch something like 'The Lunchbox' but when I go to watch a movie with my 10-year old, I would end up watching 'Simbba' or 'Suryavanshi'. I watch a lot of movies - different genres and different languages (English, world cinema, Hindi, Malayalam, Telugu, Tamil....]. I look for good stories and good performances and do not restrict myself to a certain genre or language. However, for most people [even I select movies based on the mood], movies are a getaway from their regular, mundane life that is often filled with stress, depression, issues, burdens, frustration, anger. They do not want to see the protagonist go through similar emotions on-screen and would rather watch a nonsensical comedy/action!! They like to watch a hero that is larger than life...who can stand against villains, beat 100 people, romance, dance, make us laugh....and what not!! Such movies help the viewers come out of the theatre relaxed [not always though!!]. So both kind of movies are required. We need movies with a message, with a great story, with brilliant performances. At the same time, we need the nonsensical formula-based masala movies. 

We need the Michelin Star dishes but also the McDonald's burger!!!

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.

An Enigma called Ram Gopal Varma

Let me start by making an honest confession, which will probably erode my social circle even further. I like the movie 'Sarkar', which is an adaptation of 'The Godfather' more than the original!!! I know it is hard to believe but it is what it is!!!

I would not say that I am a fan of Ram Gopal Varma but I do believe that he has the potential to make truly world-class movies. He is best when it comes to dark movies about crime and underworld. He can be pretty okay with horror genre as well. Yet, he churns out one shitty movie after another!!! That truly baffles me.

How can a director who has made movies like 'Satya', 'Company', 'Sarkar' 'The Attacks of 26/11' and 'Kaun?' also make movies like 'Ram Gopal Varma ki Aag', 'Naach', 'Shiva' (new one) and 'Department'? Even some of his horror movies like 'Raat', 'Darling' and 'Bhoot' have been quite good/okay.

There is no denying the fact that he lacks consistency. That coupled with his attitude makes him quite a unpopular person on social media. He has become a joke in the league of KRK!!! 

I find it extremely strange. The question that I ask is 'does he really care'? I do not know how good/bad/ugly is he in terms of financials but I hope he understands that movie making is not only about creativity, art and joy. The movies need to make sufficient money so that you can make another one. He makes so many movies so I guess he does not have financial issues but the rate at which his movies are tanking at box office, he may soon lose market confidence or simply run out of gas. 

To his credit, RGV is one of the few directors who keep experimenting. There are few others who are similar. Anurag Kashyap is a great example but he IS from 'Ram Gopal Varma School of Film Making'. Anurag agrees that he has learnt a lot from RGV!!

There are 'lesser-Directors' who do not experiment much and make nonsensical movies but they make truck loads of money. Rohit Shetty can make interesting and entertaining movies but can also make absolute crap. Sajid Khan is class apart when it comes to making stinky-shitty-crappy-bullshit. Karan Johar makes 'goodie-goodie' movies. They are not 'story-tellers'. They are just 'story-sellers'. 

RGV is certainly better than these directors but he is trying hard to prove this wrong. I wonder how does he select a story. If he is good enough to understand that a story like 'Satya' would work (especially in the time when it was made) and is good enough to make a masterclass out of that story, why cannot he understand that a movie like 'Naach' or 'Department' would not work. Or does he do all that because it makes HIM happy? Does he get engulfed by his desire to try out new things so much that he forgets that people would come to watch the movie in hope of seeing the kind of magic that only he or only few can create in Indian cinema? Does he treat movies like 'Department' or 'Agyaat' as laboratories for testing out new things?

Hindi movies enjoy decent popularity here in Kuala Lumpur. Whenever people (Malaysians, Chinese and people of Indian-origin) ask me which movies should they watch, I do suggest 'Satya', 'Company' and 'Sarkar' along with others. I am sure most of them curse me after watching these movies as they are mostly 'Sharook Kan' fans!! Yet, I suggest these movies as these are movies that I feel proud of!!! I do not know the reason but I guess I am happy that Indian directors can make such movies. I call these movies as 'RGV Signature Movies'. 

Amidst all the 'tests' that he conducts, I hope he delivers his signature movies every now and then.  However, I feel if something gives him happiness, he does not care about what others think or want. I think he is in a different world where he does things that truly please him. 

He is the Howard Hughes of our times!!!

Metro Manila vs. Citylights

Both movies are very similar. The makers of Citylights give credit to Metro Manila (MM) and acknowledge that their movie is inspired by MM. However, the story is slightly different.

I watched Citylights first and like always, was impressed by the acting of Rajkumar Yadav (still not calling him Rao). In fact the entire cast has done great work. It is a depressing story about a simpleton from a small town in Rajasthan coming to Mumbai with his family in hope of a better and successful life. And then he runs into bad luck.

I was so moved by the movie that I immediately decided to watch Metro Manila. Most of the scenes and dialogues are same. The 'flavor' was of course different. Some of the challenges encountered by the families (in Citylights and Metro Manila) are also different. However, the plot is exactly the same. And so is the ending.

However, the situation in which the protagonists in these movies found themselves after an incident were slightly different. While the protagonist in Citylights was almost forced to choose a path that he ultimately took, it seemed that the protagonist in MM had an escape route. Tiny one but could have avoided the end. His boss was helpful, he did not run out of money. He could have made a different choice. However, another way to look at it is that he took the step in hope of giving his family much more than he could ever have.

Both the movies are great but I liked Metro Manila better than City Lights.

Do yourself a favor....

"You watch too many movies". 

I am told that quite often. So often that I sometimes question myself that what exactly am I looking for? The answer is "It Depends". 

Sometimes I watch movies just to forget things. Sometimes I am looking for 2-3 hours of nonsensical fun. But, more often than not,  I am looking for a story that moves me and touches the soul. Those are the kind of movies which have a 'resale value'. One can watch them again and again. Does not happen quite often and I am made to try numerous movies. 

And then.....a movie like 'The Fault in Our Stars' comes by!!! :)

Shahid

Started the day with an extremely well-made and thought-provoking movie. SHAHID is based on the story of lawyer Shahid Azmi, who was killed at the age of 32. He was known to fight for people wrongly accused in cases of terrorism. Brilliant performances by the entire cast. A must watch!!!

Movie Marathon

Watched 5 movies today!!!! Must be a record for me. I do have such movie marathons sometimes but I do not think I have ever watched 5 movies in a day.

I started with 'The Wolf of Wall Street'. It is a highly acclaimed and popular movie by Martin Scorsese. Had high expectations from the movie due to the director and the lead actor i.e., Leonardo Dicaprio. I must say that I did not quite like the movie as much as I expected. The movie is about a stock broker who has this unsatisfying hunger of getting rich. He is also a robinhood of sorts for his employees. He does drugs and women like people breathe. It has a predictable storyline and the performances are not anything special. It has fetched Leonardo a Golden Globe (I am told), so clearly mine is not a popular opinion.

Then I watched the 'Grudge Match'. It is a movie about two champion boxers who used to be arch rivals. They get old but they still do not see eye-to-eye. Hence a 'grudge match' is arranged. Again, a very predictable storyline. I watched the movie as it stars Robert De Niro and Sylvestor Stallone. I like the later and truly admire the former. Moreover, both of them have played extremely popular roles as boxers in the past. I expected the movie to be funny, which it is. But it is not hahaha kind of funny. Moreover, it is not gripping. Not the best work of either actors and not the best movie that I watched today.

Then I watched 'The Secret Life of Walter Mitty'. It is a movie about a 'Negative Assets Manager' in Life magazine. The guy is shy, introvert, always drags himself in awkward/embarrassing situations and is a DAY DREAMER. The part is played by Ben Stiller, who is also the director of the movie. Ben Stiller has played similar roles in the past. There is something about Mary, Meet the Parents, Meet the Fockers, Duplex....you name them. But this movie is different. It is not a comedy. Or lets say that the movie wont tickle  you but it will bring a smile on your face. Sean Penn plays a cameo in the movie. Overall, the movie is interesting and not predictable but still does not have a strong story. My wife did not like the movie. But.....I did. I could relate to the shy, introverted day-dreamer!!!

Then I watched a long due movie that I wanted to watch in theaters and in 3D. GRAVITY!! Extremely gripping story. Nice cast (Sandra Bullock and George Clooney, who has a small but extremely good role). I really liked the first half but the second half started to drag a little. Getting sucked into space from one space station.....then reaching another space station.....and then another one.....and then landing on earth was too much to digest. They could have added a crocodile or a lake monster in the lake Sandra Bullock finally lands in but thankfully did not do that!!!! Overall, good engaging movie that could have been better.

And then I watched 'The Purge'. The movie was recommended by a colleague, whose last recommendation ('The Iceman') was not bad at all. The movie stars Ethan Hawke (not the greatest ingredient for a so-called good dish). The movie is about a scenario in United States of 2022, where the government legalizes any crime (including murder) in a 12-hour window, once a year!!!! What was I thinking!!! Do not want to waste more time on this movie so lets just say.....STUPID STUPID MOVIE!!!

The Vow: A Great Watch

Yesterday, I watched the movie "The Vow" and really loved it. It is a simple story, which they claim has been inspired by true events.

The story is about a couple who meet an accident. The girl suffers severe memory loss and wakes up without any memory of her husband!!! Then the husband tries to win her back.

You will find it difficult to not feel frustrated along with the husband but at the same time, the wife is not wrong as well!!! It is a great watch and I strongly recommend it.

And this is the second movie of Channing Tatum that I have really loved. The other one is Dear John. Another must watch. The guy is definitely not a great actor but seems to be extremely smart with his movie selection.