Teaser : Dhoom3

The much awaited teaser arrives. We get to see looks of all actors, specially Katrina who is looking hot. Abhishek not sporting beard like in Dhoom2 and then Uday on bike.

The voiceover of Aamir is brilliant, his confidence in voice and the look in his eyes try to tell how brilliant a thief he is going to be.. to catch.  I would have liked some more shots of Aamir when he says those dialogues, but probably the makers wanna reveal his shots slowly, playing to the anticipation of his lovers. Also, since the actor is Aamir playing the villian.. maybe they wanted to use his acting power more than the style in teaser.  The best part of teaser is, the voiceover of Aamir, that slow motion frame of Aamir riding bike over, and the final stunt scene. Also, I am already liking the new background theme they have kept for him, though I hope they use the old famous one enough in the film too.

One of best teasers ever,  I am gonna watch this teaser a lot until trailer comes, and they did live upto the standard a teaser should had.. a teaser should always make you impatiently wait for the trailer release.

Movie Analysis : The Prestige

Directed by : Christopher Nolan
Imdb link -> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0482571/

Another of Nolan's masterpieces, thrilling and full of mysteries.

Read at your own risk, this post is full of spoilers... 


This film easily falls into the 'Memento' and 'Inception' category, because this one makes you think what happened there, did that character actually meant something else, what was the intention of that character, and did that really happen or it was just to fool the audience. Too many questions come up, and the only reason for that is a narrative that confuses you because you are so much involved in whats happening to the plot. You get almost no time to think except when the end credits roll.

Robert Angier (Hugh Jackman) and Alfred Borden (Christian Bale) work with illusionist Cutter (Michael Caine) who helps them in their acts for the magic show. One of those acts involves Angier's wife Julia (Piper Perabo) with her hands (tied by Alfred) and legs (tied by Angier) to go into a locked water tank and come out of it alive (through tricks). But, Alfred's mistake of putting wrong knot on her hand, takes her life away. Angier now seeks revenge from Alfred who has started his own show with help of a financer Fallon. How their rivalry affects the people around them, and what personal losses they both go through in this obsession.

Nolan uses non-linear narrative very effectively, making both Alfred and Angier read diaries of each other, narrated to us. The flashback is time and again mingled with the present.

When I watched the movie 1st time, I was totally engaged to the extent that I didn't care to check how much more is left, as I just didn't want it to end. I wanted to see the rivalry go on and on. Another point to note is that the secret of Alfred at 1st watch for me was that he has a split personality, specially the scene where he says to Olivia (Scarlett Johansson) that a part of him loved Sarah (Rebecca Hall) and the other part didnt. Just like he says same to Angier about the death of Julia.

Now, the 2nd watch when its known that the secret is he had a twin brother, Alfred (Freddie, one who dies) and Borden (who kills Angier). Hard to believe how well they change the look of the actors. It made the film even more interesting. It was time to look out for the scenes which involved Alfred and ones that had Borden. With Nolan as director, even knowing the secret doesn't help.. just like knowing the keyword for the cipher written diary wasnt enough for Angier. Because he just directs it skillfully leaving doubts and numerous possibilities.

Here's how I tried to decipher some of the key scenes of film ...

Whenever Sarah replied to 'I love you', if she felt it was true, it was a scene with Borden who loved her. And if she felt not true, it was Alfred who loved Olivia. Other clue Nolan gives is that Borden hates being called Freddie while Alfred likes it.. two occasions for it. Another is when Sarah says Mr Borden, and gets reply that its 'Alfred', and just when he leaves, she enters her room.. she finds Alfred inside, which was Borden.

The main difference in both characters of Alfred and Borden was, their nature. Borden was reserved, intelligent to crack the tricks of rival party, talks less, and probably didn't like too much of violence (just assuming, though its he who shots Angier or his clone to death in climax). While Alfred was short tempered (most of the loud fights involve him and not Borden), keen to take revenge from Angier.

I am again assuming that Julia was killed by Alfred, while Borden came to say sorry for it. And Angier shoots Alfred fingers (this one I am not fully sure), means Borden has to sacrifice his fingers later. This is in reference to the scene.. where Borden tells Angier 'this is total devotion to art, sacrifice'.. because Borden believed in it.  In another scene, Alfred tells the nephew of Sarah 'secret impresses no one, the trick you use it for is everything'.  Both Borden and Alfred followed these two principles throughout, which is why I loved these two scenes a lot.

That was one part of mystery in film, other is Angier's obsession of creating duplicates from the teleporter machine given by Tesla (David Bowie) Now I have to admit, this is the one that I feel like not giving importance, as its very difficult to tell whether the drowning or shot person was Angier or the duplicated Angier. And how did the conscious mind of original and the duplicated Angier work at the same time. Just like he says in the final dialogue, 'It took courage going into the machine, not knowing if I will be the one in the box or the prestige'. I read one interesting youtube comment of a guy, that holds true to Angier's and film's plot - the magic trick of bird where one of two brother's die, but no one knows whose turn it would be.. same was the case for Angier, he won't know if he will die or his clone.

Nolan even gives three characters their own magic tricks in the form of narration. Cutter does it to the girl of Borden, taking bird (Act1), hiding it (Act2) and bringing it back (Act3). Angier does it when he makes Alfred read his diary (Act1), upto the point where he goes into the machine and vanishes (Act2) and then he comes in front of him in the jail as Lord Cardlow (Act3). Alfred and Borden do it together, Alfred makes Borden's daughter look at the rubber ball (Act1), Alfred before being hanged says the magic word 'Abracadabra' (only time its shown in movie, but at a perfect time), and he is gone (killed, Act2), and Angier sees a rubber ball coming towards him, Fallon takes his hat off, and reveals himself as Borden (Act3). This was the most fantastic part that I realised much later after having seen the movie.

Other interesting aspects in the movie are :

• The opening shot, which is actually the one where in latter part of movie Angier realises the tesla machine is working. But Nolan takes that shot to warn the audience how much confusion they may face in the narrative to follow 'Are you watching closely'. And I so loved this line, which is used later in jail by Alfred twice.

•  The idea of showing the final magic trick in parts before going to the flashback of both rivals through diaries was also good one. Nolan could had chosen to directly begin the story from the court scene, but that scene before adds extra edge to the rivalry where we would soon reach in the narrative. Also, it makes you take a initial side, who are you supporting. At that scene, I was with Angier.

• The character of Cutter adds to the drama and mystery, because its never clear whose side he is with, and whether he is looking for his own profit, when he demands the Tesla machine to be sold to him. But, Nolan keeps it a very small sub-plot if you can call it, never gives it extra importance.

• Fallon never talks, even when its turn of the short tempered Alfred to be fallon. Nolan wanted to tell that Alfred was devoted to his art, and he wont make a mistake of revealing his identity. Only word Fallon says is 'Good-bye', also Nolan made sure there are no long close up shots of Fallon, though to be frank I doubt if I would had still got that it was Alfred only, the disguise was too fantastic.

• Both Angier and Borden take turns at getting one up to each other, one kills Julia (a accident I assume, not something he intended) then other revenges with shot at him. One spoils the bird magic act, and other steals the transporter magic trick idea but with Cutter's illusion. And then the Root (double of Angier) revealed to audience, with Angier's death act (which could be one of his clone). So, Nolan never tried to favour one character..

• When Tesla warns Angier about obsession which may lead to his downfall, Nolan gives a hint where Angier's character is leading to, his obsession to be better than Borden and destroy his happiness was going to go against him only. He lost Julia, then Olivia, then his broken knee, and later he gambled with his own life.

• Nolan keeps both Angier and Borden characters grey, both make mistakes. Its only that Angier commits bigger ones.. the scene where he says that now he doesn't care about his wife, all he cares is about the trick. Thats where I took side against him because more than revenge of his wife Julia, he was after Borden's failure in magic shows. Angier in another scene hates Root getting the applause, so much that he asks Cutter to interchange the roles, Angier is keen to see the praise of audience after fooling them which he was missing while doing it with Root as double.  It would be tough to say that only Alfred was wrong, because even  Borden allowed Sarah die by not giving her full love she should had got. Alfred did the same with Olivia, but he made up for it by not letting Sarah's daughter get affected by parts of love.


The background score is very light, and adds extra mystery layer.. I specially love the one that is used where Julia dies, and the one that intercuts Borden/Alfred act in the last scene involving Alfred in jail, Angier in theatre and Cutter leading Borden to Angier.

Both Christian Bale and Hugh Jackman deliver outstanding performances, it would be wrong to pick best among them. While Michael Caine added more mystery even with his small role.  And good supporting performances by both female leads. Also, special mention to how Hugh Jackman played Root, as well as David Bowie's portrayal of Tesla.


There are two aspects that I haven't understood yet.. (correct me if anywhere I interepreted the plot wrong)

• Who wrote the diary that Angier reads.. was it Borden or Alfred.. or both wrote a part of it.

• What does Angier in final scene want to convey to  Borden when he says 'You really don't know, it was the look on their faces'. Was it a routine before death confession, or he meant something more with that ?


If there is a single thing I have to say against hte movie... then it would be the choice of song at end credits... it looked totally misplaced, a simple background theme would had been better option.



Overall, The Prestige adds to the long list of Nolan movies that I love.. and probably new secrets will keep getting revealed with each watch.. there's a lot in the movie, that comes across the more you think about or pay attention or in Bale's words 'Watch closely'.

Movie Analysis : Satyagraha

Directed by : Prakash Jha
Imdb link -> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2275802/

Strong 1st half is let-down with a disastrous 2nd half.. Average Movie

Read at your own risk, the post is full of spoilers. 

My journey with Prakash Jha cinema began with Raajneeti, and unlike many others I very much loved it. I am yet to watch his two much acclaimed movies, 'Gangaajal' and 'Apharan', hoping to catch them sooner. But ever since Raajneeti, Jha's films hasn't left me with the impact I thought I am gonna have with his films. Much on the lines of Madhur Bhandarakar since Fashion.

Like his previous films, Satyagraha again is a political issue based movie on the lines of Anna's anshan. Though the movie isn't based on anshan, it just forms a important part of the narrative. To be frank, Prakash Jha begins the film on perfect note, the 1st half is very close to flawless or worth sitting for 2nd half thinking this may be a winner. The reason is that he doesn't try to show Manav (Ajay Devgan) lifestyle and the corruption he himself has been part of. Instead, he focusses on the main character i.e Dwarka (Amitabh Bachchan). The adarsh and usool he lives by, and the ones he taught his own son Akhilesh (Indraneil Sengupta) too. Dwarka finds problems in the way people like Manav live, he believes its these modern people who are contributing to the corrupt system of India.

Jha keeps the Dwarka's family story as main plot, while he shifts the story some years forward. A tragedy happens with Dwarka family, Manav returns and thereby starts the revolution against the system.  Everything looks going good, but in 2nd half he divulges into un-necessary parameters. First, the awkardly built romantic relationship between Manav and Yasmeen (Kareena Kapoor), who even break into a romantic song which had to be avoided for the narrative sake. Then, the way he directs the scene where Dwarka decides he will go on anshan was unconvincing. Thats a reason why I never felt that special feeling when Raghupati Raghav Rajaram song comes, even though I love that song and the way Prasoon Joshi has changed lyrics to match the current system of India.

And then to make it worse, Jha quickly ends the film in few minutes, a powerful minister Balram (Manoj Bajpayee) for almost 100 minutes of movie, suddenly becomes weak and without any power in final  10 minutes. That scene was most funnily edited when they show a shot of character telling Balram is missing from his house, and the cut to a location where Balram is and Manav opens the door and beats him. At that time, only thing I was wondering that Jha was surely in a hurry to end the film either while shooting or while editing happened.

1st half promises you a revolution that would anger you against the system, as we all know how badly corrupt it is. But, the 2nd half diverts in every possible direction and almost defeats the purpose the film had set it to do. The sub-plots of Manav's corrupt life before coming to Dwarka place after death of his son, and the secret search as to how he was killed by Manav and a police inspector.. was stretched. Also, showing Yasmeen go against Manav feeling he is taking wrong direction.. to add drama.. didn't work for me either.


Performances wise, Amitabh Bachchan shines brilliantly, special mention to that scene where he enters the collector's office, slaps him saying 'janta ke naukar hai aap, aur battmeezi bardaasht nahi karenge hum'. That for me was the most powerful scene of the movie, or maybe the only one.

Ajay Devgan is decent, seen him in such roles too often. so doesn't really bring anything new. Same goes for Manoj Bajpayee, though his way of delivering dialogues always gives same roles something extra, along with the way he improvises. Arjun Rampal is fine, not as impressive as he was in Raajneeti.

Kareena Kapoor looks beautiful as a journalist, thats it.. her performance was weak. Amrita Rao is wasted in a small role, only worth scene for her was when she goes to collector's office to get the money Balram had promised to her family.


Overall, Satyagraha had a great intention.. it looked like going towards it but in the middle it lost its way and ended up nowhere. The message they wanted to convey comes across but not in the manner one would have liked. Still the film is watchable for 1st half and good performances from Amitabh and Manoj.


Verdict : AVERAGE

Masala Movies - Why do films like Chennai Express work ?

With the way Chennai Express has broken records despite being such a ridiculous bad movie... I thought of writing this post.  My question is - Was it the movie that won, or the non-stop promotions of Shahrukh or it only tells the big bad truth about Indian audience ? Surely its not the 1st one for me...

Just today I saw a post on facebook comparing Chennai Express with Bhaag Milkha Bhaag, and as expected Chennai Express got more votes in it too. Needless to say that the blind fans are the ones who prefer a bad movie over a very good one.


Its not the first time when a over the top senseless movie earned lot of money, many salman films did it in past, specially Bodyguard or Race2. Par afsos tab hota hai jab you see a stupid movie get the no.1 tag and break records. It tells how bad audience taste has become.  I wont be surprised if some shahrukh lovers call Chennai Express as one of their everfav shahrukh movies. Maybe I have to stop associating 'Intelligence' with fans as well as lovers.


The main point is, why do Masala movies earn so much. Even 3 Idiots apart from 'action' had everything in it but if you have good sense of watching movies, you would agree to me that 3 Idiots was miles ahead of Chennai Express in quality (No, I am not aamir fan.. and Yes, I am Shahrukh lover).

The aam janta doesn't like 'no entertainment' movies, 'Shanghai', 'Lootera'  and 'Madras Cafe' are best examples. Shanghai was a total failure at boxoffice, despite being among the top5 films of the year for me. Lootera had small entertainment quotient that definately helped it, but I noticed people having problems with the content in theatre. Madras Cafe has worked very well so far, but why not 100 crs or 200 crs for films like this ?

Does it mean that masala movies have repeativity value ? Or does it mean that there is audience that watches masala movies again and again, but the audience that watches non-masala movies don't like to re-watch it ?  The masala loving audience mainly constitutes either the aam janta or the family audience, while non-masala reduces both of those audiences to a larger extent. Probably there lies the difference why the former films work so much.

Please don't give me the crap that people come to watch movies to free their mind therefore they love masala movies. That's the cliche and idiotic line I have heard from many people.

I don't keep track of Hollywood movies, but would love to know if bad movies earn so much there too ? And are its audience also so stupid like ours to not accept that they liked a bad movie.


If every good film or atleast 70% of them were accepted by the audience, then I would not have felt bad watching Chennai Express reach 200cr. But, its not the case.. here people make bad films earn way too much, and good films end up as flops most of the times.

I don't know if that day would ever come when the cards reverse and people appreciate good films more. If they like bad films that also is welcome, but please prefer good over bad.  Its true that everyone have their own likings but another fact is.. when bad films work so much, the film-makers get excited to make more poor movies because they know that audience is there who would accept it and take it to 100 cr or above.


Today I unfollowed shahrukh for first time on twitter, such is anger towards a super bad film doing so well. Now, I would follow him only when he does a good film...

This post is only for those who didnt' like Chennai Express, the others won't connect to it. and I have no interest to connect to them either.

May Indian audience change for good one day and our films grow creatively ....

Trailer : Diana

I still remember that day when she died, I was watching the live telecast of her cremation on T.V channels. I didn't knew much about her then except that she was known as 'Princess Diana'.. and I still don't know much about her.

Somehow I feel I would connect to this movie, it looks well made from the trailer, and from it looks like Diana's personal life got affected due to her professional duties. Might even be a oscar performance by Naomi Watts like Meryl Streep in 'The Iron Lady' was last year.

I am definately not gonna skip this movie, even if it gets below 2 star ratings by critics.

Movie Analysis : Madras Cafe

Directed by : Shoojit Sircar
Imdb link -> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2855648/


Superbly shot and edited political thriller, with few weak points

Read at your own risk, the post is full of spoilers... 


You direct very well, edit very well, shoot it very well... but you make mistakes in the way you narrate it out to the audience and there you mess it up. Madras Cafe works for me so much, yet the fact that Vikram (John Abrahim) narrates the story to a father from the start doesn't gel with me at all.

For people like me (I am sure there will be), who didn't knew a thing about Rajiv Gandhi's assassination, I just didn't want to know in the first conversation scene itself that Vikram failed to save his life. I know most of our films have happy endings, this one doesn't have it.. so that could be one reason why director wanted to take confidence of audience that what the film will be heading to. And other reason would ofcourse be, that he expected most of the audience to know how Rajiv Gandhi was killed and the film will not try to develop thrilling moments for that.

But my question is, if they started the story right from the developments of Tamil Sri Lankans and LTF, with voiceover of John (not narrating to the father, but to the audience), and then taken it to the right end. Then, there was a chance of that feeling coming 'kya pata bach jaaye', who knows director opted for new ending, who knows its not totally realistic depiction. That suspense factor director missed out.

Plus, the final beautiful lines of Rabindranath Tagore looked awkward the way they were shown. Instead of it, should had kept visuals with silent background score, and the lines said  over it.. it would had made it look much better.

Despite all the mentioned problems I had with the film, what I loved was Shoojit's direction, and the editing. The editing was so tight, and it didn't allow you to remain with a latest proceeding, immediately shifting to next one. That made 1st half to certain extent confusing, which is commendable work. The fast cuts allowed the thrill element sneak in at various parts, be in 1st half or the finale of 2nd half. Good background score used too, be it the south song (I dont know which it was) used when Vikram goes to Jaffna for 1st time, or that theme which is used frequently  when something big is about to happen. I like how they showed the assassination day too, the whole effect of pre-blast, and post-blast was superb. And I am saying that when I knew (or was allowed to know) that he will die now.

The conversations between Jaya (Nargis Fakhri) and anyone else she talks with in entire film, appeared very wierd, for the simple reason that she talks in english and other person replies in hindi. What Shoojit should had done is kept the entire conversation in English or let Nargis speak few words in hindi.  He tried to keep it very realistic and not compromise on using dub for her, but this way he made those scenes look slightly awkward to say the least.

The tension built right from the moment the flashback begins till the assassination day had no scope of a song at all. So, its good to see Shoojit didn't bow down to the demand of entertainment seeking audience forcing song into narrative.

Regarding how accurate the facts are in the movie, I would say Shoojit has fictionalised it in various ways. Most facts are right, and some aren't shown probably citing the risk of film not getting released. Therefore blaming the director or writer for not including various portions associated with the event would be bad. In any case, its not a Rajiv Gandhi biopic, it just involves his character, and that main day when his assassination happened, thats about it.

Among Performances, John Abrahim does pretty well in the main plot where he plays the officer. Only place he looks out of sort is the scenes with father in church. Nargis Fakhri did fair work, leaving asides the hindi dialogue problem. Her expressions and body language playing the reporter was bang on.

The supporting cast was very new, and it kind of reminded me of Kahaani. New cast and so effective as well as powerful performances. Prakash Belawadi and Siddhartha Basu were the pick of them, probably the reason their close up shots look so good too. Would love to see more of them in future films.


Overall, Madras Cafe is a very good political thriller.. it does have its lows but doesn't effect the main impact of the plot. Plus, some good performances from the starcast. It had in it to be India's Argo as John said once in interview, but I would say it missed out on that by some margin.


Verdict : VERY GOOD


P.S : If you are going to watch this film for entertainment value, please stay away  and watch the stupid Chennai Express once again instead. Madras Cafe is only for quality and intelligent movie lovers.

Movie Analysis : The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

Directed  by : Sergio Leone
Imdb link -> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0060196/

Long but very engaging and brilliant in all aspects.

The Ugly : God is with us, because he hates the Yanks too.
The Good : God's not on our side, because he hates idiots also.

The opening credits begin with that splendid background piece that has been thereafter used in numerous hindi films. Its very much like Pulp Fiction, only difference being that here no scene comes before credits. The theme is used many times in narrative, though I felt it was over-used but I didnt mind it as I like the theme very much.

The pace of movie is slow, so much that it takes almost 10 mins before a character says a dialogue. All 3 characters are introduced in reverse order of the title, The Ugly (Tuco) played by Eli Wallach, The Bad (Angel Eyes) played by Lee Van Cleef and The Good (Blondie) played by Clint Eastwood.  All have dramatic starts and ends to their sequences. I loved, 'The Bad' one specially, as it had slightly longer suspense drama.

The story is about finding the gold buried under a cemetary about which only a certain Bill Carson (Antonio Casale) knows. The Bad is after it, while The Good and The Ugly get invovled into the race out of nowhere.

The scenes between The Good and The Ugly provide excellent humour, specially Eli Wallach who seeks revenge from Blondie for betraying him. But he always ends up getting himself in trouble, and Blondie too later. That scene where Tuco makes Blondie walk across desert was superbly shot. Also, the makeup work done on Blondie, it was hard to see his face with those closeup shots.

My personal fav scene is when Tuco has to suddenly change his tone with Blondie, 'You are my friend, dont die, dont die'. That one where Tuco goes to buy pistol, full comical scene. Or when Tuco thinks the horses coming aren't enemies, and he would say hello and go away.. the look on his face when the officer's uniform turns from gray to blue.  That final scene when all three have to earn the gold, its superbly cut and intentionally lengthened with wide shots to mid shots to extreme close up. I actually guessed wrong as to what would be the outcome of that sequence. And the final dialogue of Tuco to Blondie, a abuse inspite of what he did for him.. just to live upto his name 'The Ugly'.

And I loved the end too, the director very well justified the titles given to all the 3 characters, their fate was similar to it. He creates the drama, with Blondie knowing half the secret about gold, and Tuco other half.. as a result both can't kill each other. That scene where Angel Eyes says that isn't 3 the perfect number, just a giveaway to where the final sequence will lead to.. as other people gonna get eliminated. The last scene where as viewer we watch what is going to happen with Tuco as he looks for help from Blondie, again drama built by extending the time to the scene.

Also, the small plot where Tuco and Blondie again land into a unknown territory thanks to Tuco mainly.. was very well put into the narrative leading to the climax of gold in cemetary.

All three main leads did great work, though Eli Wallach was my pick of the three as he would bring a light humour in almost every scene involving him. Also, Clint Eastwood was excellent, love the scene where he asks Tuco to bring his ear closer as he spills water over him saying my friend will take good care of me. Lee Van has the lesser screen time of them I guess, though he creates his bad image right from first murder he does, or the music scene where he beats Tuco.

Cinematography is excellent, also the camera angles.. for instance when Tuco runs around the cemetary, all his pov shots were well cut with other angles.



Overall, I completely enjoyed the movie, great performances and technically without any flaws. Yes, its nearly 3 hr long but do you mind watching a long movie with all those merits, I doubt so.