After watching ‘Mohan Joshi Hazir Ho’, a deftly written early 80s flick by Saeed Mirza, one realizes how little of (and in) Mumbai has changed in all these years. Or rather, how little has our society evolved. In fact, watching this movie can lead one to reflect upon how seeds of the modern day degeneration we see around us, had already been sown some decades back…
The film is a depiction of the power struggle between the land grabbing aristocracy and the common man buried under the debris of avarice while also being burdened by the daily skirmishes he has to master for mere self-preservation. And it is a strong depiction indeed, for, despite its simple motif of one man leading a judicial battle against a malicious land-owner, it contains multiple narrative streams, all being helmed by some of the finest parallel cinema actors and performers of the time. Also stark is the sarcastic (and caustic) tone of the proceedings, where humor is sufficiently employed to take digs on pretty much everything that’s lacking in our judicial system, and how it heeds to arm-twisting and delaying tactics of the influential.
One thing that I look forward to in a satirical movie is to see what kind of closure it choses for itself. Does it end on an ‘All is well/All can be well’ note leaving behind a ray of optimism, or whether it revels in the hopelessness of the situation and concludes on a pessimistic note. As this particular movie moves along, the odds for the latter happening keep on getting stronger. More so, the tone of the film is quite unequivocal in regards to this. But despite the unambiguous defeatism of the narrative, it is engrossing for most parts, largely helped by the actors playing out their quirky, well-written characters to the hilt.
Parting Note: The movie is a must watch, if not for everything else, just for the fact that it has hardly lost its relevance even after so many years, and makes points extremely pertinent to even this day.
I was watching some interviews of
Gulzar recently on YouTube. One thing that he mentioned in almost all his conversations
was the impact of India’s partition on his life and works. Not surprising for
someone who was born on the other side of the border that wasn’t present at
that point of time, Gulzar talked very fondly about the land that was once a
part of his being, and that presently was alienated from him, at least in terms
of physical distances. But despite this admission, we find that the man was
hardly ever a part of any cinematic venture that explored the stories of that
painful time. Most of his work that revolved around that motif was not done for
the big screen. His poems, his stories, and anecdotes on the subject are a part
of his poetry books, his memoirs, and some plays that have been adapted from
the same.
Gulzar in a still from Jallian Wala Bagh
However my quick research
reminded me of one movie set in pre-independence India, which Gulzar
contributed to immensely. Jallian Wala
Bagh, a movie directed by Mr. Balraj
Tah (one time director/film-maker), had its screenplay and dialogues
written by the maestro of words. Chronicling the events around the horrific
incident that gave a new impetus to the Indian Nationalist movement, the movie
can also be termed as a sketchy biography of Shaheed Uddham Singh, the revolutionary young man who murdered the
man largely responsible for the mass massacre that happened on 13th
April, 1919.
Parikshit Sahni essays the role
of Uddham Singh, while Vinod Khanna and Deepti Naval play major parts that
bring in some star value to the otherwise non-commercial looking venture. Shabana
Azmi has an insignificant cameo, but the surprise of the show is a meaty role by
none other than Gulzar. As a young man contributing to the freedom struggle while
living in London, Gulzar delivers a patchy performance that vindicates his
decision of not going in front of the camera ever again. However the portions
involving him are some of the most polished part of the otherwise amateurish attempt
by the first time director.
The movie is far from being a
very fine one. However, at just over 100 minutes in length, it is a reasonably
good watch, at least from the point of view of being an important film based on
true events. It is tough to describe it as a biopic as it fails to do justice
to that genre despite having Uddham Singh as a fulcrum for the narrative. As an
effort that documents a critical chapter of our freedom movement, the movie
again falls short. Ultimately it ends up as a confused attempt that could have
been made into a defining feature, had some more research and effort been done
before making it. Some of the factors that redeem the movie are:
Non-violence vs Violence: How to get India to revolt?
Its depiction of the underling
conflict between the extreme revolutionaries and the moderate (and non-violent)
Gandhian reformers. The characters of Om Shivpuri and Vinod Khanna, father and
son, are at constant loggerheads regarding the approach that the freedom
struggle should adopt. Here Deepti Naval provides the balancing act and
articulates the difficulty in making one choice out of the two. This debate
later continues between Uddham Singh and Om Shivpuri’s character in London, two
decades after the incident of Jallian Wala Bagh.
The introduction of a global
perspective to the proceedings in the later part of the film. When Uddham Singh
reaches London, the world is in a state of conflict, with Hitler on the warpath.
It is refreshing to see a movie talk about the broader canvas, while not losing
the grip of the core plot. The use of an English lady’s character that supports
Uddham Singh and Sunil (Gulzar) against the British is done really well, and
executed sans any stereotypes.
A major part of the second part
(which is set in England) is in English. This again is quite different for a
movie that largely talks to a Hindi speaking audience. In fact this leads me to
believe that the second part of the movie, which has much finesse as compared
to the first, must have been shot first. The first hour of the movie (the
events leading to the massacre) might have been shot later with more mainstream
appeal in the hope of giving the movie a commercial release.
Parikshit Sahni as 'Uddham Singh', the revolutionary who killed Micheal O'Dwyer, the man responsible for the massacre of Jallian Wala Bagh
In the hands of an expert (or
rather more ambitious) director, the subject of the movie could have been
exploited better. Haven’t we seen many Hollywood movies going back to the past
to churn our Oscar winning films? Here it must be said that our Hindi film
industry has not made use of the vast source of literature that our
pre-independence days resulted it. Neither has our period of struggle been
given its due importance in many of our films. We have a very few films that
talk about that era, and sadly many of them are on similar subjects (with the
life of Bhagat Singh seeing more than five cinematic representations over the
years).
A Poster of the movie: Highlighting the commercial elements, while concealing the real ones
The sad demise of Jagjit Singh today marks he end of an era. The following is a write-up on a movie embellished by his 'Ghazals'- a movie that embodies his soul- melodious, thoughtful, and beautiful...
Togetherness, affection, love… so many of our movies talk about these things, but hardly any of them try to look into the actual meanings and connotations of these rather abstract emotions, and fewer still try to take a realistic look at these things. Saath Saath, a Farookh Shiekh and Deepti Naval starrer from the early 80s, is a movie that attempts to give an answer to an oft repeated question- ‘What is Love?’ (A question that has left many a philosophers and thinkers grappling, and whose answers, more often than not, are pretty vague ones that stem more from frustration rather than actual understanding or sudden flashes of cognition). This movie is the debut for writer/director Raman Kumar- another of those people who went downhill after showing a lot of promise in their first feature. One striking feature of this movie is that all songs are sung by the husband-wife pair of Jagjit Singh and Chitra Singh, but more on that later.
Saath Saath starts off in a manner, which despite being predictable is fairly engaging. Geeta (Deepti Naval in a girl next door avatar), the only daughter of a rich industrialist, moves into a new college and meets Avinash (Farookh Shiekh in a fiery role of a young socialist), and falls in love with him. Avinash reciprocates, and soon their love blossoms, much to the happiness of their group of friends (all recognizable faces-ranging from Satish Shah to Neena Gupta). It is usually hard to put an exact reason to why someone falls for someone else. But in this case Geeta certainly takes to the revolutionary streak in Avinash, and his zeal for honesty and passion for making a difference in society. He is one who minces no words against the money-minded industrialists who, he believes, revel in their corrupt means and build their empires by exploiting helpless people who agree to become slaves to their exploitative ways just because of lack of other options. Avinash freelances for newspapers, but more often than not, finds his articles rejected on the pretext of them being too realistic and too aggressive against capitalists.
Geeta, despite being a daughter of an industrialist herself, fully empathizes with Avinash’s ideas and thoughts and decides to spend her life with him, despite her parent’s passive resistance. Soon they marry and move into Avinash’s small home; making it a home of their dreams by their understanding and love. Things start to change when Geeta gets pregnant, and because of their rising monetary requirements, Avinash joins the publishing house of his friend (Satish Shah), as an employee. Soon, blinded by his love for Geeta, and his desire to give her and their kid all the comforts in the world, Avinash leaves his path of honesty and starts to compromise on his ideals in the company of his profit minded friend and boss. How Geeta reacts to this, and how she starts to alienate herself from Avinash’s life is what the movie is about in its latter half.
Like most of the realistic movies of that time, Saath Saath too has a simple plot, but is taken to the next level by its thought and its conviction. Its purpose seems to be to highlight the meaning of true love, and at the same time draw out the distinction between life pre and post marriage, when even the best of men can sometimes move away from their staunch ideals due to rising responsibilities and higher stakes in life. Although the narrative gets a bit shaky in parts (especially during attempts to bring in some humor), and the culmination looks a bit simplistic and hurried (as if the writer was forced to end it this way), the movie is a delightful watch for most parts. Certain scenes are truly splendid- the post marriage scene between Avinash and Geeta when they both take up hectic jobs, and the scenes that bring out the change in Avinash’s personality in the latter portions, are worth a mention. But what really adds wonderfully to this movie is its music. This movie, despite being a fairly different and engaging one, is still remembered more for its songs by Jagjit Singh and Chitra Singh. Kuldip Singh is the man behind the compositions, and the words are by Javed Akhtar. The two evergreen songs that form the backbone of this movie are ‘Tumko Dekha toh Yeh Khayal aaya’, and ‘Yeh Tera Ghar Yeh Mera Ghar’. The rest of the songs too are good, but not as popular.
The performances in such movies always appear better than what they are, but despite that it can be said that both Deepti Naval and Farookh Shiekh did an excellent job as the lead pair (though Farookh Shiekh looked a bit theatrical at places- especially during the ‘Tumko Dekha’ song and his scenes of outburst). The supporting cast (Rakesh Bedi, Satish Shah, Neena Gupta, Iftekhar etc.) doesn’t have much to do, and the focus never wavers from Deepti and Farookh.
Parting Note: All in all, Saath Saath is a good breezy watch (at just about 120 min), elevated to a great extent by its music and performances by its lead pair. Signing off with...
P.S: The editing is credited to David Dhawan, who incidently never attempted this kind of cinema after turning director.
Unlike the west, Indian cinema has seen very few books being adapted into movies. Shyam Benegal’s ‘Junoon’ is one of those rare features that sources its material from a book; Ruskin Bond’s novella ‘A Flight of Pigeons’ being the subject of attention in its case. The book was written by Bond in the early 1970s, and is the story of the trials and tribulations faced by an English family during the Indian mutiny of 1857, in a small Indian town-Shahjahanpur. It is a true account told from the perspective of Ruth, the young daughter of an English officer, who witnesses the brutal killing of her father at the hands of the communal mob that breaks out during the mutiny. How she, her mother, and the rest of her family including her granny and a cousin manage to keep themselves alive over the course of the next one year, is what the book talks about. But more than being a story of survival and an account of human helplessness, Bond’s book is a showcase of how human compassion and empathy has no communal boundaries, and how true love can keep the worst in a man at bay.
It is a powerful written material that Shyam Benegal chooses to bring alive on celluloid. However what he puts across in his film is an entirely different perspective that follows a texture that is far from what the book adopts. While the book has its focus on the humane relationships between people from two communities at war, the movie treats the backdrop of the 1857 mutiny as an opportunity to make some political points (including some slightly jingoistic ones) and centers the plot around the obsessive love (‘Junoon’) that Javed Khan (Shashi Kapoor as a dashing Pathan) had for Ruth (Nafisa Ali in her debut role). The movie is also an ‘Indian’ version in a way that the mutiny is shown in a highly positive light (something that was not done in the book written by the Anglo Indian Bond), and the atrocities that the British Raj committed on the helpless Indians are brought out emphatically. Also, while the book condemned the violence committed on Ruth’s family and their ilk, the movie somewhat justifies the virulent means adopted by the rebels lead by Sarfaraz Khan (Naseeruddin Shah is a role that seems to be written for him).
The movie takes off with a starting credit ‘qawalli’, featuring a vagabond fakir and introducing the protagonist Javed Khan on horseback. This qawalli is a really stretched one and tests the patience of the viewer, and in my opinion should have been done away with or compressed generously (I can imagine some people in the audience contemplating leaving the auditorium when the movie would have been playing in theatres). However, like in the book, the actual story starts off with the killing of Ruth’s father in a church, and her and her family’s subsequent surreptitious refuge in Lala Ramjimal’s (Kulbhushan Kharbanda) house. Soon their nervous and unsafe stay at Lala’s home ends when Javed Khan (one of the rebels who were fighting the ‘firangis’) discovers them and takes them to his place where his wife (Shabhana Azmi) welcomes them reluctantly owing to her fears about the supposedly illicit and open ways of the English women. Her fears prove somewhat right when Javed Khan admits being besotted by Ruth since a long time and expresses his wish to marry her and make her his second begum. This proposal by him starts a slight battle of egos and wits between him and Ruth’s mother (Mariam).
The movie from here on becomes a tale of Javed Khan’s unrelenting pursuit of Ruth’s love. Being a true Pathan he refrains from having her by force, and rather shows great dignity and poise when his people accuse him of putting his obsession over everything else. A great deal of spark is added to the proceedings by Javed’s wife Firdaus (played by Shabhana Azmi). She is quite expressive of her dislike for Ruth and her mother, and revolts quite vociferously in front of her husband, who determinedly ignores her constant complaints. Parallel to this, Sarfaraz Khan (the leader of the rebels and Javed Khan’s brother in law) is shown marshalling his troops against the British in Delhi, and subsequently in Kanpur.
Meanwhile Ruth’s mother and Javed Khan agree upon a condition that she would give him her daughter’s hand in marriage if the British lose the battle (otherwise Javed would never even think about her again). Javed Khan reluctantly accepts this agreement on the insistence of his ‘Chachi’, who incidently had grown very fond of Mariam and Ruth, and at whose place they both were residing for a while. So the fortunes of Javed’s love get attached to the sepoy mutiny that was burning in many of the country, and which was being brutally suppressed by the British troops at most places.
A tale of fierce love that remains unrequited in an extremely volatile political situation, Junoon is more than an account of India’s first war for independence. It is a complex film, which has more meaning than what it conveys overtly through its narrative. Shyam Benegal has left it upon the viewers to form their own interpretations and opinions. One question that arises when you finish watching this movie is whether Javed Khan was justified in putting his love over all other rational and irrational things in the world. Frankly, there is no answer, to this- but this tale suggests that love may be a human failing, but it is also the most powerful emotion in the world. The last scene of the film, when Javed returns to the village while risking his life, to catch a last glimpse of Ruth before escaping with his family to safety, is one of the most powerful ones of the movie. While Mariam refuses Javed to meet Ruth even one last time, Ruth by herself disobeys her mother and lets the Pathan have a final gaze at herself, till he turns around and trots away on his horse. This gesture by Ruth is a silent acceptance of her love and affection for Javed. So while Javed loses Ruth, he does manage to win her love and devotion, and that too quite handsomely for it is mentioned that Ruth decided to remain unmarried for the rest of her life.
To do his bidding, Shyam Benegal chooses a splendid star-cast. While Shashi Kapoor (in his first film as producer) is phenomenal in the central role, Jennifer Kendel (Shashi Kapoor’s wife) who plays Ruth’s mother is heartwarming in her portrayal of a strong woman faced with a very difficult situation. Shabhana Azmi is energetic and excels in an extended cameo, while Naseeruddin Shah is his usual brilliant self in a powerful role of a leader of the rebels. Nafisa Ali, in a central role in her very first film, is raw and somewhat amateurish (her discomfort comes across more glaringly in company of seasoned actors as the rest of the cast). Deepti Naval, Kulbhushan Kharbanda, and Sushma Seth pitch in with solid supporting acts.
Shyam Benegal paints the movie on a very realistic canvas. The 19th century Indian town is recreated authentically, and the other elements of a good historical like the costumes, dialects, and vocabulary seem all in place. The music of the film is classical Hindustani, and may appeal to the connoisseurs of that kind of music.
Apart from giving a different tenure to the story, what Benegal does differently from Bond’s book is that he gives a lot of emphasis on the metaphorical title that Bond chose for his book (The flight of the pigeons). So while at one level Javed Khan is shown to be quite fond of his pigeons, on the other Sarfaraz Khan in anguish equates Ruth and her family to worthless Pigeons that had captured Javed Khan’s thought process. At another level, the film culminates on the note when all the local people are forced to flee from the town to save themselves from the fast approaching British troops.
Parting Note: For people who are interested in History, and do not mind a leisurely pace to the proceedings, Junoon is a must watch. And for anyone who is interested in reading, ‘the flight of the Pigeons’ is a must read (it’s a short novella and won’t take much time).
On friendship day, recalling an on-screen friendship that is closest to how friends are in real life....
Three students renting a flat in a big city- all of them single, lazy, carefree, and most of the times out of cash. Sounds familiar? It is the story that plays out in our cities, especially Delhi and Mumbai, at more places than one. Sai Paranjape’s ‘Chashme Buddoor’ is a delightful take on bachelorhood and friendship. The three guys Siddharth, Omi, and Jai are played by Farooq Sheikh, Rakesh Bedi, and Ravi Baswani repectively. While Omi and Jai are quite exuberant and overtly desperate to have girlfriends, Siddharth is a shy person more interested in books than girls (He is made to wear thick spectacles to drive this point home I guess).
A delightful intrusion in their daily routine comes in the form of a charming young girl (Deepti Naval) that they spot from the window of their flat. Omi and Jai decide to take turns at attempting to woo her. The urgency and the excitement that this mere sighting of a pretty girl in the neighborhood brings to these two is quite relatable to what actually happens even in this time and age. They offer Siddharth an attempt at wooing her, but he declines. Then one by one Omi and Jai visit the girl’s home in the neighborhood. While Jai gets thrown out by the girl’s hefty brother, Omi walks out of her place after being mistaken for a plumber. Subsequently both of them, instead of admitting their failures in front of Siddharth, hatch up false stories of how they managed to woo the girl successfully and how she went on a date with both of them. Then on the pretext of sacrificing the girl for each other, they end the matter and vow to never think about the girl again.
Unknown to both of them, the same girl visits their home on a sales assignment for the ‘Chamko’ brand of detergent powder. Siddharth, being the only one at home, interacts with her and watches the whole sales demonstration, completely dazed by her charm and affability. In a not entirely chance encounter, they meet again. Slowly Siddharth and Neha, or Miss Chamko as he calls her, fall for each other and start meeting quite frequently. Siddharth also manages to get a job and later on, to his utmost surprise, he discovers that his boss is none other than Neha’s father. Things couldn’t be more perfect of Siddharth, but then Omi and Jai get to know about his affair with Neha. Slightly jealous of the fact that their friend had managed to woo a girl they couldn’t- they false a false picture about Neha in the mind of Siddharth.
The story is really uncomplicated and light hearted. The director creates an engaging set of characters and gives complete focus to their interplay and interactions instead of introducing unnecessary twists and turns and sub-plots. The actors do a good job and pitch in with truly natural performances. All of them are highly commendable, even the interesting role played by Saeed Jaffery of that of a neighborhood ‘panwallah’ who continuously keeps reminding them of their rising debt on cigarettes, but despite that takes keen interest in their affairs and wishes the best for them.
The one thing I didn’t like about this movie was its climax, which was probably designed as a tongue in cheek take on the way most Bollywood movies were at that time. Another instance the director tried using this tool was when Siddharth and Neha ridicule how film couples singing songs in gardens etc. when a plethora of people can watch them, but subsequently break into a song themselves. This sequence however is quite cute and brings a smile to your face. As a parting note- that can be said for the whole movie too…
PS- As per reports David Dhawan is remaking this film pretty soon- In my opinion he will murder the film by introducing unnecessary gags and songs- and will kill the soul of the film- i.e. its simplicity.
