Taare Zameen Par: A Celebration of Life and Uniqueness

There are a very few, in this world, who are born to be uninhibitedly unique. But unfortunately, many of them are forced to flow along the commonness of the majority!!! 'Taare Zameen Par' is a tribute to all of them.

--+$0*0$+--
As everyone might have known, being 'not good at studies' is like a social taboo. Most teachers love brilliant and diligent students; and, if taken on a humor note, almost have crushes on class-toppers! For me, it’s because of the human tendency to settle in the comfort zone. When they can get self-appreciated with the report cards of good students, why should they worry about the weaker ones, whose reports cards bring them disgrace? And hence, Ishan, who is severely bad at studies, is treated like an untouchable handicapped. But he cared less about the teachers’ indifference. He knows that his mother loves him. His mother’s love is the confidence factor left in his life. And he goes ‘bin-daas’!!!

Many parents aspire to put their children on the zenith of this merciless competitive world. But they are a very few who inspire their kids to be there. In the maze of aspirations, the importance of inspirations is forgotten. And thus, the unique ability in most of the gifted kids becomes dormant. Whether, in future, the ability is invoked back, is destiny. As for Ishan’s amazing ability to paint, it would have gone dead, if not for Aamir Khan’s surprise entry!!!

--+$0*0$+--
There are many positive and negative paths in life. Parents must take care of their children from threading the negative ways, but leave the choice of the positive path to the children themselves. It is the latter aspect which most in our society fail at. Some children are born to walk the road less travelled. And on the other hand, those who thread along with the general flow of the crowd must be appreciated enough for keeping up with the harsh competetion. I have read in a review by a certain woman, that after watching this film, she realized about forgetting to appreciate her son for his good work at school and she must take time in keeping up his morale.

The best part of this film is that it is very less preachy and carries no pretence. It doesn’t force the audience to think on its lines. On the contrary, the story is so strong and in-depth, that the audience themselves will identify with it. The focus on the importance of ‘journey’ through childhood over ‘destination’ of the same is very well handled. The film expresses that childhood is not only about ‘focus’ on future, but ‘living’ the moment to the fullest.

--+$0*0$+--
A synchronous audio-visual blend is very important in any film to enhance effect of the theme to pronounced levels. Setu’s cinematography leaves no stone unturned to capture even the minutest details of Ishan’s expressions; Prasson Joshi’s lyrics aptly describe his anguish; and Shankar-Ehsaan-Loy’s compositions assert the essence in the lyrics. Hats-off to the wonderful technical team whose creative genius’ and hard-work are very much evident on the silver screen.

The acting department is completely natural. Be it Vipin Sharma playing Ishan’s father or Sachet Engineer playing Ishan’s brother or Tanay Chada as Ishan’s friend, the performances are refined and identifiable. Tisca Chopra as Ishan’s mother is outstanding and Aamir Khan, playing the ‘sutradhar’ of the film, makes no mistakes while sticking to the basics of method acting.

Choosing the best part in films like these is always an unfair practice. But like every human who is tempted towards favoritism, I declare Darsheel Safary, playing Ishan, as the best part of ‘Taare Zameen Par’. And with numerous reviews already in the stands, this declaration may not sound a personal one. It is quite obviously general that Darsheel steals everyone’s heart. Backed by a strong characterization, he simply sails through the role so effortlessly that it is hard for one to resist sailing along with him through the story. It is rare to find such perfect blend of actor and character. In fact, I would even call it a unique combination!!!

--+$0*0$+--
Having said it all, I would quote that, as much as there are people who don’t realize that they are unique, there are even more people who don’t realize that they are not unique. Yes!!! That’s the reason why, these days, we mostly find mediocre films and rarely, films like 'Taare Zameen Par'. My hearty applause to Amol Gupte, for his in-depth analytical script of the otherwise predictable story-line, and Aamir Khan, for his sensitivity in executing the beauty of the abyss.

No Smoking::: POINTs OF VIEW

People would slap me if I said that 'No Smoking' is a good film. In fact, had I constrained myself to watching this film only once, even I would slap myself if I said that it is a good film. But I watched it again for Anurag Kashyap, hoping there could be something I missed during the first watch. And, I liked it. Now, was it because of my already-accepted-the-bitterness mindset or was it because of the unusual execution involved in the film? Let me analyze….


========================
the story’s POINT OF VIEW
======================

“Everyday, thousands of people quit smoking, by dying…...”

‘K’ is obsessed with Smoking. Even in his bizarre dreams, where he is about to get killed, his last wish is to ‘have a cigarette’. Smoking forms his individual choice, his individual self and his individual compulsion; and also, his soul. His wife keeps nagging him to leave the injurious habit. He hardly cares. But, when she threatens with a divorce, he agrees to go through a mysterious treatment by a certain Baba-Bangali-‘proyogshala’.

His journey of experience in Baba-Bangali-prayogshala forms the crux of the remaining story. And in the end, ‘K’ has only two options to give up smoking: to die OR to submit his soul.


==================
my POINT OF VIEW
==================

‘No Smoking’ questions the difference between the two options ‘K’ ends up having. Or in other words, the film emphasizes the similarity between those two options.

The film is Anurag Kashyap’s ‘Point of View’ on how Reality treats a Hoard-Roark-ish man, when he, living by his individualistic rules, tries to go against those of the real world. Contrary to what I expected and perceived initially, this film has less to do with the ill-effects of Smoking! Smoking, as an injurious habit, though appears on the surface of the film, is just a thrown-at-a-corner string of the film. But at the end, it all sounds meaningful, at-least in my ‘Point of View’.

From my point of view, this film deals with the Battle between Self-Independence and Society’s Indulgence. Smoking may be an unhealthy habit, but it is also K’s assertion of independence. He does not want to leave it, just because the world around him wants to. If he leaves, it has to be his own choice, rather than that of others. But he never wants to leave smoking. On the contrary, he is so much addicted to it that, in his dreams, he fears of future situations when he may not be able to have a cigarette. So quitting smoking is out of the scope of his individual, independent choices. But how far will the society let him carry his self-independence? Family and friends, and several recognition-greedy, anti-smoking institutions pose several propositions against one’s independent smoking habit!

Even Rama, in Ramayana, has had to ignore his inner-voice and send Sita to exile, because the society has its own nagging ways of suspicions. According to religion, he who respects the society is Wise. And on that regard, Rama is considered The Wise Man. And in today’s world, many give away their soul to societal absurdities, probably, to get labeled as ‘Wise’!!!


======================
anurag’s POINT OF VIEW
======================

Further on a film-making perspective, ‘No Smoking’ is the Battle between Anurag Kashyap and the Society around him. It, in Anurag’s own words on his blog, is his most personal film. He made this film against all those peoples who have fire-walled Indian cinema, within narrow borders of romantic themes and colorful musicals. No Smoking, in almost every aspect, cross the borders and dwells mostly on the unseen territories of film-making. Check-out the usage of bath tub as K’s medium of transition between the real world and the surreal one. Smart and well-reasoned (it’s only when one relaxes, he/she can think about the things/world beyond the existing; and K relaxes mostly in his bath-tub)!!!! Or try to think about the narrative: fully fluid…. it has enough space in its density for a free audience interpretation. Each person may make his/her own… the narrative leaves such huge scope for a wide spectrum of perceptions. Kudos to Anurag’s script!!! As expected, the critics have slammed the film, because it doesn’t fall within the confines of their pre-set perceptions.

Through the film’s story, where K ends up submitting away his soul so as to survive, Anurag expresses his anguish over the current system, where he has less scope for his form of expression; and to survive in the system, he is compelled to dwell within the limitations devised by the influential peoples. But for ‘No Smoking’, Anurag hasn’t compromised with anyone or anything and his film did not give away its soul; thereby, got (physically) killed by the critics’ low rating…. i.e. out of the two options he had, he chose the first one for his film!!!!


========================
again, my POINT OF VIEW
======================

Having written the above, I don’t personally submit myself to the ideology that one must adhere only to one’s individualistic view and ignore the opposing society. From my point of view, independence may sound great, and even fashionable; but on a broader note, it is as injurious as Smoking. Self-reliance is good but when it leads to over-self-indulgence, it may result in self-destruction. There are always better ways of balancing life on an ‘Interdependence’ note. To understand better about Interdependence, fall in Love!!! Trust me…. Everything gets clear on why: more than an individualistically arrogant decision, a simple sacrifice leads to a better Life! One will understand why Rama’s decision to respect the society has a broader significance than one’s instinctive viewpoint that he has disrespected his chaste wife. Finally, one can realize that Soul is not about being independent, but respecting “your existence with others’ existence”.

After watching the film, one can also infer that, Anurag Kashyap has a wonderful knack of film-making. Not doubt of it!!! But he independently and individualistically, smoked! He arrogantly smoked a lot!!! Thus, at the box-office, his film burnt down to ashes. Smoking is Injurious!!!!


=====================================
for the audience and their POINT OF VIEW
==================================

Even if people would slap me, I prefer to stand by my soul: ‘No Smoking’ is a good film. But on my preference to recommend it to others, I prefer to step back. Barring my linguistic lapses, the above mentioned review should make one realize their own individualistic choice of watching the film.


==============================
from the credits’ POINT OF VIEW
===========================
John Abraham played ‘K’; Ayesha Takia, his wife and Paresh Rawal, Baba-Bangali!!
Vishal Sekhar provided the BGM and also co-produced the film!
Anurag Kashyap has written and directed this film.

=========================
the readers’ POINT OF VIEW
=======================
Slaps and Pats from each one’s point of view are heavily expected, eagerly anticipated and warmly welcome!!!!

Of KBC's heroines, Male Chauvinism and Basic Instincts!!!!

Last evening I was having a casual online chat with one of my acquaintances, when gradually the conversation grew serious and we began hitting back and forth at each other. She claimed that K Balachander is a male chauvinist because presents his heroines as inferior humans; to which I blatantly disagreed. Later she commented that portraying females as objects of poetic imagination is actually degrading women. And when I expressed that I prefer women to be symbols of pure poetry, she blamed me of being a hidden male chauvinist. Though I do not like to recall the whole futile and silly episode, I would love to share my expression on the topics we dwelt across: KBC’s heroines, Male Chauvinism and Basic Instincts. Hope this makes an enjoyable read for you, as much as an enjoyable writing it was to me.

****************************************************

Considering the social taboos in the 70’s, KBC’s heroines are, by far, the most beautiful, progressive and complete female characters on Indian screen. They are first of all, real, and most of all, feminine. The reality aspect makes women identify with the characters and the feminine aspect makes the men idolize their beloveds with them. Even a gaudy prostitute’s role sounds believably pleasant in KBC’s films. Such presentation is attributed to the fact that KBC respects women, must they be from any strata of society! He wishes them to be loved in whatever situation they are in and however crude their attitude is. They are strong and independent, yet they are also, sensitively soft and divinely tender. And that makes them extremely lovable. There could be a touch of exaggerated femininity, which in today’s practical world is not so frequent, but when it serves the purpose of loving the characters in the film, it can be humbly pardoned. All’s fair in love, war and entertainment!!!! :) KBC’s heroines are inspirations even to modern day film-makers, like Shekhar Kammula. Imagine Kamilini Mukherjee’s characters without those deeply feminine traits.

Male chauvinism, as many would have known, is the undue acceptance by men, of male domination among the sexes in the society. When men feel that they are a superior race among humans, then those men are technically termed as ‘male chauvinists’. Exemplifying, these are men who feel that, women ‘need not’ be socially progressive. On an extremity, some men feel: women ‘should not’ be socially progressive. But, in today’s society, when most men are educated enough and have broadened their mindsets, the number of male-chauvinists has reduced to a great extent. Now days, I find most of the mature populations of men follow the following: if the woman is submissive, try to lift up her morale; if she is balanced, enjoy the synchronism; if she is dominating, just ignore her! In KBC’s films, male chauvinists were always was given a negative characterization. Try to recall, Rajinikanth’s egoistic character ogling with jealousy on his sister’s earning ability! He wasn’t given the hero status in that film. Anyway, my own perspective of male chauvinism largely depends on one’s Basic Instincts. Now what about that?

Before that, let me pass on to exaggerated femininity, which will route itself to basic instincts.
A simple situation: Hero complements the heroine.
Now the mostly loved and widely expected response from the male audience in the situation is: a blushing smile from the heroine. For many, the scene may seem exaggeratedly filmy and limitedly real. But, more than the realness, the scene looks beautiful. More than the physical beauty involved, it infers humbleness of the heroine’s character. And isn’t that worthy enough entertainment for the bucks remitted at the ticket window? KBC’s heroines have clock-full of exaggerated femininity. It shows in their gleaming eyes, their alluring smiles, their swaying body language and most of all, in the divine grace they displays on the screen. Now the success of such characters among the audience, esp. men, is the result of the fact that, for generations before and for generations in future, men would love women who look, sound and feel more feminine. Anyway, there could be men on the other side of the spectrum; but personally, I can identify with men only on this side, because I am one among them!!!!! Yes!!! I would prefer to look more at a woman with feminine characteristics than the one with tomboyish nature. And it’s strictly personal. And moreover, I feel it has got more to do with my Basic Instincts. Now, let me clarify to all those who are misled by Sharon Stone’s film. Basic Instincts have got more to do with the mind. In every man’s mind, there exists a Child’s Expectation. That is, in some contexts, grown-up men mostly respond or react to certain things like a little kid. And an example of a kid’s response/reaction is: my cousin’s son, who is 3 years old, did not like to see his aunty wearing tight-fitting jeans; because he has never seen his mother wearing jeans. Basic instincts get built from childhood. Some instincts bend with time and experience, and get sophisticated; but some aspects still remain childish. In our middle-class Indian society, most men have nurtured their instincts by seeing the previous generation, which was mostly male-dominated. So technically, even male-chauvinism is a Basic Instinct. So a little boy, who has seen his mother being submissive to his father, when grown up, unless he is exposed to the ill-effects of the imbalance, cannot expect his wife to be his equal; he would still expect her to explicitly serve him and be submissive to him. And men who are able to control their male-chauvinism are the ones who could apply their experience and maturity to control their basic instincts. Thereby it is 'the Thought' that pacifies the intensity of Basic Instincts. It is that very Thought which can sweep away all the childish instincts and make a man manlier and respect women as their equals in society.

On a final note, it is not wrong to expect women to be like KBC’s heroines, but care must be taken to control Basic Instincts and thereby, avoid Male Chauvinism!!!!

************************************************