Burning Analysis

Burning (2018)

Directed by: Lee Chang-dong

Competed for Palme d'Or at Cannes in 2018.

Spoilers ahead. It's a brilliant film, try not to read anything about the film before you watch it.

I had no clue what this film is about before I watched it, at the beginning it seemed like a drama and there was a slight mystery about how things were going on - if she really was his childhood friend or not and just the way things were going forward. Till she disappears, there's some capitalistic drama that plays out and only till a few scenes after she disappears didn't I realise that there's a possibility of Ben killing the girl. I didn't even think in that direction, that's how deceivingly the character is written and performed.

The scenes were Jong-su follows Ben and when Ben knocks at the window, and when Jong-su discovers the watch at Ben's bathroom - they felt so riveting inspite of the subtlety in the treatment. In the first viewing, it feels like there's a lot more in the film and it definitely deserves a re-watch to understand the film better. Lee Chang-dong says that he wants people to discover the mysteries of the world through this film, and he presents a simple plot which leads upto the larger mysteries of the world.

I loved the fact that this film doesn't close every mystery logically, and the way it's open to various interpretations. I wonder if the writers/filmmakers have their favourite interpretation of the film or if they choose to leave things open ended because they like different possible interpretations. Of course, a mystery in the true sense of the word doesn't have to give us answers - films like Memories of Murder and Zodiac have already made us used to that sort of narratives.

At the ending, I felt uncomfortable because I generally give the benefit of doubt to a criminal - because a wrongful conviction or a wrongful punishment is horrifying. But then, I realised that this film throws a political statement about how a common man has to dig deep into the larger mysteries of life and take action which he feels is right, because of the incompetence of the system.

Bandish Bandits Analysis

Bandish Bandits

Streaming on Amazon Prime Video

Created by: Amritpal Singh Bindra, Anand Tiwari

I think one of the primary questions of life is should we be happy with what we have, the Western philosophy, to accept yourself for who you are or should we strive for excellence, the Eastern philosophy, to push yourself to the limits and discover who you are. Films like Boyhood, Wake Up Sid support the former and in films like Whiplash, Black Swan, Dangal - the latter. This conflict is beautifully portrayed through Tamanna's character and her character arc is the best in the show, where she turns from former to the latter, for better or worse. I wish they focused on this trait of her's throughout the show, they call attention to this only in the last few episodes of the show.

This show is about the obsessed artist, or rather obsessed artists. This is a decent foray into the world of Indian classical music, I was so inspired by the amount of hard work they do to pursue excellence. Now, I'm even more excited and waiting for Chaitanya Tamhane's The Disciple (which is also about Indian classical music) which is the only Indian film in 20 years to be in competition in the Big-3 (Cannes, Venice & Berlin) film festivals. The world of Indian classical music is shown in this show, along with the context of the pop culture that exists. The show doesn't give us a stance of being oblivious to today's world. But sometimes, it felt like the portrayal of today's world was media's idea of today's world rather than the reality. 

The show meanders a lot, it goes from one conflict to another very fast without letting us feel one. The subplot of the uncle where he sells his art, was so touching. The ending two episodes felt so good, where Mohini explains what music is and how you can find rhythm in every activity - the portrayal of music felt so profound here. Mohini's story has a feminist undertone and it's done beautifully, it's show don't tell here as well. They show us what patriarchy is capable of and they show us what humanity and equality could be capable of. When Panditji asks Mohini to sit on the table, that's a beautiful moment. 

The King of Comedy Analysis

 The King of Comedy

Directed by: Martin Scorsese
Starring: Robert De Niro, Jerry Lewis
Streaming on Amazon Prime Video.

This film is another character study, just like Scorsese's and De Niro's earlier collaborations like Raging Bull & Taxi Driver. Rupert Pupkin, is an aspiring stand up comedian and he's looking for gigs - but he imagines himself to be a celebrity and he thinks of himself as The King of Comedy. There is one brilliant psychological trait that is used to portray Rupert Pupkin - it's tough to articulate, but I'll try. There are two types of people: Type 1 - People who will ask for 10 mins if they need 5 mins to do something, just because they don't want to give the other person a chance of blaming them for not keeping their word - the other type, they ask for 2 mins, if they need 5 mins and they just assume that the other person will give them leverage. Rupert Pupkin would ask for 2 seconds. At every scene, he presumes that the other person will give him some leverage or be extra nice to him - it's just similar as starting to walk towards the stage before even your name is announced as the award winner. The way he goes to Jerry's office saying that Jerry is expecting him, the way he goes to his house, the way he gets into Jerry's car, and many more instances.

I was reminded of Fan, during some scenes. The celebrity worship culture, is to another level in India - which even Anurag Kashyap says that you cannot shoot with a star on the roads here, there'll be outright havoc. It comes out of lack of a strong sense of identity and mob mentality. In this film when Jerry is walking on the road, a fan says that she loves him and when she asks him to tell her friend hello on a call and when Jerry refuses saying that he has to go, the next second her love becomes 'I wish you get cancer'. It talks about how we have a facade on, all the time and as soon as someone is brutally honest to us, we get caught off guard. The film also talks about rejection, and our responses to rejection. Rupert Pupkin - the unpredictability of his actions make him seem dangerous - because you don't even know if you should be careful or let loose of yourself. 

Do Paise Ki Dhoop, Chaar Aane Ki Baarish Analysis

 Do Paise Ki Dhoop, Chaar Aane Ki Baarish

Written & Directed by: Deepthi Naval
Starring: Manisha Koirala, Rajit Kapur
Streaming on Netflix.

Rain is a setting, a part of the world in this film - it amplifies every feeling that the film creates. Rain enhances joy, the feeling of liberty, love, aggression and also melancholy and most of the film is shot in the monsoon. The film is also about the fleeting moments in life, a major chunk of the scenes are where the characters are jamming to songs or just chit-chatting while enjoying the moment - the rain adds to this feeling as well. The two main characters in this film, are Juhi - a prostitute whose son is wheelchair bound and Debu - a homosexual man who is also a struggling artist. My initial thoughts while watching the film was that all the characters seemed purposefully inclusive - she being a prostitute, he being a homosexual, the kid being handicapped - they seem like they are conveniently created to evoke empathy (it actually turns out to be sympathy). But as the film goes on, they interestingly delve into the psyche of Juhi and especially her relationship with her son - the way she says that while being busy providing for him - she forgot nurturing him as a child.

Prostitute with a golden heart, is such a trope - although in this film, she isn't shown to be so nice to people - she is designed in an authentic way, the way she talks about why she got into the profession. But at the ending, I'd have loved it if she would have continued doing it after an excellent scene of moral dilemma. She getting out of it, makes us feel like all that we saw during the film, all of her conviction about why she's into it - it's all gone. Both of them try to change each other, he tries to change her outlook and the way she carries herself, but fails to - because you can act only for a while. She questions his own beliefs about his sexuality, she fails as well. There was something interesting that could've been taken out of this - but the ending that they'd be together seemed convenient - because they don't discuss if they'd have sex with other people. 

Mary and Max Analysis

 Mary and Max (2009)

Written, Directed and Designed by: Adam Elliot

Bittersweet. A lot of times we desire to feel, but we only manage to think. We wish we can cry something off, but we can't. We wish we can say something, but we can't. There is a myriad of emotions that are piled up in us, a lot of times. That is how this film made me feel. This film is about two penpals, Mary, an 8 year old girl in Australia and Max, a 44 year old man in America - when Max writes that he's unable to cry, Mary recollects a sad incident in her life, cries and collects her tears and mails them to Max.

The way this film is narrated, the events of their lives pass by so fast that it feels like we have witnessed the entire lives of these characters. There are so many relevant themes which are discussed, self love, depression, vulnerability, friendship, isolation, anxiety, loneliness and many more - but it's not the mere fact that these topics are being discussed that makes the film work. Of course, these themes make the film more relevant - but the underlying thread of friendship and human connection makes it accessible to anyone. I was immediately recalled of Amelie especially because of the voice over, the editing and the usage of music. The idea of penpals, I think started because people don't find enough connection and understanding around them which is why they look for love and validation from elsewhere. In this film, both the characters have such issues. The scene where Mary is rescued by Len - is so heartwarming. The film celebrates being laid back and not being on your toes all the time - with Max, like Richard Linklater does in his films. This film made me feel so many things, I can't even articulate them properly.

The Past Analysis

 The Past

Written & Directed by: Asghar Farhadi

The way Asghar Farhadi seamlessly mixes family drama and mystery - two genres which seem so far away from each other is so interesting. The film starts with a simple setup and a few characters – like in every Asghar Farhadi’s film. As the film goes on, with every additional detail that gets added into the story, the story gets deeper and complex. By complex, I don’t mean Nolan-ish complex – here it is the relationships that become more layered with every detail. This film is similar to A Separation, in terms of the narrative of the film – there is one seemingly simple inciting incident, but the revelation of every detail adds up to conflicts between characters and fleshes out interesting drama. For example, in this film - whether she read the mail or not, one simple detail - changes a lot of things for every character in the film and this detail is dealt in a way mystery films are treated. In another scene, Marie says that she trusts Samir and hence she is pregnant, Samir says that it was an accident - the dynamics change now and she says that she could've got it aborted, they again change and he replies that she didn't abort because she wanted to convince herself to be sure of Samir. 

The best part about Asghar Farhadi's films is the way he explores the psyche of his characters, they say something, they mean something else, but the other character realizes this later when they know more things and they bring it up then. For example, Ahmad asks Marie why she told him that she's pregnant just before the meeting of the divorce, after he knows the entire story. The ending of this film was so moving, I reacted so strongly to that shot. It completes the arc of Samir, and in fact every character - all the dishevelled mess comes to a conclusion with that one shot. This film too has all the trademark Asghar Farhadi qualities - moral ambiguity, no background score, cut-throat scene transitions, brilliant usage of foley - apart from these I felt that this film had a sense of color as well.  

Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse Analysis

 Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse

Directed by: Fax Bahr, George Hickenlooper, Eleanor Coppola

It's a documentary about the complications during the production of Apocalypse Now (1979) made by Francis Ford Coppola. This documentary portrays how intense and cathartic of an experience filmmaking can be, if you give it all you have. While watching this film, I was shocked to see the nightmare of experiences they were facing during the production - Marlon Brando who charges 1 million dollars per a week of shooting, comes to the location without reading the book, without getting into shape and Coppola has to make it work with whatever he has, he can't complain or play victim there - because it's his money, his reputation, his sanity and everything at stake. Making it work with what you have, anyone can do it but making it work without letting go of the intensity of the subject matter is what Coppola could do. He was saying all along  'It's not working, I'm going to go bankrupt - I might as well accept that the film is not working and face my worst fears' - I can only imagine how stronger his vision of the film would've been if he has managed to make this with all these challenges.

After watching this film, I realized the importance of aesthetics - in the modern world everything is so simplistic and function oriented, but in the pursuit of productivity and efficiency, we have forgot to create and appreciate beauty. As Coppola said in the ending, with the advent of technology everybody is making films, but all of that aesthetics and professionalism with which they made films, that is going to be an art which everyone won't be able to achieve. The saddest part is, even after making two Godfathers he couldn't make the film he wanted to make, the way he wanted to. Of course, when money is at stake then it's a hoopla of numbers, ROI, etc but I'm sure if it was today, Netflix would've happily backed him.

Apocalypse Now Redux Analysis

 Apocalypse Now Redux 

Co-written, Directed & Produced by: Francis Ford Coppola
Based on: Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad
Won the Palme d'Or at Cannes in 1979

This film is set in the Vietnam war (which was changed from the book) and the premise is simplistic, a soldier is sent to on a mission during a war to kill a Colonel who has won the trust of a local tribe and has gone insane. This plot is similar to 1917, but the depths with which they deal the subject matter is interesting. In the beginning, we see Willard's face upside down dissolved with shots of war, and they instantly tell us that he's going through PTSD. I wonder why they don't use dissolves anymore, I think it's an effective tool - Paterson used it wonderfully to portray poetry in images. The production felt surreal, the sets blowing up, the helicopters and the scale of the film was visible and audible too - the sound editing by Walter Murch was too good, especially the way they overlap sounds of a chopper and a fan in the first scene - again portraying his psyche and his PTSD.

I should've watched the theatrical cut first and then the Redux version, and the film also depends on some level of understanding of war and the setting from the viewers. I couldn't understand a lot of conversations in the film, but I could feel the film because of the visual language of the film. I'll revisit the film some other time when I have a better understanding of the context and war in general. The ending scene was a horrifying cut - this scene encapsulates how the film doesn't shy away from the harsh realities of war. I was more interested to watch this film, because of the story behind it - about how this film meant life and death to Coppola. I'm going to watch the documentary, Heart of Darkness, a Filmmaker's Apocalypse.

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon Analysis

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon

Directed by: Ang Lee
Nominated for 10 Oscars in 2001, highest for a foreign language film until Roma also had 10 in 2018.

I remember watching Kungfu Hustle long back and I immensely enjoyed it. In martial arts films, of course unless they're set in the contemporary world, they already setup the world in a way that informs us about the liberties they are going to take. Usually, why we associate some ridiculous actions scenes in Indian films to cringe is because the world of the film is grounded and only the hero does ridiculous stuff, then people lose their minds. Although in Balayya's and Rajni's films, people seem to forgive them (or maybe enjoy them too) because of the kind of image they have, which also informs us about the world. This film too informs us about it in the first fight scene where people are almost flying, it felt difficult for me to watch these kind of action scenes in a film which got 10 Oscar nominations - but as the film progressed I got it that the rules of this world are different, like a Western movie.

There was a strong visual sense in this film - blocking, staging and lighting - especially they are used to convey a sense of power and dominance. They either have two people talking and have a single shot for one person and show the other person in OTS, or they use the low angle, high angle framing and do that. There is one sequence where they are flying and fighting in a tree, that felt beautiful because by then I got used to the people flying. I was in awe of the world of the film, the costumes, production design, the hair and make up, etc. There were a few good dramatic moments in the film, like in the ending scene where he confesses and a few more - but apart from that I couldn't feel that sort of depth in this film which I expected because of the awards it won - it just felt like a well made action film to me.

Eighth Grade Analysis

Eighth Grade

Written & Directed by: Bo Burnham
Starring: Elsie Fisher

This is a film about self worth, confidence and especially in today's context of social media. It's about an eighth grade girl who makes vlogs on self help but she herself has anxiety issues. The film is about how she changes from that to a more evolved, confident person. This film shows how in order to become thick skinned, you need to face trolls, get hurt and only then will you be able to become thick skinned towards negativity. If everyone loves and respects you right from the day you are born - then it's difficult to love oneself when all of that suddenly vanishes one day. This film talks about self worth and how we underestimate ourselves often, it's just that the image we have of someone else is not how they feel inside and it's not the real them - it's just our idea of them. In this film, she has a crush on a guy and he has no clue about it - her image of him and his own reality, is clearly contrasting. Later, when she meets another bunch of people, a girl finds her extremely cool similar to how she feels about her and it makes her feel so happy. Till then, she doesn't realize that someone could find her cool. Self love, confidence and a feeling of self worth - these ideas are bombarded on social media these days - but they only make sense if you find that moment of truth within yourself, or else it just feels like hoopla.

Her behavior with her dad, makes us introspect on our own behavior with our parents - the way we are glued to screens and have headsets on us all the time. It shows how difficult it is to be an understanding parent, to take all the crap, the 'whatever' attitude and yet be kind and loving. It's because of the difference in thought process, or rather the perceived difference - that it takes a lot just to have a conversation.

Dev.D Analysis

Dev.D

Directed by: Anurag Kashyap

Starring: Kalki Koechlin, Abhay Deol, Mahie Gill

Cinematography: Rajeev Ravi

Available on Netflix

Dev.D is a classic example of how unique a film can become by proper usage of setting. This story has been adapted and made into films like Devdas, Dev.D and Arjun Reddy (loosely based) - all three films are so different from each other in spite of the same story and the only reason being that, the setting is well established in each of these films. Anurag Kashyap's films always have a strong sense of setting because of the way he shoots them with his DOP Rajeev Ravi, by going into real locations. Rajeev Ravi is a genius, for capturing locations in a way that establishes the setting very strongly - for example, Gangs of Wasseypur, Moothon and many more. The film looks like it has a lot of Wong Kar Wai influences, in terms of the use of music repetetively, for letting loose of the visuals and letting some abstraction flow into the editing.

Dividing the film into chapters to focus on the point of view of different characters is an interesting choice, I wonder if they did that in the script stage or on the edit table. Chanda's MMS scandal story is more like a backstory according to the core story of the film, it doesn't directly add to the original Devdas story - but it definitely adds to the setting and the tone of the film and this is what makes it a different film than the other adaptations. AK says that he doesn't write stories from his own experiences - he interprets stories using them and here he has something more to say than what we'd know from the story. Although in Dev.D, Vikramaditya Motwane wrote a screenplay, because he knew Devdas in and out and AK adapted Vikramaditya's screenplay into his own film, I'm guessing by using his phrase 'Fuck the script' during the shoot. 

Gunjan Saxena Analysis

 Gunjan Saxena

Directed by: Sharan Sharma

Starring: Janhvi Kapoor, Pankaj Tripathi 

Streaming on Netflix.

This film worked for me, there are many reasons - for one, it tortures the protagonist like anything, of course it's inspired from a real story, making us feel even more. I can't recall a protagonist being this tortured in films that I watched recently, it's not about taking a beating physically - it's about the number of times she is told by people that she isn't worth it and yet she keeps self belief. They practically tire us by making her go through bad times and hence when she gets her due, even we feel rewarded - it's a simple tool, Rajamouli, Pixar and a lot of filmmakers and writers use this tool to their advantage in different ways. 

The film is visually solid too, I could recall a shot where she gets rejected because they tell her that she is short and overweight and in that scene they chose to shoot her crying in a car just a little after the sun sets - the lighting, the shadows and the color of that scene perfectly matched what she was feeling. I was reminded of Uyare here and there, especially because films about pilots are so symbolically in sync with the idea of having freedom, flying with your dreams. Thematically, it backs the idea that doing what you do with utmost sincerety in itself is patriotism and it need not be externally portrayed and if everyone does their own bit for themselves - it's a win win for everyone - they put in individualism in a very subtle way, which I thought was brilliant writing.

The scenes where time passes by and she comes back after 10th, 12th and diploma and the montages where she loses weight - they are edited in a dynamic way - you can't miss a beat in those sequences. This film in spite of having women empowerement as a prominant theme, it never felt preacy because here we don't see Gunjan saying things like 'women are equal to men' - her actions prove that and the situations she is thrown in - they make us feel against patriarchy. 

Dazed and Confused Analysis

Dazed and Confused

Written & Directed by: Richard Linklater
Starring: An ensemble of actors - a lot of whom later became stars.

Usually when a filmmaker has recurring themes in their filmography, I personally love it - whether it's the Scorsese's gangster trilogy, Woody Allen's entire filmography, Wong Kar Wai's films, David Fincher's films, GVM's films, Hong Sang-soo and I'm sure many more. Having watched this film after watching Boyhood and Before Trilogy - it felt so good to see the 'Seize the moment' theme being enforced here throughout the film. This film at an idea level itself is about seizing the moment, it's a bunch of teenages goofing around on the last day of high school. The DP was saying that they considered shooting the entire film in cars and the film would be the duration of the entire album that they play as temp music. Music is used in this film to establish the setting - this reminded me of the childhood scenes in Boyhood - filmmakers usually use music to control how the audience should feel towards a particular scene, but Richard Linklater uses music to show us the character's perspective, their state of mind and the milieu. 

I observed a few recurring aspects in Richard Linklater's films - we have a lot of politically incorrect stuff happening on a light note, which tells us to take life and ourselves not so seriously. We see men giving advice to younger men on how to get laid. We see a lot of opinions on pop-culture. I'm trying to recollect and breakdown all of this, because the dialogue in his films is banal and yet so mysteriously engaging. I think it's because he makes it seem like we won't see much conflict by grounding the world initially and then he puts in enough conflict to keep us hooked. Quentin Tarantino quoted this to be one of his favorite films, I'm sure he was influenced by this style of writing dialogue.

The Truman Show Analysis

 The Truman Show

Directed by: Peter Weir
Written by: Andrew Niccol
Starring: Jim Carrey

This film has a very interesting premise, it is about a man whose entire life is a reality TV show - his friends and family are actors, his house and the places he visits are sets, even the weather in his area is controlled by a media company and his life is streamed 24*7 throughout the year. All of this is drawn parallel to our real life with one line in the film, 'we accept the reality of the world with which we're presented' and this feels so relevant even today - where it becomes difficult for us to differentiate between our own idea of beauty, success and happiness to that which the media bombards us with. Also, the way family, society and all authority figures pave out our life with numbers and rules - it is very difficult to escape this version of the reality. 

The best part about films like this - especially Bong Joon-ho's films like Okja, The Host, Snowpiercer have a fun action film on the physical layer which even a 6-year old can understand and appreciate and they have either a political commentary or a thematic expression in an underlying tone along with it. There is tonality of a survival thriller in the external conflict where he is trying to escape and people are trying to catch him, his fear of water and he overcoming it is the internal conflict and the ending says that no matter how much you try and how far you go, you can never escape the version of the reality that you are put in - a cynical worldview - this is the resolution to the philosophical conflict of the film. A lot of sci-fi films aren't so good in spite of exciting ideas and I think the reason is, they lack this sort of depth in writing where they deal with multiple levels of conflict.

Crimes and Misdemeanors Analysis

Crimes and Misdemeanors

Written & Directed by: Woody Allen

One of the best aspects of Woody Allen's films is the way he makes fun of himself - like Michel de Montaigne - a philosopher who made fun of people who are proud and narcissistic about their intellect. Usually when we write films which are so personal to us, it's difficult to take the film's worldview above our own worldview and Woody Allen does that effortlessly in a lot of his films. The fact that he is making a documentary about a philosopher, is making fun of the fact that a lot of filmmakers are interested in exploring intellectual themes which no one is interested in.

One of the important ideas in this film is, how our relationships affect our sense of self worth - the way Cliff's worst fear is that Reed will fall in love with a successful guy over him - it's not about losing her or missing her - it is reinforcing the idea that he isn't good enough as another person who makes more money and is more famous than him. Films like these don't teach us not to do that or feel that way, they give us a pat on the shoulder saying that we aren't alone on this and that there are a lot of people like us feeling the same way - after this affirmation, we get to introspect on fixing this.

The other subplot about murder, it also deals with dark themes and yet is treated in a light note. I was wondering the same when I was watching Cafe Society, about how differently he treats a gangster subplot than anyone else - a lot of it comes with his use of classical and jazz music - which Allen himself humbly says in his book that he uses them to make his movies seem better, but it is also his style of writing dialogue. The ending voice over takes away the cynical view of the film, giving us something to look forward to.

Anomalisa Analysis

Anomalisa

Written, Co-Directed & Co-Produced by: Charlie Kaufman

It's an honest portrayal of the intimate side of humans. It explores loneliness, self doubt, feeling vulnerable, not being able to cry, totally feeling lost in spite of trying to connect with the people and the surroundings all the time. If you've experienced any of these, the film will hit you hard - and the film being made using stop-motion technology doesn't seem like a hindrance at all. Actually to an extent, the stop-motion suits the theme of the film - wherein everyone doesn't seem that human and the abstract narrative that they bring in - where every voice that he listens to, sounds the same. 

The sex scene between Michael Stone and Lisa - is one of the best sex scenes I have ever seen and how ironical it is that a film made using puppets has a better sex scene that a lot of films which have 'stars'. It is because this film understands and exactly captures what sex means, in today's world of alienation and lonelinss. The intimacy starts way before the actual act begins - it is about being emotionally vulnerable, opening up with all of the insecurities that this consumeristic world creates in you. It has gotten to a point where people don't believe anymore when someone compliment them - Lisa can't believe it that someone has fallen in love with her and is actually interested in her for who she is. She has come to terms with the inevitable loneliness in life and someone suddenly comes and breaks it. For Michael, he is present in the world, he has people all around and yet he feels lonely - loneliness is not about not having people around - it's about not having people who talk to you in your language. A lot of times, people talk shit that doesn't even matter - all of this angst has been portrayed in this film beautifully. Charlie Kaufman has a unique voice in writing, he brings out deep, dark feelings of humans and puts them on screen and makes us ponder.

Coco Analysis

Coco

Directed by: Lee Unkrich

A PIXAR film.

Streaming on Hotstar

Academy Award for Best Animated Feature 2017

The premise of Coco falls under the conflict of individual vs community - where Miguel wants to play music but music is banned in his family. As always in Pixar films, we get to see the reason for someone's flaw in order to empathise with them - here we get to know that the great-great-grandfather of the family left his family to pursue music and hence the family is turned averse to music. While it seems a little silly when you look at it on a physical level, but it definitely makes sense - they understand what music can do to a person - it can make them inspired to a level where the start looking at the largeness of life and they tend to not prioritise family after a certain point. So we have a flaw and a reason for the flaw in place, now this film is different from the usual character arcs that Pixar films have, like in Finding Nemo, Up, etc - where in the conflict that they face directly addresses their flaw and they have no other option but to change in order to go ahead. This film constructs the plot in a way that the conflict isn't individual vs community anymore, they flesh drama out of that conflict for a while - but they don't make a choice of individual over family - which would've made in a different world. Pixar films are sweet, endearing, they have a certain moral code, philosophy and tonality - they are rarely anti-authoritarian or anti-societal. They beautifully set up the different worlds in the film - the rules are well established. 

After watching this film is when I understood how complex writing an animated film could be - because literally, anything could happen and there are no limitations to your creativity and that's the most challenging part. If you give someone a premise, a genre, a setting - it's easier to write a story in these limitations but otherwise, the urge to want to write something great will stop you from attempting to write anything - everything that you start to write will not seem good enough.

Dil Bechara Analysis

Dil Bechara

Directed by: Mukesh Chhabra

Starring: Sushant Singh Rajput, Sanjana Sanghi

I watched and read The Fault in Our Stars way back - I loved the characters and the world of the story back then but I didn't understand the core of the story - I'm not saying the film didn't convey that, I'm saying I didn't get it back then. If you look at the core of this story, even at the idea level - it's a heartbreaking story. You have a girl who has cancer, and she is at a point where she has lost the fear of death and now her fear is about how her loved ones would face her death - it's so endearing that she has become so selfless and come to terms with death at such a young age. Now, the thing that scares her more than death, the loss of a loved one - she herself has to face her worst fear - the loss of a loved one. What a story! In the process, she understands a different way of looking at life, she comes of age and becomes a better person. It's a beautiful story, I enjoyed the film back then too but my understanding of the story was so basic.

About Dil Bechara, I don't want to write much about how Sushant's death affected me - but I was expecting a cathartic experience from the film, through which I could let go of some of the pain and weight of Sushant's death - which didn't happen. You can't create catharsis in a calculated way, even if you have a heart wrenching script, you never know and it also depends on the audience - I'm sure a lot of people would've cried. Sanjana Sanghi was so good as Kizie, I fell in love with her - she was in the character in every scene of the film and she made it seamless for us empathize with the character. Sushant's acting was interesting as well - he comes off as annoying to us, the same way he would be to Kizie and all of it pays off when we know that he'll die. I liked the film, I only wish it made me cry.

Everybody Knows Analysis

Everybody Knows

Written & Directed by: Asghar Farhadi

Starring: Javier Bardem, Penelope Cruz

Premiered at Cannes Film Festival 2018.

Asghar Farhadi has a unique voice, his films are suspense dramas set in middle class families - where because of a mishap, the family is in a situation where they rediscover their relationships and dynamics. In this film, it's the kidnap of their teenage daughter and how they manage to arrange ransom for their kidnappers. It seems so simple on a logline level, but with every added detail in this - it keeps getting more complex, in terms of plot, theme and character. We get to know that the child happened when the mother cheated with her ex, and we know a lot more things. Asghar Farhadi's films are more stimulating to the brain that to the heart, but they hit you hard because sometimes they question your belief system. It's not just the complexity of the situation, it's how the drama unfolds at each revelation - that is what tells us about the world and the characters and keeps us hooked - that's the reason his films are extremely riveting.

As always, this film too doesn't have any background score throughout - it is all sound design and even without any music to uplift tensions, the scenes have high tension just because of the writing and the performances. The editor Hayadeh Safiyari - Asghar Farhadi's regular collaborator - respects our attention span and she doesn't cut with conventional transitions - she mostly uses the constrast in the soundscape to cut and it's so brave editing. The cinematography is by Jose Luis Alcaina, who is a frequent collaborator with Pedro Almodovar - who uses strong colors to bring in contrast between scenes - but in this film it's purely an Asghar Farhadi's world - handheld and dynamic. This film ends the mystery without any twists, which indicates that it's all about the drama that unfolds in the setting of a missing child and not about the mystery itself. 

Uma Maheswara Ugra Roopasya

UMUR

Directed by: Venkatesh Maha

Based on: Maheshinte Prathikaaram
Starring: Satyadev Kancharana

The nothingness of life, the fleeting moments are best captured by the Malayalam filmmakers and we saw that in C/O Kancherapalem, which is rare for a telugu film even today. This potrayal of life, this style of capturing a milieu is very important - focusing on the simple pleasures of life and yet in an accessible way with humor - a mix of realism and romanticism in a better ratio. I could see a lot of faces in the film who vouch for better cinema, Bommalata Ajay Vegesna, Paruchuri Praveena, Maha himself, TNR and I'm sure a lot more. This is a sweet gesture of forming a community in the industry, like how in Malayalam cinema they write, produce, direct and act in each other's films and there's a strong sense of comradery which is why it feels like their work has higher standards. We need a wave of such films and filmmakers, where people root for each other and only then can we see standards getting higher. Films like this are extremely important, they encourage producers to greenlit films which are out of convention and respect the artistic integrity of filmmakers. 

Having said that, I'd have been happier if this was more of an adaptation than a remake. The problem with remakes in general are that they have the pressure of living up to the original, whereas in an adaptation, the director takes the material and makes their own film out of it. I'm sure Woody Allen, Scorsese, Tarantino and Fincher would make totally different films out of the same screenplay. Of course this film had a sense of self discovery in the protagonist more than what I felt from the original and there are a lot of beautiful lines in the film - but I felt that the artistic voice of the filmmakers was exactly the same in both the films - it could be because of the same music director and also a similar visual palette. I'm definitely in love with Venkatesh Maha's voice and I'm waiting for more of his own interpretation of stories.

Raat Akeli Hai Analysis

Raat Akeli Hai

Directed by: Honey Trehan
Written by: Smita Singh

Starring: Nawazuddin Siddiqui, Radhika Apte

I initially looked at this film as a murder mystery, but Rahul Desai's observation about this being a coming-of-age drama was so interesting. Nawazuddin's thoughts and instincts are informed from a sense of patriarchy in the beginning and his belief system is challenged at every point in the film later and this arc was subtle and he doesn't unrealistically become a feminist by the end of the film. We hardly see character arcs in detective films, Sherlock and a lot of such detective characters are usually flat arcs. We sometimes see a wound in the past which haunts them, which they have to address and overcome in order to solve the case - but rarely do we see character arcs, subtle or blatant. L. A. Confidential is a brilliant film which had a corruption arc. 

It's difficult to have character arcs for detective films because usually the conflict or the challenge should directly address the flaw and solving a case could probably address your fear, you could have a fear to bravery arc - but it doesn't seem real - a detective being fearful doesn't make much sense. In this film, the case addresses his flaw because he assumes certain things because of his flaw, that a woman couldn't have killed that man so brutally - his flaw or the lie that he believes, patriarchy, directly hinders his progress in the case and punishes him and makes him re-evaluate his understanding of the world.

That one scene where she is told that if she has any shame, she would've already been dead - he outrages her modesty and that is depicted by the sound of fireworks bursting in that moment. I like it when filmmakers try to use sounds and visuals in the scene to depict internal feelings and emotions of a character - I wonder why people don't do that. If this is overdone, it can get irritating too - but people hardly do it. 

However, while I was watching the film - it felt like I was watching a show, the treatment of the film. I don't know why Netflix makes all their films/shows look the same, at least in each genre. This film had a different color palette for the scenes in the mansion but apart from that, the exteriors look similar. The problem with that is, we don't differentiate between different worlds and different settings easily. All films and shows feel the same. It might be helpful for Netflix to build their brand that way, that it's all about Netflix but I'd want to see a filmmaker's world and not that of Netflix's.

Shakuntala Devi Analysis

Shakuntala Devi

Directed by: Anu Menon

Starring: Vidya Balan, Sanya Malhotra, Amit Sadh

Streaming on Amazon Prime Video

Shakuntala Devi falls under the films which explore themes like 'the obsessed artist', like Whiplash, Black Swan and Sankarabharanam - it explores the basic conflict of - how will you balance your family life with the kind of obsession you have for your work. I personally love these films because I myself have this internal conflict a lot of times. For the setting of the film, the pressure of family life adds up because she is a woman and in India, people put mothers on a pedestal and don't let them be women and have an agency of their own - but Shakuntala Devi was an eccentric and naturally, a narcissistic woman and she wouldn't let others take control of her life. There couldn't have been a better conflict and better themes than this, to explore her film and if they also had real incidents to latch on to for material, then why wasn't the film as brilliant as it sounds on an idea level?

It's because they put activism into the lines of characters - I understand where this is coming from, in an effort to bring social awareness, but I'm not going to root for films where the characters blurt out activist dialogue. They could instead do the same through the actions of the characters, best example is Mahanati. They inspire us with the 'goodness' of Savithri; but they don't do that by making her say lines like 'we should donate our wealth to all' and instead they show us how even in bad situations, she chose humanity and donated. In this film, we see her actions as well where she chooses Math over her family and when she faces the conflict, she prefers her daughter and so - but still we hear lines like 'mai bada aadmi nahi badi aurat banungi' - she is great irrespective of her gender. By bringing the women empowerment angle, you are saying that she is great because she is what she is, in spite of she being a woman - why would you imply that? 

Yes, later she had to face the conflict of, people telling her that she's not being motherly enough - individualism vs family is a brilliant theme that they brought in, but they could've done this without the glasses of women empowerment too. It's like repeatedly saying the obvious, how would you feel if a character says, 'Honesty is the best policy, do good, respect elders'? This film doesn't overdo this, this film is still nuanced - all of this is in response to a wave of films doing this. I'm no one to say how someone's artistic voice should be, but I just want to encourage people to look back at what kind of films inspired them to pursue cinema in the first place.

Having said that, I loved Vidya Balan's performance and also what Sanya Malhotra did - but the chemistry somehow didn't work for me in the ending scenes. The scene of pretending to be normal with the in-laws was hilarious and the normal vs amazing debate is also interesting, because somehow close people don't empathise with such characters and all they worry about, is their eccentricity. The recreation of that old milieu in the childhood scenes and the London scenes - they reminded me of Marathi film Harishchandrachi Factory which used a different frame rate (similar to Charlie Chaplin's films) to convey a sense of time.