The alternate version of Sacred Games

SPOILERS AHEAD

The show has been loved, hated and talked about so much that another review would just be a culmination of picking different stuff from different reviews that are already published. I loved season 2 so much more but I was also in for a treat since a friend of mine told me that 'Guruji' wasn't really behind everything which made me wonder who could be the one creating the ruckus.

This was when I had just about finished episode 5 and my immediate reaction was 'Dilbagh Singh' and I started to think about it and the plot sounded a lot more fun(had that been the case). However, there were certain areas that I thought about that acted as an alternate version to this wonderfully crafted show. They were never fulfilled, though, but the assumptions were good while they lasted. Just to clear things out, these were my thoughts before I finished the last episode.

1. Gaitonde calling Sartaj - Jojo tells Gaitonde that he has been made a fool for almost 20 years by the concerned person. Now, he hadn't known Guruji for 20 years but Dilbagh Singh met him 20 years back. The process of overseeing the entire plan without divulging your identity could have been a good reveal, had it been the case. Dilbagh Singh was making sure that Gaitonde has broken down completely before taking him under his wings. This plot point would have worked even during the part where Gaitonde meets him again in the ashram. He did not want to see him unless he was sure that Gaitonde has surrendered to Guruji's will.
2. The Baap Connection - It was all about Gaitonde's three fathers and how each of them fucked his life. Gaitonde's realisation about who the main person is could have been a justifiable driving force for him to call 'Sartaj' since the son might be able to emotionally weaken the father or at least make him vulnerable. He also says that fathers are always the ones who fuck up their children's lives and this could have acted as a hint for Sartaj to realise what is going on. Also, the stories are running in parallel. Gaitonde talks about his dads being evil. A clue that was almost there but people wouldn't have caught on. 
3. Bhaagwaan mein maante ho? - First words on the phone.
4. Blind Faith - Another layer that it would have added to the narrative would have been to Sartaj's mother's beliefs that his husband was a good man. The confidence in your loved someones is so densely clouded that you cannot comprehend that their highly positive (perceived) actions could drive them to do something insane. The conversation between Sartaj and his mother could have negated the possibility of such a plot and then reinstated it like a twist in the end.
5. Just like my Dad - Malcolm Murad not killing Sartaj and asking him to fulfil his father's wishes.
6. The Shahid Khan connection

There are a couple of scenes that I felt were solidifying my assumptions, too. The first one is when Guruji allows people to leave his 'Satyuga' plan and then Dilbagh reacts. I thought he was hinting at Guruji to send Murad. The next is when Kalki enters the secret room to reveal that Guruji is still alive. She is looking towards something else before she turns to Guruji and the camera pans towards him. I thought the reveal would have a flashback with Dilbagh sitting at the front and Kalki looking at him first. 'Guruji' could have been a tool like Gaitonde and all others were. The pattern drawn in the end would then pave way for another season.

There are many plot points that would fit in, assuming the mentioned cases. The only additive that I think should have been there was the motivation of Dilbagh Singh to create this chaos. However, there could be another season to explore Dilbagh's motives and how then Sartaj tries to tackle an ideology that he never thought could go wrong. Aham Brahmasmi.

Gully Boy - A successful journey marred by an unwanted ending

Gully Boy has been receiving an immense amount of love and Zoya Akhtar has another film in her list which she has to beat, the other being ZNMD (strictly based on responses), the next time she decides to direct a movie again. For me, Gully Boy deserves all the love that it has been showered upon but there are areas where the film could have been so much more than it actually turned out to be. Despite being such a gem, I still came out with some of my desires (Murad) unsatiated.

Speaking of the positives, Gully Boy boasts of some of the finest cinematography and production design in recent times. Talking further about camera movement, I was blown away by how meticulously Zoya has collaborated with Jay Oza to slide cameras that convey the inner struggles of a character. The scene where Murad is trying to walk towards the club after being attracted to the rap being played (his dream) and how he then walks back after being calmly rejected by a bouncer. The initial camera movements are slow that speaks about how the enchanted world engulfs you with a leisurely pace and when the reality strikes you hard, you just go back to being you with a reluctance (displayed by fast-moving and slightly shaky camera panning) and in a quicker time that it took to reach you there. The idea of the film is beautifully established since a mere movement of the hand by the bouncer is enough to let Murad his dream go since he is aware of what lies beyond once he starts to resist the reality. Another aspect of cinematography that blew me away was the meeting point of Alia and Ranveer. You do not get to see the surroundings until right before the interval. What we notice is a bridge over garbage that is metaphorical to what these individuals are trying to do. In between a song, you see Murad and Safeena sitting inside the train with two distinctive colours of background lighting (blue for Murad and Yellow for Safeena) explaining their classes how they have merged them together. The point where he is sitting inside the car (lights being reflected off the smooth surface of the vehicle denoting how his life is the one that is destined to be big) and mouths 'Apna Time Aayega' was pointed out by someone and that is where the brilliance of the makers lie. The song 'Mere Gully Mein' just comprises the sheer awesomeness of the makers. Amidst all of this, the aesthetics are on point, be it the lanes of slums or the rap battleground. 

Diving deeper into the bridge scene, the storytelling by Zoya keeps informing you of what is to come and all you have to do is catch onto the clues. Safeena leaves the bridge and Murad is too careless to notice her insecurities and walks away from the other side. It culminates to a mini break-up. Or the part where Moeen is seen involving kids into drug business and how that becomes a major plot point and another reason for Murad to win that competition. Another thing that comes to my mind is the train scene where Safeena takes a dig at Murad's friend and eventually does that again to take Murad back. These are little moments but the brilliance of Zoya and Kagti made sure that they weren't there for the sake of it. Another bit that I loved was when MC Sher rejects Murad's offer to sing his lyrics saying he does not convey anybody else's life story. This is Zoya's wee homage to art and true artists. It is your own experiences and understanding that brings out the art in you and catering to a process outside your own framework might drive you towards the craft but can never elicit the energy that just about helps you cross the line. (Tamasha made filmmakers and 3 Idiots, cameramen)

In terms of the art of acting, I saw Murad throughout the film. Compared to his portrayal of Khilji (which was hugely appreciated and I felt I saw traits of Ranveer which was a letdown), this is a film that brings out the actor in him. Alia as Safeena makes you wonder the powerhouse of talent that she is. You just get to see another version of a human breakdown in her performance. The other star cast has been spoken about and I do not feel the need to add any more to that although my appreciation towards Kalki keeps growing by leaps and bounds. Zoya has pulled off the best ensemble cast in a film for me. I sincerely hope none of them gets typecasted and we get to see more and more of them.

The finale of this wonderful movie was, however, a letdown for me. None of the characters in the film is looking to find themselves or getting into something; they already have the talent and the balance (and relationships) but do not know what to do with it. The film starts off at a random point in each character's life and all you see is the current part of their lives, like a continuum. You get to know where they are coming from but you, as an audience, are left to make conclusions about it. Concluding the film in such a way was a total letdown for me. The final few minutes of the film, after Apna Time Aayega, were not necessary, as per my opinion. It would have been better had it been left to us (as was the case throughout) to guess what happens after. The journey should not have come to an end. Although they did try to cover up by cutting to the end credits after Murad asks the crowd about their demands; I, personally, felt it wasn't necessary. The movie is a journey of desires and desires are never fulfilled since, like our genes, one gives birth to another.

Additionally, the two scenes that shook me were Aftab hitting Razia and Murad seeing kids packing the drugs. However, it also made me realise how soft the rest of the moments were when it comes to depicting the harsh realities of the slums. On the contrary, I was okay with the film until those two scenes appeared since I believe people tend to, subconsciously, make peace with how screwed up their lives are. The dichotomy did not go down well for me.

That being said, Gully Boy still triumphs and the flaws that I found can never outweigh the plusses of the film. This is a gem that needs to be nurtured and appreciated. More power to Zoya and Kagti for making this unprecedented musical and introducing India to Asli Hip-Hop. I cannot wait for what she does next. The landscape of Indian cinema is changing. We are probably not seeing it since our desires keep multiplying. The journey continues.

Dimension Unavailable

Based on my last post about a movie called 'Zero', I kept wondering about the need to be more open in our approach towards the acceptance of things that are around us or probably not.

The idea of filmmaking was to create an aura for the perceiver to be transported to a dimension that they will have to detach themselves from after few hours. That being said, since the impact was so powerful, it gave rise to cinephiles who started seeing between the frames and discovered an extra dimension to filmmaking.

Quoting a personal example, my parents always thought that I was interested in movies because they were fun to watch and a career in it would be like a part-time job for me, once I have settled down in my life. For the most part of my life, this thought framed a major section of my reality until I started to find my own voice. Ever since then, there has been a huge change in my parents' approach when they watch a movie because they can now see the dimension that is present right in front of them. Earlier, their minds were clouded by opinions of people around them, which is still the case. Only this time, their society has been shaped up by me.

This brings me to our own cinephiles. Just like a modern day society that is condemned for being too arrogant in their ways of adhering to rules that are way too ancient and rigid, the filmmaking society has become what we call a social structure with an ideology that has no relation to subjectivity. There are rules that are being followed. There are voices that are being heard. An artist, amidst all of it, is creating a product that they want to, only to be left surprised by its rejection owing to these voices and rules. I don't think I need to put examples in here.

There is a regular trend of mapping out a film through certain parameters that are definitive which is fine. The problems start to arise when everything in a film is defined by those parameters and there is an individual assessment of their presence instead of taking a holistic approach. This is why a film like 'Zero' is ridiculed despite it claiming to be a film that took everything literally. There is a constant need to suit one's own artistic ego via someone else's work. The last line, to me, is something that is completely unfathomable.

Another example that comes to my mind is that of 'October' (which surprisingly is mentioned in most of my posts). I requested a friend of mine, who is completely oblivious to the cinema and watch movies for the same reason my parents used to, to experience this film. I wanted to see how truthful the film was through an external dimension (albeit her internal) and she absolutely loved it. For someone who is still into typing WhatsApp messages like 'sm1 clled u' wrote 'Every improvement was a sense of Hope' because there was, subconsciously, a desire to express one's own feelings, once they saw their own expression via an external reality, by recognising the presence of that dimension. She asked me if any of the makers had experienced that in life since it would not be possible to get everything spot-on. Which makes me wonder if she would have liked the film at all if she hadn't felt the emotion in the first place?

Adding to the list of examples is that of the group favourite Anurag Kashyap. He has been a terrific director and a brilliant craftsman. However, I felt his writing aspect started to get repetitive with each film and Mukkabaaz was a complete disaster for me. He comes with a film called Mannmarziyaan that is not written by him and you could see a huge change in the way he presented the story. For me, it is his best work since none of them has stayed with me for so long. I strongly believe he needs to start looking beyond himself to keep nurturing his craft. This idea of widening your understanding of this universe not by expanding it but finding a new dimension within the existent reality is something that I am trying to present here. It is not about whether the dimension will hold true in the future since in the past a number of scientists had been asked to falsify their theories in order to accommodate the ego of the religious institutes and bureaucracy. It is about sustaining the idea in your own wee realm and allowing it to make its presence felt in the world outside.

This, obviously, brings me to 'Zero'. There were polarising reviews and I had read most of them. However, the more I read them, the more confidence I had in the film. I could see people pointing out mistakes which were actually the strength of the movie but they were in a dimension that we have chosen not to see because the order that we live in has been powerful enough to make us do so. After watching the movie, I felt the lesser the people watch it, the better it is (which was wrong from my end) because of the downgrading it will face from the people due to incomprehension. It had happened with 'October', with a few reviews drawing criticism towards it pace, and I did not want 'Zero' to go the same way. Alas, it did.

One of the worst criticism that the movie received was the showcasing of the love angle between a Scientist and a High-School dropout. These are the same people who have been critical about the division within the Indian circuit in terms of multiple parameters. However, when it comes to 'Intellect' or 'Class; the division somehow seems okay. Categorically speaking, it's not. The idea of finding something in nothing is what an artistic mind does and it is the acknowledgement of a person of who they are, irrespective of the parameters that have shaped them up, that forms the definition of Equality. Science is no different than Art. As a matter of fact, every profession can be termed as Art (mentioned in one of my other posts). But then, some of our cinephiles and critics do not want to look beyond what they know. A coherent story, a strict screenplay and a logical outcome are what continues to define 'Good Cinema'.

Did Cinema exist for this purpose or are we just following a trend that someone started? 

Murakami in Bollywood

Finally, Murakami comes to India. It's been a week since I saw Zero and I chose not to write about it then because it took me time to process what I had seen or rather experienced. This isn't as much a review as it is an expression of my feelings. *FEW SPOILERS*

Zero is a winner not because it is unconventional but because it stays true to what it is. We have all, at some point in our lives, dreamed of a miracle to happen. This is a movie of such miracles happening at regular intervals. The movie starts off in a typical Rai-Sharma style with the characters being established and a giveaway of a conflict that would soon seep into the screenplay. However this time, they take it a notch higher with Bauua (a brilliant SRK) swiping stars from the sky. I bought into the world immediately, hoping that I will be in for a joyride and I wasn't disappointed.
Unpopular opinion but I enjoyed the second half thoroughly. The first half was more of typical storytelling coming from the writer-director combination but the second half is where they upped the ante. I feel the idea of the film was inspired by Murakami's world. There are two regular people who get embroiled in a love story that has metaphysical elements and their life takes a turn with attributes like love, loss and life embodied, only to have those characters have a happy ending.
This is no easy film to sit through because it is illogical. Illogical not because it has stupidity written all over it but because we, as humans, cannot comprehend something that does not feature in our logical framework. The idea of finding our own realities in a world that is virtual has seeped in so much that we fail to differentiate between our imagination and what is real. At the core of it, Zero is a humane story of triumph, grief and emotions but is coated with a plotline that is beyond this world, both literally and psychologically. And this is what makes it great. How can you judge a film that is based on a parameter lying on the opposite end of the general human spectrum?
There are two ways to it. You either discard it or accept it in the form that it has been created. People chose the former and I have no issues with that. However, the film would go down as one of the finest experiences I have had inside a theatre because it transported me to a dimension within our world but a dimension we cannot feel because we have not sensed it. It does take its concepts literally but not seriously which is a dangerous line to function on.
Our logical framework has an ego that needs to be satisfied and the movie challenges it, just like any other Murakami novel. It puts in real characters with real inner conflicts and makes them do extraordinary things that people can only dream of. Bauua kept blaming his father for every trouble that he had to face in his life and the father, eventually, becomes the reason why Bauua and Afia did not end up together in the first place.
What I am trying to say is that everything fits but not in our realities, which does not make it untrue. I believed in the film since the trailer came out. I believed in the fact that Katrina would be the best part about it since her first poster came out. It had something to do with me being an SRK fan but the film has stayed with me for so long making me believe that my belief wasn't driven by my biases.

Zero is a movie that might never get its due which makes me feel bad. However, when I first compared it to a Murakami movie, a friend asked me not to glorify a shitty film but a true Murakami fan felt the same which gave a definition to my reality of this magnanimously beautiful and yet down to earth movie. Murakami has finally come to India.
It is never 'Sometimes that we wish for a miracle' (as I had mentioned) but 'ALWAYS' wishing for it.

P.S. - I did not intend to add these two points in my post but I cannot resist now, even after months of watching the film. Firstly, the no gravity scene of Zero where Anushka and Bauua have an argument of sorts, but the way it has been shown displays the genius of Rai. Two people, who have a story that does not belong to the world, are away from from the ground and are finding grounds to their haphazard bond.
The next one is probably the most beautiful feeling I have had inside a cinema hall. Anushka completing the countdown for Bauua and then swiping. This is the reason why I go to watch movies. The sheer bliss that the scene elicited from my face is a feeling I would want over and over again. I could not stop smiling since I had seen a moment that blew away my brain. Kudos to the team. And No, Shahrukh, you did not make a wrong film. It wasn't perceived correctly. Your count up till 5 was correct, we could not complete it to zero and therefore, did not see the night stars falling at our will.

Knowledge before Greed

'Tumbbad' is a winner all the way. Again, this is not a review as much as it is a discussion post and yes, Pankaj Kumar has outdone himself and any cinematographer in the Indian film industry this year. Watch out for the last 15 minutes especially.

'Tumbbad' claims to be a horror film and I am still in two minds about the fact whether it redefines the genre or actually introduces us to it. It is a film based on the concept of 'Greed beyond Fear' and how aptly have they explored its depth both cinematically and literally.

It is always our innate desire to pursue something that is beyond our capacity to comprehend. We are in a perpetual state of seeking the ultimate power, based on our perspective, and more importantly, keeping it to ourselves. It is the exposure to the things that we neglect, due to the inferior approach, that really makes us fearful.'Tumbbad' exposes us to such inner demons which pops up and make places in those vacant positions of our mind that should have been filled with the knowledge of what we were supposed to seek. And this is where it is frightening.

A human walks through the jungle periodically and all the trips they make turn out to be a success. The thought of expecting more out of those trips might actually increase the frequency of our visits but also deepen the footprints we leave behind each time for the beasts of the jungle to easily track us. It is not the Greed as much as the child inside us that refuses to stop and despite all the maturity, we follow a route beyond our limits of understanding. And this is where we falter. This is where the demon strikes because they can only overpower you once you give them that power.

It is the point where whims replace reality and we let them, hoping those whims will turn into our reality. We refuse to lose. We refuse to bow down. We accept the God in us but fail to recognise it. We let the external power of our own kind take over our mind sidelining the very reason of how we could be the fascination of those external entities. At the end of the day, this is what makes us mortal. This is why we must lose for the game to end. This is why we must cease to exist for the powers to vanish.

The more we know about the world, the more it expands itself. Or the more we know about the world, the more we realise the unimportance of continuous seeking and how important it is to be satisfied with our process and results. This dichotomy of the same idea is what probably gives birth to the thin line between right and wrong. It is not bad to be greedy as much as it is to greed for something without knowing. The meeting of these ideas and us, and what we could become with all our ignorance and clouded opinions is what makes 'Tumbbad' a compelling watch and a true horror movie.

You are not looking at Vinayak (a fantastic Sohum Shah) but your own self. You see Hastar and your inner conscious twitches. You know you are powerful but can also fathom your anti-power. You realise the powers in you but you cannot use them because you do not know how to channelize them. You will only realise it because you are watching it from a distance. Do not commit that mistake because 'Tumbbad' wants you to go inside that womb. Let 'Tumbbad' engulf you and you will come out as confused and blanked out as I was, probably. I need to watch it again to make more sense out of it. I am in shambles and my thoughts in disarray.

Andhadhun - Made in India

A lot has been said about 'Andhadhun' and how brilliant the movie is and I feel almost everything has been covered in the discussion. What I am trying to do here is not review the film or appreciate film but rather talk about the power of cinema through the world of 'Andhadhun'. It might have SPOILERS because it is an interpretation and might ruin the movie experience. IT HAS SPOILERS.

Andhadhun in the true sense questions our understanding of the word 'Truth'. What is 'Truth'? Is it something that we comprehend? Is it something that we believe in? Is it a perspective? Does it even exist?
In one of the famous Murakami novels, I read a line that goes like - "Do we believe in the truth or just in the things that we wish were true?" Andhadhun presents us with the same question.
It is a deep study of human psychology and philosophy. It talks about a character who pretends to be blind because people tend to shed their inhibitions in front of him. Thus, he can find the inspiration. He can see them naked on a psychological level or physically. Artists leave their home in the morning to find an inspiration and come back to their house again in the evening only to leave again, the next morning. This is what Ayushmann does throughout the film. He sees a rabbit stick and probably creates a story around it. He can focus on things that are important rather than varying his vision to inculcate unnecessary details. He can make people believe in the most unusual story. Everything is happening by chance yet everything is believable.

If one asks a psychologist about extracting information from the subconscious, the probable answer would be that it is not possible today but even if we could, it would just be pure chaos. To bring a meaning to that chaos, one would need a deeper understanding to solve those equations and this is where Raghavan comes in. This is a chaotic movie told with an orderly approach. Raghavan talks about manipulation, our incapability to overcome our emotions, our search for finding a solution and being content with it and above all, our inability to look beyond our own little world. This is where an artist like Akash comes in and weaves a story or a tune despite their blindness (that we perceive). We tend to feel that an artist is socially blind and confined to their own whims but what we don't understand is those whims are a byproduct of the dimension they notice within the human structure. Andhadhun is a prime example of 'What we see might not be the truth' or 'Every entity has its own truth'.
I still feel Raghavan was Akash and the audience was Apte. What I also felt was Akash was as much a musician as he was a storyteller. He found a sense of entropy around and gave them a form of a 'Tune' or a 'Story'. I wonder if he sometimes sits alone and laughs at the world and its mediocrity while an old lady, out of deep respect for God, hands him a note of a higher denomination believing it will reconcile her with the ultimate truth.
This is the part that differentiates the artist from a common man. They know how to keep the commoners, commoners. An artist has an ego to satisfy. An artist has the power to display. And they will. What we do is, unknowingly give in to those mediums and then when left awestruck try to polish our egos by giving it a boundary via our answers.

Also, I loved the film and if it does make it to international circuits, it should have an addition to its title for people who despise Indian cinema without knowing that a guy like Sriram Raghavan exists. Andhadhun - Made in India.

We, the fools.

Ignorance is Bliss.

There might be spoilers ahead for 'The Darjeeling Limited' so you might want to refrain yourself from reading further after the first three paragraphs.

I know a lot of you are pissed about a number of posts regarding 'October' but I couldn't find a more suitable movie to initiate this discussion.

I had restricted myself from writing any reviews for 'October' believing that expressing feeling via mere words is a polluted form of communication (also evident in the film). I wasn't reading any reviews too because of the very same reason but my optimism drove me to go on and read reviews of few critics that I sometimes look up to. The only takeaway for me was how each and every one of them reduced this heartfelt film to a piece of furniture in a living room. They were judging it by the factors that were way below the film's standard and therefore they could not connect with the film. I know most of them have been to a film school and learned the craft but what if something like October comes in that takes it a level further and we are still looking at it through our myopic lenses.

This makes me wonder if 'Ignorance is indeed bliss' especially in this case where we are ignoring the essence of the film as well as the need to draw the line between something like October that is artistic and 'A Death in the Gunj' that is well crafted. Someone suggested me to watch a film twice - the first time to feel it and then to understand why you felt the way you did.

Adding to the above discussion, I also feel our habit of over analysing with a blurry unidimensional vision has been mocked by a few filmmakers. Take an example of 'The Darjeeling Limited'. They carry luggage with their father's name inscribed on it which was symbolic of the baggage that they carried after their father's death. A point that most of the viewers completely missed, until the last train scene because of (probably) our habit of look for something great in a film. I laughed out loud during that scene because I felt that is where Anderson mocked all of the viewers for competing to be erudite. Ditto for when I was watching 'Mulholland Drive'. The film in itself was opened to multiple interpretations (that is what art is) but I felt the director knew people will go crazy looking for just a single explanation of what was happening. Reading its Wikipedia page just confirmed my theory.