Raajneeti or "Out Damn Spot! No? Ok, What's the Big Deal About a Little Blood on my Hands Anyway?

SPOILERS! Sorry but there is no way to review this movie without some spoilers (though I've tried to steer clear of specific plot points) so read at our own risk.

I really enjoyed Raajneeti. Yes, it was long. Yes, it was fairly violent. Yes, it's a film about politics. It's also an engaging, absorbing tale of filial duty, the sins of one generation punishing the next, the love of power for power's sake and good old-fashioned vengeance. It is truly Shakespearean storytelling and to try to talk about it or see it through any other lens would make it seem over the top and I believe it deserves better than that. So, if you're in the mood for Machiavellian political machinations and high drama in a morality play with a resolution as murky and gray as the characters and their motivations, Raajneeti is a must-see film.

The film started out with a lot of information about the characters and their relation to each other and the same with political parties. I was a bit overwhelmed and wondered if I would be able to make sense of it all. Eventually, I realized that those things were really just distractions from the real story of people and the corrupting influence of power. You have 3 hours of political families and parties vying to win the upcoming elections and not once does anyone discuss the issues, what it is the voters want or why it is they want to win other than they believe they are entitled to win. The candidates feed the populace empty rhetoric that has nothing to do with actually governing the people and the people are easily influenced by such rhetoric, not questioning any of what happens. This is why I say Raajneeti is simply an examination of power. It's about how obtaining a little bit of power causes an insatiable thirst for more power, how having power creates a hunger to maintain that power at any cost, how power blinds those who have it to the reasons they wanted it in the first place and how it brings out the worst in them.

I find I don't really want to talk about the specific plot points of Raajneeti. I found all of it interesting and it all served to illustrate what I saw as the overall theme. What I do want to talk about are the performances and chemistry between characters.

Hallelujah! Finally, Arjun Rampal has an outstanding performance. He was truly good in this role. He was perfect as the charismatic but less calculating and more passion-driven scion of a ruling political family. He got everything about the character right from the coldness of the manipulating politician to the vulnerability of the brother, son and husband motivated by his love of his family, to bloodthirsty and slightly mad man in the throes of revenge. His chemistry with Ranbir was fantastic! He plays the protective, older brother with so much affection that you believe that, as bad as he is, if he can love his brother that much, he must not be totally irredeemable. I have always wanted Arjun to be a good actor and he has far exceeded my hopes in Raajneeti. I hope he can be consistent in the future.

Speaking of consistency....Katrina Kaif needs to try it sometime. She wasn't awful but she wasn't very good either. She had some of her trademark wooden moments when you wondered if, like a claymation figure, they were posing her, taking a shot, moving her, taking the next shot and thus animating her. She had some moments that were pretty well acted too but her problem seems to be that you can see her thinking about her acting all the time. She tries too hard and you can see the thought process as plain as day on-screen. Her character was a pivotal one which could have resulted in a very moving and powerful performance had it been given to a better actress. It's a shame it was wasted on someone not ready for it, someone who may never be ready for it.

Ranbir Kapoor was fantastic as usual. He is an actor that, I believe, has enough stand out performances under his belt now to be counted on to deliver every time. I've said it before and I will say it again, he's got the "it" factor and is Bollywood's newest generation's brightest star. He has joined the very exclusive ranks of stars who will get me to the theater no mater what, Shahrukh, Hrithik, and Ranbir. That being said, I have been eagerly awaiting him in a negative or gray role and he delivers in Raajneeti and how! I actually think it's genius casting because he has that vulnerability and aura of niceness that he brings to all of his roles so that you are all the more shocked to see what he does and becomes over the course of the film. He plays cold and calculating brilliantly and makes it sexy! His performance was fantastic and compelling. An interesting point about his character...he may seem to be one of the worst people in a film full of really bad people but his character actually has the purest motivation of all. He is ready to leave all the politics to his family and return to his studies in the U.S. until something happens that causes him to seek vengeance for the sake of a loved one. He is the character most suited to the mantle of power and yet he is the only character that I believe doesn't do what he does for power.

Ajay Devgan...another good character played by a mediocre actor. He's better than Katrina but he needs to have more than one facial expression. Is the man capable of smiling? Has anyone ever seen it? And the way he carries himself...classic "smell the fart acting." Also, whose idea was it for him to play a 27 year old character? Ridiculous! Still, his performance was passable. I just, again, think another actor could have done more with it.

Nana Patekar...wow! He was outstanding as the patriarch/puppet master/kingmaker of all the political maneuvering in the film. His character will go to any lengths to protect the family's political position and power all seemingly with a chilling lack of conscience. He smiles and plays the caring chacha while peoples' lives are bought and sold and ended to serve his whims. His chemistry with Ranbir was terrific! They have some stand out scenes together that are great fun to watch.

The other actors and actresses are fine. Again, they could have found a better American actress to play Ranbir's girlfriend but she wasn't awful in the KJo tradition of white actors. Although, if I had to hear her say "summer" instead of pronouning Samar properly one more time...I would have gladly killed her.

Manoj Bajpai as Veerendra was a little too "filmi villain" for me. It was mostly his look that was a bit ridiculous and he had a few OTT moments. I think a better actor could have won the audience's sympathy more at the end when I think we were meant to feel something for him. I was too distracted by his filmi moochie and straight from the 70s wardrobe to feel anything for him at that point.

Nikhila Trikha is the debutante actress who plays the mother of the family. She was much better in the scenes where she was a young woman opposing her father's political party than she was as the present day 50-60ish mother of Ajay, Arjun and Ranbir. She just didn't have the skill to play the emotional depth needed and her scenes that should have evoked some emotion left me feeling cold. Maybe it was because I couldn't find anything sympathetic about her character at that point in the film. Any woman who allows herself to be controlled and then allows the same thing to happen to her children and lets them be raised to be what they become gets nothing but contempt from me.

Finally, Nasserudin Shah. He has a very small role in the film but he made the most of it. He was wonderful for the few minutes he was onscreen and I wish he was in more films.

So, Raajneeti is definitely worth seeing in my opinion. Even if you don't like the story I think you'll find the performances worth your time and money. I, however, think that you'll find this case study of the human hunger and quest for power compelling in and of itself. There is a lot packed into the last half of the film and I've already heard some people say it gets too filmi but when you play as deep a game as these characters do, consequences are to be expected. What goes around comes around. This is why I call it Shakespearean in scale. It is a heightened version of life...an absolute version, if you will. After all, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Kites, or I Don't Know What the Message is but it was Damned Entertaining

I have been waiting for this movie since I first became a Hindi film devotee a bit more than a year ago. I happened upon my first Hindi film Jodhaa Akbar when it was available for instant viewing via Netflix and I needed to test out my new Tivo wifi adapter. Hrithik Roshan immediately mesmerized me with his breathtaking beauty, screen charisma and talent.

Hrithik was my first love in Bollywood. Immediately after watching Jodhaa Akbar I googled him (what did we stalkers do before google?) and started finding out everything I could about him and watched and purchased ALL of his movies in quick succession. I quickly exhausted all of his films and so my focus shifted to waiting for Kites which was already in the works (until SRK entered my life and stole my heart... but that's another story for another day. I still love Hrithik and he is 2nd in my affections hence my continued anticipation for this film.) So today, after the release date being pushed back time and time again, I finally got to see Kites.

Normally, the kind of hype and anticipation that preceded Kites would result in me being disappointed by the final product but it turned out to be everything I expected it to be, a feast for the eyes, a real entertainer and just great fun at the movies. Anyone who expected it to be more than that...you're misguided at best and kinda dumb at worst.

From my perspective, as someone who saw a decade's worth of Hrithik's work all at once, I definitely think he made a huge leap in his confidence and comfort in his own skin and as an actor with Jodhaa Akbar, Dhoom 2 and Luck By Chance. One thing I was anticipating in Kites was seeing whether or not he had taken that further. I think the answer is that he demonstrates less potent sex appeal and mesmerizing charisma in Kites than he did in JA and Dhoom 2 but in exchange he seems to have grown as a dramatic actor. It's almost as if the compelling gazes and sexy expressions which he perfected in Dhoom 2 were put on the backburner for Kites while he mastered a more subtle style for his dramatic scenes. Now he just has to put it all together in the same film, the subtle dramatic performace with sizzling sex appeal, to really blow people away. This is not to say that there are no "Gah!" moments in Kites where he'll make you drool because there are...just not as many as in JA or Dhoom 2 (a moment on the boat comes immediately to mind and pretty much anything at the beginning of the film when his backstory is being established. Add learning to turn into a toothpick at will to life goals...you'll understand once you see the movie).

All of that being said, Hrithik gives a great performance...I just can't wait to see how he continues to evolve as an actor because I know he can be even better than he is in Kites. I guarantee you, from an American gori's perspective, if he were in a Hollywood film tomorrow, he would be an instant phenomenon in America just like he was in India after his debut. I'm not sure that "Kites the Remix", however, is the platform that will do that. The main reason being, the acting of the supporting actor who plays Tony is totally cringeworthy, enough so that it casts a serious pall over the entire film that may cause American audiences to have trouble taking the whole film seriously. Other than that, there were only two scenes that really didn't work for me and only two scenes that I noticed being lifted from or reminiscent of other films SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT>>>>>>>>>>
There is a scene between J and Natasha/Linda that takes place the night before her wedding to Tony in which they are discussing their motivation for why they are with Tony and his sister and discussing cutting their ties to each other. It didn't work for me. It was the one scene where I felt Hrithik's acting was less than convincing. The line delivery was just off for me. Others may find it charming...I just didn't.

The other scene that threw my mental brakes was one of the car chases. They have an extended scene of J and Natasha/Linda driving down an empty desert highway then the police come out of nowhere and start chasing them which is fine, it looks as though the police were laying in wait for them. That I can accept. What bugged me was how all of the sudden approximately 10 other cars suddenly appear on this previously empty highway in the middle of nowhere just so the police cars have something to smash into. It was poorly executed. The other chases, however, were great! I love a good car chase and so, apparently does Anurag Basu. The chases were fantastic and the stunts and action sequences were very well done and not at all cheesy.

The scenes that were lifted from or reminiscent of other films (this is a Rakesh Roshan production after all) were a scene where J sees Natasha/Linda through as fish tank a la Baz Luhrman's William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet and a scene where Tony's father punishes a cheater in his casino which reminded me of Reservoir Dogs.

OK, so enough with the negative. On with the gushing!

Kites is a beautifully shot film. There are some scenes that are simply stunning visually. Two that I especially enjoyed were one where J is looking at his new car and the flashing lights of the casino sign are reflected on the car surface. It's just a great visual, very cool. The other is a scene of J and Natasha/Linda in the desert framed by rock arches...very pretty. I also appreciate the color coordination of the couples' outfits when they are on the boat. If you ever wonder in a Hindi film who is going to end up together, look at who is wearing the same color and you'll have your answer. I like that. It's certainly better than airbrushed T-shirts from the mall.

My two favorite scenes in the film are two quiet, tender scenes between J and Natasha/Linda. The first is when they make shadow puppets together. It's so sweet you can't help but smile and feel all gooshy inside. The other is a stand out scene for Hrithik where he tells Natasha/Linda about why the rain makes him sad. Really well written and exceptional acting from Hrithik.

The other scene that I loved was Hrithik's big dance number. He never fails to top himself. He is without a doubt the BEST dancer in Bollywood! The man must be made of rubber! Knowing a bit about how Hrithik prepares for roles, I can't even begin to imagine how many hours of practice he put into getting the dance right. He works incredibly hard yes, but he also has enormous amounts of natural talent. The scene is mesmerizing. I think I watched the whole thing with my jaw on the floor. The high splits alone will blow your mind.

As far as the music is concerned, I really enjoyed all of it and thought it was different than the usual Hindi film fare, it absolutely works both in the context of the film and as stand alone songs...that is except for Kites in the Sky. It pains me to criticize Hrithik's first attempt at a movie song but this song just does not work! I think Hrithik is a decent singer...probably better than this song indicates. It's just a bad, bad song (Rajeshji did a bad, bad thing). The lyrics are beyond cheesy and the arrangement is awful. Upon hearing it before the release of the movie I know some kept an open mind thinking, "Oh, it just needs to be heard in the context of the film" Nope! In fact, it may have been slightly less cringeworthy if used in a different scene, a quieter scene. As it is, the context in which it is played just adds to the reasons why the song doesn't work at all. I hope Hrithik sings again...just a much better song.

Barbara Mori is gorgeous and sexy but sweet at the same time. You can't help but fall in love with her just like J does. She's a fresh, talented actress and is especially touching during the climax of the film. She will break your heart in the scene where she saves J's life. I am curious to see what she does next.

Hrithik's performance I already touched upon but I will say a bit more (mostly because there are few things I like more than rhapsodizing about Hrithik and SRK). In the beginning when they are showing us J's life in Vegas, Hrithik couldn't be hotter! God, he's sexy! But I digress. He does a great job playing a convincing...well, player. He then transitions beautifully to devoted man in love. He is totally believable as both. He is also really funny in a few scenes. I would love to see Hrithik in a *smart* comedy. He has some great comic timing and expressions. His most affecting scenes were the quiet scenes between he and Barbara. He's fantastic at sweet and sincere. He has also really gotten good at the big drama scenes. He held back the lip and nostril quivering (well, there's a little bit of that but not too much) puppy dog-eyed histrionics. He was subtle and believable. His physical performance complimented the scene rather than detracting from it by being too over the top.

As for the much speculated about on-screen chemistry between Hrithik and Barbara...it is powerful, no doubt. I would, however, not call it sizzling or hot or anything with a sexual connotation. There are a couple of steamy moments to be sure and they are certainly very beautiful together but I found the chemistry to be more emotional than physical. When they look into each other's eyes, you really believe that they love each other not just that they want to jump each other. Oh and for those of you who care, there's not just one kiss in the movie...there are at least 4 if my count is right. ;-)

The supporting cast, with the exception of Tony (Nicholas Brown) and the train station agent, are quite good. I especially liked Kangana in her limited role and Anand Tiwari as J's friend Robin.

So what is the message of Kites? I don't know. Does it need one? At the beginning, there is a scene with two kites in the sky with a narration that likens them to two lovers but we are cautioned that the kites don't have control of their actions or fates, those who hold the strings do. So, who then controls the fates of our lovers if not they themselves? The rich and powerful Tony and his father? Fate? There's no clear answer to that especially since J and Natasha/Linda individually have chosen paths that are less than noble so they can't really blame anyone but themselves for the people they find themselves beholden to. Then they continue to make poor decisions that lead them to their ultimate fate. So the story seems to actually contradict the "theme" of the kites. Anyway, like I said, does this movie need a message? Nope. It just entertains and does so thoroughly. I'm recommending it to everyone just with a parenthetical disclaimer about "Tony's" acting.

Koyla or Mute Stable Boys FTW!

If you haven't guessed already by the "K" title of this movie, it is a film by Rakesh Roshan. I have given Rakesh Roshan a bad rap in the past but I may have to give him the benefit of the doubt in the future after this most recent viewing of Koyla. I have found new depths to the movie that I didn't notice before and he does always entertain.

What bothers me most about Rakesh Roshan is that he borrows (and that's putting it nicely) so heavily from other films' plots and his movies are the kind that you feel guilty enjoying because they unabashedly cater to the lowest common denominator. In Koi Mil Gaya it was the painfully obvious similarities to E.T. and also the 1968 American film Charly. In Krrish he even copied himself which I will point out later in this review. In Koyla he did it again copying the Kevin Costner film Revenge plus a little bit of Rambo and just a dash of Forrest Gump. The effects are bad, the wardrobe and the hair is unforgiveable and he has stolen plots but what he also has is an action/romance/drama packed film that will keep you interested from beginning to end. What surprised me into reconsidering my inherent ambivalence towards his films are the Hindu symbols running through Koyla and the little touches here and there that reinforce them. Really cool stuff! (I have explained in more detail at the bottom of this review)

Koyla is the story of Raja Saab played by Amrish Puri who rules as a tyrant over the local villages and workers in his coal mines. (For those of you who have seen the movie before, Raja says "bloody fool" exactly 13 times. I counted just for you!) He has a crazy brother, Brijwa, who runs amok raping, pillaging, beating. He has a mute stable boy/slave (yes, he's called a slave) named Shankar played by Shah Rukh Khan (dil squish!). He also has a secretary, Bindiya, who sleeps with him for power and money when he can get it up, which it turns is not very often despite ingesting copious amounts of herbs which are a homemade version of Viagra. His inability to perform in the bedroom is blamed on the available woman not being desirable enough or so the local snake oil salesman tells him. He is advised to get himself a new woman who will stir his desire. Unfortunately for Gauri, played by Madhuri Dixit, it's about this time that Raja sees her for the first time and becomes obssessed with having her. Add to the mix Gauri's absentee brother and unscrupulous Auntie and Uncle and it's disaster for Gauri.

There is, of course, a love story at the heart of Koyla as well as a tale of evil deeds and vengeance. Shankar and Gauri's love story is quite beautiful. What makes it so is the way the two characters begin to evolve upon meeting each other and grow into their relationship and each other(despite the mad Rambo-like jungle chase they are involved in much of the time).

When we first see Shankar he is literally running with hunting dogs, he is compared in conversation to a loyal dog and he presents Raja's hunting prize to him on his knees, head down, giddy in his master's praise as a dog would. When Gauri enters the picture and Shankar realizes how she has been deceived and mistreated, he begins to look at Raja differently. It's as if Gauri awakens the compassionate human being in him. He begins to stand up for Bindiya and Gauri, eventually breaking away from Raja. He goes from slave to protector of innocents to man fighting for and winning the right to self-determination.

Just as Gauri awakens the compassionate human in Shankar, he awakens the woman in her. When we first see Gauri she is a mischievious woman-child still running around tormenting priests at the temple and spending her days with the village children. Once she finds herself married to the old, lecherous Raja she goes through a crisis, at the pinnacle of which she meets Shankar. When she realizes that she and Shankar are essentially in the same situation, both prisoners to Raja, she softens toward him and together, they care for each other and grow as people. As much as possible, in the situations she finds herself in, she is not a victim. She fights when she can and rebels when she can.

By the end of the film, both Shankar and Gauri have become strong people in charge of their own lives and able to punish those who robbed them of their choices before. They have also become a formidable team working together to achieve their goals and assert their personhood.

I also have to give kudos to the filmmakers for the way the relationship between Gauri and Bindiya is treated. So many times in life and in movies, women are each other's worst enemies. In Koyla, however, they do not pit the two against each other. Although Bindiya would have every motivation to resent Gauri, she does not. She becomes Gauri's protector and Gauri becomes hers. I definitely applaud the solidarity in that relationship as opposed to the easier and more titillating route of cat fighting and scheming the filmakers could have taken.

The main thing that Koyla has going for it in my opinion is of course Shah Rukh Khan. Even with one of the worst mullets in hair history (Where oh where was Dilshad?) the man is amazing to watch. He is nothing short of entrancing onscreen. In this role he is especially fascinating because he is mute for at least 2 hours so that all communication is done with body language and eyes. When he's a slave, before he begins to evolve, his posture is often curled in as if to look smaller and avoid notice or as someone constantly in fear of being whipped like an abused animal. His eyes convey an innocence and vulnerability that immediately inspire your compassion and protective instincts.



There is a scene where Gauri comes to his hut to tend his wounds. This scene will break your heart! His eyes somehow convey every slap, every whipping, every emotional scar and indignity that he has ever suffered without once shedding a tear. Throughout the film he conveys torment, confusion, love, anger, joy and sadness all with his eyes. I can't say enough about his performance. I can't imagine another actor pulling it off. Much has been said about Shah Rukh Khan's eyes and I have to agree. They have an eloquence that I have rarely, if ever, seen before.

I believe Madhuri Dixit is at the height of her beauty in this movie. Her dancing is wonderful. She is a great actress and she does a great job in Koyla. She is equally believable as the childish Gauri at the beginning through her transition to powerful, mature woman at the end. She is exquisite in the item number Sanson Ki Mala Pe Simroon Main Pee Ka Naam where she dances under the statue of Shiva. This is one of my favorite item numbers of all time. A terrific scene from beginning to end that should not be missed. This scene marks a very important transition in the movie and the characters which I will discuss in the religious symbols section at the end.



Finally, Amrish Puri as the lecherous old goat Raja Saab and Salim Ghouse as his lunatic, animalistic brother Brijwa are two of the creepiest villains in filmi history. Yes, they're campy and over the top but I defy you to not get the shivers at the thought of having Raja Saab turn his lustful gaze on you or at the prospect of being anywhere near Brijwa.

This film has a lot of problems, I'm not gonna lie. I rarely find Johnny Lever as funny as he is supposed to be but he's not horrible in the quiet scenes where he's just being Shankar's friend. His father is annoying throughout and none of the comedy in the film worked for me. When Shankar suddenly turns into Rambo in the jungle it's a bit silly but then you have a sweet scene where he brings Gauri food that kinda makes up for it. There's also a scene where he starts running and splints break off his legs a la Forrest Gump that will have you rolling your eyes. There is a lot of improbable stuff that happens during the "jungle time" as I like to call it but I truly believe that the relationships and evolution of characters in the film more than make up for it. And, hey, I grew up watching Rambo movies with my dad and I loved them, so what can I say?

That pretty much sums up my feelings about Koyla. It's not fully original, some parts are totally campy, over the top and just plain bad. However, the surprisingly smart and heartfelt evolution of the two main characters and their relationship plus the riveting performance by Shah Rukh Khan and the beauty and talent of Madhuri Dixit more than make up for the shortcomings. This is truly one of my favorite Shah Rukh films and, in my opinion, Rakesh Roshan's best film.

Religious symbols in Koyla-
I will be the first to admit that I am way out of my depth talking about Hindu religious symbols. I had a hunch while watching and did some research and the mind boggles at the amount of information I came up with. That being said, I think knowing that these symbols are there enrich the movie-watching experience and show that Rakesh Roshan is smarter than I gave him credit for previously. So, here's what I got and I encourage you to keep it in mind as you watch and see what else you can find.

Gauri is a young, innocent girl in the beginning of the film and is a representation of the goddess Gauri who represents purity and austerity. She is the Kanya (young, unmarried) Parvati who had undergone severe penance in order to get Lord Shiva as her husband. Unmarried girls pray to Gauri for a virtuous husband. The goddess Gauri is the peaceful, innocent aspect of the goddess Durga. Durga fought and killed Mahishasura and his army. This demon represents the egotistical propensity that brute strength is all that is needed to acquire selfish desires. You can see how Gauri in the movie follows the same evolution as her goddess namesake as she evolves into a strong woman who fights the evil of Raja Saab at Shankar's side. Raja Saab also uses his brute strength to obtain his wealth and Gauri and anything else he desires. Durga is the Mother Goddess. She is Mother Nature and Shiva is the Father of the Universe.

One of Shiva's many manifestations is as Shankara, giver of joy. So, Shankar in the beginning of the film is Shankara the peaceful, gentle manifestation of Shiva. But, we are given a clue to his forthcoming evolution in the first scene when Bindiya comments that "he is not a man but a storm." Rudra, another manifestation of Shiva, is the god of the roaring storm and is usually portrayed in accordance with the element he represents as a fierce, destructive deity. Rudra is also viewed as the protector of humanity against its enemies just as Shankar protests Gauri and Bindiya and eventually all those under Raja Saab's tyranny. Just as Shiva and Durga are consorts, so Gauri and Shankar are meant to be together.



Rudra is associated with the color red as is the goddess Gauri so watch for red in the movie. Durga is known for her mudras or small, precise hand movements, so pay attention to the way Gauri uses her hands when she dances. Also watch in the scene where Gauri goes to Shankar's hut to tend his wounds and she fixes his shrine which was disturbed in a fight. The shrine is dedicated to Shiva and Durga and we are shown Shankar's and Gauri's reflections in the glass of the pictures. This is pretty obvious foreshadowing that they are not going to be helpless for long. Finally, pay close attention to the Sanson Ki Mala Pe Simroon Main Pee Ka Naam item number mentioned above as it's my opinion that this scene is where the shift occurs from their peaceful manifestations of the gods to their destructive avatars. The intensity of the dance, the events that spur Gauri to dance and Shankar to play the drums (drums associated with Shiva) and the scene taking place under an enormous statue of Shiva kinda clue us in as well.

Before I close, I mentioned in the beginning that Rakesh Roshan has copied himself in Krrish and he does so from this film. I believe Shankar is an early incarnation of Krrish. Allow me to demonstrate: Krrish has superhuman powers including outrunning horses. Shankar has superhuman powers including outrunning dogs. Krrish is a simple, rustic raised in nature. Shankar too is a rustic character obviously quite close to nature as we see in the jungle scenes. Krrish wears horrible, homespun clothes using strange scarf as belt and Shankar also wears awful homespun clothes using rope as belt. Both go on quests to win the women they love and seek vengeance for their families. I rest my case.

Friday Non-Bolly Film and Book Rec

The film I have for you this Friday is Indochine a French film from 1992 starring Catherine Deneuve, Vincent Perez and Linh Dan Pham.

I watched this film several years ago when I was in my Vincent Perez phase which was comparitvele short-lived but rather intense. He's another actor who has incredibly expressive eyes which I find so intriguing.

The movie takes place in French Indochina and is about a French woman who owns a rubber plantation and the orphaned Vietnamese girl that she raises as her own daughter. It is set in the 1930s against the backdrop of the rising Vietnamese Nationalist movement. Vincent Perez plays the French Naval Officer that mother and daughter both fall in love with. How real that love is, is a question I have often struggled with. As in most works of art that deal with the shift from colonialism to post-colonialism, most of the characters and relationships represent larger ideas about the relationship between countries than what appears on the surface.

This is an intense film loaded with passion, beautiful locations, desperate love affairs and intrigue.

My book recommendation this week is Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhys.

I read this book in a college literature class that focused on colonial and post-colonial literature. My professor was a wonderful woman named Zoreh Sullivan who had a lovely British accent shaded with something else, though I was never sure what. She called the first half of the semester "Literature of the Empire" and it included books written by the colonizers about the lands and people they colonized i.e. Rudyard Kipling a British author born in Bombay, etc. The second half of the semester was called, "The Empire Writes Back" and included books written by the colonized i.e. Jean Rhys who was born in Dominica to a Welsh father and Creole mother.

Wide Sargasso Sea tells the story of Mr. Rochester's wife from Jane Eyre. Who was this woman? What made her lose her mind? What life might she have led before ending up in the attic? Jean Rhys gives her an identity and a life beyond the shadow figure raving in the attic and, in the process, makes a statement about colonialism and loss of native identity. This book left such an impression on me that I have never been able to read Jane Eyre. I read Wide Sargasso Sea before ever attempting Jane Eyre and had such sympathy for Antoinette, that I have felt a grudge against Mr. Rochester and Jane ever since.

This is a lush book full of heady passion and one woman's struggle, like her country, to be herself and be proud of it rather than conform to what the colonizers would make of her. As she goes from innocence to madness, you begin to realize you cannot desire something for its wildness and inherent natural beauty only to then try to assimilate it, necessarily destroying the things that made you desire it in the first place and expect a good outcome. This is what happens to Antoinette and, on a larger scale, those countries subjected to colonialism. (There is also a movie from 1993 if you are so inclined.)