No villains in Rab Ne Bana di Jodi …
Going by media reports, Rab ne bana di jodi, has had a tremendous opening but a lukewarm response. As in, a lot of people wanted to watch it but not too many went back for a second viewing. Suprising? Not really.
At the Screenwriters’ conference yesterday, Abbas Tyrewala brought up the idea that there is no ‘Villain’ in our Hindi films today. I agree with him.
Maybe, we now need to rely on not one but many villains who keep coming to create conflict in Act 2 and our heroes battle all of them out.
The mystery of the missing ACT 2 in Rab Ne …
If ACT 2 of Rab Ne.. was about creating a villain and vamp in the yuppy duo who Suri and Taani have to defeat in the final competition it was very weak!
How did you not think of creating a villain from somewhere within Punjab power? How did you not think of creating a villain who gets to know Surinder’s sham?
In any case Surinder’s disguise hinged on a flimsy makeover! Look at what all the Robin Williams character had to do in Mrs Doubtfire to be with his woman!
But, I confess the story captured me emotionally in the beginning and the end. The beginning matters. The end matters.
But what about the middle??? Isn’t ACT 2 the whole point of telling us the story?
I am your loyal North Indian audience and I wanted to watch the film and I watched it once. But is emotion enough for me to go back for a second viewing? Sorry, it isn’t anymore. The DDLJ fan base has by now grown up. High time! Besides, DDLJ had a very strong villain in Simran’s father. Remember?
The recently successful YRF venture Jaideep Sahni’s script for ‘Chak De India’ had villains at every stage – The sarkari babus, the boys in the fast food joint, Bindia Naik and of course the Australian hockey team. Quite a variety, I must say. And Kabir Khan fought them all – himself or through the team he trained.
No villain. No conflict. No conflict no ‘mazza’ in a happy ending. And If I am looking for a happy ending I want it to be mazedaar.
So, what’s the silver lining.. ‘Realism’ creeped into an Aditya Chopra film more than ever, even though as a storyteller he stuck to the ‘reality of emotion’.
There are some films which we celebrate only for the ‘reality of emotion’ that the film maker creates for us and may they always have their place. But, we need better ACT 2s!
(‘realism vs Reality of emotion’ – for this I’ll have to do another blog. Plz wait for it.)
Anurag Kashyap
Abhay Deol
Dibakar Banerjee
Hansal Mehta
Khalid Mohamed
Kundan Shah
Anish Kuruvilla
Jaideep Verma
Manish Gupta
Navdeep Singh
Bhavani Iyer
D. Santosh
Onir
Ashvin Kumar
Ramu Ramanathan
Sudhir Mishra
Pankaj Advani
Revathy
Saurabh Shukla
Shilpa Shukla
Sujoy Ghosh
Suparn Verma
Santosh Sivan
Shashank Ghosh
Shivajee
Pavan Kaul
Partho Sen-Gupta
Prroshant Naryannan
Sam Langoria
Satish Kasetty
‘realism vs Reality of emotion’
Now that’s a topic I’m rubbing my hands in expectation of!
‘the story captured me emotionally’
This is the key phrase for me when it comes to liking/disliking/evaluating a movie.
“Loss of villain” is primarily because its a beginning(just begining) when story is getting more importance than iconizatin of charactors and who plays it(stars).
I watched few old hindi movies recently and was pissed off to see how much they screwed a good story to paint lead charactor in white and villain in black.We would have more great cinema in past had we given its due importance to its story.
I think..it was a unique story here.the villian in ACT 2 is Suri, who becomes the hero in the end. nai?
Why was “Hum Apke hai koun” such a massive hit then ? I guess the whole point is that the movie should ‘connect’ with the viewers. The audience is not just looking for ‘thrill’ all the time.
Further, there were no ‘villains’ in those glorious movies of the 70s we still remember – Rajnigandha, gol maal, dillagi (basu chatterjee)etc
Hmm am not sure, if u really need a villian just for the heck of it.
Anand never had any villians, and yet it is still a classic. Every scene in it is brilliant. Conflict need not be between hero and villian(s). It can be between any one, friends, parents, brothers.
Anand had a conflict between AB and Rajesh Khanna. The latter believed in living life for the moment, not taking it seriously, the former feels Rajesh is too frivolous. But at the end of it, you had AB come around to Rajesh’s viewpoint.
Also in certain movies, though there is a villian per se, the conflict is more between 2 heros opposed ideologically, as in Anbe Sivam, where though Nasser is the bad guy, the main conflict is between the atheist, leftist Kamal and the right wing yuppie Madhavan.
There was no villian in Mounaraagam, but agai the conflict was between the wife who refused to accept her husband, and a husband who yearned for his wife’s love.
The problem of the movie-going audience is, we (and its a generic term im using, i can’t define it, if u ask me) want everything to be spelt out to us, despite having moved on from the old school of movie-making of in-your face information to the recent trend of smarter movies. and that’s where the need of a clear-cut defined ‘villain’ arises in our sub-conscious.
as i see it, the situation can also play the pivotal role of a villain by providing a tougher time to the main protagonist. consider namak haraam, the role of a villain is assumed from time to time by different personalities / situations, although there is no defined villain per se. In the beginning, AK Hangal is made out to be the villain (for Amitabh & his father), then Om Shivpuri (to AK Hungal & Rajesh Khanna), then Rajesh Khanna ((to Amitabh), and at the end Amitabh (to his father). However, looking at it objectively, no one was the “villain’ villain, not even the truck driver,who kills Rajesh Khanna, as he was a mere ‘nimitta’ (Aks, anyone..?) inthe whole scheme of things.
So, RNBDJ has villains at appropriate moments, we just have to look at it objectively. Personally speaking, I had only two redeeming moments in the movie, character of Suri and the Japanese epilogue.
@ Om – Raj as the villain? but we know all along it’s the same man – the good Surinder, we know our heroine is safe with him. he could have been used as a villain to create more conflict but he too turned out a hero. he tells her I know you are married and I am ok with it! it isn’t like say, Me, myself and Irene when Jim Carrey’s other half turns villanious, violent and genuinely problematic. what does Raj do other than joking around? he doesnt even touch her!
@ Ratnakar
Anand – you are introduced to Anand’s villain right at the beginning of the story. DEATH. could there be a villain greater than that? and what does our Hero do – he fights Death by living life to the fullest!
@YK – Golmaal – Utpal Dutt. Why do you think he was there? quite like Amrish Puri in DDLJ!
Hum aapke hai kaun – no wonder it was made as a ‘musical’ with very few dramatic scenes.
Have not seen RNBDJ yet so will not comment.
Didn’t HAHK too have Bindu’s character as a villain for a little while? I forget the exact situation but I recall her being a villain for a small part of the film?
What about a film like 15 Park Avenue? Who’s the villain in that?
Waiting Smriti. Bring it on
I think..it was a unique story here.the villian in ACT 2 is Suri, who becomes the hero in the end. nai?
i didnt see this film but i think it is quite and lovely