The Bollywood Observer

Tracking Bollywood’s emergence into a new era.

A Small Leap for Television…

There is a glimmer of hope amidst the dramatic daily soaps and mind numbing reality programming in Indian television. Yes, reality programming, including the ridiculous copies of American favorites (examples) and singing competitions have taken the majority of prime-time programming and ratings, similar to the trends in the US. Daily soaps are still prime time and will continue to be so in the years to come. But Sony Entertainment Television, one of the standard and most popular channels in the country, is trying something new.

The channel, which is home to Indian Idol and the Indian version of Dancing with the Stars, has gotten rid of most of its daily soaps. It has also launched two new shows, Mahi Way and Rishta.com. The shows are one hour long and only air- wait for it- once a week! It’s a complete departure from the daily soaps (which are similar to telenovelas).

These two shows are funny, witty, and can be slightly uncomfortable for me to watch with my parents- a rare occurrence when watching Indian television. It’s different from previous risky programming, such as serials made by Ajai Sinha. Sinha’s ventures were always scandalous, ripe with sexual innuendos and extra-marital affairs. SET’s newest ventures have characters that drink wine, go clubbing, date, and wear western clothing. Pretty standard stuff for Delhi and Mumbai adults, but also a reality that is avoided in soap operas and serials that have dominated television.

Mahi Way is a show about a  lovable and bubbly Agony Aunt columnist who happens to be overweight. Her best friend is gay and she is also friends with a gay couple who live together (progress!). She is career oriented, drinks wine, dates, yet still has family values, lives with her family, and is under a lot of pressure to get married.

This is complete departure from Balaji Entertainment, which replaced some great television in the 90’s with stories that were always the same at the core. The central characters (always women) were from middle class backgrounds and marry into a rich family. The antagonists were always women who wore a lot of make up and jewelry and were not religious. The men were usually flawed and rarely central characters. Of course there were variances and some shows that tried to break the mold, but were usually cancelled or ended up following the same mold. During the last 15 years, these soaps dominated. In fact, it was said they even helped women gain confidence in their own households. Then reality programming broke in and stole some of their thunder.

The two new shows don’t fit these molds, and it’s incredibly refreshing. Rishta.com is about two friends who start a matrimonial business together. One of my favorite episodes was about a guy who was dragged to the company by his parents who were desperate to get their son married. Turns out, he’s gay. But what’s so great about his charecter was that he wasn’t stereotypically gay, meaning he wasn’t extra feminine or wearing really tight shiney clothes, as is usually how gay men are portrayed in most Indian pop culture.

Both shows have an unlikely source– Yash Raj Films. It was about time the production company that once dominated formulaic film making is in the business of making innovative television. It is annoying that they shamelessly promote their music and films, but hey, I’ll take what I can get.

The shows are really funny and entertaining, but still have a women target demographic. They’re the equivalent of Gilmore Girls or Ugly Betty, but in the midst of daily soaps and reality television, the change is very welcome.

CORRECTION:  Yash Raj Films have launched five new shows on SET. The other three are Lift Kara de (Talk/reality show with director Karan Johar), Seven (similiar to Heroes) and Powder, a dramatic series that I will review in a future post.

Hillary Reminds us– Bollywood can do Better.

The Clintons have always been India’s darlings (although Mr. Obama’s Hanuman charm did win over many hearts). Mrs. Clinton took full advantage of this love and won Indian hearts all over again.

Hillary’s quote that was heard around the world  (or on the blogosphere) was not from the heated debate with the Indian environment minister, Jairam Ramesh, nor from the various deals brokered. It was about Bollywood. The Secretary of State said:

“Anyone who watches Bollywood movies will think Indian lives are very dramatic with happy endings. Hollywood, on the other hand, makes people believe that we don’t wear clothes and that we are always fighting with one another.”

Ouch, Madame Secretary. You touched a sore spot. Indeed, Bollywood definitely conveys such a message to the world. I just don’t care for it. She definitely pinned Bollywood correctly (and I thank her for leaving out the part that all of our movies have songs and dances). But, I want Bollywood to be more than that. I want diversity in genres, in plots, in themes. Bollywood shouldn’t imitate Hollywood, nor does it need a complete makeover. All Bollywood needs is a face lift.

No more rona dhona (crying dramatically) or songs in the Swiss Alps or cliche story lines. Let’s make movies that represent the changing dynamic of India. Let’s open our minds and make progressive films that can still be funny, still have songs, or have none at all. There can be unhappy endings, movies without love stories, even movies that are (gasp!) less than two hours long. We see the change already happening, we just need to speed things up. Next time Hillary visits, let’s aim for a visit to the local movie hall, where she could watch a Bollywood film that’s really Indian, possibly (gasp again!) without a happy ending.

Hats off to Bollywood’s Star

Imagine– Prime Minister Manmohan Singh visits the US, and one of his key meetings are with the creators of Wall-E because their film was about global warming and human waste.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton discusses India's education with Bollywood star Aamir Khan. That didn’t happen, obviously. But, when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited India, she met up with Aamir Khan. Before you scratch your heads, it’s because Khan is the brand ambassador for The Times of India’s Teach India Initiative. Why is a Bollywood star the brand ambassador for the program? Because he made a movie about a dyslexic child’s struggle with the Indian school system.

Before you think I’m pulling an Arundhati Roy and think it’s ridiculous for actors to voice their opinion or take a stance with social issues, let me tell you that I think what Khan’s doing is brilliant– and here’s why.

Years ago, I wrote an opinion editorial about Lage Raho Munnabhai’s incredible achievement of reviving Gandhi’s teachings in India (yes, Gandhigiri was so forgotten that it needed reviving). I thought it was incredible– and I thought, this is why Bollywood is great. Everyone watches mainstream Bollywood films. And if made right, they really can have an incredible social impact. Aamir Khan’s directorial debut Taare Zameen Par was one such film that highlighted a huge problem in Indian society. I’m not sure how much of an impact it had, if any, on the educational system in India, but it was definitely a topic that needed the limelight.

Khan and Clinton had an important conversation on the many problems in Indian education, like the lack of diversity in majors students pursue, or the style of teaching that the majority of teachers use. Usually, talks about education in India center around the need to make sure rural areas and women are getting a good education. Of course, that’s a topic of utmost importance. But a focus on the current methods of teaching that will impact future students must also be reviewed.

Aamir Khan, as many Bollywood actors, have been criticized for their support of different social issues (such as the Narminda dam). If Bollywood stars are capable of bringing important topics to focus, then I’m all for Bollywood stars getting active with social issues.

Waiting for Kaminey

Kaminey is the next big film to release in Bollywood, and I’m really excited.

The film is directed by one of my favorites, Vishal Bhardwaj. Originally a composer (Maachis was one of his best albums) and good friends with Gulzar, his films are some of the best that have come out of Bollywood in recent years. Most notably, Omkara and Maqbool, both interpretations of Shakespere plays (like Gulzar’s Angoor), were highly appreciated by audiences and critics. Maqbool, starring Pankaj Kapoor, Tabu and Irrfan Khan, reenergized Kapoor and Khan’s career. The haunting interpration of Macbeth reminded us why Tabu is the best.

Omkara went a few steps further. Although Maqbool had better performances and was overall a better film, Omkara was much more mainstream than Maqbool. While Maqbool had more parallel cinema stars like Tabu, Pankaj Kapoor, Naseeruddin Shah and Om Puri, Omkara had Saif Ali Khan, Kareena Kapoor, mast item-numbers from Bipasha Basu, an incredible performance from Konkana Sen Sharma, Ajay Devgan and Vivek Oberoi. All were phenomenal in their roles, and it was Khan’s most important and needed performance in his career after Dil Chahta Hai. This film also reminded us that Kapoor can act. It also reminded us that films with incredible depth, meaningful dialogue, and tragedy don’t have to exclude filmi item songs. Serious films can have some fun too, and Omkara taught us that.
So what will Kaminey teach us? Priyanka Chopra already had a fantastic 2008 (Fashion, Dostana, let’s pretend Love Story 2050 didn’t happen) and Shahid Kapoor needs what Omkara did for Khan, to show that he can deliver a performance different from his default role (Jab We Met). Let’s hope this caper helps remind Bollywood what good films are!

New York: Inspire Please.

To really understand the impact of the latest films out of Bollywood, New York, one thing must be understood about Bollywood– it’s all about trends. As soon as an off-beat film manages to win over the audiences, filmmakers become “inspired” by the success and make films that are eerily similar to the unlikely hit film. Some of these imitations work (Jaane tu ya Jaane na), and some, well, fail (Julie, Sheesha).

Of course, this is common in any industry. But things are a bit different in Bollywood, as usual. Take for example the scary movie phase that started with the success of Raaz. When the thriller became a hit, horror films such as  Bhoot, Saaya, Kaal, Kasoor, and Naina followed. The same thing happened after the skin show Murder was a hit. Many scandalous and sexual films were produced after.

jab_we_met_02The most recent example of this phase is probably the one caused by Jab We Met. The film was different from the other successful films of 2007 because it didn’t require the Khan star power like Chak De India or Taare Zameen Par did.  Jab We Met worked , and soon similar films such as Kismat Konnection (failed) and Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na (excellent) released.

I won’t even get into the multi-starrer phase or the sequel phase in Bollywood. It’s too disturbing to recall.

So what brings me to discuss this Bollywood phenomenon today? It occurred to me after watching New York. This film is probably the next one make producers rush to find directors and directors rush to find producers with hopes for a sure-fire hit. This is because, after a series of dependable Yash Raj Films productions failed (they also produced this film), filmmakers have been scrambling to find films that would be dependable hits at the box office.

New York dealt with the “detainee” issue after 9/11 and the Patriot Act’s power of placing people in jail without any rights. At first glance, New York seems like a film that has some sort of political message. But, that really isn’t the case. What is different about this film is that it takes a risky political theme and uses it to make a thriller, but in a less “let’s kill the bad terrorists” way, like most movies about terrorism in Bollywood do. The film is more about entertainment (don’t forget, Yash Raj Films produced it) than about the detainee issue.

Let me clarify my point. By having Irrfan Khan and John Abraham’s characters as complete opposites, and then throwing in two moderate players in the mix, there really isn’t any stand being taken. There is barely a mention of John Abraham’s (the terrorist) religion. His character’s name, Sameer, could be either Hindu or Muslim. You do find out later that he is Muslim, but the word “inshallah” or “jihad” is never used. It’s not even a completely realistic point of view. Yes, terrorists definitely can and have been born out of he injustice caused by the Patriot Act, but the dramatic twists took away from any political weight, and what was left was an extremely exaggerated version of reality. This was purposefully done and successfully accomplished.

John Abraham’s character was portrayed as an all-American man (well, Bollywood’s interpretation of it) who called himself Sam, not Sameer, and was violated by the government as a possible 9/11 suspect. This contrast was made to show the extent of the detainee problem. But, the character was supposed to be arrogant (which was said over and over). The FBI agent played by Khan and Abraham’s wife played by Katrina Kaif  said that it was the timing of the situation that caused such injustices. No firm stance was taken on the matter.

This film wasn’t made to make a political statement, as I just explained. And the script did have giant holes in it, as usual. But, the film may have started its own new phase. It was an all-out entertainer, a thriller, an action movie. New York had very few songs, had a short love triangle that didn’t take over the film, and had some light moments, albeit few and far between. It wasn’t a formulaic masala film, it was definitely something new. And it worked.  It’s better to avoid the validity of the political concepts altogether.

ghajini-wwwtumtubecomNew York could inspire the next batch of filmmakers in the coming months and years, and here’s hoping it’s for the better.  Action films in Bollywood have lately consisted of films like Ghajini, Race, and Tashan, all of which were full of dance sequences and weren’t much of a departure from the norm (other than maybe more of a skin show). New York offered something new to the viewers, and most importantly for filmmakers, it brought people to the box office.

My verdict is that New York has obviously entertained the masses, and it took a new route to do so. Hats off to that– but there was definitely huge potential to make the film much better (tighter script, better role for Kaif). It seems like this film will inspire many more of its kind. Here’s hoping that some good will come out of it.

Bollywood’s peeking out from its closet

Movie still from the film Dostana

Movie still from the film Dostana

Finally. Finally finally finally. Indian courts yesterday ruled that gay sex is no longer illegal in India, stating that “The inclusiveness that Indian society traditionally displayed, literally in every aspect of life, is manifest in recognizing a role in society for everyone.”

Thankfully, in this new age of Bollywood where fimmakers are actually veering away from formulaic masalas, some films did have gay characters and addressed some issues pertaining to the gay community, some better than others. Here’s a look at some of those films that made an impact:

  • Honeymoon Travels, Ptd. Ltd (2007)– A light film with some heavy themes. One of them was of an gay non-resident Indian who married an Indian girl he met online. Another newlywed couple start to face problems when the husband discovers that he may be gay. The reason why the film was important is because it doesn’t portray the two gay characters as cross dressers (which is Bollywood’s default definition of homosexuality). The men are perfectly normal, and are gay. It’s not overly dramatic, it’s actually very relatable. Hats off to the director!
  • Fashion (2008)– The film was another from Madhur Bhandarkar, who is famous for his films with strong female leads. The film was mainstream, thanks to the strong backing of Ronnie Screwvala (the producer), and the lead actor Priyanka Chopra, but still touched on themes that were seldom addressed in films before. One of them was homosexuality. Some men were openly gay, while another openly gay established fashion designer asked a female friend to marry him because of pressure from his mother. She does, knowing full well that he is gay. The film did a great job handling the subject because it wasn’t demeaning and it was a realistic portrayal of gay men needing to marry to appease their family.
  • My Brother… Nikhil (2005)– This film came out years before any of these others. I would credit it with opening the gates for homosexuality in Bollywood. The film wasn’t like the others– it was serious, and it was a tear-jerker. Also, the main character, unlike the other films, was actually gay. The protagonist, played wonderfully by Sanjay Suri, was diagnosed with HIV. The film doesn’t show any love scenes between the two men, but it does show a type of intimacy that was never before shown between two men in Bollywood. The movie was produced by one of the most powerful production companies in India, Yash Raj Films, but the promos never touched on the gay relationship, just on the AIDS theme.
  • Dostana (2008)–I saved this movie for last because it is getting all the hype when it comes to homosexuality in Bollywood. (The New York Times even referred to it in its article about the court case today.) The reason why this film is a big deal is because it is produced by Karan Johar, and stars three A-list actors. Personally, I found some of the story ridiculous (like Priyanka Chopra’s wardrobe, or why Bobby Deol was even in that film). The two leading men (Abhishek Bachchan, John Abraham) pretend to be gay so they can live in an apartment with a girl who has an overprotective aunt. It was a masala flick that was a bit different, but still did have all the songs and ridiculous wardrobe choices and overacting. Although the actors pretend to be gay, homosexuality isn’t looked down upon, and a doting mother even accepts her son and his son-in-law. I wouldn’t say that the film was revolutionary for gay rights, but it seemed to make it OK to be gay, which was definitely needed. I just wished that the  characters would have actually been gay.

I have left out Straight because the film failed and didn’t really seem to make sense, but it’s worth a mention because the leading character (Viinay Pathak) thinks he might be gay. It wasn’t that revolutionary, or even that good. I didn’t include Fire because it wasn’t really a Bollywood film and was made way before the period of Bollywood I’m referring to, although it was fantastic. Movies like Girlfriend wasn’t included either because it was all skin and no depth.

Obviously, Bollywood has a long way to go. I’m hoping that Bollywood moves on from only showing cross dressers or gay characters included in the script just for comic relief. Hopefully this progressive movement by the Delhi Court ushers in an even more progressive movement from Bollywood.

Remembering Michael Jackson through A.R. Rahman

When I think of Bollywood and Michael Jackson, I automatically think of this song.

It’s not an obvious copy of anything Jackson, which definitely were common in the 80’s.

The song “Urvashi” by A.R. Rahman was definitely before his Slumdog days, even before his Chaiya Chaiya days. The song, which was from Prabhu Deva’s film Humse Hai Muqabala, makes you feel nostalgic for the 1990s and for the late Michael Jackson.

The song made the now famous singer/ composer Shankar Mahadevan famous. Rahman, who joined Mahadevan for the vocals, made the song extremely popular and catchy.

Today, there are many noteworthy composers who take risks with their music, such as Pritam, Salim-Sulaiman, Vishal-Shekhar and Shankar Ehsaan Loy. In the 90’s, it was Rahman who left the typical Jatin-Lalit and Nadeem-Shravan melodies and made music that was distinctly original, whether it was Roja, Bombay, Dil Se, Taal or Rangeela.

“Urvashi” in particular stands out to me. For one, it was one of his early hits, before his name was a household one in the north (he was already extremely popular in South India). And the other is definitely because of the lyrics of the song.

The chorus simply says, “Take it easy Urvashi,” and the whole point of the song is to just go with the flow, a modern version of Dev Anand’s “Mein zindagi ka saath nibhaata chala gaya.”

Some favorite verses from the song are sometimes comical, sometimes revolutionary. Some favorite verses translated:

Urvashi, Urvashi, take it easy, Urvashi
…..
The way to win is by having a take it easy policy
There are only four days of bliss,
Youth is a fantasy

The power went off during Chitrahaar (popular TV show)
take it easy policy

After studying, still failed
take it easy policy

Father said that you’re mother’s enemy
take it easy policy

Commit sins, and wash them away
take it easy policy
……
Cats aren’t vegitarians, not everyone is God
Women won’t have equal rights without a revolution
Times have changed, old thoughts won’t work

She didn’t come for the movie
take it easy policy

If there’s an old hag sitting next to you
take it easy policy

If you have to work on Sunday
take it easy policy

She loves but then asks for money

It’s an incredible song, made better with Prabhu Deva’s dance moves. Here’s the video:

Bharat ko bachale Vidhaata.

Ram Gopal Verma’s new trailer for his film Rann somehow already managed to get banned by the censor board and reached the Supreme Court, who ordered the Censor Board to reconsider its ruling.

If you watch the trailer, hopefully you will recognize the melody and the words. It’s India’s national anthem, with some added lyrics. The song by no means tainted the national anthem or voiced any anti-Indian sentiments, yet it was banned.

The lyrics addressed the growing divide between Indian states and its people. It addressed India’s apathetic nature towards politics and the government, as was seen earlier this year when, despite major efforts to increase voter turnout, it was still only 50 percent.

The Censor Board referred to a law which stated that the National Anthem could not be altered, thus banning the trailer of the movie. But isn’t that at odds with the basic concept of the freedom of speech? Even if the song was unpatriotic and anti-Indian, it would surely warrant controversy, but definitely not a ban. And this song is far from either– the words and the creativity in which the song was rendered does not deserve such treatment from a progressive democracy.

The song isn’t anywhere near a performance by The Roots in California, where they sang Bob Dylan’s “Masters of War” but started the song by singing lyrics on the tune of the National Anthem. Some lyrics, directed at the leaders of the country at that time, were: “You play with my world like its your little toy… i just want you to know, i can see behind your masks. ” Very tame compared to Rann, yet no problem.

RGV has done many crazy things over the years, including some incredible films (Satya, Company) and some not so much (Daud, Gayab). But in this case, more power to him, and to the what should be progressive country of India. As said so wonderfully in the song, “Bharat ko bachale vidhaata.” God save India.

Bollywood’s growing up, and we’re watching.

When people think Bollywood, the script pretty much goes like this: The colors are so pretty! The dances are so fun! It’s escapism at its best! Everyone is so pretty! The acting is over the top. The story lines are completely unrealistic.

While many of these thoughts accurately reflect many Bollywood films, another style of Bollywood that stands in complete opppostion from the mainstream masala flicks is regaining a strong following in Bollywood. These films don’t come with the generic ingredients to make a “only for profit” masala flicks, nor do they necessarily come with a profound message or are void of songs or silliness. They’re just better– more thought out, more logical, better for your brain– and more entertaining.

00dev-d-_5_Now hold on. I’m not referring to the Bollywood that is completely “artsy” (although they count), I’m talking about films that are well-made, films not solely made to woo certain audiences to make some box office money. Recent examples include filmmakers like Vishal Bhardwaj (Omkara, Maqbool), Rajkumar Hirani (Munnabhais), Anurag Kushyup (Dev D). They were successful in making fantastic films that, surprisingly, were commercially successful as well. This clearly states that Indian audiences are expecting more than they used to. Films that once would have struck box office gold and won all the awards are failing. Switzerland and dance numbers just don’t cut it anymore.

The late 80’s, 90’s, and early 2000’s were dominated by masala films with formulaic scripts backed by producers whose sole purpose in making movies was to turn a profit. That’s not to say that this era completely lacked in profound cinema. Filmmakers like Ram Gopal Verma (Satya, Company), Vidhu Vinod Chopra (Parinda, 1942 A Love Story), Mani Ratnam (Roja, Bombay, Dil Se, Yuva) were those rare commercially successful yet innovatively enlightened filmmakers. I must add that I too am a a fan of  commercial cinema, but more a fan of movies that broke from the norm (DDLJ) rather than followed it (too many to name).

The problem lies in the fact that that era lacked diversity in substance. Sure, commercial cinema, brainless entertainers, chick flicks are all welcome and an obvious ingredient in any film industry. But Indian filmmakers have so much more to offer, and we’re slowly watching what exactly that entails.

The point of this blog is to follow this new movement in Bollywood– call it progressive or parallel cinema. As Nasseeruddin Shah once said, “Bollywood is entering it’s adolescent phase.” Let’s be thankful that it got over its infantile phase and hope that Bollywood allows itself to fufill its incredible potential.

Filmfare Awards and the new Bollywood

I usually don’t expect much from the Filmfare Awards. It’s rare that a Best Actor or Best Film Award will go to a movie that wasn’t a box office sensation. Most years, top-grossing films are the winners and critically acclaimed films receive “The Critics Award,” which is odd– a clear demonstration that deserving movies do not receive the popular awards.
I do not like the Hollywood/ Bollywood comparisons, but The Filmfare Awards are often referred to as The Academy Awards of Bollywood. Keeping that in mind, can one imagine Spider-Man 3, the top- grossing film in Hollywood history, winning an Academy Award over No Country for Old Men?
One of my strongest criticisms of Bollywood was that the immensely commercial, made-for-profit-only films made money and won the awards, strengthening, and only strengthening, that one kind of cinema. But, thankfully, this year’s Filmfare Awards reflected the new movement in Bollywood.
Any other year, I would have bet money that the box-office sensation “Om Shanti Om” would have won Best Film, Best Actor, Best Director, and/or even Best Music. But it won no such award. The movie was entertaining and fun– but definitely not worthy of an award. This year, movies that did win were movies that deserved to win (albeit maybe not my personal favorites).
All the films that won the main awards (Taare Zameen Par, Chak de India, Jab we met, Life in a Metro), were refreshing, innovative, and best represent the new movement in Bollywood cinema. All these films broke away from conventional themes of masala movies (some didn’t even have a love story!).
One important point to note is that all these films still did make good money and had at least one major star in it. Granted, the movies that won were not parallel cinema, and most winners were actors who have all won Filmfare Awards before. But the films themselves represent the changing nature of Bollywood. An Om Shanti Om isn’t going to guarantee an award, as it once would have in the 1990’s. But a heartfelt story about a child with dyslexia won Best Director, Film, and Critic’s Award.
The Awards represented, not a new Filmfare, but a new Bollywood.