Auro : Life kum Aura jyada
Print
Paa is a very positive film. Shadow of a possible death is present throughout the film but untill death finally takes away the most fascinating character, film celebrates the life. Whatever moments are remaining there with a 12 years old boy, Auro, who is suffering from Progeria, they are passed in a lively manner. Nothing is there which can suppress the zeal of Auro to live a life, though a short one, in a brave and lively manner.
In Paa, Director R Balki extends one chapter of his previous film Cheeni Kum. A young girl, suffering from cancer, was there as an important person in the life of protagonist (Amitabh Bachchan). She helps, motivates and accelerates the love life of AB with Tabu.
Here in Paa, Auro directly controls the re-union of his parents.
It is not common in hindi films when kids are used in an effective manner and they do not irritate audiences because most of the filmmakers try to take an adult like behaviour from the kids. There were many who had not liked adult like behaviour of the girl in R Balki’s previous film Cheeni Kum. But here in Paa Amitabh’s Auro does not give any such scope to complain against his onscreen behaviour. Other kids are also outstanding. They create a very lively atmosphere in the film.
In fact Amitabh Bachchan is not there in the film. It can be said that Paa is one film where Amitabh Bachchan has acted but he is not visible and audible anywhere. One searches for Amitabh since beginning of the film but famous personality of this actor does not come on surface even once. Auro’s aura has concealed Amitabh Bachchan completely.
Paa can be said as an actor-less film. It becomes a character based films. A young boy, afflicted with Progeria, his unwed mother (Vidya Balan) and his grandmother (Arundhati Nag) come as real people to us. A school, a principal, teachers and students all look real and nothing looks like a filmi atmosphere. Even a young politician (Abhishek Bachchan) lives in an authentically real looking haveli with his rich father (Paresh Rawal) who is a retired politician.
Auro becomes a darling of anyone who comes in his contact. He says once to his onscreen father, who does not know that Auro is his son,” Nobody leaves me”.
Once he comes on screen it becomes difficult to bear the absence of Auro from the screen. Desire to see him in every single shot remains there throughout the film.
As far as emotional quotient is concerned, Paa is R Balki’s Anand, though not as superior in everything as Anand was. It has its share of weaknesses as Hrishikesh Mukherjee’s Anand had but as Anand, inspite of its weaknesses, has been touching hearts of millions of audiences over the years, Paa also has the same capacity to touch the hearts of the audiences. Parents of such kids die every single moment seeing their kid suffering from such a rare disease where their kid would definitely die in coming few years. Paa presents this situation in a convincing manner through the characters of Vidya Balanand Arundhati Nag.
Like Anand, a fear of a possible death exists throughout the film in the Paa also but like Anand, here also lighter moments make Paa also a film that presents the joys of life. Till death happens finally in the climax Paa is also a full of life film. Moments are filled with humor, joy, love and sorrow.
Auro generates tears of joy and sorrow together. His body is decaying fast and it creates a sorrow all around but his charming ways create love and laughter all around.
Auro, suffering from accelerated aging disease, is a naughty and intelligent boy. Humour comes easily to him. During a competition in his school he paints the world globe in white. Things get meaning via interpretation. Chief Guest, a young MP Amol, searches a meaning in the white globe and he praises the boy who has painted the globe in white as boy has created a united world where there are no boundaries. Auro gets the first prize but later we get to know the mystery behind the concept of a white globe and humorous nature of Auro is revealed to us.
“Galati karne wala galti sehne wale se jyada sehan karta hai”, a young girl says to Auro. Auro looks at his mom who receives the message from his eyes and she looks at Amol, who gets the message from Vida’s eyes. Camera captures emotions of different characters. A simple message shakes all of them present in the room and fulfils the demand of those moments.
Amitabh Bachchan had concluded the climax of Anand saying something like,”Anand mara nahin karte, ve zinda rehte hain yahan hamare dilon mein”.
Somebody in Paa also could/should have repeated the same or similar dialogue,”Auro has not died, he would live in our heart”.
Like Anand, Paa also could have been titled as Auro. Auro’s monkey dance may become a favorite dance among kids.
Film tries to create a positive environment all around.
If politics is covered in the film then it presents Amol, a young politician who represents an ideal new age politician. In India politicians have lost all the credibility. They have become epitome of corruption and selfishness. Amol’s thinking and doing present how a politician should be and how he should think and behave. Honesty ultimately pays the dividends, is shown and re-established by Amol’s character.
Few films show what is happening all around and few films show what should prevail. Second category films focus more on idealism and earlier hindi films of 50s and 60s used to focus more on this ideal factor. They used to deal with the stories which used to focus what should exist in our country. Paa belongs to second category of films.
Auro expresses his desire to see Rashtrapati Bhawan. It is doubtful if many kids of today’s India may desire for this though till some years ago it used to be a common desire among kids to see Parliament and President Residence.
Paa tries to establish a faith in politics and politicians and journalism. It advocates that good things should prevail in politics and media because both these mediums, which are two important pillars in a democracy, have become quite dirty in their very existences. Paa tries to create a positive atmosphere around these two areas also.
Paa is based on human emotions and it presents them in right doses and right format. An audience may carry more than 15-16 scenes with him after the film is finished and this looks like a remarkable achievement in present time otherwise films are coming and going, leaving no memorable impression in the mind of audience. Paa gives every actor a scene/few scenes where s/he could show the quality and competency.
People may have problems with Amitabh Bachchan, Abhishek Bachchan or whole Bachchan family on a personal basis and they may not like to watch Paa in a theatre but it is certainly a film which any genuine cine lover would like to watch once anywhere through any medium be it DVD or DTH or cable TV. Film does not lose anything if one decides not to watch it rather he will miss something good if he does not watch it. It does not harm an audience’s cinematic sensibilities but satisfies them.
Scope is always there for further improvement in such subjects and Paa opens a whole arena for others to come forward and make much better film/s in future.
Anurag Kashyap
Abhay Deol
Dibakar Banerjee
Hansal Mehta
Khalid Mohamed
Kundan Shah
Rahul Dholakia
Anish Kuruvilla
Jaideep Varma
Manish Gupta
Navdeep Singh
Bhavani Iyer
D. Santosh
Onir
Ashvin Kumar
Ramu Ramanathan
Sudhir Mishra
Pankaj Advani
Revathy
Saurabh Shukla
Sachin Kundalkar
Shilpa Shukla
Sujoy Ghosh
Suparn Verma
Santosh Sivan
Shashank Ghosh
Shivajee
Pavan Kaul
Partho Sen-Gupta
Prroshant Naryannan
Sam Langoria
Satish Kasetty
Rk your review is from the heart as the film is. If you allow I would like to point out one mistake.You mention a dialogue spoken in Anand by AB.It is actually – “Anand mara nahi, Anand marte nahi”.
The film is excellent in my view and the point where you say that it is a film without actors and has characters.I couldn’t agree more.This is how films should be.Characterisation is a very important part of film making.
While watching the film I was wondering whether any other actor would have made the same impact as AB senior did.It is like The Godfather,where Brando completely transformed himself, and what we saw was a chilling, aging Mafia Don and not mumbling sensual icon- Marlon Brando.
I don’t think anybody has any personal problems with Bachchan family, unless it is media created.Infact AB Corp is doing quite a lot for needy people.You would have observed the trailer of the Marathi film Veeheer. I think its a great effort by them to encourage talents like these. I doff my hat to the AB family for their commendable work.
loading...
Nikhil,
Thanks for comment and writing right dialogue from Anand. Can not recall properly the exact lines as have not seen it again in last 20 years or so.
Other actors will not try what AB has done. Few will be scared of the performance he has given and few will be scared of the criticism he is getting by accepting this role.
It will remain as a unique role for a long time in hindi cinema or perhaps in Indian cinema.
loading...
RK,
If Auro would have been shown as a normal kid, would it change anything significant in the film. I mean the bigger picture not the details.
loading...
Well yes, definitely. I observed an undercurrent of tension throughout the film, which would not have been there had Auro been a normal kid.
You can argue in the same lines for Anand, but the fact remains that’s its the film makers preogative to show what they want. We can only agree or disagree. You disagree, I agree.
loading...
Azad,
Anand, the film, at every point focusses on Anand, the protagonist, thus giving us insight into him and also the impact of his death on various people. The entire movie is about Anand’s impending death and its reverberations. Now compare that too Paa. What was Paa about?
loading...
Gaurang,
Ohh yes film would have been entirely different if Auro was shown as a normal kid.
What you see now is based entirely on present format of Auro’s character.
If you do not believe in it, you may go back in to the history of Hindi cinema. Please watch “Do Kaliyan” (late 60s) and “Kaash” (late 80s).
Both the films will satisfy most of your questions and problems with Paa.
loading...
Trailer of the film was very clear in establishing one fact that Amitabh Bachchan was playing PAA (Progeria Afflicted Auro) – a 12-13 year old boy.
If anyone goes to watch the film then he has accepted this premise. Now he has only two check points whether Mr Bachchan has performed well against this challenge imposed on him by the director of the film or he has failed or less effective in this role.
Why such a character was created and why Mr Bachchan played the character are not objections which one may cherish after buying the ticket.
Then he has problem with the premise of the film. He is not right audience for the film,
Film’s trailer has not tried to keep him in the dark. Trailer was quite honest.
People may have reservations about story, script etc.
loading...
If Auro was shown as a normal kid then chances were there that Amol could not have got any interest in him while giving prize to him at school.
Just one example.
loading...
yes, and neither would the Media pick it up and nor would a I hate You mail sent, nor would there be any reply from Amol
loading...
Yes a whole series of events is dependent on that factor.
…
There have been many hindi films where children have arranged and manipulated a re-union of their parents who had chosen to live separately for any reason.
Or where a sick child has become a cause for this re-union.
Amitabh Bachchan playing a kid, though a Progeria patient, was the specific point with this project.
Film’s promotion campaign gave stress on this point so naturally people had a clear option to buy or leave the idea.
loading...
This just a specific detail ur pointing out. What about the bigger picture? And if progeria was used just to get the paa interested in the child, then it surely proves that progeria was a gimmick. The point you made was not ‘just one example’, it was the only use of progeria done in the plot. I’m asking why doesn’t a movie, which shouted from the rooftops that AB sr played a 12 yr old with progeria, didn’t even once gave us an insight in the complications and consequences of accelerated aging (Not technicalities of the disease, but the phsycological impact). The movie doesn’t justify AB sr putting himself on line by playing Auro.
loading...
Do you have any prototype how such a boy may behave or can show psychological impact?
If it is clear then other things can be discussed.
While considering it, as in another comment you have focussed on Anand, How Rajesh Khanna’s character showed psychological impact of cancer on him?
loading...
RK,
The trailer tells me that the film is about a child with progeria and his relationship with his Paa. Till the last half an hour it was all Maa. Half the movie Auro doesn’t know that he is his paa, the other half Paa doesn’t know Auro is his son. And you tell the movie delivered on what it promised?!!! come on!! THe focus was never on Auro with progeria. It was only on the child raised by a single mother whose father is a politician, and this is bieng very generous. In fact I would say, it was never on the child, it was always on the parents dillemas.
loading...
As far as I can recall, Amol and Auro meet each other in the very begining and soon after this meeting, Vidya sees Amol on TV and goes into flashback and she and her mother and through them audience also get to know the relationship between a father and a son. Biological relation is established and rest of the film deals with when and how Auro and Amol will also get to know about it and how they will take it.
Majority of films work like this only. You may have problem with this arrangement but I did not face this particular problem.
This is prerogative of a filmmaker how he wants his characters to behave. If he likes to show his character, who is suffering from a fatal disease not to take any deep impact of the disease on his normal functioning then he is free to show his character as a lively and jovial person. When it is unbearble on physical level then his character will endure what can not be cured but when attack is not there he may behave like any other person of his age.
Cricket scene may help a bit in this theory.
loading...
Ur comment
“Do you have any prototype how such a boy may behave or can show psychological impact?
If it is clear then other things can be discussed.
While considering it, as in another comment you have focussed on Anand, How Rajesh Khanna’s character showed psychological impact of cancer on him? ”
I’m talking about pshycological impact of death, not the disease. Thats what the part of my point is, Auro could have cancer too. Progeria was just a gimmick. At least accept that!!! Ok lets give that leeway to Balki. Ok Auro has progeria, and he doesn’t want to explore accelerated aging, but at the end of day he is dying!! Why the focus of the movie was never on Auro’s impending death?? Was it not important for the characters?? Was Abhishek-vidya reunion more importanat than Auro’s life??
..
Ok lets assume u r right about no fixed prototype of behaviour of a dying 12 year old. But what about the other characters?? Now if u ask for prototype for other’s behaviour, I would say Anand. What is baffling and annoying me is complete sidelining the issue of Auro’s death.
loading...
Gaurang,
You are doubting the intentions of Director R Balki.
How you and I may know that R Balki had intentions to use Progeria as a gimmick in his film?
Why it can not happen that he got excited by the idea of using AB as a Progeria affected young boy. This became the nucleus of his project?
(Finished project may appeal to you or it may not)
Why it can not happen that R Balki thought that like Anand, disease will also not create a gloomy atmosphere all around on a 24×7 basis?
There are such films focussing more on depressive atmosphere. Why all should make similar kind of films.
As mentioned in a previous comment Do Kaliyan deals with the story where two twin sisters act to re-unite their separately living parents.
Kaash, deals with a dying kid, whose disease and death help in the re-union of his parents.
Karan Johar’s KKHH shows that a girl fulfils the last desire of her dead mother and arranges for a re-union of her father with his college time friend.
Fiction is a limitless area.
It appeals to one or not is a different matter.
Till now you have been showing objections to the story and its different parts.
Your focus has been on what you find missing there from the story.
or What you think should have been there. or What treatment you wanted to see with such a story.
Weak points based on “what is shown” can also be interesting.
Whatever story was chosen by Director, could he give good treatment to his chosen story?
Visually weak scenes, weak performances in particular scenes etc?
loading...
And to have a consistent approach perhaps you may need to check your stake on which you are assessing Paa, AB, Auro and R Balki’s decisions and socalled intentions.
For example, was it a gimmick for Mahesh Bhatt to select Anupam Kher in the role of a retired teacher?
Anupam Kher was around 30 years old then. He definetely did not look like a 60 years old man in a convincing manner as other actor, who played his friend’s (Bhau) character, looked. Perhaps another actor really was a 60 years old man.
But there was no lacking in the portrayal of Anupam Kher and after so many years this still remains his one of the best performances.
There were many good actors who could fit in that age group which was required to play that character but Mahesh Bhatt selected Anupam Kher. His prerogative as a director. People liked it. Though possibility remains that perhaps there were audiences who did not like Anupam Kher’s very good performance in Saaransh.
loading...
(Now if u ask for prototype for other’s behaviour, I would say Anand).
I guess you are entering in the territory of those things which are prerogatives of a director or a story teller.
Anand is dying- do all the characters like AB, Ramesh Deo and his wife, Johnny Walker, Lalita Pawar, AB’s lover, behave in a same manner at that moment or before that final moment?
They all are sad but their way of expressions can differ from each other.
How one can question if R Balki decided that his characters will not cry all the time?
People become ready to do anything defying their own perceptions,ideas and ideals when they are standing near someone who is going to die any second. As AB is shown to do in Anand. An allopathic doctor runs to get some Homeopathic medicine saying that miracles do happen while his doctor friend Ramesh Deo does not believe in it and does not do any such thing.
Characters are puppets in the hands of a director or story teller. He will decide how characters of his story will behave.
There are many scenes which show in a subtle way a constant fear which lives with Vidya and her mother and later with Amol also.
Veeru cries loudly in Sholay when he loses his dear friend Jai. Vijay sheds tears silently in Trishul when his mother dies. Both takes impress many audiences.
And last rainy scene in Paa?
How do you deal with stories published in Reader’s Digest Patients related stories always try to give an emotional strength to the readers. They may work always with some people and to others they may appeal depending on their personal conditions. If they are suffering from any kind of sorrow or disease then they may appeal to them more intensely.
loading...
Well agree to an extent that the film was more about Maa than Paa. Perhaps Balki envisioned it as a story of father-son relationship, but most of the audience found it about mother-son.
It happens most of the times. According to Govind Nilhani, Ardh Satya was made to depict father-son relationship, but for most of the audiences it was more about cop-politicians relationship.
loading...
Did not we agree when Dharamji said,”It is not age, It is mileage that matters”.
It is not footage, it is intensity and turning points that matter
Paa is about relationships.
Maa-son,
Maa-daughter (two very intense scenes- First when AN asks VB, she wants child or not, second when VB shouts at AN, what she must tell to Auro and what she is hiding and AN says…..
Auro-Amol => Son- father
Auro- friends specially Vishnu
Auro- girl at his school
Amol-Vidya
Amol- his father
Politician- public
Death-Life
…
Sanjay Dutt makes Naam his film.
Manoj Bajpai makes Satya his film.
Young boys and girls live for 20-25 years with their parents but once they fall in love that period of their life becomes a love story though they continue paying attention to other relationships also but this love affair takes maximum intensity and becomes a deciding factor at that time.
loading...
RK,
What do you think about the structure of the movie
You say “Anand is dying- do all the characters like AB, Ramesh Deo and his wife, Johnny Walker, Lalita Pawar, AB’s lover, behave in a same manner at that moment or before that final moment?”
Come on RK I never inferred they behaved in same manner. I was just giving an example of people’s behaviour in presense of someone else’s impending death. And that, the focus of the movie and it’s characters was on the dying person.
Arey RK saab, you yourself gave examples of so many behaviour patterns of characters around dying person. What are the patterns explored in Paa? Frankly speaking I could see none. The plot point which I can think of which is hinging on the impending death, is that Maa has no other option but to tell her son about his real father. But that too remains as a plot point, it doen’t come out organically from the character.. are you getting what I mean?? I will ask you the same ques which I asked An Jo, did you get moist eyed when Auro dies in the end? If u did than all these arguments are running in subjective parallels.
Ok so lets keep the feelings, the behavious and death aside. Lets come to something objective, really objective
- Amol meets Auro
- Maa comes to know Auro is actually interacting with his father who left her when she got pregnant
- (Interval point) Maa tells Auro that Amol is his father.
- Maa tells auro not to tell Amol that he is his son
- Auro interacts with Amol, not once telling him the truth but teases Amol with the truth
- Auro lays on the deathbed. Amol comes to meet and sees Maa and realises Auro is his son
- Auro makes his last wish that Amol and Maa to get married (symbollically)
- Auro dies
Check the plot before the interval, it has so little to say!! I thought pre- interval movie was not moving at all. In fact post interval too the real drama starts 20-25 mins before the end when Amol sees Maa at Auro’s death bed. That was the point which I had expected sooner, because the fact that Amol is Auro’s dad is comveyed to the audience at the very start. and it takes the movie about 45 mins to 1 hour to make Auro know that Amol is his Dad, and another 45 mins to make Amol know that Auro is his Dad. I found that very stretched. What is your take on this
loading...
Gaurang,
your point about structure. I am writing inside the brackets ( )
- Maa tells auro not to tell Amol that he is his son
(She does not say it. She says to him that he has to decide whether he wants to be a hiccup of his biological father’s life or not and he says NO. That may satisfy your next point also why he does not reveal his real identity to Amol. But that self imposed restriction may not stop a 12 years old boy to enjoy silently the company of his father and he likes him as a person also.
Different films can have different treatment to a subject. Paa shows that neither Vidya keeps any hatred toward Amol nor she instils such a negative sense about Amol in Auro. She simply states the facts to him. What people feel inside and what they actually say are two different things as far as emotions are concerned. A mother, who is a medical doctor also and who knows very well since the birth of her son that he will not live longer, may try to fulfil almost every demand of her son. Film shows this through the behaviour of Vidya and her mother. Though nothing is said in an obvious manner. It is shown in a subtle manner.
Auro will die soon, this fact affects the atmosphere around him at all the places and his desires are respected most. His presence brings the changes in the behaviour of Vidya with respect to Amol also. There is a difference between what she thinks about her relationship with Amol and relationship between Amol and Auro. She did not arrange or manipulate for a meeting between Auro and Amol but she did not stop Auro forcibly also from meeting Amol after their accidental meeting at school.
She may say anything on surface but deep down such mothers may have a desire that her dying child should meet his father (if Father himself has no restrictions or problems).
If Amol had married Vidya then film could have been different as then it could have become a journey of a couple dealing with the Progeria affected son.
Like Milli is. Ashok Kumar and Milli’s friends have to see sick days of Milli.
Paa is a different film.
Why there are no scenes in the film which could have satisfied you and your problems are related with script.
Subjectivity about film comes if we focus on the quality of What is shown. And from your side it is not coming
I would say, Paa is a film which is against corruption, abortion and extremely cynical views about anything, and Paa is a film which is based on a loose structure and many characters present in the story are given footage and it is not focussed entirely on one character in a family only. A physically sick boy is there but life around him is given more importance and his sickness has been accepted as a fact as his mother and grandmother and his friends and Principal and teachers, (in short whoever knows him personally) all have accepted this fact.
Vidya is to fulfil Auro’s likings. Doctor says her clearly that physically it is too dangerous for Auro to attend the school anymore but she says that she can not stop Auro from going to school because he loves it. He has to die but why to take away whatever he likes to do.
He has a body of an old man but not mind. His mind is as curious about anything and everything as mind of majority of kids of his age.
I can write directly on Paa but I am waiting for you to write the real issues, hence many examples.
For example Film protests Abortion and it is given a metaphysical meaning also.
If you get this connection towards the end then perhaps you can enjoy a bit more the treatment, R Balki has given to the subject.
loading...
Re: Anand and Paa and different behaviours of characters. If you like you may object in Anand also. When he is so ill why he is so much interested in fixing a love affair between AB and Sumita Sanyal?
And people having only 6 months remaining may act differently than what is shown through Rajesh Khanna’s character.
But that Zindadili of severly sick patient is main thing that appeals in the film.
No?
loading...
Gaurang Your last paragraph
(….post interval too the real drama …the end when Amol sees Maa at Auro’s death bed. …because ..Amol is Auro’s dad is comveyed to the audience at the very start. and it takes the movie about 45 mins to 1 hour to make Auro know that Amol is his Dad, and another 45 mins to make Amol know that Auro is his Dad. I found that very stretched.)
You mean you do not differentiate between two different things?
-First what an audience knows and
- second what characters of the story, shown, know?
Does that mean, you never enjoyed any film where a murder was shown in the very begining and audiences knew since first scene who was the murderer but characters of the film got to know it in the second last scene, after 2 hours and 25 minutes only?
What about a general scene where a character A is walking forward and audiences can see that a man is following him but this character A can not know it because he has not seen backward.
And all the films which are shown through the Point of view of director show these things.
Hindi films alone may give countless examples of these things
All lost and found films are like this only. Audiences know since begining who is who and who is related to whom but these characters don’t know.
This emotional build up acts in the favour of film. Film is not always a destination but that beautiful journey through which we and characters reach at that destination.
What would you say to Humraz (BR Chopra), Aradhana, Dil Kya Kare, Masoom etc where you as an audience know the relationships between characters but characters (atleast few) have no idea about it.
Do you always know in real life also who is cheating on you among your so called friends?
You can not know it on your own at a time when it is happening because you do not have a arial position from where you could see all the happenings.
You are part of the happening and therefore your vision and understanding is limited at that point.
You may get a feel but you still may be clue less.
It may not be an accurate example but if You see Big Boss then you as an audience know who is against whom but people living inside the house may not know it at that time. They may get some clue based on their understanding about human psychology and human behaviour and how strong their natural instinct is, but normally they get to know through others or through TV clippings.
loading...
Guarang,
(- Auro lays on the deathbed. Amol comes to meet and sees Maa and realises Auro is his son)
If you recall properly the scene then perhaps you can help in knowing that if Scene shows that Amol, after seeing Vidya sitting besides the bed of Uaro, realises that Auro is his son, or he realises that Auro is related with Vidya?
Does scene show clearly anything? If I recall correctly it leaves audience to guess.
Next Amol and Vidya were shown sitting on stairs outside of building and it is possible that Vidya told him there only that Auro is her son and he is his son also.
The expressions which Amol gives after seeing Vidya inside the room could be expressions of finding her there after 12-13 years. He knew she was studying Medical and she could be a doctor taking care of Auro.
No?
I mean scene does not give a direct message and it is open to interpretaion because dialogue has not been used!
There are many such things which may bring different messages to different people.
loading...
You didn’t answer my question. Did u feel moist eyed when Auro died?
loading...
“Subjectivity about film comes if we focus on the quality of What is shown.”
From the onset I’m arguing with you on WHAT is shown, I never commented on the quality of the scenes. I was more on quality of the films structure, why did the film unfold in a certain way, or why certain situations were shown and certain not. But then u counter argued that “things mean differently to diffrent people” thus inferring to subjectivity and “you are entering in the territory of those things which are prerogatives of a director or a story teller.” thus inferring that we should not comment on what is shown, just on how it is shown. Doesn’t the base of any film starts with WHAT is being shown, and shouldn’t any film critic analyse that? The HOW part can be subjective, but WHAT can be debated pretty objectively. I started that way, but you countered by, picking my point and then raving on about How it is shown. So you converted my argument to subjective. (Even when I jotted down the structure you started responding on the treatment, subtelety of scenes and emotions) So I saw our argument going nowhere. You give examples about some great hindi movies, but that in turn lowered my respect for Paa, coz then you opened the doors to WHAT Paa could have been, and I could now see how effective things could have been done. So we were going in parallels. So I thought why beat around the bush and play critics. Lets come to the bottomline, Did you feel moist eyed for Auro. Did the movie make you feel about Auro? Finally Auro has to move you? Aint it? If it moved you, you will go any lenghts to explain me the reason. It didn’t move me so I’ll of course go great lengths to try to explain you why?
.
I’ll chart my thought process for you.
In first half, I started to feel restless, I was like why is the film going nowhere. There is such a beautiful premise with ample scope of drama setup, but still the movie is dabbling in preachy and pointless scenes.
Then at the end of the film, when I saw Abhishek entering the hospital room, I said to myself “Oh fuck, now thats something, that is a moment” the film gathers momentum.
Then when Auro dies I felt hardly anything. I asked Why? I then noticed that I was more into what Amol is thinking and what Vidya is thinking. And then slowly I started tracking back, and I realised WTF? the movie never focussed on Auro or even Auro-Amol. And then I was just pissed about the whole gimmick Balki planned. And then I started commenting on PFC posts.
.
So now as you know how my thought process triggered, u are free to dismiss it if you find it skewed.
.
Look, I agree with An Jo, I agree with you when you note down all the subtelities, all the emotional nuances, raves about Maa’s character. When you note down these things, I have nothing to counter argue, coz these were not my problems in the first place. When do people sit and note down all the nuances and subtelities, when they are moved by the film. When they feel strongly positive about a film. Then they inquire and dig deep into what made the film work so strongly for them. I’m stuck at the first hurdle. It didn’t move me in any profound way. (I mean in terms of the whole movie as an entity, individual scenes worked pretty well) And then when I inquire or dig deep I find problems at the very basic levels. If I’m not able to get over these how will I able to argue on the nuances.
I hope you understand my side!! U may dismiss it outright but don’t go on explaining each scene of the movie! Thoda toh respect karo yaar meri
loading...
“You mean you do not differentiate between two different things?
-First what an audience knows and
- second what characters of the story, shown, know?”
Bas point pakdo aur dhajjiyaan udao. Saamne waale ko kaise izzat se sophisticatedly neecha dikhaya jaaye. Yehi agenda lagta hai tumhara. If there is not even a hint of respect, then you should outright stop the conversation. Why going on and on Sir?
.
But anyways, to restore some respect in myself I’ll try and counter-argue. Arey RK saab, the film has to keep in mind what the audience knows and the characters know. The film has to work that way. If the film wants its characters not to know a basic thing (Why I say basic, coz, the movie is supposedly about that thing – father-son-son-faather realtionship. Sorry RK saab, I’m still not able to get over that gimmick) then it has to have enough drama to last for 2 hours, which Paa sorely lacked. Now let me take your route by taking other film examples
Johnny Gaddar. audience knew who the gaddar is but the characters are unawre till the end. Now just notice the twists and turns despite the film’s disadvantage. It keeps you hooked. Here I’m noway trying to infer that Paa should have twists and turns. Every movie has some hooks, In paa it should have been some drama points. But as we can see the premise of Paa itself had only few drama points and most of the points were in the final 20-25 mins and thus those final minutes, though hooked me, remained as a emotional mess for me. And Auro the main character was lost in all of it.
If I was to structure the premise, I would have the final 20-25 minutes as the interval points and then spend time on blossoming the father-son relationship (Come on yaar the movie is supposed to be about this. Ok sorry I wanted it to be about this). And then it could have easily worked the Anand way in the end.
loading...
You totally dismiss my line of argument on structure without actually dismissing it (in a roundabout fashion, taking some high stand).
I mean I jotted down story points to find out your take on structure and what u do?? U expand each nd every point and argue with me on the wording and the validity of a point!!! this is not done. I guess you are on a fault finding spree in my arguments. Its getting difficult for me
loading...
Gaurag, a simple answer – it’s the journey of the boy till he ‘officially and respectfully’ is allowed to call his father ‘ PAA.’
loading...
hmmm.. Now I see what Balki was trying to focus on, but sadly that didn’t come out of the movie for me :notsure:
loading...
It seems that the last paragraph has been written for me as if reading my mind and reluctance to watch the movie in theatre except that I have nothing against AB or his family. Will probably wait for DVD if my mind doesn’t change in next few days. :notsure:
loading...
Film’s strengths and weaknesses will educate aspiring screenplay writers and directors so students of cinema have to see it from that point of view. DVD, DTH, TV, anything will be good. It is emotions based film like Anand and thus it can bind your attention through any medium. There is nothing earth shattering that it should be watched immediately avoiding all other important jobs.
Film is not so great that it will change the way hindi films are made but it is not so weak either that a film lover should avoid it. Somethings are new and it is a positive attempt. If it does not take hindi cinema’s progress ahead then it is not a backward attempt also.
Considering Cheeni Kum and Paa it seems that R Balki may complete a trilogy where a kid’s death remains an important part of the whole plot.
…
Amitabh Bachchan is the only actor in contemporary hindi cinema whose films are affected by many other factors than his performance in the films. He has to face opposition because of people’s reservations about Aishwarya, Abhishek, Jaya Bachchan, Amar Singh and stories about his own off screen life and his khari khoti padhane wali blogging to counter the media’s irresponsible activities etc. And then fanatic fans of 1-2 relatively younger stars are there who open the front against him.
His steady performances are hardly judged without any biases. Not his performances but his personality, success, busy life etc become the bases for his opponents to criticise his performances which remain mostly better than other actors present in the films.
loading...
And RK one more thing, why can’t Balki show children as children, why does he have to make the children talk like grown-ups, why do they have to wisecrack all the time. Sure, they result into laughs, but only temperory laughs, it doesn’t make the child’s character grow on you. It rather knocks out all the credibility out of the the child depiction.
U know, when did Auro’s character grow on me, when he plays video games, when he has packed his bags and is waiting for Amol to come recieve him, not when he is wisecracking.
Ok I would give leeway to balki to extract laughs from Vishnu, who abuses his father on the phone, coz he is not the focus of the movie, and not any character that has to be developed. But Auro has grow on you.
loading...
That is a general problem with films but sometimes few kids work and people digest their onscreen beahviour. e.g Girl in School of Rock who says to JB, that groupies are sluts as per her mom.
12-13 years old youngesters can be quite humrous, spontaneous in reactions and sharp minded. With so much exposure through Net, TV etc, they can not be defined by a single definition. Many such kids, even younger ones, can be seen displaying their wit on many reality shows on TV.
They are learning things earlier and faster than what their elder siblings used to learn when they were at this age.
There can be many weaknesses on script level. There can be inconsistencies in the characterization. But thing is through visual different things will appeal to different people. Things which look appealing to you may create problems for others.
Unlike you others may like a humrous Auro and these scenes, Video game, waiting for Amol etc, which have appealed you, may look odd because now he behaves like he is younger than his age.
Then there is a flexible attitude where we accept that human behaviour can not be understood in a fixed manner and things are quite flexible there and even elders can show different types of traits at different times and it depends on their mood at that time.
While focussing on emotional quotient in a fiction, creator may pay attention to bring in the required effect and what should normally happen in real world may not appeal him much.
loading...
AB has been facing a lot of flak for doing the kind of roles he has been doing. But i wonder which other roles he could have done. Also, i do think he is a workaholic.
One more thing that seems to work against him is that he doesn’t fall in the scheme of a lot of young talented mostly indie film directors. His persona looms so large in every frame he is that instead of getting involved in story, one starts judging AB.
If Movies of AB has to work, film makers need to have a different approach. The task is not just to make a good movie but also how to present AB. R Balki seems to be doing well in this regard.
loading...
True, new directors have to use him properly. They need content in their script to justify his presence in the film so that his talent can be used properly. He can not be used as a decorative piece.
loading...
is there something called a spoiler alert or what!
loading...
http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/movies/review/14149/index.html
(03.12.2009)
http://passionforcinema.com/paa-movie-review-zara-heart-ke/
(04.12.2009)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paa_(film).
Was created on 4th itself.
Those who were interested in reading they read many things about the film within 24 hours of its release.
And then comments were generated on the posts made everywhere.
I guess Black gogs may stop one to see properly.
And not all spaces are Ok to fulfil a fetish to shoot one liners.
Save energy for better things.
loading...
kinda guessed bollywood hungama would be a nice benchmark for you.
loading...
Tushar Shukla,
Whatever suits your pleasure!
There is no restriction on self- pleasure kind of activities anywhere.
Benchmarks do change.
Earlier people used to read posts to get lyrics of hindi film’s songs and now when Hindilyrics type websites have come into the existence people get the required material in a solid form and they save energy and time.
loading...
Great review. Keep it up.
loading...
Thanks vivgup
loading...
Just one question to the reviewer? What was this film originally about? My naive senses failed me in understanding this simple thing.
loading...
The None,
-There are films which an audience can understand while watching them,
-There are films which an audience can understand after films are finished, because there are many things which are though shown in the end but they have some deeper connection with the things shown in the very begining.
Paa comes in the first category. If you have watched it and you are not satisfied with what you saw then I am afraid what others may think what was this film originally about may not satisfy you.
Moreover whoever has not read the original script, how he can say what was this film originally about?
Though your question looks simple but it is not. Maybe somebody may help you. I can try if I read your detailed views and confusions about the film.
loading...
I don’t know if its only me or the director didn’t know what he was doing. One moment, its a film about good politicians, bad politicians, next moment its a film about how the media affects society. Yet again it becomes a social statement against bearing children out of wedlocks and then it goes on to preach that one must always use condoms. Not to forget the stereotypes that the Indian woman, however strong she might be ultimately goes back to her man and that every Indian child that is not normal(in the most generic sense and not derogatory) is the fruit of an illegitimate affair. Am I seeing too much into it? :witsend:
loading...
Director and his film both are completely failed in your case if you could not connect with the doings of characters.
Amol always goes back to people who have made him an MP. He makes a connection with them. It may not happen anymore in Indian politics and society but director shows that it should happen again.
Time has gone when films used to be based on a story tightly focussed on some points only, now most of the time films are based on a loose structure but they have some connections with the characters. Now stories may jump to the next restive point without filling the gap between two points. Many things are left considering that an audience does not need to be told everything and he may connect the dotes himself.
…
If Vidya Balan does not accept Amol in the end then she would have appeared as a strong woman?
Those who forget the past and move on are weaker people?
If Amol had married in those 12-13 years, would have it been possible for Vidya to take him back into her life?
loading...
Nice review! Loved your point about same person depicting different maturity levels regardless of age. That is quite a profound thought.
loading...
Thanks KK.
Reading this name here after a long time. Though you must be a different KK.
loading...
loading...
and you have been reading all of them !
loading...
Gaurang,
(You didn’t answer my question. Did u feel moist eyed when Auro died?)
That scene was satisfactorily convincing.
loading...
Film does not lose anything if one decides not to watch it rather he will miss something good if he does not watch it. It does not harm an audience’s cinematic sensibilities but satisfies them.
Dont give sweeping statements like this. I, for one, would have missed it if I knew what was in it. And I wouldnt regret it one bit.
loading...
Amit,
Regret ?
PFC is changing very fast. Your comment gives a strong support to this impression.
By the way did not get “I, for one, would have missed it if I knew what was in it”.
Without watching the film how you would have known what was in it?
loading...
Gaurang,
I think if I am responding your comments in detail and spending time then I am giving you full respect. If I avoid you and your comments then only I take a high stand and somewhere insult you and your presence here.
If I write
“Gaurang, you do not differentiate between ….” then I show you my opinion/impression about your way of thinking.
If I write
“You mean you do not differentiate …?” then from my side I am asking you if that is the case.
Weakness in writing is a case with more than 90 hindi films out of 100. Even films of directors who are writers also suffer from this lacking.
And after writing about it once or twice on a thread, one has to move on to second level and that is, how the chosen material is shown.
You have not liked the film, so when you interact with others then somewhere you have scope that perhaps you missed something. Because those who have liked the film will not start disliking it after reading your points. Chances are with those who did not like it earlier. They have possibility of a change in their stand.
Re: Structure, if you do not quote a scene rightly from a film which is seen just 2-3 days ago then there remains a possibility that person reading it may think that you have not observed the scene in its right context.
If after thinking and writing so much about a film you find that you see no change in your stand on the film then you should be happy that you have got firm views about a film and you should be very happy if you think your observations are very accurate.
It is immaterial what others think about your take.
This is not possible that anybody’s any and every kind of views will get 100% acceptance by others in one go only.
It is possible that if you visit this whole discussion again after some days or a month, you may find that discussion was about the film and not about you or your views.
loading...
Though it is quite an old joke, atleast 20 years old but got it again few days back in my email. Hope you like it.
…………
Nisar kaise hua?
To know it watch the following video and pay attention to the mukhda of the song.
loading...
Rk,
Fair enough!
loading...
(Hope to) See you (here) after Feb. 1st 2010.
loading...