Inspiring Incident

100 Things I Love About Movies


It’s good to have rituals. It’s good to reaffirm your faith in certain institutions. And clearly, if you’re reading this site, then you know that cinema is one of those institutions. It’s time for another “100 Things I Love About Movies” list. As you may recall from the other times I’ve performed this exercise, this list isn’t a top 100, nor is it the ONLY 100 things I love about movies. It’s a snapshot of 100 specific things I love about movies. A complete list of things I love about movies would be staggering, as is the case for most of us.

View original post 1,222 more words

Reviews, Screenwriting

Lootera: A visual feast


Lootera | 2013 | Directed by Vikramaditya Motwane | Screenplay by Bhavani Iyer and Vikramaditya Motwane


Udaan was released a little less than three years ago (I seem to be obsessed with numbers today). VM already appears to be one of those auteurs who take their time to deliver. And boy does he deliver. Lootera is a treat.

I write this after this blog post at F.I.G.H.T C.L.U.B, which contains Vikramaditya Motwane’s very candid and supremely awesome responses to pertinent questions. RESPECT!

  • Though it is perhaps still too early to gauge VM’s thematic inclinations, I’m going to try anyway:
    • Stories within stories: VM has a story-fetish (I mean this in an entirely good way). Like Rohan in Udaan, Pakhi (Sonakshi Sinha) wants to be a writer. She delights in reading poetry aloud, and her father tells her a sweet bedtime story when she is sick. For Motwane’s characters, stories seem to offer both escape and reprieve. For the audience, it establishes a bond with the characters. We like stories and so do those people whose stories we’re watching.
    • Rejection of patriarchal authority: In both Udaan and Lootera, the protagonists are trapped in lives that have been chosen for them by patriarchs. In Udaan, Rohan is forced to study engineering and work in his father’s factory. In Lootera, Varun (Ranveer Singh) is an orphan and a thief – we get a sense that this is a destiny chosen for him by his uncle. When Varun tries to ‘escape’ from this ‘prison,’ he dies (a classic noir trope).
  • Period films are hard to come by in Indian cinema. Lootera is aware of this. Early on in the film, when Varun enters Pakhi’s world pretending to be an archaeologist, he tells her zamindar father that there is an old civilization buried around the house – he’s come to find it. Though this is a lie, it is an irresistibly resonant lie – ours are times when monuments fall to disrepair. I know I’m reading too much into a minor line, but I want to believe this was a conscious thing. Oh well.
  • I’m more comfortable talking about the screenplay here because it’s co-written by the director. The screenplay’s strength lies in the economy of its dialogue – exposition is minimal, and I liked that. In times where voice-overs and flashbacks are the narrative norm, Lootera is a refreshing change. Humor lies in genuinely comic situations (like Varun’s attempt at painting a leaf) rather than slapstick gags. This strength, however, becomes a weakness when the economy is broken. Varun and Pakhi’s occasional emotional outbursts appear jarringly melodramatic and out of place. An example is the first act scene where Pakhi confronts Varun at the ‘archaeological site.’ It seems like it belongs in another film. For a second I thought they were aiming for a 50s tone, but I’d prefer not to go with that assumption because the tone is still inconsistent with the rest of the film. One wishes VM and Iyer had maintained their restraint.
  • That said, the aspect that carries this film for its 143 minutes is undoubtedly its visual style. Cinematographer Mahendra Shetty finds ways to use minimalist, natural light in a manner that augments the action in any given scene. I expect one would be tempted to go with cozy yellows for a period narrative like this (especially the first half), but there are moments when he douses the frame in a soft, natural blue (I recall a scene in the library that used both soft yellow and a very natural blue/white to incredible effect). I’m sold. The first half is all doused in a cozy, understated elegance, the second half in a kind of raw and harsh white. Costume designer Subarna Ray Chaudhuri (whose credits include Parineeta) makes Shetty’s task much easier. The scenery chews the scenery.
  • The staging of scenes is occasionally reminiscent of Udaan. Like the moment where Pakhi breaks down in her car, and the camera cuts to a wide shot of the car with the mustard field in the foreground – it’s a beautiful shot, but a visual setup very similar to that used in Udaan when Rohan bashes the shit out of daddy’s car.
  • A key weakness for me was story. Though I’m the kind of viewer who is a sucker for visual style, the plot in general seemed laid out a little too simplistically – the Interval as usual forces a typical Indian 2 Act structure upon the narrative. First half – heist and fall in love. Second half – the Lootera is chased and love matures. I cannot express how frustrating this neat ‘splitting into two halves’ has become. Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani, Raanjhanaa and now Lootera – just to name a few. I know it’s an industry norm, an imperative, but why? If a viewer likes the film, no amount of soporific fatty foods will keep him or her away. The problem is that it makes the plot immediately predictable. You can sense an intermission moment coming, and it’s maddening – a major turn or reversal has just occurred, and close-ups get closer up and the music rises to a crescendo. Lootera, unlike the other films I just mentioned, is even more predictable than the others because of a trailer that gave everything away, and its publicized incorporation of elements from The Last Leaf. The narrative lacked an element of surprise, and that is what usually keeps an audience hooked – what happens next? At no point did I feel surprised by something a character did, which is my only major grievance with this film.
  • One surprise was how Lootera‘s plot, in very basic terms, mirrored that of Raanjhana (which had a more complex story, but fell short on other counts). Both films are about young men who destroy the lives of their loved ones, and then spend most of Act 2 fighting for forgiveness. Tea seems to be the peace offering of choice, which the women in both films dramatically reject. Both films have grooms abandon their brides on the day of the wedding.
  • A powerful narrative element emerges from this comparison: one character’s future is almost completely in the hands of another. In Raanjhana, Kundan devotes himself to gaining Zoya’s forgiveness, and she has total control over what his fate should be. He dies. In Lootera, Pakhi can choose to give Varun up to the police, but she doesn’t. In Barfi! too, there is a memorable scene at the end when Shruti leads Barfi away from the special-care home, while Jhilmil calls out Barfi’s name. Barfi, of course, cannot hear her. It’s a moment where Shruti exercises total control over Barfi’s fate – if she so chooses, Barfi will never know that Jhilmil is around and Shruti will have Barfi all to herself.
  • Divya Dutta is probably the most underutilized actress in Bollywood. She needs about 3 seconds on screen to make you cry along with her. There’s just never enough of her. Sonakshi Sinha and Ranveer Singh have probably found roles of a lifetime in VM’s hands.
  • Re: the music, I felt they ought to have gone with an entirely 1950s-type score. Though Amit Trivedi and Amitabh Bhattacharya create a formidable team and the music is great in it’s own right – it is at times a bit excessive and tends to overpower the narrative. A scene when I felt assaulted by it was the scene when Pakhi and Varun kissed for the first time. Music tends to tell you how to feel. Don’t do that, Music?

I seem to have rambled on. Point is: it’s been more than 8 hours since I watched this film and I can’t get it out of my mind. It’s past 3 AM and I’m inspired enough to keep going on and on. It isn’t a great film, it isn’t a ‘masterpiece,’ but it is an important film in 2013 because it is different. And it’s VM’s second. And it’s stunning to behold.

Don’t miss it?

Screenwriting, What They Said

In focus: Bhavani Iyer

I was in the middle of working through my thoughts on Lootera, when I went off on a tangent trying to find out more about Bhavani Iyer, who co-wrote the screenplay. Her past credits include Guzaarish and Black. In my hunt, I found this heartfelt defense of Indian cinema she wrote for Outlook back in 2006. A paragraph I found particularly resonant:

“We love it all, the Salvador Dali sets, the Rubenesque heroines, the too-good-to-be-true heroes, the hysterical one-dimensional vixens, the lack of white space. Largesse is our dream and a fierce unworldliness our characteristic. And almost always, all that glitters is great cinema. So what? We laugh with tears in our eyes, cry with a smile on our faces—we want to be part of that world on the silver screen and don’t like to feel excluded from the goings-on.”

Do check out the links below if you’re interested in knowing more about Bhavani Iyer and her craft.

Related articles:



The Lone Ranger (Bulletpoints): One collaboration too many?

The Lone Ranger

The Lone Ranger | 2013 | Directed by Gore Verbinski | Screenplay by Ted Elliott, Terry Rossio and Justin Haythe | Based on Lone Ranger, a character created by Fran Striker and George W. Trendle


Thanks to this friend, I’ve decided to go with the bulletpoint approach. And this is going to be brief, for I’d rather spend my time talking about Lootera.

  • In the last decade, these things happened: Longtime writing partners Elliott and Rossio wrote all 4 Pirates of the Caribbean movies and TLR. Director Gore Verbinski directed 5 films, 4 of which starred Johnny Depp and 3 of which were the Pirates of the Caribbean movies. Depp and Helena Bonham Carter co-starred in 5 films, all of which were Tim Burton movies. Dark Shadows – the most recent Burton-Depp-Bonham Carter outing – was a critical and commercial dud.
  • What does this mean for TLR? The key creative folks have worked together before. A lot. And this, to me, seems to be the reason this film doesn’t work. It is too assured. It is over-confident, relying heavily on the audience’s level of familiarity with the kind of characters its actors usually play. The film ensures that Depp is allowed to do his dark-screwball-comedy act that made Pirates an enviable franchise. The film ensures that Bonham Carter is allowed to be a weird character with crazy hair. It’s almost like they didn’t know what to do with Armie Hammer because they hadn’t worked with him before.
  • The aspect of the film where this over-confidence is most evident is its humor – or lack thereof.  ‘What’s with the mask?’ is a recurring question that characters ask The Lone Ranger. We’re supposed to laugh. We don’t. Comic timing depends heavily on pacing, and the film’s schizophrenic pacing means its comedy suffers.
  • Speaking of comedy, most of it relies on the ‘buddy’ dynamic between The Lone Ranger / John Reid (Armie Hammer) and Tonto (Johnny Depp). Unfortunately, Hammer always remains an outcast in the Rossio-Verbinski-Elliott-Depp-Bonham-Carter family. Depp seems to be practicing for Pirates 5. They never seem to settle into their characters, which is unfortunate because they’re both generally fantastic. It’s the way the characters have been devised and written. The Lone Ranger is often reduced to ‘the wrong brother,’ bombarding Tonto with inane questions. That’s good, right? Is that thing sterile? Why am I covered in dirt? Where are my boots?
  • It is reported that Elliott and Rossio’s earlier draft (Haythe came in later), involved supernatural elements – we see a glimmer of this in the meat-eating hares, but I’d have liked to see more. The story’s development is indicative of its tonal problems. You got from werewolves to meat-eating hares? What?
  • The film is part-Western, part-Whatever Pirates is and part-Johnny Depp. The film is therefore about 90 minutes too long and messy as hell. You have an evil railroad guy, a Native American with a complicated past and a psychopathic outlaw as your secondary characters. Alexander Mackendrick wrote of the density of sub-plots, and this is a heroic effort in that respect. But the Lone Ranger takes a damn long time to become the Lone Ranger, and an even longer time to get a goal. And then the reversals begin. At about 3 times in the second half, the film felt like it was about to end.
  • Armie Hammer has a voice that I should like to hear in an animated film.
  • James Badge Dale (who plays Dan Reid, John’s brother) is officially 2013’s Handsome Heroic Man Who Gets to Die a Ghastly Death. In World War Z, he is bitten by a zombie and thus shoots himself before he turns undead. In The Lone Ranger, he is shot and has his heart eaten by a not-very-friendly outlaw. Leave James alone, please?
  • The Lone Ranger is by no means the worst film of the year (2013 has seen After Earth). But occasionally spectacular visuals cannot salvage a story that doesn’t know what to do with its overblown ambition.
Upcoming Films

When it rains, it pours

Have been out of action for a while during what seems to be a busy, busy month @ the movies.

Today, I’m headed for Lootera and The Lone Ranger. The latter because I want to see how bad it really is. The former because I’m excited as hell. The cinematography looks delicious – watched Udaan once again yesterday to remind myself what Motwane and co. are capable of. For Lootera, Motwane teams up once again with Amit Trivedi (music), Amitabh Bhattacharya (lyrics), Dipika Kalra (editing) and Mahendra J. Shetty (cinematography). We don’t really get to watch too many period films here, so it’s a welcome change. This appears to be screenwriter Bhavani Iyer first outing since Guzaarish (2010).

Tomorrow onward, I face the tough task of managing my time properly so that I can watch each of these: GhanchakkarB.A. Pass, Sixteen, Bhaag Milkha Bhaag, Despicable Me 2, Baandhon and Pacific Rim.


Note to self — never miss a Friday @ Mega Mall.


Screenwriting, What They Said

Vikramaditya Motwane responds to our criticism of Lootera

Vikramaditya Motwane responds to criticism of Lootera.

F.i.g.h.t C.l.u.b

I got to watch the film on Tuesday. This was amidst too much hype, too much expectation, pressure to like/dislike instantly, and too eager to react. By that time reactions from the film fraternity had already started pouring in. And as a member of the crew told me during the screening, honestly, it’s impossible to make out anything from the pre-release screenings. Also, if one has read the script, one might be reacting differently from others.

In terms of reactions, Lootera has turned out to be strangely divisive films. The reaction of critics and audience going in extreme directions is quite obvious for most films these days. But here the critics rating varied from 2.5 to 5 stars. I can only think of Dev D which went further extreme and got ratings from 1 to 5 stars, and everything in between. But strangely, the audience reaction have also been…

View original post 1,162 more words

Screenwriting, What They Said

David Lynch on ‘endings’

“What I learned is that a feature film has a beginning, a middle and an end. It’s a beautiful thing and you can do so much within that form, but at the same time we’ve seen so many films that are like verses and choruses. You know what’s coming up and you can feel it go from the beginning to the middle and you can feel the ending coming. Television is so appealing because you can have a continuing story that will lead you here and lead you there. Something could come up and could relate to something from way back long ago. I love detective novels, but at the end you know the answer and it’s really pretty depressing to me, because it always seems a little too simple. I think the film Chinatown has one of the most beautiful endings. It gives you so much room to dream.”

– Conversations at the American Film Institute with the Great Moviemakers, George Stevens, Jr., 2012

Screenwriting, What They Said

Satyajit Ray

“When writing an original story, my predilection is for working densely within a restricted field in terms of time and space. Planning the story of Nayak, I dismissed quite early the notion of an orderly, step-by-step account of the making of a matinee idol. That seemed to belong to the cinema of the thirties and forties. In the film, the hero’s part is revealed in flashbacks and dreams which make inroads into a very tight time-space pattern (twenty-four hours in a train).”

– Some Aspects of My Craft; Our Films, Their Films, 1976