One of the “charms” of being an immigrant Indian in the USA is that you will inevitably be asked the “A-Question” as in : The Arranged Marriage question. This can range from the oblique “Do you believe in Arranged Marriages?” to the more frontal -assault ” Did you have an Arranged Marriage?”  (to which I am always tempted to respond ” No, it was quite chaotic really!”).  Its nice to remember that the Arranged Marriage phenomenon is not exclusively “desi”. I recently saw two really good movies that explore the insititution of arranged marriages in cultures other than South Asian.

In “Arranged”,  an Orthodox Jewish woman and a Muslim woman strike up a friendship when they meet as teachers in a Brooklyn Public school. Each one faces the possibility of an  arranged marriage.  Zoe Lister Jones plays Rochel Meshenberg, an Orthodox Jew whose family enlsits a traditional matchmaker who produces one unsuitable groom after another. Frances Behnamoue plays Nasira Khalidi, a Muslim woman, who also is dealing with the possibility of an arranged marriage. This is a little gem of a movie where the insititution of arranged marriage is treated with dignity and respect. The story of  how these two forge a friendship and end up happily (and arrangedly) married makes for a charming tale, enlivened by some wonderful nuanced performances from both the leading ladies. Almost restores my faith in human nature to see how Jews and Muslims can be friends, regardless of how the world expects them to treat each other!

 The other movie I recommend is “Sabah -a Love Story”. This Canadian production is the story of Sabah, a 40 year old Syrian immigrant in Canada. She commits the cardinal sin of falling in love with Stephen ( played by the dishy Shawn Doyle- last seen in “Big Love” ) , a non -Muslim white ( amusingly referred to as “Ajnabee” by her Syrian family - that must be the equivalent of “firangi” ! ). She has to sneak around so that her brother does not find out. Meanwhile, her niece rebels against having an arranged marriage. Arsinee Khanjian plays the lead with luminous intensity. I found this movie to be absolutely charming and very romantic. Far better than the horrible crop of romcoms that Hollywood churns out today!

I think the common theme I liked in both these movies was that non-Western cultures were treated with respect, while making a muted plea for immigrants to open up a little to the freedoms that the Western world offers. I hope some of you enjoy watching my recommendations ( both are available on  Netflix). Do let me know via the comments if you agreed with them or not!

Looks like you are one of our regular visitors. Here is our RSS feed, just another way to keep up with the new posts.

SPOLIER ALERT: This review contains spoilers for “Raavan”. In case you plan to see it, don’t read it. I am going to do you a huge favor and tell you : Don’t see it !

I am and have been a die hard Mani Ratnam fan. From the day I saw “Mouna Raagam”, through “Agni Natchathiram”, ” Bombay” ,”Roja”,”Naayagan”, Iruvar” , “Guru”. I loved the recurring elements : the feisty heroines, naughty grandmas, the mature understanding of the man – woman relationship in all its forms, gorgeous vistas in the rain, excellent music. So with a heavy heart , I have to ask : Mani Ratnam: What the hell happened to you?

I want the near-to-3 hours of my life spent watching Raavan back. I never thought I would ever use “ham-fisted direction” and “Mani Ratnam” in the same sentence. But there you go. The premise is interesting. A retelling of the “Ramayana” to show both sides of the story. The titular “Raavan” in the film is Beera – a sad combination of Veerappan and a Naxalite, played atrociously by Abhishek Bachchan. Jr. Bachchan starts off with an imitation Amitabh – in – Agneepath – growl that inexplicably disappears in the latter part of the film – along with all semblance of plot, logic and common sense. Abhi grimaces, twitches and makes a complete ass of himself. Amitabh he is not – never was and never will be. In what was thought of as a casting coup, Aishwarya Rai (of the Shrimati Aishwarya Bacchcan Kanya Mahavidyalaya fame) – his real -life wife – plays Ragini – the wife of police officer Dev ( Get it ? Dev = God = Ram) Sharma ( played by a blank look aka Vikram). Beera abducts Ragini thereby setting the stage for a retelling of the Ramayana epic. Aishwarya starts out strong and her acting ( presumably impacted by Abhi’s lack of acting) gets progressively weaker. The twist in the tale is that Beera has good and justifiable reasons for wanting revenge against the police. Ragini develops a serious case of Stockholm syndrome. Dev rescues her and then questions her fidelity. The movie ends with Ragini’s deeply held beliefs being questioned. In other words what appeared bad maybe good, what appears good maybe bad. Which is fortune cookie philosophy at its best.

( ASIDE DESIGNED TO BRING A HINDUTVA FATWA ON MY HEAD: What is godly about questioning one’s wife’s fidelity at the drop of a hat? How can Ram be “Maryada Purshottam”( Ideal man) if he abandons his pregnant wife ? And does no one see the inherent misogyny of the basis of Sita’s abduction?That she dared to cross an imaginary line drawn by an in -law? But that is probably fodder for another post!)

I cannot in good faith believe THE Mani Ratnam directed this nonsense. I have a sneaky feeling that one of his directorial assistants must have taken over and Ratnam -ji must have franchised his name ( a la McDonalds). The camera angles are atrocious and MTV-video like (in the days when MTV actually showed Music videos as opposed to crappy reality dating shows). Govinda is completely wasted in a cameo appearance as Sanjeevani (aka Hanuman), an alcoholic forest guard who practices some kind of parkour.

Ragini’s and Beera’s relationship is never properly developed. He acts all caveman and Tarzan-ish, winging from vines. She is happy playing Jane- looking remarkably put together despite being in a jungle,where Beera’s hideout is. Why on earth she feels any sympathy for him is unclear. The ONLY redeeming feature of this movie is the locations. The jungles of Kerala and Tamil Nadu are glorious, lush and damp. The movie is only damp.

The music pretty much sucked. There are plot holes large enough for a truck to be driven through. For example: How is Ragini able to make her way back to Beera super secret hideout (after Dev questions her fidelity) when the entire Indian Police Force is unable to? And of course the original Ramaayan plot hole: If Sanjeevani could find Ragini, why did he not simply rescue her?

This post is a kind of 3 in one : a review of a book, a movie and random musings from me.

I just finished reading Orhan Pahmuk’s “The Museum of Innocence”.Pahmuk, the 2006 Nobel Prize winner has written a magnificent, wordy, illuminating and infuriating novel. The  book tells the tale of Kemal a rich young businessman from Istanbul and of his obsessive and destructive love for the beautiful (but poor and hence off-limits)  young Fusun. His obsession leads him to a passionate affair with her while he is still engaged to the Sorbonne-educated and more suitable Sibel. Ultimately, Kemal’s obsession leads him to create a museum dedicated to Fusun- hence the title. A couple of things struck me while reading the novel. The first : there is so much similarity between the society of Istanbul in the 70s and that of upper middle class India that I experienced in the 80s. Pahmuk is known for delving into the dichotomy of Turkey as an Islamic and as a European society and the inherent conflicts that arise between the demands of conservatism and the pull of openness. In this story too, Kemal, his fiance Sibel and Fusun as well as Kemal’s set of rich,Westernized friends constantly undergo turmoil as they struggle to fit into the mores of traditional Turkish society while trying to taste freedom sexual and otherwise. There is a lot of lipservice and hypocrisy which definitely reminded me of India!  The second  thing that resonated: while I loved the book and admire Pahmuk’s prose, it was very difficult to feel empathy for the “hero” Kemal. His behavior through the book reminded me of another hero – one I have always actively disliked – the pathetic, wimpy, tragic  Sarat Chandra  Chattopadhyaya creation – Devdas.

Coincidentally, just last week I finally watched the latest spin on Devdas, the Abhay Deol starrer “DevD”. This movie caused quite a buzz with its re-imagining of the Devdas tale in modern times. DevD is a semi – watchable , noirish film about – who else?- DevD a spoilt , self- indulgent rich kid unable to come to terms with his love for Paro. Like every other Devdas before him, he drowns his sorrows in drinks and drugs. What can I say? Whether it is Abhay Deol, Dilip Kumar or Sharukh Khan ( in Snajay Leela Bhansali’s ornate “Devdas” starring Aishwarya Rai), I am unable to muster any empathy for the title character. His motivations are unclear to me. His behavior is immature, wimpy and ultimately his destruction is self -wrought. My impatience with the Devdas character is his inability to act rationally. I just do not get what is so fascinating about self indulgence and self pity. Why does the tragic male lover , a Devdas like character keep reappearing in various interpretations? Pahmuk’s book is just the latest in a long string of movies and books about such tragic heroes.

Coming back to the reviews: By all means read “The Museum of Innocence”. Ialso recommend watching “DevD”- its flawed but has its moments. ( The high point for me was a song whose lyrics go ” Touba tera jalwa/Touba tera pyaar/Yeh Emotional/Atyachar!”- I kid you not!)

I am pretty sure I am missing out on some deeper symbolism here . I welcome any input from our readers – anyone out there like or understand Devdas? Please educate me!

All is well.....

Raj Kumar Hirani is the bearer of a lost art, the art of story telling. The problem is sometimes, he overlaps his piece of art with another of his own, that is still fresh in your memory.

And I’ll try to keep the review clean of any spoilers.

3 idiots is a movie ‘loosely’ based on one of India’s ‘best-selling’ novels, “Five point Someone, what not to do at IIT“, by Chetan Bhagat. A book, that critics love to hate and take a jab at it’s ‘popularity’, while a particular section of the readers who may not be into serious literature can skim through it with the ease of reading a tabloid magazine. Having read the book a few years back, and having lived with not really disliking it for some reasons and not liking it too well either, let me say this – reading or not reading the book may not really make a difference with respect to your movie experience.

Except a minor plot or two (actually, make that three) that do form an integral part of the story, the feel good, subtly emotional, humorous and pleasant movie is fun to watch. It may however, remind you (a lot) of the Munnabhai series. To begin with, the character artists are mostly in repetitive roles as the Munnabhai series, facing similar circumstances, and you feel a sense of familiarity with introduction of new roommates in a hostel, the unique hazing (or ragging) rituals, the challenges in classroom between a student and a professor, dramatized hospital recovery scenes, and some well known anecdotes that you may have received in forwarded e-mails ( a few thousand times) in the past several years that have been incorporated in the movie… those are the familiar parts. ‘Jaadu ki jhappi’ turns into ‘All is well’, but has a humorous application in the most chaotic circumstances. The group of friends (Aamir Khan, Madhavan, Sharman Joshi) were also a group of friends in ‘Rang De Basanti’ a group that we may have already begin to love before we know what their characters are like.

The humor in a few scenes combined with Aamir Khan’s ever lovable, cheeky delivery, and keeping the heroine to one character and NOT compulsorily introducing two more (unnecessary) female characters, for the other two in the group (Madhavan, Sharman) keeps the plot manageable and engaging.

The beauty of it is while regional cinema (especially Telugu cinema) takes you to Switzerland, Australia and New Zealand for the song and dance sequences that have no relation to the plot, Raj Kumar Hirani takes you to Ladakh and Himachal (as seen in the movie as well as the end credits), albeit for a few minutes and sticking to the plot line and actually having a scene or two at these locations.

The speech by ‘Chatur Ramalingam’ who does not understand Hindi as well as he would like to, is by far one of the most hilarious scenes in a Hindi movie that I’ve seen in years.

This movie is probably a box office winner, going by Aamir Khan’s fan following, but is definitely worth watching for its humor quotient alone. Hope this gives you a reason to get out of home during this holiday season, and stop looking at movie reviews .

Cheers.

Psst – movie credits, here.

You may have heard of the movies ‘Bwana Devil’ (first American 3-D Color movie) and ‘The Ghost and The Darkness’ (starring Val Kilmer, Michael Douglas and our very own Om Puri) that were based on real life incidents connected to the Tsavo man-eaters of Kenya.

The Ghost, and the Darkness. Source: Wikipedia

New research suggests that the number of victims may have been much lesser than previously thought.

Over nine months the two voracious hunters claimed 35 lives _ no small figure, but much less than some accounts of as many as 135 victims.

It was 1898, when laborers from India and local natives building the Uganda Railroad across Kenya became the prey for the pair, a case that has been the subject of numerous accounts and at least three movies. Link.

Also, the scientific technique takes into account only the number of victims eaten by the beasts, and obviously not the victims that were killed but not eaten.

Researchers led by anthropologist Nathaniel J. Dominy and Justin D. Yeakel of the University of California, Santa Cruz, report in Tuesday’s edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

They noted that estimates of the death toll reported at the time ranged from 28 reported by the Ugandan Railway Company, to 135, claimed by Lt. Col. John H. Patterson, a British officer who killed the lions in December, 1898.

The researchers did note that their study covers only the number of people eaten, while the number killed may have been higher. They said the death toll may have been as high as 75.

More than a century and 10 years later, science can figure out how many people two lions ate. Isn’t science amazing?

And not to forget, regional Indian cinema had their own versions of the historical account, not necessarily set in east Africa, but same rail road in forests of Andhra Pradesh. Ladies and gentlemen, watch Chiranjeevi  below  (at least the part that has jay jay – j j j , can anyone suggest the original American movie/song  name?)