312 reviews
- Magnificent sets
- Intricate art design
- Designer costumes
- Eye-pleasing visuals
- Loads of celebrations
- A Punjabi track with bikini babes
- Feel-good factor
- Trademark Shahrukh Khan
- Complimentary Kajol fluttering sari for a 5 second song appearance
- Predicted houseful openings
Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna has all the regular contents of a Karan Johar extravaganza. Plus a story this time!
In 1981, Yash Chopra made Silsila on extra-marital affairs that was considered ahead of its times. The culmination of its theme, however, was as per the Indian sensibilities of those times. 25 years later, Karan Johar makes a film on extra-marital affairs (am not drawing any parallels between the two films whatsoever) and the culmination of the plot makes it the so called 'different' or a 'bold' film.
A bold film is not about sex, skin or sleaze. It's about matured mindsets and moving ahead with times. Karan also moves ahead with KANK. In terms of its plot outlines, while Kuch Kuch Hota Hai was an overrated triangular love story and Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Ghum was just another conventional family drama, Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna has a comparatively sensible and substantial story to back the candy floss on the screen.
The story, as everybody and their second cousin by now know, is about an extra marital affair.
The visual appeal in a Karan Johar film is, like always, intricate and immaculate. Be it Anil Mehta's eye-pleasing camera-work, Sharmista Roy's appealing art design, Manish Malhotra's fashion fiesta or Farah Khan's cosmic choreography, everyone is just perfect in their department.
But as I earlier said, apart from the visual dazzlery, the movie clicks because it has something to say in which it succeeds. Karan always had heart in his films; here he puts in a lot of soul too. Shibani Bhatija who earlier wrote the overrated Fanaa this year, co-writes a more cohesive, convincing and a satisfying screenplay for KANK with Karan Johar. The comic scenes are very well written while the emotional ones are deftly acted and executed. Dialogues vary from the tongue-in-cheek lines in the lighthearted scenes to the regular ones in the emotional outbursts. Niranjan Iyenger's witty one-liners compliment the funny scenes without a glitch.
Also the screenplay balances the bittersweet act and maintains the equilibrium. While a Karan Johar film is broadly envisaged as a compulsive tearjerker, KANK has sufficient light-hearted frivolous relief in the first half. The scene where Rani Mukherjee tries to impersonate a BDSM girl is outrageously hilarious. If you go to compare KANK with Karan's earlier works, the tone of the film is more like a Kal Ho Naa Ho (which was written by Karan) as compared to his over-dramatic first two directions. In fact what sets the film apart from the daily soaps on the idiot box (each one of which is based on an extra-marital affair) is that the performances never get overtly melodramatic even in the emotional outbursts.
The pace is slow and the movie does get stretched in the second half. The conclusion could have been impermeable to the audiences' mentality but the screenplay has enough conviction to make it digestible. And while Karan took excuses of the bhartiya sanskriti and parampara in his first two films, here thankfully he stays free from the culture crap and sanskaar endorsements. On the contrary, KANK strides against the clichés in culture to make its own way. And the best part is that it doesn't do this blatantly.
Of course while going off-route, there are some elements where he arguably takes the fast-forward path. Like Amitabh Bachchan's characterization of a philandering sexagenarian might not gel well with the Indian sensibilities. But since his character adds a comic angle to the film and isn't the central focus either, one doesn't take it quite seriously. Still, the idea of imagining Amitabh Bachchan and his character sleeping with a new whore every night, without a trace of repentance and with the full knowledge of his son, isn't easily digestible.
What's notable in this film is that rather than just being the usual Chopra-Johar escapist cinema, it has a lot of realism too. For instance Shahrukh in KANK is not just the regular lover-boy. Though he continues his legacy of wooing the female species and taking away a woman from his initial partner in the film (he has been doing this since ever), he still isn't that man who makes things happen for others. The Dev Saran of KANK has a lot of vulnerability in him that makes him much human rather than the regular perfectionist SRK (of films like Main Hoon Na, Mohobbatien or Kal Ho Naa Ho) who plays the peacemaker and makes things happen for others. Imperfection makes Dev Saran real rather than starry.
In an age of breaking marriages and failing relationships, the movie's portrayal of the incompatibility in marital bonding is something that a contemporary audience can relate to. In a film that demands a lot of emotional play, the performances are as natural as it can get. Preity Zinta has the spunk to carry off the career woman character, Abhishek has a melting intensity, Rani only gets better like an old wine and Shahrukh, despite indulging in his trademark antiques, is acceptable for his character's vulnerability.
I am not a hardcore Karan Johar fan, neither am I cynical about his flamboyant films. I watched KANK with an open mind and without preconceived notions. So on the credit of its content, KANK ended up being neither a superlative piece of cinema nor the abysmal film tagged by its hypercritical detractors. It's just the perfect balance of entertainment.
Maturity, sensibility and entertainment increased in direct proportion from Karan Johar's K2H2 to K3G to KHNH. KANK continues the trend.
....Karan Johar for KANK!
I was waiting with so much excitement for this movie only to have my hopes dashed in the biggest way possible. I have loved some of Karan Johar's earlier films and thoroughly enjoyed them. However, I think this time around, he has completely got it wrong! (Which is OK because we are all humans and we make mistakes). This being a Rs500 million one.
This movie dragged on endlessly. The only salvation to all this... Amitabh Bachchan and Abishek Bachchan, who stole the show with their on-screen chemistry.
Is this movie worth a watch? No...not unless you have absolutely nothing better to do. Even then, I'd recommend chewing or biting your arm off as a better option.
I was waiting with so much excitement for this movie only to have my hopes dashed in the biggest way possible. I have loved some of Karan Johar's earlier films and thoroughly enjoyed them. However, I think this time around, he has completely got it wrong! (Which is OK because we are all humans and we make mistakes). This being a Rs500 million one.
This movie dragged on endlessly. The only salvation to all this... Amitabh Bachchan and Abishek Bachchan, who stole the show with their on-screen chemistry.
Is this movie worth a watch? No...not unless you have absolutely nothing better to do. Even then, I'd recommend chewing or biting your arm off as a better option.
- Cuttingcha
- Aug 14, 2006
- Permalink
Here I will comment on the content rather than the filmmaking techniques or acting: I'm not of Indian decent and don't understand any Hindi, except what I have learned from watching subtitled Bollywood... Yes, I'm a big fan. I used to like Shahrukh Khan and watched KANK just because he was in it. I assumed it would be a great film. I was VERY DISAPPOINTED :( Talking to many Indian friends, they seemed to share my feeling that Shahrukh lost many fans after this movie.
I just read some of the positive reviews and to me it seems as though many people consider anything unconventional or defiant as "artsy" and therefore valuable. Especially in Europe, many so-called educated people still confuse "immoral" with "open-minded". According to these people, if you cheat on your spouse, you are no longer bound by the traditional, maybe even religion-based, institution of marriage. For many Indians who have felt the pressures of culture, religion and society, this film may feel like a whiff of fresh air just because it seems to break free from those strings... and indeed it does. This reminds me of those repressed youngsters whose parents force religion on them, only to see them revolting with sometimes becoming delinquent once they become independent.
To break free from the negative aspects of tradition (i.e. even arranged or forced marriage), one doesn't need to lie and cheat or to do the opposite of ALL that's traditional or religious. One can question tradition and religion and take what's valuable and throw away what's not fair (sexism, homophobia, etc.) I am personally not affiliated with any religion. Nevertheless, I believe that morality is needed to make the wheels of a society run. Otherwise, there would be total anarchy. Trust is needed so people can get along peacefully. Everyone has the right to the truth, especially when it involves someone that they have trusted their life, love, emotions and body with. A person with a good social understanding realizes that if everyone acts selfishly, the society falls apart and there won't be anything anymore to hang on to.
Cheating on someone, deceiving, lying to, hiding from someone, especially a spouse, is not being progressive, open-minded and modern. A successful modern society survives on basic human values such as empathy, trust and a sense of morality in its laws as well as among its people. Deceit is simply immoral and unfair. Do onto others what you like done to you. Problems arise in almost every marriage, but should first be solved by good communication. If both parties reach a solution where it seems the only way out is a divorce (so sad), so be it. At least it gives both people the respect of their time and knowing the truth and having the freedom to live their life however they want without deceiving someone else to do it.
KANK may have wanted to hint at some things that may cause marital problems... or maybe not. It doesn't even vilify the spouses that were cheated on and doesn't make the viewer hate them (even if it did, I'd still stick to what I said above about cheating).
KANK pretends to be a "realistic" film about things that can happen in everyday life. Well, do they? No, unless your average Joe is a sociopath. Someone who can carry on an affair must be a sociopath, someone with no feelings, no guilt, no remorse, no empathy, no respect for other people's rights and no sense of fairness.
Then there are those who claim that one should not be offended as this is just a (realistic) story. It's not. Then why glorify an extra-marital relationship? Even if this happened with a couple, this film could have turned it on its head and use it as a teachable moment... show that actually people who cheat once, are capable on cheating again (no empathy, remember?!!), so they are very likely to cheat on that new person with someone else, and again, and again, and again...
Instead, the ending romanticises this extra-marital affair and gives it a seemingly happy ending (that may have been the intention but I felt reallky appalled). Have the makers of this film not looked at any statistics? Don't they know that "once a cheater, always a cheater" is true (because someone with no soul, empathy or morality doesn't suddenly achieve them!)? Have they no values, no respect for integrity? Maybe one of them had an affair and this film was made to justify it, to no avail. In any case, this huge mistake was made at the expense of millions of Bollywood viewers. I found the ending disgusting and not at all romantic. I couldn't help feeling sorry for the duped spouses and thinking they deserved better than having been married to such low scums. The filmmaker's attempt to make these two cheaters likable totally fails... miserably.
I'm happily married and I met my spouse myself. Even if I had had an arranged marriage like some traditional Indian people, I would still treat that spouse with respect and honesty and would either try to work things out or separate with dignity.
p.s. As for being someone's soul mate, if you give yourself the right and the permission to look outside your marriage, you would find a potential soul mate with many people, as you will have things in common with many people. What makes you think the next person will be any different? THE IMPORTANT CHALLENGE IS TO KEEP THE ONE SOULMATE THAT YOU PROBABLY ALREADY HAVE.
I just read some of the positive reviews and to me it seems as though many people consider anything unconventional or defiant as "artsy" and therefore valuable. Especially in Europe, many so-called educated people still confuse "immoral" with "open-minded". According to these people, if you cheat on your spouse, you are no longer bound by the traditional, maybe even religion-based, institution of marriage. For many Indians who have felt the pressures of culture, religion and society, this film may feel like a whiff of fresh air just because it seems to break free from those strings... and indeed it does. This reminds me of those repressed youngsters whose parents force religion on them, only to see them revolting with sometimes becoming delinquent once they become independent.
To break free from the negative aspects of tradition (i.e. even arranged or forced marriage), one doesn't need to lie and cheat or to do the opposite of ALL that's traditional or religious. One can question tradition and religion and take what's valuable and throw away what's not fair (sexism, homophobia, etc.) I am personally not affiliated with any religion. Nevertheless, I believe that morality is needed to make the wheels of a society run. Otherwise, there would be total anarchy. Trust is needed so people can get along peacefully. Everyone has the right to the truth, especially when it involves someone that they have trusted their life, love, emotions and body with. A person with a good social understanding realizes that if everyone acts selfishly, the society falls apart and there won't be anything anymore to hang on to.
Cheating on someone, deceiving, lying to, hiding from someone, especially a spouse, is not being progressive, open-minded and modern. A successful modern society survives on basic human values such as empathy, trust and a sense of morality in its laws as well as among its people. Deceit is simply immoral and unfair. Do onto others what you like done to you. Problems arise in almost every marriage, but should first be solved by good communication. If both parties reach a solution where it seems the only way out is a divorce (so sad), so be it. At least it gives both people the respect of their time and knowing the truth and having the freedom to live their life however they want without deceiving someone else to do it.
KANK may have wanted to hint at some things that may cause marital problems... or maybe not. It doesn't even vilify the spouses that were cheated on and doesn't make the viewer hate them (even if it did, I'd still stick to what I said above about cheating).
KANK pretends to be a "realistic" film about things that can happen in everyday life. Well, do they? No, unless your average Joe is a sociopath. Someone who can carry on an affair must be a sociopath, someone with no feelings, no guilt, no remorse, no empathy, no respect for other people's rights and no sense of fairness.
Then there are those who claim that one should not be offended as this is just a (realistic) story. It's not. Then why glorify an extra-marital relationship? Even if this happened with a couple, this film could have turned it on its head and use it as a teachable moment... show that actually people who cheat once, are capable on cheating again (no empathy, remember?!!), so they are very likely to cheat on that new person with someone else, and again, and again, and again...
Instead, the ending romanticises this extra-marital affair and gives it a seemingly happy ending (that may have been the intention but I felt reallky appalled). Have the makers of this film not looked at any statistics? Don't they know that "once a cheater, always a cheater" is true (because someone with no soul, empathy or morality doesn't suddenly achieve them!)? Have they no values, no respect for integrity? Maybe one of them had an affair and this film was made to justify it, to no avail. In any case, this huge mistake was made at the expense of millions of Bollywood viewers. I found the ending disgusting and not at all romantic. I couldn't help feeling sorry for the duped spouses and thinking they deserved better than having been married to such low scums. The filmmaker's attempt to make these two cheaters likable totally fails... miserably.
I'm happily married and I met my spouse myself. Even if I had had an arranged marriage like some traditional Indian people, I would still treat that spouse with respect and honesty and would either try to work things out or separate with dignity.
p.s. As for being someone's soul mate, if you give yourself the right and the permission to look outside your marriage, you would find a potential soul mate with many people, as you will have things in common with many people. What makes you think the next person will be any different? THE IMPORTANT CHALLENGE IS TO KEEP THE ONE SOULMATE THAT YOU PROBABLY ALREADY HAVE.
I'm gonna keep this short and simple. The movie is OK. Not too great, not too bad. Flaws: Too long-3.5 hrs, not to mention too stretched. Storyline doesn't make all that much sense. Boring at many times, ESPECIALLY after the interval. Too much repetition of certain things. Overacting by many of the actors at times in the movie.
Good: songs, and cinematography is very very good. Well executed humor, and jokes. Entertaining in the first part of the movie. Acting is good by Shah Rukh Khan, Rani, and Abhishek, although at times, they tend to overact a bit. bold, and different type of story. likable by some who like change.
Overall: Good for ONE and ONLY ONE viewing. If you view it more than once, you will start to get a huge headache.
Good: songs, and cinematography is very very good. Well executed humor, and jokes. Entertaining in the first part of the movie. Acting is good by Shah Rukh Khan, Rani, and Abhishek, although at times, they tend to overact a bit. bold, and different type of story. likable by some who like change.
Overall: Good for ONE and ONLY ONE viewing. If you view it more than once, you will start to get a huge headache.
- mseclectic
- Aug 12, 2006
- Permalink
Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna was promoted as Karan Johar's most mature work. It's not, and it's actually rather childish in the way it addresses marriage. Look, the combination of comedy and drama, laughs and tears is common in Hindi films, and I like it, but it doesn't work here. The banality of the story couldn't be more contrived or transparent: two couples (Shahrukh and Preity; Abhishek and Rani), in two troubled, unsuccessful relationships; Shahrukh befriends Rani and Preity befriends Abhishek; while Abhishek and Preity become good friends, Shahrukh and Rani clearly want more, which later on grows as expected. The film has a great share of loopholes. First, it is so exhaustingly long, especially for the story it tells. Almost four hours. And considering two hours were just trashy jokes and loud songs, I would've deleted at least one hour of it. While the combination of comedy and drama was handled quite well in Kal Ho Naa Ho, it was overdone here: the comedy was more of a parody, the drama was more of a soap opera. Most of the time the comedy is ridiculous and consistently unfunny. Amitabh Bachchan's affairs with young prostitutes and his pathetic behaviour are not funny at all and are actually very embarrassing. The "Black Beast" sequence should have been deleted, it's one of the most redundant, pathetic and pointless sequences I can imagine. It's just one of many sequences which didn't contribute to the film in any way.
Towards the end of a hardly amusing first half, the comedy ends. And all of a sudden starts the drama. The couples start fighting and insulting each other intensively in what resembles the cheapest of soap operas or sometimes even a very bad school play. An overblown scenery is filled with cheap and cliché "family situations", which are totally unconvincing and everything about them strains credulity. And this supposedly brings to the so-called extramarital affair. Many ask, does Karan Johar really know what marriage is all about? The answer is a definite no, and he's not even smart enough to be able to guess. His approach to the idea or concept of a marriage is shallow and lacking in any depth or critical thinking. As a result, the film in those portions where marital life is put to test, is unrealistic, hard to believe, and just never rings true. Johar's cheesy, theatrical and overly emotional dialogue could be forgiven if the characters weren't wealthy people living in New York 2006 - for your information, they don't speak like this. The music in the background is just completely distracting. I do know people like Hindi films also for their escapist and larger-than-life melodramas, but even in such films, the context is always clear, as opposed to this film which pretends to be a portrait of a marriage which never gels.
Those were the specifics, but what about the basics, like, for instance, the fact that the main characters always bump into each other "coincidentally" in the streets of New York as if it was as small as Chandni Chowk. Moreover, the setting is ridiculously exaggerated - the lavish houses and interiors make no sense, sorry but they don't look like people who could afford them and their financial and social background hasn't been set up well enough to make any of their lifestyle credible. I just kept wondering who are these people! Are they American citizens, or Indians living in America? They speak Hindi and heavily accented English, so they haven't been in the US for long, so what made them move to America? How come recent immigrants are so financially successful? If they were successful back in India, why did they move to the US in the first place? Even the little boy, supposedly US-born, speaks English with a Hindi accent. Does Johar even know that no kid speaks a heritage language better than a dominant societal language, especially English? More than anything, this tendency to choose foreign countries to tell stories of Indians is really getting pathetic. India is such a wonderful, culturally rich country, why go elsewhere?
The acting in this film is roundly average, but no one is to be blamed in particular since the direction, writing and editing are so weak, and the setting and dialogue just keep reducing the desired seriousness of the situations. Shah Rukh Khan, in one of his most unpleasant performances, is irritating for the most part. He can be a great actor when given the right opportunity, but this role is not for him as, worse than just not being good enough, he fails to register its complexity and mostly overacts. There are some scenes where he manages to retrieve his trademark witty style here for a few minutes, but his character is too exaggerated and underwritten to work, and strangely even his charisma is missing! At points one is even left wondering why anyone would fall for him here in the first place. Rani Mukherjee is similarly a major letdown. First, she does not really act, she mostly cries. I mean, she is a waterfall. I think she should learn that displaying grief is not all about tears. And there are far too many tears there. I wonder how much glycerin she used in this film. She seems to not have a clue what it really takes to play her character's inner struggle which is never brought out well; hers is overall a weak act.
Those who really do well are the supporting actors, particularly Preity Zinta, who is excellent as Rhea. Despite a relatively small role (which Johar must be slapped for), she comes across as a strong, serious career woman and is always credible and dignified. She convincingly displays Rhea's tough outside and soft inside, and her gestures and line delivery are spot on. When given the right chance, Abhishek is a revelation, but the chance is limited. His romantic and loving Rishi is a lovely character on paper, much less so within the film's context, but the actor does it relatively well. His dramatic scenes are difficult to play and he partly delivers. As expected, Kirron Kher is spectacular in a brief part. Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna is visually pleasing, partly watchable, and only occasionally entertaining. Shankar-Ehsaan-Loy's soundtrack is fantastic and the songs are beautifully pictured, especially "Tumhi Dekho Naa". The film's ending is overlong, could have been shortened, but worse than that, it shows how morally damaged the entire outlook of the writers is - a story of infidelity is romanticised in a way that really looks peculiar. KANK is a poor film, it is poorly executed, but it does have glipses of Bollywood's unique style, colour and beauty, and that's why I do understand people who are willing to forgive its flaws.
Towards the end of a hardly amusing first half, the comedy ends. And all of a sudden starts the drama. The couples start fighting and insulting each other intensively in what resembles the cheapest of soap operas or sometimes even a very bad school play. An overblown scenery is filled with cheap and cliché "family situations", which are totally unconvincing and everything about them strains credulity. And this supposedly brings to the so-called extramarital affair. Many ask, does Karan Johar really know what marriage is all about? The answer is a definite no, and he's not even smart enough to be able to guess. His approach to the idea or concept of a marriage is shallow and lacking in any depth or critical thinking. As a result, the film in those portions where marital life is put to test, is unrealistic, hard to believe, and just never rings true. Johar's cheesy, theatrical and overly emotional dialogue could be forgiven if the characters weren't wealthy people living in New York 2006 - for your information, they don't speak like this. The music in the background is just completely distracting. I do know people like Hindi films also for their escapist and larger-than-life melodramas, but even in such films, the context is always clear, as opposed to this film which pretends to be a portrait of a marriage which never gels.
Those were the specifics, but what about the basics, like, for instance, the fact that the main characters always bump into each other "coincidentally" in the streets of New York as if it was as small as Chandni Chowk. Moreover, the setting is ridiculously exaggerated - the lavish houses and interiors make no sense, sorry but they don't look like people who could afford them and their financial and social background hasn't been set up well enough to make any of their lifestyle credible. I just kept wondering who are these people! Are they American citizens, or Indians living in America? They speak Hindi and heavily accented English, so they haven't been in the US for long, so what made them move to America? How come recent immigrants are so financially successful? If they were successful back in India, why did they move to the US in the first place? Even the little boy, supposedly US-born, speaks English with a Hindi accent. Does Johar even know that no kid speaks a heritage language better than a dominant societal language, especially English? More than anything, this tendency to choose foreign countries to tell stories of Indians is really getting pathetic. India is such a wonderful, culturally rich country, why go elsewhere?
The acting in this film is roundly average, but no one is to be blamed in particular since the direction, writing and editing are so weak, and the setting and dialogue just keep reducing the desired seriousness of the situations. Shah Rukh Khan, in one of his most unpleasant performances, is irritating for the most part. He can be a great actor when given the right opportunity, but this role is not for him as, worse than just not being good enough, he fails to register its complexity and mostly overacts. There are some scenes where he manages to retrieve his trademark witty style here for a few minutes, but his character is too exaggerated and underwritten to work, and strangely even his charisma is missing! At points one is even left wondering why anyone would fall for him here in the first place. Rani Mukherjee is similarly a major letdown. First, she does not really act, she mostly cries. I mean, she is a waterfall. I think she should learn that displaying grief is not all about tears. And there are far too many tears there. I wonder how much glycerin she used in this film. She seems to not have a clue what it really takes to play her character's inner struggle which is never brought out well; hers is overall a weak act.
Those who really do well are the supporting actors, particularly Preity Zinta, who is excellent as Rhea. Despite a relatively small role (which Johar must be slapped for), she comes across as a strong, serious career woman and is always credible and dignified. She convincingly displays Rhea's tough outside and soft inside, and her gestures and line delivery are spot on. When given the right chance, Abhishek is a revelation, but the chance is limited. His romantic and loving Rishi is a lovely character on paper, much less so within the film's context, but the actor does it relatively well. His dramatic scenes are difficult to play and he partly delivers. As expected, Kirron Kher is spectacular in a brief part. Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna is visually pleasing, partly watchable, and only occasionally entertaining. Shankar-Ehsaan-Loy's soundtrack is fantastic and the songs are beautifully pictured, especially "Tumhi Dekho Naa". The film's ending is overlong, could have been shortened, but worse than that, it shows how morally damaged the entire outlook of the writers is - a story of infidelity is romanticised in a way that really looks peculiar. KANK is a poor film, it is poorly executed, but it does have glipses of Bollywood's unique style, colour and beauty, and that's why I do understand people who are willing to forgive its flaws.
- Peter_Young
- Jul 6, 2009
- Permalink
- gundugumblock
- Sep 5, 2006
- Permalink
I'm an American that's been living in India for four months. KANK is the only Hindi movie I've seen with subtitles (that is, where I've known what's going on). I liked it. It was definitely a bit melodramatic and cheesy, but I've come to expect that from Indian cinema. Relative to US movies, I would rate it as a pretty run-of-the-mill, cheesy drama/chick-flick.
I've seen a lot of responses to the movie that are really negative, saying the story didn't make sense or the characters didn't make sense, and I don't really understand what they're talking about. I would say the characters were relatively well-formed. They were consistent, and although they didn't necessarily have a full depth, it was easy as a viewer to fill the gaps, to imagine the kind of person they were. An example of this is the tension in both marriages. The tension and the reasons for it were well-established, and that gave insight into the characters' personalities. I was surprised by how decent the acting was (decent, but not great). Compared to what I've seen on TV and movie clips here, the acting in KANK was far more realistic. It was hard to believe Maya sometimes under all the makeup, but I thought she did a pretty good job beneath that mask.
The story wasn't bad. It had a lot of pretty extreme (but predictable) coincidences, but I applaud their creativity in coming up with so many ways to prolong the problem. Speaking of which, this movie was very, very long. If it was a US movie, it could have ended right after the intermission - they love each other, get together, bam, it's over. The song and dance numbers were not something I'm used to (well, there's Moulin Rouge, Chicago, and The Producers, but I'm not used Hindi song and dance numbers). However, I had heard the songs played all the time here, and it was cool to see how they fit into the movie, and what they really were about.
Comments I've seen about how it glorifies adultery and such are hogwash. It's a story about people. People aren't perfect. These things happen, and drama is about reflecting real life. Go watch Sideways or Crash to understand how flawed people can be the subject of a movie. As I said, relative to US movies, I would rate it as a pretty run-of-the-mill, cheesy drama/chick-flick. However, I give it a 7/10 (higher than I would a US movie of this quality) because I think it's a Hindi film worth a viewing, at the very least to understand a little bit of the culture here.
I've seen a lot of responses to the movie that are really negative, saying the story didn't make sense or the characters didn't make sense, and I don't really understand what they're talking about. I would say the characters were relatively well-formed. They were consistent, and although they didn't necessarily have a full depth, it was easy as a viewer to fill the gaps, to imagine the kind of person they were. An example of this is the tension in both marriages. The tension and the reasons for it were well-established, and that gave insight into the characters' personalities. I was surprised by how decent the acting was (decent, but not great). Compared to what I've seen on TV and movie clips here, the acting in KANK was far more realistic. It was hard to believe Maya sometimes under all the makeup, but I thought she did a pretty good job beneath that mask.
The story wasn't bad. It had a lot of pretty extreme (but predictable) coincidences, but I applaud their creativity in coming up with so many ways to prolong the problem. Speaking of which, this movie was very, very long. If it was a US movie, it could have ended right after the intermission - they love each other, get together, bam, it's over. The song and dance numbers were not something I'm used to (well, there's Moulin Rouge, Chicago, and The Producers, but I'm not used Hindi song and dance numbers). However, I had heard the songs played all the time here, and it was cool to see how they fit into the movie, and what they really were about.
Comments I've seen about how it glorifies adultery and such are hogwash. It's a story about people. People aren't perfect. These things happen, and drama is about reflecting real life. Go watch Sideways or Crash to understand how flawed people can be the subject of a movie. As I said, relative to US movies, I would rate it as a pretty run-of-the-mill, cheesy drama/chick-flick. However, I give it a 7/10 (higher than I would a US movie of this quality) because I think it's a Hindi film worth a viewing, at the very least to understand a little bit of the culture here.
- benandorsqueaks
- Nov 30, 2006
- Permalink
- shikhasinghi
- Aug 11, 2006
- Permalink
Since I know a lot of the situations shown in this movie personally - from my own private life and from working in a divorce-lawyer's office for quite a long time - I think Karan Johar has worked out the occurring problems in those relationships in a very sensitive way. I really cannot agree with all those negative comments given for this film. In my opinion it is Johar's best work up to now. The actors all did their job extremely well. The bad comments are really unjustified. Just let yourself fall into the movie, to feel the transferred emotions... In regard to the often required "message" of this film, or better: the lacking message: This is a film, entertainment, not the concept of a missionary. And I, for my part, would prefer to end a relationship, when my parter falls in love with someone else, than to stick together because at one time one has promised to do so before a priest or any other official. So just watch this movie, let yourself fall into the emotions and enjoy!
- fellnerelli
- Oct 3, 2006
- Permalink
I felt that the movie is OK and would be able to hit the box office.
+ of this movie in priority:
Story,Songs (Good Job Shankar,Ehsaan,Loy), BGM (Back Ground Music), Big B,Sharukh Khan and Rani Mukherjee, Rest of the actors
Deepest Love at first meeting itself (hard to digest), Stretched and lengthened scenes, Repeatedly touching the emotions in all the scenes, Film centered around only two actors Shahrukh and Rani Mukherjee
For details read my review at my blog - http://sureshspeaksout.blogspot.com/ -Suresh Gangadharan
+ of this movie in priority:
Story,Songs (Good Job Shankar,Ehsaan,Loy), BGM (Back Ground Music), Big B,Sharukh Khan and Rani Mukherjee, Rest of the actors
- of this movie in priority:
Deepest Love at first meeting itself (hard to digest), Stretched and lengthened scenes, Repeatedly touching the emotions in all the scenes, Film centered around only two actors Shahrukh and Rani Mukherjee
For details read my review at my blog - http://sureshspeaksout.blogspot.com/ -Suresh Gangadharan
Like an Expensive Melodramatic Indian Soap Opera In New York Karan Johar attempts to make a 'so-called mature' movie but the handling of the themes and the storytelling is very amateur. Many of the comedic sequences, especially the silly ones like 'black beast' (racist?) were cringe inducing. Much of the dialogues are the kind you would hear in soap operas.
The characters are poorly written. Rhea is supposed to be a strong woman who loves her job and family and while her quality time with family is limited, her excuse to Dev is that she's 'forced' to be the 'man' of the family? This is not the kind of thing one would hear a strong independent woman say. Then there's Maya, who is also a strong character and yet she lets herself be treated so harshly by Dev. Sexy Sam is quite a pathetic caricature blend of a sleazy Casanova-type old hag (who only seems to sleep with white girls that are about 40 years younger than him) and the loving father who's there for his son and whatever.
The last hour is so laughable because of the sheer awfulness in execution, acting and writing. Johar's direction lacks aim and focus while his script seriously lacks consistency. The overall soundtrack is far from memorable but two songs are quite beautiful: 'Tumhi Dekho Na' (artistically shot) and 'Mitwa'. Not surprisingly, the background score is heavily intrusive.
Shahrukh Khan pretty much overacts in every single one of his scenes. Dev isn't supposed to be likable nor sympathetic but the way Khan plays him is frustrating to the viewer especially with his overdone expressions and measured tone of voice. In my opinion, this is perhaps Rani Mukherjee's worst performance to date. She fails to demonstrate the complexity and depth of Maya and could someone ask Rani or Johar why Maya keeps crying so much? Abhishek Bachchan tries to be funny and charming but he's not entirely convincing which, unintentionally, makes it easy to understand why Maya doesn't want him. Amitabh Bachchan is incredibly irritating as Sexy Sam (though he is not as bad as Khan) but otherwise he does a fine job in a number of sequences, especially the ones with Kiron Kher. Kher is quite superb as the grounded mother and Sam's confidant. Preity Zinta stands out as she delivers an impressively restrained performance with grace and élan. She easily steals the show from Bachchan, Khan and Mukherjee.
It's interesting that Johar has attempted to tackle a mature contemporary theme and even though he failed, I think his intentions were sincere. Perhaps, this is a path Johar shouldn't tread yet.
The characters are poorly written. Rhea is supposed to be a strong woman who loves her job and family and while her quality time with family is limited, her excuse to Dev is that she's 'forced' to be the 'man' of the family? This is not the kind of thing one would hear a strong independent woman say. Then there's Maya, who is also a strong character and yet she lets herself be treated so harshly by Dev. Sexy Sam is quite a pathetic caricature blend of a sleazy Casanova-type old hag (who only seems to sleep with white girls that are about 40 years younger than him) and the loving father who's there for his son and whatever.
The last hour is so laughable because of the sheer awfulness in execution, acting and writing. Johar's direction lacks aim and focus while his script seriously lacks consistency. The overall soundtrack is far from memorable but two songs are quite beautiful: 'Tumhi Dekho Na' (artistically shot) and 'Mitwa'. Not surprisingly, the background score is heavily intrusive.
Shahrukh Khan pretty much overacts in every single one of his scenes. Dev isn't supposed to be likable nor sympathetic but the way Khan plays him is frustrating to the viewer especially with his overdone expressions and measured tone of voice. In my opinion, this is perhaps Rani Mukherjee's worst performance to date. She fails to demonstrate the complexity and depth of Maya and could someone ask Rani or Johar why Maya keeps crying so much? Abhishek Bachchan tries to be funny and charming but he's not entirely convincing which, unintentionally, makes it easy to understand why Maya doesn't want him. Amitabh Bachchan is incredibly irritating as Sexy Sam (though he is not as bad as Khan) but otherwise he does a fine job in a number of sequences, especially the ones with Kiron Kher. Kher is quite superb as the grounded mother and Sam's confidant. Preity Zinta stands out as she delivers an impressively restrained performance with grace and élan. She easily steals the show from Bachchan, Khan and Mukherjee.
It's interesting that Johar has attempted to tackle a mature contemporary theme and even though he failed, I think his intentions were sincere. Perhaps, this is a path Johar shouldn't tread yet.
- Chrysanthepop
- Feb 22, 2010
- Permalink
- punjabipete
- Aug 9, 2006
- Permalink
I make onion poha for breakfast thrice a week, with the bare minimum ingredients possible. One day I tried to experiment some (inspired by the stalls outside my Engineering college) and tried some sugar (caramelized onions anyone?), extra turmeric and some red chilli powder. The result was anything but edible but I humbly gulped it down.
KANK is an honest attempt to break away from the mauled of sugary romances by the new age love guru Karan Johar. An honest attempt, huh? Its the result that speaks volumes in the age of fast-food and fast-love. What we get to witness this time is not the time tested elaborate shaadis, karwa chauths or the big fat Indian family reunions, reminiscent of his and Yash "uncle's" earlier movies. This time its the bold subject of infidelity - the sensitive (ahem!) portrayal of seeking love outside a loveless (???) marriage. How far does Karan succeed? Lets check it out through the eyes of a neutral, unassuming viewer.
KANK is the story about Dev (Shahrukh), a footballer whose career dreams are broken along with his leg when he meets with a freak accident, which makes him a recluse. His ever complaining ways puts his marriage with Rhea (Priety), a successful woman, on the rocks. In another part of New York city, there is marital tension between Rishi (Abhishek), & Maya (Rani) for reasons only known to Karan dude. Maya is a cleanliness freak and doesn't know why she is married to Rishi even after 4 years being together. She thinks that she is trapped in a loveless marriage, whereas her hubby still goes ga-ga over her. In the midst of all this mayhem, we have the swinging sexagenarian Sam (Big B) who could be the poster boy for Viagra and Dev's endearing mom played by Kirron Kher.
Its baffling to comprehend the first meeting between the protagonists Dev & Maya on the latter's wedding day and the subsequent exchange of words between total strangers. She is confused about the marriage right from the word go due to godforsaken reasons. Cut to the present times and the duo meet up under similarly make-belief circumstances. The sequences revolving around a bizarre character "Black Beast" is corny to the core (now I wish I had seen Krrish!). The first half is laced with incoherent scenes like these, barring a few. The screen lights up whenever Big B is there, he provides the much desired light-hearted moments. His tete-a-tete with Kirron Kher is quite funny.
Well, coming back to the crux of the movie, the protagonists become pally, meet up regularly and discuss ways to save their crumbling marriages. At this point, Karan dude goes over the top again and gives us the work which resembles that of an overzealous amateur. The scenes where Maya teaches Dev the art of giving a good massage in a furniture store and Karan trying it on his wife and Maya metamorphosing into a seductive hunterwaali clearly takes the movie to abysmal levels. Then the inevitable happens, the duo become too close for comfort and decide to cheat on their respective spouses - what set out as mending work created a bigger monster.
Now lets talk about the performances, which forms the most important aspect of a Karan Johar movie as he employs the best in the industry. Shahrukh plays the role of Dev with conviction and nobody else could have bettered him here, but hey wait a minute, haven't I seen the same expressions in half a dozen of his earlier movies? Rani is competent but one hardly tends to sympathize with her character inspite of crying a bucketful. Abhishek Bachchan is the surprise packet, he goes through a range of emotions as if he is already a veteran, great acting from the junior. Priety looks glamorous and in a couple of scenes manages to overshadow king Khan too, but was that cleavage show necessary? Kirron Kher too does a great job but its Big B who again proves yet again that he is the real king and this time he gives a certain Mr.Hashmi a run for his money. He is ice cool in the first half and philanthropic towards the latter stages.
All said and done, the stellar cast raises the bar of the movie but then to what extent? A movie with such a half baked plot and treatment can't be saved from the obvious, it disappoints. The screenplay leaves a lot to be desired and that poses a question in front of Karan dude - Is it really worth to break away from the mauled? An ardent fan of his movies would be satisfied watching the protagonists running around trees and mustard fields and elaborate traditional celebrations of filthy rich families.
Nowadays I make onion pohas with a dash of lemon and they taste just fine. I guess I've learnt that the right way of making it by pondering over my mistakes, without going overboard with experimentation. Good luck Mr Johar!
KANK is an honest attempt to break away from the mauled of sugary romances by the new age love guru Karan Johar. An honest attempt, huh? Its the result that speaks volumes in the age of fast-food and fast-love. What we get to witness this time is not the time tested elaborate shaadis, karwa chauths or the big fat Indian family reunions, reminiscent of his and Yash "uncle's" earlier movies. This time its the bold subject of infidelity - the sensitive (ahem!) portrayal of seeking love outside a loveless (???) marriage. How far does Karan succeed? Lets check it out through the eyes of a neutral, unassuming viewer.
KANK is the story about Dev (Shahrukh), a footballer whose career dreams are broken along with his leg when he meets with a freak accident, which makes him a recluse. His ever complaining ways puts his marriage with Rhea (Priety), a successful woman, on the rocks. In another part of New York city, there is marital tension between Rishi (Abhishek), & Maya (Rani) for reasons only known to Karan dude. Maya is a cleanliness freak and doesn't know why she is married to Rishi even after 4 years being together. She thinks that she is trapped in a loveless marriage, whereas her hubby still goes ga-ga over her. In the midst of all this mayhem, we have the swinging sexagenarian Sam (Big B) who could be the poster boy for Viagra and Dev's endearing mom played by Kirron Kher.
Its baffling to comprehend the first meeting between the protagonists Dev & Maya on the latter's wedding day and the subsequent exchange of words between total strangers. She is confused about the marriage right from the word go due to godforsaken reasons. Cut to the present times and the duo meet up under similarly make-belief circumstances. The sequences revolving around a bizarre character "Black Beast" is corny to the core (now I wish I had seen Krrish!). The first half is laced with incoherent scenes like these, barring a few. The screen lights up whenever Big B is there, he provides the much desired light-hearted moments. His tete-a-tete with Kirron Kher is quite funny.
Well, coming back to the crux of the movie, the protagonists become pally, meet up regularly and discuss ways to save their crumbling marriages. At this point, Karan dude goes over the top again and gives us the work which resembles that of an overzealous amateur. The scenes where Maya teaches Dev the art of giving a good massage in a furniture store and Karan trying it on his wife and Maya metamorphosing into a seductive hunterwaali clearly takes the movie to abysmal levels. Then the inevitable happens, the duo become too close for comfort and decide to cheat on their respective spouses - what set out as mending work created a bigger monster.
Now lets talk about the performances, which forms the most important aspect of a Karan Johar movie as he employs the best in the industry. Shahrukh plays the role of Dev with conviction and nobody else could have bettered him here, but hey wait a minute, haven't I seen the same expressions in half a dozen of his earlier movies? Rani is competent but one hardly tends to sympathize with her character inspite of crying a bucketful. Abhishek Bachchan is the surprise packet, he goes through a range of emotions as if he is already a veteran, great acting from the junior. Priety looks glamorous and in a couple of scenes manages to overshadow king Khan too, but was that cleavage show necessary? Kirron Kher too does a great job but its Big B who again proves yet again that he is the real king and this time he gives a certain Mr.Hashmi a run for his money. He is ice cool in the first half and philanthropic towards the latter stages.
All said and done, the stellar cast raises the bar of the movie but then to what extent? A movie with such a half baked plot and treatment can't be saved from the obvious, it disappoints. The screenplay leaves a lot to be desired and that poses a question in front of Karan dude - Is it really worth to break away from the mauled? An ardent fan of his movies would be satisfied watching the protagonists running around trees and mustard fields and elaborate traditional celebrations of filthy rich families.
Nowadays I make onion pohas with a dash of lemon and they taste just fine. I guess I've learnt that the right way of making it by pondering over my mistakes, without going overboard with experimentation. Good luck Mr Johar!
- Arunirvana
- Aug 11, 2006
- Permalink
The problem with reviewing a Bollywood movie, more so a Karan Johar movie, is that you never know whether you should review it on your terms or it's own terms.
Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna ("KANK", of course), is a film that doesn't do much, but does what it does pretty well for the most part. I say "for the most part" because by the final third, it becomes an endurance test.
This is a Karan Johar film that begins where most Karan Johar films end. Dev Saran (Shah Rukh Khan)is married to Rhea (Priety Zinta). One morning he meets Maya (Rani Mukherjee), sitting at a bench, hesitant to go into her own wedding with Rishi (Abhishek Bachchan). Dev talks her into taking the plunge and they go their separate ways. A few years later, Rhea is successful, Dev isn't. Rishi's in love with Maya, Maya loves Rishi but isn't *in* love with him. When Maya and Dev reconnect, infidelity ensues.
So is this a film about marriage, love, following your heart, the difference between love and being in love? Well, yes and no. Johar flirts tantilizingly with all those issues, but never really gets a grip on any of them. You could argue that I'm being a bit lofty in my ambition for a Karan Johar movie, but I'm only disappointed because the opportunities for dealing with these issues all present themselves repeatedly during the film's mammoth three and a half hour runtime, but Johar never does them justice. This is definitely his most mature film yet, but the maturity feels token and isn't enough.
Is this a bad film? Nope, not in the least. Johar is still very much melodrama's Michael Bay; KANK is loud, lush, gorgeous and Johar knows how to get his actors to crank the emo factor up all the way to 11. The chemistry between Rani Mukherji and SRK (hamming it up) is palpable, their little gestures saying more than the loud ones (a pity, because little gestures are in short supply here). Abhishek Bachchan is here to stay but lets not forget Amitabh Bachchan. I can't figure out if its a testament to the Big B's ability or an indictment of the other actors (and indeed the script) that in spite of dealing with two complex marriages, the emotional center of the film is the relationship between Amitabh and Kiron Kher. (he plays Abhishek's father, her, Shah Rukh's mother).
The most sorely under-written character is Priety Zinta's. The script does her the disservice of painting her as cold and so focused on her career that her marriage has fallen by the wayside. Why does this bother me? Because it just feels like Johar's trying to force our sympathies towards SRK and Rani's relationship. She's got a thankless job to do, even though her character fleshes itself out a bit more towards the end.
This is a Karan Johar film and so of course the beautiful people are dressed in beautiful brands courtesy Manish Malhotra. The film is dressed in great (if slightly forgettable) music by Shankar, Ehsaan and Loy. But somewhere along the way, somebody was asleep at two important tables; at the writers' table, both Johar and screenplay writer Shibani Bhatija clearly thought they had an obligation to drag the film across a 200 minute finish line, so the script is flabby and padded. At the one table we could have had a liposuction, the editing table, editor Sanjay Sankla went to sleep.
As a result, in spite of it's ability to make you think in bits, in spite of it's beauty, in spite of some searing performances, the film loses its ability to ever truly touch you, instead leaving you checking your watch, wondering if you're going to make that dinner appointment.
I almost missed mine.
Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna ("KANK", of course), is a film that doesn't do much, but does what it does pretty well for the most part. I say "for the most part" because by the final third, it becomes an endurance test.
This is a Karan Johar film that begins where most Karan Johar films end. Dev Saran (Shah Rukh Khan)is married to Rhea (Priety Zinta). One morning he meets Maya (Rani Mukherjee), sitting at a bench, hesitant to go into her own wedding with Rishi (Abhishek Bachchan). Dev talks her into taking the plunge and they go their separate ways. A few years later, Rhea is successful, Dev isn't. Rishi's in love with Maya, Maya loves Rishi but isn't *in* love with him. When Maya and Dev reconnect, infidelity ensues.
So is this a film about marriage, love, following your heart, the difference between love and being in love? Well, yes and no. Johar flirts tantilizingly with all those issues, but never really gets a grip on any of them. You could argue that I'm being a bit lofty in my ambition for a Karan Johar movie, but I'm only disappointed because the opportunities for dealing with these issues all present themselves repeatedly during the film's mammoth three and a half hour runtime, but Johar never does them justice. This is definitely his most mature film yet, but the maturity feels token and isn't enough.
Is this a bad film? Nope, not in the least. Johar is still very much melodrama's Michael Bay; KANK is loud, lush, gorgeous and Johar knows how to get his actors to crank the emo factor up all the way to 11. The chemistry between Rani Mukherji and SRK (hamming it up) is palpable, their little gestures saying more than the loud ones (a pity, because little gestures are in short supply here). Abhishek Bachchan is here to stay but lets not forget Amitabh Bachchan. I can't figure out if its a testament to the Big B's ability or an indictment of the other actors (and indeed the script) that in spite of dealing with two complex marriages, the emotional center of the film is the relationship between Amitabh and Kiron Kher. (he plays Abhishek's father, her, Shah Rukh's mother).
The most sorely under-written character is Priety Zinta's. The script does her the disservice of painting her as cold and so focused on her career that her marriage has fallen by the wayside. Why does this bother me? Because it just feels like Johar's trying to force our sympathies towards SRK and Rani's relationship. She's got a thankless job to do, even though her character fleshes itself out a bit more towards the end.
This is a Karan Johar film and so of course the beautiful people are dressed in beautiful brands courtesy Manish Malhotra. The film is dressed in great (if slightly forgettable) music by Shankar, Ehsaan and Loy. But somewhere along the way, somebody was asleep at two important tables; at the writers' table, both Johar and screenplay writer Shibani Bhatija clearly thought they had an obligation to drag the film across a 200 minute finish line, so the script is flabby and padded. At the one table we could have had a liposuction, the editing table, editor Sanjay Sankla went to sleep.
As a result, in spite of it's ability to make you think in bits, in spite of it's beauty, in spite of some searing performances, the film loses its ability to ever truly touch you, instead leaving you checking your watch, wondering if you're going to make that dinner appointment.
I almost missed mine.
- SoldierOfTheDarkSide
- Aug 13, 2006
- Permalink
- vani_mehra2003
- Aug 14, 2006
- Permalink
- marat_safin22
- Aug 16, 2006
- Permalink
So, how do we make movie.
Step 1: Start from an idea Step 2: ... No point going to this step and onwards because that's where the thinking part ends in this case.
The idea was good, different and definitely unconventional. The execution was flawed and suffered from lack of thinking and complete inability to knit a story around that idea.
Let's start with lack of identity in and relevance of characters: Sam - couldn't figure out why is this character in the movie. He could not resolve anything, could not set an example of any kind. If he is trying to be Hugh Hefner, so be it - don't mix or dilute that character with stints of love for his late wife.
Kamaljit - Such a fine actress - totally wasted because of the same issue as above.
Maya - why is she unhappy? is she very fond of cleaning and Rishi very fond of throwing trash around; she wants to do or achieve something in life that Rishi is not letting her to? is she in love with some other guy before marriage (like Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam) and she is stuck here? Not explained at all in the movie.
Dev - Why is he so irritated all the time? What does he want in life? Why does he feel bad when Rhea kind of shows her generosity when she declines the promotion but he makes sarcastic remarks when he wins some small time cup in the beginning of the movie but she is unable to make it because of her interview? His love towards Maya all these years (even though he was married) and his waiting or letting the trains go, keeping a close watch at her etc. comes as a big surprise to the audience as well (at least tell us about it so that we can at least appreciate and understand your character and try to defend you.. because ultimately it is going to be your story)? How was he wronged to an extent that he had to leave his son, his mother because of some Maya after more than 5 years of marriage? What led him to pull the chain in the end when he didn't even know that Maya wasn't living with Rishi anymore? Totally confused guy with no sense of life.
Rhea - Understood. She is a career oriented woman and work comes first and family second. That's a personal choice and I appreciate that. She is very successful and took the magazine to No. 1 spot in less than 2 years (she joined when her son was 5yrs old). But her way of dealing with personal situations is very immature - don't believe she played any role in dealing with people issues to make the magazine such a big success. And what was the meaning of - Now we are No. 1 and now let us go back to our husbands and family. Are you saying that leaving husbands and family was part of the project plan to bring the magazine to No. 1 spot and that now there will not be any effort to keep it that way. Trust me, fight for sustenance at No. 1 spot is far more hard than achieving it.
Rishi - The most reasonable character in the movie. Although we don't know what is going on in his mind and how he wants to resolve things than just being totally committed and in love with Maya..but still.. we can grant him some room.
Arjun - A cute little angel with Chicken Little looks. He could have played a significant role in the movie to turnaround things and situations. But he is a kid...he gets to suffer in the end...so let us leave him for now.
In short - if we have so many weak characterizations playing the lead role in the movie, howsoever good the concept is - it is bound to fail.
The only good thing in the movie (that is why 1 star) 1- Music. Great Music!! But the songs, lyrics and the situations were totally out of sync with the storyline.
Mr. Johar - I have been a big fan of yours and I am sure you know this but I don't know why you missed it this time - There's a lot that goes into a movie to make it watchable than designer dresses, new york streets, and the most expensive and talented set of actors in Indian film industry. Please take charge of the movie and understand your responsibility and accountability to get the best out of them.
This is not a Karan Johar movie - this is a movie that happens to have Karan Johar's name as the director.
Step 1: Start from an idea Step 2: ... No point going to this step and onwards because that's where the thinking part ends in this case.
The idea was good, different and definitely unconventional. The execution was flawed and suffered from lack of thinking and complete inability to knit a story around that idea.
Let's start with lack of identity in and relevance of characters: Sam - couldn't figure out why is this character in the movie. He could not resolve anything, could not set an example of any kind. If he is trying to be Hugh Hefner, so be it - don't mix or dilute that character with stints of love for his late wife.
Kamaljit - Such a fine actress - totally wasted because of the same issue as above.
Maya - why is she unhappy? is she very fond of cleaning and Rishi very fond of throwing trash around; she wants to do or achieve something in life that Rishi is not letting her to? is she in love with some other guy before marriage (like Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam) and she is stuck here? Not explained at all in the movie.
Dev - Why is he so irritated all the time? What does he want in life? Why does he feel bad when Rhea kind of shows her generosity when she declines the promotion but he makes sarcastic remarks when he wins some small time cup in the beginning of the movie but she is unable to make it because of her interview? His love towards Maya all these years (even though he was married) and his waiting or letting the trains go, keeping a close watch at her etc. comes as a big surprise to the audience as well (at least tell us about it so that we can at least appreciate and understand your character and try to defend you.. because ultimately it is going to be your story)? How was he wronged to an extent that he had to leave his son, his mother because of some Maya after more than 5 years of marriage? What led him to pull the chain in the end when he didn't even know that Maya wasn't living with Rishi anymore? Totally confused guy with no sense of life.
Rhea - Understood. She is a career oriented woman and work comes first and family second. That's a personal choice and I appreciate that. She is very successful and took the magazine to No. 1 spot in less than 2 years (she joined when her son was 5yrs old). But her way of dealing with personal situations is very immature - don't believe she played any role in dealing with people issues to make the magazine such a big success. And what was the meaning of - Now we are No. 1 and now let us go back to our husbands and family. Are you saying that leaving husbands and family was part of the project plan to bring the magazine to No. 1 spot and that now there will not be any effort to keep it that way. Trust me, fight for sustenance at No. 1 spot is far more hard than achieving it.
Rishi - The most reasonable character in the movie. Although we don't know what is going on in his mind and how he wants to resolve things than just being totally committed and in love with Maya..but still.. we can grant him some room.
Arjun - A cute little angel with Chicken Little looks. He could have played a significant role in the movie to turnaround things and situations. But he is a kid...he gets to suffer in the end...so let us leave him for now.
In short - if we have so many weak characterizations playing the lead role in the movie, howsoever good the concept is - it is bound to fail.
The only good thing in the movie (that is why 1 star) 1- Music. Great Music!! But the songs, lyrics and the situations were totally out of sync with the storyline.
Mr. Johar - I have been a big fan of yours and I am sure you know this but I don't know why you missed it this time - There's a lot that goes into a movie to make it watchable than designer dresses, new york streets, and the most expensive and talented set of actors in Indian film industry. Please take charge of the movie and understand your responsibility and accountability to get the best out of them.
This is not a Karan Johar movie - this is a movie that happens to have Karan Johar's name as the director.
- HeadleyLamarr
- Aug 12, 2006
- Permalink
The storyline is weak. It lacks a good foundation to build a good plot...though I am glad that Karan Johar took the initiative to break out of his routine-happy-movies...he definitely missed the mark. Could this be the beginning of the end for him?....
The content was unconvincing, fake and unreal. There is no justification for any of their actions, namely Maya (Rani) and Dev's (SRK). To put it simply...it's just something the general audience will not be able to digest.
The backdrop is all too familiar with Kal Ho Na Ho and the songs aren't that great either. The film felt like it was on a never-ending roundabout...so much could've been edited and so much of it was unnecessary...felt like I was in the theatre for ages. BUT... nonetheless, I personally think the acting was satisfactory- and that goes for Preity, Rani, Abhishek, ..and maybe even SRK.
I wouldn't be surprised if this turns out to be a big flop.
The content was unconvincing, fake and unreal. There is no justification for any of their actions, namely Maya (Rani) and Dev's (SRK). To put it simply...it's just something the general audience will not be able to digest.
The backdrop is all too familiar with Kal Ho Na Ho and the songs aren't that great either. The film felt like it was on a never-ending roundabout...so much could've been edited and so much of it was unnecessary...felt like I was in the theatre for ages. BUT... nonetheless, I personally think the acting was satisfactory- and that goes for Preity, Rani, Abhishek, ..and maybe even SRK.
I wouldn't be surprised if this turns out to be a big flop.
- deenabeckham
- Aug 12, 2006
- Permalink