Mainstream Hindi cinema, accused often of insensitivity and callousness towards grim realities of the world, and compared, often unsuccessfully with regional, art-house or international cinema for their stark portrayals. Unsuccessfully because mainstream Hindi cinema comes a cropper whenever such comparisons are made, given the surfeit of escapist and superficial material produced by the industry. However, mainstream Hindi cinema or Bollywood, as it is popularly known for its umbilical connection with the bustling Bombay, comes around to produce, every once in a while, a film that propels it, inch by inch, towards the ultimate goal of achieving that elusive goal of being the progenitors of complete, well-rounded and not to forget, grounded cinema. Of late, a number of films, albeit categorized as mainstream have tickled the grey cells of Indian audiences a bit more than what Bollywood is thought to be capable of. Some of these films have addressed overtly political issues and concepts, taken them head on and interpreted the rather complex polity of India in more complex ways than one. Gulaal (2009) traversed the difficult terrain of university politics with more grit than one could credit a mainstream film with. It had its failings, mostly in the way it was cast but the film, with its impressive backdrop of a dust-laden Rajasthan and a simmering confrontation between the Rajputs and the non-Rajputs, epitomized in the personalities of characters like Duki Bana and his eccentric elder brother, made for compelling viewing. Close on the heels of Gulaal, comes director-turned-politician-turned-director Prakash Jha’s magnum opus, Rajneeti; arguably his most ambitious project till date. Jha assembles a plethora of actors and performers to stage what can be easily called one of the most scathing diatribes against the existing political system. The film set extensively in the dust-bowls of North and Central India profiles, in a nutshell, the bloody legacy of a political family. While parallels can be drawn with the reigning dynasty of Indian politics – the Gandhi’s – especially in terms of the violence unleashed against the members of the family, the director quietly and quite successfully keeps the focus on the characters he has built up and does not let the Gandhi story take over. Therein lies the merit of the film. Of course, the coincidence are hard to miss; the characters too seem akin to the many stories one has read about the Gandhis in broadsheets and political weeklies, the film makes a genuine effort to steer clear of overt allusions. Though the image of a heavily-accented Katrina Kaif (Indu Prithvi Pratap nee Sekhsaria) taking the podium at a crowded rally. Clad in a crisp cotton saree and speaking in a clipped accent, Kaif forces the mind to make comparisons. The bespectacled Ranbir Kapoor (Samar Pratap) coolly handling his brother’s election campaign is another enduring image that the film creates. None of these coincidences cripple the film. It remains a taut and mirthless portrayal of the politics of our times. Some have argued that the blood and gore overpowers the moot agenda of the film. Perhaps. Others have said that the film is badly cast and could have done with better performances. Negative. The film rides on its performances. The wide ensemble of actors give the film its true character. The star power of some of them lends it that extra charm. Which explains the fact that despite being a subject that most Indian audiences would pass off as ‘serious’ and ‘boring’, the film has opened to record earnings.
Rajneeti moves deftly between being a well-crafted tale of deceit, intrigue, menace, and violence and a launch vehicle for Bollywood diva Katrina Kaif’s launch vehicle into ‘serious’ cinema. Please be warned, however that Kaif appears in the political heiress garb only in the last 30 minutes of the film. It belongs to the Kapoor heir though. As the quiet and reclusive Samar who enters the political fray by a stroke of fate and slowly but surely decimates his opposition in one calculated move after another to keep his family’s legacy and his brother’s political fortunes alive, Ranbir Kapoor packs in a blistering performance. Watch his eyes for what they have to say. He is brilliant.
As Prithviraj Pratap, Samar’s older brother and the heir apparent to the family’s legacy, Arjun Rampal is boisterous, brash, egoistic and impulsive. After the quiet Joe Mascarenhas of Rock On, Rampal is dazzling. And what’s more, in the crisp khadi and designer politico-wear, he looks like a million bucks!
Critics have also drawn parallels with the Mahabharata. Figures. Especially exemplified in the character of Brij Gopal, played deftly by Nana Patekar who, after a really long hiatus, pitches in with a restrained, minimalist, stupendous turn. Patekar is the archetypal Krishna, the party elder, the advisor, the most astute pillar of them all. Giving him company in the performance department and arguably presenting the modern day Duryodhan is Manoj Bajpayee. As Veerandra Pratap, Prithvi and Samar’s cousin, and a contender for the family’s political legacy, Bajpayee plays the cold-blooded villain with panache.
2 comments:
The film is actually more 'The Godfather' than 'The Mahabharata'. For example, Al Pacino is the youngest who wants to steer clear of his family 'business' and gets embroiled in it only after an attempt is made on his father's life. James Caan's character, the older brother is brash, exactly like Rampal here. The godfather himself, remain bed-ridden for most of the film—another similarity. There is even a corrupt police officer here, though he meets his fate in the hand of the older brother and not the younger one, as in Coppola's magnum opus.
The link with our epic is more in the names. Besides the obvious 'Brijgopal' that you have mentioned, 'Bhaskar' is another name for the Sun. And Karan (or Suraj in 'Raajneeti')is supposedly the sun's child.
I found the film slightly lopsided, in the sense that for long periods it seemed to have forgotten all about the other characters and focused more and more on Samar's vendetta. Though I liked the bit that Samar's PhD (which I believe was never submitted) was on 'subtextual violence in early 19th Victorian poetry', which portend to the simmering violent streak that underlies his placid demeanor.
For a better interpretation of 'The Mahabharata', watch 'Kalyug'. And for a better political film, I would propose a recent Telugu film called 'Leader' anyday, which traversed the serpentine nature of loyalty, politics, and its twists and turns much more effectively.'Raajneeti' was quite simplistic that way.
Also, granted that the film had a big canvas, but what really irks me is how they miss out on the basics of filmmaking—continuity, for example.
In one shot, a black Merc is spic and span, in the next it has red dust even on its roof! In one shot, a champagne glass is half empty, in the next it is almost empty, in the next it is half full again!
In one shot, the champagne glass is held slightly bent, in the next it is straight...so on and so forth.
These things take a lot of credibility away, and shows that we might be churning out the max, number of films per year, but we still have a lot to learn as far as nitty-gritties are concerned.
Post a Comment