Cavite and Aamir
There’s been a lot of talk about Cavite and Aamir. So I decided to watch them both. First, Cavite. The next day, Aamir. At the end of it, I wanted to dissect both and figure out why I reacted the way I did to each. So here it is.
*Warning: This whole article is one big spoiler. Consider yourself alerted.*
Both stories are about a regular guy who heads back home (in the case of Cavite, to the Philippines, in Aamir, to Mumbai, India). When they land, they are not greeted by their families but instead with the news that the families have been kidnapped. To secure their release, they must follow the instructions of the baddie terrorist.
Both films give us enough of a background on the protagonists.
Cavite - The film spends some time showing us the depressingly dull life Adam lives as a security guard. His father dies in a bus explosion in Manila and as he heads home, he learns that his girlfriend is going to abort his child, driving him further into depression. He half-heartedly tries to overdose in an airport bathroom. That’s his mental state as he lands in the Philippines for his father’s funeral. Why spend so much time on the background? Well - wait till we finish this exercise.
Aamir - The scene with the immigration agent is very good - it tell us who Aamir his, his occupation (doctor in the UK) and also tees up the conflict to come - Aamir is returning home, but even there he’s treated as somewhat of a suspect due to his religion.
Where the films are starkly different is how they deal with the antagonist.
Cavite - We never see the antagonist. He’s only a voice throughout the whole film. I really liked this. Terrorists are nameless, faceless people and Cavite kept to that theme. His voice could at times be soothing - almost nice to poor Adam - and at other times, cruel and unforgiving. You don’t get a sense for who he is. Only that he is powerful, is watching everything all the time, and will have no compunction in making Adam pay if he disobeys. We hear Adam’s mother and sister, but again, we don’t see them either.
Aamir - We see the terrorist - a solid man, requisitely bald and with a mustache. We get glimpses of his kid and his spouse, in what seems to be large, oldish house with high ceilings. The message that even outwardly ordinary folks can be terrorists come across nicely. However, we never see Aamir’s family or hear them even though they are “in the living room”.
While both antagonists get their victims to do their bidding, the approach is quite different. Both send their victims off into the unsavory parts of the city to impress upon them the plight of their Muslim brethren, but the cruelty levels differ considerably.
Cavite - From the beginning, the terrorist makes it clear that he’s in charge. He knows everything about Adam. In an early scene, he tells Adam to pick up a pack of cigarettes that he’s placed there and inside Adam finds his sister’s thumb. As he hurls it away in fear and disgust, the terrorist makes it quite clear that there are consequences for disobedience. Surefire way to instill fear, panic and implicit obedience. Of course Adam, now shaken, follows his every word. But even here, Adam pushes his limits. He tests the terrorists to see what he can get away with and sometimes (like in the case of looking at the bomb - see below), he goes too far. This is what anyone would do - see how much they can get away with.
Aamir - This terrorist also knows everything about his victim, but there is no real punishment when Aamir pauses instead of following implicitly. When Aamir looks at the police station, a guy appears and says “don’t even think about it”, but there’s zero consequence. No little sibling even gets spanked! Besides the initial video of the family in a living room, Aamir doesn’t ask for any more proof that they are alive. The only other time we see the kidnapped family is when Aamir imagines them being tortured. The only hold over Aamir is his family and we never hear them? And more importantly, never see them hurt even in a small way? That was a bit weak for my taste.
Oh, and why on earth does it take Aamir *at least* three rings of the cell phone before he ever picks it up?! If a terrorist has your family, wouldn’t you pick up the phone as soon as the first ring starts? Wouldn’t you stop in the middle of the street, drop everything to get the phone immediately? That never happens here - he’s always la-la-la, let me finish what I’m doing and get to the phone after it has rung three times. Argh! That little nit drove me crazy as I watched it. Primarily because this is a thriller - build the tension throughout the movie instead of just at the end… I wanted to see more tension, to see Aamir more afraid and panicked.
Aamir, as a character, also seems somewhat spineless to me. He is an obedient puppy dog. In fact, there is a scene where the terrorist taps a toy monkey on the head and it claps. This is supposed to symbolize his control over Aamir. Aamir is just too much of a milk toast for my liking - he’s pretty spineless through the whole movie. The only exception to this is when he thinks he’s lost the suitcase and goes in after the baddies with a big pipe and beats the crap out of them. That level of desperation was perfect. (As an aside, the music in the scene was also excellent.)
In terms of the “why me?” question, again, the films differ in how they deal with it.
Cavite - The terrorist tells Adam that his father ripped them off and then fled the country. To pay for that, his father was forced to detonate a bomb on a bus (yes, that’s the father from the opening scene.) He wasn’t an innocent victim, he was the bomber! Now, this is the next step. Adam will complete paying the debt.
Aamir - Why Aamir is the chosen one is a bit vague, but sufficient. The terrorist alludes to “look at how much your fellow muslims around the world contribute” and to the London bombing and Aamir running away from that. But it is not clearly spelled out why it is Aamir and not some other poor sap who got off the flight. This didn’t bother me too much because in reality terror victims can be chosen very randomly and there is enough allusion to cover it.
The mid-sections of both films feel a touch bloated.
Cavite - There’s a scene where badman specifically has someone killed in front of Adam to further instill fear - this scene felt forced. Was the only point to scare him? Why? He’s already very scared. Is it to show that killing is also as easy as cutting off a finger? I think Adam already got that. Then there’s the whole “swap” the bag issue. In Cavite, Adam’s bag is stolen by a little street urchin and Adam disobeys instructions and chases him. The urchin still gets away and Adam is brought back under control. Then, he’s asked to go a home where two little boys are held hostage, take their picture to their father, the bank manager, and get cash in exchange. This cash is then taken to a cockfighting arena and swapped for… his bag! Ok, fine, he needed to get the cash his father stole, but why steal his bag elaborately? Just tell him - hand over your bag to the kid. He’s not in any position to argue, is he?
Aamir - the whole “the suitcase has money, oh no it is a bomb” thing is a bit wasteful. I agree with Dabba that this wasted a ton of time and the movie did not progress much the whole time he’s chasing after the suitcase. And all the chasing around - what for? Just to do the switch? Damn - there had to be an easier way! Have a junior badman follow him to the bathroom and offer to hold the suitcase and do the swap there. If he’s not going to check it again after not having it in his possession for half an hour, why would he check it again after a pee-break? Then again, why tell him it is even money? Why not just lock the suitcase and put a bomb in it to start with? Does the terrorist need to kidnap a whole family just to have Aamir drop off money? The whole suitcase swap was a good chunk of film time…
The reveal of the bomb is also handled very differently in both films
Cavite - Once Adam gets his bag back, he immediately wants to know what’s in it because it feels different. Terrorist threatens him not to open it. Adam can’t help it. He has to open it. He has to know what he’s carrying. He opens the bag and freaks out that it is a bomb. Right then his cell phone dies. His panic is evident as mild-mannered Adam snatches a cell phone away from a lady bystander and then calls the terrorist back. The terrorist has Adam walk over to a street where a gaggle of kids are hunched over… Adam’s mother’s tongue! The terrorist cut off his mother’s tongue as punishment for the disobedience. It is very freaky - Adam breaks down and begs. It is powerful - the complete and total ownership of Adam even though what he has to do is so terrible.
Aamir - See above for the suitcase runaround. Aamir discovers it is a bomb in the final scene. He’s on the bus with his suitcase. Terrorist calls him and tells him to leave the suitcase there and get off. Only at that point does he realize it is a bomb. The only issue is that there is little to no time in the movie for Aamir to be conflicted. The ending is rushed.
With regard to the ending itself, I have no real quibble with how either film ended even though they are polar opposites of each other.
Cavite - Adam places the bomb in a church. Then the enormity of what he’s doing hits him. He refuses to leave. Again the terrorist points out that he has no choice but to obey him and commands him to leave. He does. He’s then given instructions on how to find his family . He’s then back to his life in the US - we see him talking to his sister on the phone; his girlfriend tells him she had an abortion because she couldn’t stand to have a muslim baby. He’s back in the reality of his life - the same shit as before, but now he has to deal with being a mass murder. Whamo!
Aamir - Aamir is really left only two choices by the terrorist. Let the people die or die himself. In the former, he would have done as commanded and would get his family back. But once he decides not to kill the innocent passengers, he doesn’t really have much of a choice - if he doesn’t detonate the bomb on the bus and he lives, he’s likely going to see his family be killed, so the only option he has is to kill himself. Now the issue here is that Aamir never tries to defy the terrorist before. He never tests the waters on how far he can go. This is the first time he ever disobeys an instruction. I just wish he’d done some of that before - established he had a spine somewhere during the movie instead of just at the end.
That’s the story. Now let’s move on to style. Here the two movies could not be more different-
Cavite is clearly guerilla filmmaking. A large chunk of the film where the camera follows Adam is all handheld (not steady-cam). There is a lot of dialog where Adam is in the frame, but his words are in the form of a voiceover. Often one sentence is a voiceover where we see him (but his lips don’t move) and then he speaks the next sentence on camera. But somehow this works - it works partly because this is done consistently and so you get used to it and it works party because the dialog is so basic, so shredded down to the core that you know he has to ask that anyway.
The antagonist is only a voice. Again, this may have been done due to cost/production issues since it is so much easier to get all the dialog at once in a sound room, but it added to the movie - it made the antagonist the nameless, faceless puppetmaster terrorist. In fact, the voice was “uncredited” in the credits. It worked wonderfully.
There are scenes where the lighting is poor. There are scenes where the sound is crappy. Some of them are a bit jarring. But keep in mind that this film was made for pretty much no budget (under $10k!) The writers Ian Gamazon and Neill Dela Llana, take on every role in the cast and crew - Gamzon is the lead actor, they direct, produce, and crew. Most of the other actors are family. This film should be added in with Robert Rodriguez’s El Mariachi on how to make a solid movie with no money!
Aamir has excellent production values. This is a “real” movie. There are no sound issues. No lighting issues. There are some very nice touches - for example, as Aamir walks back through the market after picking up the red suitcase, we see a lot of red - a shot of the suitcase and the feet in the marketplace has red swirling sarees, red meat being cut, red handbag, red shirt, and several red buses all lined up in traffic. In the market, everyone there seems to look at him - they either know what’s going on and are silent spectators, or it is in his imagination. Nicely done.
The background scores in Aamir were also excellent across the board. I still remember a lot of it. The same can’t be said for Cavite…
And finally, we come to the big question - is Aamir a ripoff of Cavite? I don’t think so. Just look at all the stuff above - besides the premise, the two films handle almost everything else very differently. I believe Anurag when he says that Raj Kumar did not watch Cavite before he made Aamir. I also truly believe that two people can have a similar idea. You only have to look at the technology world to see that it is true - how many music recommendation sites are there? Tons. They all popped up at the same time because the idea itself is easy to have. How many blog comment systems are there? Several. All funded by competing venture capitalists. Again, one did not copy the other. People had similar ideas to fulfill a need they saw and at the end of the day, there are only so many ways that you can execute the idea.
It’s my belief that RK made the best story he could based on the idea he had. Apparently the producers also bought the remake rights to Cavite (just to be on the safe side) and in a classy move, RK thanks Gamzon and Dela Llana in the opening titles. I liked the movie. And in the Indian context where stark “message” movies without songs and dancing are hard to make and harder to market, it is a great step in the right direction.
This is a debut feature - I am a huge fan of debut features. I cheer for them because it is a sign of yet another person who’s overcome the odds to make his or her first film. So, congratulations, Raj Kumar - you’ve made something you should be very proud of!!
But… I liked Cavite more. Was it because I was amazed at what they accomplished despite the budget? Possibly. Was it because the style matched the genre and the story was pretty tight? Yes. Was it because I liked the ending - where the everyday victim does the everyday thing - no heroics, no histrionics? Yes. I just like gritty, real movies. And that’s what Cavite was.
At the end of the day though, they are both solid films - similar in the premise, but different in many ways. As I said up top, I just wanted to dissect both and figure out why I reacted the way I did to each. That’s why my title for this post is not Cavite vs. Aamir, but rather Cavite “and” Aamir.
Filed Under
Movies
Loading ...
50 Responses to “Cavite and Aamir”
Leave a Reply
(Ref smilies)
Our Comments Policy : The following kinds of comments are troll capped, blocked and/or commenter's identity reported publicly: Verbal abuse, personal attacks, hate statements, spam, trolls, advertising. Please assist us in keeping the comments clean. Use the contact form to let us know if you find unwarranted comments on PFC. Thank you.
-
Advertisement
-
- Random thoughts on Yuv
- Dev.D- Emosional Aty
- An Interview With Oye Lucky Lucky Oye’s Dolly - Richa C
- SORRY
- The story of Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi Reve
- Ada Music Review
- Ajay TG- Man With A Camera.
- Maharathi: Murder is in the Details (Zero Spoiler Review)
- Mukhbiir Versus Chamku – A toss-up between two lone rangers
- Random thoughts on Yuvvraaj
-
Advertisement
Hottest Today:
Recent Posts:
Nice one! Looks like the violence in ‘Cavite’ (tongue, finger) was smoothed over for ‘Aamir’. The same thing was done for ‘Zinda’ when compared to ‘Oldboy’…
A copy is a copy is a copy.
But premise is the main thing. You take the idea and ‘Indianize’ it. Thats what Hindi films have been doing for a long time. From what you say Partner, Har Dil Jo Pyaar Karega, Ek Ajnabee and whole lot of other movies are different because the treatment is different, because in India we don’t show tongues\fingers being cut off or sex scenes, because we have to have some songs. I don’t mind a movie being inspired or ‘Indianized’, but why deny it? And if it was an original idea, why buy the rights and thank them?
@D&C - The violence was quite jarring. Don’t think that kind of thing would have gone over well in India.
@Ravi - ah, but, if the Aamir screenplay was done before Cavite got released, then the whole premise issue being “borrowed” goes away, right? There are really lots of situations where people come up with the same/similar premise. Usually the person finishing the project 2nd just doesn’t release in that situation. Here they probably said screw it, it is a great idea and we had it independently, so why not…
It comes down to whether you believe they came up with the premise on their own. I do.
one more tight antagonist themed film I liked, was “Phonebooth”
I can believe the premise could have been the same coincidentally but what about the details like the stolen briefcase being swapped and all that…
The way I see it…The premise was the same. Coincidence. When Cavite released, somebody realised, shit our screenplay sucks…lets just buy the rights and change the movie.
Of course, my theories count for shit too…
Although I don’t agree with you on a couple of interpretations (which are quite subjective, so no point in arguing on that) overall I liked the way you dissected both movies.
One thing I am surprised you didn’t mention was the awkward and sub-par acting by Gamazon. (Yes, even after knowing that he’s not a professional actor.) I mean, his way of showing all of the following expressions was to say “f**k, f***k, f**k” while taking some steps back and forth: shock, disgust, fear, anger and confusion.
Regarding the end of the movie, I really liked Aamir. That was the only thing in the entire movie that he did on his own will — this made his a leader (i.e. aamir) of his fate in the true sense. However limited his options were he acted on his own gut and willingness.
Copy or no copy? I don’t know. The question I have is: inspiration or no inspiration? I think that Aamir clearly seem to have inspired from Cavite - so what pissed me off is how the makers of Aamir are not accepting that and trying to pass it around as an original script.
I agree that two people can come up with similar (or even same) ideas — but here even the execution & locations are same. You tried really hard to show how some things are different in two movies, but I guess one (the makers of Aamir) could have easily made some changes and added/removed stuff based on the milieu. No biggie.
Check out my thoughts on The End of Aamir: http://vishal12.wordpress.com/2008/06/17/what-i-took-away-from-aamir-movie/
Thanks Shripriya for bringing this comparision….looks quite clear that Aamir is a Copy of Cavite with almost all identical situations…dont understand what made you to defend Aamir at end
“I believe Anurag when he says that Raj Kumar did not watch Cavite before he made Aamir. I also truly believe that two people can have a similar idea.”
Emotions took lead than plain Reason.Good Post Nonethless!
@D&C - There is *no* similarity in briefcase stealing
Cavite - Adam’s backpack is stolen. He then gets back the same backpack with a bomb. There’s no cash/bomb nonsense. When he opens it, he pays dearly.
Aamir - He’s given a suitcase. Not his. I mean, come on, if someone has to place a bomb, they have to be given a bomb, right? And he can’t carry a bomb in public, can he? No, so it is a suitcase. Then all the cash/bomb stupidity ensues.
@Vishal - I really didn’t get into the acting in either movie. Just focused on story and how it was conveyed.
The rest is really not that similar
Again - if the premise is similar “terrorist controls normal dude to place a bomb”, there are elements that will be similar i.e. the terrorist will control the normal dude to er… place a bomb!
@Hermetic and @Vishal
Here’s the deal - I honestly started writing stuff down for myself. Just to deconstruct both movies. To figure out what was similar and what was different. What resulted was this piece and I decided to throw it up on the web.
Am I reading a different article from you guys?
Yes, the premise is the same.
The antagonist and how they are shown - night and day
The antagonists method of control over the victim - completely different
The things the victim has to do in the story - nothing similar
The family involvement - completely different
The characters - different (Adam is a peon at work but is quite aggressive with is terrorist; Aamir, as I said, is a milk toast and spend a lot of time gazing into space)
The pacing - very different
The shooting style - very different
When I looked at all this, I was like - wow, there’s really not much that is similar, is there?
I don’t know Anurag. I don’t know Raj Kumar. I’ve not met either of them. If my deconstruction had come up saying all the pieces were similar, I would have posted that.
Thanks for engaging in the discussion!
Oops, missed the comment
@kcp - haven’t seen it, but it is on my list for next week. thanks!
It is a bit funny that actually the author rips the film, gives us enough reasons to realise that Aamir is just a lousy rip and then even says that she believes (just because someone else said so) that the idea came to the Director prior to the release of Cavite.
I have to admit that I have not seen Cavite but did see Aamir. For that very reason I had no reasons to believe that Aamir was a ripped film (Though I did believe that the premise has been lifted from the Johnny Depp starrer ‘Nick of Time)
It can’t be a coincidence that I have the same views on Aamir as the author does. It is a bad meandering script, with a screenplay and a really lousy excuse for a 90 minute film. Hence we are stuck with a screenplay which does not have enough meat to even last for 10 minutes. The big difference, of course, is that the author liked the film and I didn’t.
Even in a simple film like ‘Nick of Time, where the son of the Protagonist is kidnapped and he is asked to kill the Governor in exchange, there is a logical flow of events and good reason for him to follow orders. In Aamir, there is no reason for doing anything at all … No intelligent screenplay there, just a stupid lamb like behaviour from the protagonist.
Thanks for the spoilers, it just opened my eyes that a lot of people go on stage and talk against dvd films but produce and direct such films themselves with the same excuse that one particular Director gives … that he has never seen or heard about ‘Three Men and a Baby’.
An idea or a premise can always be similar and can occur to the same person over centuries too maybe, but to write the same screenplay (right down to the bag), one has to be the other’s alter ego. I do have a suspicion though that the writer of Aamir may be the Filipino writer of Cavite in disguise.
Actually, we see so much crap and cliches that even the smallest deviant (however good or bad) gets some share of glory. Let’s toast to that … Amen!
@AT - feel free to call me Shripriya.
Er… I “ripped” both films. It’s called analysis or dissection or whatever else you want to call it. Rip. Fine.
I am just so freaking tired of people having opinions about stuff they haven’t seen that I decided to decide for myself. Screw what the filmmaker says and screw what the critics say. *I* want to watch both and decide for myself. And that’s what I did.
The purpose of analyzing the details of both films was for me to figure out why each worked/didn’t. And by actually looking at the pieces instead of the high level, you can tell how similar/dissimilar they are.
I am so tired of taking the highest level and calling everything a copy. Do you know that there are only nine stories in the whole world? Then everything is a copy of everything else
Anyway, everyone is entitled to their opinion. I actually put some effort into mine - I went in with no preconceived notions. Thought through the elements and then figured out what was similar and what was not. Where I came out is that there is more that is dissimilar than similar.
And while I liked Aamir (esp. for a first-time effort), I think Cavite is a superior film. BECAUSE it is so different.
Sigh… I feel like a stuck tape. I guess people take what they want to take without bothering to actually read…
I will not unsubscribe to a film just because it has a similar plot line to another film. The fact is that, I, like many others had never heard of Cavite or that there is a movie industry in Philippines. (My friend - didn’t even know that Philippines was a country). I thoroughly enjoyed Aamir and more than that I am glad that it exposed me to Cavite, its a fantastic film and should be adopted to every culture possible. A good idea deserves to heard in many languages and I would only encourage it (read Nelson Mandela, King and countless inspired by Gandhi).
hey shripriya
nice write up,i’ll now make sure that i watch Cavite.
I liked Aamir and also i am not against getting inspired from world cinema and making a hindi film out of it.Atleast it helps the audience to indirectly watch world movies:))who otherwise are not interested in watching films from other parts of the world.
Also remaking cavite is far more better than remaking bruce almighty(god tussi great ho) which will no doubt end up as one of the highest grossers of 2008.
Well thats just my point of view..
P.S. Would love to see a hindi remake of City of God,Motorcycle Diaries,Death Proof etc etc..
Yes Shripriya…phonebooth is one film which is shot only on one location. Around the phone booth on the street !!! It is an incredible and gripping film !! do watch and review on PFC
The intricate details may not be a lift off but the broad story line(for which aamir was highly praised) is a straight xerox of Cavite. Aamir has obviously been tailored to suit the Indian audience.
No doubt Raj Kumar Gupta has done a fantastic job but the fact remains - Aamir is “inspired” from Cavite.
Conclusion of the author is the funniest part…..after explaining how small details are different in what could be otherwise same scenes …. the author says ….after careful deconstruction no less….apart from the scenes, the whole premise, the story….. they are actually too different to be a rip off.
Its like the famous joke …apart from being bald, short, fat and dark the rest looks like Hrithik Roshan.
@Abhilash - ah, finally, a voice of sanity!!
@ the tribal - Glad you liked Aamir. Definitely watch Cavite. Very nicely done - you’d hardly believe it was made for less than $10K.
@kcp - can’t promise the review, but maybe I’ll ping you quickly with my thoughts.
@ Mihir - I think everyone agrees the broad story lines are similar (see below for some thoughts)
@ funnyman - so funny! It’s actually like - since he’s bald, short, and fat, he’s not Hrithik. Get it? As I said before, perhaps we are not reading the same article?
@everyone - the premise is clearly the same. I’ve stated it here and everyone agrees. But IF you believe that Aamir was written before Cavite was released, then where’s the “inspired from” bit? Maybe RK say a synopsis? Who’s to know?
Let’s use the example of the following premise- Man drives around in a car and shoots people until hero cop stops him. This is slightly modified from the Virginia shooter incident that happened a little while ago. Could two people not come up with the same premise? Sure they could.
Would the premise and therefore a very high level story line be similar? Yep. Would the details be very differently. Entirely likely.
Anyhoo…
What you actually said is he looks like Hrithik,walks like Hrithik and talks like hrithik but he is not a Hrithik impersonator. So he must be Hrithik himself ….yeah.
So after watching Aamir and cavite you deconstructed them into one movie but wants the reader to believe they are two different movies because…..no other reason but the script was allegedly registered before cavite.
I get it now …he cannot be a Hrithik impersonator because he was born before Hrithik. Wah what a deconstuction….waiting for more of these gems.
@funnyman - clearly we didn’t read the same article. And the script being registered before Cavite is a pretty big reason, don’t you think?
Let’s agree to disagree - no need to denigrate the other person while doing so, right?
I thoroughly agree with Shripriya about there being only so many stories in the world (didn’t know it was nine though). There are a lot of people who are ever ready to pounce on a film saying “Pakad liya! Copy copy copy!” on the flimsiest of grounds. A good example would be Partner and Hitch. There were maybe 4 scenes lifted from Hitch in Partner, but the whole thing was different, otherwise, and in fact, Partner made me laugh more. Another one which really got my goat was some numbskull somewhere who said that the Anil Kapoor Juhi Chawla story in Salaam-e-Ishq was a retread of the Alan Rickman-Emma Thompson part in Love Actually. Ridiculous!
It’s like a man who’s never seen bovines in his life. He sees a cow, then he sees a buffalo and says “Oh there’s another cow.” Then he sees an ox and says, “Yet another cow.” It’s only the milkman who truly will know different breeds and their properties.
In half of the movies, the hero shoots the villain at the end. Does this mean all these movies are copies of each other?
I’ve seen both Cavite and Aamir. I liked both. It’s perfectly possible for Rajkumar Gupta to have come up with the idea simultaneously; these things happen. It’s also perfectly possible that he wanted to make an Indian version of Cavite, which, if it is the case, he’s succeeded well enough in my opinion. Aamir has a few flaws here and there, but I’ll stand by it as a really good piece of work.
If Hollywood can give Martin Scorcese an Oscar for a great remake, what the hell is our problem? Aamir isn’t a frame-by-frame copy like Ek Ajnabee or cowdung khichdi like Fool n Final; it’s a very decent film, whether remake or not.
I just showed this comment to a close Filipino friend of mine… (who, incidentally, happens to be a big film buff… including Indian (yup) and Filipino films)…
“…The fact is that, I, like many others had never heard of Cavite or that there is a movie industry in Philippines. (My friend - didn’t even know that Philippines was a country)…”
He was at once thoroughly disgusted, shocked, and amused…
Whoever made that comment needs new friends.
I dont know what to say. when 2 movies r so similar, how can i say that both r original.Also i read here that, script of aamir was registered b4 cavite released. I saw on IMDB, cavite was released in 2005. And Anurag Kshayap has said that RK wrote this much before NS.What does that mean?Much b4 NS was released or much b4 NS was conceptualised??Coz NS too was released in late 2007?So are we being told that two people has same story born in their mind in 2004/2005, one is made in 2005 and another is materialised in 2008.There is no insipiration taken from other?Still they are so similar in concept? A muslim getting off a plane, to his surprise finds family is not waiting, luggeage stolen, cellphone given to him, asked to follow the command which leads to planting a bomb somewhere.How they can be diff with their soul being the same?just because the cinematic execution/implementation is diff?Just coz ending is bit diff?
We r not comparing Lagaan and TZP, Black Friday and KANK.They r soul different.But how can we believe that a movie made in 2008 is totally uninspired(very original), when we have a movie in 2005 with same concept, storyline and soul.
@Tejas - Or it just proves that he has friends from every strata of the society.
@Abhilash - agreed. My bad.
Shripriya,
>> “The antagonists method of control over the victim - completely different”
I disagree. The method is exactly same. Only the degree of control (and hence the punishments for disobedience) is different.
>> “The things the victim has to do in the story - nothing similar”
I disagree. The things that victim has to do in the story - are very similar. Yes, in a materialistic view, they are different, but the essence is exactly same. I mean, how different are the following for example: walking through a squatter camp in Cavite and through a stinky gully in Mumbai, swallowing the inside of an egg as opposed to eating a date - both symbolizing the ethnicity. Adam goes through a cock-fighting stadium, while, since we don’t have such things in India — Aamir walks through a mutton market.
>> “The family involvement - completely different”
I agree. But think about it. It’s almost irrelevant to the context of the movie. The only difference it made was: the situation of Aamir became this-could-happen-to-you-too theme. A smart modification by RK Gupta, in my opinion.
>> “The characters - different”
Well, you see, if we assume RK Gupta to have at least a marginal amount of intelligence, this change is nothing but obvious. Indians could easily relate to an NRI who’s a Software Engineer or a Doctor (as opposed to a minimum wage earner).
>> “The pacing - very different”
What are you talking about? Both movies are shot in (almost) real time. Aamir is given some more time to ponder over what lies in the briefcase. And he’s not not given enough time to make a final call after he finds out what lies in the briefcase. That’s about the only difference.
>> “The shooting style - very different”
The reason why Gamazon chose a handheld camera was that he (and the other producer dude) didn’t have enough budget to get expensive camera. (heck, they couldn’t even hire a cameraman because of limited budget.) And Mr. Gupta didn’t have such limitations. Hence the difference.
In any case. if Gupta decided to make a movie based on Cavite he would have been stupid to copy the whole movie frame by frame. Any sane director would make necessary changes based on the mind-set of his target audience (i.e. Indians in this case). So minor changes don’t surprise me (based on my hypothesis that Gupta is not stupid.)
@Kenny - very well said!
@Abhishek - Yes, the premise is similar, but if the script was registered before Cavite, then who knows, right? Also, the fact that it was only made in 2008 is not really relevant. As a first-time filmmaker who wants to make a film, Raj Kumar would have had to wait to shop the script, find a producer etc. Plus he was assisting AK and made his movie after those duties were done.
@Vishal - thanks for the link to your blog. I visited and read your article and commented there as well
Thanks for engaging in the discussion. Here’s my response…
method/degree of control - fair point. The method (by phone) is the same. In this day and age though, they can’t really control by carrier pigeon though
So, has to be the phone.
things the victim has to do - walking through squalor would happen in any city in the world. If a “gritty” movie was set in NYC, they’d be walking through through squalor. Walking through places is not similarity to me. [As an aside, I don't believe the meat market was because there isn't cockfighting in India. I think there is, actually, but maybe more in the villages - it was there because there are such meat markets in India and it added to the theme and visual effect for that scene.]
The tasks one has to do is what constitutes similarity. Cavite is much more complex in all the sub-tasks Adam does. So, we disagree here.
The characters - come on! That’s NOT a good argument. Every time something is different, you are going to say “it is because RK did not want to do a real copy?”
When I said the characters are different, it is not just the income/success disparity, but the types of people they are.
Pacing is not so much about real time as in how fast or slowly the movie movies through that time.
Shooting style - yes, Gamazon did it handheld due to budget reasons, but there are big budget films that have a lot of handheld action. Some almost nauseatingly so (like the last Bourne film).
I don’t think the changes are minor. You do. So, let’s do a thought exercise - assume you came up with the same high-level premise. What would your film look like?
I thought the meat market thing was some reference to “Bakra Halaal hone wala hain”….also Aamir was well fed before being handed the bag…
@29 Shri!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nauseating??!!!!!!!!!!
how could u ?
how could u?
how could u?!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Shripriya has pointed out the difficulties of a first time filmmaker getting a film made and then distributed. For the average new filmmaker, this is the reality.
A similar example to the time discrepancy between the release times of Aamir and Cavite?
I worked on a horror film in 2004 here in the US. It took two years for it to release. During the final week of shooting in 2004, we found out another independent film with the same basic idea was releasing in theatres. We had never heard of that film, they had never heard of us. They had distribution and some “names” attached, and thus got released right away. It became a hit film that spawned an entire franchise of horror films.
At no point in any review has anyone ever mentioned we copied Saw, even after our film got released in 2006 (Saw released in 2004).
It is entirely possible for two films with similar ideas to be developed at the same time independent of each other, and without knowledge of either party, especially if the subject material is something topical, something that is inspired by current events, or a new idea that is forming in the collective consciousness.
Yes, the Indian film industry has a history of stealing ideas and remaking them. The knowledgeable readers of PFC are the first to cry, “Copy” or “Inspired”. Why not be the first to say, “good job, Raj Kumar and production team” for playing fair with the rules of international cinema? Why not do some homework and realize that it is not uncommon in the film industry that two films with similar ideas can be developed at the same time, with either one not copying the other?
@Shripriya ..’script was registered before cavite’. I m not very clear on it. ‘Registered before the script of cavite was registered’ or ‘registered before cavite was released’?Coz cavite was released in 2005, so its story might have given birth somewhere in 2001-2002.A possibility.
@t! thanks for ur comment.Ur argument is good and believale that, if source of the inspiration of the story is same, then 2 stories can born at the same time at 2 diff places.I agree. RK and team can be praised for their effort and bringing out a diff kind of cinema, with a story which is diff from other trendy movies.But dont u think that it could have been a much better movie with some tighter story?I dont rate this movie very high, and mostly agree with dabba’s review of it.At places it moves very slow.e.g. Aamir is asked to go in diff places without any purposes, eat nuts.It is shown that even a restaurant waiter knows that he is a puppet and can refuse to serve him.Camera is glued to his face and fingures for unlimited time when he is handed a bag.Somehow the whole world around him seems to know that he is carrying SOMETHING.There are lot of things unexplained?Why Aamir only?Why he is shown returning back from UK?He could have found his family missing even when coming back from his office at Church Gate.Why antagonist choose someone to do such a diff job, when there r chances he can spoil it?Where as he can very much hire someone and get it done?Just to bring him in the same group?Thats not convincing.In the end antagonist is shown on knees, why?To show that he got defetead??Is he really?Wont he find another one to get the bomb planted?Was the purpose of his life to make aamir a terrorist, that he was shown so frustrated??
I didnt intend to review it, but the movie is not as good as praised on PFC.It started well, promising a lot only to slip later to average levels.Be it first movie of someone, it should be great movie to praised like one.Raju Hirani with Munna Bhai, RGV with Shiva, Aditya Chopra with DDLJ have done that earlier.
@DPac
@ t! Thanks for the personal experience. I am actually convinced this happens all the time - often leading to films being “held” from release even after they are completed.
@Abhishek - I think the script for Aamir was registered before Cavite was released. Since Cavite is an indie production, there is little chance you would have heard about it until release.
Re: the quality of Aamir, I agree with a lot of what you say. Read my post
I am bothered by the pacing, by how “milk-toasty” Aamir is, by… a lot of things, actually. And I call all of things out. That’s part of the reason why I think Cavite is a superior movie even though it was made for $10K.
BUT, all that said, I still thing it is a very applause-worthy effort for a couple of major reasons - 1. It is a debut feature and 2. Consider the milieu in which it is made. How hard must it have been to convince people to fund a movie with no songs, no dancing, no romance in a world where 99% of all commercial hits have that?
In this sense, nothing will ever be a copy. So, can we apply these standards evenly to every film here on?
@ t!
“The knowledgeable readers of PFC are the first to cry, “Copy” or “Inspired”. Why not be the first to say, “good job, Raj Kumar and production team” for playing fair with the rules of international cinema? Why not do some homework and realize that it is not uncommon in the film industry that two films with similar ideas can be developed at the same time, with either one not copying the other?”
Agreed! Agreed! Agreed!
@Shripriya#34
I agree that any debutant shud be applauded, but i also have diff point of view here.This film is not praise worthy, coz of its makers only.Its lagging in story, direction and pace of the movie.It doesnt have anything to do with lack of big production house support.This is also one effort to make a movie out of a single line concept.A man forced to do something by a terrorist, and he does it, almost.There r no branches in the story.No more than 1 charactor effecting the story anyhow.If u know, that aamir’s family is kidnapped, he is asked to put a bomb in a bus, which he chooses not to, and dies instead, there is no need to watch the movie.Where he is coming from, what does he do, how does he get the bomb, what all happens is really not at all important to story.I can not blame anyone other than makers of this movie for all this.
When u r in market(i mean releasing movie), people will judge on the basis of movie, not on the basis of whether its a 1st movie or 10th or 100th.
Also, because of these half-cooked thrillers and attempt to make a movie out of single-line-story, its diff to find fundings for the such movies.Coz they dont work at box office.A thriller can not have anything loose.Be it story, direction, editings, endings etc etc.Thats what we get in the name of suspence/thrillers in India.So it better to make a debut with love story( half-cooked somewhat work here), than to choose thriller and make it wrong.We r still a lot lagging in producing good thrillers to have faith of investors in such movies.
I will say, make a debut like Munna Bhai MBBS or Lagaan or TZP or DDLJ, and u wont need any campaign to garner praises for you.
Maybe the script was registered before Cavite..
But statements like “i have seen the movie and they are nowhere close to each other” is a blatant lie..
Anurag Kaisan Ba..
@ Shripriya #29,
I think we both have already made our firm conclusions that can’t be changed: You say Aamir is not a copy nor an inspiration of Cavite, and I say Aamir clearly seem to have been *inspired* from Cavite. Any argument we make is just *rationalizing* those individual conclusions. [Sorry to go philosophical, but I don't think we are being reasonable, we are just rationalizing the conclusions that we've already made.]
“What would my film look like?” is a very big question and requires a lot of thinking. But since I’ve watched both Aamir and Cavite, I keep on comparing any idea that I come up with - with Aamir/Cavite. I just can’t go through a thinking process that is similar to the thinking process of a person who came up with a new fresh idea.
The counter-question that I can ask is: if I saw Cavite and liked the idea…. Wanted to make a movie on that theme but didn’t want to tell the world that my first movie is an adapted screenplay (because of my ego or whatever)….what changes would I make into the screenplay? (of course, keeping in mind that the targeted audience is the Indian multiplex-movie-goers.)
* I would change my protagonist from minimum-wage-earner to an NRI doctor/engineer. Because Indians can easily relate to that.
* I would not show chopped off fingers and cut tongues because that would be too-much for my target audience.
* My protagonist has to do something heroic in the end. Audience is not going to accept a “hero” who is also a suicide bomber.
* Since my protagonist is going to die in the end, there’s no point in showing his life in the foreign country. (Cutting the first and last few scenes from Cavite.)
* I can actually show the villain (physically) and make him do all those villain-ish stuff - that the masses seem to enjoy a lot in movies.
* A female factor is needed. Viola! A sympathetic prostitute!
* That shaky camera need to be replaced with a steady one, definitely. I don’t have any budget issues either!
* Adam is asked to leave the bomb in a churn…. Can I make Aamir plant a bomb in a Hindu temple? NO WAY. I don’t want to get my movie banned, or have people throw stones at my house. Let’s replace Hindu temple with a public bus.
* And so on…
But then again, you might just say that I am rationalizing the conclusion that I’ve already made, right?
@kic - don’t know who “we” refers to. But as for myself, *if* I am comparing two films, before sharing my perspective on whether I think it a copy or not, I promise to watch both and examine multiple elements.
@Abhishek - I agree with you completely when you say that people will judge a film on the basis of whether it entertains them versus whether it is the first film or the 100th film of that filmmaker. I just like to keep it in mind as I evaluate something critically. And clearly I didn’t think Aamir was the perfect thriller, but I disagree that people should start with comedies/love stories. Don’t we have enough of them already?
@Vishal -
I guess where I come from is that I prefer to give folks the benefit of doubt. If the date of reg. of the script was pre- the release of Cavite, then that’s more of a reason to give RKG the benefit of doubt.
@Shripriya - Would you point me to the source of this information? (that the script of Aamir was registered before the release dates of Cavite) Thanks
i don’t fully agree with you blame Aamir as being ’spineless’. as Aamir is following his orders virtually at the gun-point, he has an argument with the antagonist. n he argues quite fearlessly, as if there was no gun at all. moreover, he also leaves the antagonist speechless in the argument, but that is simply not good enough against a gun.
@Shripriya #40
Here, in PFC, its not about critically accalaiming a movie coz its made by a debutant. But people support anything coming from someone near and dear, and thrash anything coming from Yashrajs and Karan Johars, blindly.No Smoking, is a classic and menifestation of height of someone’s talent(that rest of the world is not able to understand), according to PFCians. I was forced to was NS after hearing so much abt it non-stop in PFC, only to get disappointed.I dont know if i lack brains to understand classics(or flops), but in general i agree with other classics(or flops).Same way, Aamir has got support in PFC.Its an average movie, which is rejected by viewers.
Also, Aamir is no thriller.It intially started as thriller, only to move forward as just a simple story.
And why not start with comedies/love stories, if u can make Munna Bhai, DDLJ or even Jaane Tu…
Again, its bad to see, Jaane Tu.., being thrashed here, by the so-called passionate of cinema.
This is not called an Analysis. This is just a comparison between two screenplays. For analysis and critiques, please refer to good technical film magazines. Times of India, HT, DNA, CNN IBN, etc don’t count please.
I think this whole thing about being inspired is overrated. No one would care except for the fact that most of the people associated with “Aamir” spent a major part of their lives badmouthing people and talking about how important it is to be original.
Why doesn’t someone just talk with the great guys who directed and produced this film, scan the so called original registered script (in 2005, hopefully before Cavite released) with the FWA stamp, put it up on this site and let people judge for themselves?
Ideas can always be the same or inspired (like this one surely is from “The Nick of Time” or like “Disturbia” is from “The Rear Window” or “Flightplan” is from “The Lady Vanishes”), but to have whole screenplays to be the same is too much of a coincidence.
But if “No Smoking” is a classic, “Aamir” might as well be an original
Sorry for the delayed reply all - dealing with a few things on my end…
@Vishal - Here you go. I am not able to directly link to the comment, so you will have to scroll down. Comment #22 on this post-
http://passionforcinema.com/aamir-is-not-a-copy-of-cavite/
And #29 here-
http://passionforcinema.com/aamir-thani-review/#comments
Now, again, you can choose to believe this or not. I just prefer giving them the benefit of doubt
@Anand - fair point. He does argue, but I would have liked to have seen him push his limits and see how much he can get away with - that seems like normal human reaction to me.
@Abhishek - Each author on PFC can write what the please - the beauty of the platform. So, you can only judge me for my posts and I can only be held responsible for my views
I think what a director starts with is personal choice… RKG might not want to make love stories. His passion may be thrillers. He may rather fail making thrillers than succeed making song/dance/love stories. That’s his choice…
@Amazing Time - One definition of analysis is “an investigation of the component parts of a whole and their relations in making up the whole”. I think this fits the description. I don’t read the Times of India, HT, DNA etc. for their reviews, so I won’t be counting them, never fear.
As for the personalities involved, their histories, their foibles etc., I’m not really concerned with that.
@Abhilash: “A good idea deserves to heard in many languages and I would only encourage it (read Nelson Mandela, King and countless inspired by Gandhi).”
Well said! This is a point I wish I could have come up with. It would be great if the message was creatively rejuvenated each time it is reused, but even that is not needed.
E.g. I’ve seen a couple of thought-provoking documentaries that are note-for-note remakes of older works. One of them is “What Farocki Taught” by Jill Godmilow. (I forget the name of the other — it’s been a while.) The key points are that remaking a film renews the public’s attention to the original concept, and it also challenges what we think a movie is and how we respond to it.
Anyhoo, this example lives on the opposite end of the spectrum where some critics whole-cloth reject movies with similar aspects, regardless of whether they bring anything else new to the cinema hall.
Found the other exact copy. It’s called “Shulie.” They were both made in the late ’90s.
Aamir was a brilliant movies…
and with the reviews from pfc i think cavite’s also a gr8 movie…
but in india its difficult to find the original CD’s of such movies…
i couldnt even find it on the net…
so anyone if knows the download link (no torrents plz)
for the movie cavite…
plz send it to
http://www.supershiva.blogspot.com
http://www.versatilecollection.blogspot.com
I liked Aamir and have not seen Cavite, but I have no problems with adaptation, only when its copied scene to scene without any thought process irks me. Aamir as a movie I think maybe director wanted to make a point about innocent “terrorist” scenarios, but I think strong performance by Rajeev also helps other view points also, which is a good thing about his performance and this movie. In wake of recent bombings, it raises some different thoughts that are needed. If nothing else Ha Raham farma e khuda is just good enough for the movie.