The Worst Film Ever?
iView Author:
Anant Raina
Noida, India
EMAIL:
Withheld
The Worst Film Ever?
“What was the director smoking?” was the comment that I heard the most, when I asked people what they had thought of the film. I saw the film very recently at a screening in Delhi, where Anurag Kashyap was in attendance and I thought it was brilliant. As Ranjini Majumdar, the film scholar who introduced the film rightly said, the film will be remembered as an important moment in Indian cinema.
Yes it is indulgent, it is very personal but so were the films of greats like Tarkovsky, Goddard, etc. I am not comparing Anurag Kashyap with these directors but only pointing out that some of the world’s greatest films have been very personal and self-indulgent. Apart from the being technically very competent, the film is one of the most layered in recent times and displays an interesting amalgamation of influences ranging from cinema to literature to history. One can see hints of Kafka, Faust, 1984 and the Holocaust all put together in a film, ostensibly about not smoking. But the film actually has nothing to do with smoking. To me, it was about a man so consumed by himself and his world that everything else was unimportant – the classic megalomaniac. Many people in the audience had their own interpretations of the film. What is interesting, as we found out in the Q and A after the screening, is that Anurag’s reasons for making the film and the story were completely different and that is what makes the film so fascinating. There is no wrong interpretation making the film “personal” in a completely different way. It is personal because everyone who watches it understands it differently.
The release and reception of this film brought to fore a very interesting aspect of our industry. The critics, who directors love to hate, the supposedly knowledgeable protectors of “good” cinema, completely panned the film. These are the same critics who very recently lauded Kareena Kapoor and Shahid Kapur for their brilliant “acting” in Jab We Met. I’m sure the hypocrisy is evident to most of us. Are our critics so spineless that they cannot take a stand or are they just unexposed? Is the commercial viability of our films the only criteria that defines them as “good” or “bad”? Is there no space in India cinema for films that don’t cater to the market forces? And how do you review something that you don’t understand? Many favourable international reviews later, the DVD reviews sang a different tune, one said that No Smoking is worth multiple viewings because “it has multiple layers with an abstract narrative”. The worst film ever made in Bollywood history in worth multiple viewings.
I agree, the Indian audience is not ready for No Smoking yet, but that doesn’t mean that it should not be made and appreciated. People called the film too surreal for the audience. We must remember that this is the same audience that doesn’t bat an eye lid when the hero and heroine are transported from a scenic Indian village to the Alps and back in a space of 5 minutes. How surreal is that?
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
“hen the hero and heroine are transported from a scenic Indian village to the Alps and back in a space of 5 minutes. How surreal is that? ” ….:d
Very true… well and succintly put.
I dont really know,how many favourable reviews No Smoking actually got(and how many of them did it actually merit),but truth be told laconically–Indian Mainstream media does really have no critics with the exception of Baradwaj Rangan.Most reviewers masquerading as film critics have no idea of how to read symbolism in and/or the motive of a film(and the same can be said about those who write music reviews too),so how do you expect them appreciate something like No Smoking?
Why even No Smoking,no one got Eklavya,Guru,Saawariya and even Jhoom Barabar Jhoom(no symbolism here,but loadsa allusiveness and clever humour)!
The only thing these people can appreciate is the over simplification(and that is not to say it is a bad thing) of Taare Zameen Par.
Having said that,No Smoking didn’t exactly work for me.The journey of a non-conformist from his ‘tryst with megalomania’ as the article here puts it,to conforming(and thusly giving up his soul)is all fine with me..but the film’s narrative becomes detached with each note,as it moves on.The uneven narrative and the inconsistent tone,really ruin most of the fun.Perhaps taking a subjective stand point might have helped.Even the music didnt work(the humour that lay in the nature in which Kash laga takes up the notion of dragging on a cigarrete,is completely ruined due to the facile orchestration).
I actually loved the movie. With films as these, it isn’t how much we understand the first time around, but the way it creates an atmosphere around us and engulfs us in the experience. The biggest thing I can attribute to the film is that it has changed my perception about John Abraham. Whenever I look at him, it is in a significantly different light.
Here is what I thought of the film -
http://movie-place.blogspot.com/2007/10/no-smoking-movie-review.html
‘People called the film too surreal for the audience.”..thats exactly what bothers me.
actually the opposite is what exactly bother me.that he didnt go the full looop with it…
nice time for a revisit though.
perfect timing for the post too!!
is desh may gandhi se bada kuch b nahi
the movie is not bad. what it lacks is proper directing. indian directors seem to handle realistic movies quite well. but when it comes to fictional enigmatic movies, there seems to lack in clarity.
i’ve only read the first few pages of the script of “no smoking” after watching the movie. there is a scene in which john is trying to open a door which only opens if pushed, which ever side you are. thatz very imaginative. i thought “oh! ok.” but it never came across in the movie. and thatz not good. a director should “guide” the audience. that doesn’t mean you have to literally show everything. instead communicate by composing shots, and directing the viewers eye in showing what he/she wants to show or achieve in a particular shot.
i wouldn’t say the movie is surreal or whatever. all i would say is it isn’t clear in what it’s trying to say.
Any surreal creation like painting, movie or poetry, anything, always has a different effect on each individual who views it. The creation is fascinating and makes you enthusiastic. For some reason “No Smoking” has only one explanation from all the reviewers and viewers. All have tried words like “absurdist, surreal, imagination, hallucination, Kafka, Fellini and Lynch”. But all of them have failed to give individual explanation and there are no other understandings. The reason for one explanation goes to Mr Kashyap’s explanation of his rage as a filmmaker being molded in the character “K” in his blog “I smoked classic milds”. For some reason that blog could have been explained as “No Smoking-Part 2″, which eventually gave a grounds to everyone who watched the film. It wasn’t just the film that had to be experienced but the comments/explanations by Mr Kashyap got blended together. It might have helped the explanation of the film but the film as not being the sole “creation” to be experienced has failed eventually. The film ceased to be surrealistic to have individuality in explanations.
that too shiva.. that too!!!
dunno if u have heard of ‘avial’ (no.. not the rock grp)…
a lot of scenes were like that…
and sometimes it was too many layers and too little time to decipher and digest…
The issue is that our audiences are only really accustomed to “plot-based” films. It’s not that other films haven’t been made, we’ve seen some wonderful character studies as well, it’s just that most of those films are either totally plot-driven, or sadly not very successful.
So when we’re exposed to a totally different kind of film, one that is not completely dependant on its plot devices to achieve its journey, and one where understanding the “meaning” of the film is not dependant entirely on understanding the “events” themselves, then the film is, unfortunately, bound to be rejected.
I watched NO SMOKING with some friends with whom I often go to Hindi films. I really wanted them to see it (as I do with all films that I feel don’t get the exposure and audience they deserve).
I warned them beforehand not to try and follow the plot, they were bound to get confused and frustrated. Just try to imagine what this guy “K” is going through, try to relate to his state of mind and not so much all that’s “happening”.
A lot of things went over our heads (couldn’t catch or relate to many of the references/metaphors). Yet after it was over we sat around for over 3 hours just talking about it, interpreting different things, marvelling over others. We all had different theories on what different scenes meant.
The one thing we agreed upon was the film was all about conforming, and losing yourself in the process (whether its the loss of your soul, or your individuality is I think a question of personal relatability).
The film makes you think beyond the film itself, even if you didn’t like it or “get” it.
What more can you ask for?
Not sure about this statement:
“It wasn
@DPAC
Interesting point about Avial. Sometimes things can be just too layered. Doesn’t take anything away from the creativity of the makers or the freshness of the product. I personally felt that the director got a little too involved and that has shown its effects on the movie.
@sarang,
i for one feel he was ‘literally’ visualising a lot of scenes, him being a writer and all…
that explains quite a lot…
but then the reasons could be many… not just that
When the movie got released i watched the noon show on saturday !! and man i was surprised, shocked and then strangled.. but !! i loved the flick like nything.. watched it again on sunday with my GF (..of course she was also surprised , shocked and then strangled me after the movie was over, but i loved her..for she didnt lose her patience).
i encouraged a few of my colleagues to go n watch NS.. few showed faith in my words and came back again surprised , shockd nd strangled…
NS is a treat to watch , so abstract, so surreal.. people wud come back to NS after 10 yrs… mark my words… i watched it again after buyin the DVD… [:)]
What i soaked from the movie is now preciouse to me. the eternal mantra
” Aatma hai to shareer ishwar hai , Aatma nahi to naswar hai”… god damn it !!! its the jist of life….
what about films like RISK, AWARAPAN.
thats so true no one understood sawaariya and most said its a bad movie even before watching it.no one got no smoking.