True Detective, the Silence of the lambs and over-kill

Caution 1: Spoilers Alert! You shouldn’t read this if you haven’t watched True Detective (sitcom), Prisoners (movie), The Silence of the lambs (movie) yet.

Caution 2: Long Post!

A gruesome crime premised upon the collective gist of inter-connected sub-plots, oozing with a tremendous amount of shock-value, captivating and sometimes equally excruciating progression of the story during tense moments, and then the haphazardly conjured up climax scene. All adjectives in the opening line are elegantly interlocked except haphazard – because any crime-thriller sitcom has to maintain a self-imposed pace to build the tension, fan it with surprise or revelations and in the end at the climax all hell has to break lose to make it a worthwhile watch for audiences. No matter how good the main plot or sub-plots are – ultimately it’s the climax that gets etched in the memory of the spectators forever. A minor let-up here and there in the plot, some loose ends in the story are happily ignored or condoned by the audiences, only if the climax scene lives up to the expectations.

I am starting the second paragraph by writing something obvious - a television crime drama TV series can afford to be lot more complex and extravagant than a crime-thriller movie because in a TV series, you have enough time and space to stretch the story in sub-plots. Yes, same can be done with movies, but here the director has to keep the running time in mind and sub-plots can’t be stretched beyond a point.

Recently I finished watching all the eight episodes of “True Detective Season 1.” The story starts with former Louisiana State Police detectives Rust Cohle (Matthew McConaughey )and Martin Hart (Woody Harrelson) being questioned by two currently deployed detectives separately, regarding a few murders – happened way back in 1995. The major events in the story are shown in the flashback versions of the former detectives. All the episodes were so engaging that I finished watching them all in two days, but the climax left me in the lurch.

Photo Courtesy: tv.com

As a big fan of suspense-thriller sitcoms, I want convincing and moving plots complemented with a mind-boggling climax. In the first episode, when the first murder happened, there were apparent hints or signs that the crime was related to religious passion or motivated by some satanic customs or nefarious voodoo practices. And, as Cohle and Hart further unearthed some interesting details, audiences got conclusive proof that the gruesome crimes were committed by some people indulging in some necromancy or voodoo practicing. As the plot thickened, I thought there could be another angle than just voodoo and black-magic shit, but that was not the case.

A writer or director gets too many options to show crimes happening in different stages and committed in the most grotesque manner or there could be many ramifications – if the plot is based upon some magic shit or superstitious beliefs. Any sort of absurd, hilarious or exaggerated imagination does not need any justification and things could be exaggerated to a great extent and fittingly termed as flimsy and bizarre – if they are based upon superstition. As a writer or director of such sitcoms, you can be as creative as you can in depicting the modus-operandi of the criminals and the motives of the perpetrators of the crimes – because their (perpetrators’) actions could be based on something – we can’t comprehend because that something is based upon a belief or superstition. And we as audience would never know that because all would be based upon superstition! Give me a break!   And, same happened with True Detective and in the end whole idea looked flawed. Why did they do that? Yes, they (perpetrators of crimes) did horrible things to those people before killing them but why? No need to go after the answer, because their actions were motivated by some shitty rituals. There goes my imagination for a toss!

Let’s talk about characters now. Throughout the story, as it flows, Cohle (Matthew McConaughey), the main protagonist looks eccentric and indomitable - a man who is too much attached to his job that he just does not give a damn about other things in the world. At times during his interaction with other guys, Cohle preaches his self-styled philosophy like a stubborn bloke who is just too good for this world. No doubt, he appears rationalist and different from others. In a way we all want to be like him. Such characters instantly find appeal among audiences because they look rational and larger than life. You can’t help liking these characters because they don’t crave for that sense of belongingness to the worldly things and usually appears detached from this mortal and ever-changing world and yes we also crave for that feeling and at times also behave like that – at least to look different or to get that vicarious pleasure that we don’t give a damn about the problems afflicting us and those who belong to us. Well, McConaughey’s character is simply portrayed in that manner. He is not normal – suffers from insomnia and behaves as if he is just at the breaking-point. He doesn’t snap!

As expected, Cohle’s partner Martin Hart (Woodly Harleson) is reduced into a sidekick who appears like a lot more believable character. He is your everyday guy with typical family issues and desires. Till the very end, McConaughey’s character shines in his hubris of being different and when he looks vulnerable or behaves like a common man, he talks – but, whatever he talks does not make much sense. Exaggerated sense of eccentricity made McConaughey look like Nana Patekar of 90’s, when the Maharashtrian actor featured in Partho Ghosh’s films, where roles were written specifically for Nana. What Nana did in “Krantiveer” earned him many admirers, but then he overdid it by replaying the role of a disgruntled self-styled preacher, on burning issues, plaguing the society, again and again until his whole act or acting-effort was labeled as stereotype. The preaching is fine if the end could have been better, but that did not happen in True Detective.

The clever dialogues are written really well and McConaughey delivers them with his usual panache. The only thing that makes me feel sick is that why these guys come to the religion or voodoo magic or other old customs to create chaos. Every day we read in newspapers about so many incredible crimes of passion. Come on, the world is full of crazy people, who raise hell every day and commit horrible and incredible crimes – yes they appear surreal at times. So, there is enough fodder out there to churn out stories devoid of any religion-based or superstition-based angle. Yes, writers or directors don’t need to connect them with religion.

McConaughey’s character portrayal couldn’t have bothered me much only if the ending would have been better. You got to justify the motive behind crime. How can a specific group of people go on a killing spree – without getting noticed by others? Here I would like to give a perfect example of motive of a killer in “Silence of the lambs.” The killer Jame “Buffalo Bill” Gumb had a traumatic childhood. Bill is described as not really transgender, but he merely believes himself as being one, because he "hates his own identity".

Photo Courtesy: zulm.net

The entire plot of the “Silence of the lambs” movie was ripped off by Tanuja Chandra to make a Bollywood film Sangharsh in 1999 – starring Akshay Kumar and Preity Zinta. The plot was almost same except the motive of the killer. Tanuja Indianised (altered) the motive of the killer Lajja Shankar (Ashutosh Rana) by bringing in superstitions on the fore – this guy believes that he can achieve immortality by sacrificing (killing) the children. Not same but once again religion based shit was shown in Prisoner movie (starring Hugh Jackman). In Prisoners, the killers, which are an old couple, wage a war against God by killing children – because they lost their only child to illness and they blame God for that.  The dialogues, conflicts between main characters and other factors were too good in the movie – except the motive of the killers – because once again it was based on religion or some crappy belief. Every moment haunts you and keeps you on the edge of your seat in such stories, but as you begin connecting the dots towards the end – things fall apart because everything looks so absurd because a superstitious belief of the perpetrator is forced upon the spectators – they have to believe in that. Now, I must tell the writers of such stories - guys it’s overdone or you just over-killed it – time to come up with something different. Enough!

Some thoughts on Finding Fanny

• Not a Review

Photo Courtesy - Midday

Away from the coldhearted hustle-bustle of a city “Finding Fanny” begins with an optimum pace, takes a sojourn in a beautiful and sleepy part of Goa and ends as it begins – on a deft note. The imaginary Pocolim village paints a stoic image of Goa – which defies the pre-conceived notion or pre-shown Bollywood images of this state – known for its bohemian feel, rave parties and cheap liquor.

Goa’s image gets a big makeover lift in this film – devoid of any mushy tinge of ‘Dil Chahta Hai’ or outrageously rave-laden gloom of “Dum Maaro Dum” and some cheap dope-shit of “Go Goa Gone.’ The narrator reiterates at the start of the film that nothing goes unnoticed in Pocolim for the natives, but there is nothing to notice here for outsiders.

What makes this film a sheer treat to watch is not only the picturesque cinematography of Goa or presence of quality actors or witty dialogues, but that uncommon honesty to deliver an authentic film premised upon simplicity. Homi Adjania – the director never ever tried to mess-up with the momentum or rhythm of the film. Only three films old in Bollywood – Adjania has just started, but if I have to draw the comparison or applaud this director then I would say that Finding Fanny has moments, reminiscent of Hrishikesh Mukherjee’s cinema – I know it’s a compliment of a mammoth level and now Adjania will have a lot to justify in a longer run. Five main characters of this film look convincing from the start and stick to their true-self till the end with an uncompromising and unapologetic laid-back attitude.

The story flows with an optimum pace except a few moments which are consciously peppered with quirky dialogues or expressions to extract humor – and the director did succeed in that. Some of my favorite stand-out moments in this film are:

• Ferdy (Naseer), who is a postmaster in Pocolim looks jaded when he cries like a child and Angie (Deepika) stuffed his mouth with a cloth. In another scene, Naseer looked completely lost in his grief, riding a bicycle – with closed eyes and open-mouth, crying and looking painfully unhappy. Ferdy appeared endearing in every scene and his mannerism evokes a lot of humor, whenever he looks puzzled or tries to assert his character or views.

• When Angie convinces timid Ferdy to search for Fanny. Just like a confused child, Ferdy looked convinced and contrived at the same time. Ultimately, fiery Angie coxed and persuaded Ferdy for the search-quest.

• Pankaj Kapoor plays the role of Don Pedro with his typical panache and adds that requisite fervor to a lecherous and somewhat vulgar character, when he first meets Rosy (Dimple Kapadia). He tries to measure-up the “Full-Figure” of Rosy with his X-Ray eyes and on a couple of occasions reached an orgasmic-state, while delving deep into sexual fantasies. Pankaj Kapoor’s perfect expressions make this vulgar character so funny and charming.

• In another scene during the second-half, Pedro discarded Rosy like an object after he managed to draw her painting, and before we could feel pity for Rosy, Director ended Pedro’s journey in the film.

• Angie (Deepika) and Savio’s post-sex discussion offers another laugh-out-loud moment. It was a hilarious scene when Angie overtly puts a doubt in Savio’s mind regarding his just concluded performance in coitus.

• An innocent looking boy shows middle finger to Savio on a couple of occasions – it is a paradox of a scene, where other characters look happy or indifferent, except the preposterous and angry Savio, who ultimately gets a fitting reply from this boy.

I don’t find it practically viable for myself to watch movies in a theater - if their promos don’t convince me a lot. Obviously, Finding Fanny’s nifty trailer had it. And, most importantly, the star-cast made me watch this film. If Pankaj Kapoor and Naseer are in a film – I bet there must be something in terms of so-called nuance. Appeared utterly authentic, simple and convincing from the start to finish – Finding Fanny will linger in my mind for a long time.

Ram Gopal Verma: An unfinished affair

“Mumbai Ka King Kaun” Bhikhu Mahatre – a line that has been etched in my memory forever and somehow introduced me to a different Indian Cinema of that time. Yes, I was shocked a bit, but more than that felt sheer happiness because for me it was a new and bold experience. We had seen many gangster movies before Satya, but the way it brought the nuance of Underworld on the forefront and presented it with stubborn honesty – simply left me awestruck. Now after all these years, I can say that Indian Cinema was taking one step at a time then to embrace the much needed change and what Ram Gopal Verma did then can be termed as a Paradigm Shift.

Before Satya happened, RGV had established himself as a director with a lot in “Different and Bold” to offer with Rangeela. But, my first serious introduction to RGV’s movies was with Satya – a film that allowed Manoj Vajpai to exhibit his immense talent by portraying the role of a Mumbai Underworld Don. It hit me like a whiplash and somehow left me jolted to the core.

In one epic scene, Bhikhu Mahatre died when he went to congratulate Bhau (main villain) for winning the election. It was a single-shot to the head to kill the most powerful character in the movie – and that was typical RGV moment of the movie – devoid of any preconceived notions. It was a totally different experience for me and I immediately became his fan.

Satya was a cult film during those times. Actually, it appeared a lot different because prior to that Box-Office was mostly ruled by directors like Suraj Barjataya or Yash Chopra or others. Either it was love-dovey Cinema, where you had those typical Bollywood love-stories – too much melodrama, Dreamy song sequences and Rona-Dhona or mind-numbing action sequences with larger than life Heroes and their whims. RGV was not there to join the rat race.

After Satya, I established a special bond with RGV’s movies – they were convincing, different and well ahead of their times – yes, if you compare his work with other directors of that time. With every movie, RGV looked strong and firm in his conviction. I did watch Rangeela later and it simply blew me away. It was not Urmila Matondkar’s skimpy dress or her audacious dance moves in Tanha Tanha yahan par jeena, but the way RGV dealt with the spirit of a free girl was simply staggering with different hues of emotions explicating her aspirations, dreams and uncommon love-affair with Aamir Khan’s character Munna.  These days we have some gutsy directors or filmmakers, who can take the Indian Cinema forward by producing a lot of different stuff; worth mentioning Anurag Kashyap and Diwakar Banerjee, but in those days, we had only RGV and he never disappointed us.

RGV  (Photo Courtesy - apnewscorner)

Be it Shool, Company or Road – RGV simply lived up to the expectations, which soared high with every movie he made. It was all good till Ab tak Chappan, another movie on underworld and police nexus. And then something happened.

I went to watch Gayab and then Naach – and felt disappointed. Whether RGV directed those movies or not, but he was involved with them. In those days, I had a friend who was taking classes with Berry John, who once trained Manoj Vajpai, told me that RGV’s production house is named “Factory” and RGV might took it seriously – it was one movie after another from Factory. Loads of quantity - damage to quality. This guy was on a spree to make movies. Well, his next flicks can’t be called anything but average with “D” and “James”, but then RGV once again hit the chord with Sarkar. There were those typical RGV moments in the flick and it was a good effort in many ways – the director was honest in his storytelling and there were some quirky one-liners like Jab koi ek taraf se ladna shuru karta hai to dushan apne aap hi ban jaate hain. Though, it was a rip-off of Hollywood’s epic flick Godfather - Sarkar was a big hit and what could have proved a turning point in RGV’s career ended up filling him with hubris, which eventually got the better of him. 2007 saw the release of Nishabd and Ram Gopal Verma ki Aag – with latter turning out as Bollywood’s worst movie ever. For someone, who delivered so many quality movies for more than a decade, this last effort brought him to his heels. And, then followed a string of Flops and creepy movies with Department, the attacks of 26/11 and Satya 2.

Yes, we have a new brigade of directors, which has kept our hopes alive for a better and nuance-oriented cinema, but amidst all this – it hurts to see such a fall of RGV. A director of uncommon sense of Cinema could have done a lot better. Now, he is coming up with Ab Tak Chappan 2 – hopefully, it would not meet with the same fate of Satya 2.

RGV gave us so much in different Cinema and kept our hopes alive that Bollywood has a big heart to accept and cherish those who believe in themselves, take risks and defy formula-based cinema.

Many call him Maverick and spontaneous director, whose love for Cinema force him to work tirelessly, but for me he is someone, who has a strong conviction, but gradually paralyzed with his own hubris. Now, at the age of 52, I believe that this great Director can take a break from films and analyze a few things about himself – a walk down the memory lane wouldn’t help and a fresh start amidst present state of affairs can do a lot for him. Yes, he can look back to draw inspiration from those great flicks of his, which enriched Bollywood in many ways. May be its too late for RGV, but he would always stand out as someone, who did a lot in reinstating the faith of many in hard-hitting cinema – when Bollywood was struggling with an identity crisis and succumbing to cliché.