March 19, 2010

Love, Sex Aur Dhokha

Films are supposed to be the mirror of the society. Does it really reflect true India? Most Indian films create an utopia of their own where everything is fair in love. But is it the truth? Does it really happen?

Welcome to the world of Love, Sex Aur Dhokha. Get an electrifying reality check!

The movie showcases the dysfunctional urban Indian society which lusts for voyeurism. It is the Indian society which starts and ends an entire day with MMS scandals. It is also the nonchalant Indian society which believes in honor killing because of religious differences and social-hierarchy issues. So far we read it all on the newspapers. Thankfully, someone had enough balls to put in on celluloid.

Told from third person point of view, using camcorders, CCTVs and hidden cameras, the movie tells three inter-weaved stories about Love, Sex and Deceit. On a macro level, the three stories talk about Love, Sex and Deceit chronologically and separately. But on a micro level, we find all the elements in every story.

The film makes a very strong socio-political statement. Albeit sarcastic, it talks about a nation which is shinning thanks to its technological progress but yet has not been able to come out of the wonderland portrayed in films where almost everything is over the top and melodramatic. Where wannabe filmmakers rather than trying to create something new, fresh, follow the easy path to attain box-office success. It also talks about the paradox of morality. A nation which gave birth to Kamasutra, where most people take sadistic pleasure watching the MMS scandals everyday, but cannot talk about sex in the open. The irony is, one such scene where a couple is having sex is pixellated by the censor board even after giving an Adults Only rating.

The master stroke was to cast all newcomers. And all of them performed brilliantly. Be it Angshuman Jha as the wannabe director, Shruti as the rich girl in love with her poor director, Raj Kumar Yadav as the good for nothing guy managing the departmental store and who is in huge debt, Neha Chauhan as the graveyard shift worker in that departmental store, Arya Banerjee as the dancer who is desperate to get herself cast in a music video, Herry Tangri as the pop icon who keeps candybars in his portable fridge right below the whiskey or Amit Sial as the journalist desperately in need of a breaking news.

However the catch-point of the movie is the cinematography by Nikos Andritsakis and the deft editing of Namrata Rao. Using hand held camera, CCTV footage, hidden camera he creates a jerky, muddled world just like that in the film.

The strength of Dibakar Banerjee has always been his script, especially the dialogs. Be it the bitter-sweet title cards at the beginning of each story, the security guard at the store who just doesn’t know when to stop or the departmental store worker who just can’t stop bragging about her boyfriend in Russia. Everything bears the signature of Dibakar Banerjee. Also that he mainly talks about middle class people whom clearly he understand. In Love, Sex Aur Dhokha too baring one protagonist, all others belong to middle class or lower middle class. Here too he creates a platter of real characters with real emotions. The society they live in is dysfunctional, but their narrative is seamless.

And then there is the outstanding last scene where all the protagonists are in one scene. The camera lingers with everyone smiling, rejoicing and the reality suddenly hits you. The happiest scene of the entire film gives you the biggest scare. You start recollecting what happened to those characters, almost like finishing the jigsaw.

Love, Sex Aur Dhokha has given Indian cinema a new genre, itself.

Take a bow Dibakar Banerjee. If not now, then when?

March 5, 2010

033 – Review

What defines a city?

The people living there? The old monuments reminding of the eras gone by? The food? The dress-code? The amalgamation of all these factors? Or is it nothing?

In the movie 033, this is exactly what the band members are trying to find out. There are two parallel tracks in the movie. A woman (Swastika Mukherjee) in search of her roots, with an endeavour to know Calcutta (the film is set in the 90s and so it is still officially Calcutta) from her foreigner point of view. The other being, the struggle of the band members (Parambrata Chattopadhyay, Shaheb, Rudranil Ghosh, Dhruv Mukherjee and Mumtaz Sorcar) of 033 (the band) to find an identity of their own with their own songs and not by playing remixed covers of old classics.

The Bangla band tradition started in the 1970s. One of the firsts being Saptarshi who later renamed themselves as Moheener Ghoraguli. Over the years the band culture faded. It came back with a bang in the 90s with bands like Cactus, Parash Pathar, Chandrabindoo etc…

033 narrates the story of one such fictional band and their struggle for existence.

This is a film about the debutants. The director, editor, writer and an actor are making their debuts. In such a scenario, one fears that the collective filmmaking might take a backseat and showcasing of individual talent might become a priority. 033 suffers exactly from that.

Every film has its own pace. But 033 is inconsistent. What hampers the most is the sudden use of frontality in between a scene. I know it is the age of experimentation. But sometimes less is good. The sudden shift to in-your-face frontality of Swastika comes across as caricaturish, very gimmicky. Also continuous use of montage hampers the film. Why do you need to use so much montages? Infact it seems the film is one big montage. The editor, Debaloy Bhattacharya, almost felt that since this is his first Bengali film, he needs to show all the editing transitions known to him. It feels that he used all the buttons in Final Cut Pro trying to impress his director. Pity! Since it comes across as amateurish.

Somak Mukherjee is a cinematographer par excellence. But somehow his work gets muddled up. There are some fascinating wide and long shots, a few superbly composed scenes, but when it comes to larger perspective, the film, it all looks gimmicky. It feels like there are multiple cinematic set pieces deliberately composed within one film to attract attention. The songs are shot like music videos with flashy editing but hardly makes any sense when it comes to the narrative. They stand out like a sore thumb.

The movie has an ensemble cast. Sadly, no one performs well. The sooner Parambrata understand he needs to shift away from the same role he has been doing over and over again, the better it will be for him. Swastika disappoints big time.  She’s the main protagonist of the film. Yet, we as audience do not feel for her. She just doesn’t connect. Also her diction is flawed. It is sad to see a performer of Rudranil’s caliber wasted like this. With a horrible wig and an umbrella as prop, he is made into a caricature.  Shaheb and Dhruv goes over the top. Mumtaz Sorcar, the debutant, looks good on screen.

I had huge expectations from Birsa Dasgupta. But clearly he bit way more than he could chew. He tried to do far too much experimentation with his first film. Almost like he wanted to show that he is comfortable with aspect of filmmaking. Sadly, it doesn’t quite gel. However, there are quite a few scenes which does show his talent. They are superbly executed. Wish he focused more on the narrative/content and less on visuals.

What stands out in the movie is the music. The score by Chandrabindoo is superlative. Few of the songs (especially Rain Machine) are very well shot. But mostly they feel like independent music videos in context of the movie.

033 thus becomes another film that could have been great rather than becoming one. It is a pity considering it had all the ingredients. If only the proportions were rightly served.